At 10/11/08 11:53 PM, Outlaw88 wrote:
I'd like to see more extreme matches, and ECW is the right place for it. I agree that teh title bouts should be contensted under those rules more. That would be a good way to cap off the fued between Hardy and Henry.
I suggested it for the title bouts because it's a good way to make that belt seem different. Also, Extreme Rules to me does not necessarily mean weapons. That's something WWE has never understood, they think "Extreme" or "Hardcore" means hitting each other over and over with anything and everything you can find, and that everybody in ECW worked like New Jack. No it doesn't, and no they didn't. What an ECW fan was educated "Extreme" and "Hardcore" meant was athletes going into a wrestling ring, and fighting as long as it took, with whatever they needed to, to beat the other guy. It was about going above and beyond to entertain and dazzle the fan, and to get the victory over your opponent/rival. Some of the best "Extreme" matches in ECW history have nothing to do with weapons, no weapons came out at ALL during them.
Eddie Guerrero vs. Dean Malenko was a great match held under Extreme Rules, not a weapon in sight in any bout they had.
Jerry Lynn vs. RVD was a great extreme rules match. Yes chairs were used, but only for RVD's van daminator, and a couple DDT spots. 90% of those matches are just solid off the chain wrestling.
If WWE were to educate their fans that Extreme Rules simply means no count outs or DQ's and no time limits, not "anything goes, pull out a million weapons and hit each other". They can try and set an ECW title match apart, and create something unique for the performers there to fight for. But they won't, because they don't "get it" they never have, and because they don't have an interest in building that brand beyond "The ECW title is a great opening match for our PPVs". Hey, I hope I'm wrong, I hope they do realize that sooner rather then later, but I won't hold my breath.