snoopy13
Jobber
Joined on: Sept 28, 2006 21:06:58 GMT -5
Posts: 37
|
Post by snoopy13 on Dec 15, 2011 9:34:43 GMT -5
do you like it when wrerstlers form a tag team and they a title shot quickly or when wrestlers change companies and they get a title shot right away!i think two wrestlers should have to be parners for a while before they get a title shot and the same when someone goes from being apart of a tag team to singles matches.and when wrestlers change companies i think they should wrestle a number of matches before getting a title shot
|
|
Road Warriors
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
"When we get done with you, we're going after family members boys!"
Joined on: Aug 15, 2006 15:16:34 GMT -5
Posts: 1,622
|
Post by Road Warriors on Dec 15, 2011 10:11:54 GMT -5
I can't stand make shift Tag Teams as a whole. Tag Team should be exclusive to Tag Team Matches only.
There hasn't been real Tag Team Wrestling since the 80's IMO.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 9:55:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 12:53:50 GMT -5
not a fan of makeshift teams at all.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 9:55:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2011 14:06:26 GMT -5
Honestly, to me it depends. I mean great tag teams have to start somewhere, and there are so many people not being used at the moment it'd be a shame to waste their talent and hire a lot of new teams. I think makeshift teams can be a great way to turn jobbers into stars, but it seems like a cheap way out many times to make a "credible" tag divison.
|
|
|
|
Post by jammer311 on Dec 15, 2011 15:18:54 GMT -5
Billy Gunn and Roaddog were a makeshift tag team, and they became easily one of the top 5 tag teams ever for WWE. I guess it all depends on how the fans react to them.
A horrible makeshift tag team was Kofi Kingston and CM Punk. It made no sense as to why they would tag up and go for the titles. But Kofi and Bourne somehow works as a tag team.
I think it really is just how the chemistry flows and how the fans react.
|
|
Road Warriors
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
"When we get done with you, we're going after family members boys!"
Joined on: Aug 15, 2006 15:16:34 GMT -5
Posts: 1,622
|
Post by Road Warriors on Dec 15, 2011 17:12:29 GMT -5
Billy Gunn and Roaddog were a makeshift tag team, and they became easily one of the top 5 tag teams ever for WWE. I guess it all depends on how the fans react to them. .  Yeaaa.. I wouldn't go that far. Top 25 maybe but no where near the top 10. I could name 5 teams that deserve to be top 5 and not in any order The Wild Samoans The British Bulldogs The Hart Foundation Demolition The Road Warriors The WWF/E was never a true stronghold for Tag Team Wrestling unlike The NWA which was a hotbed of great teams. |
|
|
|
Post by jammer311 on Dec 15, 2011 21:30:32 GMT -5
The Road Warriors for top 5 teams in WWE history?? No way!! They didn't really do much there. Sure, 2 tag title reigns (3 if you count Animal and Heidenreich) but I wouldn't put them in Top 5 WWE teams ever.
Now in a Top 5 Teams over all for tag teams, of course! But not for just WWE alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Dec 15, 2011 23:52:29 GMT -5
Top 10 WWF/E tag teams ever IMO based on not just length of time together, but gimmick and chemistry together as well (in no order) =
- Hart Foundation
- British Bulldogs
- Edge and Christian
- The Dudley Boys
- Demolition
- Los Guerreros
- Wild Somoans
- Owen Hart and The British Bulldog
- Booker T and Goldust
- The APA
Honorable Mentions: The Rockers, The World's Greatest Tag Team, New Age Outlaws, Jericho and Christian, Angle and Benoit
Always thought that the Hardy Boyz were overrated as hell. I was a fan of Matt's but Jeff has always sucked at everything in the WWE from in-ring work to charisma and mic work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yeezy's Mullet: Team X Blades on Dec 16, 2011 0:02:16 GMT -5
Billy Gunn and Roaddog were a makeshift tag team, and they became easily one of the top 5 tag teams ever for WWE. I guess it all depends on how the fans react to them. A horrible makeshift tag team was Kofi Kingston and CM Punk. It made no sense as to why they would tag up and go for the titles. But Kofi and Bourne somehow works as a tag team. I think it really is just how the chemistry flows and how the fans react. I agree completely. Sums up my thoughts. What really kills me is the angle where two sworn enemies are put in a tag title match by the heel authority and they win. I'm not booking expert but I don't think that helps anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Dec 16, 2011 0:18:48 GMT -5
99% of the time I hate when the WWE just throws 2 main eventers or top mid-carders out of no where together and call them a tag team. Teams like Jericho and Edge, Miz and Big Show, CM Punk and Kofi, Booker T and RVD, Cena and Michaels, Cena and Batista, etc... always anoyed me because they were just thrown together for absolutly no reason and had no chemisty what so ever.
Two teams of main eventers that I actually liked were Austin and HHH, and Angle and Benoit. The storylines made sense as to why they joined up, or were forced to join up in the later case, unlike the previous teams mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Dec 16, 2011 3:47:53 GMT -5
I think a tag team like the New Age Outlaws are an exception to the rules of a "make shift tag team" as both guys pretty much were tag team guys once they joined up. Make shift to me means you throw two guys together and a couple weeks (or months) later they're back in their own feuds wrestling singles matches. Teams like Bros of Destruction, Two Man Power Trip are examples of make shift tag teams that pretty much still focused on their singles careers.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 9:55:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2011 23:14:30 GMT -5
I agree with everyone else I hate the makeshift main event tag teams. To the other question, I'm ok with someone showing up somewhere and getting a shot if they were already on that level. A former WWE champ could go to TNA and get a shot no problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 17, 2011 0:31:09 GMT -5
credibility in wrestling is essentially nonexistent at this point so now it doesn't matter, but i always preferred to believe in the title's prestige and a wrestler having to build his way towards it - this puts over whoever had to work all that way while also seriously putting over wrestlers who jump the gun and make it before others.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Dec 17, 2011 13:16:32 GMT -5
credibility in wrestling is essentially nonexistent at this point so now it doesn't matter, but i always preferred to believe in the title's prestige and a wrestler having to build his way towards it - this puts over whoever had to work all that way while also seriously putting over wrestlers who jump the gun and make it before others. Agreed 200%. I loved the days when guys like Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Steve Austin, Macho Man, Booker T, RVD, and even the Ultimate Warrior were built up over years before finally winning the world title. Not only did it get the wrestlers over, but it made the title look prestigious and made it worth something. IMO Christian winning the World Title at Extremem Rules was the last real "feel good" moment we'll get for a long time because the WWE gives the world titles to everybody now a days. I've loved Dolph Ziggler's midcard push for the last few years and he is going to be a great main eventer eventually, but even his 1st title reign was ruined when the WWE simply handed it to him, only for him to lose it 8 minutes later. Today, you have guys like Sheamus and Del Rio winning the Royal Rumble and World Titles in mere months w/out doing anything to deserve it. They win these big achievements w/out being built up at all and hurt the prestiege of things like the Rumble and the World Titles. Atleast when Brock Lesnar won the WWE Title in 6 months he was built as an unstoppable monsters and was made credibile w/ clean wins over guys like The Rock, Hogan, RVD, Booker T, Big Show, The Undertaker, ect... The guys today simply beat up a jobber and are considered instant main eventers by the WWE. The WWE seriously need to go back to long title reigns once in a while because hot potatoing the titles only hurts them and the guys that wear them. I enjoyed the long title reigns of guys like JBL, Batista, and Cena from 2004-2007, and would love the WWE to throw in long reigns once in a while. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 9:55:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2011 15:50:26 GMT -5
credibility in wrestling is essentially nonexistent at this point so now it doesn't matter, but i always preferred to believe in the title's prestige and a wrestler having to build his way towards it - this puts over whoever had to work all that way while also seriously putting over wrestlers who jump the gun and make it before others. Agreed 200%. I loved the days when guys like Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Steve Austin, Macho Man, Booker T, RVD, and even the Ultimate Warrior were built up over years before finally winning the world title. Not only did it get the wrestlers over, but it made the title look prestigious and made it worth something. IMO Christian winning the World Title at Extremem Rules was the last real "feel good" moment we'll get for a long time because the WWE gives the world titles to everybody now a days. I've loved Dolph Ziggler's midcard push for the last few years and he is going to be a great main eventer eventually, but even his 1st title reign was ruined when the WWE simply handed it to him, only for him to lose it 8 minutes later. Today, you have guys like Sheamus and Del Rio winning the Royal Rumble and World Titles in mere months w/out doing anything to deserve it. They win these big achievements w/out being built up at all and hurt the prestiege of things like the Rumble and the World Titles. Atleast when Brock Lesnar won the WWE Title in 6 months he was built as an unstoppable monsters and was made credibile w/ clean wins over guys like The Rock, Hogan, RVD, Booker T, Big Show, The Undertaker, ect... The guys today simply beat up a jobber and are considered instant main eventers by the WWE. The WWE seriously need to go back to long title reigns once in a while because hot potatoing the titles only hurts them and the guys that wear them. I enjoyed the long title reigns of guys like JBL, Batista, and Cena from 2004-2007, and would love the WWE to throw in long reigns once in a while. While I agree with most of what you said I want to point out that most of brock's wins werent clean especially against rvd nd hogan |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Dec 17, 2011 22:48:16 GMT -5
Agreed 200%. I loved the days when guys like Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Steve Austin, Macho Man, Booker T, RVD, and even the Ultimate Warrior were built up over years before finally winning the world title. Not only did it get the wrestlers over, but it made the title look prestigious and made it worth something. IMO Christian winning the World Title at Extremem Rules was the last real "feel good" moment we'll get for a long time because the WWE gives the world titles to everybody now a days. I've loved Dolph Ziggler's midcard push for the last few years and he is going to be a great main eventer eventually, but even his 1st title reign was ruined when the WWE simply handed it to him, only for him to lose it 8 minutes later. Today, you have guys like Sheamus and Del Rio winning the Royal Rumble and World Titles in mere months w/out doing anything to deserve it. They win these big achievements w/out being built up at all and hurt the prestiege of things like the Rumble and the World Titles. Atleast when Brock Lesnar won the WWE Title in 6 months he was built as an unstoppable monsters and was made credibile w/ clean wins over guys like The Rock, Hogan, RVD, Booker T, Big Show, The Undertaker, ect... The guys today simply beat up a jobber and are considered instant main eventers by the WWE. The WWE seriously need to go back to long title reigns once in a while because hot potatoing the titles only hurts them and the guys that wear them. I enjoyed the long title reigns of guys like JBL, Batista, and Cena from 2004-2007, and would love the WWE to throw in long reigns once in a while. While I agree with most of what you said I want to point out that most of brock's wins werent clean especially against rvd nd hogan His KOTR 2002 win over RVD was clean, and his win over Hogan on SD was also clean besides for a quick second when Heyman grabbed his leg. |
|
