No announcement yet.

Live WWE TV Discussion Thread

This is a sticky topic.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • So let me get this straight....

    The WWE, in the past few weeks release Andrade, Alistair Black and Braun Strowman, and then they decide to push Jackson Ryker? A guy they had to suspend for his political tweets, who pissed off the locker room, and is not a good talent? They had 3 men on their roster who are infinitely more talented on their roster, that the let go, only to clean up Ryker with a haircut and a beard trim, and try to push him.....

    Someone explain that to me.

    Also, the WWE better get their shit together real soon with RAW. They are going back to live crowds, and real soon. Much of the stuff they are doing will get torn apart by the live crowds that are itching for good stuff. I love Alexa Bliss, and think she is amazing in her creepy role, but this Lily Doll storyline is really bad, and would never play with a live crowd. Shayne is being reduced to a stupid teenager in a 1980s slasher flick, when she should be a Ken Shamrock type of talent. A former MMA fighter who is an ultimate badass that takes shit from no one.
    Last edited by Powder; 06-08-2021, 08:00 AM.


    • Easy.

      The reason for the cuts were reportedly budget. If negotiating with Braun, Almas, Black, and Ryker, which one do you think will cost less? AEW and Impact will offer the 3 released guys decent offers. But Ryker wouldn't. Costs less. And he'll be booked better in WWE because they'll use the patriot story better. Also, he's got a better look than Black or Almas. As for talent, that's not a factor. In ring talent is subjective, and he's more than fine in the ring. I also highly doubt the Ryker project is to find a new main event guy, and more like a credible midcarder who can put others over.

      For the record, I wouldn't prefer Ryker to the other 3. But to say he has no benefits is silly IWC hyperbole and negativity.


      • Sorry, but I love the Shayna/Alexa stuff. I don't see the problem with it, and think it's showing us way more of what Shayna can offer than she'd ever get in a 'Ken Shamrock type' role of just turning up and kicking ass. Thing is, we know that about Shayna already. We don't know why she would want to do that - which is what this whole thing is about establishing.

        I think you're thinking too much in absolutes, Powder - 'this is what Shayna should be doing, anything else is wrong'. It's not that simple.

        As for Ryker - well, I've always thought the guy sucked in the ring. Nothing has changed for me there. But whatever, a minor midcard push for a guy doesn't harm me or anybody else.


        • Originally posted by Oliver View Post
          I think you're thinking too much in absolutes, Powder - 'this is what Shayna should be doing, anything else is wrong'. It's not that simple.
          I've said this plenty of times before. Usually it was about Matt Riddle, how he needed to be serious as an asskicker. Now he's still just as goofy as ever, and part of the best thing on Raw.

          That said, I didn't like the Shayna thing last night. I don't she needs to be an asskicker at all times, and thankfully her asskicker background was essential to this story. She went in over confident because she knew she could wipe the floor with Alexa, not expecting the supernatural stuff that ended up taking place. But the execution was lame. I truly hate when these segments take place in the ring. That's my personal line for becoming silly.


          • Can I ask exactly what people think make the released talent "better" than Jaxson Ryker? Outside of the traditional, 2005 IWC opinion of some of them having a wider variety of flashier moves and a better "workrate" (which is a meaningless word to anyone but hardcore internet fans).

            He bumps well, he doesn't seem stiff -- to the point where he's almost overly light -- he moves well in the ring and isn't wooden. I think that the majority of it comes from one tweet, and the fact that because he was a big, jacked up guy who wasn't an indy darling doing springboards, everyone decided Gunner was the shits in TNA.

            I don't think he should have been fired, nor even really punished for a fairly benign tweet. Dislike it and be upset by it all you want, that's life and you're right and I'm not going to say you're wrong for it. And sometimes not all of your coworkers are going to want to be best buddies. I despise 1/4 of the people that I work with, but I show up every day and do the job that I'm paid well to do. I don't agree with his tweet, nor do I appreciate the timing of it. But guess fucking what, I don't have to agree with nor like every single thing that every single person says, and people shouldn't be punished for doing things that upset me personally.

            But what there is with Ryker, that there wasn't with a lot of the released talent, is the unknown. He's never been given a chance in the WWE to be a star. Most of the rest had to some degree, and for one reason or another didn't really catch on. You can say they were used "wrong", or that they were never really given an opportunity and I'd disagree with you. But this is another case of doing what people have begged for and trying something new with someone new, and because it's not an indy darling, or your favourite person that was soooooooooo over in front of 400 people at Full Sail, it sucks.
            Last edited by Team Farrell; 06-08-2021, 11:57 AM.
            My latest (and hopefully last) Covid-Era show


            • I think the critique is he isn't special. It's the same complaint online fans have for Baron Corbin, or Orton. I would say many labeled Elias the same way. Hell, isn't this what Roman Reigns was criticized for as the in ring weak link of the Shield until the last couple of years?

              In terms of being a above average sized beast, Gunner Ryker might be great in this role. Imagine him learning from Roman Reigns right now? He's got the size and the intensity.

