Fan Interaction
Posted by Douglas Nunnally
on 02/15/2006
Originally posted on October 22, 2004.
Scott Stover: Welcome everybody to this week's Wrestling Roundtable here on TWV. This week starts a new era as I take over the moderation duties for Mystique. For those of you who don't know me, I am Scott Stover and I would like to welcome our members Douglas Nunnally and Matt Green who have joined us this week. And a special welcome to our guests Jake Feldman and Phil Snyder! This week's topic is on "Fan Interaction". The question is "What is the future of creative (making matches and stipulations) fan interaction in pro wrestling?"
Jake Feldman: I think that fan interaction can only really work if the WWE stops interfering in it. When it came to Taboo Tuesday, the WWE forced who they thought should wrestle the matches down our throats. If they gave us options that all got equal push from the WWE, I think it could revolutionize the sport; but as it was run at Taboo Tuesday, I think that could get really old, really fast.
Douglas Nunnally: I think WWE has to interfere to be honest. Otherwise, we could literally get stuck with A-Train vs. Triple H for the World Title. Some might think its a good idea, but to be honest, things like that devalue the importance of the title. Think about it. We could have seen Coach vs. Chris Jericho for the IC title. That would have really screwed over the other deserving champs. I think WWE has to interfere to gives us a strict list. With the World title picture, it was good how all 3 men would have been a suitable contender. For the IC title though, 15 people? That's ridiculous.
Scott Stover: So let me ask you this Jake, did you like the way the choices for Taboo Tuesday were presented, three choices only, or do you prefer more? It seems you and Doug both has conflicting opinions.
Jake Feldman: Well, I agree with Doug on the fact that it should be kept to potential contenders, 3 or 4. However, I do feel that the WWE definitely made Shawn Michaels the bigger fan favorite going into the PPV, obviously showing who they wanted to face Triple H. I think, in the situation they were in, it would have been good if the contenders were all faces, and all pushed equally as faces, so it really comes down to who people like more, not who's portrayed as the better man.
Scott Stover: I understand, basically your thinking is that you don't mind the choices, you hated the fact the WWE made us feel compelled to vote for one over the other.
Matt Green: To be honest, I can see why restrictions have to be brought in to keep the contenders more believable. However I personally think this is just another WBF or XFL venture on Vince's part. It'll flop eventually. I know it's old fashioned, but if WWE wants to know what their fans want, listen to the crowd reactions. Not interactive match making, every wrestling fan wants to be a booker; but to be honest, leave the job to the guys who know what they're doing. Now I know that's debatable with the WWE booker, but it totally throws out the window what wrestling or even sports entertainment is about. To be honest, if I had to buy the PPV I wouldn't because I'd rather know what I'm buying compared to something booked by a bunch of casual fans.
Scott Stover: That is a very strong statement Matt, but the WWE pushes wrestlers a certain way to elicit a reaction. Isn't it the same way?
Matt Green: Well, Stevie Richards isn't meant to be over, but he gets some pretty good reactions on heat to me that says he's over. That tells me the fans would buy into his gimmick. Push the guys. You don't need fans choosing between wrestlers for title shots. Wrestling is meant to be a business. I don't think Taboo Tuesday will have done anymore business than usual October PPV even with the innovative gimmick they put upon it with interaction. Not mentioning the fact it could blow storylines to bits unless they want to fake the poll results.
Phil Snyder: Well as far as voting is concerned, I really didn't like how WWE kept the totals hidden from the voters. I realize that they have to cover themselves in case Coach or someone was voted as the opponent for Chris Jericho, but that kind of makes the fans ask why they should bother to vote in the first place. The chances of Rodney Mack or Coach being voted as the opponent were slim anyway, so the WWE should have left it up to the fans completely and show us the results ahead of time. Anyone else notice how Shelton Benjamin won that 6 way match the night before and then wins the voting the next night? I'm not knocking Benjamin, but no one that I talked to voted for him and I'm sure there was a similar pattern throughout the world.
