Postmania XVIII: Big Zeke ain't got no cuts!

[XPac]

then what good is the belt really?? even if somebody is over already winning the title the 1st time should still put them over on a new level, if not the title doesn't mean much. and he was over, he was pretty damn over actually if you look back. that whole partnership with goldust really got the fans behind him. now if he wasn't over enough to be champ and not established as a main eventer it's not rocket science, put him over and establish him. it's pretty hard to establish and get somebody over on a main event level without a maineventer putting them over(hence the term put over).

booker was over and if HHH was as great a heel as people say he was at that time booker should've been even more over after winning the feud. they wasted the opportunity to get the most out of booker while he was in his physical prime.

I think he was somewhat over... just not the point IMO at least where he could carry the RAW brand as the top face. They needed to build him up more... and eventually they did. When he did carry the world title during his King Booker run, he was legitimately the top heel of his brand.

[Alex]

I don't think you give someone the world title to get them over... I think you have to get over first in order to get the world title.

didn't work for swagger or miz, worked for daniel bryan.
Might not work for ziggler.
The problem isn't putting the belt on someone to get them over, the problem is their tendency to completly bury guys they know they are giving the title too.

[SephirothDZX]

then what good is the belt really?? even if somebody is over already winning the title the 1st time should still put them over on a new level, if not the title doesn't mean much. and he was over, he was pretty damn over actually if you look back. that whole partnership with goldust really got the fans behind him. now if he wasn't over enough to be champ and not established as a main eventer it's not rocket science, put him over and establish him. it's pretty hard to establish and get somebody over on a main event level without a maineventer putting them over(hence the term put over).

booker was over and if HHH was as great a heel as people say he was at that time booker should've been even more over after winning the feud. they wasted the opportunity to get the most out of booker while he was in his physical prime.

Back before there were tons of belts all over WWE, having a belt was a vote of confidence by the company that you could carry the promotion. There were plenty of people back in the day who were plenty over who never sniffed the world title. I personally hate how the belts are now just used to try and push someone.

didn't work for swagger or miz, worked for daniel bryan.
Might not work for ziggler.
The problem isn't putting the belt on someone to get them over, the problem is their tendency to completly bury guys they know they are giving the title too.

Personally I thought it worked for Miz, I liked him as champ. The problem was that he became the odd-man-out during the Rock/Cena feud.

[Gryphon]

WWE officials will be meeting with officials from the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff, Wales on Friday about the idea of doing a mega-show, perhaps a pay-per-view event from there. The Stadium holds around 75,000 fans.

WWE hasn't held a worldwide pay-per-view from the UK since the 1992 SummerSlam. WWE officials have also met with representatives from a stadium in London as well as Old Trafford, a soccer stadium in Manchester that holds 75,000
Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe/...Bppp4uTUhyg.99

[Alex]

Personally I thought it worked for Miz, I liked him as champ. The problem was that he became the odd-man-out during the Rock/Cena feud.

If Rock wasn't at the mania miz headlined, it would have been one of the lowest bought manias in a long long time, and also,the match sucked.
...I dunno what that was about, Cena usualy doesn't have outright bad matches, and Miz isn't the best but same with him, but that match was just...ugh.

[Gryphon]

http://www.wrestlenewz.com/wrestling...ns-wwe-future/

There has been talk of bringing Money in the Bank back for WrestleMania 29.

- Neither of these are confirmed but potential feuds for Randy Orton in 2013 include Sheamus and Ryback. Orton still wants to play the heel role.

- We’ve noted before how Daniel Bryan has a big fan in Vince McMahon. Once Team Hell No with Kane runs its course, the plan is for Bryan to receive another big singles push, likely as a babyface.

[Alex]

http://www.wrestlenewz.com/wrestling...ns-wwe-future/

There has been talk of bringing Money in the Bank back for WrestleMania 29.

- Neither of these are confirmed but potential feuds for Randy Orton in 2013 include Sheamus and Ryback. Orton still wants to play the heel role.

- We’ve noted before how Daniel Bryan has a big fan in Vince McMahon. Once Team Hell No with Kane runs its course, the plan is for Bryan to receive another big singles push, likely as a babyface.

Literaly don't beleive any of the news you posted.

[lboinyamouf4sho]

I think he was somewhat over... just not the point IMO at least where he could carry the RAW brand as the top face. They needed to build him up more... and eventually they did. When he did carry the world title during his King Booker run, he was legitimately the top heel of his brand.

i disagree but just for arguments sake lets say that was the case. he's over just not over enough to carry RAW as the top face. Hmmmm, how do we fix that problem?? have our best heel put him over in a high profile feud at the biggest show of the year, or job him out and send him back to go after the IC title shortly thereafter?? what are the risks and rewards of HHH putting book over and letting him either sink or swim, would it hurt HHH at all, do they have anybody they could go to if booker isn't cutting it?? imo the answers are pretty clear.

Back before there were tons of belts all over WWE, having a belt was a vote of confidence by the company that you could carry the promotion. There were plenty of people back in the day who were plenty over who never sniffed the world title. I personally hate how the belts are now just used to try and push someone.



Personally I thought it worked for Miz, I liked him as champ. The problem was that he became the odd-man-out during the Rock/Cena feud.

that's because there has always been people like hogan, flair, & HHH. protect your spot at all costs.

[SephirothDZX]

If Rock wasn't at the mania miz headlined, it would have been one of the lowest bought manias in a long long time, and also,the match sucked.
...I dunno what that was about, Cena usualy doesn't have outright bad matches, and Miz isn't the best but same with him, but that match was just...ugh.

Well if Rock wasn't involved it's hard for me to believe that the Mania match with Cena/Miz would have played out the way it did (setting up for that lame RAW-ish finish). But yeah, Cena and Miz usually don't have that bad of matches.

[SephirothDZX]

that's because there has always been people like hogan, flair, & HHH. protect your spot at all costs.

To be honest, I almost kind of miss that. Only because the titles didn't get passed around like a Kardashian sister and still had at least some sort of meaning.

[lboinyamouf4sho]

If Rock wasn't at the mania miz headlined, it would have been one of the lowest bought manias in a long long time, and also,the match sucked.
...I dunno what that was about, Cena usualy doesn't have outright bad matches, and Miz isn't the best but same with him, but that match was just...ugh.

rock was a distraction, it was not placed well on the card, and miz got a concussion during the match IIRC.

[lboinyamouf4sho]

To be honest, I almost kind of miss that. Only because the titles didn't get passed around like a Kardashian sister and still had at least some sort of meaning.

i don't think rude, perfect, or roberts getting a whiff of the belt would've taken a damn thing away from the meaning of the title back then.

[Alex]

rock was a distraction, it was not placed well on the card, and miz got a concussion during the match IIRC.

Well, whatever the reason, that was a bad john cena match, at the biggest show of the year,and i was shocked at how much i didn't like that ppv. Can at least usualy count on the main event to be good.
And opening with Rock just standing around and talked for 25 minutes was...guh.
Sorry, i hated that mania. And the was the mania when i started watching wrestling again after my break.

[XPac]

i disagree but just for arguments sake lets say that was the case. he's over just not over enough to carry RAW as the top face. Hmmmm, how do we fix that problem?? have our best heel put him over in a high profile feud at the biggest show of the year, or job him out and send him back to go after the IC title shortly thereafter?? what are the risks and rewards of HHH putting book over and letting him either sink or swim, would it hurt HHH at all, do they have anybody they could go to if booker isn't cutting it?? imo the answers are pretty clear.




that's because there has always been people like hogan, flair, & HHH. protect your spot at all costs.

Beating the top heel in a match doesn't get you over enough to carry a brand. Koffi could beat Punk for the world title at the next PPV, and that wouldn't necessarily make him the next John Cena. Beating the top heel for the world title is a part of that... but it frankly should be the last part. Everything else should already be in place. Ideally if you're going to be the world champion positioned to carry the company as a top face, you should ALREADY be the man... the belt is just that last leg of that journey building up to that.

There are times out of necessity that you give a belt to someone as a prop to build them up... sometimes you're short on main eventers and you have to take those short cuts. But when possible I think it should be avoided, but if the title loses value it loses it's ability to act as a prop in that capacity in the first place.

It's why the Intercontinental title no longer really means anything anymore. Now it's either just a way to elevate a curtain jerker into the mid-card, or it's something for a second tier main eventer to do when they're not in the world title scene. Belts need value so that they can in tern mean something to the wrestlers holding it. And that's watered down when the guys holding it aren't properly built up to the level they need to be to carry it.

[XPac]

To be honest, I almost kind of miss that. Only because the titles didn't get passed around like a Kardashian sister and still had at least some sort of meaning.

I think in Hogans case he arguably held onto that title a little too closely... not saying it was necessarily Hogans call, but I think it probably could have been passed around a BIT more.

But I think Flair and even Triple H did an okay job with the belt. They were top heels certainly, and didn't just give it up to anyone and everyone. I know Triple H gets a lot of heat for not putting people over, and at times I certainly agreed with that sentiment... but the fact that Triple H was so nearly unbeatable really meant that when a Batista or a Chris Benoit rose up and beat him, it meant something. It's the perfect heroes journey to win the Rumble and go on to challenge the unbeatable hell for the world title at Wrestlemania and win.

Even if you can argue Triple H should have lost more, the fact that he didn't lose to just anyone really allowed him to make someone if it was the right person at the right time.