Russellmania

NXT discussion in some of the other threads has got me thinking...they have kind of a dilemma right now whether they know it or not. Eventually they are going to run out of indy darlings in the NXT pipeline and as much as HHH wants NXT to be a sustainable touring brand I just don't think it's feasible when all the best talent will leave NXT within a year. I just don't see how they can have their cake and eat it too w/r/t NXT. If it's meant to be developmental then they should really keep the focus on that. With that said, I do see value in HHH's vision of a separate touring brand feels distinct from the main product as we know it today. They are at a point where they have stockpiled a pretty huge roster and have a ton of TV time to fill but many wrestlers are underused (or poorly used) and TV often feels rushed and sloppy. At this point RAW is really the only show that matters so Smackdown simply exists as a sort of vestigial offshoot of RAW that they're obligated to continue supporting but doesn't have enough of a following to actually bother making it meaningful. So my argument is that now would be the perfect time to do a brand split. Keep RAW around as the "main" brand and let Vince continue to run it with Kevin Dunn and do his thing there. Give HHH the "Smackdown" show and brand and let him run it completely autonomously without Kevin Dunn. Steph can go with HHH if she wants or she can be the liaison between both bands or whatever. As for the brand names, they don't even have to be Smackdown and RAW, hell you could give the 2nd brand a new name and try to really sell the illusion that it's a separate company. I know a lot of people hated the brand split, but I think if they learned from the mistakes of the last brand split this could work out really well for them. The biggest benefit IMO is that it would give them a chance to cater to a wider audience and allow them to use all their talent more appropriately. It would also hopefully resolve one of WWE's biggest problems which is how stale and homogenous the whole TV product looks right now. A 2nd brand that has the freedom to completely reevaluate its TV production style would really be exciting, and seems like something people are clamoring for (see the Beast in the East special for example). to clarify, my thinking is that the 2nd brand would be the touring brand and NXT would go back to focusing purely on developmental. What do people think of the idea? If you think it has value then what are some things you'd like them to do with it? what are some pitfalls you'd want them to avoid?

who is "they?" HHH clearly wants it to be a big deal, but the company as a whole per Vince's direction clearly still sees it as developmental. If HHH can fill a 13,000 seat arena for a special then Vince isn't gonna stop him and I don't think Vince really interferes with NXT at all, but when they think it's time for a certain guy to come up to the main roster they make it happen even if it ultimately hurts NXT. If NXT wasn't still seen as developmental then why not leave Owens, Banks, Neville, Charlotte etc. down there and start touring full time? the whole "they have said as much" argument doesn't hold much water to me since I think it's really just lip service. At the end of the day anyone in NXT that they think can be a star is going to get phased out of NXT...the flow of talent between the two entities only goes one way.

as much as smarks love NXT it is still clearly a development system, not a separate brand. Christ, Sasha hasn't even been bringing her NXT title out on RAW so that shows you how little prestige they see in NXT. To argue that you could send a guy like Cesaro down to be the "ace" of NXT without damaging him is ludicrous.

Everybody knew it was all a work back in the late 90's but they still had the crowd eating out of the palm of their hand wanting to see Austin kick McMahon's ass. I think if you tell compelling stories it doesn't matter if it's fake. I mean people watch TV dramas and get really into them knowing that it's all fake, right? Just make people care and the rest falls into place. As for Taker/Brock, anyone else get the sense they are going to have Taker cheat to win at Summerslam and then have Brock win a rubber match at HIAC?

People don't go to wrestling shows to watch wrestling as a "sport" anymore. Fans know they're watching a performance and treat it as watch. Reigns was only cheered because he wasn't Batista. Times change. Cena's been on top for 10 years and has had a divided reaction the entire time. Fans now view main eventers who were pushed without "deserving it" as being handpicked and thus must suck. In any other generation, Reigns would probably have no issue with getting over just based on performance alone. Fans are post-modern in the sense they know they're trying to be manipulated, resist and the company resorts to booking using annoying reverse psychology. Daniel Bryan was viewed as being held down. The company had the people who the audience knew had power backstage demean and belittle him. This makes the audience think this is what Triple H and company really think of him and rally behind him. Not to say they didn't botch up his feud with Orton. He even said in his book it was a misguided attempt to protect him. The bolded is patently false. Bryan was clearly the top guy at the time, but most fans genuinely liked Roman who was still in the Shield and all 3 Shield guys were still on fire. Reigns was still very much seen as the cool upstart babyface...this was way before anyone started turning on him (which was nearly a year later)

I think they'd still have faced the wrath of Bryan fans because ultimately it was Reigns getting pushed over the "more deserving" Bryan that really made people turn on him. So yeah if Reigns hadn't been injured then he'd probably have been more effectively built up before winning the Rumble, but I think fans would have still been pissed that Reigns won over Bryan. Now if they did the smart thing and just kept Bryan off TV until after the Rumble then I think it would have completely changed the dynamic. Consider that in 2014 when fans turned on the Rumble match after realizing Bryan wasn't coming out, Reigns is the guy most of that crowd latched on to as the consolation prize over Batista. If fans at this year's rumble went into it thinking that Bryan was still not cleared to wrestle then i truly believe they'd have gotten behind Reigns. Maybe not to the level that they were behind Bryan, but I don't think they'd have really had a reason to turn on Reigns en masse.

I still stand by my belief that when Bryan first vacated the IC title they should have changed plans to have Reigns win the IC title and hold it all year. Then he could have still had plenty of solid programs and matches to continue proving himself, but could have kept winning as the defending champ. I know there'd be some fear that it would be too similar to Cena's current US title gimmick, but I don't really buy the idea that you can't have two babyface champs regularly defending their titles at the same time. You could differentiate Reigns' run from Cena's by having Reigns be involved in more ongoing feuds for his title as opposed to Cena's run where he's facing a new guy every week. Anyway I think that would have gone a long way towards taking some heat off him as people wouldn't be able to say he's being pushed too hard since he wouldn't be world champ, but he's still be able to keep winning and looking strong. The end game in my version of events would be the ultimate re-match against Brock. Basically I'd see Reigns IC title run as following a similar formula to The Ultimate Warrior's run leading up to WM 6 (though I'd probably have Reigns drop the IC title before WM 32 rather than do a champion vs. champion thing). I think ultimately this would let them tell a more traditional story of "guy gets a shot at the title but comes up short b/c he wasn't ready so he spends the next year getting stronger for the rematch". I think the IC title would have been a really good vehicle for telling that story while keeping him strong, but instead they've done the typical WWE thing where they'll just have him wander aimlessly all year and then decide at the last minute to retcon the last year and build him up again (like when they tried to sell the idea that Cena had had a terrible year following his loss to the Rock when there was really nothing unusual about it)

I could have sworn I posted a reply to Strummer's initial post about the Summerslam build... Did I type it up and forget to hit submit or did it get deleted for some reason?

I'm in agreement with those saying Cena/Bryan is top 5 easily. It's really a shame we may never get more matches out of those two.

I'm pretty sure they've retconned the Extreme Rules 2012 match.

I would *much* rather see Reigns/Lesnar 2 at Wrestlemania. I think if booked well that has the potential to be really great.

I'm guessing they are deliberately keeping the focus off the titles at Summerslam so as not to undermine the gimmick of Night of Champions. Incidentally I really hate the idea that they run a PPV where the gimmick is basically "titles matter on this show!". They should treat the titles with that level of importance for every PPV.

Sasha vs. Bayley really should be the main event at Takeover. It's the most compelling story going into the show, you know they'll deliver, and the crowd will eat it up. Plus from a PR standpoint it further reinforces the "diva's revolution" to be able to brag for weeks about how two women main evented the biggest NXT show to date.

I was thinking about this today... IF (big if) they decide to clear him I think the best use of him might actually be to turn him heel. I think they'd have to keep him face for a few months at first since he'll return to a hero's welcome, but long-term I think having him turn into a bitter heel ala Bret Hart in '97 would give them the most options while allowing him to maybe work a more grounded style and take less of a beating. The key would be to lean on the fact that even though he's small he's still the best technical wrestler in the world. They'd have to be willing to make him look strong and have him look totally capable against the top faces. As for the heel turn they could pitch it a few different ways...maybe desperation at the near loss of his career put him over the edge. Maybe he's bitter about Roman Reigns taking his spot...whatever. I think there's plenty of fuel there and I think a nice Bryan heel run where he works a more technical style would maybe be the best use of him. As much as I'd love to see Bryan vs. Brock or a long title run for Bryan as a babyface I think the ship has sailed. We'll always have that WM30 run which was just so special, but I think given his age and health you're better off using him to build up some new stars by making them rise to the occasion to beat him.

wrestlers don't need acting coaches because they shouldn't be "acting". scripted backstage skits have no place in wrestling IMO. promos are a different beast and I could see value in having improv training.

honestly a huge portion of the roster needs to be allowed to wear street clothes regularly. forcing everyone to wear their own merch makes everyone look lame and stifles individual personality so much.

I LOVE the idea of Stephanie telling him he has to start from the bottom and programming him with someone like Slater to start. They could stretch that out for two years and just let the crowd determine how far to take it. yeah I could see him having competitive matches with lower-mid card guys for months and making everyone look like a million bucks in the process ala Cena's current US title run. Going all the way back to his ROH title run in 2006 a lot of my favorite Bryan title defenses were against guys that you know had no chance of winning like Delirious or Jimmy Jacobs...Bryan would get such great matches out of those guys...I'd love to see something like that again.

there's still time to vacate the IC title and do a little 3 round IC title tournament to crown a new champ. Bryan could announce that he's back and entered in the tourney and the finals could be at Summerslam. honestly even if Bryan's not back I still think that's what they should do with the IC title. Not sure why Ryback gets to sit home with the title and no TV exposure for the title at all when other guys have vacated it fairly quickly in recent years due to injury. Staph infections are kind of unpredictable so you'd think with an injury so indefinite in nature they'd have vacated the title right away so they can make use of it. With Cena as face holding the US title it seems like the perfect time to have a heel IC champ talking trash every week to build up heat for an eventual Bryan or Ryback return to challenge for the title.

hmm, interesting. Gotta wonder if they have finally cleared him. It seemed like only a matter of time since his own doctors gave him the green light. I know the WWE docs were hesitant to clear him, but I can't imagine Bryan would agree to just let it go already so I doubt this is a retirement announcement or anything like that. Plus with the way business has been going I'd have to think the temptation of bringing back one of their top draws would be too much for them to resist.

getting rid of the hard camera is a terrible idea. if anything they need to be using the hard camera more. Dunn and company rely way too much on the handheld cameras and quick cuts between them and miss out on a lot of action and catch a ton of spot-calling in the process. The Beast in the East show used way more static hard camera shots and the overall production of that show felt way better than your typical episode of RAW. WWE right now is really overproduced so doing things like eliminating the hard cam and inserting slow-mo into live shots (wtf?) is the exact opposite direction they need to be heading. Also what does eliminating the hard camera have to do with Royal Rumble 2001? Did they go through a time where they didn't have a hard camera and I'm not remembering it or something? You need a hard cam, like it's a basic requirement for shooting wrestling. The problem in your example isn't the camera, it's that the workers don't know how to play to the crowd any more.

it's funny how many of the best acts in WWE over the last few years have been trios. Shield, Wyatts, New Day, 3MB...am I missing any?

I think the post you quoted had some awkward wording, but I believe he was talking about RAW when it was 2 hours long when listing all those tropes, not saying that NXT has all those tropes. The point seemed to be that RAW wasn't automatically better at 2 hours just because it was shorter (since it had a lot of the same problems it has now at 3 hours long) and was comparing to NXT which is better not because it's shorter but because it's just better executed.

Not sure if you're making a salient point here or saying you disagree with what has been posted so far or what. If you disagree with the points in this thread then let's hear it and be specific.

lol ok

Honestly I feel like they should have had him win the IC title when Bryan got hurt and had to drop it. That would have been a great way for him to build up his credibility for a while. Then Reigns and Wyatt could be feuding over the IC title right now instead of having it sit at home in Ryback's suitcase or whatever.