Skip to main content

WM29 Top Matches

Scott,

Hello.  I have a couple of questions I'd like to know your opinion on.  I think these are questions a lot of fans have.  I'm not sure if you've already addressed these in the blog but here goes anyway...

As the inevitable Rock-Cena II match is coming close I was wondering your take on what WWE can do to make it different this time around?  Added stips?  Guest ref?  The simple fact that its a title match does nothing for me, mostly because I'm a Rock guy and Cena is winning.  Plus, hyping it as "Once in a Lifetime" last year and serving it up again one year later is really weak.  

Weak to the tune of MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.  

But OK, if we're gonna continue to play that game, then logically the escalation is for Ziggler to cash in at Elimination Chamber and win the belt, then Cena wins the belt on RAW the next night to set up the UNIFICATION MATCH with Rock at Wrestlemania.  Won't happen, but that's what I'd do.  Yeah, Ziggler gets fucked over again, but he's used to it.  I think seriously though that Orton wins the Chamber and turns heel, then challenges Del Rio at Wrestlemania.  And Rock-Cena will just be a match.

Same questions for Brock-HHH.  What do they do to make it different?  Added stips?  Guest ref?  I really have no desire to see their SummerSlam match again, however the thought of Brock playing the Taker role in last year's HiaC match at WM sounds good on paper.  I can see Lesnar returning tonight during Heyman's performance review, roughing up Vince which will then lead to HHH's return as well.

Good eye on the Lesnar return there.  I think this is clearly where they need to stip up that shit, since HHH has gotta be limited in what he can do in the ring with his new haircut, and both guys love to bleed and go all old school and violent, so they either do a Hell in a Cell match or pay tribute to Magnum and Tully with an I Quit match.  Either way, I would expect gimmicks and blood out the wazoo so they can show up Rock and Cena.


From a marketing standpoint I believe Rock-Brock is the biggest match they could have made, however it seems they want the belt back on Cena, so... I was curious what your take on something like Rock-Brock-Cena in a triple threat title match at Mania would be?  

OK, but you understand the fatal flaw with that, right?  HHH doesn't get his payday and doesn't get to take credit for any extra buys over last year's show that way.   

Considering WWE was hell bent on putting Rock and Cena in a match together again at least this way they wouldn't have to go back on their "Once in a Lifetime" match and we get a new dimension on old rivalries.  If they really want to give Cena a boost have him beat a Hollywood mega-star and a former UFC heavyweight champion in the same match.  That's not how I would book it, but it'll sure give them their Super Cena.  You can still book Undertaker-Punk on the card and whatever else they're going to throw at us.

That's not how they see it.  Wrestlemania is for the once-a-year, casual buyers who only know Rock and Cena and don't care that they already engaged in feats of sports entertaining the year before.  To them, a year is a long time and this is fresh again.  They would be foolish to leave the money on the table from that rematch, especially since Rock is getting older and could leave again at will.  It would be like UFC not doing Sonnen-Silva II just because Chael already lost one match to Silva.  This isn't like TNA fucking up the Aces & Eights booking and drawing 8000 buys instead of 10000.  This is literally a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR wrestling show, and they should tell the smart community to go fuck themselves and do the match that will finance the company for the rest of the year.  It bores me, but I 100% understand and support the reasoning behind it.

Comments

  1. My unification theory was that Dolph wants to do it so he challenges Cena at EC for his title shot. Cena makes Dolph put up his briefcase. Cena wins. Orton wins the title in the EC match, Cena cashes on him. Cena beats Rock to unify the titles, next night on Raw, Orton snaps and turns heel and Orton/Cena headlines Extreme Rules.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, I think there's more money in Ziggler cashing in and losing to PUNK... who then retains at Wrestlemania leading to a Summerslam mega main event against Cena to unify the belts... and Johnny finally gets his big win over Punk there (after all, as he reminded us, he's 0-6 in title shots vs Punk). That really only works if the Undertaker can't go at WM as has been rumored... but what else is Cena going to do after beating the Rock?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why do people continue to think that Ziggler cashing in his WHC Money in the Bank contract for a WWE title match is going to happen?

