TUP Wrestling Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Wrestling > WWE Smackdown Live
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Carmella On Smackdown
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Carmella On Smackdown

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Message
Rico Len View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (X, XII, XIII)

Joined: 23/October/2012
Location: Yosemite Lakes
Status: Offline
Points: 11411
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rico Len Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22/March/2018 at 12:07
WWE logic, my friend, WWE logic.

What if Charlotte was "injured" during the match and needed to take a week or two off to recuperate? Meanwhile Asuka is up and at em with little more than taped up ribs and a bit of a limp.

It wouldn't be too much different from when Rollins injected himself into his buddy Reigns during his match with Lesnar and walked out champion. Lesnar didn't get the follow-up feud, Reigns did.

Similarly, Asuka gets the match, Carmella gets her WrestleMania moment, but then forgotten about as Asuka and Charlotte continue their feud as Asuka still would not have beaten Charlotte, yet even so now Asuka has the title and Charlotte is the challenger.
Back to Top
Tom Colohue View Drop Down
Raw/Smackdown
Raw/Smackdown


Joined: 24/November/2017
Location: Blackpool, Eng
Status: Offline
Points: 631
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tom Colohue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22/March/2018 at 12:50
I'd have Carmella cash in, make it a triple threat, pin Charlotte and then Asuka has to earn her title shot all over again.

Which she will. In short order. But Carmella gets at least a month's run as champion, possibly more. I'd rather see Carmella beat Charlotte during the rematch via immense cheating and then Asuka destroys Carmella for the title, keeping Asuka vs Charlotte for a later, larger event. 

Charlotte could then be to Asuka what Reigns is to Lesnar. Years later we still don't have an answer as to who would have won.
Tom Colohue - Wrestling Journalist (PWTorch)
Follow me @Colohue
Back to Top
#Heel View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (VII, VIII, & XIII)

Joined: 03/January/2012
Location: Newcastle, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote #Heel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22/March/2018 at 19:09
Originally posted by Tom Colohue Tom Colohue wrote:

I'd have Carmella cash in, make it a triple threat, pin Charlotte and then Asuka has to earn her title shot all over again.

Which she will. In short order. But Carmella gets at least a month's run as champion, possibly more. I'd rather see Carmella beat Charlotte during the rematch via immense cheating and then Asuka destroys Carmella for the title, keeping Asuka vs Charlotte for a later, larger event. 

Charlotte could then be to Asuka what Reigns is to Lesnar. Years later we still don't have an answer as to who would have won.

That is the way id like it to happen too - i really want Carmella to successfully cash in
Back to Top
Dukezilla View Drop Down
Raw/Smackdown
Raw/Smackdown
Avatar

Joined: 22/October/2015
Location: Hawaii
Status: Offline
Points: 630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dukezilla Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 02:31
So let me get this straight. Charlotte beats the unstoppable monster Asuka, ending her nearly three year long undefeated streak, and then two days later, loses the belt to someone that would often get raped by Asuka in NXT?

This booking is absolutely retarded.

Edited by Dukezilla - 11/April/2018 at 02:33
Back to Top
#Heel View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (VII, VIII, & XIII)

Joined: 03/January/2012
Location: Newcastle, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote #Heel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 07:24
Not really Duke. Charlotte was 3 to 1 outnumbered and it was a typical MITB capitalising on a weakened opponent.

Im glad she was successful because i love the whole MITB principle
Back to Top
Kondor View Drop Down
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Avatar
Forum Moderator / Ticket Wars Founder

Joined: 02/June/2010
Location: Right here
Status: Offline
Points: 7020
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kondor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 11:01
Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

i love the whole MITB principle

How is it that you love a concept that devalues every belt the federation has by hot potatoing it among weaker champions? Not to mention a concept that makes better talent look bad by having them lose to people whom they would likely handily beat otherwise otherwise? 
 



Back to Top
admin View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Open To Bribes For Favours

Joined: 01/October/2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 47448
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote admin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 11:29
Originally posted by Kondor Kondor wrote:

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

i love the whole MITB principle

How is it that you love a concept that devalues every belt the federation has by hot potatoing it among weaker champions? Not to mention a concept that makes better talent look bad by having them lose to people whom they would likely handily beat otherwise otherwise? 
 
It's not hot potatoing when a champion gets beat after nearly 300 days as champion. It would be hot potatoing if Carmella now doesn't hold the title for at least a few months.
 
Quote Carmela runs out to the ring while Charlotte is still down. Carmella cashes in her Money In The Bank briefcase. The referee hesitates before starting the match, but he does start it, and Carmella is getting her Women's Title shot.

- Carmella vs. Charlotte: Carmella kicks Charlotte and then immediately pins her for the three count.

Winner & new SmackDown Women's Champion: Carmella

- After the match, Carmella grabs her Title Belt and runs around the ring with it. Carmella gets back in the ring and celebrates her win and taunts Charlotte with the belt.

She was getting outshined by two guys. Firstly Mike Chioda being dragged by his shirt to the ring and asking her if she wanted to cash in at least three times, like he's either going deaf in old age or trying to help Charlotte recover.
 
