QOTD #46: Favorite Athletes
By Scott Keith on August 7, 2014
Today’s Question: Kind of a random question of the day, but who is your favorite professional athlete of all-time – outside of the wrestling business?
.
.
Yesterday’s Question:
In sort of a continuation of yesterday, I hear people talking about WWE
Style. Strictly focusing on the in-ring product, I think we are headed
for a more homogenized product, as WWE insists on new guys going thru
developmental first. So my question is: What automatically comes to mind when you hear someone refer to the “WWE Style”?
In sort of a continuation of yesterday, I hear people talking about WWE
Style. Strictly focusing on the in-ring product, I think we are headed
for a more homogenized product, as WWE insists on new guys going thru
developmental first. So my question is: What automatically comes to mind when you hear someone refer to the “WWE Style”?
.
Yesterday’s question was sort of an extension of Tuesday’s topic, but I just wanted to get a feel for what everyone was referring to when they mentioned WWE in-ring style.
Kyle Fitta: WWE matches typically follow the same format. The beginning starts with
the babyface’s fire period, with him or her going crazy and avoiding
everything the heel throws at him. In more strategic matches, the story
establish that the babyface is superior because of their strength,
power, technical, highflying skills, or whatever. The next portion is
where the heel takes over. This could happen for a number of reasons –
the heel could have cheated, the babyface could have failed to deliver
high-spot, the heel could have found a weakness, etc. The heel will then
methodically dictate the pace of the match. A good heel will listen to
the crowd’s reactions to know the right time for cut-off a comeback and
when babyface should get in hope-spots or make their comeback. This all
builds to the finishing sequence, which usually occurs after the
babyface makes their full-blown comeback. Generally, this when the
wrestlers go for the deathblow as they try to hit their trademark spots
and finishers. The structure has stayed simple, but all the twist and
turns, the psychology, the wrestlers’ personalities, and the story can
make it a masterpiece.
Stuart Chartrock:
Kyle Fitta: WWE matches typically follow the same format. The beginning starts with
the babyface’s fire period, with him or her going crazy and avoiding
everything the heel throws at him. In more strategic matches, the story
establish that the babyface is superior because of their strength,
power, technical, highflying skills, or whatever. The next portion is
where the heel takes over. This could happen for a number of reasons –
the heel could have cheated, the babyface could have failed to deliver
high-spot, the heel could have found a weakness, etc. The heel will then
methodically dictate the pace of the match. A good heel will listen to
the crowd’s reactions to know the right time for cut-off a comeback and
when babyface should get in hope-spots or make their comeback. This all
builds to the finishing sequence, which usually occurs after the
babyface makes their full-blown comeback. Generally, this when the
wrestlers go for the deathblow as they try to hit their trademark spots
and finishers. The structure has stayed simple, but all the twist and
turns, the psychology, the wrestlers’ personalities, and the story can
make it a masterpiece.
Stuart Chartrock:
Not really answering the question here, but just something I want to say about “WWE Style”:
As
much as many of us in the IWC may loathe the so-called “WWE Style” or
“Main-Event Style”, it doesn’t automatically mean that everybody
wrestles the same bland, chinlock-filled style.
Yes, it’s a bit
“toned down” from the 100mph indy style of doing a billion dangerous
spots in a row, and it does focus more on telling a story than just
stringing a bunch of cool moves together. And, yeah, it also means being
able to condense a few signature spots into three-minute matches. That
doesn’t mean that it can’t be exciting, though: Austin, Rock, Trips,
Shawn, Bret, Taker, Cena, Brock, Punk, Bryan, Savage, Hennig, Jericho,
Angle, Eddie, Benoit… all of these guys wrestle(d) within the
boundaries of said style. Sure, there are limitations placed on the
workers, but the truly talented can overcome those limitations to put on
consistently great matches that engage audiences.
As
much as many of us in the IWC may loathe the so-called “WWE Style” or
“Main-Event Style”, it doesn’t automatically mean that everybody
wrestles the same bland, chinlock-filled style.
