Thursday, March 28, 2024
EditorialeWN's Round Table Preview of WWE Stomping Grounds 2019

eWN’s Round Table Preview of WWE Stomping Grounds 2019

601 views

TRENDING

Welcome to another edition of eWN Round Table, where we gather some of the most active writers here on eWrestlingNews and share the platform to answer some questions surrounding a centralized topic, upcoming event, etc.

This is meant to showcase the potential for both a wide range of perspectives as well as how sometimes, there can be a group consensus no matter what your viewpoint is, so we also invite all of you to join in on the discussion by answering these questions yourself in the comments section below.

For this particular volume, we’ll be focusing on the WWE Stomping Grounds 2019 pay-per-view event.

Participants for this round = Anthony Mango, Richard Staple, Robert DeFelice, Vincent DiPietro, Ethan Absler and Kyle Dunning.

1) “What do you think of the name Stomping Grounds? Is this a better or worse replacement of Backlash?”

MANGO: I think the name would have been better for a television show about the Performance Center, like Breaking Ground. Maybe this could have been WWE’s version of Tough Enough, if they can’t fully get the rights to that name? As a pay-per-view, it doesn’t make much logical sense, but the name is still better than Great Balls of Fire. I just thought there was nothing wrong with Backlash and if we were replacing another event, why not get rid of TLC instead?

STAPLE: WWE never has been the best at gaming PPV’s after the Ruthless Aggression Era. Since Stomping Grounds is more or less a rehashing of Super Showdown, Backlash is a far more appropriate name.

DEFELICE: I don’t hate the name. Actually, to be honest, I like the fact that it is a generic name that doesn’t have a specific gimmick attached to it. It is not as good as No Mercy, but it’s not as lame as Fatal 4-Way or Great Balls of Fire.

DIPIETRO: I think it is a worse replacement and up there with the worst sounding PPV names in history. It’s a toss-up for me between this and Great Balls of Fire. The name would make sense for a network special involving main roster talent going back down to NXT, but in this case, it has no meaning to even be called Stomping Grounds.

ABSLER: I think this is a worse replacement than Backlash and you can see it in the seating chart for the show. Fans are uninterested; WWE hasn’t had this much trouble selling tickets in ages and people were excited for the reboot of an old favorite PPV in Backlash.

DUNNING: Stomping Grounds usually means somewhere you grew up. You cut your teeth in your old neighbourhood, and by going back to your Stomping Grounds you are revisiting your past to find something you may have forgotten or lost. It can also mean somewhere for rookies to train. So .. unless WWE is somehow going back in time to when it had better ratings? Then sure, the name makes sense. Are we going to see a lot of NXT “rookies” show up? I doubt it. Stomping Grounds is up there with Roadblock and Fast Lane as one of the worst PPV names WWE has ever come up with. I miss Backlash, which was one of the best names ever.

2) “Which heel do you find harder to watch right now, Baron Corbin or Shane McMahon?”

MANGO: Shane McMahon’s promos have become such drains on my energy that I can’t stand them. Baron Corbin, for as much hate as he gets, I’m not a hater. I actually enjoy his shtick. But I can’t stomach the McMahon stuff anymore, as it feels it goes on far too long and accomplishes nothing every single time. It’s EASILY easier to watch Corbin segments for me. No comparison.

STAPLE: Shane McMahon by a mile. He has no business having half hour segments devoted to him, much less going over the likes of Miz and Reigns. My biggest question is what is the endgame to all of this? What is this leading to?

If it’s him winning the WWE Title (sorry, I just threw up in my mouth), then it would be arguably the worst creative decision in WWE history.

If it’s him getting his comeuppance, what fun is there in seeing a 49 year old non-wrestler get beat? There’s no positive outcome to this nonsense.

DEFELICE: Both are insufferable at the moment, but if I had to choose, I would pick Baron Corbin. At least Shane McMahon is standing the test of time with the heel authority figure gimmick, Baron Corbin literally exists right now to be the person that makes everybody want to change the channel.

DIPIETRO: I would have to go with Shane McMahon on this. He isn’t the believable heel going against his father during the Attitude Era. Shane has always excelled better in babyface roles, thinking back to his feud with Kane.

ABSLER: I think Shane McMahon is harder to watch right now. As a wrestler, you take opportunities when they are granted to you and Baron Corbin is just doing the best he can to turn his push into quality television. Although Corbin is hard to watch, it isn’t as bad as Shane because Shane has creative control in the company and is possibly pushing himself. Fans have criticized wrestlers who have ties to creative in the past like Triple H and John Cena, as fans don’t like when someone in charge of the storylines pushes themselves

DUNNING: Shane McMahon. Corbin’s a great heel, because he’s consistent and doesn’t need anyone to get people to boo him. As for Shane .. this is 2019, not 1999. When he was a face, I was getting sick of seeing him, but with him beating The Miz and Roman Reigns? I’m like .. well, I guess he’s playing the heel, but I couldn’t care any less when he’s on-screen. He’s just like Vince, Triple H, Stephanie and any other legend they bring back. Unless all of this leads to Drew McIntyre becoming a main event superstar? Then I’ll applaud Shane for getting him over. But if it’s just to feed The McMahon family ego? Then I’m already tired of it.

3) “Reigns vs. McIntyre, Rollins vs. Corbin, Kingston vs. Ziggler, Lynch vs. Evans and New Day vs. Owens and Zayn are recent rematches. Does that bug you, or are you okay with that?”

MANGO: The only one of these that I care about is Kingston/Ziggler, because they’ve added a stipulation to it. There’s nothing new with the other ones, so why should I give a damn? McIntyre and Reigns fought at WrestleMania. I’ve seen it. Now what? I’m supposed to care because Shane beat Reigns? Well, I don’t. Just like movie sequels or follow-up seasons of television shows, I only want a return to what happened before if it was good enough for me to be left wanting more, and then, I want to see something new added to the mix. Simply going “here’s that again, copied and pasted” does nothing for me.

STAPLE: It doesn’t bug me, but WWE television is so by the numbers these days I couldn’t care less. None of these matches are exciting. None of them. It’s just people fighting for the sake of fighting. The matches are bland, dull or plain uninspiring.

DEFELICE: In theory, I have no issue with rematches. These writers and producers only have so much time to work with to create new stories. However, some of the rematches on this show bother me more than others, specifically Becky Lynch vs Lacey Evans and Roman Reigns vs Drew McIntyre. I really feel like Becky and Roman have lost steam for their respective divisions, so I don’t think that just putting them in rematches lazily was the best way to go about handling their direction for this event.

DIPIETRO: It doesn’t really bother me to be honest as I am a fan of continuity of storytelling. I am not sure at which point in pro wrestling it became a “okay, what’s next” approach in regards to booking. During the Attitude Era and even after, feuds would last sometimes over several PPVs.

ABSLER: In some instances, a rematch is warranted, in other instances, it is a cheap escape from writing a fresh story and just filling a card to grab cash. I am getting the feeling that most of the rematches on this card are here because creative didn’t have a better option and for a PPV like this, WWE needs some fresh matchups to boost sales and interest levels.

DUNNING: There’s only one way it can be saved .. if all the heels win. If McIntyre beats Reigns clean .. by himself, Corbin becomes Universal Champ, Ziggler becomes WWE Champ, and Evans becomes Women’s Champ, then I really don’t see the point in the rematches. Let the heels win, have the faces come back and get their titles at a later PPV. What’s with WWE and the way they treat heels (outside Brock Lesnar) these days? I’m finding it hard to care about any of the faces winning because almost all heels in WWE are not threatening in the slightest.

4) “What do you think of WWE harping on the catch phrase of “kick ass and take names” for this event?”

MANGO: This wouldn’t have gotten under my skin as much if we hadn’t just gotten through weeks of hearing the phrase “Super ShowDown will be the equivalent or exceed WrestleMania”, which makes me think this is some new directive where you have to have one tagline and repeat it like a parrot. Like anything with WWE, I would have liked it better if it wasn’t beaten into my brain so many times. Having the commentators say it four times a show and Reigns cut a promo about it and more just reminds me of when someone gets a laugh and they keep repeating that same joke until it’s not funny anymore. With the boot logo and all, “kick ass” was a good little pun to go with, but they ruined it by beating that horse, and I wish WWE would sometimes follow the philosophy that less is more.

STAPLE: Not even that ridiculously basic catchphrase is enough to build hype for the show.

DEFELICE: WWE gets onto these weird kicks sometimes. However, I will admit that it was weird for me to constantly hear Michael Cole harp on this catchphrase. I guess I don’t mind it. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if this pay-per-view was actually supposed to be called WWE Kick Ass.

DIPIETRO: It’s not a bad tagline for an event. However, as we know countless times WWE overdoes phrases and such especially feeding it to Michael Cole. The tagline doesn’t really go with the event name in my opinion, though.

ABSLER: I haven’t really thought too much of the catchphrase, I just assumed it was a cheesy WWE slogan. It could be worse, it could be better, I’m indifferent toward the slogan because it won’t change the quality of the event.

DUNNING: Isn’t that what Renee Young says a lot? There’s been worse slogans used for WWE events. I’m not sure what else to say about it.

5) “Which superstar do you feel is the biggest omission from this lineup?”

MANGO: Oh boy, there are so many names. AJ Styles is injured, as is Lars Sullivan, so I’ll give them a pass. But Braun Strowman, Bobby Lashley, The Miz, Ali, Finn Balor, Randy Orton, Charlotte Flair…those are a different story. Between them, I’d have to lean more toward Finn Balor, as he has a championship that hasn’t been focused on since before Money in the Bank, which gives him a boost above the rest, although The Miz and Strowman are right up there.