The second being Corey Graves on commentary having a go at Mike Chioda for not understanding what Carmella was trying to do and for how overexcited he was post match at having a new champion.
Back to Top
Kondor View Drop Down
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Avatar
Forum Moderator / Ticket Wars Founder

Joined: 02/June/2010
Location: Right here
Status: Offline
Points: 7020
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kondor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 11:55
Originally posted by admin admin wrote:

Originally posted by Kondor Kondor wrote:

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

i love the whole MITB principle

How is it that you love a concept that devalues every belt the federation has by hot potatoing it among weaker champions? Not to mention a concept that makes better talent look bad by having them lose to people whom they would likely handily beat otherwise otherwise? 
 
It's not hot potatoing when a champion gets beat after nearly 300 days as champion. It would be hot potatoing if Carmella now doesn't hold the title for at least a few months.

I was making a general assessment of the Money In the Bank concept since 2006. Edge, CM Punk (twice), Jack Swagger, The Miz, Alberto Del Rio, Daniel Bryan, Dolph Ziggler, and now Carmella all capitalized and weakened Champions. All of those except Miz had short reigns and all but Punk over Edge was a case of the briefcase holder easily beating someone they would be hard pressed to under normal circumstances. That does indeed hot potato the belts as well as give it to less credible competitors.   

I have never liked the Money In the Bank concept. 

And yes I am prepared for #Heel's defense of Ziggler here. Ziggler is a credible challenger; but Del Rio had recently beaten Big Show at the time and was very on the mark. I would still call it an upset; but I would grant it was not as bad as other more ridiculous cases.  




Edited by Kondor - 11/April/2018 at 11:59

Back to Top
#Heel View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (VII, VIII, & XIII)

Joined: 03/January/2012
Location: Newcastle, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote #Heel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 12:48
Originally posted by Kondor Kondor wrote:

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

i love the whole MITB principle

How is it that you love a concept that devalues every belt the federation has by hot potatoing it among weaker champions? Not to mention a concept that makes better talent look bad by having them lose to people whom they would likely handily beat otherwise otherwise? 
 




It is not hot potatoing at all - nearly every successful cash in has been from someone who has been built up in the weeks /months prior.

It does not devalue the belt in anyway infact it makes them more prestigious when you have guys all competing to ultimately have a chance of a title opportunity - its effectively a glorified #1 contender match.

The champions are not devalued, buried or any other form of the word - 99% of cash ins are on a champion that has already comoeted, been attacked, been multi teamed so they always have an out.

The unpredictability added to every title match after MITB makes them far more interesting based on tbis additional factor of a potential cash in.

MITB is one of the best things WWE have
Back to Top
Kondor View Drop Down
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Avatar
Forum Moderator / Ticket Wars Founder

Joined: 02/June/2010
Location: Right here
Status: Offline
Points: 7020
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kondor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/April/2018 at 13:13
Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

Originally posted by Kondor Kondor wrote:

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

i love the whole MITB principle

How is it that you love a concept that devalues every belt the federation has by hot potatoing it among weaker champions? Not to mention a concept that makes better talent look bad by having them lose to people whom they would likely handily beat otherwise otherwise? 
 




It is not hot potatoing at all - nearly every successful cash in has been from someone who has been built up in the weeks /months prior.

The briefcase holder is built up as a challenger. Bob Holly was once a challenger. That is a far cry from appearing as if they can credibly beat the champion. Plus I don't even agree that some briefcase holders were properly built up to World Championship level. Miz was sure not in 2010 and neither was Swagger. But I've written essays about that.   

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

It does not devalue the belt in anyway infact it makes them more prestigious when you have guys all competing to ultimately have a chance of a title opportunity - its effectively a glorified #1 contender match.

I will give you that the actual Money In the Bank Ladder match itself increases the competition; but the stipulation that the briefcase holder can pounce on a damaged champion causes the champion to lose to people they would probably defeat given they way they have been presented. Plus I would say that every normal wrestling match is a match where people are in title contention; and that is actually a better system as some MITB victories have seemed like someone got lucky. 

In fact, the subject of this thread had her boyfriend actually take the briefcase!! 

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

The champions are not devalued, buried or any other form of the word - 99% of cash ins are on a champion that has already comoeted, been attacked, been multi teamed so they always have an out.

Thank you for admitting the Champions are not in their full state when they are forced to defend their titles. IF there is going to be a new champion, wouldn't it be better if the challenger were to beat the champ when they are at full 100% capacity? How many times has someone, champion or challenger, say "I don't want any excuses." It makes the new titleholder appear as if they could not beat the champion otherwise and thus certainly devalues the belt. 

Not to mention a beat down by someone or a group of people is not as bad for the champion as a beat down combined with a belt loss.  

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

The unpredictability added to every title match after MITB makes them far more interesting based on tbis additional factor of a potential cash in.

The short term excitement due to that unpredictability is not worth the long term damage to the titles by having a turnstile instead of a steady stable kingpin. The WWF World Title was worth more when Bruno Sammartino and Hulk Hogan had it  for years straight, constantly proving they deserve it by beating the best, than the title was when Edge hit a John Cena who had just survived a Chamber and then only kept it for a few weeks.  

Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

MITB is one of the best things WWE have

It is probably the worst thing to happen to championships. It does even more damage than the brand extension does. 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.