Yes, it’s a bit
“toned down” from the 100mph indy style of doing a billion dangerous
spots in a row, and it does focus more on telling a story than just
stringing a bunch of cool moves together. And, yeah, it also means being
able to condense a few signature spots into three-minute matches. That
doesn’t mean that it can’t be exciting, though: Austin, Rock, Trips,
Shawn, Bret, Taker, Cena, Brock, Punk, Bryan, Savage, Hennig, Jericho,
Angle, Eddie, Benoit… all of these guys wrestle(d) within the
boundaries of said style. Sure, there are limitations placed on the
workers, but the truly talented can overcome those limitations to put on
consistently great matches that engage audiences.
redman:Main event matches-Punch, kick, chop, chinlock, at one point someone has
to be outta the ring for the commercial break. Then another chinlock
when the break is over. Then a nice nearfall sequence at the end with a
finisher always being what is used to win. Absolutely no story
Midcard marches- punch, kick, chop, chinlock, distraction, roll up finish
As
far as entertainment goes, the matches are consistently better today
than they ever have been IMO. But I see so many of them every week and
they are a ALL THE SAME kind of match that I get bored of it.
Garth Holmberg C.C.:WWE Style has always been focus on working for the production crew than
the live audience. Yes, the audience is a major part of the show, but
look at the latest Rumble: There’s a horrible production botch where we
see Kane sitting at ringside 20 minutes before his due run-in. Why?
Because they were trying to catch something else going on that was
important to production than the in-ring product, and they fucked it up
rather than the performer. Just one of many examples that come to mind,
but one that had me scratching my head at such a bush league move.
Jason Clark:
In ring, I see “WWE style” as
(1) having an emphasis on brawling and size instead of technical wrestling or MMA-like submissions.
(2) as much as possible, having matches templated and paced for a television audience vs. a live arena.
(3) wrestlers being booked “50-50”, unless you are a US or IC title holder, in which case you are losing most of the time.
Overall,
I see it as brand over individual component. They want to sell the WWE
product rather than DB, Brock, or even Cena. That way, the company is
protected when those individuals retire, go elsewhere to wrestler, or
get injured. When you own a lot of stock like the McMahons, why *try*
to make billions when you can guarantee yourself to make millions.
Chris B:Two things: Learning to put a match into 3 minutes – that is what most
of the indy guys say is the hardest thing to transition to. The other
thing is brawling into the crowd … classic WWE style.
VintageECW: WWE Style: Dolph Zigglers ridiculously dumb finisher. (agreed….)
(1) having an emphasis on brawling and size instead of technical wrestling or MMA-like submissions.
(2) as much as possible, having matches templated and paced for a television audience vs. a live arena.
(3) wrestlers being booked “50-50”, unless you are a US or IC title holder, in which case you are losing most of the time.
Overall,
I see it as brand over individual component. They want to sell the WWE
product rather than DB, Brock, or even Cena. That way, the company is
protected when those individuals retire, go elsewhere to wrestler, or
get injured. When you own a lot of stock like the McMahons, why *try*
to make billions when you can guarantee yourself to make millions.
Chris B:Two things: Learning to put a match into 3 minutes – that is what most
of the indy guys say is the hardest thing to transition to. The other
thing is brawling into the crowd … classic WWE style.
VintageECW: WWE Style: Dolph Zigglers ridiculously dumb finisher. (agreed….)
Based on the responses, it follows a basic format…..
* Authority has 20-minute talking segment
* Authority makes a match (which if its early in the show, starts….RIGHT NOW)
* Punch, kick, punch, kick for about 2 mins, then take a powder
* Michael Cole changes inflection and goes to commercial
* resthold, chinlock, etc. etc.
(No new spots whatsoever)
The only variation is the finish which depends on a few factors:
– If the match involves John Cena, then Cena hits 5-knuckle shuffle (100% of the time) and gets the AA after one failed attempt
– If the match involves mid-carders, then the finish will include a distraction (either by the next PPV opponent or the MUSIC OF the PPV opponent) followed by a roll-up or caught by their finisher
– 90% of ALL matches must end with the winner hitting his finisher – with the exception of the aforementioned distraction/roll-up. Also, the recipient must be in PERFECT position to recieve the finisher at the perfect time. For example, for RVD, the victim is perfectly positioned underneath RVD at an angle as to be perfectly 5-star splashed. Or, for Rey Jr. the recipient must always land with head sticking out of the ropes for the 619, then after getting kicked, land perfectly to recieve West Coast pop. I could go on but you get the drill.
– WRESTLEMANIA VERSION: The main event includes the above, except each man must kick out of the other’s finisher, then ATTEMPT the opposing wrestler’s finisher at least once.
Pretty predictable when you spell it out. Or as The Fuj put it……
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!
Comments are disable in preview.