The Official WWE / NXT Discussion Thread *May Contain Spoilers*

[packerman120]

NXT/NJPW/LU/AAA/CMLL

 

Ahhh, yes.. yes.. Then I agree with you cancelling. I'm glad actually that you take in more wrestling than just the corporate giant.

[TakerNGN74]

Ahhh, yes.. yes.. Then I agree with you cancelling. I'm glad actually that you take in more wrestling than just the corporate giant.

 

Can't forget about ROH!

[TakerNGN74]

NXT/NJPW/LU/AAA/CMLL

 

What about ROH?

[BHK1978]

What about ROH?

 

Maybe it is not in Ricky's market, I know they took it away from me...

 

I really liked the segment at the end of RAW tonight, I thought it was very well done.

[Rickymex]

I get Sinclair but meh. I just don't watch it.

[Mootinie]

The thing is, I think if you're anti-Reigns, you pretty much have to cancel your Network subscription. If you don't, you're basically telling them that's it's just Philly and it's perfectly okay to push guys like Reigns over Bryan, Bray, Ambrose and Ziggler. Hence why I cancelled.

[Rickymex]

The thing is, I think if you're anti-Reigns, you pretty much have to cancel your Network subscription. If you don't, you're basically telling them that's it's just Philly and it's perfectly okay to push guys like Reigns over Bryan, Bray, Ambrose and Ziggler. Hence why I cancelled.

 

I'm not anti-Reigns (apart from that stupid interview he gave about critics). What I'm against is them basically deciding this guy is the future without giving him character development, feuds, credibility, good promos, or allowing him to build a more balanced moveset.

[Kitarzu]

I stopped buying PPV after last year Royal Rumble.

 

With the perspective of Reigns as the next Cena, going with the controversial route again, I'm staying where I am today. There's plenty of wrestling options around the world.

[Warhawk8492]

The thing is, I think if you're anti-Reigns, you pretty much have to cancel your Network subscription. If you don't, you're basically telling them that's it's just Philly and it's perfectly okay to push guys like Reigns over Bryan, Bray, Ambrose and Ziggler. Hence why I cancelled.

 

Good job, I am never subscribing to the network now.

[Rickymex]

Good job, I am never subscribing to the network now.

 

Do you hate Reigns winning when he isn't ready or do you just hate Reigns?

 

From your previous messages it seems more of the latter.

[RayW]

Jesus, the IWC is full of babies throwing their dolls out of their prams because they aren't getting what they want. I'll keep my Network subscription, because as a wrestling fan, there's for too much enjoyable content on there, that I'm grown up enough not to get upset that a company wants to push someone that I disagree with. Jesus.

[The Final Countdown]

Jesus, the IWC is full of babies throwing their dolls out of their prams because they aren't getting what they want. I'll keep my Network subscription, because as a wrestling fan, there's for too much enjoyable content on there, that I'm grown up enough not to get upset that a company wants to push someone that I disagree with. Jesus.

Good for you, but maybe not everyone views it the way you do. If someone won't find the current product worth paying for with Reigns on top and the classic content/NXT isn't enough to justify subscribing in their mind, why should they continue to subscribe?

[Mootinie]

I'm not anti-Reigns (apart from that stupid interview he gave about critics). What I'm against is them basically deciding this guy is the future without giving him character development, feuds, credibility, good promos, or allowing him to build a more balanced moveset.

I don't see that changing in the near future. Even to the point where I could realistically see them burying Rollins by having him cash-in just to lose to Reigns within seconds. You heard it here first.

 

Jesus, the IWC is full of babies throwing their dolls out of their prams because they aren't getting what they want. I'll keep my Network subscription, because as a wrestling fan, there's for too much enjoyable content on there, that I'm grown up enough not to get upset that a company wants to push someone that I disagree with. Jesus.

Then by all means, continue watching. I find WWE programming to be an insult to my intelligence and it makes me feel like a dog is taking a giant number two on my face. So, I've decided I'm not going to give them money anymore.

[RayW]

Good for you, but maybe not everyone views it the way you do. If someone won't find the current product worth paying for with Reigns on top and the classic content/NXT isn't enough to justify subscribing in their mind, why should they continue to subscribe?

So because of one man, people are going to stop paying for the service? It's inane. It's so over the top that it's laughable. I don't like Arsenal, but I still pay for Sky Sports so that I can watch the teams I do like. It's the exact same argument here. I don't particularly like Reigns, but I do like Ambrose, Rollins, Ziggler, etc. so why should I forego seeing them just because I don't like one person?

