Things I Wanna See WWE Bring Back

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Lockard 23, Dec 30, 2012.

  1. 1. The 'Throw In The Towel" finish. This was brought up on a wrestling blog a week ago, and it's a good idea. When's the last time we saw a match end because a manager or whoever threw in the towel? It's a good way to have a face lose without giving up himself. It's also a good way to have a heel lose without giving up himself. It's also a neat way to have a manager screw over a baby face. When was the last time this finish was used? The 90's?

    2. This is a similar point as the previous one, but the finish where the referee stops the match. Piper laid down a huge beat down on some guy named Rick McDraw a week after he got slapped by him on Piper's Pit. The ass whopping was so bad the ref stopped the match. When Brock Lesnar debuted, he would often just keep slamming and power bombing guys just to hurt them and the ref would have to stop the match to avoid further damage. Then there was the Summerslam 2005 finish with Matt Hardy and Edge (which I still think was a very weird finish that made Matt look like a bitch.) The ref stopped the tag title match at RR 1994 because of Bret's leg injury. When's the last time this finish was used? It is, at the very least, a good way of introducing a monster gimmick by having them hurt people and having the ref intervene to prevent injury. Also, if someone has a submission move and applies it long enough on someone and that someone won't submit, the ref could stop the match because they fear the person might be injured if they don't give in, especially if they already have an injury (say a leg injury) going into the match.

    3. The 30-day/one month stipulation. It used to be that if you were a champion, you got stripped of the belt if you didn't defend the belt within 30 days. Michaels was stripped of the IC belt back in 1993 because of this. This is a good thing to introduce in certain angles. Look at Punk's current WWE Title reign. He got injured on December 3rd (ironically one day before he beat Cena's title record) and even though the 30 days will be expired by January 7th when he is scheduled to face Ryback, it's still exactly one month later to the day, and they could tell him that because his match with Ryback was signed ahead of time, that January 7th is the last chance he has to defend his belt or else he'll be stripped of it because of the rule. Through this, it's a good way of stacking the odds against Punk by informing of his choices - facing Ryback in a TLC match (whether he's cleared to wrestle or not) or be stripped of the title.

    It's also a good way of adding extra drama to a situation where the baby face is champion. Say you have a baby face champion who is injured and perhaps not cleared to wrestle, but the 30 days is coming up and he has to compete unless he wants to be stripped. So, you get a lot of extra drama and support on the side of the face by having to go into a match knowing he isn't in the best shape to wrestle. If he wins, he looks good and brave for doing so. If he loses, you have the injury as an excuse to fall back on. Say for example that Kofi has a leg injury that is making him limp around a bit. The smart thing is to forfeit the title but he's proud to be champion and so he doesn't want to. Say he already has a PPV match scheduled against Wade Barrett. If he forfeits, Barrett says Kofi is using the injury as an excuse because he knows he will lose the belt to Barrett anyway, and so that makes Kofi determined to beat Barrett, even with the leg injury. And he puts on a great performance, but ultimately the injury costs him the match and Barrett wins the title. Kofi could then take 2-3 months off to heal from his kayfabe injury, and then come back with a lot of momentum (and be at 100% health) to face Barrett in a rematch. Barrett could even slip away with the belt again and Kofi is determined to win it in the next rematch, since fans really love to see people chase the belt. Either way, it makes people really want to see Kofi win the belt again, since the reason he lost it and had to take time off because of an injury was because he would be stripped of it if he didn't defend it within 30 days.

    4. Having a Time Limit on matches. Not a big, big thing, but there was usually a 15-20 time limit on non title matches, and a 30 minute time limit (or an hour) on title matches. It's a good way to end the match in a draw without having either guy lose or simply get counted out or something. Didn't the 2-3 falls IC Title match between Rock and Triple H at Fully Loaded 1998 end this way? They both got a fall each but the time ran out before either could score the last fall? Also, imagine a guy makes his opponent submit or at least hears the bell ring when he has the move locked on.

    It'd be nice to see WWE incorporate these things more often.
  2. The main problem with the towel thing is who has a manager to throw it in? Time limits are something which can be used imo, im a fan of title matches having them personally, really adds to them. Not keen on using the 30 day thing though, I'd prefer it was scrapped as a minor injury such as Punks shouldn't be a reason for him to drop the strap.
  3. Last time someone threw in the towel that I remember was Hart vs Backlund in 1994 (although it was a Throw in the Towel Match, so it was the only possible finish, but anyway). Quite a while. If there were more managers it'd be cool. Referee stoppage is very nice.
  4. The towel was used a bit more recently than 1994.
    I disagree on the referee stopping the match, sure it might help the storyline a little but don't pretend you wouldn't be disappointed with an outcome like that.
    Couldn't agree more, injured superstars should be exempt though.
    Disagree with 4 as well, it's just another way to not come to a conclusion in a feud, and disappoint fans. Let's think back to the 2000 Royal Rumble, Rock and Big Show feuding for months, each saying they would win the Rumble. Rock was top face, and Show had so much heel heat. Now imagine they both went over the ropes, and both hit the floor first, how pissed would you be?
  5. I like the time limit broadways. Those were great showcases of talent and endurance. Like the op said puts over both guys without having either of them take a loss. Take the 45 min Sting/Flair broadway back in '88. It made Sting, and let Flair keep his title.
  6. With the exception of the first idea, the others could still be incorporated today. Since Triple H has an old school mentality with some things (wants long title reigns, wants vignettes to return, etc.), I wouldn't be surprised if he has considered some of these things.

    Another idea to consider is something from the 90's called Face To Face, where two guys would be on a split screen and engage verbally with one another. It's a good way of having a promo battle without having to go out to the ring and do it. Could see something like this being used on Main Event or something. Here's a good example. There was also a great one with Bret and Austin from '96, but I think the uploader took it off Youtube:

  7. Well, the Rumble match would be the one big exception as far as time limits go.
  8. Not just time limits. The towel and having it stopped by the ref is what I'm talking about. You can imagine all of your favourite matches and end them like this instead in your head, it's never a good thing.
  9. Yes, my favorite matches ending that way would be shit, but it's not like there aren't other ways to end a match terribly. If used sparingly and in the right situations, they could still be good finishes.
  10. I miss Savage :downer:
  11. We need a Savage smiley.
  12. [​IMG] :ohyeah: ?
  13. We had one I think, none of us ever used it except Gohan.
  14. lingerie match between aj and kaitlyn :yes:
  15. :facepalm: