The "Incident"

The Bull

Just seen this on youtube and just shows how different the WWE was back in the attitude era. 9mm gun, head crushin in the door of the car, holding the guys head down in the paddleing pool. The PG era we now live in is so boring. We need a bit of life back in the WWE, if punk or other heels had more scope outside the PG restraints then they couild be really great. When you compare this to the shameful suspending of Brian Danielson for the Tie chokeing debackel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uiKQW0ply0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uiKQW0ply0

rossie1977

is this another thinly veiled, "everything is crap because wwe is pg" thread

what makes you think that if wwe stopped being pg that it would become great??

grames_bond

"oh my god he is coming back"

kevin kelly = legend!!

CMpunked

If vince had a visit from the ghosts of wrestlings past, present and future and he decided to turn heel and bin the PG thing.
I still gaurantee that the booking would be still crap.
And then people would be still giving out that it's not the mid 90s still.

Someone would say "oh we don't have the stars we had in the 90s" or something to that effect.

Tribesmen7

rossie1977 wrote: »

is this another thinly veiled, "everything is crap because wwe is pg" thread

what makes you think that if wwe stopped being pg that it would become great??

Sometimes I feel like banging my head against my laptop when people blame PG for all the wrongs of the WWE. I'm not talking about you directly The Bull, because yes I too would rather the WWE to be a little bit edgier. But the PG era is not a problem with WWE right now. I agree with Rossie right here. Have people forgotten the years 2002-2008 when WWE WASN'T PG? It was much worse than what we have right now.

The Bull

rossie1977 wrote: »

is this another thinly veiled, "everything is crap because wwe is pg" thread

what makes you think that if wwe stopped being pg that it would become great??

No its not the point really i was trying to make and yes i do agree with you that if wwe stopped being pg that its not automaticlly going to be better. I guess i would like the WWE to be a little bit edgier as Tribesman has pointed out. I think that the attutide era was great and maybe if they could try to create a modern day verison of it without been limted to by PG boundarys it may be good. I agree that it just not the PG thing, good writers and new concepts and thinking by the production staff is very important if they were to go down that route. but i much rather see storylines like the incident rather that alot of the tripe we have seen over the years.

SlickRic

the compelling nature of CM Punk's character, for one, shows that the PG era has nothing to do with WWE's problems.

their problems are in the cr*p storytelling, and we have very few reasons to get behind any of the characters that are on offer.

there is no substance to anything.

WWE sell concepts and gimmicks, not stories anymore.

they could easily do that in a PG era.

take the Orton/HHH feud for WM 25. up to the point where Orton kissed an unconscious Steph after he RKO'd here while HHH was tied to the ropes, that was gripping storytelling. if they'd had the right pacing to that feud and had that sort of thing the week before PPV, and they hadn't fought the WM match as if they were just having a nice wrestling match, it would've been brilliant.

WWE are just cr*p storytellers for the most part right now, and therefore don't really give us a reason to care about anything.

flahavaj

SlickRic wrote: »

the compelling nature of CM Punk's character, for one, shows that the PG era has nothing to do with WWE's problems.

their problems are in the cr*p storytelling, and we have very few reasons to get behind any of the characters that are on offer.

there is no substance to anything.

WWE sell concepts and gimmicks, not stories anymore.

they could easily do that in a PG era.

take the Orton/HHH feud for WM 25. up to the point where Orton kissed an unconscious Steph after he RKO'd here while HHH was tied to the ropes, that was gripping storytelling. if they'd had the right pacing to that feud and had that sort of thing the week before PPV, and they hadn't fought the WM match as if they were just having a nice wrestling match, it would've been brilliant.

WWE are just cr*p storytellers for the most part right now, and therefore don't really give us a reason to care about anything.

This sums it up well. Lack of competition has made them lazy and the fact that they can now make more money from selling merch than selling PPV's means they see no real need to focus on building compelling characters and storylines.

tdv123

The wrestlers characters themselves are just not interesting anymore.
There just isnt enough variety, everyone is so alike.