 

Then by all means, continue watching. I find WWE programming to be an insult to my intelligence and it makes me feel like a dog is taking a giant number two on my face. So, I've decided I'm not going to give them money anymore.

This. Mootinie is saying he doesn't like the programming, this implies the overall show. He's stopping his subscription because he no longer likes the product - not because one man has upset him. It may have been the final nail in the coffin for him, but it's not he sole reason, unlike all those "Reigns won so let's cancel our subs because Daniel Bryan isn't main eventing WrestleMania!!!!1!!!1111" comments I'm seeing everywhere.

[Warhawk8492]

Do you hate Reigns winning when he isn't ready or do you just hate Reigns?

 

From your previous messages it seems more of the latter.

 

I am not really a fan of Roman Reigns, he is terrible. He is not a good wrestler and he is awful on the mic. He is only getting pushed because he is related to The Rock. WWE has so many much more deserving wrestlers on the roster, namely Daniel Bryan.

[Kitarzu]

Jesus, the IWC is full of babies throwing their dolls out of their prams because they aren't getting what they want. I'll keep my Network subscription, because as a wrestling fan, there's for too much enjoyable content on there, that I'm grown up enough not to get upset that a company wants to push someone that I disagree with. Jesus.

 

I would basically agree if it wasn't for a major point.

 

WWE changed a big part of revenues changing business model launching the WWE network. From a based TV distribution, PPV through cable or satellite providers to an internal internet based streaming service. It's a double edged sword because, aside your initial costs, you'll potentially gaining a lot of money; on the other hand your customers has a direct relationship with you and they'll have more influence on your business and creative decision making. Unless WWE will return to the old revenue system, these events like the #CancelWWENetwork trend will happen more in the future.

 

I don't think it's about being or not grown up, it's about having enough about:

 

1) Vince McMahon's mentality stuck in his age of glory;

 

2) a product that from a narrative point has major logic flaws;

 

3) a decision making that stops or diminish someone the viewers feel he's deserving the top spot and instead are forced to swallow somebody who he's undeserving or not yet deserving the position he's getting.

 

For me it was last year Royal Rumble the time to stop paying for WWE product, for many this year. Everyone is free to spend their money whatever they want.

 

By the way, showing for free the two top matches you paid on the WWE Network or on PPV, seemed another insult to your customers. Vince McMahon is again playing with fire and already got burned last year.

[RayW]

I would basically agree if it wasn't for a major point.

 

WWE changed a big part of revenues changing business model launching the WWE network. From a based TV distribution, PPV through cable or satellite providers to an internal internet based streaming service. It's a double edged sword because, aside your initial costs, you'll potentially gaining a lot of money; on the other hand your customers has a direct relationship with you and they'll have more influence on your business and creative decision making. Unless WWE will return to the old revenue system, these events like the #CancelWWENetwork trend will happen more in the future.

 

I don't think it's about being or not grown up, it's about having enough about:

 

1) Vince McMahon's mentality stuck in his age of glory;

 

2) a product that from a narrative point has major logic flaws;

 

3) a decision making that stops or diminish someone the viewers feel he's deserving the top spot and instead are forced to swallow somebody who he's undeserving or not yet deserving the position he's getting.

 

For me it was last year Royal Rumble the time to stop paying for WWE product, for many this year. Everyone is free to spend their money whatever they want.

 

By the way, showing for free the two top matches you paid on the WWE Network or on PPV, seemed another insult to your customers. Vince McMahon is again playing with fire and already got burned last year.

 

I can respect and appreciate if people want to cancel because they no longer enjoy the product, my issue is with the uproar and movement of people cancelling because of one man winning. By cancelling because of Roman Reigns you're saying that you care more about disliking him than you do about supporting the guys you do like. I again take it back to my Sky Sports example, I don't unsubscribe because they show a lot of the teams I dislike, I keep to watch those that I do. It's the same principle here.

 

But cancelling because you're displeased with the overall product and cancelling because someone won the Rumble that you didn't want to win it are two different things.

[Jaysin]

WWE announced that they surpassed 1 Million subscribers to the WWE Network today.

 

Ziggler and Bryan are teasing a match up at Wrestlemania between the two. If given a decent chunk of time, these two could easily steal the show.

[Kitarzu]

I can respect and appreciate if people want to cancel because they no longer enjoy the product, my issue is with the uproar and movement of people cancelling because of one man winning. By cancelling because of Roman Reigns you're saying that you care more about disliking him than you do about supporting the guys you do like. I again take it back to my Sky Sports example, I don't unsubscribe because they show a lot of the teams I dislike, I keep to watch those that I do. It's the same principle here.

 

But cancelling because you're displeased with the overall product and cancelling because someone won the Rumble that you didn't want to win it are two different things.

 

I think the people here are more inclined to be reasonable than !!1!!111!11!! commentators. The whole IWC is another beast.

[masterded]

At the moment Brock Lesnar vs Roman Reigns looks like it will be the worst main event since Wrestlemania 2000. Reigns has yet to show the ability to wrestle a 10 minute match and I just don't see him being carried to a good match. Plus the only way the build up over the next 2 months is going to work is if either Reigns learns to cut a promo overnight or they do what they did with the last segment yesterday and let Heyman speak for him 99% of the time. What makes it sad is you can imagine how great a Daniel vs Brock, Ambrose vs Brock or Ziggler vs Brock match could have been. Heck if they wanted to do a power vs power match I would have been much more interested in Brock vs. Rusev though I understand why they wouldn't do that one.

[Rickymex]

I can respect and appreciate if people want to cancel because they no longer enjoy the product, my issue is with the uproar and movement of people cancelling because of one man winning. By cancelling because of Roman Reigns you're saying that you care more about disliking him than you do about supporting the guys you do like. I again take it back to my Sky Sports example, I don't unsubscribe because they show a lot of the teams I dislike, I keep to watch those that I do. It's the same principle here.

 

But cancelling because you're displeased with the overall product and cancelling because someone won the Rumble that you didn't want to win it are two different things.

 

Not if his victory is part of the problem with the product.

[dvdWarrior]

Well, I watched the Rumble on Raw last night, and... the less said about that the better. Not a pleasant experience for the dvdWarrior, I tell you what.

 

Firstly, I have no problems with Roman winning. I like him. I was a big fan when he was with The Shield, and he was well on his way to becoming one of my favorites... until those Roman and The Beanstalk and Sufferin' Succatash promos laid the proverbial smackdown on his coolness.

 

Thing that hurt the Rumble for me was A) Daniel Bryan being eliminated so early, (and with an elimination you'd typically see for a midcarder to boot); B) Dean Ambrose, Dolph Ziggler, and Bray Wyatt each being dumped like a sack of taters; and C) Damien Sandow lasting what felt like about 28 seconds. Think that was everything.

 

I was perfectly fine with Roman winning, and I would have been perfectly fine with Bryan, Ambrose, Ziggler, or Wyatt NOT winning...

 

Just the way it went down felt almost like... kind of an attack on part of the audience in a way.

 

Made the whole thing a pretty negative experience all around.

 

Definitely wouldn't cancel WWE Network though. Just think of that $9.99 a month as your 'NXT Tax', as I heard a guy on YouTube say. For me, it'd be an NXT and Lots Of Classic Wrestling Tax, but same difference.

 

Too much good stuff to give up on account of one off night.

[packerman120]

Alright, now if you know me, you know I like to add my two cents. So I am going to on Bryan. In my opinion, Bryan doesn't deserve more. For gosh sake, he is the only man to not win the Rumble and then win the strap at Mania. Bryan's had the title, it has his stamp on it. The Rumble is used to get guys over, and Bryan is over as hell. Do I agree with Reigns winning? Nope, I personally would have had Ambrose. But you have to understand, Bryan doesn't need to win the Rumble. Reigns does. Eventually we'll all realize that.

[moon_lit_tears]

 

 

Then by all means, continue watching. I find WWE programming to be an insult to my intelligence and it makes me feel like a dog is taking a giant number two on my face. So, I've decided I'm not going to give them money anymore.

 

 

This past two weeks has been different from the past 10 years?

 

The writing has gone downhill, the "stars" pretty much are all worthless except a handful. They've ruined the Tag team decision, even though they are trying to fix it now...sorta.

[UkWrestleFan]

Watched the Reigns / Lesnar / Heyman segment from last nights "RAW" and have to say, it was pretty good. Yes, this was because of Heyman, but I think Reigns handled himself just fine (even if the rumors are to be believed that he was being fed the lines) For anyone who watches Sons of Anarchy, I think he (Reings) came across very Jax Teller.

 

Honestly, the fact that RAW was cancelled may be a blessing in disguise, and may give fans a chance to cool down on the Reigns Rumble win before they have to put him in front of a live audience again.

 

The build-up to 'Mania is certainly going to be interesting with Reigns' shortcomings on the mic, and the heat he is getting. They need to somehow hide his promo flaws while trying to get some good reactions for him again. I think he has to be involved with the beloved babyfaces of the company (Bryan, Ziggler, Ambrose) to try and get the fans back on his side. Teaming with them, saving them from beatdowns etc.

 

It's going to be a big challenge for the creative team and I am looking forward to seeing how everything unfolds.