Douglas Nunnally: Well, Edge also won the triple threat and got the better of HBK and Benoit many a time, but HBK won the vote.
Jake Feldman: I don't think the WWE was so desperate to get specific matches or stipulations that they hid the voting so they could cheat. I think they did that so it wouldn't influence people to push someone up from behind. Shelton Benjamin won his voting because he was a face, and he was pushed strongly the night before. We, as internet fans, have to remember that we're in the minority.
Phil Snyder: From my standpoint, if I saw that Coach, Batista, and Rodney Mack were in last place, I'd want to keep them there and add on to the votes for the stars that I actually want to see wrestle. I talked to many other people, not just one or two columnists online. I'm including people from College and what not, most of whom voted for Hurricane (like he would win the voting). I don't think this pushes Jericho any further up the card either, it makes it seem like anyone at anytime can beat him if someone who won the voting 2 hours before the match can defeat him.
Douglas Nunnally: I have to agree that having 15 contenders and the fact that Jericho lost really does no good for his character. You can say he had no time to prepare all you want, but in the end it makes him look really weak. That is a big problem to me. Fan participation in the form of the internet (where a lot of people just like to mess around and screw up the votes) really makes some situations look weak. Key examples: Flair (in his specialty match), Kane (in a match he beat Triple H in), La Resistance (ending the longest tag reign in 7 years), and of course, Jericho.
Scott Stover: Let me ask you all a question to sum it all up. Based on Taboo Tuesday, do you feel the WWE will attempt to do another event like that again in the future and would you like to see it?
Douglas Nunnally: I think they will, but not on Tuesday as that is a reason they probably will have low buy rates. I expect to see them do it again in January with SmackDown! since Teddy Long liked the idea. Will I like it? Not really.
Matt Green: They'll go for it, it'll flop because from a few observations I made it has been an unmitigated disaster even if the WWE won't admit it. To be honest, no one except the WWE knows how successful it was; however, I think the fact that they are releasing questionable data from the voting this means their trying to hide something. So either the voting threw up some winners they didn't want or we're going to be force-fed a bunch of nobodies, or not that many people actually voted and they had to bolster the figures they actually got. Overall yes they will do another. It'll be a Sunday and it'll probably be the last one.
Jake Feldman: Firstly, I doubt they'll do it in January, considering that's Royal Rumble time, but yes, I do think they'll try it for SmackDown! Since I haven't had internet access for the last few days, I haven't been able to see the buy rates for the PPV, but I would imagine they're slightly higher than normal but not much higher. I won't be watching it though, considering my limited income, and no cable box. Whether it'll be good enough to watch will have to wait to be seen.
Phil Snyder: There's no doubt that the WWE will try this again, but I was kind of thinking of this in a different way. Taboo Tuesday might have opened up a new door for professional wrestling. Think about this: some business man somewhere with a lot of money (Ted Turner anyone?) could take this idea and open it up by making it the basis for their entire new promotion giving the fans almost full control over what they want to see. What's the hardest thing for a new promotion to do? Attract fans. With the fans basically controlling the promotion, they would stick around and stay with the promotion until it undoubtedly collapses (like all the others do). Would that make a good promotion? Not at all, but that would definitely equal ratings and a lot of tickets sold. I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if at all, but it's something to ponder.
Scott Stover: This has been a great topic of discussion and no doubt if the WWE ever tries this again, it will be interesting to see what happens. I would like to thank everybody for stopping by and checking out this week's Wrestling Roundtable. Say good night to the readers!
Douglas Nunnally: Night!
Jake Feldman: Goodnight and God bless.
Phil Snyder: Thanks for inviting me. Goodnight readers!
Matt Green: Night.
Scott Stover: Until next time, this is Scott Stover signing off. Allez Cuisine!
Click here to let us know what you thought about this roundtable on TWV's official discussion forums!
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement
