Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Everything that is happening in the wrestling world.
Post Reply
User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 25273
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by Big Red Machine » Jul 24th, '20, 17:15

https://www.f4wonline.com/aew-news/cody ... ite-316061

By Josh Nason | @joshnason | Jul 24, 2020 9:29 am

A match that has been in the rumor mill for weeks is now a reality as Cody will defend the TNT Championship this Wednesday on AEW Dynamite against indie fan favorite Warhorse.

On the Road to Fight for the Fallen, Cody's coach Arn Anderson suggested that Warhorse would be a good future opponent when the champion was asked about potential future opponents from the indies. AEW tweeted the clip, effectively setting the match into motion.

This will be the promotional debut for the 27-year-old who has been the IWTV Independent Wrestling Champion since September 2019. This will be just his second match since the pandemic put a long pause on the indie wrestling business in March.

Cody will be looking for his seventh successful defense of AEW's new title and is coming off a win over the debuting Eddie Kingston in a no DQ match last week.

The show will also feature AEW World Tag Team Champions Kenny Omega and Hangman Page vs. Dark Order, World Champion Jon Moxley and Darby Allin vs. Brian Cage and Ricky Starks, The Inner Circle vs. Best Friends, Orange Cassidy, Luchasaurus and Jungle Boy in a ten-man tag, and Women's Champion Hikaru Shida vs. Diamante in a non-title match.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Northern Gate
CHIKARA Hot Off the Griddle

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 25273
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by Big Red Machine » Jul 24th, '20, 17:17

In the two months Cody has had this title, he has defended it against... one person who has actually earned a title shot and only had one match where people thought there is anything close to a possibility of him losing.

Is this sh*t going somewhere, or did Cody just make a belt to put it on himself?
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Northern Gate
CHIKARA Hot Off the Griddle

User avatar
Thelone
Posts: 168
Joined: Jul 9th, '19, 16:22

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by Thelone » Jul 24th, '20, 18:00

I've been out of the indy loop for quite a while, but who the fuck is Warhorse?
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 24th, '20, 17:17
Is this sh*t going somewhere, or did Cody just make a belt to put it on himself?
What? No, don't be silly!!! He totally didn't create a vanity belt or anything, just like he never was world champion (except in ROH and the NWA, but those don't count because they're the little leagues, amirite Cody?).

In all seriousness, this is why I hate the whole open challenge stuff. What they should have done is announce that the rules for getting a shot at the TNT title will be more lenient than the world title, like someone with three consecutive wins can get a shot at the belt for example. I guess Details Man didn't think that one thoroughly because Cody needed HIS PRECIOUS.

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 19864
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by cero2k » Jul 27th, '20, 10:02

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 24th, '20, 17:17
In the two months Cody has had this title, he has defended it against... one person who has actually earned a title shot and only had one match where people thought there is anything close to a possibility of him losing.

Is this sh*t going somewhere, or did Cody just make a belt to put it on himself?
It's an open challenge, no need to 'earn' a title shot, and it's giving work to a bunch of indie guys that haven't worked for months. It's awesome.
Image

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 25273
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by Big Red Machine » Jul 27th, '20, 10:09

cero2k wrote:
Jul 27th, '20, 10:02
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 24th, '20, 17:17
In the two months Cody has had this title, he has defended it against... one person who has actually earned a title shot and only had one match where people thought there is anything close to a possibility of him losing.

Is this sh*t going somewhere, or did Cody just make a belt to put it on himself?
It's an open challenge, no need to 'earn' a title shot, and it's giving work to a bunch of indie guys that haven't worked for months. It's awesome.
Doing an open challenge once in a while is fine, but if there is no need to earn a shot at the belt, then the title doesn't mean anything. It also completely undermines the importance of wins and losses in a promotion that is actually keeping track of them.

If they're so concerned with these indy guy not working then they should just mail them a damn check anyway, and then go book the promotion in a way that it isn't stupid.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Northern Gate
CHIKARA Hot Off the Griddle

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 19864
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by cero2k » Jul 28th, '20, 08:23

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 27th, '20, 10:09

Doing an open challenge once in a while is fine, but if there is no need to earn a shot at the belt, then the title doesn't mean anything. It also completely undermines the importance of wins and losses in a promotion that is actually keeping track of them.

