Skip to main content

Most counterproductive angles?

So as you know, WWE booking isn't exactly lighting up the logic meter these days; we have the heel champ making the valid points and the top babyface acting like the disrespectful punk, not to mention Sheamus pulling cheap shots to win and committing grand theft auto (Maffew summed it up best on Twitter: "WWE: Where faces are heels and heels are faces!"). That got me thinking about what would be some of the most counterproductive angles in recent memory, ones that made the good guy look like a dipshit, undermined a guy completely, etc, basically achieving the opposite of what the goal is. 
The first thing that jumps to mind is the Lance Storm/Stone Cold "Boring" angle. I understand the endgame there (repackaging Lance Storm into a goofy, cabbage-patching face, just give him some kind of persona), but having maybe the biggest 'face of all time bury Storm out of the gate with "BOOOORRRRRRRINNNNNG" chants (and as we learned with "What?", Stone Cold has a knack of getting the crowd to chant the simplest of words) that poor Lance would never live down was probably not the best way to do it. Why not have Bischoff, still effective as a heat magnet, berate Storm for killing his ratings every time he was on and THEN having Stone Cold light a fire under his ass? Instead, turning him into a jiving square (with a huge dick apparently) did nothing to change the fact that Storm was done once Stone Cold brought out a pillow and blanket to the stage.
What say you and the Commentators of Doom?

Oh, by far I'd say Kurt Angle getting his nuts cut off by HHH in 2000, where the finish of the angle was the exact opposite of what should have happened.  Angle should have stolen Stephanie and given HHH a reason to be jealous and pissed off, but instead Angle lost the girl and then ate a Pedigree.  It was mind-boggling.  Still is.  Same idea with the initial Randy Orton face turn in 2004, where Orton was made to look like a goof week after week and then lost the belt to HHH a month after winning it.  Took him years to fully recover from that.  

Comments

  1. WCW probably wins this in a walk.

    --the Fingerpoke of Doom
    --the Sting-Hogan matches
    --Black Scorpion

    Take your pick.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Goofy egotistical preppy asshole Randy Orton was still fucking superior to the piece of shit warmed over leftover Steve Austin clone he ended up being.

    Dude needs to regrow his hair, start wearing clothing again, and giving those RNN updates where he acted like Ted Baxter.....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Almost any "losing streak" angle, since it's always just a mask for WWE burying a guy as per their policy of jobbing an over guy for 6-12 months to prove he really loves the business, or some such nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  4. In 2003, when HHH said guys like Booker T shouldn't be World Champion, and then he went and beat Booker in the blow-off. That was pretty counter-productive. 

    ReplyDelete
  5. I admit....I sent him a get well e-mail at getwellrandy@wwe.com during that injury.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A thousand likes for this...

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't think the actions determine who's the face or heel, it's whether people like you, period.  Steve Austin and Rock were not exactly nice guys, yet folks loved them, so people rooted for them.  Everyone loves an anti-hero. 

    Now, the bizarre thing about the WWE, and we've talked about this ad naseum, is that the majority of the audience prefer Punk over Cena, yet they're doing everything possible short of Punk piledriving an infant to get you to boo him instead.  Sure, Cena has the bulk of the kiddies, but if you turned him corporate heel, he'd be hated by 100% of the audience while Punk would get all the support.  Eh, I already typed more about this than I wanted to.  

    ReplyDelete
  8. I always thought that when he said "people like you", he was referring to people with a single letter for a last name. Think about it: Barry O, Johnny V, Mr. X, Eazy E, Kenny G, Maggie Q, Malcolm X, Elizabeth I, etc. None of these people are World Championship material, so why should Booker T have been any different? Only the great Robbie V is an exception to this rule.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jobbing Daniel Bryan in 18 seconds to get Sheamus over as a mega-face. Instead of shuffling Bryan back to midcard obscurity it made him an even bigger star. It really did nothing for Sheamus. He's at the same level he would have been at if he and Bryan fought an Iron Man match at Mania.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Just a few off the top of my head:

    -Bam Bam Bigelow & LT: KILLED Bigelow's career on the spot. He could have been a star, WWF's version of the Vader-style monster heel. But he was done after that, he was almost below squash-match-jobber level at that point, at least guys like Barry Horowitz were losing to actual wrestlers. And the worst part is that they could have used anyone for that angle, and they killed the one guy that had a chance of really getting over as a credible threat to Diesel.Well, besides Bret Hart, but Bret's win over Nash at SS95 kind of meant nothing because after beating Shawn at WMXI Nash was just squashing people (Mabel, Bulldog) that had no chance in hell of winning .

    -The Insiders, DDP and Nash: Took DDP from the #1 babyface to Nash's lackey. He never recovered, IMO. Plus the whole angle was terrible to watch.

