Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

What are some things you've learned from 1983 Project, e-feds and armchair booking?


Recommended Posts

What are some things you've learned from 1983 Project, e-feds and armchair booking?


Some things I've learned:


- WWE having to book 7 hours a week of wrestling, plus another 3 on PPV weeks is something that I think is almost impossible to do well. There's too much time to fill. I couldn't do it and I'm not sure I'd even want to try.


- Not being able to cycle guys in and out makes wrestling booking 10x harder. It dooms certain people to certain spots and after a while, it makes everything just "meh". The territory system was the most perfect system wrestling could ever have. You bring guys in, milk them dry, get rid of them and bring them back years later when they are fresh again.


- Squash matches are really important. You basically sell off your pennies to get dollars. You use up the guys who mean little to make the guys who mean a lot worth more. This saves some of your lesser roster members from losing and keeps your top roster members strong.


- Managers are such a big part of making these systems work. They are great pieces. You can make anyone relevant with them. They never lose their heat because they don't wrestle, their crew does. You can keep them around for years as well without them getting stale.


- I really do think 6-7 weeks is the ideal amount of time to build up to a show. It gives you enough time to do some pre-building, the actual match/angle, some post angle stuff and then interviews and stuff to hype it up. Anything under a month is going to be too soon and anything over 2 months is too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Something from e-feds in particular, be my role as management or roster:


-Come up with a set schedule and base less than half of the weekly cards on current storylines/feuds. Focusing on the emotional motivation for each bout is a quick way to burn out as then each match requires a "big time" feel. That's just not realistic. Having a more sports-centric cycle builds gradual heat, forces the roster to interact (great way to judge potential new stars), and allows fans to buy into the kayfabe again.


-Roster interaction is a HUGE thing that often goes overlooked. The Red Sox don't play the Yankees every week and a mid-season game with the Blue Jays could either go squash or highlight a new coach/player/etc. Cena's US title run proves this as close matches with undercard talent elevated all involved. A hierarchy is great, but a perceived glass ceiling kills interest both on the roster and in the stands.


-Gimmick matches should be special and fit the talent involved. Not every main event needs to be a cage match (or variation), not every tag match should involve a ladder, and a well-timed street fight can liven up a show whereas a poorly timed one can hurt everybody involved.


-Not everything has to be blown off all at once. If everybody on a show has a "WrestleMania moment," per se, then few are going to truly stand out. It's okay to blow off a hot feud between hive events and let others take the brightest spotlights. Think of it as a "mid-season finale."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...