What should WWE do with the superfaces every week?

Discussion in 'RAW' started by Snowman, Mar 19, 2013.

  1. One thing that's really dragging Raw down is the Big Five. Whenever there's a match starring Cena, Sheamus, Ryback, Orton, or Del Rio, you know the finish. The superface is going to win clean, no feuds will be advanced (outside of a possible attack after the match), the face gets that much more stale, and the young heel they beat up just can't measure up to their perceived awesomeness.

    What's something better WWE can do with these guys every week?
     
  2. A couple of them have to turn. Other than Del Rio it seems the other 4 have been faces forever. Everything gets stale after a while, especially in todays over saturated market. In the Hogan era they would have at most 2 televised shows a week and only 4 PPVs a year. Now you have 4-5 shows a week and monthly PPVs, things get stale that much quicker.
     
  3. Stop as much show cross over as well ADR is the WHC so have him on SD. Make SD relevent and not RAW part 2 and u dont need everyone on both shows each week that will help keep things fresher.
     
  4. To be fair, there really isn't much difference between this and how Hogan and Austin were booked. With the weekly shows and the monthly PPVs though, it just seems like someone is being overpushed or winning too often, but how often did Austin lose on Raw or Smackdown back in the day?

    The thing is, only guys like Cena and Del Rio and maybe Ryback (since they still want to push him as a monster) should be getting the treatment. Guys like Orton and Sheamus are midcarders and could job more often (no one says it has to always be cleanly either) but since it's Wrestlemania season, I can see why they don't. They always want to keep all the wrestlers - especially the faces - who are gonna have an important part in Wrestlemania as strong as possible.
     
  5. Some stars need to start jobbing a little more because then it makes it a little more unpredictable at least, makes the matches interesting and also it makes the superstar that they're up against as a legitimate underdog.

    + Dolph Ziggler jobs and wins, so you don't know whether the superstar he's facing is going to win, or lose. For example, Dolph vs The Miz, whose going to win? We don't know because it's unpredictable, they can have The Miz win, but on the other hand, they can quite easily have Dolph win. It's unpredictable.

    + Sheamus & Randy Orton vs 3MB, so it makes Sheamus and Randy Orton look completely stale as we know what's going to happen. It's completely predictable

    So, if you take the differences between them, it's the predictability. How do you make them unpredictable? By having the superstars they're up against somewhat credible, legitimate contenders and have them possibly defeat the other superstar due to outside interference, DQ or anything in relation to winning regardless if it's a clean victory or not.

    Week 1.
    + Sheamus & Randy Orton vs 3MB, while Sheamus and Randy Orton are dominating The Shields theme music plays, but then quickly Heath Slater scrambles for a roll-up on a confused, shocked and anxious Sheamus. It's an up-set victory, but does that harm Sheamus? No, because he blames The Shield for the loss.

    Week 2.
    + Sheamus w/ Randy at ringside vs Heath Slater w/ Jinder & Drew at ringside. Do you know what's going to happen? It's a possibility, but it's defiantly going to be more unpredictable due to the fact that Slater pinned him last week and the questions in your mind, are they going to win due to The Shields interference? You can have The Shields theme music hit, but Sheamus brutally beats up Heath Slater to an extent where he gets himself DQ'd. 3MB scatter and celebrate at the ramp, while Sheamus and Randy's attention focuses to 3MB celebrating, Orton and Sheamus get's attacked by The Shield.

    If you look at it, you can see that the other competitors are looking like legitimate contenders and have managed to pick-up 2 victories against a credible Sheamus, but then you can have 3MB go against stars such as Tensai and Brodus saying they've defeated Sheamus twice and they can beat them.

    Instead of a simple squash match, they can have an unpredictable match as we don't know whose going to win, do we care who wins? Maybe not, but it develops them and makes the faces look less stale as they are also losing matches.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. That's very logical...it'll never happen.
     
  7. Totally agree, it's a wonderful idea. They kinda did this on Main Event where Swagger attacked Del Rio and caused a countout victory for Big Show, but that didn't mean much since Big Show's pretty close to that level anyway. Stuff like this could have done wonders for a 3MB or Cody Rhodes.
     
  8. they won't do this though :/, it's annoying that matches can be so predictable.

    I also hate how they make champions look weak, I.E IC and US champions lose and win pretty much like you said. WHC/WWE champions hardly ever lose.

    Now surely you should build up the Champion and the Rival. as Two guys who are awesome.

    The rest should lose and win evenly until they're in line for a push to contend for A title.
     
  9. Orton has jobbed quite a bit to be honest. Certainly more than Sheamus has.

    There are multiple reasons why this booking annoys us.

    1) It's repetitive.
    2) It's boring and predictable.
    3) We complain about faces, it's what the IWC does. They complained about Austin, Rock, Cena, and any other dominant face.
    4) The way WWE book faces and heels now is a huge problem.

    The last face who everyone got behind was CM Punk surprisingly. He had the male adults liking him because of his outspoken nature. The females liked him because he's either good looking or he's just a good guy, and the kids liked him for the same reason (not good looking, just that he's a good guy). The only other face who gets this treatment is The Rock, and he's part-time. They need to drastically push the boundaries with face characters. Ryback got over when he was the lone wolf who was killing anyone and everyone, and certainly not when he was partnering with other faces and being oh-so-typical. The booking of faces and heels is something TNA does so much better than WWE at the moment.
     
  10. The first part I can't comment on much but the second one I agree with 100% now that you mentioned it. Orton and Sheamus were top faces looong ago (Orton in 2010 and Sheamus 2012) but they still get that same old superman treatment. Great call. Orton specially since it's been longer.

    And yeah Rain, they're a problem. When they announced Orton/Sheamus and ADR matches I felt something bad inside of me because you know, I already knew the finish. And I really dislike Rhodes jobbing (although it was a relatively competitive match, I'll give them that).