My ideas for creative......

[Dandy 0]

If anyone wants to move this to fantasy, so be it. I see things on her that have ideas from time to time, so please let it stay here if at all possible.

 

I tried reading all of the pages in the thread about Jericho and Trish, and wanted to respond and add some things, but it was already 12 pages long when I started reading it, and more posts were coming in while I was trying to follow it. Soooooo, here are a few certain things I think would work. I think it fits with the competition thing, simple feuds based on WRESTLING, and maybe s little drama, since you know that wrestling matches don't provide drama. Fans in the arena and watching at home all, sigh or cheer at near falls because Jericho almost killed Lucy the dog, not because the match has them on the edge of their seats.

 

you want puro obviously. you think the focal point of a fued should be the matches. well the average viewer doesn't care about that enough to buy a ppv. they need something juicy.

 

And if viewer's don't buy the PPV's for the matches, why the hell do they run basically all matches on PPV's, and use matches to decide feuds. Because it is WRESTLING............

 

Idea #1---Two wrestlers talk to each other about how they have never held the World Heavyweight Championship, and they are getting on in their careers. They decide they will set out to achieve this. Both are hell-bent on getting the Title, and trying to get their shot at it. They both tear through the competition with renewed vigor, and basically are competing against each other along the way, as they see who will accomplish it first.

 

I would pick Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit for this. They can handle the wrestling parts very well, have held just about every title imaginable except for the big one, and are veteran wrestlers. Smarks and marks alike have wanted Benoit to be on top for years, and Eddie is gaining unbelievable momentum. You could have this angle stretch out for several months, and end several ways. They fight for the number one contendership, and the loser of that tries to cost the other guy to lose in the title match; OR One guy ends up winning the title and the other guy turns on him due to jealousy, or they trade the title as faces once each after one inititially wins the title. The outcome would depend on how the crowd reacts to the angle, and who has more support.

 

I realized this was WAY long while I was writing it, so I will put another idea up after this post.

[Guest robvandam420]

If anyone wants to move this to fantasy, so be it. I see things on her that have ideas from time to time, so please let it stay here if at all possible.

 

I tried reading all of the pages in the thread about Jericho and Trish, and wanted to respond and add some things, but it was already 12 pages long when I started reading it, and more posts were coming in while I was trying to follow it. Soooooo, here are a few certain things I think would work. I think it fits with the competition thing, simple feuds based on WRESTLING, and maybe s little drama, since you know that wrestling matches don't provide drama. Fans in the arena and watching at home all, sigh or cheer at near falls because Jericho almost killed Lucy the dog, not because the match has them on the edge of their seats.

 

you want puro obviously. you think the focal point of a fued should be the matches. well the average viewer doesn't care about that enough to buy a ppv. they need something juicy.

 

And if viewer's don't buy the PPV's for the matches, why the hell do they run basically all matches on PPV's, and use matches to decide feuds. Because it is WRESTLING............

 

Idea #1---Two wrestlers talk to each other about how they have never held the World Heavyweight Championship, and they are getting on in their careers. They decide they will set out to achieve this. Both are hell-bent on getting the Title, and trying to get their shot at it. They both tear through the competition with renewed vigor, and basically are competing against each other along the way, as they see who will accomplish it first.

 

I would pick Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit for this. They can handle the wrestling parts very well, have held just about every title imaginable except for the big one, and are veteran wrestlers. Smarks and marks alike have wanted Benoit to be on top for years, and Eddie is gaining unbelievable momentum. You could have this angle stretch out for several months, and end several ways. They fight for the number one contendership, and the loser of that tries to cost the other guy to lose in the title match; OR One guy ends up winning the title and the other guy turns on him due to jealousy, or they trade the title as faces once each after one inititially wins the title. The outcome would depend on how the crowd reacts to the angle, and who has more support.

 

I realized this was WAY long while I was writing it, so I will put another idea up after this post.

sure the wrestling would be great, but thats not a strong enough story to keep people interested for 6 months. you need swerves, and shock tv to make in interesting. why do most if not all of you think that what worked along time ago will work now? it doesn't. for an example take john cena. the reason he's so over is that his character has never been done before, its something new. if he was just the john cena that debuted against angle, he wouldn't be close to where he is now. thats why i say that those details are very important. no one likes seeing re runs.

[Dandy 0]

Oh, I agree with you about Cena. And I'm not a mindless sheep. I have been a member her for a LOOOOOONG time and rarely post. I disagree with people on here all the time, I just don't post it. And your reference to things of the past.........everything is cyclical. However, you already stated that the company has returned to Crash TV and the Russo Era because it has proven to work in the past. If they switched over to an emphasis on wrestling in the year 2000, then why did they "go back to the past" to the Russo era. I hope you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, because you contradict yourself too much for anyone to take your good points seriously. It's like you change every statement to mold you into an argument in whatever is being discussed.

 

Example---

you say the Russo era is better than a good blowjob

 

you say that switching to the "wrestling emphasis" of 2000 was a mistake, even though it provided the most recent peak in ratings and the bottom line

 

You say that things from the past do not work, and we are all stuck in the past

 

Russo's era is in the past

 

 

Hmmmm...................

 

Please stop trying to ruin our board. It's not that you are spouting a different opinion; it's that you are not accepting anyone else's ideas. If you want to rock the boat, rock the boat. But please don't tell me 2+2=5. Simply look at what is provided to you. If you are wrong, move on. If you want to argue just to get an erection, please go elsewhere.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

I think this would work very well as each match, you could see Benoit and Guerrero trying to one up the other by having a better match and trying to prove to Vince that they deserve the shot at the Title first. This allows for a heated rivalry with both men even watching each other's matches at ringside, hiring other wrestlers to take the other one out, etc.

[Guest robvandam420]

Oh, I agree with you about Cena. And I'm not a mindless sheep. I have been a member her for a LOOOOOONG time and rarely post. I disagree with people on here all the time, I just don't post it. And your reference to things of the past.........everything is cyclical. However, you already stated that the company has returned to Crash TV and the Russo Era because it has proven to work in the past. If they switched over to an emphasis on wrestling in the year 2000, then why did they "go back to the past" to the Russo era. I hope you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, because you contradict yourself too much for anyone to take your good points seriously. It's like you change every statement to mold you into an argument in whatever is being discussed.

 

Example---

you say the Russo era is better than a good blowjob

 

you say that switching to the "wrestling emphasis" of 2000 was a mistake, even though it provided the most recent peak in ratings and the bottom line

 

You say that things from the past do not work, and we are all stuck in the past

 

Russo's era is in the past

 

 

Hmmmm...................

 

Please stop trying to ruin our board. It's not that you are spouting a different opinion; it's that you are not accepting anyone else's ideas. If you want to rock the boat, rock the boat. But please don't tell me 2+2=5. Simply look at what is provided to you. If you are wrong, move on. If you want to argue just to get an erection, please go elsewhere.

thats not what i said. i never acknowledged them stopping the attitude era. marrying the bosses daughter is pretty attitude laden if you ask me. russos era is in the present. its russo's approach to writing tv that they adopted. they adopted it because it works. your style is in the past, thats what i said, and i stand by it. and if they try to revive it it will end up in the past again. i agree that 2000 was a great year, but it was not traditional. it was complex storylines that grabbed the viewers interest. and the matches hhh had didn't hurt either.

[Guest robvandam420]

if there were more oposing ideas than just one, i might accept it. but this on idea i dont accept.

[Guest robvandam420]

I think this would work very well as each match, you could see Benoit and Guerrero trying to one up the other by having a better match and trying to prove to Vince that they deserve the shot at the Title first. This allows for a heated rivalry with both men even watching each other's matches at ringside, hiring other wrestlers to take the other one out, etc.

yeah the matches would be excellent but its not enough to draw the average viewer. how well do you think a japenise promotion would do on u.s televeison?

[Ultra Violence 0]

Isn't this a little too much like AJ / D'lo in TNA?

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

if there were more oposing ideas than just one, i might accept it. but this on idea i dont accept.

You know what I don't accept? Your stereotype on how anyone who isn't bowled over for sportzzzz entertainment must "obviously want puro". It's a totally unsubstantiated claim and is total bull.

[Guest robvandam420]

if there were more oposing ideas than just one, i might accept it. but this on idea i dont accept.

You know what I don't accept? Your stereotype on how anyone who isn't bowled over for sportzzzz entertainment must "obviously want puro". It's a totally unsubstantiated claim and is total bull.

well you want simple storylines. thats as close to puro as you can get with todays atmosphere. people dont want to see simple, logical storylines because they are boring. thats why he wants NEW viewers. not everyone likes that boring crap, me included.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

When (NOT if) this 'Jericho bangs Trish then leaves her' storyline doesn't catch the world on fire I'll be looking for you.

 

This applies to Scott Steiner's "awesome" heel turn as well.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

I'd rather have REAL Wrestling than goofy Storylines and Shock TV.

 

And I only watched 4 or 5 Puro Matches in my life. SO HA!

[Guest robvandam420]

When (NOT if) this 'Jericho bangs Trish then leaves her' storyline doesn't catch the world on fire I'll be looking for you.

 

This applies to Scott Steiner's "awesome" heel turn as well.

umm, ok

[Guest robvandam420]

but puro matches do rule though.... kiwada/ misawa. fucking nuts.

[Dandy 0]

I have only seen TNA a couple of times. I am not very familiar with how the AJ Styles/D'Lo feud went.

I saw the 2/3 falls matches, but have no knowledge of how the feud began.

 

 

And robvandam420, I know that there is nothing that is going to convince you otherwise, but just for my own sanity, please understand that storylines can and are built from simple mathups. You don't have to have a necrophiliac pedophile hooker to have a storyline. I understand that there is a mix of wrestling and storylines. I grasp that very well, as I am not amphibian shit. However, even you have to agree that today's WWE is struggling at such a point that whatever fans are left need to be kept happy. And if what they are doing is turning off diehard fans and not attracting new viewers, don't you think they should try something else? Take it from someone who owns/runs their own business. If business is stagnant or on the decline, you don't want to keep doing what you are doing and hope it rides out. You want to go with what makes you money. Simply put, the WWE's infamous storylines that they are running to grab all these viewers is running the company into the ground. A company that most of us grew up on and want to see it succeed. You're not Vince McMahon by any chance are you? Because you are about as stubborn.

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

if there were more oposing ideas than just one, i might accept it. but this on idea i dont accept.

You know what I don't accept? Your stereotype on how anyone who isn't bowled over for sportzzzz entertainment must "obviously want puro". It's a totally unsubstantiated claim and is total bull.

well you want simple storylines. thats as close to puro as you can get with todays atmosphere. people dont want to see simple, logical storylines because they are boring. thats why he wants NEW viewers. not everyone likes that boring crap, me included.

Why do you always equate simple storylines with boring? It's only boring if the wrestlers involved are boring. I find nonsensical crap boring personally because I just can't get into it.

[Guest robvandam420]

I have only seen TNA a couple of times. I am not very familiar with how the AJ Styles/D'Lo feud went.

I saw the 2/3 falls matches, but have no knowledge of how the feud began.

 

 

And robvandam420, I know that there is nothing that is going to convince you otherwise, but just for my own sanity, please understand that storylines can and are built from simple mathups. You don't have to have a necrophiliac pedophile hooker to have a storyline. I understand that there is a mix of wrestling and storylines. I grasp that very well, as I am not amphibian shit. However, even you have to agree that today's WWE is struggling at such a point that whatever fans are left need to be kept happy. And if what they are doing is turning off diehard fans and not attracting new viewers, don't you think they should try something else? Take it from someone who owns/runs their own business. If business is stagnant or on the decline, you don't want to keep doing what you are doing and hope it rides out. You want to go with what makes you money. Simply put, the WWE's infamous storylines that they are running to grab all these viewers is running the company into the ground. A company that most of us grew up on and want to see it succeed. You're not Vince McMahon by any chance are you? Because you are about as stubborn.

well my take on it is that shock tv is good, but they way they are doing it is bad. in a perfect world, elements of logic and maintaining credibility would be balanced with shock tv with PROPER followups.

wwe right now does not know how to follow up. for instance with the kane angle... if after he burnt jr he started going after the title, that would be good. it would make sense. he fucking snapped and decided he wants the title NOW. thats what i call a good mixture. it elevates kane and the belt. but this shane o mac crap has got to go. i could beat up shane, yet shane can beat kane? whats going on here, is kane allergic to shanes cologne or something? its retarded.

[Guest robvandam420]

if there were more oposing ideas than just one, i might accept it. but this on idea i dont accept.

You know what I don't accept? Your stereotype on how anyone who isn't bowled over for sportzzzz entertainment must "obviously want puro". It's a totally unsubstantiated claim and is total bull.

well you want simple storylines. thats as close to puro as you can get with todays atmosphere. people dont want to see simple, logical storylines because they are boring. thats why he wants NEW viewers. not everyone likes that boring crap, me included.

