Gauntlet Mania

[Redboy123@]

After an extremely digestible gauntlet match last night. I was thinking wouldn't it be cool if that match had something on the line? I think so.

Imagine a gauntlet match of that magnitude being for a world title. I think that would be pretty cool.

Then I had an idea of a PPV that is centered around the gauntlet match. Not just your bog standard gauntlet match. But a 10 man gauntlet for a world title or a number one contendership or something. I think that could work out quite well.

Here's a mock simulation of what the show could be.

10 man gauntlet match for the WWE Championship.

AJ Styles defeats Dolph Ziggler
Styles defeats Big E
Styles defeats Corbin
Orton defeats Styles
Orton defeats Rusev
Roode defeats Orton
Nakamura defeats Roode
Nakamura defeats Owens
Final Nakamura defeats Zayn

What you guys think of this ppv idea?

 

[bullyballmm]

I like the idea, but again like Hell in a Cell, TLC etc., I don't think we should have PPVs based around gimmick matches. The only ones that should are ones that we know and want to happen yearly (Royal Rumble, Elimination Chamber, MitB ladder match, Survivor Series match). But if it is to come when the stories call for it then yeah it could be good.

 

[Redboy123@]

I like the idea, but again like Hell in a Cell, TLC etc., I don't think we should have PPVs based around gimmick matches. The only ones that should are ones that we know and want to happen yearly (Royal Rumble, Elimination Chamber, MitB ladder match, Survivor Series match). But if it is to come when the stories call for it then yeah it could be good.

Yeah I agree to a certain extent. HIAC and TLC should not be ppvs. A HiAC should only be used when the feud requires. Not just because its October.

But I don't mind gimmick ppvs were the stipulation Isn't about ending a blood feud. I think this gimmick is more like MITB royal rumble and survivor series.

But yeah they could just do the gimmick at an existing ppv. When the story requires the match.

 

[Grievous 3D]

I think Gauntlet matches should be used to decide #1 contenders for titles...
hence why as good as the match was on RAW...it didn't really serve a true
purpose in my opinion.

It may have helped Rollins short term...but if he's the 1st to go on Sunday...
then well...momentum lost.

In fact it actually sets the bar incredibly high for men's chamber match this
Sunday because you just know some fans will be:

"Man...the RAW Gauntlet match was better than this! Plus Roman didn't win that!"

Although I do like the idea of a Gauntlet match at Wrestlemania this year
for the U.S title...it would give the SmackDown mid-card some focus instead
of most of them being shoved into the ATGMBR.

Also...a TLC Gauntlet match could be an beautiful train wreck if booked correctly.

I kind of want SmackDown to book one for their women's division so Becky
can win it & earn a title shot...but then I have a feeling Becky is more important
to me than she is to the WWE.

 

[Snowman1]

On the idea of the gimmick PPV's, I like the ones that feel like sports (for the "What kind of wrestling fans do you hate" thread, I pretty much auto-dismiss the opinions of anyone who says an Elimination Chamber should be for grudge matches) and the gauntlet match certainly qualifies as more of a sports concept than a grudge ender.

It's similar to Rumble where there's a lot of (kayfabe) luck of the draw involved, but as we saw Monday there's a lot of fresh, easy stories to tell in a Gauntlet match. They can freshen it up pretty often and easily.

I actually don't mind Hell in a Cell and TLC as PPV's anymore. HIAC would be totally devalued if it wasn't for the Usos and New Day stuff, and I like it when a PPV has a different identity like TLC (Extreme Rules doesn't count)

 

[Mr. Roman Empire]

Gauntlet matches are fun, but it gives the earlier guys a complete disadvantage (kayfabe obviously)

 

[Redboy123@]

I actually don't mind Hell in a Cell and TLC as PPV's anymore. HIAC would be totally devalued if it wasn't for the Usos and New Day stuff, and I like it when a PPV has a different identity like TLC (Extreme Rules doesn't count)

For me, HIAC means nothing. It used to be grand finale to a fued where the two dudes hate each other. Now we just get an obligatory match in October, even if the feud doesn't deserve. (Sometimes the feud does deserve it tho) Roman v Rusev and KO v Rollins were good matches, but was not worthy for the cell. Well they are noe, cuz the cell means nothing anymore.

