Ascension & Homecoming

We're looking for a general consensus. The IWF Night Crew has been conversing about Ascension and idea of the Ascension Ladder Match (which was discussed a couple weeks back). Styg and Tim pointed out some flaws in the match and the implications. Axle and myself are totally sold on the idea...so as we normally do when things are on the fence, let's see the general consensus: Should we hold such a match at the next PPV (after Nowhere to Run)

The Established Rules:
-Ladder Match
-Six to Eight participants
-Four cases hung above the ring on a single chain, with increasing heights
-Each case contains a title match for one of the four titles (Tag, Uprising, High Impact, IWF)
-Order of cases is unknown. Cases are locked, with the GM holding the keys.
-Competitors fight it out to try and grab a case. As the order is unknown, logic dictates the competitors go after the lowest case first...and so on until they reach the highest case at the top of the chain.
-Once a case is grabbed, the competitor is eliminated from the match
-After the match, the cases are opened, and the matches revealed.

It is important to know where this match would sit in the context of the Ascension card. The biggest opposition is that "You would have guys like Axle or Styg against the Ninja or Johan." Not the case. Remember that Ascension contains all titles on the line, as well as matches being #1 Contender matches.

For sake of this example, let's assume all champions retain at NTR. A mock Ascension card might look like this:

----------------------------------------------
IWF CHAMPIONSHIP
Alexander Remington vs Griffin Hawkins

HIGH IMPACT & QUEEN OF WRESTLING
Gordon Fury & Blyss Lockhart vs Tiffani Michaels & Diana Logan

UPRISING
Eric Steel vs Farmer Dick

IWF TAG TEAM
Axle & Ace vs Flex & Desmond

IWF #1 CONTENDER
Stygian vs Ethan Cage

HIGH IMPACT #1 CONTENDER
Molly Reid vs Philip Joseph

ASCENSION LADDER MATCH
Eric Steel vs Sean Libby vs Khaos vs Jacob Figgins vs Baron Thompson vs Jack Savage vs Tim Patrick vs Erik Reigns

--------------------------------------------

Something of that nature. The Ascension match would serve primarily to give title matches to people who either aren't often looked to for title matches, or people who are usually overlooked when it comes to big matches. This is a match that would occur once, at Ascension, and would exist primarily to give the "younger guys" a chance to show what they can really do.

"If there's a #1 Contender spot for the IWF and High Impact titles, though, how can you give shots to the Ascension winners?"

Bear in mind: Immediately following Ascension, IWF goes on its world tour. Tour lasts for four weeks, with the fifth week being in the states for Homecoming. Those four weeks of the tour would consist of the main event title matches earned at Ascension. For sake of example, let's take that same card, and lay out the winners:

----------------------------------------------
IWF CHAMPIONSHIP
Alexander Remington retains

HIGH IMPACT & QUEEN OF WRESTLING
Gordon Fury & Blyss Lockhart win. Blyss becomes QoW Champion

UPRISING
Eric Steel wins Uprising Championship

IWF TAG TEAM
Axle & Ace retain

IWF #1 CONTENDER
Stygian def Ethan Cage

HIGH IMPACT #1 CONTENDER
Molly Reid def Philip Joseph

ASCENSION LADDER MATCH
Tim Patrick wins IWF Case
Sean Libby wins High Impact
Jacob Figgins wins Tag
Neon Exodus wins Uprising

--------------------------------------------

We then go on to the world tour.

Stop I: Ireland
Main Event: Neon Exodus vs Eric Steel, Uprising Championship Match

Stop II: France
Main Event: Jacob Figgins & (Tag Partner of Fig's choosing) vs HFF, Tag Title Match

Stop III: Japan
Main Event: Sean Libby vs Gordon Fury, High Impact Championship Match

Stop IV: Australia
Main Event: Tim Patrick vs Alexander Remington, IWF Championship Match

The #1 Contenders would get their earned shots at the PPV.



The reason for this booking:

1. Since the #1 Contenders are hand-picked as people IWF thinks should be pushed towards a belt, their matches will happen at PPV's, where they can shine brightest.
2. The Ascension match is designed to give opportunity, not crown new champions. We use the match to filter who exactly is more talented than they're given credit for. Who SHOULD be gunning for a title, but for whatever reason is being overlooked?
3. While the previous point is true, the fact remains that ANYONE can win in IWF under the right circumstances. The world tour, then, has the potential to really shake up IWF on the way to Homecoming, as it's entirely possible for the titles to change hands between Ascension and Homecoming.

HOWEVER, there are cons to the match:

1. Ask if we are, essentially, setting up people to fail? None of the names in the sample are really world title contenders, and arguable all of them for good reason. One of them WILL get a shot at the IWF title...but are we simply setting them up to get crushed by the top dog?
2. What if they DO win the title? Neon Exodus wins the IWF shot. Remi's net fucks him. Remi loses, and Neon becomes the IWF Champion. Is this damaging? Is this a scenario that could realistically play out, and make this match a bad idea?
3. Possible the biggest opposition: How does this match look? It's been compared to a modified "Feast or Fired" match, in that all title shots are given in one big ladder match. Would this match be obnoxious? Would it be a pain to watch?

Things to consider.

The question is up, then. Is this an idea worth pursuing, or should we scratch this idea immediately before if gets through the drawing stage and into the planning stage?

I tried to make that original post as unbiased as possible, and add both sides of the discussion to it. Here's my own personal opinion:

I think "Why the fuck not?"

I agree, the match might be a bit of a pain in the ass to watch on TV. However, I would also argue that the triple cage IS a pain in the ass to watch on TV, and yet the Pyramid in IWF is a fucking awesome contest. The fact that this is an e-fed, we can write shit differently than you'd see on TV, and we can do cool shit that human beings wouldn't normally be able to do makes it different, even if the winners aren't predetermined. My logic there is that "We aren't ACTUALLY a company. IF, for some reason, this idea sucks, and the match bombs....we don't actually lose money. IWF still goes on, no problem.

Scenario where Neon might win the ladder match and due to crazy shit, Remi loses the belt. I will point out that VVR was world champion. So was Chad Mason. Nuff said. We HAVE had some stinker champs in the past.

I believe it was Steel who had compiled a shortlist of people who had never received IWF Championship matches, but probably earned one. Whether he had a good list, or a list that was fucking stupid is up for debate...but Siege Perilous sought to remedy that by giving those same people (who had never received a world title match) an opportunity to prove themselves. Ascension, I believe, does the same. We give them the opportunity to prove us wrong, and even if they don't win the belt, they have the opportunity to prove that they can hang in a title picture.

I don't really see this being damaging in any way. I mean, that's really why I'm on board with it. I do see how it might go awry, and I can see the potential for failure...but I can also see the potential for a crazy competitive match that could establish Ascension as a fun event. I like the fact that we CAN actually take risks like this and say "Fuck it, let's do it" and the worst case scenario being that the match blows...in which case, we just learn never to run it again. No skin off our asses.

I, personally, think that the world tour should be bigger than Battle Grounds, though not as big as PPV's. I like the idea of having the titles defended as the main events of those shows. My ONLY issue with that is that I'm not entirely comfortable with making the IWF Champion defend his belt twice in a row...however, it can be argued that the IWF Champ would sweep the floor with the Ascension winner, and would gain an easy defense in the process.

To build/counter that, though...IF the contender wins, he goes into the PPV fresh as a new champion. I think the fact that we COULD have some really weird champions that you'd never expect is a positive, not a negative. The way I see it? If we have a low-card guy win, and then win the belt, he moves on to Homecoming, where he faces the #1 Contender. Contender wins? New champion, and the lower-card guy gets momentum for beating the champ and winning a belt...but it sets up a rivalry as they prove it wasn't a fluke win. OR, Ascension match winner vs #1 Contender, AMW wins, he establishes himself as a credible champion for winning not only the ladder bout, but the championship match and THEN beating the original #1 Contender.

I think the possibility for the new guys to win titles is a good thing.

That's my two cents on this. Continue to weigh in if you think there are problems we missed, or if you think there are other perks to such a match. If people think this thing is doomed to fail, we won't bother running it.

now that it's written out, i like it

With a match of that caliber, it would need to be on a short PPV card....

example:



The entire PPV be the Ascension match, with a battle royal.

select X number of participants. for my example I shall use 20.


Everyone starts out in the ring, no order of entry. The last 8 standing move onto the Ascension match. The participants of Ascension are placed in holding cells, student desks, play musical chairs...whatever, while Corey Casey sings "You are the Wind Beneath my Wings" as the ring crew set up the match.


Then you have your Ascension match. Just as a consolation prize the four that do not win a briefcase could earn the last four entries into the Path to Valhalla match...




What say you?

Kind of agree with Crimson.

I read the details of the match; I'm neutral. But, if you were to do it, it would probably be best for it to be a short PPV, or even its own PPV on it's own.

I really think this is a good idea. I also dont think that it needs to be a shorter PPV. If we only limit it to about eight people, its not that much more than matches we usually run. Especially if the other half of the roster is already booked in title or Number 1 contender matches on the rest of the card.

The reason it shouldn't be a battle royal is that like Chuck said, this is for people who haven't ever really gotten a chance at a title, or havent recently but probably deserve to. If we start putting other wrestlers in, like Griffin, or Stygian, or Phil, wrestlers who would normally be the number one contenders or competing for the titles, then it really just serves as a match to push them. I think that defeats the purpose of the match, which is giving shots to guys who've never realy had the opportunities.

That being said, if there's more than eight people who haven't been in title matches or might deserve to be in the match, you could very easily hold a few qualifying matches before the PPV.

I'm definitely for this idea, I just don't like or really understand the point of a battle royal of twenty people to see who deserves to get in this match. I really just like it the way Chuck laid it out, and think it makes way more sense that way

The only issue is that it would be longer to write. But if you give one writer only that match to write for the show, it wouldn't be that big a deal. Trust me, we've done bigger matches and bigger cards LOL. I wouldnt sacrifice the match just because it might take longer to write.

Okay I love this its like a money in the back with more then one match on the line. It does not need to be on a shorter PPV. This Match should happen at it would be epic if it did. It gives those who don't get chances to shine and show what they can do.

Maybe it can get its own PPV Name like WWE

I love the idea though. It allows people to opportunities they wouldn't normally get on the spot, and it pushes them. It really should be a highlight of a show. But if you ask me, it sounds alot like a Feast or Fired thing, and you know, maybe we should have something like that implemented too?

A fired angle like what happened to Libbeh a few months back (only cause I don't like on screen firings) but a fired angle could be potentially good for the fired person if say, they'd return in about a month or two and goes after one person who they blame for them getting the fired contract.

All and all, I'm not sure how and where to put it. It sounds so much like a PPV caliber match, but it could also be on a BG, as a main event. And while it has IWF vets and good peoples in Chuck's example, it may not steal the show because of the new comers. Despite that, I love this match type. Do it up!

GO FOR IT!

I like the idea but who picks the participants? I would say we have 8 beat the clock type matches with the winners getting in the match at the PPV. Other then that I like the original idea.