If they're so concerned with these indy guy not working then they should just mail them a damn check anyway, and then go book the promotion in a way that it isn't stupid.
You have 3 other titles working with win/loss records, you don't need the fourth to be the same, what's the point in having a fourth if it's just a copy of the other world title? the TV is being defended on TV every week, it's putting wrestlers like Starks/Kiss/Kingston over. Once they find someone worthy of taking the title, the title will change and we'll likely won't get open challenges for a while, but until then, this is PERFECT use for a title like this. Or would you rather we unify the titles and then vacate it two weeks later for a cheap tournament?

This is how the promotion books, stupid, but you keep watching it
Image

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 25273
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by Big Red Machine » Jul 28th, '20, 08:59

cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 08:23
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 27th, '20, 10:09

Doing an open challenge once in a while is fine, but if there is no need to earn a shot at the belt, then the title doesn't mean anything. It also completely undermines the importance of wins and losses in a promotion that is actually keeping track of them.

If they're so concerned with these indy guy not working then they should just mail them a damn check anyway, and then go book the promotion in a way that it isn't stupid.
You have 3 other titles working with win/loss records, you don't need the fourth to be the same, what's the point in having a fourth if it's just a copy of the other world title? the TV is being defended on TV every week, it's putting wrestlers like Starks/Kiss/Kingston over. Once they find someone worthy of taking the title, the title will change and we'll likely won't get open challenges for a while, but until then, this is PERFECT use for a title like this. Or would you rather we unify the titles and then vacate it two weeks later for a cheap tournament?

This is how the promotion books, stupid, but you keep watching it
I don't know what the point of having a second title in the men's singles division is if works the same as all of the others... which is a question AEW should have answered before making a new title. And let's not pretend that the other titles care about the records. If they did, MJF would have gotten a title shot long ago.

And those matches didn't put Kingston, Starks, and Kiss over. They lost, and were no more popular afterwards than they were coming in. If AEW didn't do matches so evenly on such a frequent basis then maybe you could argue that, but they do, and thus when Excalibur says "5 used to b Alan Angels, who had a competitive match with Kenny Omega," most people responded by saying "huh? When did that happen?" Similarly, no one cared about Sonny Kiss any more after this loss to Cody than they did before. Ditto for Quen, and Starks and everyone else.

I'd rather not have the Suck Up To The Network Championship in the first place, but if we're going to have it, I'd like it to feel like you actually have to accomplish something in order to earn a shot at it. Otherwise, the only getting over is Cody, who gets to defend his title more than Moxley while hurting the product by muddying the babyface/heel dynamics even worse than they already are.

And if you don't want to use the records for this then you at least need to have some mechanism so it doesn't feel like all you have to do to get a title shot is be the first one by the entrance way. Do some sort of four-way #1 contendership match or battle royale on Dark every week.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Northern Gate
CHIKARA Hot Off the Griddle

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 19864
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by cero2k » Jul 28th, '20, 11:08

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 08:59

I don't know what the point of having a second title in the men's singles division is if works the same as all of the others... which is a question AEW should have answered before making a new title. And let's not pretend that the other titles care about the records. If they did, MJF would have gotten a title shot long ago.

And those matches didn't put Kingston, Starks, and Kiss over. They lost, and were no more popular afterwards than they were coming in. If AEW didn't do matches so evenly on such a frequent basis then maybe you could argue that, but they do, and thus when Excalibur says "5 used to b Alan Angels, who had a competitive match with Kenny Omega," most people responded by saying "huh? When did that happen?" Similarly, no one cared about Sonny Kiss any more after this loss to Cody than they did before. Ditto for Quen, and Starks and everyone else.

I'd rather not have the Suck Up To The Network Championship in the first place, but if we're going to have it, I'd like it to feel like you actually have to accomplish something in order to earn a shot at it. Otherwise, the only getting over is Cody, who gets to defend his title more than Moxley while hurting the product by muddying the babyface/heel dynamics even worse than they already are.

And if you don't want to use the records for this then you at least need to have some mechanism so it doesn't feel like all you have to do to get a title shot is be the first one by the entrance way. Do some sort of four-way #1 contendership match or battle royale on Dark every week.
But you're asking that it worked the same as the others and arguing that it's shit because it doesn't at the moment. And just because not all wrestlers with the better win/loss records are getting title shots, doesn't mean they're not used, MJF will get his title shot when the time is right for him to do so, when the story mandates, he's been busy with other feuds and it's likely to change tomorrow night. Even UFC books title matches against guys lower than the #2 in the rankings. If it's always the #2 ranking, then it just becomes a conveyor belt, processing people with not emotion at all.

Didn't put Kingston and Starks over!? Are you kidding me? Kingston was a SUPERSTAR last week! Motherfucker was trending nationwide last week for a promo and a match, before this his career highlight was winning a title in CHIKARA of all places and being on Impact for a while. Starks got himself a contract on a national televised promotion based on answering the open challenge. These open challenges have been a great way to showcase a lot of guys, both from the company and outside the company. And putting Cody over IS a positive thing.

And I disagree, it's an "Open Challenge", not a quick scheme to pretend 3-ways give you title matches.
Image

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 25273
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Cody vs. Warhorse TNT title match announced for AEW Dynamite

Post by Big Red Machine » Jul 28th, '20, 16:11

cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 08:59

I don't know what the point of having a second title in the men's singles division is if works the same as all of the others... which is a question AEW should have answered before making a new title. And let's not pretend that the other titles care about the records. If they did, MJF would have gotten a title shot long ago.

And those matches didn't put Kingston, Starks, and Kiss over. They lost, and were no more popular afterwards than they were coming in. If AEW didn't do matches so evenly on such a frequent basis then maybe you could argue that, but they do, and thus when Excalibur says "5 used to b Alan Angels, who had a competitive match with Kenny Omega," most people responded by saying "huh? When did that happen?" Similarly, no one cared about Sonny Kiss any more after this loss to Cody than they did before. Ditto for Quen, and Starks and everyone else.

I'd rather not have the Suck Up To The Network Championship in the first place, but if we're going to have it, I'd like it to feel like you actually have to accomplish something in order to earn a shot at it. Otherwise, the only getting over is Cody, who gets to defend his title more than Moxley while hurting the product by muddying the babyface/heel dynamics even worse than they already are.

And if you don't want to use the records for this then you at least need to have some mechanism so it doesn't feel like all you have to do to get a title shot is be the first one by the entrance way. Do some sort of four-way #1 contendership match or battle royale on Dark every week.
But you're asking that it worked the same as the others and arguing that it's shit because it doesn't at the moment.
What I'm asking is that it works in some logical manner. The rankings and records make the most sense, as that is the theoretically established way that things in AEW work.
You countered by saying that it shouldn't use the records and rankings because it wouldn't make sense for it to work like all of the other titles. I'm pointing out that the records and ranking really aren't used in determining contenders for the other titles, and therefore your defense of why it shouldn't work with the records and rankings is invalid.
cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08
And just because not all wrestlers with the better win/loss records are getting title shots, doesn't mean they're not used,

Yes, people who have the best records can still be used and not get their shots. The problem, however, is when it happens on such a consistent basis as to make the rankings worthless.

Since Double Or Noting 2020, the top five pretty much every week has included: MJF, Lance Archer, Brian Cage, Brodie Lee, and Chris Jericho, and almost always in that exact order. Of those men, the only one of them who has received a title shot in that time (which is two months at this point) is Brian Cage, and he wasn't granted a title shot because he was ranked so highly; he was granted a title shot because he won a match that earned him a title shot. What f*cking use are the ranking, then?
cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08

MJF will get his title shot when the time is right for him to do so, when the story mandates, he's been busy with other feuds
Is he, though? There was definitely time between when he came back after being away at the beginning of COVID and when his feud with Jungle Boy started for him to have been booked in a title shot. Hell, he was more deserving that Brodie Lee and yet AEW booked him vs. Jungle Boy for Double Or Nothing 2020 before they had started to feud, and that was well before Moxley had a title defense scheduled for that show, either. Why wasn't it booked then?

This idea that MJF " will get his title shot when the time is right for him to do so, when the story mandates" is not a valid kayfabe excuse. You have to come up with and explain to the audience a reason for why MJF is not getting his title shot.

