Scripted Through Sin 3.25.08: Sinful Axxess and Mania Wrap-up

Posted by Jarrod Westerfeld on 03.25.2008

Having blown my load last week on a big article centered around Wrestlemania, this week I pull it back a bit with some light lifting, showcasing a myriad of feedback from last week’s article.

It's the final week of build into Wrestlemania XXIV and there's still a lot of buzz going into this year's biggest spectacle in the wrestling world as the card rounds itself out, and all the players seem to be in their places ready to take to the center stage. But what Mania weekend would be complete without a fan interactive series of events, such as the previous Fan Axxess events?

So this week, Scripted Through Sin focuses upon some of the reader's comments and their fantasy bookings for this and other Wrestlemania events.

Scripting Agenda

Wrestlemania vs. Starrcade

Responses to Sin

Wrestlemania vs. Starrcade

Recently, the comparison between WCW's Starrcade and WWE's Wrestlemania shows was made in the comments section of TSlay1974's new video, The History of Wrestlemania by Truthslayer. While the more successful company survived the ratings war, it seems that the event that was the better wrestling spectacle faded away in favor of the more mainstream friendly spectacle.

" In my personal opinion, WCW Starrcade was a better pay per view than WWF/E Wrestlemania (WCW's Superbowl vs. WWF/E Superbowl.) I am not saying that all Starrcades were great because some of them really sucked, but many were very good. Many of the Wrestlemanias were headlined by one match. Meanwhile, Starrcade would have 3 to 4 very good matches on their card."
~ Posted by montkv

I think the fair argument here is that the shows names are switched. WCW's Starrcade is a show that focuses more on the wrestling aspect of its show while the WWE's Wrestlemania focuses more on the spectacle of delivering celebrity involved segments and moments that don't revolve around the in-ring wrestling.

While everyone is fighting over whether this year's Wrestlemania can live up to the spectacle of previous Mania events, everyone seems to miss out on the formula established from Starrcade that made it a successful wrestling card more often than not.

Starrcade's failure to allure fans into the sense it was a bigger event than any other WCW pay-per-view running at the time was the fact that the arenas they catered too weren't bigger than the usual arenas they catered to – something that Wrestlemania does to allow itself to feel that much bigger – and the shows didn't have anything to really stand itself apart from the other events, such as Mania's reliance upon celebrities. Starrcade felt like every other pay-per-view event, despite having stronger matches featured on the card every year, or so it would feel.

Perceptions of these shows is always going to vary but there will be those who believe Wrestlemania should deliver a spectacle built around the in-ring wrestling talents of the WWE's roster, a standard that was never there for previous Wrestlemania events for most of these same fans who have now grown older. To expect a show to follow a set of standards you hold now versus the standards they've always had that you, before, enjoyed and bought into is unrealistic and counter-productive. It's already been proven that the Mania formula works, and after the major success of last year's figures, there's no reason to believe that the WWE is going to switch up their strategy to appease the few minorities in the crowd when the majority is willing to spend more money on their current direction of product.

But at least, as usual, this time of year has fans buzzing, and what better way to hear some of that buzz than to check out some of the responses to last week's column.

Responses to Sin

Last week I got a lot of responses and comments, and a lot of it focused in on one common "dream" match for next year's Wrestlemania. A match I had never heard any buzz around until just recently.

"By the way, as cool as Batista/Umaga for the World Title would be, I say give
Wrestlemania XXV to John Cena v. Batista. THAT is a dream match waiting to
happen.

OR...

Taker/Cena and Batista/Orton."
~ Posted by Christopher Warrior

"nice article - but like Chris Warrior pointed out, Batista vs John Cena seems to
be a blockbuster waiting to happen."
~ Posted by Guest#8647

"yeah Batista/Cena would be like the modern day Austin/Rock, that needs to happen
at next years mania whether it's for the title or not."
~ Posted by Kenny

I don't see the appeal of this match, and probably for good reason: both workers need to have their hands held to really put on a strong looking match, especially Batista. Cena has pulled watchable matches with Khali and was able to work well with Bobby Lashley in the past, but looking over the matches that build up the legacy of his career you see names like Michaels, Triple H, Angle, Jericho, Undertaker and even Lesnar attached to it. These two could work a passable match but by no stretch is this going to be a classic that defines these two careers.

Now, I had not heard of the appeal to this match prior to these comments, so seeing that some want to see this match is a shock to me. Is there really an outpouring of WWE fans interested in seeing these two clash, particularly on the biggest stage the WWE has to offer?

But I do see Christopher Warrior's trade off of Taker vs. Cena and Batista vs. Orton as being more than viable, especially the latter as the WWE tried to set this up 2 years ago to no avail thanks to Batista's untimely injuries.

It would also be an interesting to see how the WWE would establish a Cena and Taker confrontation and the conclusion of it at a Mania event – does Taker continue to be dominant at Mania or does Cena take the fall in an attempt to establish his legacy as a WWE mainstay guy and the future of this company? Of course the downfall to putting someone like Cena over Taker at Mania would be a backlash of the fans both hating the product, the company and the worker who finally snapped that streak, something you'd probably want to dump on a heel character that could use that extra heat.

Restating Myself
Also in the comments section was Guest#7588's dismay about my comments about last year's WWE Championship match between Shawn Michaels and John Cena.

"What do you mean that the booking around the WWE Title match last year wasn't strong? HBK and Cena did a tremendous job at selling the match. For weeks, the two top faces on RAW worked together and were faced with friction and compromising situations. After Cena pinned his opponent, I can't recall who, the camera shot to an angle where HBK was about to kick Cena's teeth down his throat. Cena turned and HBK tried to play it off. Tremendous."
~ Post by Guest#7588

I still stand by my words from last week:
As good a chemistry as Shawn and Cena seemed to create with each new match they've had, the story they had leading into Mania didn't seem to have as strong an allure as this year's, what with the three playing general manager and trying to one-up the previous week to really soften up the opponents before Wrestlemania weekend. Last year's build would have been better if they had more time to build into it, much like the match they had on Raw (April 23, 2007). The build seemed to pay off more there then it did for Mania.

The build around Michaels and Cena seemed to pay off better at the April 23rd edition of Raw, where the set-up to the match and the exchange between the two in the backstage area felt more like a Mania environment. The match was also better played out for all of that build and told a better story than the Mania exchange. Had Mania happened on that date, instead, then the build would have aired out enough to allow these two to really draw in more emotion into it.

It's not to say the entire experience was bad but the build between these two really peaked during that episode of Raw as opposed to Mania weekend's showdown.

Others Book Wrestlemania XXIV
There was also a buzz of commenter's with ideas for booking Wrestlemania XXIV, as demonstrated in this e-mail from Nicole:
"Hey Jarrod,

I think that the WWE would be smart to consider dropping their current Playboy/Diva angle and get back to wrestling. Maybe leave the bunnies to SmackDown and put the wresters on Raw. (BTW, have you noticed all the only divas who can really wrestle are heels)

I think the Victoria/Trish feud was amazing as was the Trish/Lita feud. Why, because all parties could wrestle.

WM-XXIV would be a good way to start this new trend off. The internet is crying for a Victoria/Beth feud. Since this is a lumberjack match they could have a Diva free-for-all at the conclusion of the match (who wins is irrelevent) and the last two standing would be Beth and Victoria.
During the brawl, Beth would be using her belt as a weapon. When just the two of them are left standing, they will stop and pause, then pat each other on the back. Victoria will eyball the belt a little. Beth will turn around to kick or talk some trash to another Diva. Then, Victoria will grab the belt from Beth and attach her with it knocking her senseless. Then she will hoist it above her head and her music will start to play.

This way they can eather have Victoria move back to Raw or build their feud with a Smackdown vs Raw angle.

No one seems to like the whole Diva/model angle. Why do they insist on continuing with it. When was the last time the women's title was defended on a PPV?

Thanks,
Nicole"

I think it's safe to say that the appeal of women's wrestling in America is based purely upon looks, even after the Trish and Lita era. While many will claim that the ROH fans are smart and understanding fans, the reality is for they're just as ignorant and belligerent as any other, main stream fan, when it comes to women's wrestling – chants of "show your tits," are going to be found in small pockets at any show where women are present near a wrestling ring. Thus, the WWE playing off of the models within their ranks is a wise move as it actually does draw in money and gets people interested in watching the ladies – it's sad, but unfortunately true.

Though it would be an interesting idea to see Victoria and Beth square off.

Jay chimes in with his own tooling of the Mania line-up, with a stipulation heavy card:
"My Wrestlemania card

Raw Main Event
Orton vs. HHH vs. Cena (no DQ)
(the person who gets pinned or taps out goes to ECW for 1 year)

Smackdown Main Event
Edge vs. Undertaker (Hell in a Cell)

Flair vs. Michaels (double retirement match/looser retires) (Anderson special
Ref)

MITB
Mr. Kennedy, MVP, Kane, CM Punk, Matt Hardy, Carlito, Batista, Umaga

ECW Title
Guerrero vs. Benjamin (extreme rules)

IC Title
Jericho vs. Finley

Woman's Title (fatal 4 way)
Phoenix vs. Melina vs. James vs. Maria

Tag Title
Miz and Morrison vs. Jesse and Festus vs. Duce and Domino vs. Wang and Moore

24 man battle royal for shot at US Title

Big Show Mayweather (hmm no real way to improve this one)"

I'm still of the mind and opinion that stipulation matches should be utilized to finish off a feud, not be present for the sake of appealing to the fans want and need for a blood bath. And though Edge and Taker have a storied history from last year that is being played off of, I don't think a Hell in a Cell is necessary just yet – maybe if they continue this story around Judgment Day or One Night Stand.

Also, is there a reason that the battle royal is for a shot at the US Title instead of the ECW Champion, who appears to be vacant off this card?

That'll do it for this edition of Scripted Through Sin. Be sure to tune back in next week as we return to our usual schedule, and take a look at the two planned cards for TNA's Lockdown, and how much more it may change prior to the event's weekend. Plus more reader feedback about many things that weren't related to Wrestlemania, and were thusly kept off of this edition.