    -Goldberg never getting revenge for Starrcade 98 and the Fingerpoke of Doom: Covered in the nWo thread. Destroyed an entire promotion, and certainly didn't do Goldberg any favors.

    -Any angle involving John Cena in the last 2-3 years. No one has come out of that better than they went in.

    For the near future: CM Punk/Cena (see above) and the current Ziggler "we're going to give him the MITB case and then job him" deal. I also get the feeling that Austin Aries and Bully Ray don't exactly have a bright future ahead of them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You know, I never even thought of that way. I always focused on how stupid it was to job out the best pure wrestler and most rising star at WM in 18 seconds, but I never thought about how it affected the guy. Probably never thought about it because it didn't affect the other guy at all.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Right now, the most worst king of angle is the "losing streak" angle. It's not even so much that history has proven these to be failures, but it's pretty much the only angle that the writers can come up with.  Drew McIntyre?  Let's give him a losing streak angle!  Jack Swagger?  Let's give him a losing streak angle, too!  The Miz?  Losing streak!  Cody Rhodes?  Losing streak!  Christian?  Losing streak!  It goes on and on and they never have any sort of good payoff attached to them.  It's infuriating!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh give me a break. You know damn well what he REALLY meant. HHH going KKK on Booker T. was pretty damn counterproductive. But the most counterproductive angle by FAR was the Invasion Angle.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I just mentioned this in a reply but it deserves its own comment: the Invasion Angle should be BY far the most counterproductive angle in pro-wrestling history.  What should've been the biggest money maker of all-time in the business turned out to be a WCW whipping session for Vince.  He cared more about teaching the WCW guys a lesson than taking advantage of dream matches.  Nothing comes even close and how Scott chooses Angle cut off by HHH over this is laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I agree -- I never understood why you would *ever* use a losing streak as an angle, unless the wrestler you're pushing is strictly a comedy act ala Barry Horowitz.

    ReplyDelete
  16. That;s pretty funny. I hope Mr. X was a "Streets of Rage" reference.

    ReplyDelete
  17.  I'm not up to snuff on the wrestling news but has the losing streak have to do with HHH's losing streak in 1996? I can imagine HHH defending the losing streak angle by saying that he went on a losing streak and still came out a big star and the losing streak is just meant to weed out the guys that don't truly love the business or something.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I really don't think a majority prefer punk over cena. It's just a very vocal minority.

    ReplyDelete
  19. and Barry Horowitz also is an exception because it really wasn't an angle at first. I think that's actually a case of using something existent (him being a jobber for years) and TURNING it into an angle.

    ReplyDelete
  20. bs on Cena: or are you really going to claim that Punk didn't look MUCH better after his program with Cena than he did before?

    ReplyDelete
  21. David Arquette - WCW World Champion. 

    In response to Scott's Kurt Angle 2000 comments - Angle WON THE BELT the next month. Triple H didn't exactly bury him their. Between that and Scott's comments about Flair's first run (which I though he always loved) I think he's losing it. 

    ReplyDelete
  22.  The Invasion as a whole, of course, but I think the most specific counter productive angle was the burial of DDP. He was the biggest WCW star that had signed at that point so he should have really been the lead guy in the Invasion or at least only second to Booker T, who was the WCW champ and someone Vince obviously saw something in. It seemed like he was poised to be a big deal, coming in as Taker's stalker. But then Taker made him look like a complete jobber, and they of course let Taker's wife, The Fish Who Walked Like a Woman, get a pin on DDP, and pretty soon DDP was dead in the water and only fit to work at the European title level.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Angle being cock blocked really ruined his whole career, imagine what might have been. 

    ReplyDelete
  24. That angle was stupid for several reasons, number one being that everyone in the audience knew DDP was married to Kimberly. Why would he want to stalk the Undertaker's wife? http://www.pwpix.net/superstars/k/kimberlypage/images/kimberly-page.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  25. The HHH/Booker T "Racist" angle.
    The HHH/Kane "Katie Vick" angle.
    The Stephanie McMahon/Jericho "Undisputed Champion" angle.
    The Ultimate Warrior/Papa Shango "Voodoo" angle
    Roddy Piper/Bad News Brown "I'll paint half myself black" angle.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I was always curious on if it was SUPPOSED to get him over as a face.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Yeah but he wasn't a REAL champion...he just holding the belt until they could line up Austin/Rocky for WM 17.

    His point is very valid....Kurt Angle in summer 2000 was poised to become a mega-super-star. That Angle/HHH match was so frustrating since the angle was basically just dropped....an Angle/Stephanie pairing would have been SO awesome and could have lead to a proper blowoff at WM 17 as the semi-main to Rocky/Austin 2.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "not to mention Sheamus pulling cheap shots to win and committing grand theft auto"Ok, I realize this isn't the main point of the initial post, but I wish that people would understand WWE's face/heel philosophy.  Babyfaces are justified in doing whatever they have to do, to ultimately triumph over the heel *who committed the crime/injustice first* - even if that means cheating, or attacking someone, or destroying their property.  The babyface is always right.  It's not a big deal, or at least it shouldn't be.  But I can't help it.  This kind of thinking annoys me almost as much as the whole "the fans determine who is a heel and a face" mentality.  Ok, I'm stepping off my soapbox now.  Carry on.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Which is hysterical because Vince doesn't even love the business. 

    ReplyDelete
  30.  Not sure on the timeline but wasn't Bam Bam in kliq hell at that point so even if he goes over LT, he's toast anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  31. YankeesHoganTripleHFanSeptember 23, 2012 at 8:10 AM

    Hey I agreed with Triple H. I didn't think that "those people" should be champion. (By those people I am of course referring to, AT BEST, average former WCW champions)

    ReplyDelete
  32. He made a good point of why he wanted to stalk Taker's wife, because he wanted to get the attention of the biggest dog in the yard, not because he wanted anything with Sara.

    ReplyDelete
  33. YankeesHoganTripleHFanSeptember 23, 2012 at 8:14 AM

    Scott was losing it 10 years ago with the "Triple H/ Shawn Michaels Summer Slam match was too good" rant.

    ReplyDelete
  34. YankeesHoganTripleHFanSeptember 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM

    Two words...Black Scorpian

    ReplyDelete
  35. The only time the losing streak thing seemed to be working fantastically was with Heath Slater and they've gone and messed that up too

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think Vince loves wrestling but he's ashamed of it at the same time.  If you've ever seen that Martin Lawrence movie "Welcome Home, Roscoe Jenkins", that's what I'm talking about.  For the uninformed, Martin is a talkshow host a la Montell who loves his family but he's totally ashamed of them and their backwoods country upbringing.  Vince seems to love THIS BUSINESS, but (obviously) he'd love to move on to mainstream entertainment.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Nah, he meant post-purchase WCW castoffs.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I don't think the LT match by itself killed Bam Bam's career. Think about it: it's a match to main event Wrestlemania and got the interest of the mainstream media. It was probably Bammer's biggest payday and one he eagerly embraced as he pulled a decent match out of LT.

    What you can blame is his booking after the match. John Cena jobbed to Kevin Federline and Big Show to Floyd Mayweather. They still survived. I really don't believe one match can really be that damaging but more the circumstances before and after.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Bam Bam wasn't even an IC contender at the time.  He had a ton of talent, but WWE never really pushed him.  He spent a lot of time feuding with a face Doink and Dink for Christ's sake.  For whatever reason (and I'm talking pre-Kliq problems), WWE never did much with Bammer.

    ReplyDelete
  40. ...Whaaaaaaat?  6-time heavyweight champ, Grand Slam champ, KotR winner, held the Euro and IC titles at the same time in his first year, won his first heavyweight title in his first year back when that wasn't the norm, was the #1 WWE guy during the Invasion, and the list goes on.

    Angle's career was more affected by his substance use than anything else.

    ReplyDelete
  41. HHH was such a Mitt Romney in that feud.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sounds good. What unjust act did Alberto commit, exactly? Becoming the #1 contender? Getting a concussion? Asking for a title shot? 

    ReplyDelete
  43. He was trying to initiate a 3-way? (The good kind, not the devil's kind.)

    ReplyDelete
  44. YankeesHoganTripleHFanSeptember 23, 2012 at 9:16 AM

    Triple H is a morman? Who knew? Does that mean he could have married Stephanie and Chyna if he wanted to?

    ReplyDelete
  45.  Not real champion? He had the damn belt. That's as real as it gets.

    ReplyDelete
  46. THIS. 

    Separately, HHH sort-of becoming a babyface in the feud with Angle, the way to finish that up would be Angle beating HHH and taking his wife.But then you would have had Rock/Austin/HHH on the face side and Angle/Benoit/Kane on the heel side, which is pretty freaking imbalanced. Someone on that face side has to turn heel (my vote: Rock). 

    ReplyDelete
  47.  Daniel Bryan went on a losing streak the moment he debuted and he turned out fine.

    ReplyDelete
  48.  Slamming the car hood on Sheamus' head?  Acting arrogant to everyone?  Take your pick .....

    ReplyDelete
  49. Fair enough, but why not go after Debra or lurk around Rock's wife?  Undertaker was hardly the biggest dog in the yard if DDP was (kayfabe) trying to "make himself famous".

    ReplyDelete
  50. Yes indeed. Hell, I thought Angle should have stolen Stephanie AND been revealed as the guy behind running over Austin the previous year (Kurt debuted on TV at Survivor Series '99 espousing "Three I's" and American hero stuff, so he kayfabe would have been the last guy anyone suspected).  He can frame HHH for the deed, steal Stephanie, and have all the political stroke that comes with banging the Boss's daughter.  HHH's sympathy heat would have been tremendous, as he goes back to being just another guy (without Steph protecting him).  He can still fight Austin (he didn't run Austin over, but he's not afraid to fight his rival just the same).  When Hunter beats Angle in the Wrestlemania blowoff, he can get Stephanie back in the Dark Universe version of the anti-Savage/Liz moment.  Steph's character is a huge whore and backs the strong horse in the feud.  Now that Hunter is back on top, she ditches Angle and takes her man back.  Or you drag the HHH vs. Steph thing out a bit longer.  Either way, everyone (not just HHH) should have come out stronger for that feud.  

    ReplyDelete
  51. Yeah, but it wasn't as a result of his losing streak that he turned out fine. Heath Slater's losing streak angle was actually working for him and they've fucked it

    ReplyDelete
  52. Yeah that's fair, but I'm of the opinion of if you have an angle that organic and the fans are just dying for it, you turn HHH face temporarily and then figure it out later.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Yeah, that was about the only way he was going to headline a Wrestlemania anyway, so I'm sure he didn't mind the payday.  

    ReplyDelete
  54. That's an interesting point for sure

    ReplyDelete
  55.  Heath Slater wasn't on a losing streak. Heath Slater is just a jobber. He's Barry Horowitz that gets to have an entrance theme, that's all. He just got to be the sacrificial lamb for all the legends leading into Raw 1000, but that was never meant to last. He's just a JTTS, what more should they have done with him anyway? He kinda sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  56. - Jobbing Wrath to Kevin Nash in a nothing match
    - Bringing back the Horsemen with no follow-up planned or executed
    - Bret Hart in general

    ReplyDelete
  57. It's so weird though.  They have Sheamus as a no-nonsense tough guy heel beforehand.  They water him down as a smiling babyface.  THEN they have him start doing heel shit as the bouncing babyface.  Why not just keep him as the badass killer and let him get over as a face that way?  We can probably ask Steve Austin and Goldberg if there is a precedent for that.  

    ReplyDelete
  58. That's the other massive problem with the story. DDP was a big enough star that he shouldn't have needed to get the Undertaker's attention. The way they did, made it look as if DDP was not on Taker's level.

    ReplyDelete
  59. It's nothing like Barry Horowitz in that the losing streak actually got Slater over and that meant they could have done something with him. The crowd was responding, unlike with other people in 'jobber' positions. Whether you like him or not is irrelevant to the fact that the losing streak was working for him as an angle

    ReplyDelete
  60. John Cena has certainly taken his place since then.

    ReplyDelete
  61. He held the belt from October 2000 - February 2001, at a time when there was only 1 champion. He defended against Austin, Rock, Triple H. How was he not the real champion?

    I actually thought Benoit would have made a better heel champion around that time. 

    ReplyDelete
  62. The vast majority of people WWE is no longer targeting prefer Punk.  The vast majority of people WWE is targeting now and for the future prefer Cena. 

    Unfortunately for them we (the undesirables) actually show up to events and are much louder.

    ReplyDelete
  63. They have no idea what they're doing with Sheamus.  Everything they've tried to use to get him over have bombed and they forgot the reason the crowd turned him face in the first place.  The fact that he murdered people in the MitB match and stood up to Mark Henry.  He got over by being a tough bad ass and he's failing by trying to be ginger Cena. 

    ReplyDelete
  64. Obviously I was being sarcastic, for some reason everyone thinks Angle not stealing Steph in 2000, had some profound affect on his awesome career. 

    ReplyDelete
  65. Which is pretty foolish on the undesireds part.

    ReplyDelete
  66. No one remembers NXT Daniel Bryan though.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I think he's talking about the current program, where WWE wants everyone to boo Punk. I'm pretty sure at Hell in a Cell he's going to come out in a Gestapo uniform and sacrifice Paul Heyman to his Aryan Lord and Savior Adolf Hitler. 

    That'll get the fans behind John Cena!

    ReplyDelete
  68. Yeah, I never understood that rant. I thought the point of the match was to put on the best product possible for the paying customer, but what do I know?

    ReplyDelete
  69.  The losing streak worked I think because Bryan was getting solid cheers despite losing, even from the non-indie fans. It carried over to his popularity when he came back.