And even if he is feuding with someone else, that's not really an excuse. Are you telling me you don't think that if MJF was given a choice between a title shot and another match with Jungle Boy he would pick the match with Jungle Boy? Even if he's worried about Jungle Boy interfering, he could just complain that Jungle Boy interfered afterwards, and management should give him another title shot. But I don't think he's even worried about Jungle Boy interfering, because if he was, he wouldn't be bringing up the fact that he has the best record in the company and should be getting a title shot.
Good booking will allow someone to do more than one thing at once. "Guy X is feuding with Guy Y, therefore they can only do things that involve the other" is exactly how WWE thinks, and it is a big part of what has made their TV shows feel so repetitive and boring over the past five or six years.

cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08
Even UFC books title matches against guys lower than the #2 in the rankings.
Comparing MMA to wrestling in this regard is difficult because it's been established that you can wrestle every week, and with an MMA fight, that's not really true, so they have to get the champ and challenger on the same cycle. And even then, I do find it silly when someone who isn't the highest-ranked non-injured challenger gets a title shot. There is no reason not to hold off on the champion's next fight until you can book him against the top healthy contender.
cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08

If it's always the #2 ranking, then it just becomes a conveyor belt, processing people with not emotion at all.
And it's up to the booker to find a way for it to not be emotionless while still making sense (for example, make sure you've got a compelling title shot story with everyone before you bring them up to #1). And if you're not able to do that, DON'T HAVE RANKINGS! It's that simple.

cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08
Didn't put Kingston and Starks over!? Are you kidding me? Kingston was a SUPERSTAR last week! Motherfucker was trending nationwide last week for a promo and a match, before this his career highlight was winning a title in CHIKARA of all places and being on Impact for a while. Starks got himself a contract on a national televised promotion based on answering the open challenge. These open challenges have been a great way to showcase a lot of guys, both from the company and outside the company. And putting Cody over IS a positive thing.
Trending on Twitter, was he?
Kevin Steen wrote:"I was trending worldwide on Twitter once. And then I looked in my wallet, and there was no money in there."
And yeah. I think Eddie Kingston had a pretty good career before he went on AEW and trended on f*cking Twitter. You think IMPACT is the #2 highlight of Kingston's career other than a title run in CHIKARA? DUDE... never mind all of the other great stuff he did in CHIKARA, you're completely ignoring one of the most famous and heated feuds in the history of indy wrestling (with Chris Hero).
He didn't get "put over." It was Cody who got to look tough for going into the thumbtacks for no reason other than to go into thumbtacks on national TV. If this helped him at all, it's because he got himself over with an awesome promo, and if he's not signing a contract, that doesn't help AEW one f*cking bit, so don't tell me that "showcasing somebody from outside the company" is a positive thing. And even showcasing somebody inside the company doesn't help too much if you don't follow up on it. We've seen that time and time again in WWE.
Starks got himself a contract, yeah, but I didn't hear anyone coming away from that match saying "WOW! They should really sign this Ricky Starks guy!" So at worst, they sign him and don't use him much, and at best, they do use him (and they seem to be happy to do so) and everyone wonders why the f*ck they signed this guy when there are tons of people who have been under contract for longer than him that they haven't don't sh*t with yet. Did you know that AEW now has OVER EIGHTY PEOPLE ON THEIR ROSTER (not including any managers)?

I'm not saying that putting Cody over is a bad thing. I'm saying that it needs to be done in a way that:
1) Doesn't get in the way of other things, and right now he's making Moxley kind of look like sh*t for not defending his title more when there seem to be some worthy challengers while Cody is defending his belt all the time, even no one has done anything to earn a title shot
2) Does it in a way that actually helps the product. It's bad for the product for a top singles wrestler to have so much trouble putting away an undercard tag team wrestler who is coming into the match with an injury (the match with Quen went longer than Cody's match with a completely healthy Eddie Kingston).


cero2k wrote:
Jul 28th, '20, 11:08
And I disagree, it's an "Open Challenge", not a quick scheme to pretend 3-ways give you title matches.
You know what the guy who won the "quick scheme to pretend 3-ways give you title matches" has done that the guy getting the title shot via open challenge hasn't? WON A WRESTLING MATCH, which is what it's all about. I don't like just one win getting you a title shot unless there are a large number of people in the match, but it's better to have to win one match that to have a promotion that is just willing to give out title shots to people who haven't done sh*t, while simultaneously doing NOTHING to actually build up any potential challengers.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Northern Gate
CHIKARA Hot Off the Griddle

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests