Matt D Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I actually think Del Rio vs Big Show would have been an interesting program and hyped the DVD. Granted, you don't use Mania to hype the DVD. But Del Rio going over huge at Mania vs Big Show seems like a bigger deal to me for some reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Lawler is a legend, but he doesn't need to be protected, and Miz absolutely had to go over clean. Miz is not a go over clean character. He is the Honky Tonk Man. There were a thousand ways he could of won that would have put heat on him. Pinning Lawler clan was not one of them. Especially when it leads to another Cena Wrestlemania main event. They could of did something special but had to hack it out as always. Maybe they did not expect Lawler to be so over. But with the build up this had having Miz win cleanly was the absolute worst finish. I know my fault for caring. Anybody would of been better than Edge. Big Show would have been far better. Or they could of had Christian take Dolph's spot. Let Rey win and weasel Edge in. At least a three way would of diluted the Edge aspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 If Lawler wins who does he wrestle at Mania? Miz in a rematch? That seems a waste. The most logical guy would probably be King Sheamus but the booking has killed Sheamus dead for the last few months. Cena v. Lawler is not appealing to me at all and I am a huge fan of both guys. Punk v. Lawler would have been awesome but Orton v. Punk is set in stone and there is no good reason to write that off so that a guy who is not going to be a long term champ can have a name opponent at Mania. I would have loved for Lawler to win but from a booking perspective it would have been utterly senseless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Just a lateral movement from what they have been doing for the last year. Except in this case there would be a cool moment they could shill for years and years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Miz's finisher has been super protected for the most part. He can get his ass beat forever and hit that and win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I don't see how or when Miz was booked as Honky Tonk Man. I mean if you're going to argue that Heath Slater is booked as the Vladimir Petrov in Wade Barret's Paul Jones army ...yeah maybe I could see that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Guy gets his ass kicked most of a match then wins via banana peel. That's Honky Tonk Man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I suppose they could have done some sort of Dusty finish with the computer bleeping in to screw Lawler out of the title to put further heat on Cole vs. Lawler for Mania. Not sure I'd actually put the belt on him, given that the last time they did something similar (Hogan in 2002) it had no legs outside the initial pop and they already switch their world titles far too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Exactly so what difference does one more hurt and this one would create a moment that would be remembered more than whatever they do with Miz and Cena at Mania. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I am shocked at some of the feedback to this PPV being negative because it was too predictable, this is coming from people who blast TNA because the booking doesn't make sense. Make up your mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Going into the match Lawler beat Miz everytime they wrestled. Booking 101 says Miz gets his win back at the PPV. They kept it simple and Miz needs clean wins going into Mania. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Guy gets his ass kicked most of a match then wins via banana peel. That's Honky Tonk Man. Except Miz doesn't work that way. We'd have to stretch the definition of ass kicked most of match and win via banana peel a ton to come to that conclusion. Was scroll era Savage really Honky Tonk Man? Was cast era Bob Orton really Honky Tonk Man? Was the first year of Orton as heel really Honky Tonk Man? Was Cena as heel with chain wrapped around fist finisher, Honky Tonk Man? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 They kept it simple and Miz needs clean wins going into Mania.I disagree. I don't think Miz should ever get a clean win unless it's against a jobber on Superstars. The Miz is not supposed to be a challenge for John Cena at Wrestlemania. He is supposed to lose and let the big babyface go over on the big show. People are not paying to see *IF* John Cena can beat The Miz. They're paying to see The Miz get his ass kicked. Just like Honky Tonk Man. You spend all the build up running away and keeping the belt by cheating. Then at the big payday you show your ass and get manhandled. That seems pretty simple to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditch Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I am shocked at some of the feedback to this PPV being negative because it was too predictable, this is coming from people who blast TNA because the booking doesn't make sense. Make up your mind.Good, logical booking =/= predictable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I am shocked at some of the feedback to this PPV being negative because it was too predictable, this is coming from people who blast TNA because the booking doesn't make sense. Make up your mind. This is common among internet fans and I blame the Attitude Era. It has gotten to the point where many people feel cheated if their isn't a surprise but then will turn around and complain if the surprise is something they don't like. (not accusing Vic of this fwiw) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Booking can be both logical and unpredictable. They aren't mutually exclusive. Terry Funk beating up Ric Flair at the conclusion of Wrestle War '89 wasn't necessarily something that everyone saw coming a mile away (at least not when his only role was that of judge), but the motivations still made sense, and it was still logical and set up a future challenger for Flair. Hogan turning at Bash at the Beach wasn't predictable, but it was logical. There is a balancing act where you can keep fans guessing while still making sense. Modern wrestling treats these as competing interests often times, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 If Lawler wins who does he wrestle at Mania? Miz in a rematch? That seems a waste. The most logical guy would probably be King Sheamus but the booking has killed Sheamus dead for the last few months. Cena v. Lawler is not appealing to me at all and I am a huge fan of both guys. Punk v. Lawler would have been awesome but Orton v. Punk is set in stone and there is no good reason to write that off so that a guy who is not going to be a long term champ can have a name opponent at Mania. I would have loved for Lawler to win but from a booking perspective it would have been utterly senseless. The fact is that there are no real interesting or appealing mania matches left. We've seen them all already for the most part. I am interested in Punk and Orton though thanks to Punk who's been on fire. I also noticed that Punk and Barrett have switched roles from earlier this year. Punk was the guy in a group going nowhere feuding against the Big Show, while Wade was keeping on top of the show with Nexus. Now Wade is sinking on SD with a group feuding with the Big Show, while Punk is owning Raw with Nexus. I blame some of that on the booking of the Big Show as he's going to be booked to win most of his matches due to his size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 The Miz is not supposed to be a challenge for John Cena at Wrestlemania. He is supposed to lose and let the big babyface go over on the big show. People are not paying to see *IF* John Cena can beat The Miz. They're paying to see The Miz get his ass kicked. Just like Honky Tonk Man. You spend all the build up running away and keeping the belt by cheating. Then at the big payday you show your ass and get manhandled. That seems pretty simple to me. Except they'll probably work an even match, the "big babyface" will probably be booed out the building and no-one is paying for Mania to see Cena beat Miz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 My dream would be that Miz wins with a flash pin and post-match Rock comes into the ring to bury the hatchet with Cena and gets destroyed by him as the show goes off the air. Zero chance of that happening but that is definitely the scenario that I would enjoy the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I think the Attitude Era did a serious number on people's perceptions of what wrestling should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I think the Attitude Era did a serious number on people's perceptions of what wrestling should be. We never agree on anything, but I said the same thing to someone not an hour ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I think the Attitude Era did a serious number on people's perceptions of what wrestling should be. We never agree on anything, but I said the same thing to someone not an hour ago LOL I think some people would gave this show 10/10 if Christian turned on Edge and Kelly Kelly was revealed as Teddy Long's attacker, deadly serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puropotsy Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I loved this pay-per-view. The disagreements on the outcome of Lawler and Miz is pretty easy to solve in my mind. Lawler winning would have been really great. But so was Miz winning. If Lawler had won, the only booking from there that would have made sense was to lose it to Miz next week on RAW after building it up tonight and then going with Miz vs Cena, or perhaps building to Lawler vs Miz at Mania. I don't see who else Lawler could have headlined against as champion. Cena vs Miz is strong to me, with some history going back two years to when Miz first came to RAW. I think Miz should have been champion going into Mania last year, but he has been really strong as champion. I don't see him as the Honky Tonk Man. HTM always retained his title by DQ rather than winning with an unclean finish. Miz would be more comparable to Flair who would always make it look like his opponent was going to win but then pull it out at the end, often through interference. I am not saying that Miz is Flair, I just see that as a closer comparison. The use of Lawler to put him over was perfect for me. As far as the atmosphere tonight, I think they would have had the same atmosphere in December or January and could have put Lawler over then. But with a month to go to Mania, unless the titel was going back to Miz, this wasn't the time to do it. As far as the line-up for Mania goes, Cena and Edge are two of the biggest names from the era of the past five years. Having them facing off with two up-and-comers at Mania is perfect for bridging to having new main eventers. It would be nice if there was a situation where both winners at Mania were going to be the up-and-comers but I don't foresee that. I feel that this is setting up to be the best Wrestlemania in four to six years, depending on your feelings on 20-23. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I think the Attitude Era did a serious number on people's perceptions of what wrestling should be. We never agree on anything, but I said the same thing to someone not an hour ago It is so true. Blame Russo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Morris Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Agreed on the Attitude Era having caused some people (not necessarily those who post here) to gain misconceptions about predictability or lack of it in wrestling. Loss mentioned a couple of examples. I can think of a few others, such as Virgil beating Ted DiBiase to win the Million Dollar Belt (rather than a DQ win as I and likely others expected) and Marty Jannetty beating Shawn Michaels on Raw to win the I-C title. And while it may not be considered unpredictable, Rick Steiner beating Mike Rotunda for the TV title at Starrcade 1988 certainly qualifies as a feel-good moment. But feel-good moments work best when they are built to and/or there is plenty of backstory to make that feel-good moment the logical choice. Virgil-DiBiase had it. Steiner-Rotunda had it. Michaels-Jannetty was an off-and-on feud given Jannetty's issues, but the backstory was still there to make the feel-good moment one people would appreciate. Doing feel-good just because it makes people feel good doesn't work so well in the long run. It's sometimes counter-productive to what you are trying to build. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.