    ReplyDelete
  70. I never thought about Angle being behind Austin's attack, but that actually makes a lot of sense. Enjoyed reading it.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Call me jaded, but I hate when they do a program where a new guy gets the title, only to lose it just before "WM". There may be several guys that deserve it, but it's obvious which ones Vince thinks are worthy of walking out of "WM" with it.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I think it's important to note that Slater's losing streak also involved all of the returning former stars - THAT'S what got over, not Slater himself. If Drew McIntyre were in Slater's shoes and sharing the spotlight with those guys, then McIntyre would have been the one getting the rub, while Slater would be stuck on dark-match duty.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Why don't we just say "2002" and get it over with.

    ReplyDelete
  74. YankeesHoganTripleHFanSeptember 23, 2012 at 12:19 PM

    In his defense he more or less took back the comments 10 years later

    ReplyDelete
  75.  Well he's still losing, it's just not as big of a deal. I just don't see where it was supposed to go from there, or why it should. It's not just because I don't like Slater, it's because there's only so much he's ever going to be good for and being a jobber is pretty much it.

    ReplyDelete
  76.  Yeah, Alberto was attacking Sheamus on the regular for a few weeks before that. He slammed the car hood on him, put him in that armbreaker while hanging off the ramp, a bunch of stuff. It's only because that was more characteristic of a heel that it didn't seem notable.

    ReplyDelete
  77.  I agree which is why I've switched over to tna.

    ReplyDelete
  78. The Summer of Punk up to MITB'11 (3 weeks of raw i believe) were all Punk.  Cena simply represented (represents) everything that Punk isn't and he could play off that, but really, that promo and the stuff with Vince - you're going to give credit to Cena now?  lol

    ReplyDelete
  79. We got a Mr. F right here.

    (hopefully someone gets that reference)

    ReplyDelete
  80. I'm going to guess that you (like all the people who like to ask "wait, so who's the heel between ADR and Sheamus) don't watch Smackdown.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Not an angle, per se, but I think we can all agree on the terrible habit of jobbing champions (cleanly!) in non-title matches for no reason. IC, US, Tag, Divas, MITB-holder, hell, they even sometimes do it to the WWE/World champ! Morrison beating Punk cleanly two or three times, I'm looking at you!

    I mean, I understand the idea of having the champ lose in order to set-up a feud with a new opponent, but they don't even do that oh-so-critical second step anymore, they just treat most of the champs as the biggest jobbers on the roster! Shouldn't one of the countless guys that pinned Santino while he was US-champ at least CHALLENGE him for the title? No, they don't bother, because even in KAYFABE the champs and championships are worthless - that's why we get storyline motivations like Cody Rhodes looking to bring prestige back to the IC-title, because it obviously lost much of the prestige it used to have. Why didn't Orton challenge Ziggler to put the MITB contract on the line at "Night of Champions"? There's just no logical storyline explanation for it.

    Now THAT'S counter-productive.

    ReplyDelete
  82. absolutely. he kicked people in the head to put them out of action. and if that didn't work, he bashed them with a lead pipe. and that's basically the way he got over. but instead of building on this, the WWE took at least a good chunk of the stuff that made him popular in the first place away. it's like they never learned their lesson from the Diesel face turn etc.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I agree with everyone below who says that each and every "losing streak" angle has been counterproductive. It's amazing, if you look at the roster doesn't it feel like everyone besides Punk/Sheamus/Cena/Orton are on a "losing streak"? I know somebody is winning these matches, but for the life of me I can't think of who.
    Maybe it's because when guys do win, it's usually on account of "opponent gets distracted by another wrestler/Titantron/hot-dog-vendor/sparkly-thing." So in that case it doesn't ever feel like someone won, just that the other guy lost.

    I have no idea why WWE is obsessed with doing angles that serve only to demean their talent. What's the point? I mean, look at Cesaro losing to Santino on Smackdown. Why? Why not have Cesaro remain undefeated, have the announcers put him over, then have Cesaro attack Cena (say, against Punk at HIAC) and BAM. Insta feud for Cena for a few PPVs. Maybe the feud starts with a non-match fight between the two and (GASP) Cesaro cleanly gets the better of Cena. Then Cena is all like "Wow this Antonio Cesaro is gonna be some challenge. I need my Cenation to rally around me." And everyone looks strong, and the match has some juice behind it. And hell, Cena can go over, but at least it'll mean something.

    Instead we'll get Cesaro go through his "you need to learn about this business" losing streak, complete with tapping to Cena in a 2-minute Raw match that helps nobody and makes zero dollars.

    OK, rant ended. Losing streak gimmicks suck.

    ReplyDelete
  84. To be honest, when the WWE Champion and John Cena don't bother showing up on the show, why should the viewing audience?

