What's wrong with WWE today?

Dr. Ring

I am a fan of professional wrestling, have been since the tender age of 9. My first encounter came in 2001 on the night of WrestleMania X-7. Needless to say it had such a profound impression on me that I instantly became a fan.

At 19, I still watch RAW every week and SmackDown (when I know something good is going down) though I must admit that the initial sense of awe I felt way back in 2001 has diminished.

Truth be told, the WWE product has been stale and extremely predictable for some time. Some will argue that their decision to embrace the PG moniker is the reason, but I am unconvinced. Do you remember the excitement you felt when Stone Cold Steve Austin stood across the ring from The Rock at WrestleMania X-7? Or how about the chills you felt while witnessing The Undertaker and Shawn Michaels tear the house down at WrestleMania 25? Or even remember where you were when Kurt Angle had some of his greatest matches against Austin (2001), Benoit (200/2001), HBK (2005) or Taker (2006).

There is a common thread here my friends and it is simply: Wrestling. As in "World Wrestling Entertainment". It seems palpable and yet, wrestling (or lack thereof) is one of the major reasons why I could care less about the business that captivated my childhood imagination. For the last number of years, WWE have shoved "superstars" down our throats who learned a fixed number of moves in OVW and were thrown into the spotlight in the hope that they will become the next big thing.

Has it worked? Yes. And no. If you look at some of the top guys today, the biggest name you will find is the now 10-time WWE/World Champion, John Cena. Since reaching the upper echelon of Sports Entertainment in 2005 at WrestleMania 21 when he captured the WWE strap from JBL, Cena has been the poster child for WWE, earning the company millions upon millions of dollars in ticket sales, PPV buys and above all else, merchandising.

As WWE's top draw, one would assume that his in-ring work would rival that of the greats who have also held his position. Legends such as Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit and Kurt Angle have all held the WWE/World title at one point or another. And deservedly so. Every single one of these men have given us some of the greatest wrestling matches not just in the last decade, but EVER. So is it too much to expect the same level of professionalism and work ethic from stars like Cena? Absolutely not.

Before I go any further, I know some who read this will be compelled to defend Cena. After all, he does get enough bashing as it is. Don’t get me wrong, personally I like Cena. He has incredible microphone skills and has that drive and that passion that one needs to have to reach the top and stay there. It therefore baffles me how he can live with himself when he performs the same lazy routine every night in the ring. I don’t think Cena's ring work is poor because he's not capable. I believe it is simply a case of laziness.

Last Sunday night at Money in the Bank, Cena had a phenomenal match with CM Punk (I'm a CM Punk guy). For over a half an hour, we were treated to a rarity: solid, methodical, old-school wrestling....and we ate it up! Never before have I seen the response all over the internet as I saw last Sunday night after Money in the Bank. And that alone speaks in Cena's favour. We all appreciate how gifted Punk is both on the microphone and in the ring. But Cena was in no way carried through their epic encounter in Chicago. Cena held his own and that match alone brought back some prestige to the WWE Championship which has become somewhat of a prop as of late.

So we've established that Cena CAN wrestle to a high quality when he wants to. So why does he not? Why does the rest of the roster deem it ok to just go through the motions?

The answer is with Vince McMahon. In a bid to achieve as much mainstream attention as possible, Vince cuts down the amount of in-ring action in favour of dramatic storylines or parading the Diva's like mindless bimbos (of which they are not). He has forced great workers such as Gail Kim, Beth Phoenix, Tamina and Natalya to take part in 2 minute snooze-fests because he feels that the Divas are not a big enough draw...EXCUSE ME but does ANYOBODY remember Lita and Trish Stratus? Victoria or Jazz? Not only could these women work but they sometimes overshadowed the men!

