A revolutionary idea ...

[Guest Loss]

How about all clean finishes, all the time? Draws are acceptable, but no more countouts or disqualifications. No more outside interference. Every match has a clear winner and a clear loser.

 

So a guy needs to lose a match, but you want to protect him? How do you do it? By working a better match that makes the guy look good in losing? It's happened before. It can happen now.

 

Encouraging all clean finishes would encourage the workers to step up their games and put on better matches, and would also take some of the stress off of the writers, leaving the performers to deliver or be quickly left behind.

 

Ratings and buyrates would also go way up if every show guaranteed a definite winner and definite loser in every match. There's a certain frustration that comes with watching a really long match that ends in a screwjob finish.

 

The downside? Well, wrestler's egos would be damaged. That's about it.

 

They figured this out in Japan two decades ago for crying out loud. We should have fixed the problem here long before now.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

But how in gods name will you continue a feud?

[notJames 0]

Why, post-match beatdowns, of course!

 

And the occasional "Your man ain't my baby's daddy!"-style adult-themed angle that's a big hit with the ladies.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Loss, your assuming that they would have wrestlers who know how to work then.....correct?

[Guest Shoes Head]

There's a historical precedent in AJPW....how did it work there?

[Exslade ZX 0]

Of course...I'm probaly in the minority here, but I'm one that says wrestling actually needs run ins. I mean of course..not all the time or anything, but for instance, last night, the Edge run in, in the World title match. IMO...perfectly acceptable, and because of it, a lot of possibilites have aroused. Edge could join Evo, or he couldn't and it could just start a one on one feud with Michaels, or Edge could join evo..and somehow turn on them saying it was all a plan (yea..that's pretty stupid but just stating examples) but the point is..it's because of many run ins, and WWe's able to continue/start many storylines.

 

Disabling that..while this may sound stupid, would make this to much of a 'sport'. And well, if you want a good, clean, watchable match with no interference, there's always amateur wrestling :/. But as I said..that's just my opinion. Should they cut down? Yes. Should they get rid of them? No.

[razazteca 0]

But how in gods name will you continue a feud?

Managers will do all the talking.

[Downhome 0]

Mainstream will forever need DQs, cheating, count outs, and on and on. I love great matches, but when all of these things are used when they should be used, they can really work.

 

That said, no WWE isn't using all of those things as they should, that's quote obvious.

[strummer 0]

Didn't Jim Ross try this in the NWA when he was booker?

[razazteca 0]

More vignettes less in ring promos

 

Make Coach a manager and never have him as an annoucer ever again

 

Fire Grisham, hire Joey Style

[Guest Loss]

Mainstream will forever need DQs, cheating, count outs, and on and on. I love great matches, but when all of these things are used when they should be used, they can really work.

 

That said, no WWE isn't using all of those things as they should, that's quote obvious.

The thing is that wrestling is far more mainstream in the Japan than in the US, or at least it was that way at one time, because people took it seriously. A large part of that was doing all clean finishes.

[Guest Loss]

Of course...I'm probaly in the minority here, but I'm one that says wrestling actually needs run ins. I mean of course..not all the time or anything, but for instance, last night, the Edge run in, in the World title match. IMO...perfectly acceptable, and because of it, a lot of possibilites have aroused. Edge could join Evo, or he couldn't and it could just start a one on one feud with Michaels, or Edge could join evo..and somehow turn on them saying it was all a plan (yea..that's pretty stupid but just stating examples) but the point is..it's because of many run ins, and WWe's able to continue/start many storylines.

 

Disabling that..while this may sound stupid, would make this to much of a 'sport'. And well, if you want a good, clean, watchable match with no interference, there's always amateur wrestling :/. But as I said..that's just my opinion. Should they cut down? Yes. Should they get rid of them? No.

Why not post-match angles? How do you feel about ref bumps? I wish they'd just do away with them all together personally.

[Guest LooneyTune]

Fire Grisham, hire Joey Style

Exactly what is so great about Styles other than him making fun of McMahon and WWE and screaming "Oh My God!" eveyr five seconds?

 

However, ANYONE is better than Grisham. Sign the guy who does the voice of ALF, I'm sure a puppet character will do better PBP than Mr. I don't know who Jushin Liger is.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

That was one of the few good ideas that WCW had in it's dying days. I loved the no interference rule they had for several months.

[Exslade ZX 0]

Why not post-match angles? How do you feel about ref bumps? I wish they'd just do away with them all together personally.

Well, usually what would be the best way to get an opponent? Especially for someone going for the World title, or even just a title in general. Costing them the match. It just in my opinion wouldn't work as well if the match goes on like normal..and that person wins, or loses...and then after the match, someone comes out and attacks them 'just because'. Proving how much you don't like someone..by costing them what they want most > Proving how much you don't like someone..by just beating them up...since that's basically what the sport is anyways.

 

I mean, of course it would be a nice change to see whoever, actually win the match THEN are attacked, that way the attacker now has his chance at the title against the person he doesn't like, but...IMO either way works, I just think the first would work better at times.

 

Ref bumps..yea I don't agree with either, well as much as they're used, but there would be nothing wrong with the occasional bump. I mean...they're bound to happen, it even happens in football :/

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Something has to change though. When fans EXPECT a run in during every important match you have a serious problem.

[NoCalMike 0]

run-ins and interference is acceptable for major storyline angles, like say a MAJOR HEEL TURN. However the way WWE uses run-ins, it makes watching main event matches a bore, as everyone just waits until the face is in position to win, and then starts focusing their attention to the back.

[Guest GreatOne]

Run-ins are, hate to tell the 'purists', as much a part of wrestling as promos. WWE's problem is they don't do them properly and at too many odd times.

 

End of Tim McCarver cross-analysis......................

[Guest Loss]

And what I'm saying is that wrestling has existed with all clean finishes and no run-ins and there's proof that it can work.

 

As for costing someone the match, I'd rather see them attacked backstage BEFORE the match or on their way to the ring, leaving them to wrestle injured and either lose or overcome the odds. It works just as well, if not better.

[Styles 0]

How do you feel about ref bumps?

Ooooh I HATE ref bumps. Nothing takes away any suspension of disbelief more than that. First of all it's usually incredibly contrived, and when he gets "bumped" it looks so stupid that the ref stays down and out for so long, and just conveniantly gets up in time to count after the heel does whatever. Also, shouldn't "The GM" or whatever be watching and immediately send out another ref to officiate if the current one is down? If it's done on purpose, why isn't the wrestler disqualified?! It just bugs the hell out of me. I don't think we need to go to an ROH style, all clean match format, but enforcing the rules and actually making it seem somewhat legite or important would go along way. More like a UFC style...

[Guest wildpegasus]

How about all clean finishes, all the time? Draws are acceptable, but no more countouts or disqualifications. No more outside interference. Every match has a clear winner and a clear loser.

 

So a guy needs to lose a match, but you want to protect him? How do you do it? By working a better match that makes the guy look good in losing? It's happened before. It can happen now.

 

Encouraging all clean finishes would encourage the workers to step up their games and put on better matches, and would also take some of the stress off of the writers, leaving the performers to deliver or be quickly left behind.

 

Ratings and buyrates would also go way up if every show guaranteed a definite winner and definite loser in every match. There's a certain frustration that comes with watching a really long match that ends in a screwjob finish.

 

The downside? Well, wrestler's egos would be damaged. That's about it.

 

They figured this out in Japan two decades ago for crying out loud. We should have fixed the problem here long before now.

What I've been wishing for since 1989. One of the reasons I took to Japanese wrestling was because they had so much clean finshes.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

There is a value to doing run-ins and ref bumps - for dramatic purposes - but it's so cliched now-a-days. There's no real reason for it, no smart way of doing it. There are no consequences. Why are there no fines or suspensions? Where is security? What is there to stop ANYONE from running in?

[razazteca 0]

The consequence to ref bumping was angles about refs such as Danny Davis becoming a wrestler or Teddy Long/Bill Alfonso becoming a manager.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Personally, I like the crooked Ref angle.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

I don't agree that EVERY match should end in a clean finish, but 90% of them should. WWE is way too reliant on flukes, run-ins, etc. My suggestions are a bit more complicated.

 

1) Nobody except managers/valets should be allowed to accompany wrestlers to ringside. Their interference is a part of wrestling (heels cheat).

 

2) Save run-ins for big feuds, saves, or turns. Nobody cares if Eugene runs in during a Grenier/Rosey match.

 

3) Place more emphasis on results. A DQ loss is a loss. Treat it like one, except in title matches. If you want an inconclusive finish, book a draw.

 

4) No fluke wins. Have the announcers treat upsets as upsets, not like the shock of the century. All of these men are professionals and theoretically the best of the best. If Spike Dudley manages to pin Undertaker, say that Spike was the better man that night. Fluke roll-ups also have to go, they only make the wrestler look like a joke. NEVER ACT LIKE YOUR WRESTLERS ARE JOKES!!! This goes for anyone on the roster, and is the #1 problem the company has right now. Nobody will take a joke wrestler seriously. This doesn't mean no comedy characters, as long as they are treated as threats. This is why Brutus Beefcake was over in the 80s and Val Venis is nothing now. Cole & Tazz are much better at this than JR & King are.

 

5) In the event that there is a fluke win (or at least said to be one by the arrogant heel), the face 100% of the time must win the rematch. The only exception is if the face's run bombs and you need to job the face out in order to salvage something. Usually this results in a turn for the face or an appointment with OVW (or the unemployment line).

[Downhome 0]

I don't see how anyone can sit back and say that there is no place in wrestling for cheating, run-ins, DQs, and all of that. All of those things have a place in wrestling.

 

The key is to actually know how to make use of them.

 

It's fine for one, ONE, feud to be going on where a heel cheats to beat the face every single time, but ONLY for one feud. Build it up over time to the point where a match is constructed which will not be possible for the heel to cheat, where the face gets the big clean win finally.

 

It's ok to have a match end by someone rolling them up and holding the ropes, but not in almost every single matches.

 

Count outs can make heels look very cowardly or can give a face a victory over someone in a feud without it actually being "the" victory that actually matters.

 

It's cool to have a heel group go crazy and do a major run-in while the ref has his back turned, but not in every match.

 

The problem is that werstling groups, not just WWE but also indie groups all around the country, over use these staples of wrestling, to the point where none of it means anything at all anymore.

 

I'm also a FIRM believer in the blowoff match in a feud almost always being 100% clean. There might be exceptions where I'd be able to accept it, but the blowoff should almost always be clean.

 

We cold go on and on and on about what should change though, not just this stuff about clean matches. There are so many things in wrestling that meant so much in the past, that now means nothing at all really. So much damage has been done to the industry, and I'm not talking about just WWE here, that it'll take years of work before everything if put back together. I could sit here all night and list what I wish would change, or go back to how it was at a time.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

I agree that Japan has it right as far as outside interference. You see it maybe once every couple of shows.

[Guest GreatOne]

The consequence to ref bumping was angles about refs such as Danny Davis becoming a wrestler or Teddy Long/Bill Alfonso becoming a manager.

Don't forget Nick Patrick

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I'm also a FIRM believer in the blowoff match in a feud almost always being 100% clean.

 

When was the last time I called you a putz DH... ?

 

As odd as it sounds, I think the WWE puts too much focus on getting crowd reactions. That in itself is not bad, but they take the easy route so many times that you never get a real reaction. You have to work for those real reactions, those reactions where the crowd is about to storm the ring, where they are jumping up and down when someone wins or feels horrible when someone loses. I can't remember the last time I actually felt good or bad when someone won or lost - that counts for Benoit matches too. It's hard to invest in anything when you feel that investment will be wasted.

 

Plus they try to get reactions so often in the same way (cheap heat) that they totally dilute what a crowd pop/heat really is, and how meaningful it can be. I don't think they use the crowd as effectively as they can; when I watch other sports, theres a collectiveness of the crowd where they are actively cheering for someone to win, in the WWE they're cheering to cheer. The only time I can recall that happening in the WWE was with Hogan at WM 18. Now, the fan is conditioned to be "part of the show" rather than reacting to the show. There isn't really anyone for them to get behind - the biggest pops go to "recognized stars" and its hard to tell if its because of "who they are" or not. The WWE relies on formulas and cliches because heaven forbid they actually ellicit a real response from the crowd.

[razazteca 0]

The consequence to ref bumping was angles about refs such as Danny Davis becoming a wrestler or Teddy Long/Bill Alfonso becoming a manager.

Don't forget Nick Patrick

I want to forget the WCW ref angles especially the Pee Wee Anderson "You're Fired" match. And I would also like to forget the ref strike storyline that happened in WWF.