    ReplyDelete
  85. 2 things:

    1. I don't agree with the Orton looking like a goof thing. I'm going off memory, but I seem to remember him getting the best of HHH multiple times. Jumping out of the cake, mocking him Rock-style (the "Ape Promo"), pinning him at SSeries. Plus he beat both Batista and Flair clean and only lost 2 matches (title match to HHH, "no more title matches"-stip match to Flair) and both were very non-clean. They screwed him out of the title at UF so you'd get pissed and cheer Randy on his quest, which would culminate at Mania (the "no more title shots" screamed Rumble win to get around that). It didn't work cause they dramatically changed his character, from a disrespectful, entitled punk to a cheerful babyface that was magically friends with all the faces that he had been fucking with previously. They asked him to be a mix of Shawn Michaels and The Rock, which 24-year old Orton couldn't pull off.

    b. I will never understand the people on here who get upset for Sheamus "acting like a heel". First off, if you actually watched Smackdown you would have seen what Del Rio had done to him first. Second, do you people want nutless babyfaces that are always honorable and "do the right thing" (like John Cena) or guys that aren't afraid to get their hands dirty. For God's sake, we've been complaining about Cena having no balls for YEARS and acting like a boy scout, and now you're upset that Sheamus isn't "being a star".

    ReplyDelete
  86. You know what, in typical Angle fashion, it should have been a legit accident. He's driving through the parking lot trying to leave the arena and doesn't realize that there's a brawl going on.

    ReplyDelete
  87. I honestly thought the same thing was going to happen to Jericho in 2002. I really thought they were setting up Triple H vs. Austin for the title at Mania.

    ReplyDelete
  88. And I just want to clarify that I do think they're mishandling Sheamus, but the problem isn't that he "acts like a heel".

    I can just imagine *you people* (tm HHH) back in the day losing your shit and emailing Scott when Austin destroyed Vince's car, or when Eddie cheated to win a match.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Don't mean to speak for the OP, but I took the question to mean, "What angles had the exact opposite effect than what "creative" probably envisioned?"  In other words, they didn't do what they were supposed to do.

    Based on that, I really don't think the 2000 love triangle counts, since the booking wasn't really "intended" to do anything.  It was just poor booking.

    The Lance Storm angle is really good example, I think.  Big Show/Mayweather was similar (Big Show doing heel stuff got him over as a face while Mayweather's brash response got him over as a heel, even though it was clearly supposed to be the other way around).

    ReplyDelete
  90. RE: losing streaks:  I think MVP's losing streak angle actually worked out well for him. It was designed behind the scenes, I think, to really test him (whether that's a valid way to treat employees is another story), but that aside, he became really over with the crowd, partly b/c I think his losing streak was tied in with HHH at one point (HHH was being punished on screen by having the "loser"'s performance dictate his fate).

    ReplyDelete
  91. I doooooooooooooooooooooooooo...

    ReplyDelete
  92. Old school: Cornette turning on the Dynamic Dudes to stay with the MX.  It only ended up making people really like the MX that much more while agreeing that "yeah, the French Fries and Executive Vice President of Talent Relations and General Manager of Both Raw and Smackdown suck!"

    ReplyDelete
  93. Sure you're not mis-remembering when MVP's losing streak angle occurred in relation to his career? Because (if I remember correctly) MVP was at his most over from around Mania 23-24 or so--- specifically the Matt Hardy feud and his long US title reign.
    The losing streak angle was well after that, and from that point MVP's career in WWE was midcard at best. The high point might have been his loser face tag team with Mark Henry.

    I'd say MVP was a pretty over heel at one point, and was never more than "guy who's been around for awhile and mostly loses and has no feuds" after the losing streak angle ended.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Fuck John Cena and the WWE Champion.

    David Bowtunga occasionally appears on Friday nights, and that's all the incentive I need.*

    *this is not sarcasm, David Bowtunga is indeed my favourite WWE performer (tied with D-Bry)

    ReplyDelete
  95. In that case, then you can add the whole No Limit Soldiers debacle in WCW.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I'm pretty sure I saw him eating a gold tinfoil-wrapped chocolate star in Wee Britain the other day.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Is that you, Mr. Levesque?

    ReplyDelete
  98. Sarcasm makes far more sense, though it wasn't really obvious.  I've read similar statements on this blog many times.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Holy overreaction Batman!!!


    1. You seem to forget that Christian pinned Cesaro last month. 

    2. So all of a sudden, one loss equals a losing streak. What has the world come to? You're going to look real silly if Cesaro wins his next match. I hope he does.

    ReplyDelete
  100. The Undertaker's ex-wife looked like Jeff Jarrett, so going after Kimberly was trading up.