    It's not.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I've seen a lot of that on Twitter, but the talk here revolves around Ziggler winning the WHC leading to the unification scenarios

    ReplyDelete
  5. What, you think they were spending the fall trying to get Cesaro, Barrett, Sandow, and Rhodes over just to create new stars? Fresh meat for Cena in the spring.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Except 3 of those 4 guys have already been reduced to job status, and Cesaro has all of sudden been booked like a complete wuss (mostly because they've written themselves into a corner by matching him with Orton and Ryback). A rehabbed Jack Swagger isn't going to cut it either.

    ReplyDelete
  7. But they're now over enough to job to Cena in a PPV match and that was the goal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nope. WWE forgets their stipulations often...but not in a way that people might actually enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. There's always Daniel Bryan as well.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why not? The rules for the Rumble seem to change every couple of years.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Aint nobody got time for that!

    ReplyDelete
  12. But not over enough to boost buyrates. TLC was down with Ziggler/Cena on top, and Dolph is front and center on WWE TV right now, more so than the others. If it's not Punk, it's going to be Cena/Orton XXXXIV. I like the start and end of your original theory, but it leaves so many people with nothing to fight for at Wrestlemania.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Every smark asshole who is complaining about Rock/Cena 2 is going to order the damn show anyway and they know that.
    I, for one, am not. They can make shitloads of cash without my $65. Besides, they already got my money for the Rumble & I'm really not happy about it.
    Can we address the real issue -- they tossed away a MEGA buyrate for Elimination Chamber (as well as my interest) by Rocky winning Sunday. Imagine if Punk retained....the rematch would be about a billion times more interesting. And they could really, really play up Punk's streak...and really, really get the smarks into a lather about Punk keeping the title forever.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Preaching to the choir. I'm just going by WWE's gorilla retard math logic.

    ReplyDelete
  15. At least will have an interesting sociological experiment -- when the winners of the two top matches get booed out of of the tri-state as fireworks go off.

    ReplyDelete
  16. ^This is what I'm counting on. Would be massively entertaining in its own right.

    ReplyDelete
  17. You know when they messed up? The PPV after WM last year. They had EVERYONE (even the smarks) sympathizing with Cena during that beat down at the hands of Lesnar. If they had just pulled the trigger and given Lesnar the win and done an injury angle with Cena it would have been maybe possible to get him full face. The storytelling possibilities with Lesnar and Cena from there would have been endless. Presumably leading to monster Brock FINALLY getting his comeuppance after a year of bloodying everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  18. And then we'd probably just have bitched about it at EC instead of at RR. I would have...it would have postponed the inevitable.
    I don't like it either, hate how it unfolded...but everyone knew it was coming.
    I did however, truly enjoy INSANE PUNK on RAW though.

    ReplyDelete
  19. That's been irritating me for months.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I guess business wise they felt they just couldn't live a year without Cena on TV and the road, but just imagine if Cena had lost and been carried out at ER and not been seen since then. (And honestly, Cena hasn't really done anything of consequence storyline-wise all year anyway. You could have had Randy Orton take Cena's place every step of the way all year.)


    Then Monday night, we get the same scene in which Lesnar F5'ed Vince.


    Follwoing week, Triple H makes his big return. And at Elimination Chamber Brock destroys him AGAIN.


    Cut to the Raw after Elimination Chamber. Heyman and Brock in the ring boasting how they now run the WWE and nobody could stop them. All is lost, until...


    And I tell you, when Cena's music hits, there wouldn't be a single fan who wouldn't be going absolutely apeshit. The smarkiest Cena haters would be completely on his side at that moment, and so long as he tweaked his character a bit (NO MORE POOPY!) they could have had a face John Cena that legitimately would have had everyone behind him.


    Obviously it would have taken a lot of guts and patience torun something like that, but by God that Cena-Brock match would have been massive, and gotten Cena over 10x more than beating The Rock while 99% of the crowd boos the shit outta him.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I went over my reasons as to why last night, but I have absolutely no interest in this card at all. Forget about actually paying, at this point I feel like even streaming it will be a waste of my time. Though I will tune in for the last few minutes, seeing the NYC crowd just shit all over Cena when he wins the title will be glorious.

    ReplyDelete
  22. So with the new reports that Taker may actually miss Mania, if that happens...where do you think Punk ends up on the card?


