Scott
I know you haven't been watching weekly (much like myself) but where do you stand on the part time Champion? Has the experiment failed, or can it be considered in any way a success?
Nothing seems to be improving the ratings but has it raised the prestige of the title? Or has it not being there harmed it?
I suppose the other main question would be if it hasn't worked, could it have been done differently and it absolutely could have worked? Will the part time 'special attraction' champ be more common moving forward?
Thanks Scott, loving your work.
(Oh and Reigns/Lesnar could be the weirdest styles clash I've ever seen. The WWE must have faith they have a **** match in them... Right?)
I think it was an interesting and worthwhile experiment, but we really need the World champion to at least defend that sucker every 30 days. Yes, the TV title defenses and such were deflating the importance of the belt on a weekly basis, but taking to the extremes of having Brock be gone and not even MENTIONED for months at a time is just too much and leaves the product completely directionless. Having someone holding it and only defending on PPV is the happy medium they should have gone with, but it would have made Brock too expensive to use.
So I'd call it a good idea in theory, put much like communism or geometry, not all theories work out in real life.
I heard through someone who works for the WWE that Roman Reigns failed a drug test. Brock Lesnar supposedly demanded Reigns be removed from the main event at WrestleMania. Vince said no to Lesnar so he walked out. I also saw promos from that same person that showed the graphics for a Lesnar Vs. Bryan Mania main event and one that was a whole commercial that finished with a Lesnar Vs. Reigns Vs. Bryan main event.
ReplyDeletei really like the idea and to me this has been the most memorable title reign in years.
ReplyDeleteWhat's more surprising? Brock winning at WM 30 or WM 31?
ReplyDeleteThe 30 day rule needs to be honored, period.
ReplyDeleteThumbs up for the Friends reference.
ReplyDeleteI liked the idea of the TV title being defended weekly on television. I think it added cred to the belt and the champion.
ReplyDeleteI heard through someone who works for the WWE that Yokozuna is going to return as part of the Hart Foundation this week.
ReplyDeleteHasn't the temporary champion theory already been tested by Hollywood Hulk Hogan?
ReplyDeleteCome on, we all want to see exactly what happens if Brock refuses to show up with the belt and push Vince to the total breakdown we've been expecting for years.
ReplyDelete"WWE must have faith they have a ***** match in them."
ReplyDeleteBWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Was it the same person who already posted that to Reddit last week where we already mocked it?
ReplyDeleteSwerve? Guess that explains why Russo quit his blog.
ReplyDeleteSee many people have mentioned this sort of scenario that Brock shows up to UFC with the WWE belt (or holds it hostage) as some sort of deathblow like this is 1979 and doing so would ruin a territory. First off, he never would but even if he did it would get some TMZ headlines and actually make business more interesting. I don't think anyone would care very much at all and in a week we'd be back to the norm of seeing Kane and Big Show in the spotlight
ReplyDeleteHi, Mr. Reddit Troll!
ReplyDeleteI don't think Brock should have defended it every PPV, but would have been more effective if Brock defended it every second PPV.
ReplyDelete"Not to mention that if Vince gave a shit about what the internet thought, Daniel Bryan wouldn't be the 17th guy in a midcard Intercontinental title match at Wrestlemania."
ReplyDeleteThe problem with that thinking is that hashtags CAN get a lot of press these days, especially when it pertains to something negative, and right now, the biggest story coming out of WWE this year is that people completely trashed the Royal Rumble and the crowning of their new golden boy.
Friends jokes is about as painful as Jerry Lawler jokes.
ReplyDeleteNo, it was honestly a guy who works in music for the WWE. The failed drug test thing is iffy, but I saw the videos with my own two eyes.
ReplyDeleteBrock walks out Pre-Mania, I will hand deliver a $1,000 check to the Susan G Komen foundation in his honor.
ReplyDeleteI didn't realize there was a post about the failed drug test. I heard a slightly different story that said he was going to show up during The Ascension Vs. PTP match and just destroy everyone then call out Reigns. That sounds questionable. As far as the promos go, I saw the videos from someone who I know works for the WWE. I am sure they make promos for every situation possible, but Bryan was in the mix at one point.
ReplyDeleteAs far as in-ring action goes, I could see Brock/Reigns going about ***1/4 (although given that Scott gave the very good Reigns/Bryan match that rating, he must have higher standards than I do). The crowd reaction is an entirely different beast, however.