    ReplyDelete
  101. not the point.

    "Any angle involving John Cena in the last 2-3 years. No one has come out of that better than they went in."

    that was what Adam Curry wrote. and again, the whole Cena/Punk program was definitely what catapulted Punk into main event. and if it was really all Punk: why is it so hard to imagine the same thing happening with the combination Punk/Orton - or really with EVERY other combination besides Punk/part-timers? because of Cena's "the biggest superstar" status guys look amazing if they get the better of him.

    ReplyDelete
  102. It seemed to me that the Santino loss was to facilitate a split between Cesaro and Aksana, so I'd bet you're right and he wins his next match(es).

    ReplyDelete
  103. Holy completely missing the point, uhm, err, also Batman I guess,
    The point wasn't that Cesaro was necessarily going to be put through a losing streak gimmick right now. Though based on the way they treat pretty much every single new heel (see Miz, Cody, Daniel Bryan, Drew Mcintyre, Jack Swagger etc) chances are he will get saddled with that gimmick at some point. They all do.

    The larger point was...why have Cesaro lose there to Santino at all? Who did that help? No viewers came away thinking "Wow, Santino looked really good there. He's on to big things!" Because that's not how it was presented. Nope, Santino's still the same jobber he was going into the match, and now Cesaro is less special than he was before. Viewers can look at that match and say "Well, I guess this new Cesaro guy isn't all that great if he loses to Santino." 

    And yeah, I remember he already lost to Christian, and that made no sense too. Christian gained nothing from it, nor was he ever meant to. All it did was bring Cesaro down to his midcard level.

    And that's what I'm saying. Why do that? Cesaro, unlike the Cody Rhodes of the world, has a clean slate to fans. He doesn't have years of losses and humiliations to his record. WWE can bring him in and treat him like a BIG DEAL, and build to a match with an actual main eventer that means something. Instead Cesaro will win some, lose some, eventually lose to Cena in a throwaway Raw match with no promotion, and 3 years from now (after he, yes, goes through a losing streak gimmick) he'll win a MITB.

    Maybe I'm overreacting a bit to the Santino loss, but I don't think I am. I think it's an example of bad WWE booking where nobody looks special and nobody gets as over as they should.

    ReplyDelete
  104.  There is precedent....and it's not just WWE face/heel philosophy.  There was an old Crockett angle were Dusty Rhodes and  Magnum TA tied Jim Cornette to the bumper of a car and were prepared to drive off before the Midnight Express set him free.  Of course it was in retaliation for something Cornette had done, but it was still well beyond what a babyface would normally do. 

    ReplyDelete
  105. Yep. The point was Cesaro dumping Aksana. Cesaro lost because of the distraction she caused by being a dumb broad. He lost to "that jobber" Santino because he ties into the whole thing with the cobra hand puppet thing being smitten w/ Aksana. 

    There will be hilarious skits of Aksana dating Santino's cobra hand puppet sock thing.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Scott, Orton was green as shit in 2004. He had no business even holding the title at that point. He was also a horrible face worker (and still is), so I don't blame them for putting it back on HHH.

    I can't remember the Angle/Stephanie storyline well enough to comment on that.

    The entire invasion angle was about as counterproductive as it gets. Vince had no interest in putting any of the WCW guys over. This included the Rock (and Austin/HHH, for that matter) treating WCW Champion Booker T like a complete nobody.

    And for as much love as the Rock gets on this blog, it's that Jericho's debut and massive pop was immediately stifled by the Rock verbally shitting on him. He didn't recover until.... oh right, until he feuded with HHH in late 2000, whom he credits in his own book as helping him reach main event status.

    ReplyDelete
  107. I can handle being the resident Triple H mark.

    #wcwruinseverything

    ReplyDelete
  108. Maybe because of his first run in 87-88? Don't remember any specifics since I was just a kid, but Bam Bam went from a big deal to gone seemingly in a 6 month period

    ReplyDelete
  109. I'm gonna open another can of worms potentially, but:

    I was watching the Elimination Chamber '12 PPV on 24/7 since I'd never seen it, and they had a video package hyping Cena's training regime for his WM match with the Rock.  And as I thought about it, I realized that yeah, Cena really looked like a chump coming out of that loss.  Totally out of his league (admitting this as much as I hate when Rock gets an unconditional ass-kissing).

    In some ways, aside from the bottom line (which is all WWE cares about, of course), it was a lose-lose for both guys.  Rock losing would have made him look old and past his prime and out of place, while Cena's loss would have made (and did, I think in some ways) him look like he was only at the top of the company b/c someone like the Rock hasn't around.  At least when Warrior went over Hogan, A) Warrior stayed around and B) both men were at the top of their game.

    More casual fans might not have had of any these thoughts, but not all fans are as discerning as us fine connoisseurs. :)

    ReplyDelete
  110.   Yeah, the Orton thing was kind of one of those self-fulfilling prophecy type reversals.  Orton should not have been there to begin with, so they jump the title back to HHH and REALLY make sure Orton isn't ready.

    ReplyDelete
  111. The Austin heel turn, when WCW was about to invade?

    Once the Austin heel turn was done, sticking HHH with him for the Two Man Power Trip instead of trying Hunter as top babyface.  

    The "Brand Extension" in general?  

      

    ReplyDelete
  112. Yes.  I like the whole "make me famous" concept for a mid-card level guy, but not for DDP, who was the biggest available star on the WCW side at that point.  If someone like Kanyon or Sean O'Haire had been the guy provoking Undertaker in order to elevate himself against a "bigger dog," I can see the benefits.  But, as you said, using Page in that role just made him look like a nobody.  

    ReplyDelete
  113. Yes.  HHH wouldn't have to act any differently either.  Just be the same conniving tough-guy involved in a personal feud with the dude who's pursuing his wife.  The situation would draw him a babyface reaction, but when he goes acting the same way to Austin or Rock, he eases back into the heel role without changing his character.  Not the bouncing babyface Sheamus of today or 2001 heel Austin pulling out cheap heat tactics to fill the required "profile" of their face/heel status.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Anyone else think that match should have been a team vs. team dynamic instead of Bigelow vs. LT?  The Million Dollar Corporation vs. Team LT or something?  You limit Taylor's exposure and it's not quite as damaging as a legit tough-guy wrestler taking a clean pinfall to a football celebrity?  LT can (and should) still get the winning pinfall, but if it's in a team situation after a pier-six breaks out, I think it's less damaging to whoever takes the pinfall.  

    ReplyDelete
  115. Diesel is a good comparison actually.  The dude gets over as a dominant, no-nonsense brawler then has his character changed to smiling babyface.

    ReplyDelete
  116.  How can Rock be blamed for Jericho? Blame Vince for putting Jericho out there with the best guy on the stick. And that moment still made Jericho seem a ton more important than his entire WCW run.

    ReplyDelete
  117.  Ugh, never put that together until now.

    ReplyDelete
  118.  Yeah!  Remember when Jericho beat HHH at... umm... at... that one time... at...?  Jericho and Benoit did win a tag match with HHH involved, though.  Yippee!

    And remember how the Rock didn't lay down for Jericho at No Mercy 2001, Armageddon 2001, and Royal Rumble 2002?  Remember when Jericho needed the credibility as he never really beat a WWF main event guy, how the Rock didn't step up and let Jericho beat him multiple times?

    Remember how Jericho dominated HHH in multiple feuds in 2000 and 2002?  Yeah, me neither.  He was made to look incompetent by HHH. Hell, even in 2012, HHH's workout buddy got to beat him to win the Royal Rumble even though it made all the sense in the world for Jericho to win.

    Jericho also credits HHH and Chyna in his book for bending Vince's ear early on, making him look like dog doo doo.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Where the hell did this idea that heels can't make valid points come from? That was the basis of like half of Hulk Hogan's major feuds. Like Paul Orndorff being upset over Hogan not returning his calls. Or Andre being upset at not getting a title shot. Or Randy Savage being upset at Hogan putting the moves on Elizabeth.

    ReplyDelete
  120.  And there are two horrible things coming out of what you're saying (and you're dead on, btw).  First, the prestige of the belt could be directly tied in to demand.  If someone wants a belt, it becomes important.  That Ziggler-Ryder match for the US title was huge (in my opinion) because the belt meant something to both guys for an extended period of time.  It's so friggin simple:  have someone WANT the belt, and the belt becomes important again.  WWE does not do this but once or twice a year for the secondary titles.

    Second, the idea of having champions is counterproductive if all they do is lose.  I hate the fact that I can text my brother, "Hey, the IC champ is coming out to lose again," and be right about 80% of the time.  The solution is simple: put IC/US champs only in feuds about the title and let someone else job to Cena or Punk in throwaway matches. 

    ReplyDelete
  121. The problem with the Sheamus thing as that they are having him cut smiley babyface promos and acting like best buddies with the other faces.  If they let him keep some edge to his promos and interactions, then no one would have a problem with the dirty tactics.  But the WWE is basically saying this is how a smiling babyface should act, so when he does heelish stuff it just doesn't work.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Uh..is this supposed to be satire? Seriously, didn't Jericho beat Austin AND The Rock in the same night to be the first Undisputed Champ? Didn't he also get involved in an angle with the returning Triple H and Stephanie at the top of the card?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment