KB’s Review: We Get It Already

Did you hear about the time Sasha Banks beat Charlotte for the Raw Women’s Title? I mean the one on “Monday Night Raw”. When she made Charlotte tap out to the Bank Statement. The fact that I still need to be more specific should tell you what kind of a problem the show and the title have at the moment. When you factor in what the Smackdown Women’s Title has going on at the moment, you can see how lacking things are over on the red show. Today we’re going to take a look at why Banks vs. Charlotte is good but completely exhausted.

The Women’s Title picture changed forever a little over a year ago when the Divas Revolution (totally started by Stephanie McMahon you remember) brought a string of fresh talent to the main roster. Among this talent was Charlotte and Banks, who were two of the most talented female wrestlers seen in a very long time.

It was clear that these two could have one heck of a match if they were given the chance but due to the huge waste of time that was the trios feud, we didn’t get to see this match until March 2016 on an episode of “Smackdown”. After that match didn’t even make it five minutes, it was clear that they needed something a little bigger to pay off all the hype behind the potential feud.

Then the floodgates opened up. Banks won the title on “Monday Night Raw” on July 25, 2016, lost it back to Charlotte at “Summerslam 2016”, regained it on “Monday Night Raw” on October 3, 2016, lost it back in the main event of “Hell in a Cell 2016” and then most recently won it back on “Monday Night Raw” on November 28, 2016.

Aside from the very repetitive title changes (both of Banks’ first two reigns lasted twenty seven days), here’s the major problem: in the four months these two have been feuding, one other person has had a shot at the title: Bayley, and that was in a triple threat with the other two women also involved.

Yeah the matches have been good if not great but DANG it’s getting hard to sit through these things. They’ve fought in the main event of a pay per view inside the Cell but that’s not enough to end the feud. I’m guessing they’ll wrap it up at the show subtitled End of the Line for the sake of the show’s name, though I don’t understand why they can’t freshen things up a little bit along the way.

The big problem is how the feud continues. Other than the dreaded contractually obligated rematch, there isn’t much of a reason to see these two fight again and again. It’s been months of “you beat me so I get a rematch and win the title there”. The fact that it’s been Banks wins the title on “Monday Night Raw” and loses it right back at their pay per view rematch hasn’t helped things.

 

For a counter point, let’s jump over to “Smackdown Live” for a bit. The Smackdown Women’s Title has only been around about two and a half months and the inaugural champion, Becky Lynch, is still in her first feud. In that span of time, Lynch and her first challenger, Alexa Bliss, have had one title match and are set for a second. How did we get there? Lynch made Bliss tap but there was a foot on the rope.

Now why is that so complicated? It’s a simple idea to get us to the next match and the words “contractually obligated rematch” were never uttered. It’s very annoying to have the same tired tropes get us to the rematches, which is all “Monday Night Raw” seems to be able to do at the moment.

Let’s get back to the Banks vs. Charlotte feud for a bit though. In addition to the lame ways to get from one match to another, there’s the problem of watering the good things down. The two of them are capable of having some very good matches but we’ve seen it. It’s almost the same match over and over again with a different gimmick to help carry them through.

It’s the same case with any form of entertainment. If you keep doing the same thing over and over again, no matter how entertaining it may have been in the first place, things are going to go down hill when it’s all you see. There’s nothing wrong with adding in something to bridge the gap a bit and again, we can go back to “Smackdown Live” to see how it can be done.

 

Back at “Backlash 2016” AJ Styles defeated Dean Ambrose to win the Smackdown World Title. The next pay per view match would see John Cena added for a triple threat match. After Styles retained by pinning Cena, James Ellsworth was added to the mix and cost Ambrose a match with Styles, meaning Ambrose didn’t get his title rematch.

However, we’re now coming up on “Tables, Ladders and Chairs 2016”, which will see Ambrose get his one on one title rematch against Styles in a TLC match. That’s Ambrose’s first (televised) solo title rematch and it’s going to be nearly three months after he lost the title in the first place. Let me repeat that: after Ambrose lost the title to Styles in the first place, it’s going to be eighty four days before he gets his rematch.

Compare this to Banks vs. Charlotte, which has seen multiple title changes in even less time. It’s almost like there’s very little thinking put into the red show’s title picture while their Tuesday counterparts actually put in some effort for the sake of keeping things fresh. Yeah imagine that: coming up with something instead of just using the same old idea that has been tired for years and then putting your feet up.

Finally, the high amount of title changes aren’t doing the title any favors. Charlotte and Banks are now both three time Women’s Champions and they’re the only people to hold that title for the last year. How interesting can it really be with the same two people getting the title over and over again? It didn’t work with Nick Bockwinkle and Verne Gagne back in the *insert your favorite decade here* and it’s not working much better here with the women in the modern era.

Banks and Charlotte are both capable of having good matches with almost anyone (see their time in NXT) and there’s enough talent on the “Monday Night Raw” roster to give them some options. Build up Alicia Fox for a short program, which is what Bliss felt like for Lynch, only to wind up being something worthwhile. Imagine that: building a story into something better than it should be. It’s almost like you’re writing or creating something.

The feud isn’t dead in the water yet and the title changes still feel a little bit special but their shelf life is starting to get very weak. It’s great proof that just because you can do a match over and over again doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. I’ve used this stat before and it still holds true here: Steve Austin and the Rock had eleven singles matches on TV/pay per view in the history of their rivalry, which is one of the best of all time. Charlotte and Banks have had seven since March. We get it already, now give us something fresh.

Remember to check out my website at kbwrestlingreviews.com, follow me on Twitter @kbreviews and pick up my new book, KB’s Complete Monday Nitro and Thunder Reviews Volume V at Amazon for just $3.99 at:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MQKDV5O

And check out my Amazon author page with cheap wrestling books at:

http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Hall/e/B00E6282W6