| 0 |
Subject: Scoring addition proposal: Vote here
Posted by: Species
- Leader [07724916] Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 12:10
We have often debated the value of a stage/ramp/ringside appearance that doesn't end up falling under our existing scoring rules. As with the Melina/Nitro non-interference on RAW Monday, there is, IMO, a blind spot in our rules and I think it's time to clear it up.
Proposal: 3 points will be earned for any stage, ramp or ringside appearance that does not already earn promo or interference points
Rationale/comments:
- This is applicable ONLY if the person does not earn promo/interference points - i.e. Torrie coming to the ring with Carlito, cheering him on, but never interfering
- Since just showing up means less than a promo, 3 points makes sense
- Since being on stage/ramp/ringside is more valuable than a backstage vignette, 3 points makes sense
Please vote: Yes or No
I vote: Yes |
| 1 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 13:30
|
Yes
|
| 2 | Bobo
ID: 5409237
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 13:53
|
Seems to make sense.
YES
|
| 3 | Farn
Leader
ID: 451044109
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 13:59
|
I'm not in favor of handing out points to people who don't do anything to advance a storyline whatsoever. If they are advancing a storyline they'd get there 5 points. But to do nothing and get 3 seems wrong to me.
so I vote No
|
| 4 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 14:23
|
Doesn't Torrie advance the storyline that she is there to support Carlito by going out there with him?
|
| 5 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 41831612
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 14:27
|
Yes, because it's a scoring nightmare. 5 v 3 is less of an ordeal. The bottom line intention, I think, was camera time.
(and we need to eliminate turn points in another thread)
|
| 6 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 15:10
|
Proposal II - Eliminate Turn Points Too difficult, hasn't been used for multiple seasons, shades of grey, this is just a formality etc etc
My vote = Yes, eliminate Turn Points.
|
| 7 | Farn
Leader
ID: 451044109
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 15:17
|
Yes to proposal #2.
|
| 8 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 15:45
|
yes to proposal one, because the person is involved in a storyline - if not directly, then it helps to build to something else. in the case of Torrie, Carlito getting his ass kicked.
NO to proposal two.
it's funny that Farn voted no to proposal one, because it doesn't advance the storyline, then when something CLEARLY advances the storyline, he votes to eliminate it....
|
| 9 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 41831612
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 15:51
|
Farn is easily confused.
This thread could get even more confusing.
Yes to # 2.
|
| 10 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 16:00
|
Yes to #2.
Tally so far:
Proposal 1: 5 for, 1 against.
Proposal 2: 3 for, 1 against.
|
| 11 | Greg Rude
ID: 4035217
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 18:39
|
Yes to Proposal 1 (I have always thought people should get points just for being shown... because you are thinking about them and who might own them, etc.)
No to Proposal 2. In fact I think we should get instant points for that week when they doing something as big as a turn. (ex. 15 extra pts) It's one of the biggest things in wrestling, always has been. It's what you remember when you were a kid... other Faces turning on your heroes. (Savage/Hogan)
|
| 12 | Great One
ID: 201155199
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 19:28
|
Rude, the problem with the turns is that they are impossible to score. So many shades of grey and there aren't so many real obvious ones nowadays. Believe me, I had multiple what I considered obvious last season (HHH/DX, Big Show tears off shirt to go bad and join ECW, Carlito) that I documented and went nowhere because nobody wanted to process or consider them. And someone's always gonna argue why its not, and why the are a tweener or they haven't completely turned or it was a ploy to screw over whoever they temporarily align with and we need to wait to see where it goes etc. and then its forgotten about.
|
| 13 | Tree
ID: 90282419
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 20:30
|
the problem is that we're looking at it from a "smark" perspective.
if a person turns, then turns again in a few weeks, to "fool" somebody, that's two turns. we need to stop thinking about it any other way, other than how we did when we were 10.
|
| 14 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 20:38
|
It's kinda pointless to even vote on turns. No one is gonna score them consistently, and that's what really matters.
|
| 15 | Great One
ID: 201155199
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 21:47
|
Basically you'd have a proposal like this one for every single nomination, and you'd need to go through and document where your guy was a face or a heel etc and present it... And if there is that much of a grey area then its just not gonna work.
For example, did Shawn heel turn when he gave Sweet Chin Music to announcer Todd Grisham last week? If you are looking at it like Tree is saying (willing suspension of disbelief) then the answer is yes.
Its a great and novel idea that I think would have been simple to score many years ago, but since the Attitude era and StoneCold and the "Tweener" have become prevelant, its just too tricky.
I still think my nomination for stipulation or cage match bonuses would be a simpler and more worthwhile to revisit. After watching Jeff Hardy and Nitro's cage match, they certainly deserved something extra...
|
| 16 | Tree
ID: 330372422
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 23:40
|
No one is gonna score them consistently
so, we should go ahead and not call flagrant fouls in the NBA, not call "in the grasp" in the NFL, and not call "gigantic nipple hard on" in the Antartica Beach Volleyball League?
if the problem is consistency, then we should put some consistency into it.
|
| 17 | Farn
Leader
ID: 451044109
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 23:42
|
I agree Tree. You are totally right. We need people to do a better job scoring.
|
| 18 | Greg Rude
ID: 4035217
Wed, Jan 24, 2007, 23:48
|
GO, I was only expressing an opinion and the reason why I voted for something one way or the other... It's a vote, that's all it is. There is no debate needed and you got my vote. That's it.
|
| 19 | wiggs
ID: 460232117
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 02:25
|
i vote no for both
|
| 20 | Tree
ID: 30050255
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 06:53
|
I agree Tree. You are totally right. We need people to do a better job scoring.
i read that with a bit of snideness and sarcasm in your voice. :o)
i'm wondering if it should be, much like some decisions of official scorers of other sports, if it shouldn't just be up to the scorer that week.
|
| 21 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 09:20
|
But its not just one week, it always winds up being, "lets see where it goes and then we'll go back and award it"... and if thats the case, what happens to all the Turn points I am owed from last season? I had a minimum of 3 obvious turns last year I should have recieved, that was 75 freaking points left on the table.