    The logical guess would be to do a big schmozz at EC and make the WWE Title match at Mania Cena-Rock-Punk. But assuming they don't want to do that on account of, I dunno, they'd have to reprint all the Cena-Rock posters they already made, what then? I assume they'd have to place him into the Lesnar-HHH storyline, which would actually make logical sense. Lesnar/Punk vs Triple H & say Ryback? Again, storyline-wise it would be pretty logical and easy to do.


    Outside of shoehorning Punk into the Rock/Cena or HHH/Lesnar matches, I don't see anyone else really at his level right now. Unless they have Sheamus win the WHC at EC and Punk somehow gets a title shot against him.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Cena doesn't even have to sit out for the whole year, if they really can't bare it. Have him sit out 2-3 months (he could probably use the rest anyway, and he sure made it sound like that was the plan in his post-match promo). Recover and return to do his usual thing. Have Brock mow down a couple other people, keep Cena away somehow. Maybe have Cena admit that he'd prefer to fight other people. Going in to Survivor Series have Cena primed to face Punk and take away his title. Instead, Heyman hires Lesnar to take Cena out AGAIN. Then he reappears at Raw after EC and follows your script.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Remember, Vince thinks the fans are stupid and don't remember little details like that anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think we all have the rights as fans to separate the concerns of being a fan of wrestling from those of acknowledging what is a smart move for a wrestling company. The show is already a big success, but that doesn't mean it will be any good.

    I do personally think the buyrate will take a little but of a hit thus year, but it'll still probably come out around a million buys, although they'll make up the difference in revenue with the gate.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yeah, that's probably it right there. They're internally consistent when it will irritate us the most.

    ReplyDelete
  27. See as a fan, I've never cared about buyrates or TV ratings. I understand why WWE cares about those things, and I understand that has to be their main concern. But as a fan and consumer what I want to see isn't based off what will get the highest ratings or buyrates. Last year at WrestleMania 28 I wanted to see Rock vs. Cena not because I thought it'd be the big buyrate bringer that it was. I wanted to see it because it had two dominating personalities who had issues and I wanted to see them inside a wrestling ring.


    So while I understand again that because of the business aspect they are going with Rock/Cena II, as a fan it's not as compelling to me as other match ups because 1. We've seen it already 2. There are several interesting match ups that we haven't seen recently that as a fan are more compelling to me.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I've thought he and Sheamus might get stuck together if they had nothing better to do. I liked the champion vs. champion matches they had in the fall, so I wouldn't mind if that wound up happening.

    ReplyDelete
  29. They could have had him sit out till Summerslam or at least Money in the Bank. It's not like Cena was doing anything compelling between beating Lesnar and the Punk heel turn anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yup, I agree. He sits out until the Monday after Summerslam. Brock destroys HHH at Summerslam. Cena feuds with Punk and then Lesnar costs him a title shot shortly before Survivor Series. Cena sits out again until EC. Megaheat for his comeback.

    ReplyDelete
  31. This is the first time anyone ever said any of this.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I think think they the stories (they tell stories) will sell the matches.

    Brock Lesnar beat Triple H. He broke his arm. A couple of times, if I'm not mistaken. Triple H retired because he can't win his biannual matches anymore. He cut his hair, and took a job in THE BUSINESS, never to wrestle again...but wait! Brock Lesnar, the very man who beat him, broke his arm a couple of times, and who doesn't love THE BUSINESS, showed up on Raw and attacked Vince McMahon, Triple H's father-in-law, and the man who created both his wife and THE BUSINESS he would die for. Now Triple H has to muster up the courage to take on the monster who broke his arm multiple times and prove to himself and everyone else that he was mistaken, he does still have it, he is THE GAME and he over-came the monster Lesnar.


