|
Post by The Boss on May 5, 2009 17:05:31 GMT -5
In response to Shawn's initial comment I don't think Edge believed we were having a 31 member match. However, it is not odd to have 10 or more people talking about World title shots, not all of them are going to get one now, not all of them are going to get one in a month, regardless of whether or not they deserve them. Ergo, if the brand is split we do so to have upper, mid, and low carders, I'm well aware people must be put in the appropriate section of the card however, there are situations like the one were in now when more than your standard amount of competitors could be considered main eventers. Division of rosters allows more opportunity which I believe over rules the title prestige argument in importance. Also with a ton of members on one show the card would get a little clustered.
|
|
|
Post by Randy Orton on May 5, 2009 17:05:49 GMT -5
That's why i modified my comment.
|
|
|
Post by The Boss on May 5, 2009 17:08:51 GMT -5
Shelley makes a fair point about people rising in credibility but with one show and tons of main eventers no one wants to advance at a snail's pace.
|
|
|
Post by alexshelley on May 5, 2009 17:10:02 GMT -5
Indeed it would get clustered, but having a lot of members in the fed doesn't mean it requires a roster split. Just needs a well organized way to give everyone matches on both of the shows but maintaining that people would only be put in one match a week. The PPVs may get clustered yeah but PPVs are big shows anyways so the number of matches on a PPV wouldn't quite matter as much as it would on a normal television show.
|
|
|
Post by Randy Orton on May 5, 2009 17:12:52 GMT -5
Again Christian, my apologies, I misunderstood your comment. I do still feel you should voice an opinion, but that's up to you. Allow me to say my final piece on the matter.
I have seen feds fail before. I know right now membership is looking good, and that's great. I also know, to quote kennedy 80% of the people in a fed want a world title shot. A lot of them will leave when they realize their rp's are not up to par, and will not be world champ. Others will leave when they lose repeated matches and are outdone. Thus with less members, and from my experience the best you can hope, on proboards at least, is 25 active members. You can't have two brands with 25 active members. And if that becomes the case anything more than one world title, one midcard title, and a tag team title would be 100% negative.
|
|
|
Post by Vince Osborn on May 5, 2009 17:14:25 GMT -5
ok listen up guys now I know this is some what a big deal and all ...but disrespecting each other is not going to help us come together on this issue. Yes I do understand that we will disagree on some things. What we need to do is handle this professionally and consider every ones thoughts. Now which ever way the poll goes either it be split or hole we still need to have faith that this fed will keep thriving.
|
|
|
Post by The Boss on May 5, 2009 17:14:27 GMT -5
Oh I didn't realize you were talking two shows one set of titles, in that case I do see your argument but I feel the importance of opportunities for those who deserve them out weighs the negatives.
|
|
|
Post by alexshelley on May 5, 2009 17:17:22 GMT -5
Well of course it's up for management to decide who will be getting title shots. But just because you have 5 or 6 solid main eventers doesn't mean someone who is very active in the federation who's only at a midcard status couldn't get himself a world title shot because of his activity.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Kennedy on May 5, 2009 17:19:57 GMT -5
I agree with Randy in the sense that people might start leaving due to frustration about not winning the title or not even getting a shot. That's why I feel that we should have two brands splitting up the top rper's so we don't have too many conflicts with that. But there are many pro's and con's to both sides of the argument, which is why I think we should at least wait till the first ppv, so it's just split up after that so we don't have any problems with current teams and rivalries.
|
|
|
Post by Vince Osborn on May 5, 2009 17:21:19 GMT -5
Ya I might have to go with Kennedy on this one
|
|
taylor
Under Card
FCW Original
1st FCW Tag Champ
Posts: 92
|
Post by taylor on May 5, 2009 17:23:03 GMT -5
I have one last thing to say. I respect FCW for making the Tag Team belts the first to be awarded not the world title.
|
|
|
Post by The Boss on May 5, 2009 17:23:04 GMT -5
There's no doubt about that statement Shelley, and I also think that reaffirms the positive effect of multiple brands, with copious amounts of main eventers we want everyone to have a fair chance to shine. And Orton I've seen feds fail in the past as well and I believe I've learned from mistakes I've made, and mistakes I've seen others make, and for the most part 2 brands seem to work. I believe their is room to create competitive rosters on two shows but quite frankly I could go either way, both sides make good points, each choice has its pros and cons and I'll just wait to see how the vote turns out.
|
|
|
Post by alexshelley on May 5, 2009 17:26:26 GMT -5
The only thing I dislike about a brand split is that I feel it limits opportunities for feuds and storylines. Lets say for example, Shawn Michaels and myself were at some point going to set up a singles feud. If we ended up on opposite brands would it be allowed to happen? Or would it strictly be that you have to face the people on the brand your on, with the exception being the Tag Titles because there is only one set for both brands.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Kennedy on May 5, 2009 17:29:40 GMT -5
Well if we do end up splitting the roster we would keep the stables together and if there is a feud going on we would keep the guys on the same show and work out a deal on how that would work. And for the most part if a feud were to be split up I think cross-brand feuds are good if they are done correctly.
|
|
|
Post by alexshelley on May 5, 2009 17:38:19 GMT -5
Well if cross branded feuds are still allowed then it should be able to work out fine. But if it were strict to where you face the people on your brand then matches and feuds would get very dulled out because they would happen quite often and become repetitive. Unless drafts happened quite often. But that's up to management anyways. I'm just giving my opinion because I've been involved with feds for quite some time and have seen a lot.
|
|