Skip to main content

Question for the blog



Hey Scott,

I've been watching a lot of Magnum TA lately and I was blown away by his best of seven series with Nikita Koloff.  He goes down 3-0, fights his way back from a deficit to push it to a seventh match and then is robbed.  And it got me thinking...

With all of the 50/50 booking that the WWE does and their habit of giving away potential money matches on Raw, why not start booking best of 5 or best of 7 series for some of their hotter feuds?  Guys can eat a pin and then get their heat back the next week with a win against the same guy.  It's outside of the box, but they've trotted out the 2 out of 3 falls recently so why not?

You think that kind of booking could work?

Definitely, but it has to be a match that people actually want to see in the first place. Putting Ziggler against Miz out there to die for seven shows is defeating the whole purpose.  Cesaro v Sheamus?   Sure because they're established as guys who care about wins and losses.   

Comments

  1. Ryder vs. Sandow best of 7 for the win!

    ReplyDelete
  2. A best of seven between the Wyatts and the Shield ending in a WarGames match would have been AMAZING.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That could work and i use all kind of bookmarking.
    Moviestica

    ReplyDelete
  4. Would a Rollins/Ambrose best of 7 take a year because of all the ppv non-starts?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm not big on the best of 7 series for a couple of reasons. 1. It always goes to the seventh match. There is no reason for anyone other than a hardcore fan to watch matches 1-6. It's like the argument against Iron Man matches. You know it's going to last an hour, so why bother watching the first 50 minutes? 2. There are very few pairs of guys today who can pull off seven different 5-10 minute matches. It's like sending two musicians on stage to play seven songs when the only song they know is Mary Had a Little Lamb.

    I'd much rather see them do something like a round robin tournament. The G1 Climax format would be perfect if they separated blocks by Raw/Smackdown and then had the finals at a major PPV. During the tournament they could even maintain the 50/50 booking through transference: A beats B, B beats C,C beats A. Then you could build story lines around how A seems to have B's number despite B proving himself a good competitor.

    ReplyDelete
  6. They kinda started doing that on WWE Superstars with their best of three series of Sin Cara vs. Justin Gabriel, and the series of matches between Emma and Alicia Fox. Of course in those cases it was just an excuse to book the same matches every week.

    ReplyDelete
  7. That could be a WWE Superstars exclusive.

    ReplyDelete
  8. so similar to the bound for glory series?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I found it amusing that they've done two best of series in the last 10 years, both with Booker T, and the latter with Benoit too, because apparently WWE's policy is that they can only happen if one of the participants has already been in one already.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So book some they end in 4 or 5 matches.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sure, but how do you book that with the climax at the PPV. Not that WWE cares about such things, they'd gladly put Match 6 on PPV and Match 7 on Raw these days.

    ReplyDelete
  12. How has it been established that Cesaro and Sheamus care about wins and losses?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I recall 2006, after a controversial match for the US title, Booker T and Benoit were put at each other in a best of 7 series on SmackDown. Booker got the first three, Benoit the fourth but then Booker legitimately hurt his leg. Nice bit of Teddy Long ready to give the next match to Benoit but he refused to take a forfeit win. So Booker goes to Randy Orton, using the logic that since Orton beat Benoit for the World title in 2004, he can win the series here and in addition to winning back respect, he'll get a title shot later. But thanks to Sharmell, Orton loses the two matches by DQ, Booker coming back to win the final one but Benoit getting the belt at No Way Out. Not a bad series a shame obvious events mean it'll never be collected on DVD but who knows, maybe the Network can show it some day in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Because they had that match where Sheamus won with a small package and Cesaro was upset about losing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I had to look it up because I had no idea how the BFG series worked. Those rules are way too complicated, especially when you start throwing in gaunlets and other things worth bonus points. I'd go with simple rules: Two points for a win, one for a time-limit draw, zero for a loss, double dq, or double countout. Either have the two block winners face each other, or do a one-night playoff with the top four.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment