SpiNNeR72
Showstopper  
Posts 588
Registered 10-21-2006 Location Shetland Member Is Offline Mood: Amused!
|
| posted on 5-28-2016 at 08:24 PM |
|
|
Heres a thought. Getting SD off to a good start is critical to making this work, what if they hot-shot all of the top NXT talent in right off the bat.
There is a lot of main roster-ready talent in NXT right now so it would also revitalise things there too and give the next batch a chance.
As for writing, I think we have to accept the main roster will always be sports entertainment driven, but almost anything is forgivable so long as
decent time is given to the actual matches.
|
|
|
G. Jonah Jameson
Showstopper
Posts 958
Registered 12-28-2010 Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 5-28-2016 at 09:53 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Count Zero
If they don't have the people to do the job properly in one instance(ie, they can't book raw properly), how are they going to find twice
the number of competent people to suddenly do two times the work? Do writermonkeys grow on trees?
Well, if the solution to a perceived writing problem is to throw more writers at it, then my scenario doesn't work. But given the tremendous
resources WWE has access to, my guess is that problems are more likely to arise from a "too many cooks" scenario, in which case splitting the
writing team in half would have a positive effect.
|
|
|
DKBroiler
SpeciASSl CUMedian
Posts 1271
Registered 1-25-2008 Location One Inch Right of Philly on a Map Member Is Offline Mood: Old
|
| posted on 5-29-2016 at 03:38 PM |
|
|
Just had a thought ... are we sure this isn't being done to bring NXT up to the level of SD and Raw? We already have an NXT Champion brand
champ and that goes over like gang busters. Why not Raw and SD too? This very well could be a 3 way brand split, not just Raw/SD and the leftovers
go to NXT.
[Edited on 5-29-2016 by DKBroiler]
Get off my lawn.
|
|
|
Gobshite
The Great One 
Posts 3243
Registered 1-30-2004 Location Right here, in Birmingham, England!! Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 5-30-2016 at 10:48 PM |
|
|
Didn't the head writer for NXT just "move up" to smackdown? So they may have been planning this for a while...
This is going to kill TNA. Hopefully.
I would prefer two world champs, two secondary champs, then have women on one brand, and tag teams on the other. Using the network they can increase
the number of "network specials", but maybe put the Smackdown ones on Saturday nights, to keep things different.
|
|
|
williamssl
Steers and Queers
Posts 7129
Registered 1-11-2004 Location Hippieville Member Is Offline Mood: Fuck USC
|
| posted on 6-13-2016 at 07:29 PM |
|
|
It's a rumor, but the brand split has it's own thread (OMG), so properly placing it here:
* Starting in September, WWE will be running two separate monthly pay-per-views for RAW and SmackDown, with wrestlers from both shows only appearing
on WrestleMania, SummerSlam, Royal Rumble and Survivor Series pay-per-views.
Again, rumor, but there ya go. Not sure how I feel about it. On the one hand, it solves for the problem of 2 full rosters and accompanying
storylines competing for, what, 6-8 matches on a joint ~monthly PPV/event, meaning each brand gets only 3-4, which means it's always gonna be
the top guys (and gals) from each. On the other, though....the brand split is still a month away and I already feel oversaturated with wrestling.
How much is too much?
Separately but related, if true, this would seemingly push the "1 unified world title or 2 separate brand-specific titles" squarely into the camp of
the latter.
Don't Mess With Texas
|
|
|
Matte
"Family Man" 
Posts 8664
Registered 12-16-2008 Member Is Offline Mood: #BROKEN
|
| posted on 6-13-2016 at 07:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gobshite
This is going to kill TNA. Hopefully.
I can't read things like this from people without thinking they're either spiteful or just purely shitty. If you don't like it,
don't watch it. That really solves the entire problem of thinking the company is horrible or whatever. Just don't give them your
viewership. But to dislike them to the point that you want anyone who does enjoy them to no longer be able to, and to the point that you want one less
wrestling company to exist, and to the point that you want everyone who works there to be out of a job that they seem to enjoy... man, that just seems
shitty to me.