STAPLE: Probably Kevin Owens. Hard to believe he’s competing for the WWE Title last month and now he’s just kind of in booking limbo. Not having an IC or US Title match is also weird, but the mid card is floundering these days anyways, so par for the course.

DEFELICE: I’m very surprised that Charlotte Flair is nowhere to be found on this card. The Queen has been the staple of the division for years now and I’m just surprised that they didn’t try to force her into something on this card just to get her on the show.

DIPIETRO: I wouldn’t say there is a big omission outside of the absence of the Women’s Tag Team Championships.

ABSLER: The Intercontinental Champion, Finn Balor is not booked on this card which makes no sense to me. The Intercontinental Title is known as the workhorse title so why isn’t it being constantly defended or at least defended every PPV? I am also confused why WWE wouldn’t put such a lovable babyface on a card that needs some spice.

DUNNING: Seen the list of those missing, and really .. the biggest omission is the lack of original matches. “Fresh Matchups” they said. WWE did good this week by actually using talents we never see on Raw and Smackdown, so at least that’s something.

6) “If you could add one more match to this card, what would it be?”

MANGO: Finn Balor against Ali in an open challenge. I think Balor is waiting for Andrade to take the title from him, so why not do something that exists just for pure wrestling’s sake, rather than starting a new feud?

STAPLE: In a perfect world, Edge wouldn’t have a stack of dimes for a neck and he’d take on Seth Rollins and Becky Lynch in a mixed tag team match with Beth Phoenix. Their feud on Twitter is the most WWE-related fun I’ve had in a while.

DEFELICE: I believe Finn Balor should defend his Intercontinental Championship. Andrade has recently had some deaths in the family so maybe that is why there is nothing going on, but there is no excuse for not having a very over face not defending a very prestigious championship at your pay-per-view.

DIPIETRO: Sonya Deville vs. Ember Moon. There’s a story already in place that seemed like it should be building to this event, yet it’s not on the card. Let’s get Mandy Rose involved. It doesn’t have to end clean. Let’s get the feud in the ring!

ABSLER: If I could add one more match it would be a Finn Balor title defense. Although the match would be great, I think a rematch against Andrade would just kill this card because of the sheer amount of rematches being held on the show, so giving another star an opportunity would be the best option.

DUNNING: Bra & Panties. Only kidding, can you imagine? Not really sure what I’d like to see. Just some quality wrestling for a change? How often is it that the fans buzz for a match after a PPV (not including NXT)? I don’t think we need to think about what could happen .. but rather, hope what they end up doing is entertaining. They drop the ball so, so often with their matches, and it’s gotta be tiresome for the talent who know they are capable of putting on an awesome show if given time.

7) “Which match are you most excited to see on this pay-per-view?”

MANGO: #2 vote would go to Ricochet against Samoa Joe, but I’ll have to give a slight advantage to Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston. The steel cage match isn’t something I think will be a Match of the Year candidate or anything, but this is a weak lineup and these two know how to perform, so I trust that they’ll have the best match on the card.

STAPLE: Excited is a strong term, and I mean VERY strong term. I can’t honestly say I’m excited for anything. I am so serious. We’ve already seen most of the matches in practice before. So whatever excitement I had before is all but gone now.

DEFELICE: In all seriousness, probably Dolph Ziggler vs Kofi Kingston. I’ve been a fan of that rivalry for years and I’m glad they’re getting their chance to shine for the most prestigious prize in the game and in a classic gimmick match.

DIPIETRO: Kofi/Ziggler is the match I’m most excited to see. These two performers have not got quite the spotlight shined on them from the company over their long tenures. We always looked back on what Kofi’s run would have looked like had he not had the incident with Randy Orton. Also, we looked back on what if Dolph Ziggler would not have had that concussion after cashing in Money in the Bank.I look for these two men to steal the show, because they have something to prove. We also can’t forget it would be a prime opportunity for Brock Lesnar to cash in with it being a cage match.

ABSLER: I am most excited to see Ricochet vs Samoa Joe. I hope WWE lets them have a good 20 minute classic instead of the classic 8 minute formula match, These two guys are world class workers and could easily steal the show Sunday.

DUNNING: Like so many others have said, Stomping Grounds is likely to be the worst WWE PPV of the year. So many are going to skip over it and I can’t blame them. There is one match I’m looking forward to because it’s the only original, fresh encounter on the card, and that’s Samoa Joe vs. Ricochet. I’d also like to see Drew Gulak finally win the Cruiserweight title, as he’d be the best heel champion on 205 Live since Neville. Otherwise, I’m keeping my expectations as low as possible, because I have no hope Stomping Grounds is going to be remembered as a great show. C’mon WWE .. surprise us! I dare ya to make us regret not tuning in.

Big thanks to everyone who took part in this edition!

Those are our thoughts, but what do you have to say about these issues? Keep the discussion going by chiming in via the comments section below!

- Advertisment -

LATEST NEWS

- Advertisment -

Related Articles