Quote:
Originally Posted by Fignuts
I just don’t think anyone will give a shit about a round robin tournament between people who cant wrestle. It’s important that the booking of it makes sense, but I believe that to keep people invested in the progress of the tourney the matches need to deliver. They can’t do that with the roster they have.
|
I disagree with this. I think too much emphasis is placed on people wrestling long matches and all that sort of stuff. Given that the wins and losses are more important than how competitive you are, you can actually make justification for shorter matches. It wouldn't be "epic," but this is where you can do things like Mandy Rose vs. Sonya Deville on a SmackDown TV (say they haven't split), or get around to Sasha Banks vs. Bayley without turning one of them. You will get dross like Dana Brooke vs. Alicia Fox, but that will help the better stuff stand out.
One of the most impenetrable things about the G1, for me, is that everything is "so good" that it blends together. And I kind of get sick of seeing the forearm exchange spot. In a broader way, I actually think the more fruity gimmicks of WWE would help a concept like this stand out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fignuts
I mean none of this matters because the rumble isn’t going anywhere. A big part of the “revolution” is them trying to prove that the women can do anything the men can, and that’s not going to change.
|
This I agree with. It's unfortunate, because they don't really know what to do with the men either.