Kurt Angle to replace Roman at TLC

[SlightlyJames]

I guess the meningitis or whatever it was spread some more. Kurt getting chucked into a TLC match with no build lmao

[prophet]

Buyrates must have been awful

[Everlong]

I mean, this actually makes me want to tune in somewhat, so maybe it's working?

But I certainly don't expect him to take major bumps. Still, what a weird occurrence.

[Str8Shooter]

Kurt might be back on pills after this is over....

As absurd as it is that Angle is back with two days build and so is AJ/Finn, you have to give credit to WWE for coming up with something big to make up for the Shield Reunion not happening.

[Hanley!]

I actually really don't like this move.

The story isn't there for Angle to get involved, and it's throwing away his return match. It also dilutes the match as a Shield vs the world concept, which was the selling point up until now.

I actually think they could have told a good story here of the odds being even more against Ambrose and Rollins, because Reigns was forced out of the match. They could have jumped a couple of their opponents at the start of the match to even up things a little (make it a 3 on 2, maybe). As the match went on the others would have got involved again, Rollins and Ambrose would hold their own for a while, but eventually the numbers game gets to them and lose.

It'd be a great way to set up for a repeat of this match (or something close to it) but with Reigns involved in a month or two. And you could use it to tell a good show long storyline at TLC - a show which is going to need some added dimension to keep things interesting.

I guess Angle being back is kinda cool, but I don't think this was the best way to do it. Though the Angle vs Jordan match they were probably planning for Wrestlemania would hardly have been the best idea either.

[VaderBomb]

I love Angle but this is a weird way for him to return to a WWE ring.

Balor vs Styles means way more to me personally. I think that I'm going to have to figure out a way to catch TLC. it still seems to be a waste to have this match with no build as well, but they can incorporate the result of the match into whatever program AJ and Balor may have down the line. Also, it's relevant considering all the WWE vs Bullet Club stuff.

[The Legend]

^^^ I really like Hanley's idea or a form of it anyhow. The easiest guys to lift out of this match would have been the Barre. Seeing as how Ambrose and Rollins are feuding with them, come up with some kind of scheme that traps Cesaro and Sheamus into some sort of circumstance that holds them up. The match starts with those two against Miz/Strowman/Kane, while the match is going on and the Shield is starting to take the advantage, Axel and maybe Dallas frantically look for the Barre. They find them in time for Sheamus and Cesaro to run out at the last second to help their team earn the win.

It would continue the Sheamus/Cesaro vs Ambrose/Rollins story by adding a new element, allow for the possibility that a form of the original match could be developed for Survivor Series and be a more interesting and coherent way of telling this story moving forward.

[Messiah]

As someone who doesn't care about the product or anything they have planned long-term, Styles/Balor and Angle wrestling has increased the odds of me watching TLC by 99.9%.

[Messiah]

On another note, 2017 has seen...

Bill Goldberg as the top champion on Raw
Kurt Angle and Kane in the main event of a WWE PPV
Jinder Mahal as WWE Champion

I genuinely don't know which of these I would have found to be the most likely a year ago at this time.

[The Legend]

On another note, 2017 has seen...

Bill Goldberg as the top champion on Raw
Kurt Angle and Kane in the main event of a WWE PPV
Jinder Mahal as WWE Champion

I genuinely don't know which of these I would have found to be the most likely a year ago at this time.

Goldberg by far...

[Hanley!]

Well Jinder as champion was certainly the least likely.

[Hanley!]

Can we all just take a moment to appreciate that WWE's creative vision is now so bad that a last minute outbreak of meningitis has greatly increased the quality of their pay per view card, along with interest in the show.

[xgamr]

^ they are now saying it may be Mumps instead. cant keep anything straight

[Ali]

I have a huge problem with the TLC card, and this is before all of the wacky changes to the card...

WHERE IS THE TLC ASPECT?!

Seriously! The only TLC match announced is the Main Event, and nothing's at stake there, so what is the point of it being a TLC match? You couldn't even have the IC or Tag Team belts on the line, because since the match involves all of them, it'd be kind of awkward to do. As cool as a SHiELD reunion is, TLC might be the worst possible event to build it for, especially since Rollins and Ambrose have belts that could and should be defended in a Ladder, Tables, or TLC match! The same applies to The Miz's IC Title. Since we all know Lesnar's only gonna show up for work maybe five more times between now and Mania, at least give us a Tag or IC Title defense in a TLC Match.

And no other stipulations have been announced, either. I'd love to see Cruiserweights in a Ladder Match for the title, or a title shot. Same for Mickie vs. Bliss, that'd be a cool Tables or Ladder match. Even the Wyatt-Balor match, stupid and drawn out as it was, might've garnered a little more interest had it been advertised as a Tables match. It wouldn't stop Bray Wyatt from being the worst-booked WWE Talent since Zack Ryder, but it would've at least fit the PPV's gimmick.

[Hanley!]

I both agree and disagree, Ali.

It is a little dumb that they're wasting a TLC match on a story that has no championships on the line - which essentially just turns things into a hardcore match. There is a little precedent for this, as the Shield have had this sort of TLC match before - where victory comes via pinfall or submission. But I always have a little trouble suspending my disbelief in this sort of match that the ladders would even be brought into play. If there's no belt hanging from the roof, why get involved with the dangerous business of climbing in the first place?

What I disagree with is that they should have added extra gimmick matches. I like that they haven't added further gimmick matches to the show. First of all, the chairs match has always sucked as a concept. I liked the symmetry of having a tables match, a ladder match, and a chairs match on the TLC pay per view. But chairs matches suck. Second of all, tables matches generally suck too. Wrestlers crashing through tables is great. Wrestlers awkwardly maneuvering around tables for 20 minutes is not so great.

Also, I just think these gimmicks lose their impact when you do too many of them on the one show. And often the gimmick matches are shoehorned into feuds where they don't work, or given to performers who can't pull them off. Mickie vs Bliss is probably going to be a little sloppy already, adding ladders or tables to the equation will probably make their match worse. In the cruiserweight title match, I'd want to give Enzo the smallest possible chance of accidentally killing himself through his incompetence at wrestling.

As underwhelming as this card was, I don't think the extra gimmicks would have made it less underwhelming. WWE actually made the right call there.

[Ali]

You are spot-on as usual, Hanley, which leads me to the only obvious solution: ELIMINATE GIMMICK PPVS.

Thing is, if you're gonna have a PPV named for gimmicks, use the gimmicks. I hate Money In The Bank and Hell in a Cell as PPVs, but at least they prominently feature their gimmicks. And TLC usually does advertise Table matches, Ladder matches, Chair matches, and Tables Ladders and Chairs matches. But this year, we only have one gimmick match billed. So if you're not going to utilize the gimmick... why keep the PPV named after a gimmick?

Especially in the era of the brand split and exclusive PPVs, it makes even less sense. Jinder Mahal could actually defend the WWE Title in a TLC match, and this Shield/Angle (Shangle?) vs. The World match would make far more sense as a Hell in a Cell encounter. And it's not like WWE is lacking in generic PPV names. They put out "Great Balls of Fire" without any shame this year, why not bring back Over The Limit, No Way Out, Judgment Day, Vengeance, Unforgiven, Armageddon, Bad Blood, Fully Loaded... you get the point.

Make the Hell in a Cell a surprise feud-ender or special event, not, "Oh, it's HIAC time again." Let's have some variation with when an Elimination Chamber shows up. Put MITB at Mania again as a kick-ass interpromotional spotfest. It all feels diluted and without meaning.

[Hanley!]

100% agree. The gimmick pay per views suck as a concept. Keep Royal Rumble and Survivor Series and do away with the rest of them. They don't work, and they lead to these gimmick matches not being used in better, more fitting feuds at other times of year.

I think they were introduced as a cheap way of selling pay per views originally, during a period where buy rates were down. Rather than addressing the core problem - that they weren't telling compelling stories - they tried to give fans a built in reason to buy these shows. Even if the cards sucked, in theory people might buy a show because they were excited to see a Hell in a Cell match.

But it never actually worked. The gimmick pay per views didn't perform better. So I don't really understand why they kept them. Now that they rely on a subscription service, keeping them around makes even less sense. At this point, it's just another excuse for the company to be creatively lazy. It's an excuse to not try.

