Big Show Officially Retires. (For now)
 

http://www.wwe.com/shows/ecw/news/bigshowtimeoff

Well, it's not exactly news anymore... but whatever...

Lol yeah... Still... :-\

Nice words from him at the end though. I've grown to enjoy him over the years, and he's a pretty nice guy from everything I've heard. He deserves time off, really. I'm sure he'll find a good career either behind the scenes with the WWE or in comedy.

Well, ECW could handle time without Heyman, but Big Show? Fuuuuck. They might as well close the brand down, now.

So they've just spent all that time building up Heyman and Show for what reason? ECW just gets worse and worse, they shouldn't have had a PPV until they started getting two hours and a bigger roster, but that's Vince for ya. I swear Vince's reputation has been severely damaged by this, if it wasn't damaged by the failure of the XFL, ECW has done the job, no matter how much he blames Heyman. Vince is fucking full of bullshit, also he doesn't deserve to be as succesful as he has been with WWE, he just got lucky.

Big Show deserves the time off he's been wrestling with pain for awhile so now's the time to go.

I was never a big fan of his, but looking back he had some enjoyable moments out there. His matches with Lesner were by no mean great, but decent big man matches.

Oh yeah fair enough for Big Show wanting time off, i was just pointing out how bad it was for ECW. What reason have i got to watch ECW now when both CM punk and RVD are just going to be buried? Lashley? Hahahahaahahaha...

well looks like it is time to push shannon moore to main event status.

^ Or k-fed...

You have to be pretty extreme to tap Brit's ass and live.

who are you kidding, not in a million years

K-Fed! K-Fed! K-Fed!:shifty:

Show is a franchise, who rarely disappoints me. I hope he comes back, and at 100%

Two hour shows aren't as necessary as you make them out. I really like what they've done in some of the single-hours ECW's had, to be honest. As for a bigger roster? I don't think they needed a bigger roster, as much as they needed a better roster.

It's not the PPV's fault that ECW isn't doing very well right now; it's ECW not doing very well's fault that the PPV was such an embarrassment.

^ To support a 3 hour ppv they need a 2 hour show is what i was getting at.

Not at all. Especially if they only have one once every five months.

Well ok, lets say they need a bigger roster in order to support a 3 hour ppv, then they would need 2 hours. Don't believe me? Just look at how shit/short the ECW ppv was.

Pepsi Man, I'm sorry but I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you. The 1hr time slot ECW has was the root of most problems with d2d

first of all, you only have one hour to develop fueds and build talent, which means you're not going to get much in. Second of all with only 1 hour, they only have and support 1 title. With 1 title, you only have one meaningful match per ppv by default. With 3 or 4 titles on shows, you have at least that many matches to go to that means something no matter what. To make other matches mean something that takes a lot of work that most likely can't be accomplished in an hour show weekly either. Then you have the lack of a midcard really. I like Striker and Thorn and stuff, but come on. People dont' care that much about these guys and its hard to get them to during a short show.
D2D failed because of ECW having 1 hour, 1 title and very little over talent. Coupled with the fact that they put their only 6 over guys in one match, and booked it shitty.
But mainly because of 1 hour/1 title.

Exactly Jeritron, rep to you for using common sense.

You can get plenty into one hour. It's not the one hour timeslot that hurt ECW for December to Dismember as much as it was the quality of talent on their roster. I don't care if you have one hour, two hour, or three hours, Hardcore Holly and Test aren't going to be taken seriously as main eventers after the way they've been used their entire careers. Daivari? Nothing against him, but he's been put over as a guy whose bark is much worse than his bite. I've personally never been a fan of Kevin Thorn or Mike Knox either.

Nevertheless, one hour a week is plenty of time to build up feuds and characters, if you use it wisely. The WWF did it for years, with Raw. Sure, they had other shows, but for the most part, those were recap shows, much like there still are today in many markets. It's not the hour time limit that makes them only "have and support" one title. Whatever their reasoning for not bringing back the ECW TV Title and the ECW World Tag Team Title, having one hour as opposed to two is not an excuse. Honestly, many weeks, ECW has more matches on it than Raw.

I disagree on the "meaningful matches by default" theory as well. Often times, titles are dragged down, to the point where no one gives a fuck about them. You have to keep them built up, or it just doesn't matter. Honestly, how much more are you going to care about Gregory Helms vs. Funaki just because the WWE Cruiserweight Title is on the line? How about a women's match? Hell, for a while there, the Intercontinental Title was treated like garbage in my view.