"I'm a professional. I know exactly what I'm doing." - Jeff Hardy
|
|
|
CM Crunk
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1219
Registered 7-20-2011 Location Elsewhereville, Whogivesashittington...Alberta, Ca Member Is OnlineMood: Berried
|
| posted on 6-13-2016 at 09:25 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by williamssl
It's a rumor, but the brand split has it's own thread (OMG), so properly placing it here:
* Starting in September, WWE will be running two separate monthly pay-per-views for RAW and SmackDown, with wrestlers from both shows only appearing
on WrestleMania, SummerSlam, Royal Rumble and Survivor Series pay-per-views.
THIS right here is what I'm terrified of happening with the brand split, and a perfect way for WWE to preemptively ruin a good thing before it
even gets going. I'm firmly in the "One World Champ floating between both rosters" camp, mostly because I think making two brand-specific
versions of every title dilutes the specialness of them. So running TWO goddamn PPVs a month pretty much necessitates them doing that, right? Ugh.
As it stands right now with one singular brand entity (Raw, Smackdown, Main Event and Superstars) there's, what, 7 hours of first run
programming for the main roster every week? 10 on PPV weeks? Even if you didn't count Main Event and Superstars (and none of us do) that's
STILL way too much programming to be expected to follow.
My grand hope for the brand split is for it to alleviate that by creating two distinct brands that can SHARE the load of all those programming hours.
To give each brand, it's roster and it's creative team a chance to breathe and flesh out storylines in a more organic manner instead of
adhering to the tired old routine of booking PPVs on the fly every 2-3 weeks that's been ever so slowly killing them. Having 2 individual PPVs a
month isn't the way to do that and only further exacerbates viewer fatigue which honestly seems to be a big problem that they're more than
happy to ignore so long as people are buying t-shirts and subscribing to The Network.
I really hope that Vince has a change of heart because I think simultaneously running two separate brands in the exact same manner that they've
been running the singular brand for years is a surefire way for them to kill the brandsplit before it's even happened. Give Raw and Smackdown an
opportunity to flourish and present their own (hopefully) unique viewing experiences that entice us to watch instead of just dumping more of the same
(albeit now color-coded) content in our laps and expecting us to just devour it because. There's a reason why Smackdown doesn't perform as
well as Raw aside from it not being live, and that's because not all of us can find the time to fit it into our lives.
Don't try and trick us into watching two of your brands when you still havent figured out a way to properly hook us on ONE.
Twitter and Instagram: WatkinsAGoGo
|
|
|
bigfatgoalie
The Man
Posts 6199
Registered 1-16-2002 Location Stratusphere Member Is Offline Mood: Stratusfied
|
| posted on 6-13-2016 at 10:51 PM |
|
|
Did the NWA and WWF having two World Titles lower the impact of Hulkamania beating the Sheik? No.
Did WCW and WWF having monthly PPVs, and 5+ hours a week kill the industry? No.
Quality product will get eyeballs. The more the WWE does to make the two shows different, the better. It'll allow folks who are not in to one
brand to have an alternative.
You could build SmackDown! around Del Rio, Zayn, Owens, Cesaro, Ambrose, Neville, Miz, and have a fairly good show. Maybe have Brock pop up once in a
while. Debut a new cruiser weight belt and give Sin Cara, Kalisto, Slater, Bo Dallas and some Indy guys a title to feud over. Maybe establish a guy
like Crews.
And RAW would still have, Reigns, Rollins, Cena, AJ, New Day and the rest of the tag division, the women's division and special attractions like
Taker and Jericho.
There's enough talent without a single call up to pull that off. And guys like Balor are ready to be called up if you think more talent is
needed.
|
|
|
Zeyes
ButtViper
Posts 7
Registered 1-26-2015 Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-13-2016 at 11:01 PM |
|
|
I suppose running 20 (?) PPVs per year is a quick fix to give the Network more exclusive content, but I wonder if it isn't going to backfire.
Outside the big 4 and the occasional concept-style PPV like Money in the Bank, there's precious little difference between a PPV and an
above-average edition of the weekly TV shows already, and that's going to be even more of an issue when PPVs become less special by happening
every two weeks.
Edit:
quote:
Originally posted by bigfatgoalie
Did the NWA and WWF having two World Titles lower the impact of Hulkamania beating the Sheik? No.
Did WCW and WWF having monthly PPVs, and 5+ hours a week kill the industry? No.
Those were actual competitors though, not merely two divisions of the same company which are going to be crossing paths every three months at the
supershow PPVs.
[Edited on 6-13-2016 by Zeyes]
|
|
|
CM Crunk
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1219
Registered 7-20-2011 Location Elsewhereville, Whogivesashittington...Alberta, Ca Member Is OnlineMood: Berried
|
| posted on 6-14-2016 at 12:25 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bigfatgoalie
Did the NWA and WWF having two World Titles lower the impact of Hulkamania beating the Sheik? No.
No, but the NWA and WWF weren't producing a glut of first-run weekly content for us to gorge our eyeholes on. They weren't expecting us to
shell out money every month for a PPV either.
They also weren't trying to trick us as viewers into thinking they were in competition with secondary in-house "brands" that had their own
world championships. I think if that had happened we'd have seen the likes of Hacksaw Jim Duggan or Warlord or Giant Gonzales walking around
with a "prestigious" WWF Championship run under their belts.
quote:
Did WCW and WWF having monthly PPVs, and 5+ hours a week kill the industry? No.
That's debatable. As it happened there was a boom in interest in the industry that supported an uptick in monthly PPVs and paid off in the
shortrun. To be fair, it wasn't just PPV buyrates that did WCW in, but a series of errors and miscalculations, ranging from minute to
catastrophic, that unfolded in such a preposterous way�one after the other�that it would have made Rube Goldberg bladder-shy.
Had they stuck around longer I think it's fair to say that the market still would have shrank as interest in the product during the Monday Night
Wars simply wasn't sustainable for either company. Sure, ratings may not have dwindled quite as fast as they actually did after WWF was left
standing, but I can't imagine either company could have kept things as hot if the Wars went on any longer than they actually did.
I think it could be argued that the switch to monthly PPVs did more to hurt the industry in the long-run, even if the decision did pay off for them in
their present day.
quote:
Quality product will get eyeballs. The more the WWE does to make the two shows different, the better. It'll allow folks who are not in to
one brand to have an alternative.
I completely agree. But the key is actually producing a quality product. I'm willing to accept being proven wrong, but right now the thought of
the two brands being told to adhere to the same booking format that's been driven into the ground in the decade-plus since the MNW and Attitude
Era ended doesn't put me at ease. I think they would be missing a huge opportunity to spice things up a bit, and in the tradition of "what once
was old is new again" taking a step back from the monthly PPVs for both brands and allowing for a more decompressed and organic style of
storytelling.
I mean, think about it. How many feuds have there been in recent memory that could have been built up to be more special than they ended up being?
One of the big problems with monthly PPVs is that we are forcefed what should be a three-course meal into a single serving. The inheritant specialness
of PPVs, and the feuds and blow-offs to feuds that are supposed to be the foundations of these shows, is practically non-existent in this day and age.
The only show where we can expect some semblance of finality is Wrestlemania, and even now its directly followed up by a PPV that's primarily
BASED on rematches from Wrestlemania.
You want to pique my interest in either brand? Get creative more invested in running a marathon rather than a sprint. Not to blow through unique
pairings as if they were some sort of immediately renewable resource.
Also, I'm not ignoring the fact that they did try to do the whole leap-frogging PPVs. It didn't work out then, but that was a different
time for WWE. A darker time. This was a time when Johnny Ace was in charge of talent relations and stacking the roster with generic fitness models and
Randy Orton clones. All but a scant few completely devoid of personality and discernible in-ring talent. It wasn't long either before they
started blurring the lines between Raw and Smackdown which only did further damage to the illusion of the split.
But like I said, that was a different time and they did what they could with the talent and creative they had available. But they ultimately failed.
Today? Say what you will about creative, it's still far from perfect, but it's LEAPS AND BOUNDS better than what we were getting 10 years
ago. I think my only tangible problem with them now is the 50/50 booking. I also honestly the 50/50 booking is necessitated by monthly PPVs.
As much as I love giving them shit, I honestly feel sorry for creative having to operate under the auspices of someone as wildly erratic and eccentric
and *mind-bogglingly* out of touch as Vincent Kennedy McMahon AND produce 3 hours of live TV every week. And that's not even taking into
consideration the 2 hours for Smackdown and the monthly PPVs. The brand-split could help alleviate those unrealistic pressures and allow stories to
breathe and for performers to get better handles on their characters through a more organic process.
Talent-wise? This is probably the most stacked that the roster has ever been. Sure there are plenty of characters getting lost in the mix but at least
they are definable characters. We're past the days where people like Chris F'n Masters or Mordecai eating up TV time. Some of the best
wrestlers in the world are under the WWE umbrella right now and however you want to divide them among the two rosters you'd be hard pressed to
find a group of men and women more capable of living up to the challenge.
The question is, is do they reinvigorate the product and the fanbase with a decidedly different approach to what's become ("what's best
for") business as usual, or do they just provide us more of the same shows and tired tropes that they've been putting on for nearly 2 decades
but just with an arena palette-swap? What would you rather have?
Everything is pure speculation right now, but one thing I do know is that I want a tangible change. Something that will draw in new fans--which is
imperative for the wellbeing of the company in the future-- and to bring back lapsed fans and reignite the passion for the product that still exists
in a lot of us fans who have stuck in there and inhabit these bOOards and others like it.
Edit: Kudos to Zeyes for summing it up in a less rambling manner.
[Edited on 6/13/2016 by CM Crunk]
Twitter and Instagram: WatkinsAGoGo
|
|
|
Flash
The Rowdy One
Posts 2847
Registered 4-22-2005 Location Brantford, Ontario Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-16-2016 at 09:32 PM |
|
|
We might have our first inkling about major PPV that the WWE is planning for the new brand-split era:
The WWE recently just filed patents for the "Clash of Champions" name, and why this seems to be more likely as a PPV than just a DVD compilation is
that the patents were filed for TV, toys, and other merchandise, which would suggest a major ad/product campaign around this.
Could the WWE go so far as to try and create a new Wrestelmania for one brand? Eh... that's probably carrying this story too far, and is
probably not something they'd do, but going for a big stand alone PPV event would help solidify this brand split as being something
different.
Like I said before... I'd like to see them really run with one brand on a completely different business model... like no monthly PPV's,
but instead maybe a Saturday Night's Main Event every 6 weeks with maybe 4 big shows for that brand a year.
|
|
|
SpiNNeR72
Showstopper
Posts 588
Registered 10-21-2006 Location Shetland Member Is Offline Mood: Amused!
|
| posted on 6-20-2016 at 11:13 PM |
|
|
Given the "news" about Angle being contacted among the others for the upcoming expansion. Please, please WWE - put him with American Alpha. Then he
can excel on the mic, give them the voice then need, get physical occasionally, hell, even be the fragile "manager in peril". It will help keep him
clean and let us selfishly enjoy him without wondering if we will see him die.
Ok, got carried away but fuck, can there be a more perfect scenario for AA and KA?
|
|
|
jefft221
And I am AWESOME
Posts 129
Registered 11-17-2009 Location Little Rock, AR Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-22-2016 at 08:49 PM |
|
|
2 "PPVs" each month outside of the big 4 works out to 20 events. Assuming Takeover events continue with ~5 a year, that's basically 1
"special event" every other week.
That makes them not very special anymore.
I could see 2 world/brand champs working, but still kinda think it'd force one to be lower than the other when it comes time to decide
what's the main event of WM, Summerslam, Survivor Series. But I do think my schedule of "PPVs" would still be better: Do the traditional big 4
as joint shows and add another joint show half way between WM & Summerslam... be it Night of Champions of MITB or King of the Ring. And then have 1
Raw and 1 SD "PPV" between each of those "big 5" events. So in 1 year: 5 Joint shows, 5 Raw shows, 5 SD shows = 15 total "special events".
Rumored event names/dates after Summerslam:
Backlash(SD) 9/11
Clash of Champions(Raw) 9/25
No Mercy(SD) 10/9
Hell in a Cell(Raw) 10/30
Survivor Series
TLC(SD) 12/4
Roadblock(Raw) 12/18
A roadblock on the road to the road to Wrestlemania?
[Edited on 6-22-2016 by jefft221]
|
|
|
First 9
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1896
Registered 1-22-2013 Member Is Offline Mood: Doing the Emma Dance
|
| posted on 6-23-2016 at 05:59 AM |
|
|
Eh, for a while now the B PPVs have felt like the old IYH shows. Just extended versions of the regular tv show but more wrestling, less promos. The
Monthly ppvs will likely just be there to offer a stage for 8-10 gals to have longer matches than usual and hit the mid-point of their stories as they
move forward to one of the big 4. Sure ocasionally, they'll be something big but most of the time they'll probably just be more
wrestling-centric versions of the usual tv shows.
I still think the Brand Split was the wrong way to go to make SD stand out but an extra RAW and SD on two separate Sundays won't be what do them
in.
|
|
|
G. Jonah Jameson
Showstopper
Posts 958
Registered 12-28-2010 Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-23-2016 at 12:10 PM |
|
|
After WWE starting doing separate PPVs for RAW and SmackDown! in the last brand split, they would make the PPV-opposing free TV show more significant
than usual. The Brock Lesnar-Kurt Angle Iron Man Match in 2003, for example, was on the SmackDown! immediately prior to RAW's Unforgiven PPV,
and that show also had a WWE Tag Team Titles change. I think that might be a better model than every-other-week brand-specific PPVs. It gives you a
way to continue or blow off big feuds, or have consistent title defenses, without having to add another three hours of wrestling.
|
|
|
williamssl
Steers and Queers
Posts 7129
Registered 1-11-2004 Location Hippieville Member Is Offline Mood: Fuck USC
|
| posted on 6-23-2016 at 08:18 PM |
|
|
The brand split topic seems to be straddling its own thread and Rumorzzzzzss....
If they bring back Goldberg, I will instantaneously go from being generally positive and cautiously optimistic about the brand split to outright hater
and never-ever-watcher-of-brand-he's-on.
Don't Mess With Texas
|
|
|
Chris Is Good517
Best There Is Was or Ever Will Be 
Posts 12476
Registered 1-10-2002 Location Little Rock, AR Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-23-2016 at 11:22 PM |
|
|
I really don't think Goldberg as a full-time option is being entertained by either party. Worst case scenario, I think he'd be on a Brock
kind of schedule where he shows up on a few Raws a season to help build a match, and then has 3-4 PPV matches a year.
More realistically, he probably fulfills his dream of working one last match so his son can see him, likely at WrestleMania, maybe returning the favor
to Brock (ugh) or putting over a Bray or Owens, and then accepting a HoF induction and riding off into the sunset forever.
I just can't foresee a world where, with this much talent depth available to them, they want to build around this guy as a series regular. And I
say that as someone who doesn't really have an unfavorable opinion of him.
Monday Night Flaw, a podcast about professional wrestling starring OO's own
Figure Foreskin as Andy the Smarmy Host and Chris Is Good517 as Cousin Balki.
|
|
|
Flash
The Rowdy One
Posts 2847
Registered 4-22-2005 Location Brantford, Ontario Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-24-2016 at 12:37 AM |
|
|
If Goldberg is brought back, then I'd guess HHH is probably the one we can expect if they go a one off route... Although Orton maybe
wouldn't be a bad choice either if you wanted a big name guy for a big match, but one that could just sand on its own.
