Lockdown is a pretty stupid concept

[PureHatred]

I was hoping they would get this after last year....it pretty much kills the novelty and interest ina gimmick match if you over use it. Ultimate X is already losing its novelty. What the hell does an entire PPV comrpised of cage matches accomplish? Do we need to see Konnan v Bob Armstrong IN A CAGE!!!1!!1???

Basically if I wanted to see pointles matches with competitor with limited talent propped up by totally unnecessary gimmicks , I'd watch CZW.

[offspring515]

Yeah, I can see your point. I'd think by the time the main event rolls around every conceivable cage spot has been done to death...seems like it would kill off the gimmick.

[tafkaga]

I agree. Cage matches are generally pretty boring anyway. A few are good, but most are pretty predictable.

[gwffantrav]

I think if they had some kind of hardcore stipulation, it may be different. But cages in every match...yeah, wears thin.

And you're right. Ultimate X should only be at the most twice a year.

[canadianpittbull]

I think this is a great concept, not only that but the Sting vs. Jeff Jarrett in an enclosed cage with weapons hanging from the ceiling of the cage that they have to climb up and get is going to be awesome!

[tafkaga]

I would rather see Lockdown as one big match, a main event of some kind like the Elimination Chamber or the triple-tier cage used in WCW. It would be something more worth looking forward to, like people look forward to the Royal Rumble every year.

[Knapik]

Pitbull, I'm with ya bud. I think Lockdown is a great idea.

[Mad Dog]

I thought it was a dumb idea last year but it ended up being a really fun show.

[myview]

I loved last years Lockdown, this years will be even better! Joe versus Sabu will be a HOT showdown, and Cage versus Abyss in the Six-Sides of Steel will be awesome! The Shelly-cam footage of Jame Mitchell stalking Denise Cage was great, Lockdown looks to be one Helluva Card!

[canadianpittbull]

Oh boo all you Naysayers! Cannot there not be a positive thing said, man there is alot of complaining and moaning around here as of late? Is it that time of the month for some? ;D

[tafkaga]

Well I've never seen Lockdown so I will concede that I'm only judging how it sounds. If I were to actually watch it I would probably enjoy it. PPV's cost too much money though.

[thefamoustommyz]

TNA's Epic Anthology, if you can still find it, is three PPVs on DVD for $20, and one of those is Lockdown...and the two most entertaining matches in the three PPVs are cage matches (AMW vs XXX and Abyss vs AJ Styles)

[butters]

So the whole card is nothing but cage matches? That reminds me of WCW Uncensored, and we know how that usually turned out.

I think it would be more effective to book two (2) cage matches at this show each year. Having one cage match on pay per view is usually a pretty big deal, but two would be like woah!

WWE kind of did this with their Badd Blood PPV. Each one was headlined by a Hell in the Cell Match. I don't think they use Badd Blood anymore, so they've moved the Hell in the Cell to Vengeance.

[canadianpittbull]

Well considering that the PPV is called Lockdown I think the cage matches are sticking to the continuity of the name. Something that is very hard to find these days in wrestling. Also I always enjoyed the themes centered around the ppv shows in general and how new feuds or old ones were either ended or fueled.

I like the concept and the AMW vs XXX and Abyss vs AJ Styles were amazing! given the fact that they don't use the cage very often if at all since they have a ppv that gives kind of a tip of the hat to Wargames minus the other ring.

[MikeMcKinney]

Well i'm getting the PPV, it's gonna rock...

[PureHatred]

I have no problem with using the cage to add drama to big, feud ending matches.

That said, it cheapens the effect when the entire show is inside a cage. I now all the TNA marks are going to jump all over that, but it does. Its booking 101. Big matches end big feuds. You use stipulations in moderation or else the idea of the 'special match' loses all meaning and it becomes repetitive. And repetitive prett y much means that the average fan isn't willing to pay to see it.

Four months from now, why pay to see a cage match between two heated rivals when there was a whole PPV chock full of them?

Crazy thing is...there are going to be matches on this card that would be worth watching without the cage. I'd pay for Joe v Sabu. I'd pay to see Daniels defend his X belt. I'd pay to see Christian v Abyss. Really, they should be using the cage for the Team Jarrett v Team Sting match and that's about it.

It's just not entertaining to me to see the undercard guys in a gimmick match. Like when WCW used the scaffold match for guys like PN News. Here's some of the undercard from last year's Lockdown: Sonny Siaki & Apolo defeated Chris Candido & Lance Hoyt.Dustin Rhodes defeated Bobby Roode. Shocker defeated Sabin, Bentley and Dutt.

The cage added nothing to those matches. So why use it?

I know some of you are gooing to cream youselves defending TNA, but really, be reasonable.

[offspring515]

I don't think it's pointless hate. I'm mostly a WWE fan, though I do like TNA too, but if they ran a show full of cage matches or hell in a cell matches I'd think it was overkill too, for many of the reasons purehatred listed.

[JED-SE]

In general, you're right purehatred, these types of matches do end fueds. However TNA has this kind of PPV for the same reason they purchased Sting, Steiner; to attract viewers.
Whether you like the cage ppv or not, this will add intrigue to the casual viewer. TNA needs to add as much intrigue as possible. WWE doesn't have something like this because they don't need to. Just my opinion.

[JimSteel]

I love cage matches and I don't mind and all cage match PPV but as others have said an all cage PPV might be overkill and they are right

Cage matches should end feuds but some of these matches don't have a real feud going on

[Joe]

purehatred said:

I have no problem with using the cage to add drama to big, feud ending matches.

That said, it cheapens the effect when the entire show is inside a cage. I now all the TNA marks are going to jump all over that, but it does. Its booking 101. Big matches end big feuds. You use stipulations in moderation or else the idea of the 'special match' loses all meaning and it becomes repetitive. And repetitive prett y much means that the average fan isn't willing to pay to see it.

Four months from now, why pay to see a cage match between two heated rivals when there was a whole PPV chock full of them?

Crazy thing is...there are going to be matches on this card that would be worth watching without the cage. I'd pay for Joe v Sabu. I'd pay to see Daniels defend his X belt. I'd pay to see Christian v Abyss. Really, they should be using the cage for the Team Jarrett v Team Sting match and that's about it.

It's just not entertaining to me to see the undercard guys in a gimmick match. Like when WCW used the scaffold match for guys like PN News. Here's some of the undercard from last year's Lockdown: Sonny Siaki & Apolo defeated Chris Candido & Lance Hoyt.Dustin Rhodes defeated Bobby Roode. Shocker defeated Sabin, Bentley and Dutt.

The cage added nothing to those matches. So why use it?

I know some of you are gooing to cream youselves defending TNA, but really, be reasonable.

Look, Tommy, he called out the "TNA Marks," not just once, but twice. Come in and tell him not to make personal attacks!

Actually, I'm just joking.

I agree with him, though. The cage effect is cheapened by having everybody in one. I will say last year's match with AMW vs. Triple X kicked ass, and Skipper's huracanrana off the cage was incredible.