              When the IWC bitched nonstop about Corbin being shoved down their throats, it felt the same way. Corbin isn't being used in a leadership role. He's there to put over people, but he needs to win once in a while to be credible enough in the first place. So yes, he beat Chad Gable. And then he lost to pretty much everyone else he'd feuded with since he became King. He looks like he'll be putting over Shinsuke and Boogs by the end of this feud.

              Promotions needs guys like Ryker and Corbin. They aren't to put titles on, but to get the right people in the roles to win the titles. When everyone on the roster is a potential main star, someone has to lose. I will debate COACH to the death that WWE didn't try with Black whatsoever. But everyone else got a fair shake. And we also don't know how everyone gets along with backstage. Ryker made his insensitive tweets, but maybe the next day he went backstage and apologized, discussed the struggles in the community with Titus O'Neil and Mark Henry (not just because they are black, but are huge community spokespeople).

              We judge employment based only by very few details. Obviously what they do on camera is most important to us as fans. But we've all been in jobs where there are people that perform really well but are disruptive in the workplace overall. Or vice versa and don't have great performances, but make the work environment a better place.

              We can debate all day about who doesn't deliver on camera. But no one, including Dead Ass Dave Meltzburger, knows what goes on backstage.


              • My main complaint, is that everyone on the roster SHOULD be able to complete for the top title at all times. No one should be a jobber to the stars anymore. No one should be on the roster just to eat pinfalls. Wrestling has always tried to indicate that they were as legit as boxing and MMA, where the goal of literally every boxer and MMAer is to win the top title (in their respective weight class). so why should wrestling be any different?

                Every boy or girl that dreamed of becoming a wrestler since 1985 has dreamed of winning the WWE title at a Wrestlemania. No one every dreamed of saying that I want to just be on the roster. Yes people get complacent, and yes people grind it out out for the paycheck. But why can't the product evolve? Why can't it be where a new guy to the product or TV cannot pay his/her dues, but also be a legit threat to the top title, regardless of being in a top title feud?

                Orton is no where near the title right now, but he is a threat at any given day. So was Strowman, and Drew, and Bryan, Kofi, Sheamus and even Rey. But why not Woods? Why not Corbin? And why not Ryker?

                If the old idea is "Well someone has to lose", then cut them and bring in new guys. Bring in someone who will be a threat. That elevates everyone, and makes the overall product better. The days of Barry O and Steve Lombardi are long gone.

                What has Elias ever done in the WWE? He can talk, has charisma, can sing, has the size and body type, so why not give him a push? I'm not saying that he should challenge Lashley tomorrow, but in the past 4 years, he has never been taken seriously. Whenever he is on screen the entire audience knows that he will attempt to sing, get interrupted, and either lose his match, or lose his feud and hit someone or get hit with his guitar. You give him some wins, and he COULD be a viable threat.

                To sum up: Yes I know that the current product has its structure and talent hierarchy, but what I am saying is that they could easily change it to be where everyone CAN be a contender. In a fake sport, it is really easy to do.

                Then us IWC guys (ironic that you call us that since you are the same) would not complain that a guy like Black and Strowman were let go in favor of a guy like Ryker. Maybe Ryker will be a contender in a few months, but if his job is too be a guy to put over talent, then in my opinion the formula needs to change.
                Last edited by Powder; 06-08-2021, 04:07 PM.


                • I just don't see it with Ryker. I don't think he has the in ring acumen to actually succeed - although a lot of that is based on his time in TNA, as I've not really seen him outside of highlights in WWE.

                  I watch him and I just see someone going through the motions. You know that Kenny Omega thing of 'playing a pro wrestler' that gets talked about in the AEW threads on here? I feel like Ryker has some of that about him, but he's playing at being a Ruthless Aggression era wrestler rather than an indy darling wrestler.


                  • Originally posted by Powder View Post
                    To sum up: Yes I know that the current product has its structure and talent hierarchy, but what I am saying is that they could easily change it to be where everyone CAN be a contender. In a fake sport, it is really easy to do.
                    If it was as easy as you claim, then it would have been done before. But it's not realistic by any stretch of the imagination.

                    And it's also not ideal. Or logical.


                    • Originally posted by Powder View Post
                      My main complaint, is that everyone on the roster SHOULD be able to complete for the top title at all times. No one should be a jobber to the stars anymore. No one should be on the roster just to eat pinfalls. Wrestling has always tried to indicate that they were as legit as boxing and MMA, where the goal of literally every boxer and MMAer is to win the top title (in their respective weight class). so why should wrestling be any different?
                      Man, I don't think you could possibly more wrong about this if you went out if your way to try on purpose.

                      If everyone can fight for the top title, your top Champion is no longer a star, and there are no stars on your roster. If Mustafa Ali might reasonably challenge Brock, Brock isn't any bigger a star than Ali.

                      Some guys are job guys. Some guys are midcard guys. Some guys are upper card guys, below the top. Not everyone you sign even has the potential to be a top guy, because a top guy has nothing to do with talent or skill or "workrate". It's all about who the average person would be willing to part with their money to see, because that person's face is on the advertising.

                      That's not to say that the undercard guy, as a human being, has to be okay with that. That's not to say that person has to accept that without wanting more. But it's the way it is. It's not Vince McMahon's job to let you live your dream, just because it was your dream to fight for the WWE Title.

                      There are already so few stars on the roster that any human on the planet would want to pay money to see specifically. There should be more separation of stars from the "guys on the card". Xavier Woods shouldn't get more than a minute or two of offense against Drew McIntyre. If McIntyre was murdering established, middle of the card guys in minutes, it puts it in fans' brains that he's a killer. If he's going 50/50 with Ricochet, he's just another guy on the card and not a big star, a big deal, or someone to pay big money to watch.

                      Drew should have some trouble with Kofi, a former World Champion, but ultimately win. He should spend a few minutes with Woods, a former Tag Champion and usually a tag team guy, but win pretty easily. He should run through Angel Garza without too much trouble. And he should annihilate whomever is sprinting after the 24/7 Champion on a weekly basis with one Claymore, without breaking a sweat and cut a promo without being out of breath afterward.

                      Since the dawn of wrestling you've had your top stars, and your guys on the card in every promotion, every territory, every random show held in a legion hall. It might hurt the heart of the middle card guy to be a middle card guy, but boo fucking hoo. Go get a job at the local factory.

                      Even in the UFC, not everyone is a contender. Not everyone has an equal opportunity to possibly be booked against the Champion, and very likely if you're not a top 10 contender but booked against the Champion, you're going to get mauled.

                      If everyone is a contender, and a viable threat to your Champion, your Champion means nothing.
                      Last edited by Team Farrell; 06-08-2021, 06:04 PM.
                      My latest (and hopefully last) Covid-Era show


                      • Surely by that logic, Powder, you'd have thought Brooklyn Brawler or Barry Horowitz should have been capable of challenging for the title in the early 90s?

                        I don't disagree that almost everyone on that roster should dream, and probably has dreamt, of one day being WWE Champion. But for a great number of people, they're never going to get there but are very capable as midcard guys. That's just their spot. It's always happened that way.

                        Now, sometimes - just sometimes - WWE can pull out something like Jeff Hardy vs Undertaker and make it work as a one off. Taker still dominated that match, but Hardy got a big step up in defeat. But not everyone is Jeff Hardy, and not everyone will get a decent result from that kind of match.

                        Ultimately, WWE - and many other wrestling rosters - needs and will always have some guys who are 'just' good hands in the ring and can support the midcard. Kofi would be an example where they caught one moment of lightning in a bottle but it fizzled out super quickly due to him not, in truth, being quite main event level. They can now use him in the way they have recently against Drew, but I'll be really surprised if we ever see another Kofi run with the top title on either brand.


                        • That's the thing. If you have an obvious hierarchy to your roster, and Bobby Lashley has been mercing lower card guys in minutes on Raw for a few weeks, but Montez Ford suddenly puts in 20 minutes with him and takes Lashley to the limit before losing, that's a notable push for Ford and something to be remembered.

                          If everyone is a potential challenger for any title at any time, there's no way of knowing who your stars are, and that 20 minute match means nothing more than "oh, I guess that was a good match."

                          You also might as well turf your midcard title entirely and just have the one.
                          My latest (and hopefully last) Covid-Era show


                          • COACH, seriously topic: do you like the concept of midcard titles? I feel it's fucking dumb to have a title that is obviously not as important as the main title while still being in the same division.


                            • I don't hate the concept if, again, there's a hierarchy and a differentiation. I suppose it's okay for someone like a John Cena to win the US Title every once in a while, but it wouldn't be my norm.

                              I remember when the IC Title was for that midcard star who was the one to watch. The guy who they clearly wanted to say was going to be a future star, or possibly challenging the WWF Champion in the not too distant future. But it hasn't been that for decades. I think that those belts are better off if they're never on someone even sniffing the main event scene, but who is on the rise or who they want to elevate.

                              But let's be real, why does the IC Title exist? Because they wanted to run multiple touring rosters with a belt to main event the B towns. It's not like they had a roster full of guys who they felt needed something to fight over, or needed to be rewarded, like the IWC argue for belts these days. So on a differentiated roster with two top titles, there probably isn't much reason for the undercard belts these days other than tradition.

                              If a midcard title can be used as a springboard to something bigger, I say keep it. But it's usually not. Johnny Gargano falling out of the NXT Title scene, holding the NA Title and then finding himself back in an NXT Title contenders match is a great example of holding the NA Title elevating someone back from the midcard to the top of the card.
                              My latest (and hopefully last) Covid-Era show


                              • To be fair, the WWF/E did use the IC to lead them into a top tile. Look at Macho, Warrior, Bret, HBK, SCSA, Diesel, Rocky, HHH, Angle, Benoit, Jericho, Edge, Cena, Orton, just to name a few.

                                All had significant IC (and US Title for that matter once the brand split) title runs prior to becoming WWE Champion. Then somewhere in the 2010s the WWE forgot all about this....
                                Last edited by Powder; 06-10-2021, 02:26 PM.