Can a wrestling style be bad for business?

[Coffey]

From the Dave Meltzer Megathread:

FMKK, on 31 Oct 2016 - 5:08 PM, said:

"Besides, I honestly think the Owens/Rollins style is downright bad for business. But that's a side point."

 

I agree with this statement and don't want it to be a side point. I think we can get some discussion going about the point.

 

Now that the old "Indie" style (that I hated) has made its way to WWE, we have a hybrid style of the WWE style mixed with the Indie style. Meaning that we get matches with two guys hitting each other with everything, none of it means anything and the crowd doesn't buy any of it. Meanwhile they're taking seemingly more wear and tear on their bodies to get a lot less of a reaction. The entire "This is awesome!" mentality sucks. I don't need to see a Top Rope Snow Plow for a 2-count to think that a match is good (Kevin Owens). Nor do I need to see John Cena going for Springboard Stunners. A.J. Styles frequently does a Springboard 450 and I don't think I've ever seen it be a finish. It's just ridiculous. Finishers never finish matches anymore. You always have a ton of false finishes as that seems to be WWE's way to make a match "epic."

 

Dave Meltzer himself liked the Seth Rollins/Kevin Owens Hell in a Cell match.

 

This current style makes most moves seem a lot worse in effectiveness. It makes near falls have very little drama. Even a finish you know isn't a finish if it's a WWE main event between two main event guys. Which is nothing new to WWE as they have been doing that for a long time but it's still prevalent today.

 

 

Dave Meltzer speaking on the Brock/Goldberg finish:

 

...it is good for educational purposes of the audience for them to believe a main event can end at any time, as opposed to knowing that everyone gets in their repertoire of moves, secondary non-finishes, and not until that is over with is the match actually going to end.

 

 

Can the bomb-throwing/kick out of everything WWE main event style be bad for business?

[JerryvonKramer]

Since Inoki drew the answer has to be no.

[Loss]

I know someone who stopped watching wrestling because The Rockers did synchronized super kicks and that would never happen if it was real. So yes.

[cpst]

One of my biggest beefs with (a lot of) modern wrestling is matches having to end with finishers. There's no legitimate drama in the match until the finishers start coming out. Everyone in the main event scene of WWE is guilty of this to a certain degree, but Owens has taken it to unprecedented heights. It doesn't help that he's often conserving energy near the end of a match due to his conditioning, and is just waiting between finisher kickouts to do the next one.

 

One obvious potential outcome of a style like this is that there could be more injuries and more early retirements. What's the best way to measure whether this is happening?

[Grimmas]

I don't think finishers is the issue. Hogan matches and WWF in the 80s matches had lots of drama and heat and NEVER ended without the finisher.

 

To me, it's more that finishers are kicked out of too much. Cena hits an Attitude Adjustment there is no drama, because people kick out of it all the time.

[DMJ]

Yea, the AA being a transition move now is annoying.

 

I've found that, though it's also happening in NXT, the fact that I only watch the Takeover specials has helped me because I'm not as familiar with those workers and their signature spots. That kinda goes double for the women's matches. Joe kicking out of the Kinchasa on Saturday irked me, but at least I hadn't seen it 1000 times already like I have with Cena/Owens/Rollins, for example, who have their finishers kicked out every single week.

 

At SummerSlam, the most protected finish was Miz's and it still feels that way today.

 

I'm not sure this sort of style will "kill" the business, but it definitely makes things much harder. Look no further than the CW division, which was DOA partially because nothing any of the CWs is particularly impressive when midcard heavyweights like Cesaro, Big E, and even Harper regularly hit suicide dives onto arena floors. On Sunday, Kalisto hit a Standing Spanish Fly off the apron ONTO THE ARENA FLOOR and I'm not even sure they teased a countout. It was such a mind-numbingly stupid spot that it took me out of that match entirely. Properly sold, Kalisto is an idiot for doing a move that would hurt himself more than his opponent, especially when he should know he can only win the title by keeping his opponent in the ring. Just negative number psychology there.

[Migs]

I think the DIY-Revival matches have shown a good way forward on this - instead of using finishers to get kickouts, they used lower impact spots that lead to finishes as the tease (i.e. the cross body on a guy trying to give a piledriver almost always leads to a finish in tag matches, and they used that as a kickoff spot). Work a little smarter and not harder and you get a much friendlier style, I think.

[fxnj]

A near-fall heavy style like WWE moving away from every finisher ending a match is arguably a good thing from an artistic perspective. Guys still get finishing moves that fans can associate with them, but now they have a lot more options in giving the fans legitimately convincing near falls. The AA getting kicked out of more seems like an extremely petty reason to stop watching and something only hardcore fans would care about anyway.

 

I'm not saying there aren't often some significant issues in execution through over reliance on kick outs and lackluster selling, but when people talk about how bad it is not protect finishers there's a tendency to ignore the good points. There's too much focus on the absolute worst examples of the convention while ignoring stuff like the Styles/Reigns series as an example of matches that worked really well largely because finishers weren't treated as instant death.

[KawadaSmile]

I don't think any style, by itself, can be bad for business. The AA has been kicked out of for how long, exactly? Yet Cena still is one of the biggest stars the industry has today, and one of the biggest in history.

 

On the other hand, people like Owens/Rollins, who are now the biggest examples of "indy wrestlers" in a mainstream setting, are often using this finisher spamming, infinite kickout style and they aren't having much reaction. It might be more about what said wrestler does, how they perform in the style at hand that the style itself.

 

I find it funny though, how in the same company we have moves like AA and the RKO, which have been so unprotected, and moves like Reigns' Spear and Miz's SCF, which are actually very well protected.

[Bierschwale]

The Skull-Crushing Finale went through a stretch where Miz was incapable of putting anyone down with it. So it's just a case of the body of the match and how it builds to the finish.

 

Just add slightly more creativity. I'd love to see Cena go for consecutive AAs without a pin attempt in-between. It's not original for wrestling, but it's original for him. More combination finishers, too. Ziggler hits a Zig Zag, immediately locks the sleeper for a tapout, not TKO. People like seeing adrenaline bursts where someone seems superhuman. Shorter but higher impact comebacks.

 

But, overall: yes. Styles make fights, right? But if everyone does the same thing, or you have too great of a contrast between workers where matches seem incompatible next to each other, then things can't work. Everything needs a root of commonality where individualism can then bloom.

[Sean Liska]

I'm surprised Vince hasn't fought this change from what I've seen.

[FMKK]

When I made the comment that was quoted in the article, I kinda thought out the point in a couple of ways.

 

1) Last year WWE had a bit of a injury crisis and I think that has to at least be partially attributed to the higher impact working style. If they slowed down and were able to get more out of less, guys like Seth Rollins could add a decade on to their careers.

 

2) It's harder to get a crowd invested in a match if moves and selling don't really mean anything. Why should I care about a guy's big spot or 10 minutes of leg work if Kevin Owens is going to be running around throwing superkicks as if nothing happened in a couple of seconds anyway? It leads to you only really being able to do one type of match as well.

 

3) It's part of a wider issue I have with modern WWE where it feels like a bunch of guys playing wrestler. It seems inauthentic, like the badly scripted promos. There was a GIF going round at the time of the Rollins vs Owens Hell in a Cell match where the two of them were no selling superkicks and clotheslines and such so that they could jump up and sprint to the next spot while Michael Cole yelled "What a sequence!" Everything about it screamed THIS IS FAKE. Working matches in this style and playing for the "This Is Awesome" chants solidifies the notion of wrestling as an athletic exhibition, like a gymnastic floor routine but with fake punches. To me, wrestling is at its best when you can buy into the characters, buy into the physicality and buy into hatred in the rivalries. Everyone knows wrestling is fake etc but that doesn't mean that people don't want to suspend their disbelief. I think that style of work is indicative of a wider philosophy in WWE that is preventative of suspension of disbelief and I think it harms wider engagement from a casual audience when it's presented as just an exhibition for the in-crowd.

[sek69]

I was watching Survivor Series with a friend who's a longtime fan but not a real inside/smart/whatever you want to call it type fan. When Roman hit the crucifix powerbomb for 2 he wondered aloud why would you do a move like that if it's not going to pin someone. So I wouldn't say it would ruin the business, but it does seem to create diminishing returns in terms of what guys can do do try to get a match over with the crowd.

 

Plus, I'd say the garbage wrestling fad of the 90s did more actual harm than pandering to the "this is awesome" chanters today.

[joeg]

I think any style that is so fake that it exposes the business can be be bad for business. I'll throw Chikara and DDT and those sorts of niche promotions in this pile. Also any promotion that has an in ring style that is excessively violent or excessively dangerous can be bad for business. It won't be initially, crazy head drops, barbed wire matches, and crazy bumbs will all initially be draws to the promotion. But over time fans become desenstized to the violence, wrestler's careers are cut short, and business begins to suffer. I'll throw 90s All Japan, NOAH, ECW, FMW, Attitude Era, etc into this pile. So anything over the top cartoony or anything excessively dangerous and career threating to the top wrestlers I see as bad for business.

I just look at the Attitude Era and think if the in ring style was a little less violent, would we have gotten Austin and Foley wrestling into their late 30s or early 40s? Would Shawn Michaels not needed 4 years off?

[Mrzfn]

I think any style that is so fake that it exposes the business can be be bad for business. I'll throw Chikara and DDT and those sorts of niche promotions in this pile.

 

Strongly disagree with this. Chikara has done consistent niche business and experienced more growth than a lot of more "serious" or "real" independents, and from what I understand DDT draws as well as anything not named New Japan. A promotion like that probably would never be the biggest one in the world, but there's no business left to expose. It's just a different kind of product/style.

[BrianB]

I don't think finishers is the issue. Hogan matches and WWF in the 80s matches had lots of drama and heat and NEVER ended without the finisher.

 

To me, it's more that finishers are kicked out of too much. Cena hits an Attitude Adjustment there is no drama, because people kick out of it all the time.

 

True. The other part of this problem is that matches very rarely end with a fall to a non-finish move. After decades of this and typical crescendo WWE style, fans have been conditioned to only start getting hyped up once the first finisher lands (or occasionally a signature spot.)

[SnoringElbow]

But at the same time when Charlotte beat Sasha with her "finisher" everyone cried that it was lame and they expected more. Can't have it both ways

[Johnny Sorrow]

The only style that's bad for business is a style that nobody pays to see.

[BrianB]

But at the same time when Charlotte beat Sasha with her "finisher" everyone cried that it was lame and they expected more. Can't have it both ways

 

True. I wasn't delighted with that match's ending, but I didn't have a problem with it as far as it getting the pinfall vs. a kickout exactly; my issue was wanting Sasha to go over for the hometown crowd and how the loss deflated them. As a the heel is just too much for the weakened babyface finish though, it was executed well, even if the table didn't break or whatever.

 

It is a bit strange that since that match WWE has been establishing Charlotte's big boot front leg back kick that time (fans) as her primary finisher, though she had won a match or two before with it, I think.

[Coffey]

I didn't even know that was Charlotte's finish. I thought her finish was the Figure-8?

[Matt D]

Is the idea of "Burning Out a Territory" a myth?

 

Did Southwest go overboard with the blood and violence in the 80s to the point where the fans had seen it all? That's the traditional narrative.

[BrianB]

I didn't even know that was Charlotte's finish. I thought her finish was the Figure-8?

 

It's one. But since heels in WWE rarely win by tap out, it's faded into the background more.

[Zoo Enthusiast]

The only style that's bad for business is a style that nobody pays to see.

Winner.

[Bierschwale]

Or the one that fans pay less to see.

[G. Badger]

Not be someone who champions Jim Cornette in 2016 but, I think when there's a style that apparently makes wrestling look 'fake' that's bad for business. Wrestling in the fixed sense works when there is a modicum of disbelief. Like, "oh shit! He really slapped him!...not like those other times..." or "there is no way that sleeper isn't a half shoot, his eyes are rolling back!"

 

That's not to say running shooting star presses and the like are excluded but, when someone doesn't sell the move or it is a blatantly fake move then, what fucking good is it!? We as viewers just shrug it off...

 

If a burning hammer is done 30 seconds in and Joe 6 pack kicks out then it pisses on all burning hammers and any move taken as less traumatic, less final..So a PWG cluster fuck is BAD for business... PWG Cyanide, Steen nearly labotimizes Akira Tozawa the first five-ten minutes in..but continue to wrestle another ten..WTF man !? It's done there! He's done- pin him! Protect the move, protect the business...cause if a guy gets up after a move that looks like his brain stem was severed then anything less than that looks weak, son.

 

It sounds like what's going on in WWE is a result..to a lesser extant...