2 Bleed of Not 2 Bleed that is de question

[UndertakerTheGreat]

Now before I go into this let me say I am not saying WWE should be a Quentin Tarantino movie, and too much blood is not good. However since the PG era has begun we only very rarely get blood, and I assume when we do it's accidental.(Is blading real or rumor?)
Now in the average match blood isn't needed, but lately even gimmick matches rarely have crimson masks. Like Taker, and Edge's HIAC match at SummerSlam. No DQ matches,some of Orton, and HHH's drama( remember when Trips would bleed all the time), Matt & Jeff's various gimmick matches etc. Even Taker's Hell's Gate has lost a good bit of viciousness since his victims can no longer "cough up blood." I think Flair was the last person I saw bleed when Jericho beat him down.
I think in certain cases blood adds a bit of drama, and oomph to a match. Do you think sometimes it's beneficial to see red? Or does blood no longer have any business in WWE?

 

[MikeRaw]

It's weird that I haven't really noticed this yet. Now that you mention it though, I agree. It's not a huge deal, not at all, but for matches like the LMS between Edge and Cena, and some of the stuff between Legacy and Triple H or Batista. Again, not a big deal, but now that you mention it, I woudln't mind seeing it some more. The one thing I will say about it though, to WWE's credit, is that they've still managed to make matches liek Taker/Edge HIAC, Cena/Edge and some of the Shane/Orton matches to be pretty good, without blood.

 

[the dark knight]

Now before I go into this let me say I am not saying WWE should be a Quentin Tarantino movie, and too much blood is not good. However since the PG era has begun we only very rarely get blood, and I assume when we do it's accidental.(Is blading real or rumor?)
Now in the average match blood isn't needed, but lately even gimmick matches rarely have crimson masks. Like Taker, and Edge's HIAC match at SummerSlam. No DQ matches,some of Orton, and HHH's drama( remember when Trips would bleed all the time), Matt & Jeff's various gimmick matches etc. Even Taker's Hell's Gate has lost a good bit of viciousness since his victims can no longer "cough up blood." I think Flair was the last person I saw bleed when Jericho beat him down.
I think in certain cases blood adds a bit of drama, and oomph to a match. Do you think sometimes it's beneficial to see red? Or does blood no longer have any business in WWE?

unfortunately its true.

 

[LKP]

Id much rather the blood in matches or to add the drama factor. I think it should be slid back into wwe slowly.

 

[The Rated R CMStar]

It depends, I mean, back in the day, they would blade just for a catapult into the ring post, which was kinda lame, and then, some matches don't even need the blood (see HIAC Edge/Taker and Unsanctioned HBK vs Jericho).

But for some of the angles they did between HHH and Orton, some blood would have helped. They should bring back blading, but only when it really makes sense and fits or is necessary, not for just the sake of blading.

 

[Luke Flywalker]

Once they find out who they feel can work, they're going to go right back to what they do best*. I * because with WWE, they can always find a way to fuck shit up. What they need to do (and please dont start this into a PG debate) is bring back some brutality to the show. Cut a face or two, hit someone in the head with a chair on Raw.

I just said this about 4 days ago. It's been so weak not having ANY brutality in the shows. Even on PPV's. Blood would have made the Hardy/Hardy feud even better solely on the symbolism it provides.

 

[phantomgerald]

I agree. Everything that needs to be said has been said. Bleeding is good but in moderation.