50/50 booking = method to the madness?
By Scott Keith on April 16, 2013
I'm an advocate for a lot of what WWE does, for example,in the live thread, while everyone bemoaned Sheamus, Orton & Big Show opening Raw last night, I just watched and saw a good match with some cool spots. The smark mentality can be a hindrance at times and stop you from seeing that actually, there is some good wrestling going on. Ryback's promo too… it actually made a ton of sense and logic, but all the smart fan wants to do is put down his promo skills and talk about how they could have booked it better. To be honest, I can totally see why Vince, Cena etc would see smart fans as unappreciative idiots. We can be a very cynical bunch at times.
But one thing not even I can defend is the 50/50 booking. But maybe we can comprehend it. Last night Ziggler loses to Swagger, and Barrett loses to R Truth – two seemingly insane booking decisions that leave new champions looking like losers. My question is… is the WWE mentality when it comes to 50/50 booking that YOU NEVER KNOW WHO'S GOING TO WIN? If we keep putting everyone over each other with no definitive overall winner, does that keep things unpredictable in their eyes? Is that what they're going for? Please, explain what you think is the method to the madness.
The 50/50 booking is because they want everyone at the same level, which in their mind is bringing the lower-end guys up to the level of the mid-card guys. In fact what it's doing is flattening EVERYONE out and not letting anyone get over. As noted by another commenter, Vince doesn't want another big star jumping to TNA or MMA or whatever, so no one gets to be a real star except for one or two tippy-top guys. It's just what happens when you have to satisfy the investors through calculated mediocrity.
Comments are disable in preview.