PoisonedSuperman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 To me a Taker vs. HHH match with those stipulations is just... blah. I mean either way, you have the streak broken because of HBK or you have HHH being retired because of HHH so he gets to come back since he didn't lose fair. Not fun either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOnu Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 X-Pac heat might be a stretched out concept, but I think in general, there are a few workers out there that are/were stuck in such bad characters that a small portion of the audience switch channel automaticaly. LayCool does that to me. Their gimmick is beyond irritating for me and can't watch their skits. For some, it's a sign they are generating a good amout of heel heat; for others, this kind of character crosses an invisible line where the good becomes bad. Wrestlemania looks a bit weak on paper so far, but it reflects the current state of the company. They are severely thin in star power as not enough new stars were created in the last years. They don't have to be Cena's level of popularity, but they need at least a few shooting stars (aka stars that draw a lot even if they don't last long). I also think the WWE painted themselves in a corner by trying to out themselves with every Wrestlemania, but that's another story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juggaloninjalee Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 X-Pac heat might be a stretched out concept, but I think in general, there are a few workers out there that are/were stuck in such bad characters that a small portion of the audience switch channel automaticaly. LayCool does that to me. Their gimmick is beyond irritating for me and can't watch their skits. For some, it's a sign they are generating a good amout of heel heat; for others, this kind of character crosses an invisible line where the good becomes bad. Wrestlemania looks a bit weak on paper so far, but it reflects the current state of the company. They are severely thin in star power as not enough new stars were created in the last years. They don't have to be Cena's level of popularity, but they need at least a few shooting stars (aka stars that draw a lot even if they don't last long). I also think the WWE painted themselves in a corner by trying to out themselves with every Wrestlemania, but that's another story. I agree this years Wrestlemania so far doesn't seem to be like one that I am dieing to see. Also I can agree about the star power some as well. As of right now the top of the Wrestlemania card looks like this... Miz vs Lawler for the RAW Title Edge vs Del Rio for the Smackdown Title Undertaker vs ??? for the streak? How can the WWE make this Wrestlemania a good classic? I have no idea. Cena vs Taker would be good in the true main event. HHH vs Sheamus would be good if Sheamus starts dominating people and being credible as a top level guy again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoNdOn Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I can't confirm the validity of this because I like my computer to work properly, but PWI's Elite section is apparently claiming that the newest candidate for main event of Wrestlemania is Undertaker vs. Triple H in a Streak vs. Career match with Shawn Michaels as referee. I don't want to see the Undertaker go up against anybody he has already beaten at mania. I have already seen it. Truth be told I didn't want to see him go up against Michaels last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juggaloninjalee Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I don't want to see the Undertaker go up against anybody he has already beaten at mania. I have already seen it. Truth be told I didn't want to see him go up against Michaels last year. Who would you like to see Taker face? If he faces Barrett, or someone along those lines then he most likely will win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbergey_2005 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Who would you like to see Taker face? If he faces Barrett, or someone along those lines then he most likely will win. Someone that appears a threat. The streak isnt going to just end on anyone. I think the streak eventually ends with John Cena breaking it when UT is ready to call it quits. Perhaps its the way the WWE is booked but at this point I cant see anyone else breaking this streak right now. After writing that I was thinking CM Punk wouldnt be a bad choice either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoNdOn Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Who would you like to see Taker face? If he faces Barrett, or someone along those lines then he most likely will win. Chris Jericho, John Cena, The Miz, John Morrison, CM Punk (would love this one), Dolph Ziggler, Wade Barrett, Drew MacIntyre, Sheamus, Alberto Del Rio. Let's be honest, regardless of who he goes up against at Mania he is going to be the heavy favourite. I think someone who he hasn't faced at Mania is far more exciting then an already defeated Mania opponent of the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juggaloninjalee Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Chris Jericho, John Cena, The Miz, John Morrison, CM Punk (would love this one), Dolph Ziggler, Wade Barrett, Drew MacIntyre, Sheamus, Alberto Del Rio. Let's be honest, regardless of who he goes up against at Mania he is going to be the heavy favourite. I think someone who he hasn't faced at Mania is far more exciting then an already defeated Mania opponent of the past. My last few posts probably make me seem like a Sheamus fan but I am not a big Sheamus fan. I think he is good and to me he seems like a guy who can fit the role of HHH once he retires. That being said I would love it if he made it his mission to end the streak and possibly to end Undertakers career. That would put him on that level with the top guys. Alberto Del Rio would be good but I think if he wins at Wrestlemania he will already be one of the top guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teh_Showtime Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I agree this years Wrestlemania so far doesn't seem to be like one that I am dieing to see. Also I can agree about the star power some as well. As of right now the top of the Wrestlemania card looks like this... Miz vs Lawler for the RAW Title Edge vs Del Rio for the Smackdown Title Undertaker vs ??? for the streak? How can the WWE make this Wrestlemania a good classic? I have no idea. Cena vs Taker would be good in the true main event. HHH vs Sheamus would be good if Sheamus starts dominating people and being credible as a top level guy again. Miz vs Cena and Punk vs Orton are missing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juggaloninjalee Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Miz vs Cena and Punk vs Orton are missing That still doesn't make Wrestlemania a must see for me. Punk vs Orton seems like a good match to me. Miz vs Cena to me doesn't strike me as WRESTLEMANIA CLASSIC! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoisonedSuperman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 The thing about wrestlemania is does it really matter what they put on anymore? Isn't there the casual fans who don't even watch wrestling that will still buy wrestlemania anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 The thing about wrestlemania is does it really matter what they put on anymore? Isn't there the casual fans who don't even watch wrestling that will still buy wrestlemania anyway? The casual fan who only buys Wrestlemania usually does so only when there is something special taking place that hooks them in. So yes, it does 'really matter' what they put on Wrestlemania. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 The thing about wrestlemania is does it really matter what they put on anymore? Isn't there the casual fans who don't even watch wrestling that will still buy wrestlemania anyway? Based on the numbers from last year...not as many as you'd think. It does matter. Because they just released the 4th quarter numbers and the PPV rate were awful. Waaaaaay down. Combine that with the dip in the st****s and the beating they took in video revenue and the E needs this to be a success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Based on the numbers from last year...not as many as you'd think. It does matter. Because they just released the 4th quarter numbers and the PPV rate were awful. Waaaaaay down. Combine that with the dip in the st****s and the beating they took in video revenue and the E needs this to be a success. And weren't you the one that told me that the WWE wasn't doing that badly? Or was that someone else? I forget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 The Undertaker vs. Triple H, with Streak vs. Careeer and Shawn Michaels as guest referee would probably get a lot of intrigue with the casual/casual smart fans. I think they'd look at like this: They know Undertaker never loses at Wrestlemania. They know Triple H is part of the family and probably think he never loses at the big shows. They probably think of Triple H as someone who isn't going to make his big return and lose, especially at Wrestlemania. So with that in mind, you've got a main event where they can't see either guy losing. But then you add the twist of Shawn Michaels as referee. Will Shawn remain true to his babyface ways and call it down the middle? Or will Shawn revert to his old ways and screw The Undertaker out of his streak to get even for The Undertaker ending his career? With proper promotion, and with those involved they'll make damn sure the build is correct, I think this match scores strong interest with the casual/casual smart fan and maybe even the lapsed fan who used to follow it and would be interested in such a match involving two guys who were main event stars when he used to watch. If we assume Wrestlemania has a baseline number of buys of 500,000, whilst I don't think this pushes it anywhere near the million mark, I think a properly promoted Streak vs. Career match with Undertaker vs. Triple H, and Shawn as guest referee, could easily get the buys up to the 650,000 level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownsy Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Based on the numbers from last year...not as many as you'd think. It does matter. Because they just released the 4th quarter numbers and the PPV rate were awful. Waaaaaay down. Combine that with the dip in the st****s and the beating they took in video revenue and the E needs this to be a success. They need to drop the price, that experiment was an epic failure. They made more per PPV buy share, but they lost money on the overall PPV revenue due to people not wanting to poney up the extra 5 bucks. If I were them I would either A) cut 4-6 PPV's, make the PPV's a bigger deal (this would obviously envolve more than just cutting the PPV number, and require good, logical storytelling spread out over longer intervals) B) cut the non "big 4 PPV's" by 10 bucks, keep those 4 ppv's (SS, rumble, survivor series, WM) at the new price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 They need to drop the price, that experiment was an epic failure. They made more per PPV buy share, but they lost money on the overall PPV revenue due to people not wanting to poney up the extra 5 bucks. If I were them I would either A) cut 4-6 PPV's, make the PPV's a bigger deal (this would obviously envolve more than just cutting the PPV number, and require good, logical storytelling spread out over longer intervals) B) cut the non "big 4 PPV's" by 10 bucks, keep those 4 ppv's (SS, rumble, survivor series, WM) at the new price. Although I agree, I think you we all know what the negative short consequences are... loss of profit. this is why they haven't done any of this. For now, they won't do this unless they are genuinely need to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eayragt Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 The Undertaker vs. Triple H, with Streak vs. Careeer and Shawn Michaels as guest referee would probably get a lot of intrigue with the casual/casual smart fans. I don't buy it. Streak vs career matches two years running? Someone's career on the line who hasn't wrestled for ages? Sounds like someone's plucked a thought from the air and ran with it as a story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 And weren't you the one that told me that the WWE wasn't doing that badly? Or was that someone else? I forget. That was a discussion from months back. Things change.They are still profitable And they are nowhere near 'struggling' but they had a crappy year. And WM is their biggest single financial draw because of the huge PPV numbers it usually does and the fact that it tends to be one of if not the biggest home video seller. So they need it to be a hit every year. This year ...just more so. They need to drop the price, that experiment was an epic failure. They made more per PPV buy share, but they lost money on the overall PPV revenue due to people not wanting to poney up the extra 5 bucks. If I were them I would either A) cut 4-6 PPV's, make the PPV's a bigger deal (this would obviously envolve more than just cutting the PPV number, and require good, logical storytelling spread out over longer intervals) B) cut the non "big 4 PPV's" by 10 bucks, keep those 4 ppv's (SS, rumble, survivor series, WM) at the new price. Agree to all of this. Anything more than one PPV a month is ridiculous. Although I agree, I think you we all know what the negative short consequences are... loss of profit. this is why they haven't done any of this. For now, they won't do this unless they are genuinely need to. That's the thing..it looks more and more as though the greater number of PPVs is actually costing them. By watering donw the importance of those events, its weakened their PPV business as a whole. You continue this pattern and suddenly you're holding more events, at a larger price, with less and less viewers, at a loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 That's the thing..it looks more and more as though the greater number of PPVs is actually costing them. By watering donw the importance of those events, its weakened their PPV business as a whole. You continue this pattern and suddenly you're holding more events, at a larger price, with less and less viewers, at a loss. I don't think the situation has changed that much, at least, not drastically. I always thought they were in a not-so-good situation. It wasn't that much different a couple of months before. Like I said before, I agree with this sentiment completely. But they aren't going to change it, at least, not any time soon. I knew for a whle that the 12 PPV year thing is out-dated, especially when you don't have new material to deal with. But to switch to even a 6 PPV a year model would mean an obvious loss in profit in the short-term, and the WWE will not do it, unless the PPVs are not profitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I don't buy it. Streak vs career matches two years running? Someone's career on the line who hasn't wrestled for ages? Sounds like someone's plucked a thought from the air and ran with it as a story. I can buy it given what the current line up for Wrestlemania looks like. I can see them looking for something special to try and make a match they think feels like a Wrestlemania match. Undertaker vs. Triple H, Streak vs. Career, would definitely be seen by Vince and company as a Wrestlemania match. I guess it comes down to whether they really feel the need to go such a match when, as you said, the ran the same stipulation last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoisonedSuperman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Yeah but doesn't having HBK as referee cheapen it? I mean either HHH gets to come back from retirement because HBK screwed him or the WWE hammers down our throats for the next 20 years that Undertakers only WM loss was because HBK screwed him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Yeah but doesn't having HBK as referee cheapen it? I mean either HHH gets to come back from retirement because HBK screwed him or the WWE hammers down our throats for the next 20 years that Undertakers only WM loss was because HBK screwed him. You can look at it like that and I really wouldn't disagree because that's almost certainly what would end up happening down the road. I'm just pointing out that I can buy that such a match was floated around as a possible main event. I'm not exactly eager to see it myself but there is a logic to making the match, whether it's now or later on, and I can see why it would be seen by WWE as a Wrestlemania match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoNdOn Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Not going to say what happened, but Smackdown was one of the most nonsensical pieces of crap I have seen in a long, long time. Absolutely dreadful almost from start to finish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe Hunter Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I personally think he can help get at least 1 or 2 more guys over before he goes. So he has another 5-10 years left in him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.