![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Get a poke on
Posts: 35,234
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I think heel stables are better in smaller numbers to be honest. All stables, for that matter.
Anything over 5 members becomes ridiculous, overdone, pales in comparison to the original formation, and also becomes a burden to creative. It's no coincidence that the Corporate-Ministry, The Alliance, The Millionaire's Club, 100 member NWO, and other huge factions were misfires. On the other hand, the greatest stables like the 4 horsemen, DX, original nWo, Evolution, and the original Corporation were among the greatest. A stable does mean strength in numbers, yes, but it doesn't have to be large numbers. Just 3-5. Really all you need is your headliner, and a well rounded group of guys surrounding him. A couple solid cronies or a tag team, a hoss, a mid level guy, and maybe a mouth peice. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Ron Paul 4 EVA
Posts: 152,467
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Beyond that, there are other logistical issues. I mean, a bunch of jobbers banded together makes sense, but a large number of main event or upper card members means shared glory, and few top dogs really want that. It gets silly, and unlike most of the flaws people piss about, it doesn't require a lot of thought or effort. |
|
![]() |
![]() |