ReplyDeleteI like for World champions to keep the title for more than a month. I absolutely couldn't stand all of the title changes back in the 90's. I know why they did it but hell it seemed like it would change every week. With Brock not defending on every show, it allows others to rise up the ranks. Although I don't mind him defending the title every few months, I do think he should make more appearances on television to build up those title matches.
ReplyDeleteIf Brock Lesnar resigns he needs to have a 10 match per year schedule. 3-4 matches a year doesn't cut it and if the new deal ends up being similar i wont shed any tears if he jumps ship again.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I hated the titles changes in 1999 in particular, in both companies. It did nothing for the WWF, WCW, IC, US, or Tag titles to have them swapped all the time.
ReplyDeleteAnd Jake Roberts is the Higher Power
ReplyDeleteDBry carried that match. Will Lesnar do the same for Reigns?
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately a TV title is treated like hot garbage.
ReplyDeletePeople don't care that much about the Bryan/Reigns/Lesnar stuff anymore. There's a certain degree of angry acceptance about the 'Mania card and the Rumble, rather than legitimate rage.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure they're capable of calling it on the fly, but they could lay it out beforehand a la Hogan/Warrior.
ReplyDelete$1 of which will actually go towards cancer research and treatment!
ReplyDeleteBut people did care, and as of right now, it's the biggest story of the year from WWE, that, and AJ straight up calling out Stephanie on her own bullshit about gender equality on the WWE.
ReplyDeleteThe World title being vacant was never an issue. It was the fact they didn't compensate by doing more with the secondary belts.
ReplyDeleteI like the fact that Cena was like, "Fuck it I can't win the World title. I'll go after the US title" But this is something that should have been done a lot sooner.
Please give it to a non-fraud charity instead.
ReplyDeleteWhen will people learn. Democracy. Doesn't. Work!
ReplyDeleteIf I am going to give $1,000 to women that need their breasts examined I'll go to a strip club.
ReplyDeleteHe's either the smartest man in the room or hired the guy who is
ReplyDeleteI am humbly corrected.
ReplyDeleteNeeds more Reigns bashing.
ReplyDeleteYou added a star.
ReplyDeleteI also think Brock legit doesn't give a shit if he works there, ufc or anywhere else. He honestly comes across as a simple guy. And I'm sure he's saved his money.
ReplyDeleteLittle late to the party
ReplyDeleteHollywood Hogan was the definition of part time champion.
ReplyDeleteHigher anyway.
ReplyDelete30 easily
ReplyDeleteI was rewatching Lesnar vs Rock and aside from the crowd, the match hasn't really aged all that well. It's now even gone down on my list of best examples of a guy putting the new champ over in spades. Far below Sting putting over Vader at the bash, Cena putting over Lesnar at summerslam, and the shock of all shocks, Orton's fine work in putting over Henry.
ReplyDeleteThe funny thing is, this match should be easy to get right. Two hosses beating the shit out of each other for 15 or so mins until one finally stays down. The formulas very difficult to screw up, the crowd is the wildcard.
ReplyDeleteNever underestimate the role of a hot crowd in elevating a match!
ReplyDeleteI swear...the TV show "Friends" is the new John Cena on this board. People either love it or hate it....no real in-between. It's fascinating.
ReplyDeleteIt's been like a lot of WWE storylines over the past very years: a good idea poorly executed.
ReplyDeleteI know he refused to.be champion again a few times but Shawn Michaels would've been an awesome part time champ
ReplyDeleteYep. Idea of an all-powerful villain destroying all of the heroes before being dethroned by the new guy was good but poorly executed.
ReplyDeleteNot talking about the title/the champion while he was gone didn't make the title more prestigious; it just made it more of an afterthought. And, to whatever degree there was the feeling of "Oh, Brock's here, this show's a big deal," it just made every other show (of which there were far more of than Brock shows) seem less important/closer to skippable; it doesn't seem like numbers popped enough for Brock's appearances to justify the damage to everyone else.
They should take a page out of.Sheamis/Mark Henry ar SummerSlam '11. Just two heavyweights going at it
ReplyDeleteThere were times I forgot Brock had the title and it wasn't because he wasn't around it was because the same people were doing the same old shit andi just didn't notice nobody was carrying a belt around while they did it.
