Thread: DISCUSSION - Is "The Corporation" concept a 100% guarantee ratings getter?
View Single Post
Old 12-09-2004, 04:58 AM   #3
Heyman
Father of Hinduship
 
Heyman's Avatar
 
Posts: 21,083
Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hired Hitman
I was watching OZ a few months back and I loved how everyone was in some sort of gang within the prison, they had to be in a gang so they have somebody to watch their back, I think that if Wrestling had gangs like OZ, then it would be awesome watching.

Who will join who, will so and so turn on so and so because he attacked his best friend from another gang, will gangs join together to take on another gang, gangs forming then disbanding due to disagreements on attack plans, maybe somebody is acting like a leader and some find him selfish in his actions etc.
You raise a good point.

As far as the WWE is concerned, when was the last time that we saw a REAL good stable feud?

I miss the days where we saw The Nation vs. Degeneration X.


Stable feuds not only generate interest, but they also make more matches seem "meaningful" (since it adds to the storyline).

Again - would anyone really have cared THAT much if someone like...........Mark Henry was "harassing" Chyna? (if there had been no "intense" DX/Nation rivalry).

Same thing with the Corporate Ministry:

I can still remember back in the day - whenever wrestlers such as Gangrel, Mideon, and Viscera would fight (on the "main" show of RAW or Smackdown), there would still be some interest (since these "jobbers" were associated with Vince McMahon and Undertaker).


Think about Triple H. Did people care about him before or AFTER he joined up with Shawn Michaels in DX? The same can be said for Randy Orton and Dave Batista (and on Smackdown - Orlando Jordan, Luther Reigns, and Mark Jindrak).



I guess the main reason why I created this topic (other than the fact that I was bored SHITLESS ), was because I'm wondering if RAW would REALLY be better off without Evolution (or an adequate replacement for Evolution).

Granted - Evolution has pretty much ran its course (IMO - the best thing would be for the WWE to turn Batista face), but then what?


My worst case scenerio, is that the WWE will have 3 or 4 "average/above average" storylines, but won't have that ONE major storyline in which the show revolves around (and in effect, helps to bring in ratings).
Heyman is offline   Reply With Quote