    Then there's John Cena. Remember the video on youtube last year of some little kid crying because John Cena lost? Well year is for him and all of his little buddies who've been distraught for a year knowing that John Cena couldn't beat The Rock. I don't know what Cena's character motivation is - he's a smug prick who's treated as if he's above the title but who can also have a shot at the title anytime he wants. If he doesn't win he doesn't seem to give a fuck anyone because he's still treated like the champion so he doesn't really need the belt, even if it is customized to match his stupid persona.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Agreed. Have Cena get destroyed, then return for his vengeance at SummerSlam. He can win the re-match, then COO HHH comes out the next night to say "OK, now leave" to Brock. Brock breaks his arm, move on to Brock killing everyone else. Cena vs. Punk, Brock/Heyman join Punk to screw Cena over. Run the "Hell in a Cell" PPV with Brock/Punk vs. Cena/Ryback as a tag Cell match. Hunter can return for his match against Lesnar at Wrestlemania (the first, not a re-match, in this scenario)

    ReplyDelete
  34. Having Punk hold the title for over 400 days, only to lose it to part timer The Rock and not have any firm WM plans three months before Wrestlemania seems par for the course.


    I doubt they'd put Punk in with Rock/Cena for a variety of reasons. They'd probably worry Punk's inclusion would turn people off.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Cena/Rock/Punk is what they should be doing to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I also thought, after destroying HHH at SummerSlam, they could have had Lesnar go after Sheamus and his World title at "Night of Champions". They could play up Brock & Heyman wanting to take out "HHH's Boy" and Lesnar could hold the title hostage for a while w/o burning his dates

    ReplyDelete
  37. Guys, this is WrestleMania we're talking about here, not some Backlash or Extreme Rules or something. The company doesn't care about the IWC pissing and moaning about three rematches topping the card. Those three matches will draw a shitload of money as Scott has said numerous times already. They know they have our money (or theoretically). They want the money of the guys like my friends, who watch wrestling twice a year and then ask me about it randomly. When they ask about WrestleMania, I can say yeah Brock is fighting Triple H and Rock is fighting Cena. And Undertaker will be fighting the cool new guy of the day. They can go cool, sounds like fun, let's watch.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Three ways (in wrestling) suck.

    ReplyDelete
  39. HHH/HBK/Benoit begs to differ, even if it technically never happened. And it's not like Rock/Cena is going to be a ***** classic or anything.

    ReplyDelete
  40. The way you explained the Lesnar-Triple H thing, in summary it's a good story but it does no good. Triple H doesn't need the rub. Why couldn't they have done this with someone like Sheamus or Daniel Bryan.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Maybe in this match Cena will do something underhanded to win the title which will turn him babyface

    ReplyDelete
  42. HHH/HBK/Benoit is the exception that proves the rule. HHH/HBK, HHH/Benoit, or HBK/Benoit would all have been better than the three way.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Doubt it - we got all three of those one-on-one matches (two of them on several occasions), and none of them were as good as the "WM20" main.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Well, anything that makes Rock/Cena more interesting will be better than Rock/Cena as it stands now. And no, any combination of 2 of those 3 guys in a 1-on-1 match would have been better than the ***** match of the decade that we got.

    ReplyDelete
  45. John Laurinaitis main-eventing a PPV in 2012 says "hello".

    ReplyDelete
  46. Better for you. All the normal people would be pissed that Rock and Cena aren't going at each other straight up.



    Three ways are for wrestling nerds. Normal people don't understand three ways anymore than they would understand a three way MMA fight.

    ReplyDelete
  47. None of those matchups ever happened at a Wrestlemania. And I wasn't impressed with the HHH/HBK/Killer Backlash match.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I'm pretty sure there were straight singles matches during that period between all three that didn't come close to being as good as the two triple threat matches they had.

    ReplyDelete
  49. If Undertaker isn't physically able to compete at Mania, that might well be it for him ever wrestling again. I mean, what, is ANOTHER full year off going to get him in game shape for Wrestlemania 30? The guy in his late 40's and he's had a litany of injury problems; hell, if it wasn't for the Streak, Taker probably would've retired a few years ago.

    But anyway, back to the specific topic at hand. If Taker/Punk isn't a go, then I'm all for the idea proposed in the other post....a Punk/Brock/Shield vs. HHH/Orton/Sheamus/Ryback/other face (Miz? A turned Ziggler? Jericho? Kingston?) multi-man match, preferably under War Games rules or at least within the Hell in a Cell. Plausible Mania card could be....