ReplyDeleteOrton/Henry at NOC was great.
ReplyDeleteI'm okay with multiple title changes if you have a large number of deserving, interesting characters. It bouncing between guys like Austin, Rock, Foley, HHH, and Angle isn't a problem IMO; but if it's guys like Miz, ADR, Swagger, Mysterio, and Orton?
ReplyDeleteNot to say they should act like it's real, but the title should be almost entirely reserved for guys who are the cream of the crop (perceived or otherwise). If you have an influx of all-time greats, then by all means pass it around like a joint.
Does anyone remember when Hulk Hogan was WCW Champion, and some people complained that he only defended the belt on PPV's, rather than every week?
ReplyDeleteIf I had a belt that ugly I'd to my best to avoid being seen with it in public.
ReplyDeleteHulk Hogan could cure cancer and people would say he should have left it alone.
ReplyDeleteI think it was more the fact he rarely even defended on PPV either.
ReplyDeleteHogan held the title from Hog Wild in 1996 until Starrcade in 1997 except for 1 week when he lost to (and regained from) Luger. The maximum number of PPV defenses he could've had was 15. He defended it 4 times: Halloween Havoc 96, Souled Out 97, SuperBrawl 7, and Starrcade 97.
He didn't even *wrestle* at 6 PPVs (including 3 in a row) while champion: World War 3 96, Spring Stampede 97, Slamboree 97, Great American Bash 97, Fall Brawl 97, World War 3 97.
When he *did* wrestle, it was often a non-title match (Starrcade 96, Halloween Havoc 97) or a multi-man match (Fall Brawl 96, Uncensored 97, Bash at the Beach 97).
His first reign was in 94 was pretty bad. He won the belt in July and didn't defend it at the September ppv -- didn't even SHOW UP. That's the first time I can remember the sitting world champion outright skipping a pay-per-view.
ReplyDeleteGood example. Or Sheamus-Cesaro from last year.
ReplyDelete"Unfortunately all the titles are treated like hot garbage."
ReplyDeleteFTFY
I hate it.
ReplyDeleteBrock really does have it all figured out, doesn't he?
ReplyDeleteAnd it's as simple as dedicating yourself to becoming the biggest, baddest mofo around, being blessed with the ability to pick things up quickly and being freakishly good at whatever you do, and not caring about fame or what anyone says about you. Simple.
Seriously though, it's often said that in negotiations, the party willing to walk away holds all the power. Brock is beholden to nobody.
The drug test was debunked, so everything you say is probably bullshit. :-(
ReplyDeleteIt could have worked if the focus had been on him even when he wasn't there. Basically they needed to Poochie the situation. But they actively went the opposite route. Cena earning the Rumble title match was the only time they put any real focus on the situation. In fact Brock being champion has really just come off as a prolonged Cena feud. The only build for his Mania defense so far has been the interview the night after the Rumble. Everything since then has been focused on Reigns vs. Bryan.
ReplyDeleteYou shut your whore mouth.
ReplyDeleteHe really doesn't, just needs the paycheck to keep his account healthy but I'm sure he's always ticking down to when he can go back home on the farm with Sable
ReplyDeleteI think you're getting worked son, unless AJ's call out was coincidence that it came after Patricia Arquette's equal-pay-for-women Oscar speech
ReplyDeleteAt the very least, Brock's absences should've been a storyline unto themselves. Like, the Authority made a deal with Heyman and allowed a waiver of the 'every 30 days' rule, allowing Paul to come out and talk on TV every week about his champion client being the best.
ReplyDeleteThe title being absent should've been the catalyst for Cena, Ziggler and company rising up against the Authority at Survivor Series, imo. That should've been the proverbial last straw. After Cena's team wins there, Brock is immediately forced back to defend the belt at the December PPV, and then his Rumble defense is locked into place before Trips/Steph are back in power.
Which is why I like having a TV Title. You can play up the fact that it gets defended every week to justify more frequent title changes (while also playing up how impressive it is when a guy gets a decent reign with it). Then you can keep your main titles as being defended less-frequently and being more important/having longer title reigns.