TNA is the way to go if you want more edgier stuff but it still has alot of problems itself to sort out.

Butch Cassidy

The Bull wrote: »

Just seen this on youtube and just shows how different the WWE was back in the attitude era. 9mm gun, head crushin in the door of the car, holding the guys head down in the paddleing pool. The PG era we now live in is so boring. We need a bit of life back in the WWE, if punk or other heels had more scope outside the PG restraints then they couild be really great. When you compare this to the shameful suspending of Brian Danielson for the Tie chokeing debackel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uiKQW0ply0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uiKQW0ply0

This was an exciting piece of business indeed and it was edgy television but what has it got to do with wrestling? Why doesn't WWE go back to how it was in 2002 with the Smackdown Six setting the house on fire in a thrilling series of matches that included the outstanding Royal Rumble 2003 encounter.

You say the current era is boring but is it the production of the television programmes that you find boring or the matches themselves? Cause I was under the assumption that there's been some really cracking matches on Smackdown and Superstars in the last year or so with Chavo Guerrero, Primo, Chris Masters, Drew McIntyre, Ezekiel Jackson, Chris Jericho, John Morrison, R-Truth, William Regal...

davrho

SlickRic wrote: »

WWE sell concepts and gimmicks, not stories anymore.

And as Flahavaj says "they can now make more money from selling merch than selling PPV's means they see no real need to focus on building compelling characters and storylines"

Last year the dirt sheets were full of scare stories about falling ppv buys and financial doom for the WWE. When the accounts were published they showed 12% growth in the business over the year, 50M profit and large dividends for the shareholders. Why would they want to change their product?

I kind of agree with Butch but the wwe is a show and you have to take it as such.

I would have had no problems with my boys watching the "the incident" or any other wwe archive material just like any lads on here in their 20's parents had no problem with them watching the risky plots of that time.

Jerichoholic

Compare this 'incident' to the HHH/Randy Orton version, at first laughter, then depression at how far wrestling has fallen in recent times.

Butch Cassidy

Jerichoholic wrote: »

Compare this 'incident' to the HHH/Randy Orton version, at first laughter, then depression at how far wrestling has fallen in recent times.

But Brian Pillman pointing a gun at someone isn't wrestling. It's a mark of how television has changed not a depressing indictment of how wrestling has "fallen". If anything that "Incident" was a low point.

Jerichoholic

You're right, Brian Pillman pointing a gun at someone isn't wrestling but you know exactly what I meant by that. I'm not going to call it "the business", becuse I'm not involved in pro wrestling so it's not my business. Nor will I call it 'the industry'. It's wrestling.

Charisteas

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

But Brian Pillman pointing a gun at someone isn't wrestling.

Well it is wrestling (pro wrestling anyway) if it's helping to further enhance a feud. And as long as there's a wrestling match to end the story, then how they build that story is going to determine if a fan is going to pay for the PPV to watch how that story develops or ends.

Butch Cassidy

Charisteas wrote: »

Well it is wrestling (pro wrestling anyway) if it's helping to further enhance a feud. And as long as there's a wrestling match to end the story, then how they build that story is going to determine if a fan is going to pay for the PPV to watch how that story develops or ends.

Except the Austin/Pillman feud culminated in a nothing match on RAW.

Jerichoholic wrote: »

You're right, Brian Pillman pointing a gun at someone isn't wrestling but you know exactly what I meant by that. I'm not going to call it "the business", becuse I'm not involved in pro wrestling so it's not my business. Nor will I call it 'the industry'. It's wrestling.

It's the TV shows that have fallen if you want to put it that way. Vince ain't locked in a ratings war so he doesn't need to do this edgy stuff. I can't remember the name for it but there's a jargon word they use for this where they just saturate the audience with edgy angles and oodles of blood. "Hotshot-ing" I think it is. WWE don't need to do shocking stuff to entice people away from another programme. They've decided not to compete with UFC so we won't see this kinda stuff.

Besides, why can't people praise the 2002-onwards period when the likes of Benoit and Angle were wrestling their arses off?