Tree, why haven't you nominated Eugene? He turned, I think. Except the next week he went against Viscera and this week he was hanging out with the faces of Cryme Tyme and Super Crazy. Mike Knox turned? maybe. I don't know. He disappeared from tv. Tatanka played a heel one week against Jimmy Wayne Yang and a face the next vs Sylvan. So what was he?
Basically the writing is so bad that there is no rhyme or reason or logic behind half the things they do... so how can you have a basis for trying to judge it and determine what the hell they are doing? For every 1 clear cut turn there are 10 that could be nominated and have so many shades of grey its just not worth it.
|
| 22 | Tree
ID: 1411442914
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 09:51
|
Tree, why haven't you nominated Eugene?
1. because i didn't see it.
2. i think i mentioned it, but after that, it wasn't worth arguing about. again, i feel like i should defer to the scorer.
i'd also argue that kicking an announcer isn't really a turn. especially an annoying announcer that no one likes. kicking him is a pretty solid face move. :o)
|
| 23 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 12:20
|
Proposal 1 has passed, with officially 6 votes for and 2 against. I will add this to the scoring thread and link this discussion. This will become effective for week 13.
Proposal 2 has 3 votes for, 3 votes against currently. Regarding this, Tree wrote:
i'm wondering if it should be, much like some decisions of official scorers of other sports, if it shouldn't just be up to the scorer that week.
I think the biggest reason that we are even considering removing turn points is to avoid pissing matches based upon too much subjectivity. I can just see the arguments about "Wrestler X" getting turn points from Farn but a similar situation for "Wrestler Y" does not earn turn points from me. At the heart of the matter I do believe that a face/heel turn is an integral part of wrestling storylines, and thus does deserve some points, but unfortunately it has become a nuisance to score with so much subjectivity. GO's point about 'tweener' guys who show a lot of heel tactics but wrestle as a face (i.e. Austin) is valid. Tree's counterpoint of swerves being two turns only adds fuel to the fire - i.e. someone wrestles as a face one week and goes immediately back to wrestling heels the next gets two turns for that? No thanks. When HBK superkicked Hogan and went on a 2-month WM heel program (with some of the best promos in my memory) deserved it, even if short lived, because it was so huge in the spectrum. It's just tough to determine it fairly across all possible swerves/storylines.
While I believe our self-governing by majority is a great thing, at some times it is a pain not to have a "Commish" who just lays down the law when needed. Unless you grant someone supreme, unquestioned authority I fear of the animosity it would generate. With a fairly narrow range of replacement managers available I'd rather not have to replace many more managers.
|
| 24 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 12:23
|
One correction: scoring change will go into effect next week, that being Week 14
|
| 25 | Tree
ID: 29082512
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:20
|
imho, i would consider the scorer's decision to be final. now, i believe the owner in question should be allowed to explain why he thinks such and such is a turn, and scorer can change, but that's it. one chance to make your point.
|
| 26 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:25
|
The problem is that we go months without anyone catching ANY changes (turns), and all of a sudden an astute GM points out a couple for himself. The points are a nice chunk of change and are only awarded because 1 GM paid close attention. That's just not fair. And the onus can't always be on the scorers, as they are busy and focused on the many other facets of the scoring, sometimes as many as 4 shows a week.
|
| 27 | Bond, James Bond
ID: 1509227
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 00:29
|
FWIW, I vote YES to Proposal 1.
Meanwhile, how about if we just use turn points for the PPV's? I still believe that the turn points are an essential part of our point distribution although I do understand how hard it is to follow. But with a character turning in a PPV, it's much, much easier to follow. Just a thought.
|
| 28 | Tree
ID: 1009265
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 06:11
|
Mike - again, simple rule restriction is all that is needed. you've got two weeks to point it out. if your turn happens on week 11, you have until week 13 to point it out. after that, sorry, statute of limitations. :o)
|
| 29 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 07:33
|
Not that simple, because "when" a turn happens is always debated. They can be slow, over the course of many weeks. It's not worth it, IMHO.
|
| 30 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 09:11
|
Yeah, Mike's right, the real obvious one like Shawn superkicking Hogan are few and far between. We have 20 questionable ones for every clear cut turn.
How about when Evolution kicked out Orton, is that considered a face turn for Orton cause he then fueded with Batista/HHH? He never really became a good guy, not by choice. But surely the manager would argue that he deserved the points for that great moment when they hoisted him on their shoulders and then HHH gave the thumbs down.
|
| 31 | Greg Rude
ID: 4035217
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 19:08
|
I saw Stone Cold on Punkd' tonight... Since he is active on my roster can I get some points for that?
WHAT!
|
| 32 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 19:26
|
What?
|
| 33 | Great One
ID: 201155199
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 22:33
|
Not sure how to score this Battle Royal. The 6 announced participants were fighting and then the Undertaker appears and cleans house. Cole did say Undertaker was "eliminating" people... so do I just assume Taker can add himself to any match and I should declare him the winner?
|
| 34 | Great One
ID: 201155199
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 22:34
|
MTV's Wrestling Society X special on at 11 PM. Sweet.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|