Quote:
Originally Posted by Noid
I'll try to explain it mathematically for you. Let's attribute values to these wrestlers. Triple H has 1300 points. That's 100 points for every World Title he's won in the WWE. Seth Rollins is therefore on 100 points. Sting has won World Titles, but not in the WWE, so let's include the International World Title and call him a 9-time champ and give him 75% of those 900 points, bringing him to 675. Let's say that a win is worth 10% of what your opponent is worth. If Sting beats Triple H at WrestleMania, his score jumps to 805 points. It's arguable that you could even increase this because of WrestleMania season, but let's call it all even. Triple H beating Sting increases his worth to 1368 points. Now, let's say that Seth Rollins beats Sting AND Triple H in the scenario that we actually have in real-life. He beats Sting for 68 points and he beats Triple H for 137. That's a total of 205 points. But if he beats Sting AND Triple H after Sting beats Triple H? That's 81 points from Sting and 130 from Triple H. That's 211 points -- a whole six points difference. But there you go -- Sting beating Triple H is far more important to increasing Sting's stock than increasing Triple H's.
|
Was this meant to be comedy?
You brought up the whole thing about "some people dont like money". As I said, the people who say that are the guys who write newsletters and the people who read them. Obviously WWE is a tad more invested in profits than you or I are. Since Vince built his company to be worth well over a billion dollars, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on all booking calls. Doesnt mean he's right 100% of the time, just means he's better than anyone else, so I'll trust him.
For me it comes to down to this - which feud do I think can draw more money in the long term for WWE A) Rollins vs HHH or B) Rollins vs Sting. The answer to me, and really should be to anyone who has watched wrestling is the HHH vs Rollins is the bigger money match. If thats the case, then you dont have your two money players lose to B level guys. You can use the B level guys for B level PPVs and to help enhance the A level guys. But you dont sacrifice any of the A level players to make the B level guys look good. Unless you think you can elevate said B player to A, but in this case, Sting is what he is. He's not moving up or down the card.
The only way your argument holds water is if you think Sting should go over Seth, and then go on a run with the title. To do what you talked about - maximize Sting DVD sales, tshirts, those dumb masks, bring back the now 68 year old dudes who used to watch WCW back in the early 90s. But I think we both know it would be absurd to bastardize the title by putting it on Sting at this point. So were back to sacrificing the bigger money program to sell more wolf tickets with Sting as a credible title challenger.