Does wwe overdo feuds?

[Pop Tatari]

To me a lot of feuds in wwe are overdone,take christian vs Orton, Bryan vs Punk for example. Two good feuds ruined by having them fight each other a zillion times in a short space of time. Why cannot wwe just give us one or two matches in a feud and then continue it later on down the line.

What do you guys think?

 

[Stopspot]

I agree. A lot of the time we see feuds either rushed through or dragged out for too long with just the same match over again.

 

[Snowman1]

Completely agree. How many times have we seen Bryan/Punk, Cena/Punk, Barrett/Orton, Henry/Orton, Ziggler/Kofi, Ziggler/Sheamus, Cena/Orton... the list goes on and on. All these matches turn out great, but we've seen them so many times that it's hard to keep caring.

 

[Pop Tatari]

Completely agree. How many times have we seen Bryan/Punk, Cena/Punk, Barrett/Orton, Henry/Orton, Ziggler/Kofi, Ziggler/Sheamus, Cena/Orton... the list goes on and on. All these matches turn out great, but we've seen them so many times that it's hard to keep caring.

I think Ziggles/Kofi is the biggest offender of overdone feuds. What elses is there to see from theses two going at it again?

 

[Leo C]

That's true. It's probably related to the fact that they have a thin roster though, so their filler matches end up being repetitive.

 

[Senhor Perfect]

I disagree, if done right, a long feud is the best thing in wrestling. The problem is too many PPVs. For Punk/DB they fought in 3 straight title matches in 3 straight months. Imagine if it were the old days with only 4 PPVs. The anticipation for the title bouts is much higher thus making the feud hotter.

 

[Lockard 23]

It's the problem with having 12 PPVs a year and weekly shows with star matches. Back in Hogan's day, there weren't star studded matches on TV every week, it was mid-carders versus jobbers back then - except for SNME, house shows and PPV - and there wasn't a PPV every month. WWF was very much a live event based business. House shows were where the main business were and you could have the same matches over and over there because it wasn't in the same town and it wasn't televised. That made SNME and PPV feel more special and fresher.

Compare that era to now. Considering we now have two weekly shows (three if you count Main Event) and a monthly PPV every year, it's almost unavoidable to have rematches. Bobby Heenan once said in a 2001 shoot interview that because of how saturated the shows are in terms of PPV and what you see on Raw every week, the only PPV that actually feels special to him anymore is Wrestlemania. While I don't completely agree, he definitely has a point.

 

[Crayo]

In some cases having repeats can be great; in other cases it feels like watching the same show. It's not the repeating matches that annoy me though, as I'm a lover for variety. Give me some different storylines and a variety of scenarios, stipulations etc. -- I'll be fine then.

 

[catlady]

I think they over-due and give more time into certain ones for sure. Ones that they should take time on and build up, they tend to go through them so fast and be done with them. I like a feud to have a slow build and a heavy end.

 

[Dat Kid1]

I think the reason Bryan and Punk fought so often was because it was a benefit to the big match later on. I think if those two hadn't had some trial runs with each other the great match quality they had for the WWE Championship wouldn't have been as good as it was. I think WWE overdoes feuds as far as TV time. They constantly have one feud dominating the majority of the TV time instead of distributing ample time to everyone. IMO they should give one feud a big chunk for one week and then do it for another the next week, that way there's much more interest in everything instead of people going to watch PPV's for maybe 1 or 2 matches.

 

[Nano]

Yeah, lots of feuds, you're right. But they need them, maybe not all those they've got but they need feuds to entertain a little more

 

[JeebaK]

I disagree, if done right, a long feud is the best thing in wrestling. The problem is too many PPVs. For Punk/DB they fought in 3 straight title matches in 3 straight months. Imagine if it were the old days with only 4 PPVs. The anticipation for the title bouts is much higher thus making the feud hotter.

A long feud is good, but not repititive matches. I would like to see more mic segments in feuds, not just for the main event matches.

 

[Saylor]

It all depends on the quality of the feud. I wouldn't mind seeing stars such as Daniel Bryan vs ADR, etc, while having repetitive matches can be very annoying, it's possibly because of the number of paperviews. I agree with your point though, such as Antonio Cesaro vs The Miz has practically happened multiple times. The story-lines are recycled endlessly causing very boring, unanticipated and predictable feuds.

 

[Zack Ryder]

They definitely do.