Chuck Taylor's Grenade
Guest

and no it's not Hart vs. Michaels, Flair vs. Hogan or Rock vs. Austin. This is the battle between promos and matches. Everyone seems to have their opinion on which is more important to wrestling. And each wrestling company has their opinion on which is more important (WWE/TNA=Less match more promo, ROH=more match/less promo). Arguments for promos being more important than matches include:
1. Good promos/angles increase ratings-The NWO, Austin/McMahon, Raven and Tommy Dreamer. What do these three things have in common? Well besides being the definitive angles of the big three they are all incredible angles that led to increased viewership for each company. If you have good storylines you create fan interest (oh damn what are they gonna do next time? which helps boost ratings.
2. Good promos/angles improve the quality of matches-Matches become pointless without a good storyline behind them. Otherwise Raw and Impact become random matches with no rhyme or reason. At the same time good promos/angles can make matches seem better than they actually were. Examples of this include Austin vs. McMahon and Sting vs. Hogan. Those two feuds had incredible build even if the matches weren't 5 star classics. Also think back to ECW some of the matches were less than spectacular but the storylines made up for it.
Now to the flipside-Matches are more important because:
1. Matches are what people pay to see-The true payoff to any angle is the match itself. It's called professional wrestling not professional talking for an hour. People pay money to watch two people damn near kill each other. The matches need to have a decent amount of time to make the storyline payoff seem worth it. Imagine if Jimmy Jacobs and Austin Aries went through this whole huge feud and at the end of it Austin beat Jimmy in less than three minutes. You'd be pretty pissed wouldn't you?
2. Good matches can make up for bad storylines-A really good recent example of this is Macho Man Randy Lethal vs. The Guru Sonjay Pitka. We all know the storyline was predictable and stupid but the ladder match for Val's services was incredible. A match can have a really awful buildup and storyline behind it but still have a great match. At the same time this is a catch 22 because if the storyline sucks too bad people might not turn into the blowoff match on ppv based on how the angle has been playing out.
Now is the time that I turn it over to you the wrestling fans with these two questions-
1. Which is more important-Angles or Matches?
2. Is it easier for a good match to save a bad angle or for a good angle to save a bad match?
Be gentle it's my first time doing one of these rant things.
1. Good promos/angles increase ratings-The NWO, Austin/McMahon, Raven and Tommy Dreamer. What do these three things have in common? Well besides being the definitive angles of the big three they are all incredible angles that led to increased viewership for each company. If you have good storylines you create fan interest (oh damn what are they gonna do next time? which helps boost ratings.
2. Good promos/angles improve the quality of matches-Matches become pointless without a good storyline behind them. Otherwise Raw and Impact become random matches with no rhyme or reason. At the same time good promos/angles can make matches seem better than they actually were. Examples of this include Austin vs. McMahon and Sting vs. Hogan. Those two feuds had incredible build even if the matches weren't 5 star classics. Also think back to ECW some of the matches were less than spectacular but the storylines made up for it.
Now to the flipside-Matches are more important because:
1. Matches are what people pay to see-The true payoff to any angle is the match itself. It's called professional wrestling not professional talking for an hour. People pay money to watch two people damn near kill each other. The matches need to have a decent amount of time to make the storyline payoff seem worth it. Imagine if Jimmy Jacobs and Austin Aries went through this whole huge feud and at the end of it Austin beat Jimmy in less than three minutes. You'd be pretty pissed wouldn't you?
2. Good matches can make up for bad storylines-A really good recent example of this is Macho Man Randy Lethal vs. The Guru Sonjay Pitka. We all know the storyline was predictable and stupid but the ladder match for Val's services was incredible. A match can have a really awful buildup and storyline behind it but still have a great match. At the same time this is a catch 22 because if the storyline sucks too bad people might not turn into the blowoff match on ppv based on how the angle has been playing out.
Now is the time that I turn it over to you the wrestling fans with these two questions-
1. Which is more important-Angles or Matches?
2. Is it easier for a good match to save a bad angle or for a good angle to save a bad match?
Be gentle it's my first time doing one of these rant things.