ReplyDeleteI was actually just watching a '96 Nitro and thinking of how a TV Title could translate to modern wrestling. My fantasy-booking went: Have a rule wherein if a champ successfully defends the title 10 times, he automatically gets a World Title shot. That way you can have champs dropping the title tregularly but if you want to push a guy he can have an extended run that creates it's own story. This of course depends on Titles being treated as an important thing and wrestling being treated as a sport so it would never happen, but still, I thought it was a decent concept.
ReplyDeleteIt actually was, and for all the shit Orton gets he really was a pro that night. Too bad the injury train hit Henry.
ReplyDeleteThe whole thing could be a perfect way to turn Cena heel who will never turn heel.
ReplyDeletethis. Lesnar hardly ever being mentioned is what hurt his championship reign, not the fact he didn't defend it that often.
ReplyDeleteespecially because that was one of those cases where they could have had their cake and eat it, too: Lesnar being on the show could have been even more special if they played up that he is the champion.
ReplyDeleteRandy Orton had a pretty good track record for most of 2011, having solid to great programs with Punk, Christian and Henry.
ReplyDeleteit's funny that as much as the WWE seems to have tried to be less dependent on individual workers, the result is them being more dependent on certain guys than ever.
ReplyDeleteyet I still think Vince's head would explode.
ReplyDeleteTheir match at HiaC was great as well
ReplyDeletebtw, weird about that match: in retrospect the buildup for that match seems to make sense: Lesnar doesn't look that good so the surprise is even bigger.
ReplyDeletebut since then people have claimed (including Vince on the Austin podcast) that the decision to end the streak was made on the same day. so it could have easily gone another way, with Lesnar looking like no real threat during the buildup and then actually losing at Mania. wtf.
So you'd be going heel? Fuck that slimey organization.
ReplyDeleteAnd how long until they run out of challengers? Or they start running the same match 5 weeks on a row?
ReplyDeleteThe idea of the midcard title with the obligatory title defences is all fine and dandy, but that only works if you have a very deep roster, or if you have the willingness of bringing indy guys to be squashed.
I'm OK with it since, to me, Brock is like the badass monster waiting in the shadows that people know is there, but they dare not speak his name for fear of drawing him out more than absolutely needed. But of course I get what you guys are saying.
ReplyDeleteOr they could do the time-limit draws that worked for Regal etc. But then of course you'd actually have to bring back the time-limit and they don't seem to keen on that, unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteThis! I'm on board with this.
ReplyDeleteYes. I mean, why not at least have Brock brag that he's such a star that he doesn't have to defend it regularly?
ReplyDeleteWith the 30 day rule I always wanted them to be tough on it. If someone has avoided defending the World Title for, say, 28 days and the next event within the 30 day period is an episode of Superstars.. Have the guy forced to defend it on THAT show just to meet the contractual obligation. Could make for fun World Title matches as we're not supposed to think that the entire roster is there for Superstars, so it could be Brock defending against Sin Cara or whoever happens to have the best record of the guys present.
Stupid but fun.
It still falls on the "same-match-5-weeks-on-a-row" scenario. 10 minute draw the first week, 15 minutes on second week, double count-out on the third, DQ on the fourth, and win on fifth week. Give that cycle (or similar) enough time to repeat itself 5 or 6 times and the net will rise up in prostest.
ReplyDeleteBoth of which are fine in my book.
ReplyDeleteWWE has seemingly forgotten that the best way to build up a big match is to make both guys look strong. Now they have one of them lose a match on RAW in under 2 minutes on the go home RAW b/f the PPV... and that's the guy that'll probably win
ReplyDeleteExcept what's the angle? AJ's not on television at the moment, and the tweet calling out Stephanie was in response to Stephanie saying she supported Patricia Arquette on Twitter?
ReplyDeleteYeah, that's logical. I was suspect of the drug test thing too. I SAW the promos on a WWE computer!
ReplyDeleteAnyone else think that the crowd will replay Mania XX, shits on Brock and Roman, and hijacks the match?
ReplyDeleteDistinct possibility
ReplyDeleteAnd they have done it twice with the same guy. Their whole logic behind not pushing anyone too hard is based largely on guys like Lesnar, Lashley, Batista "leaving" for other things. Yet when they return, Rock headlines two Manias, Brock gets carte blanche, and Batista wins the Rumble and headlines in the title match.
ReplyDelete