 

[Snowman1]

For me, HIAC means nothing. It used to be grand finale to a fued where the two dudes hate each other. Now we just get an obligatory match in October, even if the feud doesn't deserve. (Sometimes the feud does deserve it tho) Roman v Rusev and KO v Rollins were good matches, but was not worthy for the cell. Well they are noe, cuz the cell means nothing anymore.

Ahh yes, I remember the build for KO vs Rollins, as I was sitting in front of my TV munching on some Pringles when Rollins was talking about any man who walks inside this demonic structure never walks out the same, and Owens was talking about how the hell Rollins will go through inside the cell, and I sit here and giggle and wonder if it's 1999 anymore, then they just had a normal match with a cage around it

 

[SWL]

in kayfabe, it's the most unfair match ever. In the Rumble you can come out as #1 but survive without doing much in between, during the Elimination Chamber you can start as the first entrant and easily survive until the end because everyone else can eliminate each other but in a gauntlet match, you have to go through each and every confrontation and win it. So I don't see much being on the line in any gauntlet match, simply because the first 2 or 3 guys who start the match have a very small chance of winning the whole thing.

It's mostly, and rightfully, used to book a bunch of guys into 1 angle on a weekly show or smth and I think it should stay that way. For us, it creates a great watching experience but if you're trying to build a meaningful story around it and put something important on the line, you'll soon realize that it's a bit of nonsense for anyone that isn't joining the match as last or second to last (because having a normal bloke beat 3 guys in a row is a bit over the top anyways)

 

[Redboy123@]

in kayfabe, it's the most unfair match ever. In the Rumble you can come out as #1 but survive without doing much in between, during the Elimination Chamber you can start as the first entrant and easily survive until the end because everyone else can eliminate each other but in a gauntlet match, you have to go through each and every confrontation and win it. So I don't see much being on the line in any gauntlet match, simply because the first 2 or 3 guys who start the match have a very small chance of winning the whole thing.

It's mostly, and rightfully, used to book a bunch of guys into 1 angle on a weekly show or smth and I think it should stay that way. For us, it creates a great watching experience but if you're trying to build a meaningful story around it and put something important on the line, you'll soon realize that it's a bit of nonsense for anyone that isn't joining the match as last or second to last (because having a normal bloke beat 3 guys in a row is a bit over the top anyways)

Maybe the winner of the match isn't who won the last match, but who won the most matches. I think that's an interesting and can create a lot of drama.

Say AJ Styles wins 3 matches, and later in the night Nakamura has won 2 matches. That can create a lot of drama.

 

[SWL]

Maybe the winner of the match isn't who won the last match, but who won the most matches. I think that's i interesting and can create a lot of drama.

Say AJ Styles wins 3 matches, and later in the night Nakamura has won 2 matches. That can create a lot of drama.

that could work but you'd have to make it close towards the end for people to stay invested throughout the whole thing and not tune out once they realized that nobody can catch up anymore. Besides, how would you end it? By having someone beat Nakamura in the last match and then Styles' music hits anyways, even though he already left the match 30 minutes ago? lol

If you think about it that way, what would the final guys' motivation be to beat Nakamura if he already knows he ain't winning the whole thing? Especially when you come out as the last guy, there's no way for you to catch up to anything

 

[Redboy123@]

that could work but you'd have to make it close towards the end for people to stay invested throughout the whole thing and not tune out once they realized that nobody can catch up anymore. Besides, how would you end it? By having someone beat Nakamura in the last match and then Styles' music hits anyways, even though he already left the match 30 minutes ago? lol

Well if you would have AJ or (insert heel name here) win. Then you could have Nakamura just fall short in the last match. You could have AJ watch the match reacting to it. So when Nakamura fails. You could have AJ celebrate. Its like in football were it goes down to the last game of the seasons and one team is relying on the other team to lose. That's always a great sporting moment.

We need moments like this in wrestling.

Obviously you would book Nakamura to win the last match for a feel good moment.