The thing is... I don't know who you stick Goldberg in the ring with... say it's a Seth Rollins to make Goldberg look good; Seth could
handle the loss, but it'd be Goldberg that would be booed, and is that really what he'd want to come for?
Rusev maybe... it would elevate Rusev, but man... that just screams potential crickets.
|
|
|
G. Jonah Jameson
Showstopper
Posts 958
Registered 12-28-2010 Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-24-2016 at 02:53 AM |
|
|
Yeah, I took the Goldberg rumor with a grain of salt. It seems to me that, if WWE is looking to bulk up the roster, it doesn't need to bring in
main eventers, because it has plenty of top guys and potential top guys. It needs the likes of Carlito, Shelton Benjamin, Montel Vontavious Porter and
Stevie Richards -- solid hands who can help fill out the card without taking time away from the guys WWE wants at the top of the card. I had the same
thought about Rey Mysterio. No way that guy can work a full schedule.
|
|
|
DevilSoprano
Pee Wee's Plaything 
Posts 7182
Registered 11-16-2002 Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-25-2016 at 12:23 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Flash
If Goldberg is brought back, then I'd guess HHH is probably the one we can expect if they go a one off route... Although Orton maybe
wouldn't be a bad choice either if you wanted a big name guy for a big match, but one that could just sand on its own.
The thing is... I don't know who you stick Goldberg in the ring with... say it's a Seth Rollins to make Goldberg look good; Seth could
handle the loss, but it'd be Goldberg that would be booed, and is that really what he'd want to come for?
Rusev maybe... it would elevate Rusev, but man... that just screams potential crickets.
Did you really just say you'd be okay with Seth losing to Goldberg?
|
|
|
Count Zero
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1239
Registered 1-29-2013 Location Canada East Member Is Offline Mood: RAM is MAR
|
| posted on 6-25-2016 at 12:50 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DevilSoprano
quote:
Originally posted by Flash
If Goldberg is brought back, then I'd guess HHH is probably the one we can expect if they go a one off route... Although Orton maybe
wouldn't be a bad choice either if you wanted a big name guy for a big match, but one that could just sand on its own.
The thing is... I don't know who you stick Goldberg in the ring with... say it's a Seth Rollins to make Goldberg look good; Seth could
handle the loss, but it'd be Goldberg that would be booed, and is that really what he'd want to come for?
Rusev maybe... it would elevate Rusev, but man... that just screams potential crickets.
Did you really just say you'd be okay with Seth losing to Goldberg?
I'll step up to bat for this one. He didn't say that precisely. More along the lines that Seth is "teflon" at this point, and a loss
to Goldbrick wouldn't be a long term black mark on his career. Jericho lost to Goldberg once upon a time, right? That worked out okay for him
in the long run.
|
|
|
Flash
The Rowdy One
Posts 2847
Registered 4-22-2005 Location Brantford, Ontario Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 6-25-2016 at 06:39 PM |
|
|
Yup... Seth is Teflon at this point.
Honestly... yeah Goldberg wasn't the best in the ring, but the guy was once the (or least one of the top 3) biggest thing going in wrestling at
one point. He's got name recognition that Seth doesn't (to the same extent) so win or lose, it's a big match that puts eyeballs on
Seth.
Do you think it's going to be the guy that hits a spear, jack hammer, a whack of punches, and shouts "Ass" 87 times throughout the match that
they will remember? No, it will be the guy who even if he loses sells like crazy, probably does some top rope moves, and who can really come across
with his character while doing all of this that people will remember.... and if that's just some casual or long ago fans that tune in and like
what they see, then all the better.
It's also going to be Seth that stands out every time someone bitches about Goldberg and then say's Seth is too good to have to slum it
with him, every website that writes about Goldberg coming back is going to mention Seth, and when the WWE puts it's posters out there it's
going to be who's that Seth guy on the poster with that Goldberg guy we all know... I should look him up.
I want Seth versus Owen's, Zayn, Cena, Brock... whoever from a work rate, want to see great matches standpoint; but a high profile match like
this (and again we're just talking a hypothetical here), that you know the WWE is going to want to be good, doesn't hurt a guy like Seth,
or the product... every month, yes, as a one off from time to time I think these kind of pairings can actually help. I think they've wasted some
opportunities with the whole Streak thing in years past, but it's why that could have been such a good showcase match for some guys, win or
lose.
Seth is just about the best thing going in the WWE right now, and is immensely talented... I have faith that he can turn a loss into a springboard
into even bigger things. Teflon.
|
|
|
First 9
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1896
Registered 1-22-2013 Member Is Offline Mood: Doing the Emma Dance
|
| posted on 6-25-2016 at 08:13 PM |
|
|
Eh, I think there's a difference between name recognition and star power. In 2016 Seth Rollins has a lot more star power than Goldberg. You have
to remember that unlike Austin, Sting, and the other big names of that era, Goldberg fizzled out. After giving WCW great ratings in 98, he became just
another guy. WWE brought him in and really didn't do anything for them.
Goldberg was my favorite as a kid so I don't mean to thrash him, but unlike the real titans of the industry he never sustained that white hot
aura and remained one of the biggest names in the business. More people would pay money for a meet and greet with Seth than for Goldberg, I guarantee
it. Sure more people know of Goldberg, but more people are willing to shell out cash for Rollins.
Rollins doesn't really gain or lose anything carrying a nostalgia act to a feel good victory. It'd just be a promotional tactic for a
video game and featured as a sideshow attraction for an off ppv. Seth RETIRED Sting and it didn't change his status that much. Losing Goldberg
would be the same.
|
|
|
First 9
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1896
Registered 1-22-2013 Member Is Offline Mood: Doing the Emma Dance
|
| posted on 7-18-2016 at 12:00 AM |
|
|
Per WWE.com, this is how the draft will work.
-Raw has the first overall pick
-Since SmackDown Live is a two-hour show and Raw is three hours, for every two picks SmackDown Live receives, Raw will receive three picks
-Tag teams count as one pick unless a Commissioner/General Manager specifically only wants one member of the team
-Six draft picks will be made off the NXT roster
Interesting notes:
-Brock Lesnar is eligible for drafting and thus could be limited to one brand moving forward.
-The Wyatt Faimly is not protected under the tag team rules so we might see them split
-No mention of drafting non-wrestlers.
I can see the obvious advantage RAW has in numbers being mixed into Steph's rivalry with Shane, so we'll get Steph bragging how she
absolutely has the advantage in quantity only for Shane to make a bombshell of a final draft pick.
|
|
|
williamssl
Steers and Queers
Posts 7129
Registered 1-11-2004 Location Hippieville Member Is Offline Mood: Fuck USC
|
| posted on 7-18-2016 at 02:15 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matte in a different thread
quote:
Originally posted by First 9
-Tag teams count as one pick unless a Commissioner/General Manager specifically only wants one member of the team
That seems like a decent way to bury the other guy. Clearly making a point to say that one member of the team is good and the other member is not. I
would assume taking a team with one pick forfeits the following pick, otherwise there wouldn't be a point in taking half a tag team when you
could just grab them both. Doesn't mention that, though.
My assumption is that tag teams count as a pick since it says they do...and it's then a matter of "do you want the 2 guys (or 3 in the cases of
New Day and Social Outcasts)...or just one of them"
There is no reason not to take the 2 (or 3) and then just force split them up via the booking....but that's real logic and not WWE logic.
Tag teams who have the best chance of getting split:
Ascension - assuming they have plans for one and hey, fuck you to the other.
Usos - because I so totally want to see one on each brand  They've been a tag team forever so time for a split?
Dudley's - time to resurrect Reverend D-Von
[Edited on 7-18-2016 by williamssl]
Don't Mess With Texas
|
|
|