It's gonna be hard to get people to care about Striker and Thorn regardless, especially with the lack of depth on ECW's roster. I'm telling you, over the course of five months, that's twenty hours, and your typical two hour Raw or SmackDown! brand has to put a Pay-Per-View out at least every other month. Two months times two hours equals sixteen hours, eighteen, if you want to cut them a break.

One title I will agree probably hurt them, but as has been said plenty of times in pro wrestling, the title doesn't make the wrestler; the wrestler makes the title.

Either way, the shit matches on the card are going to mean more and be more interesting if its a tournament to crown a new TV champ.
A wrestler makes the title great, but a title can make the match work. You think people would want to watch Batista and Booker duke it out month after month, night after night if it wasnt about a title? Shit even Austin and Rock clashing repeatedly wouldnt draw as much if it wasnt about the belt. It serves as a launching pad for the fued and gives a match meaning. It draws basically.
If you have matches on the card with guys like Knoxx, Dreamer, Sandman, Thorn and Striker, people are going to care more if its a tournament to crown a new TV champion or for another spot in that title match.

And as for the one hour thing, its a combination of the lack of talent and the one hour thing. The talent could get over better with more time, you make a good case with the mathematics and such on paper, but the common sense of it is that with 1 hour you can't promote a ppv as well as you can with 2.

You probably chose a bad example with Booker and Batista. :p I don't think very many people care about that feud as it is, and I would have to say that most that do probably would even if it weren't for the title.

OH! OH! I can play this game, too!

I didn't jerk off this morning, which caused it to snow. Don't believe me? Look at the weather.

Seriously, that's not a line of reasoning that actually illustrated cause and effect, it's a line of reasoning that says "It was bad, but let's ignore the lack of hype and booking and thought and instead blame the length of the show and size of the roster."

Pepsiman, I dont neccesarily disagree with you. I do believe however that the title does in some cases make the match/wrestler, or at least enhance the storyline and fued a lot. Thats why they have titles, especially midcard titles.

The title is a prop. Generally, if the match has no meaning, throwing the title won't be changing anything.

Must be some pretty strong cum...

Its a prop, but I think you're missing what I'm saying.
Its a fictional world, with fictional character, who have fictional goals.
Those fictional goals include aspirations of a title. The title is often the meaning of the match. Benoit doesnt just jump brands and come for HHH because he doesnt like him. Its the basis of fueds and the method used to push and elevate talent.
They don't have a Royal Rumble for the hell of it, its meaning is all about the title.
Thats why a title shot, #1 contendership or mid-card titles is the root between fueding between superstars and such.
High profile fueds are booked over 2 things, titles and/or soap operatic drama.
The majority of fans/marks care for these things. Not everyone is like us and looking forward to a Benoit/Angle grudge match or random meeting. The title gives it more selling power and makes it draw more, as they elevate the title and make it mean more as well. Its a little of both.

TNA only has one hour shows per week. They were at 11 PM and they were still able to put on better PPVs than this.

Then again the talent in TNA actually look like they might care unlike the travesty that happened at the ECW PPV. Titles or not it's the talent, it's what is done in the ring that matters. So to say that it's cause they only have one hour a week can't cut it since another promotion has only 1 hour, just now they got a better time slot and they're still able to fill whatever PPV time with matches.

No, I just don't agree with it. A title doesn't automatically augment the match. That's why they have other things going on in almost every title match that doesn't involve Stevie Richards or Val Venis on Monday Night Raw. Matches that lack that drama from other aspirations or inclinations tend to be lackluster and unimportant.

And that's saying something.

When I cum, I cum with tha thunder.

Yes, but more important than they would be without it. I said enhance, not make.

it doesn't take a title to always enhance a match. Just the proper build up. Not every WrestleMania matchup is a title match but there are some on that card bigger than the title matches themselves. Some that are better.

WMXIX - Michaels/Jericho, Rock/Austin
SummerSlam - Matt Hardy vs. Edge
WM 21 - Angle vs. Michaels

It's the talent, the build up, the story that the wrestlers are able to tell that make the match. It's the skill that the stars posses and make the best of. THey all can't do everything they know they can do but they can do enough. If the title is the crutch needed to make a match "great" then the match was doomed from the start.

It doesn't automatically enhance it, either.

Which I already said. I said "augment," not "make."

Never said the title ALWAYS makes EVERY match. I'm just saying that as a prop, it is in many cases used to enhance and be the basis for a fued and storyline and it develops from there.