The IIconics thread

[comfortablynumb]

I don't think they are a comedy act at all. They are arrogant heels. Honestly I thought it was predictable they'd win at Wrestlemania since the titles would do more for them than any other pair, plus they are the only real tag team.

[LibSuperstar]

Very fitting that the first Australian tag team in WWE since the Fabulous Kangaroos are heels.

[Oliver]

I don't think they are a comedy act at all. They are arrogant heels. Honestly I thought it was predictable they'd win at Wrestlemania since the titles would do more for them than any other pair, plus they are the only real tag team.

This, entirely. For me they're annoying heels who play the comedy side of it lightly and with a good touch. Their recent backstage work has been terrific from a character and fun perspective, and despite being a mark for Bayley I'm already enjoying them as champions much more than Boss n Hug.

There's a line of thought, for me, that the 'Four Horsewomen' and a lot of the top level women since the Revolution all take this far too seriously. It's really po-faced, in a lot of ways, and that serves a purpose in making it all feel a bit more important and legitimate, but also kind of slowly sucks the fun out of things. It's why Becky's off screen stuff with Ronda was so enjoyable - there was a good element of with there, which it seems we don't get from anyone on screen.

I think that makes the IIconics kind of important, because while they aren't a comedy act, they are certainly comical and fun. It brings a sense of levity to the female side of things that we don't get in the main event picture.

[Prime Time]

I must confess that I haven't seen too much of it since promotion, but it's felt more to me like they were arrogant heels in NXT, and are playing a kind of pastiche of arrogant heels for laughs on the main roster.

As for taking it too seriously, I could stand everyone taking it a whole lot more serious than they do. Still feels like playtime rather than anything with any stakes more often than not, women and men both.

[King Kong Sundae]

I agree with Oliver, cannot see them as champions by the time June rolls around

[LifeLostInRewind]

I'm not too wild about the tag titles having a short reign on anyone since if you're going to introduce the belts, you need to have a fairly lengthy run for someone at the beginning.

I also don't buy that Sasha and Bayley couldn't be a real tag team. There have been competitors who didn't debut as a team that eventually became one. Bradshaw and Ron Simmons as the Acolytes and soon the APA, Kane and Daniel Bryan became a tag team known as Team Hell No, Jerishow, ShowMiz, The Rhode Scholars and The Bar as other examples. You don't need to come in this business as a tag team to become one.

[T.O.]

The first two reigns for the RAW tag titles (the former SD tag titles from 2002) were 4 weeks COMBINED. It doesn't matter as much as you think it does, if they make it matter in the long run.

[Team Farrell]

The length of a reign really doesn't matter and a long reign isn't immediately a successful one. This is some BS cooked up in response to the Attitude Era "musical belts", but each reign when they were trading the title six times per year made the belt important arguably more than AJ Styles near year long run with that same title because it was always the absolute most important thing on the show being fought over by the absolute most important people on the show.

Bayley and Sasha could have had a Bruno-length run with the belts but if they, and by extension the titles, weren't treated as a top act in the women's division, it wouldn't have made a difference to the belts "meaning something". The same thing is going to happen with The Iiconics. They're being treated like a fluke joke, and so those belts aren't going to gather any steam with them, even if they hold them for a year.

The Women's Tag Team Titles were unnecessary in a company that already has so many titles. What was the point of them? If you had one Women's Title, one World Title, one set of Men's Tag Team Titles, one set of Women's Tag Team Titles and a midcard belt per show I could see it. But as it stands, this Women's Revolution™ has been going on for like three years, and every women that WWE wants you to believe is worth a damn has spent that time being established as a singles star. Great, Asuka and the pirate are a tag team now. Them chasing The Iiconcs doesn't make the belts feel more meaningful, it makes Asuka feel like she's got better things she should be doing.

I understand that they want gender parity and part of that, they feel, requires a women's tag team division. But these are needless belts in a company that already has too many. And to make things worse, The Iiconcs have been sticking to Smackdown (which is probably better than having them travel brands, to be honest) but all the worthwhile teams were on Raw. However, they split The Riott Squad, Nia is out injured and Sasha is crying on the floor.

So we're left with the makeshift Japanese team and Mandy and Sonya suddenly putting their issues aside and coming back together. Their Women's Tag Team division, what little of it existed, could not have been decimated at a worse time.

[LK3185]

I'm fine with a tag division for the women because they have women up that don't even do anything or are there to job. Which in turn, shrinks the value of how important someone is. Unfortunately, this company rarely does seconadary women's feuds and there's at least potential with a tag division to protect people before a singles run.

One of the problems though is that Sasha/Bayley were on the verge of splitting up, then they get the titles, told they will be defending it against all comers... then the title is dropped to the Iconics and treated like filler. Sasha and Bayley didn't need a marathon run but it would have helped establish the titles as something if they defended the titles til like Summerslam. The Iconics on the other hand will lose every match and fill time until they fluke win title matches.

Which would be fine if the titles had been established to be something to go after.. but they have very few teams for it.

[LifeLostInRewind]

Ugh hard to take the Iiconics seriously as tag champs when they keep losing. I get that Sane just debuted, but even the Iiconics jobbed on Raw to Bayley and Naomi. I guess we're not suppose to take them seriously, but still. Pretty much reinforces my opinion that Bayley and Sasha should have kept the belts a bit longer. Agree or disagree with me, it's fine.

[meandi]

The Women's Tag Team Titles were unnecessary in a company that already has so many titles. What was the point of them?

I can’t wait until we get women’s IC and US titles.

[T.O.]

I'm still holding out hope for a strong Sonya singles push. Obviously I stan her as a fellow LGBT, but she's good.

[Cannon]

It's pretty obvious that a good short reign beats a bad long one, but a good long reign does more for a title, especially a new one, than good short ones. Yes, it's about how well you treat it but if it seems like it's hard to come by winning it will feel like it matters more.

If they switch now I say leave it on the next lot to shift the rhythm of the changes.

[LifeLostInRewind]

It's pretty obvious that a good short reign beats a bad long one, but a good long reign does more for a title, especially a new one, than good short ones. Yes, it's about how well you treat it but if it seems like it's hard to come by winning it will feel like it matters more.

If they switch now I say leave it on the next lot to shift the rhythm of the changes.

Well, Bayley and Sasha didn't exactly have a notable short reign. It would have been better if they kept the titles at least until MITB, and the Iiconics title reign hasn't been a stellar short one, either. May as well just shift the belts to Sane and Asuka at this point. Though, in the future, I would not mind seeing Trish Stratus and/or Lita coming back for a tag title reign and give the belts some prestige while elevating the team that beats them..

[Oliver]

I'm still holding out hope for a strong Sonya singles push. Obviously I stan her as a fellow LGBT, but she's good.

I'm super into Sonya, and think she might be the most underrated talent currently on the female main roster. Would have loved to see her get a proper shot at Ronda and do something with a real MMA flair to it. Hopefully she gets something good to do in the future.

As far as the women's tags go - I'm struggling with them because they've dropped them straight into booking 101 hell of 'X has pinned the tag team champions!', which just bores me. I want to have some kind of reason to believe in the stories they're telling, and at the moment all I've got is 'well, they beat them once'. It's like Wade Barrett, when he was IC title he couldn't win unless he was actually defending the title.