[The Legend]

Let me ask a question, the WWE has pretty much always had gimmick tied PPV's. Is it much better to have a PPV called Badd Blood that you know will have a HIAC match on it over a PPV called HIAC?

As an aside I am disappointed that we aren't getting Mickie vs Bliss in a ladder match, Enzo vs Kalisto in a tables match and the CW tag match as a chairs match. I did like that aspect of the PPV.

[Hanley!]

Let me ask a question, the WWE has pretty much always had gimmick tied PPV's. Is it much better to have a PPV called Badd Blood that you know will have a HIAC match on it over a PPV called HIAC?

As an aside I am disappointed that we aren't getting Mickie vs Bliss in a ladder match, Enzo vs Kalisto in a tables match and the CW tag match as a chairs match. I did like that aspect of the PPV.

Do you think those would actually be better matches though? In every single example you gave there, it sounds to me like the match would have ended up being worse as a direct result of the gimmick.

And Bad Blood wasn't a Hell in a Cell themed show. It always had a Hell in a Cell match, but the event only happened twice excluding the In Your House show in 1997. They were never tied down to doing the gimmick on a show where it didn't belong. In 2003 they picked the name as an homage to the first Hell in a Cell at IYH, because they had a Cell match planned already. In 2004 they did another Hell in a Cell, kinda establishing a precedent. But then the next year the show was axed.

The Bad Blood name never boxed them into a corner - it never negatively affected the pacing or dynamics of a story they were trying to tell. It also didn't limit what they were able to do on other pay per views. We can't say that for Hell in a Cell. How many memorable Hell in a Cell matches have we seen since that pay per view was conceived? Most of them were almost entirely forgettable. Randy Orton and John Cena have faced each other in TWO HIAC matches (which is a bad sign in itself) and I couldn't tell you a single spot from either of them. It's past time that they get rid of the Hell in a Cell and TLC pay per views, like the Elimination Chamber before them. They don't need to give themselves any more limitations.

[The Legend]

Let me ask a question, the WWE has pretty much always had gimmick tied PPV's. Is it much better to have a PPV called Badd Blood that you know will have a HIAC match on it over a PPV called HIAC?

As an aside I am disappointed that we aren't getting Mickie vs Bliss in a ladder match, Enzo vs Kalisto in a tables match and the CW tag match as a chairs match. I did like that aspect of the PPV.

Do you think those would actually be better matches though? In every single example you gave there, it sounds to me like the match would have ended up being worse as a direct result of the gimmick.

And Bad Blood wasn't a Hell in a Cell themed show. It always had a Hell in a Cell match, but the event only happened twice excluding the In Your House show in 1997. They were never tied down to doing the gimmick on a show where it didn't belong. In 2003 they picked the name as an homage to the first Hell in a Cell at IYH, because they had a Cell match planned already. In 2004 they did another Hell in a Cell, kinda establishing a precedent. But then the next year the show was axed.

The Bad Blood name never boxed them into a corner - it never negatively affected the pacing or dynamics of a story they were trying to tell. It also didn't limit what they were able to do on other pay per views. We can't say that for Hell in a Cell. How many memorable Hell in a Cell matches have we seen since that pay per view was conceived? Most of them were almost entirely forgettable. Randy Orton and John Cena have faced each other in TWO HIAC matches (which is a bad sign in itself) and I couldn't tell you a single spot from either of them. It's past time that they get rid of the Hell in a Cell and TLC pay per views, like the Elimination Chamber before them. They don't need to give themselves any more limitations.

Badd Blood didn't exist as a name long enough for it to box them in a corner, but I'm pretty sure that they would have continued with the basic booking concepts which would have eventually boxed them into a corner.

As for tonight's show specifically, I think the Alexa vs Mickie match will be fine as is and has the chance to tell a great story as is, but I think a ladder stipulation would have given each of them a chance to do something unique that they haven't done before and potentially be more exciting. As for the CW title match, it depends. If Kalisto is going to win a regular match is better, but I'm believing Enzo will get the belt back, in that event a tables match would fit Enzo's barely escape with his life type of story that he does so well and is very entertaining with. The chairs match is unnecessary, but it fits in with the concept and it won't hurt or help the CW tag match.