    * Cena vs. Rock
    * Punk/Brock/Shield vs. HHH/Sheamus/Ryback/Orton/Miz
    * Del Rio vs. Ziggler....this still seems like the most logical World title bout
    * Bryan vs. Kane
    * Mysterio/Sin Cara vs. Rhodes Scholars for the tag titles
    * Kaitlyn vs. AJ for the divas title
    * Jericho vs. Cesaro...easy storyline is Y2K going after the one title he's never won, and Cesaro gets put over big
    * Money In The Bank match for all the remaining notable talents.....winner would presumably be Barrett

    ReplyDelete
  50. To my knowledge, HBK and Benoit have never had a one-on-one match on PPV, so that's an apples-to-oranges comparison. And I don't imagine that HHH was all that motivated to put over Benoit a third time at Vengeance.

    HHH/HBK at Bad Blood was better than either three way was.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I think HBK and Benoit main evented a Raw back around then but I'm too lazy to look it up. And by all accounts, HHH and Benoit were pretty close, so I have no doubt he had no problems putting him over again.


    If you like that Bad Blood match more than the triple threats, god bless you but you are the first person I've seen make that statement.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Good thing it's not an MMA fight, seeing as how no one involved in this conversation has a fucking thing to do with MMA. Well, Punk kind of does, but he's not an active fighter or anything.


    HOWEVER, Punk has a pretty big fanbase among wrestling fans, and adding him to the Cena/Rock match will draw money, as opposed to having him get squashed by Taker, or doing something else that doesn't involve Punk in that world title match, which won't draw shit.
    Putting Punk in that match at least adds a little more intrigue to it.

    ReplyDelete
  53. But wouldn't brock v rock be the biggest draw?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Let me type slowly so it gets through to you:

    The...main...event...is...for...MAINSTREAM...fans!

    Right now, in the mainstream world, there is The Rock, there is John Cena, and there is everybody else (well, there is Stone Cold if he decides to come back...) You might as well throw in Hiroshi Tanahashi or El Generico into the match, it would have the same effect of diluting it for the masses as adding in CM Punk.

    No three way match has even won a WON Match of the Year award. Take a few moments to ponder why that is.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I'm guessing they may save that for Wrestlemania 30?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Punk adds zero intrigue to that match. He would just be there to eat the pin and be an excuse to do Rock/Cena 3.

    ReplyDelete
  57. That's a little ridiculous. Triple threat matches are no harder to understand that a ladder match or any other gimmick match.

    ReplyDelete
  58. A lot of the reason why Triple threats suck is because there is a shit worker or two in the match. Pretty much every triple threat that had 3 good/great workers in it have all been at least 5 stars, including one of the best of the decade at WM20.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Apparently, you're too far removed from normal people to think like them.


    Even WWE themselves can't figure out what a three way fight should be like. That's why they are always structured as a series of two way fights, juryrigged with clumsy, convoluted segues to keep the third guy out of action until it's time for him to wake up and create some artificial drama.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Just because a match is poorly laid out doesn't make it hard to follow or understand. There have been triple threat matches since the 90's. It isn't some new concept.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Correct. And that's precisely why those matches would have been better as regular two man fights, without the ridiculous three man match crutches that have to be attended to.

    ReplyDelete
  62. But it doesn't mean the concept sucks or that a Rock/Cena/Punk(all 3 great workers)match would suck.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Which is why this is the perfect time to do a 3-way.

    ReplyDelete
  64. While I have been defending the triple threat match, I can't co-sign a Rock/Cena/Punk match. It would be good but I no interest in seeing Punk become Rock and Cena's personal punching bag for 20 minutes.


    Plus it would lead to another Rock/Cena match.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Right now, probably, because it's one of those dream matches for wrestling fans. But in the sense that it's the big Hollywood star vs. the big UFC star? No way. Rock is a decent actor that's made decent money with his movies, but he ain't DiCaprio or Willis or Matt Damon, and even if he was he's not bringing in non-wrestling fans. People that hate wrestling hate it for a reason: they think it's total bullshit, and nothing is going to change that. And UFC fans that didn't follow Brock over from WWE hate wrestling, because it's fake.

    ReplyDelete
  66. The draw is that Brock brought a ton of wrestling fans with him to UFC who stayed there. He was the 3rd biggest PPV draw of all time when he retired. Those fans would come back for that match(for one night at least).


    And Cena is nowhere near Brock's level on a mainstream basis or draw basis.

    ReplyDelete
  67. It may not suck. But it will bring the match down a level from where it could have been.

    Think back to the epic Wrestlemania matches of lore, and adapt for three way stips.

    Hulk Hogan vs Andre the Giant vs Paul Orndorff

    Hulk Hogan vs Ultimate Warrior vs Randy Savage


    Shawn Michaels vs Bret Hart vs Diesel

    Steve Austin vs The Rock vs The Undertaker

    Do any of those sound like an improvement on what we got?

    A three way match is designed to compensate for people that can't have a normal match (that's why ECW did them in the first place) It helps those that can't work, but it hinders those that can. As such, the three way stip has no place in the main event.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Rock/Cena 1 wasn't exactly the bees knees so I don't think adding Punk would make it worse. No way would you do Rock/Cena 1 as a triple threat but this is the re-match. Nobody will care.


    And if triple threats would have in vogue back then, I bet you a hundred bucks they run Warrior/Hogan/Savage instead. And it would have rocked. And so would Bret/Nash/HBK for the record.


    I think it has been proved that 3 ways don't hinder guys at all when all 3 are equally good.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "No three way match has even won a WON Match of the Year award. Take a few moments to ponder why that is."

    Because it didn't happen in Japan? Fuck Meltzer and fuck the Observer.

    "Right now, in the mainstream world, there is The Rock, there is John Cena, and there is everybody else"

    No, there's the Rock. Go take a sample of a few hundred people and ask them if they know who John Cena is. Maybe 10% will know the name, and it's because either A: They're already wrestling fans, or the parent/boyfriend of a wrestling fan (which means they're not MAINSTREAM) or B: Saw him on Kimmel or whatever before they changed it because they hate wrestling. Rock doesn't bring in MAINSTREAM fans, he brings in people were Attitude Era fans and stopped watching because it sucks now, but miss when it didn't. Cena don't draw shit, as much as certain trolling fuckheads that should be banned from the blog like to blame the decline in ratings and buyrates on Punk, fact is that Cena has still been the main focus of most shows and business is tanking when it's not WM season and Rocky ain't around. Badly.

    "The...main...event...is...for...MAINSTREAM...fans!"

    Yeah, OK. Come talk to me when Rocky is gone and Raw is doing a 1.5 in May or so. Of course, they could have spent the past year actually building up new people and putting on a show for people that want to watch wrestling. But fuck, what do I know, I'm not the guy who's stock is worth about 1/4 what it was worth 3 years ago...

    ReplyDelete
  70. Oh, saying Cena is "nowhere near" Brock's draw is being generous. But that was kind of my point, Brock is like Rocky, they're only bringing in fans that were wrestling fans to begin with and want to see the guys they loved before WWE got all shitty. And once Rock leaves for Hollywood, and Brock goes back to banging Sable or hunting or corn farming or whatever he does when he's not wrestling all those fans that bought WM are gone too. The only new fans WWE is making are little kids, and once they discover girls or start playing sports or just get sick of it (kids tend to have short attention spans) they'll move on.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Good point, but I can't think of anything else to do with Punk. Rock/Cena/Brock would be even better, but no way will HHH sign off on that.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Punk/Taker or Punk/HHH is fine.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I could see that match drawing in some people who hear about it and think "Wait...the Rock is fighting the crazy UFC guy?" and they buy it without really knowing what they're in for.



    Kinda related: Look at how UFC used Brock to lure in the wrestling fans and then kept them there by featuring other top guys and up and coming guys on his cards. Hooking the Brock fans on non Brock guys so there is no loss when Brock retired. Yet another thing UFC outclasses WWE in.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Michaels/Hart/Diesel sounds better than the WM11 match, more eventful but not as good as the WM12 match.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Scott's right, they're going to make a bajillion dollars off this show, so how can anyone blame them for going in this direction (*IF* this is what they go with, it's January 31st and Brock just resigned for 2 more years so plans might change)?
    And there's nothing more annoying than people who pick and choose when they use the numbers (ratings and ppv buys) and when they deem them "irrelevant" and make an analogy involving Transformers. Presently these people are dismissing them (even though the point of wrestling is to MAKE MONEY), but if Cena/HHH go over and Raw ratings and the ER buyrate drop, they'll be in full "see? see? Told 'ya!" form.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Where is this "year of bloodying everyone" going to happen? The man has a seriously limited contract, so you'd still have him gone for most of the year. So know you've lost the guy you've positioned as the top dog, *and* the guy who used to hold that spot.

    ReplyDelete
  77. "HHH/HBK at Bad Blood was better than either three way was"
    I'm with cult, you are literally the first person I've ever seen make that statement. I liked that match better than most, but it *was* too long (they could've easily chopped off 10 minutes), and isn't close to being better than WMXX.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I don't think it's a given that it will do more than last year in terms of buys. I think it's going to depend a lot on the build. If it is as corny as last year and they don't touch each other, I think it does worse.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I don't think it necessarily has to eclipse last year, just as long as it's in the ballpark. Does it really matter if it beats last year by 10k buys or comes up 25k short?
    As for the build, I have a lot faith in Rock/Cena/McMahon. I thought they did a great job last year (probably in the minority on this blog) with the "no touching" cause it was a first time match. Now that the novelty has worn off I think they're smart enough to go with a different build.
    Personally, I'm just not as down on this year's Mania as everyone else for 1 reason: Brock resigned for 2 more years. They've got time to do Brock/Rock, Brock/Punk, Brock/Sheamus, etc. Now that I don't have to worry about a HHH rematch being his last match, I'm actually looking forward to it cause it's a great story (in fact it's the same one people were pitching for Cena/Brock).

    ReplyDelete
  80. I think the no touching thing was a good idea for last year but my problem was the terrible Rock concerts, rap battles, and fruity pebbles type stuff. That shit can't happen this year. Would I rather have a different card? Yeah but I'm not freaking out about it like some people. If the build is good, I'll have no complaints.


    But if it sucks, I think there is a definite chance it will do under a mil buyrate wise and that would be a huge disappointment for WWE.

    ReplyDelete
  81. I'm not so sure the Wrestlemania plans are set in stone. Rock/Cena II is obviously in place, but if Taker isn't able to wrestle (which I think is fairly likely) then the rest of the card is up for grabs.



    In that case, a big 5-on-5 with Brock, Punk, The Shield vs. HHH, Sheamus, Ryback, and perhaps Hell No! would work. Gives a lot wrestlers the rub, gives HHH the chance to get his win back. I don't see HHH/Brock being a big secondary draw in the way HHH/Taker was last year, and Punk/Sheamus both need to be in a high profile match - two birds, one stone.

    ReplyDelete
  82. I would say that there are matches who could draw more money than Rock vs Cena II.



    For example:


    The Rock vs The Undertaker
    or
    The Rock vs Triple H
    or

    John Cena vs Steve Austin

    ReplyDelete
  83. Benoit and Trips wrestled at No Mercy 00 (Trips won) and again at Vengeance 2004 (Benoit retained the title).

    ReplyDelete
  84. If they wouldn't only think about and build up Wrestlemania but would instead put the same effort in the other ppvs as well, they would make a lot shitload more of money than today with only one real ppv.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Nice Rounders reference

    ReplyDelete
  86. "And then we'd probably just have bitched about it at EC instead of at RR"


    Because its cool to swear!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Pay dat man his money.

    ReplyDelete
  88. THREADJACK!~


    At long last, WWE Main Eent has jumped the shark.


    Oh well. It had a good run.

    ReplyDelete
  89. The HHH-Brock story actually reads pretty well. It's just that no one, anywhere, gives shit one about HHH.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Who were the top 2?

    ReplyDelete
  91. Pacquiao and Mayweather. I forget which one is first, but all 3 were pretty close at the time of Lesnar's last fight.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Why the fuck does Grammar(sp?) get so upset when KGB loses anyway? He is going to get his money... did he just want to beat him up that badly?

    ReplyDelete
  93. Been awhile since I've seen it but basically Grama was a nobody who suddenly thought he was hot shit when he was getting backed by Teddy KGB. He used that to his advantage over Worm and Mike when they were in trouble, so when Mike wins, he loses that power. Back to being a stooge with nobody to push around.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Brand split, Once in a lifetime, royal rumble

    ReplyDelete
  95. Sometimes...

    ReplyDelete
  96. I give a shit about Triple H. Granted, a lot less than before. His haircut is terrible looking BTW. Like it works for everybody else, except him.

    ReplyDelete
  97. They had a Raw match in 04 that kicked all kinds of ass. Benoit vs. Shawn at Backlash would have been epic. And yes the 3 way rematch at Backlash was great as well, but Benoit-Shawn would have been the bee's knees.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I did really like Punk's promo on Raw (and all of his recent stuff with Rocky), but that particular line came off a bit flat from the guy who repeatedly told Rock that he would kick his ass just a couple of weeks earlier.

    I guess it's cool to swear sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  99. He's a heel... that gives him some leeway with being a hypocrite

    ReplyDelete
  100. up vote for "because it didn't happen in japan." I love the observer and have been reading it since I was a kid but hey dave we get it, Japanese guys are better, now can you please tell me what was wrong with savage v steamboat that you had to deduct a half a star? Oh yeah, cuz vince promoted it.

    ReplyDelete
  101. That's what i've been telling my girlfriend for months.

    ReplyDelete
  102. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0SCX-7JiFU

    ReplyDelete
  103. I'm in on a sandow v cena main event program even if sandow does a few jobs to big john.

    ReplyDelete
  104. This guy gets it. Rock/Cena I wasn't an exceptionally good match. It got carried by the crowd reaction, which, while not Rock/Hogan, was still strong enough to make an average match better. Rock isn't the worker he was 10 years ago. Cena's good, but he doesn't work miracles.


    The only argument for excluding Punk is that he'll overshadow both guys in NYC. The Mania crowd is uber-smark. They're definitely going to boo Cena no matter what he does. You throw Punk in and there's a chance you split the crowd support between Rock and Punk. The show is being built as Cena's ascension as the GOAT. The fans are going to shit on that because it's generally a stupid idea, but the bile will be much stronger if Punk is present in that match. Especially if they do the Rock/Cena handshake deal after Punk eats the pin (because you know he will in this scenario).

    ReplyDelete
  105. "Every smark asshole who is complaining about Rock/Cena 2 is going to order the damn show anyway and they know that."


    seriously doubt that. I am pretty sure many people will try to find others ways to watch WrestleMania than paying for it (or at least: paying the full price).

    ReplyDelete
  106. Despite me wishing that Punk's title reign was still going, not having the title at least gives him some fresh material to work with.

    ReplyDelete
  107. At least that would have got us out of seeing that shitty Hart/Backlund match.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Kids these days don't know what a heel is. The heel that they think they know is just another shade of face.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I've seen a few comments from people wondering what Punk will do if Undertaker can't go. Couldn't they have him face Ryback at Wrestlemania? Ryback wanted to get The Shield, since they cost him the title. But now we found out that Punk was behind it the whole time. So Ryback gets his hands on The Shield at EC, and then gets Punk at Mania.

    I'm not saying this is what I want to see, but it would bring the storyline to a close, no?

    ReplyDelete
  110. GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

    ReplyDelete
  111. How are those stipulations? Once in a Lifetime was a fucking tag-line.


    What the fuck are you talking about?

    ReplyDelete
  112. Sorry, stipulations was a poor choice of words. WWE often forgets what they say/tell their audience. Which is why they write shows with such comments as "people don't remember that." In reference to the above comment, in which there was an idea about Ziggler cashing in for the WWE title, in which his MiTB briefcase is not good for.

    ReplyDelete
  113. I agree -- I personally love talking buyrates and statistics as all of that stuff interests me, but I think it'd be an awfully silly as a fan to let that inform decisions about what you like or what you 'should like'. Lots of mediocre and terrible things are extremely popular and make tons of money.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Yeah, I would venture that given the enormity of the contracts involved, that doing under a million buys would be pretty bad in terms of the bottom line.

    On the other hand, they are pretty likely to nearly double their biggest gate ever based on current ticket sales, so they may make the money up there if it bombs on PPV.

    ReplyDelete
  115. I get that. But I really think the lack of continuity/disrespect of canon is exaggerated by the IWC.


    Ziggler will not cash in his briefcase for the WWE title, they do not piss on stipulations to that extent.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment