Skip to main content

WCW War Games

Hello,

I've recently begun watching the WCW War Games DVD boxset, which WWE released last year.

I checked your review and you seem to be the biggest fan of the war games concept and you really enjoyed all the matches (or at least the majority) on the boxset.

What for you makes for a quality war games match? What is the key factor that defines a bad brawl from an excellent fight? Do you think WWE's Elimination Chamber or Hell in a Cell could be used effectively as a War Games throwback?


​Really you need a compelling feud with believable motivations and people who you can buy as hating each other.  The actual structure surrounding them isn't as important.  That's why the original versions worked so well:  The Horsemen had long-standing problems with Dusty's team, and the Dangerous Alliance had a series of issues with Sting's Squadron, to name two.  Elimination Chamber could have been used as a blowoff to Shield v. Wyatts but they felt it was more important to job Bray to John Cena 16 times in a row instead, so that's cool, I guess.  ​

Comments

  1. WWE should run War Games in October each year. This year would be perfect if they did Triple H, Rollins, Orton, Kane vs. Cena, Ambrose, The Uso's

    ReplyDelete
  2. I gripe about constant rematches on RAW and SmackDown but I would have had no issues with constant Wyatt/Shield six mans for months on end.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gunther the Nasty LoserOctober 14, 2014 at 1:34 PM

    BLOOD

    /thread

    ReplyDelete
  4. CruelConnectionNumber2October 14, 2014 at 1:34 PM

    War Games wouldn't work in current WWE. WWE now is for kids. No blood is a major flag. Also, most of the feuds are based on stupid comedy. It would tarnish the legacy of War Games, just like every Hell in a Cell match tarnishes the classic HIAC matches. They barely use the cage.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ...and money was left on the table by not having Wyatts vs. Shield in the Chamber.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Still annoyed when TNA did it but then had the faces get the man advantage which completely ruins the entire damn point that makes the match work.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Worst War Games: '94 (Dusty, Dustin and Nasty Boys vs Stud Stable) or '95 (Hogan's Army vs Dungeon of Doom)?

    ReplyDelete
  8. 94's not too bad, just dull. 95 is nonsense, but goofy enough to be okay. I'd say 98 is a safe bet.

    ReplyDelete
  9. At this point, is there anyone left in WWE who has ever used color in a match?

    ReplyDelete
  10. TONS of guys left in WWE have bled.

    ReplyDelete
  11. With the way WWE booking is these days, you know if they ever have a Wargames the faces will win the coin toss.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I like the '94 War Games match.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This may sound like crazy talk, but until they can book it so that a Babyface can actually *win* a coin toss, it's somewhat predictable in its execution. The heels winning the coin toss makes for great babyface comebacks, but ultimately it's the fatal flaw of WCW's version of War Games. You need to be able to tell a story and achieve a resolution through not-so-predictable means.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Did fucking Brazilian Kid write this email or something?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Cena's done some gory ones.

    ReplyDelete
  16. My Uncle ;Oliver just got gold Dodge Challenger SRT8 Core by w0rking parttime 0n COMPUTER from home. navigate to this website

    >>>>-> ow.Ly/CwNl6

    ReplyDelete
  17. Really should have been Hogan's Heroes IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  18. HowmuchdoesthisguyweighOctober 14, 2014 at 2:11 PM

    Uso's unfortunately stick out as the weak links in that match.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Was 98 the Horsemen vs. the nWo? I was at that one, and it was pretty bad.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Babyface wins coin toss, immediately turns heel. What an asshole. Now there's gonna be a 3 on 1 heel advantage!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Adam "Colorado" CurryOctober 14, 2014 at 2:18 PM

    You can sell crack online now?

    ReplyDelete
  22. It was WCW vs nWo vs nWo, I think. It was also every man for himself. I think Stevie Ray lost the fall. By pinfall. 5 minutes of the match was everyone laying around dead.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Adam "Colorado" CurryOctober 14, 2014 at 2:19 PM

    I forget, when did WWE ban blading? 2010 or so?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Adam "Colorado" CurryOctober 14, 2014 at 2:20 PM

    The one Russo booked. Or do we not even count that one?

    ReplyDelete
  25. The one I'm thinking of is the one where Curt Hennig turned on the Horsemen and they had everyone handcuffed to the cage and started raising the cage up off the ground.

    ReplyDelete
  26. WWE put it on the DVD!

    ReplyDelete
  27. That wasn't very good either. It was really fucking depressing, and knowing the Horsemen never got their own back made it worse.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Look past the lack of blood and what you have left is an awesome, awesome match. One of the more unjustly dumped on matches of the decade, if not all-time.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Blading ended in 2008 when they went PG.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Gunther the Nasty LoserOctober 14, 2014 at 2:34 PM

    That sounds like crazy talk!

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 2:37 PM

    It was like everyone said "it's almost impossible to screw up War Games" and WCW took it as a personal challenge.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dustin Rhodes had some serious ones in WCW. Cena has had some bloodbaths. Orton, Christian, Flair, Taker, Triple H, Brock, Show, All of the indy guys at some point in ROH or DGUSA (Bryan, Steen, Ambrose, Rollins, Cesaro, Callihan).

    ReplyDelete
  33. Christ. They really did fuck up Shield vs Wyatts.

    ReplyDelete
  34. the 95 one is awful but look at the star power on that baby face team, just wasted on the dungeon of doom.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 2:45 PM

    It's funny how often WWE will try and push mundane stuff as "epic" (hello, Cena vs. Orton!) and yet continually passes up opportunities for matches and programs that could actually live up to that kind of hype. People were salivating over the possibility of Shield vs. Wyatts and going crazy whenever the groups were within spitting distance of each other. How do you not run with that?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Because fu-

    Ah, hell. You know.

    - WWE CREATIVE

    ReplyDelete
  37. Worst_in_the_WorldOctober 14, 2014 at 2:47 PM

    Did they? I mean, they had an awesome match on a PPV and one of the teams won the match/feud.

    ReplyDelete
  38. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

    So we get one Wyatt/Shield match and 5000 Cena/Orton matches?

    Sound about right, actually.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Sounds great! You kinda have to book the rest of the match, though. That'd be a very long and boring heel turn.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Babyface team wins coin toss, but final babyface entrant gets destroyed on the outside before officially entering the match, rendering him more or less useless until the final heel entrant enters the structure and The Match beyond officially begins.

    ReplyDelete
  41. ....and probably had a lot to do with Davey Boy Smith's death.

    ReplyDelete
  42. It's a creative writing exercise. Next person takes over.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Yeah I think there's a difference between "fucking something up" and "leaving us wanting more". Looking at their feud from whenever it started through Wyatt moving on to Cena, they didn't botch it.

    They had that epic staredown on RAW, the build was good, people genuinely wanted to see their match and then it delivered big time. And that was it. It was executed well.

    Would I have loved to see more? Of course. They had amazing chemistry. But WWE didn't fuck it up. They actually showed restraint. But damn I would have loved just one more PPV match between them.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Didn't Russo and Ferrara try this in December 2000?
    The results speak for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yeah, this should've been a showstopper at XXX.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I always thought the best element of WarGames was that it was the Defcon 1 option for a feud. When all other options have been exhausted for two groups that need to get medieval to let out their hatred for each other, there was the WarGames to be talked about in hushed tones as a last resort. And you knew that would be the end of that feud.

    Yeah, I know they went on to suck balls, but the concept was really cool.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Good! Change it up. Heels won the coin flip how many years in a row?

    ReplyDelete
  48. The last line of Scott's answer is so accurate, it hurts.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Bruce, how would you book it? Elimination Match? Or WarGames rules where everyone enters and then it's first submission?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Weren't there 3 Shield/Wyatts matches? PPV, Raw, Main Event?

    ReplyDelete
  51. I've always said, faces win the toss, beat the ever loving hell out of the heels from beginning to end, crows has a collective orgasm while watching the ultimate comeuppance.

    ReplyDelete
  52. So two, then. Because Main Event does not count for anything but a cheap payday.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Cena's blade job at Judgment Day 2005 is pretty much up there with Eddie's at the previous year's JD. Both of them facing JBL.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I think either the Elimination Chamber of Hell in a Cell structures would work beautifully for a War Games match. With Elimination Chamber, you'd probably only do 3 vs. 3 matches--but that seems to be the number WWE puts in stables these days anyway (Wyatts, Shield, the New Nation, 3MB, the most recent Evolution, etc.). The only thing you'd lose is the possibility for a mystery partner since all of the participants would start out in the cage at once.

    ReplyDelete
  55. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 3:40 PM

    *hangs head in shame*

    I can't believe I posted an inaccurate statement on the internet. How will my ancestors live with the humiliation?

    ReplyDelete
  56. I was just gonna post...yep, sums up the entire sorry state of the company today.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Damn I want to watch Wrestlewar 92 now.

    Also a Shield vs Wyatts war games would have been awesome during the attitude era in say 2001ish.

    ReplyDelete
  58. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 3:45 PM

    Weren't they all in high school then? I think WWE would have some trouble with their sponsors if they had teenagers bleeding in a cage.

    /dumb joke

    ReplyDelete
  59. Christian's Time Machine man.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 3:46 PM

    Also, I now feel really old.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Is that why he is actually out? He's stuck in some time somewhere he shouldn't be?

    I'm betting it's the middle ages.

    ReplyDelete
  62. #HOSSAPPROVED

    ReplyDelete
  63. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 3:56 PM

    Not everyone has to be a top star in War Games. You just need guys who know how to brawl effectively. I mean, "War Machine" wasn't exactly setting the world on fire in 1987.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Wait, which one? The 94 or 95? Because yeah, 94 was really good in a lot of ways, but 95 didn't have much for redeeming factors.

    ReplyDelete
  65. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 4:04 PM

    Seven years or so earlier with those same guys, and there would be no question. I mean Dusty vs Funk alone would have been considered a dream match. And it's easier to forget that Col. Parker was a decent worker way back when and he and Bunk were a solid team for years in the South.

    ReplyDelete
  66. That actually would be pretty awesome, the only problem is do you want to subject a group of heels to be thoroughly squashed like that? (unless you have Honky Tonk Man, Miz level heels that you wanna see get their asses beat)

    ReplyDelete
  67. There are a couple of very good war games style matches in roh histor: generation next vs prince nana's group and czw v roh.

    ReplyDelete
  68. The Love-Matic Grampa!October 14, 2014 at 4:16 PM

    (unless you have Honky Tonk Man, Miz level heels that you wanna see get their asses beat)

    That's an unfair comparison.

    Honky Tonk Man actually drew money.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Much like Ozzue Smith.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Like he wasn't a drug addict before that.

    ReplyDelete
  71. The feud that really needed wargames was Evolution vs Benoit, Michaels, Foley, Benjamin.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Usos stick out as the weak link in most matches.

    ReplyDelete
  73. How were they supposed to know the fans were into it? It's not like they got a "This is Awesome!" chant at the opening bell on a B-PPV

    ReplyDelete
  74. War games rules with guys locked in the chamber. Pinfall or submission, non-elimination.

    ReplyDelete
  75. the czw vs roh one is great but the lack of commentary kills it.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Biff Kensington IIIOctober 14, 2014 at 5:17 PM

    I literally just got done watching that show this afternoon. Glorious times.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Biff Kensington IIIOctober 14, 2014 at 5:19 PM

    The very nature of War Games as a match (the 'true' breed, from 1987 to 1992, before it became a self-parody) is gone from wrestling today. I watched the '92 War Games match between Sting's Squadron and the Dangerous Alliance, a match that happened twenty-two years ago, yet I can almost remember move for move. It was bloody, yes, but more than that, it was frenetic, and chaotic, and visceral, and badass. The current product is so anti-septic, so polished, so lackluster, that the whole product almost feels like wrestling-lite.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Amen! WarGames were sanctioned because the NWA was tired of all of their crap. Just let them all kill each other and be done with it.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Adam "Colorado" CurryOctober 14, 2014 at 5:49 PM

    The SCUM vs. ROH one last year is pretty decent.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Any discussion of the worst War Games starts with 1993. It ended on a bear hug. A BEAR HUG. From a guy dressed as a construction worker!


    I found '94 to be a lot of fun, just a good dirty brawl. 95 was bad, but not nearly as bad as 93. BEAR HUG.

    ReplyDelete
  81. I actually love that it has no conmentary

    ReplyDelete
  82. Plus, it had one of my favorite exchanges ever.

    Michael Hayes: "I gotta go in there?"
    Paul E: "You gotta go in there."
    Michael Hayes: "Damn!"

    ReplyDelete
  83. Thing is, the faces would have a numbers advantage most of the time, so the heels wouldn't really look bad. They were just on the wrong side of luck. So they can be super squashed without getting buried.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Ebola fears

    /end thread.

    I say that sort of tongue-in-cheek, but hey, with all of the frenzy and paranoia going on about that at the present time, and the ever present threat of other bloodborne pathogens and diseases, it's actually good that WWE has stopped the blood-letting. Can you imagine fans in this day and age being okay with having a strange person's blood spattered all over them?

    ReplyDelete
  85. I remember there was a great spread in the WCW magazine for War Games at WrestleWar 92 -- with a cool chart showing all the past and current feuds, between the heels and faces as well as within teams. I really miss stuff like that.

    ReplyDelete
  86. That wouldn't work in this day though. Nothing to do with technology, they just wouldn't be able to remember who's fighting who and why

    ReplyDelete
  87. Interesting point....just thinking from a psychology perspective, instead of a face coming in to save a teammate from a heel beatdown man advantage every x minutes, you get a heel saving his teammate from a face man advantage beatdown....I'm not sure how I feel about that, I'd almost wish I could see an example of that in real life to see how the crowd reacted to the match overall.

    ReplyDelete
  88. 1999 had a ready made WarGames match: Flair, DDP, BamBam, Kanyon vs Douglas, Benoit, Saturn, Malenko. Instead, they just didnt do it at that Fall Brawl.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Bryan & Shield vs Evolution & Kane would have been awesome after Wrestlemania

    ReplyDelete
  90. There's an easy way around the coin-toss logic problem. If you do War Games in WWE, just have the two top guys from the team square off for the advantage in a one-on-one in the go-home show. Naturally, the heels cheat and win the advantage, but at least we don't have to believe the heels ALWAYS win the toss.

    ReplyDelete
  91. I believe I've read that they wanted to do a WarGames in 99, but didn't decide to until like 2-3 weeks before the PPV, by which point tickets had already been sold, so they couldn't alter the arena to accommodate the 2nd ring they'd need to put in to have the WarGames. Sounds like typical WCW ineptitude, so I'd be inclined to believe it!

    ReplyDelete
  92. Actually (and I'm probably too late to reply), I don't think the heel would make the save. Cause say, it's 3 on 2 for the faces, and the 2 heels are basically dead. So every new heel that comes in is like a lamb to the slaughter house, and will immediately get double/triple/quadruple teamed. The ultimate squash!!

    ReplyDelete
  93. War Games '97. No reason the Horsemen shouldn't have done this with the NWO B-Team.

    ReplyDelete
  94. the babyfaces team is made up mostly of "underdogs" and the heels have at least one "monster". faces win the coin toss, but are still not that dominant because the "monster" goes in first.

    (for example: someone Lesnar and someone who is "cruiserweight" start. face gets destroyed. coin toss, another babyface comes in but gets beaten up as well. the drama now not only comes from the question if anyone will be able to fight back against that guy much less the rest of the heel team)

    ReplyDelete
  95. first ever stable/faction doubleturn?

    ReplyDelete
  96. I didn't think it was bad at that time though (Benoit answering "bite me" > me going crazy at home! "YEAAAAH!").

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment