Upward Progression

[Grimmas]

Watching Raw and seeing the IC Title match between Miz-Big Show-Ryback and then seeing Seth Rollins doing the main event angle promo really got me thinking.

 

I think the absolute biggest problem the WWE has is upward progression. The WWE method seems to be putting a new guy into a top program and then dropping them down the card where they never recover. The IC Title division seems to be built around failed main eventers.

 

Shouldn't people get a run with the IC Title and then move up to the main event? I think there is very little issue with somebody being on the undercard and then moving up, while there is a huge problem with getting a main event run and then moving to the bottom of the card. After you drop like that it is really difficult to move someone back up.

[Matt D]

We've talked about this. Part of it is the amount of TV and "Special events." Part of it is the lack of jobber matches. Part of it is the idea that post-Brock leaving, Vince doesn't want to make stars bigger than the WWE brand and the WWE wanting to humble guys after they get over to see how they'll react/put them in their place.

[Grimmas]

We've talked about this. Part of it is the amount of TV and "Special events." Part of it is the lack of jobber matches. Part of it is the idea that post-Brock leaving, Vince doesn't want to make stars bigger than the WWE brand and the WWE wanting to humble guys after they get over to see how they'll react/put them in their place.

Can they ever create a new star if they get a short run on top early on and then drop low on the card before moving back up?

[Mad Dog]

Yes. Rehabbing guys is fairly easy with planning and creativity. The key is they have to deliver once you start pushing them up the card again. The big problem I see in WWE is you know the second you should give up on a guy because he hit his ceiling.

[Grimmas]

Is there an example of a guy who got pushed to the top, moved down and worked as a midcarder and then became a legit drawing main eventer again?

[NotJayTabb]

Mark Henry circa 2011? He was an upper-midcarder who'd get the odd title match, got dropped to the C-show in ECW (admittedly as their champion), became MVP's midcard face tag-partner then got a monster push to the world title with the "Hall of Pain" resulting in improved ratings.

[Quentin Skinner]

I can't think of one right now. It's always "big push and that person sticks" which is what they hope for or the more likely "big push that turns in to mid card purgatory". WWE is just terrible at rebuilding guys to that status they were after the initial push.

[Matt D]

There aren't a hell of a lot of draws to begin with.

[Loss]

Challenger du jour booking goes all the way back to the days of Vince Sr. It worked at one time because of all the talent cycling in and out constantly. It doesn't fit what wrestling is in 2015.

[Mad Dog]

John Cena. Started with Jericho and Angle, got pushed down, retooled and jobbed to Rikishi a lot and then moved back up.

[Mad Dog]

Eddie Guerrero kind of. Started with a big angle, mired in the mid-card, fired, came back in the mid-card and went to the top.

[NotJayTabb]

You could make the argument for the Undertaker, who, following his massive push and brief title reign in 1991, didn't win the world title for another 6 years and instead spent time in the midcard fighting IRS, Kama, Bundy, Mabel and a fake version of himself.

[Loss]

It's just the way they've always done business. They build heels up for one feud, and when it's over, they cycle them down. Unless they are HHH. Again, that would be fine if you had 25 territories and you could bring guys in and send them away anytime you wanted. Now, it just makes the losing heel going down the card seem like damaged goods.

[Matt D]

I think we see it more with babyfaces in the last 10 years though.

[Loss]

Agreed. And I think the biggest issue is not really coming out of a main event feud on the losing end, but it being so quickly forgotten afterward. Most things that happened six months ago have little to no impact on what's happening in WWE now. I wish they made more effort to protect guys in their follow-up feud so it being a step down isn't as much of an issue.

[Loss]

Now that I think about it, it even happens with big wins. Why was Dolph Ziggler not presented as the conquering hero who against 3-on-1 odds secured the pinfall that got rid of The Authority? Why didn't he get the hero's welcome on Raw the next night and even tell Brock Lesnar he was eyeing him? Shouldn't that have made his career (even with them coming back before year's end)? Telling HHH at some point that he got rid of him once and if he wasn't careful, he'd do it again seems like a natural confrontation too, instead of what they did where he had to be fearful of how Stephanie would retaliate.

[Quentin Skinner]

ZIggler getting that huge Survivor Series win and WWE not doing anything with that except making it about Sting just irritated me. That win should've been used to catapult someone to the main event, but they made that entire scenario about Sting screwing The Authority.

[Matt D]

Now that I think about it, it even happens with big wins. Why was Dolph Ziggler not presented as the conquering hero who against 3-on-1 odds secured the pinfall that got rid of The Authority? Why didn't he get the hero's welcome on Raw the next night and even tell Brock Lesnar he was eyeing him? Shouldn't that have made his career (even with them coming back before year's end)? Telling HHH at some point that he got rid of him once and if he wasn't careful, he'd do it again seems like a natural confrontation too, instead of what they did where he had to be fearful of how Stephanie would retaliate.

 

Remember the night after the Hardy Boyz/Edge and Christian TIT final when they made a massive deal out of their ladder match and how that was contrasted to some crazy Dragons vs Three Count match which WCW just ignored the next night?

 

Or am I making that up?

[Loss]

You're not making that up, although the 3-Count/Dragons match was nearly a year later, so it was a hindsight comparison. It was also contrasted with how WCW never mentioned Eddy-Rey at Havoc again on their show.

[Loss]

When you create an environment where nothing matters, I guess nothing matters.

[The Chief]

Ziggler has had some really high peaks for someone who is pretty much a mid level guy. He beat Cena on a December PPV too and that was also negated fairly quickly.

[Loss]

On the contrary, expect Jericho to again mention that he once beat Austin and Rock in the same night on his next run.

[Matt D]

The post-WM title win was one of the biggest moments of the last five years. Granted, that one was due to a concussion.

 

Re: Jericho: Big Show is the only other guy on the roster who mentions things like that.

[Quentin Skinner]

There has been at least three times where I thought Ziggler was on the road for sure fire main event status. One being the 2012 year where he won MITB, sole survivor in Survivor Series match when it came down to him and Orton, and feuded with Cena. Another is in 2013 where they did the double turn at Payback with Del Rio. The last is the already mentioned Team Cena vs Team Authority match where he won after being down 3 to 1.

[Cap]

Isn't the problem long term, coherent storytelling, ultimately? We see guys from time to time move from the mid card or a mid card title to the main event (not as often as we should), but like loss said, nothing matters. I think part of the problem is that the WWE only really cares about having one super draw and they don't really want anyone else stand out THAT much. It gives them leverage and Vince's biggest fear is someone taking his toys and playing with them. I am not sure if it is concious or not, but a lack of long term cohernce keeps the fans from getting too invested in anyone, keeps momentum in check. The last two really compelling, long term stories I remember are Punk and Dragon's and it seems like those were sort of in spite of the WWE. They tried with Reigns for obvious reasons, but the timing was just bad.

 

I have always liked the idea of the career that chips away at the top tier before truely establishing one's self as a star and hopefully a draw. Didn't punk have sort of a rollercoaster? They had more titles to create more tiers (well, in theory), so he wasn't exactly getting the main title, but he won the ECW Title, the world title a few times, and then made his real push into the true main event. Of course punk is always a little bit of a different beast because of the pipe bomb and all that, but between them first putting a "top of the brand" title on him and him becoming a draw, he was sort of all over the place.

 

Another big problem - in addition to getting people to drawing level - I just thought of is a lack of main eventers (outside Cena) that can truely elivate other wrestlers with a good feud. Who can really do that outside Cena. They have tried with Kane, Show, and Orton countless times... nope! Trips maybe?