Why do you always equate simple storylines with boring? It's only boring if the wrestlers involved are boring. I find nonsensical crap boring personally because I just can't get into it.

boring is ok for undercard fueds, but not main event ones. they need to draw. and shock tv can help if used properly. if kane started chasing the title after he burnt jr think how high the buyrates would be. that is what i would have called a legit threat to the title for sure. but now im only convinced that shane can beat up an entire bar full of people while i can apparently bitch kane seeing that im bigger than shane is and in better shape.

[Anakin Flair 0]

if there were more oposing ideas than just one, i might accept it. but this on idea i dont accept.

You know what I don't accept? Your stereotype on how anyone who isn't bowled over for sportzzzz entertainment must "obviously want puro". It's a totally unsubstantiated claim and is total bull.

well you want simple storylines. thats as close to puro as you can get with todays atmosphere. people dont want to see simple, logical storylines because they are boring. thats why he wants NEW viewers. not everyone likes that boring crap, me included.

Hey slick, I LIKE good story lines. GOOD story lines. Not Jericho asking Trish out to the prom, but GOOD, well planned out story lines that elevates someone and puts out great matches. And I like good wrestling. And I've NEVER see puro.

I repsect your opinion, but don't try to just force it on us because you deem yours is the only opinion that counts.

[eirejmcmahon 0]

sure the wrestling would be great, but thats not a strong enough story to keep people interested for 6 months.

It's a rare WWE program that has to last six months, hell till the PPV split, you only had to get 4 shows worth out of most feuds.

[Guest robvandam420]

sure the wrestling would be great, but thats not a strong enough story to keep people interested for 6 months.

It's a rare WWE program that has to last six months, hell till the PPV split, you only had to get 4 shows worth out of most feuds.

yeah... the brand split makes it harder to book fueds because you now have more time. but on the other hand you get to see what works and what doesn't before you risk putting it on ppv. not like vince cares or anything.

[eirejmcmahon 0]

sure the wrestling would be great, but thats not a strong enough story to keep people interested for 6 months.

It's a rare WWE program that has to last six months, hell till the PPV split, you only had to get 4 shows worth out of most feuds.

yeah... the brand split makes it harder to book fueds because you now have more time. but on the other hand you get to see what works and what doesn't before you risk putting it on ppv. not like vince cares or anything.

Well my point was more that you were discounting angles out of hand on the basis that they couldn't stretch to six months when clearly the don't need to be.

 

Even in the advent of the split, the WWE appear to be opting for a four week on/four week off holding pattern. So you have Brand A spinning it's wheels while Brand B builds towards its PPV that month, with Brand A's major feuds only kicking in after Brand B's PPV.

[Guest Megatron]

I am a new member to this board. I hope to make a home here. I have been watching wrestling since WM2. I think that the WWE was alot better back in the day. I mean, Honky PUSHING Elizabeth to the ground was MONEY. Nowadays Stacy gets beat up on a semi-regular basis and it draws flies. Can you see where I'm going with this? Simple storylines always make the most sense. Remember how they used to portray practically everyone as someone who was looking to get into a run for a belt, any belt? Now they just throw a couple guys out there and let them have 2 minutes of match time just to do yet another 20 minute interview. I'm sorry, but I think old school is the best style. I don't mean to say that they should go back to armlocks and chinlocks, just keep the motivations simple. "Wrestler A has a beef with Wrestler B because they both are potential title contenders." That's the stuff I want to see. I don't care for Jericho/Trish because we've already seen Jericho beat up several women, including Trish. He flattened Chyna's hand with a hammer! Now we're supposed to believe he's all about saving the women? I'd rather see him wrestle and do his Highlight Reel. I think that this should be the only format for the interviews. Piper's Pit or Brother Love used to be the way to go. And we didn't even get one of them every weekAnd they always tended to keep them kinda short. Guy comes out, talks shit, gets punked. It's as simple as that. I think that they should try to bring back the little interview snippets that they used to run during matches to have a guy introduce himself, talk trash or whatever. 5 years of 20 minute interviews has gotten pretty damn old. Sometimes we even get 2 per show.

 

Sorry if this post has been rambling, but I feel strongly about this. I have invested too much time and money into the WWE and I am really starting to get pissed that they won't do anything to fix the product. I know it's been said in better ways than I've put forth here, but if they don't start trying to make a real change, then I'm afraid that there won't be any WWE in 10 years. RAW has been slowly improving lately, and I even like Goldberg as the champ. Anybody but HHH at this time is welcome. But I keep hearing that Bill's gonna be gone come WM. Just think how many average fans know this as well. How can the marks get behind anybody when they know that they are going to split anyway?

 

That's enough venting for now.