It wouldn’t even require anything drastic: Just give the Divas adequate time to build storylines and to perform. Gail Kim and Kia Stevens (Kharma to new WWE fans) had AMAZING matches in TNA and I'm sure she could have matches that are just as good with the other Divas I've mentioned above. I’m excluding the other Divas because I have never seen them have a good Divas match. But that doesn’t mean that they can’t go away and train with someone like Finlay (I know he's not with the company now but other wrestlers/agents like him). If the Divas really work hard and hone their craft, I see no reason why they can’t be every bit as compelling as their male counterparts.

Also, the cruiserweight division has been removed for similar reasons. Perhaps there was a general feeling that there were not enough high-flyers but that is not the case now. Ok, Rey Mysterio no-longer fits in this category because his ring work is not the aerial showcase it once was. But what about Sin Cara? Evan Bourne? Justin Gabriel? Primo? Tyson Kidd? If you ask me, these WRESTLERS need to be given their own division and their own Championship to chase after. It worked extremely well in WCW? In fact, more often than not, the cruiserweight division had the most exciting matches on the card. They were a huge draw when utilised correctly. There is nothing to say that they would not be as big now.

The Tag team division is also in dire straits. But it need not be. The Tag team titles have become so obsolete that when a Tag team comes to WWE, they immediately set their sights on solo Championships such as the Intercontinental or United States Championships. What happened to the glory days of the Legion of Doom, the Hardy Boyz, Edge & Christian, the Dudley Boys...etc...



What do you guys think? Let me know because I'm dying to know what others feel is wrong (or right) with WWE today.

jaykhunter

Well-written piece mate; welcome to PW boards!

I'm sure this has been bandied about before, I'll try find the thread. The main problem is the lack of fresh new charismatic main-event talent in compelling storylines - although this statement would have a lot more impact a month ago; CM Punk's storyline being one of the best ever WWE has done; coming off one of WWE's biggest B-PPVs in a long time.

Although roster depth is a problem, oversaturation of TV is adding to it (some weeks have 10 hours of first-run programming); wwe aren't doing their best with what they have.

That said, that definitely are trying. They might be stalling on pushes or giving up on them too soon, but they are trying. And the last month on RAW has been must-see TV

Dr. Ring

jaykhunter wrote: »

Although roster depth is a problem, oversaturation of TV is adding to it (some weeks have 10 hours of first-run programming); wwe aren't doing their best with what they have.

That said, that definitely are trying. They might be stalling on pushes or giving up on them too soon, but they are trying. And the last month on RAW has been must-see TV

Agreed. I cant remember the last time I've been so hooked on a storyline. The current CM Punk saga is gripping my imagination like never before and it has certainly reignited my love for wrestling. Punk is a rare talent without question. But as you said, some people are not receiving the push they need to reach the next level. WWE needs to remember how they built the like of Austin, Rock, etc. The talent is there, it's just not being handled correctly.

They should hire us, we'll show em how its done

Diabhal Beag

I think its improving if we're being honest here. Punk so far has been the best angle I've ever seen and there's obviously more to come. RAW was a bit ****e but it was always going to fail to live up the hype post MITB. We all know the problems like pushing awful wrestlers, being brought up too early. If you made this thread a month or so ago it would be more apt but there is a newfound buzz about wrestling. It made all the ****e worth watching just for the pay-offs like Rock returning and Punk in general. Those two things have been two of the biggest moments in wrestling.

I'm loving wrestling these days.

steelcityblues

For me it is the 'glass ceiling'

Until 2010, there was an 'old order' at the top - or near top - of the card: HHH, Cena, Orton, Edge, Batista, Shawn, Taker. They headlined far too many PPVs from 2005-10 between them, while this prevented the progression of a few others to break through the mid card ceiling.

This can be best seen as to how the likes of Kennedy, Kofi, MVP were all suffering from 'attitude problems' or being 'unprofessional.' Convenient PR speak for the big guns threatened by their spot to hide behind.

I think that's why I rarely watched RAWs or SmackDown's in full during this timeframe, because of the great safeness in who headlined the big matches.

Since then, they have in fairness tested the waters on guys like Sheamus, Swagger and Del Rio, but yet all of these came off as too rushed, thanks to their unnecessarily conservative booking during the late 00s. Though, a llack of competition meant they didn't have take many risks.

Since 2010, there is the growing feeling of a 'new order', and it is long overdue, and more importantly makes things interesting.

DM_7

Wrong month to have this thread to be honest. A few weeks ago I would have
joined in but I can't now, I've enjoyed the last month or so too much to say anything bad.

Regarding the cruiserweights. The cruiserweight division in WCW was exciting because it was such a contrast to the World Title scene.

WWE really don't need it as many of the wrestlers are so much smaller now. Now guys like Punk, Mysterio, Morrison, Bryan, Bourne, Gabriel, Kofi etc do cool spots in their matches.

Many of WWE's top starts look like Athletes rather than Bodybuilders and have integrated the cruiser style throughout the card, from top to bottom. The only way a cruiser match could stand out now is by having guys trying to kill themselves.

The WWE Champion, WHC, US Champ are barely billed over the 215lb weight limit. The Smackdown MITB holder would be a cruiserweight.

The cruiserweight division/ light heavyweight division was never that great in WWE anyway.

jaykhunter

before i found out about how horrible it is to be in WWE Creative; it was my dream job. now my dream job is to replace Russo in TNA Creative. I really think i could double it's ratings in 3 years. Wrestling is easy!

rovert

I am just sorry you got into Wrestling so late. Ha ha.

waltersobchak

jaykhunter wrote: »

before i found out about how horrible it is to be in WWE Creative; it was my dream job. now my dream job is to replace Russo in TNA Creative. I really think i could double it's ratings in 3 years. Wrestling is easy!

I'm pretty sure a retarded monkey could do that too tbh

jaykhunter

I dunno about that Walter; writing a 2-hour show each week is hard work. I bet a lot of the IWC wouldn't have a clue tbh (i'm not talking about boards lol)...thinking "bring back the Attitude Era" = more garbage wrestling and unprotected chair shots.

waltersobchak

jaykhunter wrote: »

I dunno about that Walter; writing a 2-hour show each week is hard work. I bet a lot of the IWC wouldn't have a clue tbh (i'm not talking about boards lol)...thinking "bring back the Attitude Era" = more garbage wrestling and unprotected chair shots.

Actually I should phrased that better.. A retarded monkey could do a better job of booking TNA than Vince Russo.. At the end of the day TNA have possibly the best roster on the planet, but have no idea how to book any of them.. Wrestling Matters to TNA yet they refuse to let their roster showcase their talents by actually wrestling instead of ridiculous storylines, that let's face it.. We all saw 15 years ago.. Wrestlings moved on, it's about time TNA did the same..

POSSY

I was actually just thinking in the gym that one of the problems in wrestling today could possibly be the lack of a title such as the European championship. Now I know many people, myself included, feel there are two many titles, but one has to remember the titles are across 2, supposedly separate brands.

I feel the European title was brilliant at moving some guys from being lower down the card to higher up. For me it was always WWE Title >> Intercontinental title > European title. As such the European title was a fundamental title in helping guys gradually getting over without being rammed down the audiences throat.

Without having such a title on both brands it's causing a problem for guys who are green to get over. Imagine how beneficial a European title would be for a guy like Zack Ryder (if they gave him tv time)? The greener guys are not believable as an Intercontinental champs but they are believable as a European champ. So what's happening on TV is your'e basically watching a two division (tag team is being given nothing at the moment, and wrt the Divas they aren't the reason people watch wrestling today) Brand and the lower guys aren't been developed in a credible way.

I genuinely feel both shows need a lower title to enable the younger guys to break through on both brands.

krudler

jaykhunter wrote: »

I dunno about that Walter; writing a 2-hour show each week is hard work. I bet a lot of the IWC wouldn't have a clue tbh (i'm not talking about boards lol)...thinking "bring back the Attitude Era" = more garbage wrestling and unprotected chair shots.

I was on a youtube wwe vid for somethng or other a while back and there was a chair shot in the match, and one of the comments was something like "its so gay they banned chair shots" which had a pile of thumbs up likes, shows how retarded wrestling fans can be, they'd rather guys get blasted in the head with metal chairs and wind up dying due to head injuries and pain pill addictions to make some internet marks happy.

What bugs me most about WWE in recent years is assuming the audience are idiots. Its actually insulting the sh1t they've tried to pull off, my biggest bugbear is the invisible backstage camera, its fcuking retarded and should be gotten rid of, it was much better years ago where it would cut to a camera man running along trying to get footage of an in progress scrap or some spot backstage, not perfectly framed action shots and stuff that randomly happens as a camera crew is wandering about. Oh look heres HHH coming into the-oh my god a car appeared out of nowhere and ran him over! thank god we had this camera crew randomly shooting him doing nothing backstage! Its stupid, and insulting, or when Kane used to be around and all the rooms lights would go red, wtf?

D.Q

krudler wrote: »

I was on a youtube wwe vid for somethng or other a while back and there was a chair shot in the match, and one of the comments was something like "its so gay they banned chair shots" which had a pile of thumbs up likes, shows how retarded wrestling fans can be, they'd rather guys get blasted in the head with metal chairs and wind up dying due to head injuries and pain pill addictions to make some internet marks happy.

What bugs me most about WWE in recent years is assuming the audience are idiots. Its actually insulting the sh1t they've tried to pull off, my biggest bugbear is the invisible backstage camera, its fcuking retarded and should be gotten rid of, it was much better years ago where it would cut to a camera man running along trying to get footage of an in progress scrap or some spot backstage, not perfectly framed action shots and stuff that randomly happens as a camera crew is wandering about. Oh look heres HHH coming into the-oh my god a car appeared out of nowhere and ran him over! thank god we had this camera crew randomly shooting him doing nothing backstage! Its stupid, and insulting, or when Kane used to be around and all the rooms lights would go red, wtf?

i know yeah, you'd swear it was fake.

Jazzy

basically, there is a sh1t load of ass nowadays in wrestling. a lot of ppl on this forum have convinced themselves the likes of K-Kwik are actually good but they are just desperate to justify what they like. thats a familiar thing all over boards.. "we like this piece of sh1t and how dare you say its a piece of sh1t. we have words we have learned to use that will describe it as not a piece of sh1t and we go by them now ya'all!"
but yeah, the cm punk thing is cool & good, but the rest is sh1t compared to 10 years ago. i know, i know some of you guys really dont want it to be as it will offend your sensibilities and taste but its crap. simple as

Jazzy

it aint what it used to be

jaykhunter

what are you on about Jazzy?

DM_7

Jazzy wrote: »

basically, there is a sh1t load of ass nowadays in wrestling. a lot of ppl on this forum have convinced themselves the likes of K-Kwik are actually good but they are just desperate to justify what they like. thats a familiar thing all over boards.. "we like this piece of sh1t and how dare you say its a piece of sh1t. we have words we have learned to use that will describe it as not a piece of sh1t and we go by them now ya'all!"
but yeah, the cm punk thing is cool & good, but the rest is sh1t compared to 10 years ago. i know, i know some of you guys really dont want it to be as it will offend your sensibilities and taste but its crap. simple as

Nobody is desperate to justify anything.

People like what they like.

People are allowed enjoy what they enjoy.

You do realise calling people desperate, saying they have sh1t opinions, saying people are easily offended and have crap taste doesn't "Justify" your own views?

Simple as.

jaykhunter

Best to call it something else; u'll never match the roster depth of 2000

I honestly don't know if WWE's configuration would "allow" another Attitude Era - which started in 98; was only one show per week (RAW) until after WMXV in 99; and stayed as a single roster until late 2002.

for me another attitude era would mean gutting TNA and ROH of their best talent, killing off SmackDown; shaving the bottom third-to-half of the entire roster and having one show per week. (excess talent could be on heat).

I think you could have really decent shows; but with many 3-hour raws and two separate rosters, with no competition; we'll never see it again. Part of what made the Attitude Era great is the unpredictability, who was leaving and who'll show up!

But on the upside we could get some great RAWs. Just not on a consistent basis.

DM_7

jaykhunter wrote: »

Best to call it something else; u'll never match the roster depth of 2000

I honestly don't know if WWE's configuration would "allow" another Attitude Era - which started in 98; was only one show per week (RAW) until after WMXV in 99; and stayed as a single roster until late 2002.

for me another attitude era would mean gutting TNA and ROH of their best talent, killing off SmackDown; shaving the bottom third-to-half of the entire roster and having one show per week. (excess talent could be on heat).

I think you could have really decent shows; but with many 3-hour raws and two separate rosters, with no competition; we'll never see it again. Part of what made the Attitude Era great is the unpredictability, who was leaving and who'll show up!

But on the upside we could get some great RAWs. Just not on a consistent basis.

Jay, who from TNA or ROH would be able to talk to the level required in WWE?

Seriously, if its just about in ring ability WWE have plenty of talented in Ring guys who don't talk as it is.

Was the roster depth that great in 2000?
Big Boss Man, Bull Buchanen, God Father, D-Lo Brown, Hardcore Holly, Crash Holly, Test, Albert, AL Snow, Steve Blackman, Grand Master Sexay, Scotty Too Hotty, Chyna, Rikishi, X Pac, Road Dogg, Terri Runnels and The Cat were all on the card of wrestlemani in 2000. WWE have plenty of wrestlers better than/as good as that lot today.

I believe Jericho is the only one they could bring in that would make any difference.

The true test of any era is what is at the top of the card. With the promotion of Punk into that part of the card WWE have the potential to start a new era.

Punk, Cena and Orton have well defined Gimmicks that provide a nice contrast. If WWE can Promote another wrestler from Christian, Del Rio, Sheamus or Miz then you have four big stars well backed up be good performers all the way down the card.

I think WWE have the best roster of Athletes they have ever had and they need to make full use of those capabilities to back up the guys at the top, providing variety on each show.

waltersobchak

jaykhunter wrote: »

Best to call it something else; u'll never match the roster depth of 2000

I honestly don't know if WWE's configuration would "allow" another Attitude Era - which started in 98; was only one show per week (RAW) until after WMXV in 99; and stayed as a single roster until late 2002.

for me another attitude era would mean gutting TNA and ROH of their best talent, killing off SmackDown; shaving the bottom third-to-half of the entire roster and having one show per week. (excess talent could be on heat).

I think you could have really decent shows; but with many 3-hour raws and two separate rosters, with no competition; we'll never see it again. Part of what made the Attitude Era great is the unpredictability, who was leaving and who'll show up!

But on the upside we could get some great RAWs. Just not on a consistent basis.

I think you need to change your Rose tinted glasses...

jaykhunter

Of course Punk's on his own level, but people who can deliver a promo as good as Randy Orton (a Main-Event mainstay) :
TNA : AJ Styles, Abyss, Aries, Pope, Jarrett, Angle, Morgan, Joe, Steiner, Sting
ROH : Claudio Castagnoli, Jimmy Jacobs

tbf when I'd bring in TNA/ROH stars it'd be for very smooth workers to bulk up the mid-card division and tag division; with opportunities to be a breakout star. I'd much rather a Claudio than say Mason Ryan or Tyler Rex, and ditto for Jimmy Jacobs than Evan Bourne.

Nobody gives a shít about the rest of the roster when you have Austin, Rock, Triple H, Foley, Kane, Taker, Benoit, Angle, Guererro, Jericho, Edge/Christian, Dudleys, Hardyz etc firing on all cylinders. The makings of a excellent upper, mid-card and tag division. Most of them having gotten the world title at some point in their career. And none of them had been beaten to death with headlining 40 PPVs in row each before a new boom period.

That said Too Cool, Godfather, Outlaws etc were over when they were pushed (see Royal Rumble 2000). Somehow I don't feel McGuillybuddys and co are exactly on the same level. About half of WWE's roster is made up of newbies or poorly fleshed out characters. How much of that is WWE's fault or the talent's is subjective. Something tells me Primo, Usos or Big Zeke aren't exactly the next Austin. Seeing wrestlers in their 20s is a bad idea IMO; they only hit their peak in their mid-30s. And 7 years (until they retire) is more than enough time to do any angle with them.

Cena and Orton have been beaten to death and have been carrying WWE since 2005; they aren't the future of WWE. Never mind Cena's multiple neck and muscle injuries. Can Orton even do another character? There is life in Cena yet but time isn't on his side. Punk can't carry it by himself on his shoulders and Miz, Del Rio, Shambo etc are still years off from being money-making draws. I'd chalk that up to (exception being Del Rio) wrestlers being exposed on TV for long periods of time before they're ready to go full-throttle. There are far more "Drew McIntyres" then potential CM Punks. That said the future's bright, in 5-7 years, when these guys are at the top of their game.

I dunno why Jericho would be the guy to turn it around, he's 40. I would like to see him in an actual main event main-stay role though, something he's never really had. I guess he'd be great to make new stars but I wouldn't build the company around him since he'll be off after his next stint.

jaykhunter

waltersobchak wrote: »

I think you need to change your Rose tinted glasses...

WWF's bottom line/year-end profits say different. And this is without WWE's massive market penetration in different countries; and with licencing picking up the horrific downward trend in PPV buys. The Attitude Era made WWF the most money and had the most people watching on a consistent basis in the last 20 years.

GTR63

DM-ICE wrote: »

Was the roster depth that great in 2000?
Big Boss Man, Bull Buchanen, God Father, D-Lo Brown, Hardcore Holly, Crash Holly, Test, Albert, AL Snow, Steve Blackman, Grand Master Sexay, Scotty Too Hotty, Chyna, Rikishi, X Pac, Road Dogg, Terri Runnels and The Cat were all on the card of wrestlemani in 2000. WWE have plenty of wrestlers better than/as good as that lot today.

Tbh most of those you named were far more over than the likes of zeek,dibiase,barrett, the usos,gabriel,red haired guy from the corre,otunga, mcgillicrudy, absolutely any diva, even the likes of Rhodes,Ziggler,Bourne & swagger get feck all of a reaction yet people put it down to damn it those oh so pesky "Bad Crowds" I hear so much about

waltersobchak

jaykhunter wrote: »

WWF's bottom line/year-end profits say different. And this is without WWE's massive market penetration in different countries; and with licencing picking up the horrific downward trend in PPV buys. The Attitude Era made WWF the most money and had the most people watching on a consistent basis in the last 20 years.

There's no denying that the Attitude Era was Wrestling at it's absolute height. But who's to ever say it can't happen again? At the end of the day who would have thought WWE could've done a complete 180 and reinvented itself post Hogan?

GTR63

waltersobchak wrote: »

There's no denying that the Attitude Era was Wrestling at it's absolute height. But who's to ever say it can't happen again? At the end of the day who would have thought WWE could've done a complete 180 and reinvented itself post Hogan?

Just reading that reminded me that they got so much talent off WcW who amazingly managed to do nothing with Austin,Foley,Triple H & Undertaker.Not to mention that they still had the likes of all time great superworkers Bret Hart & Hbk. I think people saying the next era is upon us are getting a small bit ahead of things,right now wrestlings popularity is 80%-90% WWE. When the WWF got popular in the 90's it took a lot of WcW viewers & I don't think many that stopped watching wwe the last decade are desperate to get back

jaykhunter

I really do hope it happens again - My point earlier was that WWE's configuration wouldn't "allow" it - 2 separate rosters (thinning of talent), oversaturation of TV, TV exposure of talent that aren't ready, no competition. There's no external pressure on WWE to improve. We need fresh characters in interesting storylines with consequence. All of these things have to change.

Of course other things can be readily improved - like making your belts mean something. 2 sets of belts can't be a good thing. Same with the IC/US. That said I thought the tag titles would see some improvement when they amalgamated them...

That said if they can sort out the main event, everyone's over by proxy - seen in the mid-card of the Attitude Era, even look at the MITB PPV. Everyone was over because everyone was so high on Punk.

parker kent

There'll be another successful era in wrestling. The last time we had this thread I brought up about natural peaks and declines. It's a cyclical thing. The late 90s/early 2000s were the biggest peak in wrestling. A decline was going to happen. Same as the Hogan peak in the 80s was followed by a decline.

Maybe...just maybe the early signs of another decent era are showing in the last few months. They have to run with Punk.

CMpunked

I remember reading a snippet of the annual shareholders meeting from this year and vince is asked what is the story with the PG rating and how it is going to alienate older fans. (ok not exactly worded like that, however)
Vinny's response was that they are going through a cycle being PG, it's better for business as it's making it's range bigger to families but slowly they will start pushing the limits of PG, keep it still confined as PG, but get to a stage where the older fan doesn't feel like it's a kids show.
One of the reasons was how at WM there was stuff for less wrestling fan types, such as lawler/cole, but still had loads for the older fan with hhh/taker.

Another question was how to replicate the attitude era today and vince answered with building stars up.

I have every faith that vince McMahon knows exactly where the problems are with the wwes current position as opposed to what it was years ago.
I also believe his genius mind is at work turning it around slowly back to what it was years ago.

Look at the PG rating, it's gotten more sponsorship deals, more publicity as a genuine form of entertainment and media outlets are starting to recognise it as such.
Sure the poopy jokes was something that we had to put up with for a while but the PG rating was fresh at that stage. Look at it now, vince is doing exactly what he said and pushing the envelope with the rating.
Certain words like ass have been used a good few times.
So I believe at the moment we are in a transition which the wwe was in around 95, where things are feeling the effects of the golden era being gone, but building toward something bigger in the long run.


Also, look at raw this week.
Vinces promo was a message to the fans about what he does for them.
"what I do is with a long term goal, you might not realise that straight away but in time you will come to, and you will thank me."
(I'm paraphrasing again. )

DM_7

GTR63 wrote: »

Tbh most of those you named were far more over than the likes of zeek,dibiase,barrett, the usos,gabriel,red haired guy from the corre,otunga, mcgillicrudy, absolutely any diva, even the likes of Rhodes,Ziggler,Bourne & swagger get feck all of a reaction yet people put it down to damn it those oh so pesky "Bad Crowds" I hear so much about

Of course they were "More Over" wrestling was over at the time.

I never spoke about anyone being over.

I was talking about ability in the ring and potential. If WWE can get the main event level right then I believe the talent is already in WWE to back them up. They don't need to bring more people in, they can use what they have.

GTR63

DM-ICE wrote: »

Of course they were "More Over" wrestling was over at the time.

I never spoke about anyone being over.

I was talking about ability in the ring and potential. If WWE can get the main event level right then I believe the talent is already in WWE to back them up. They don't need to bring more people in, they can use what they have.

Wwe would want to start working on how to get the majority of the roster over quickly then the reaction or lackthereof the likes of the Corre got at MitB was humiliating in front of the best crowd in a long time

briany

I do think that the diva roster needs to go pretty much entirely. There's no real niche that they're filling. Exactly who are they supposed to appeal to? Wrestling fans? The diva matches have got to be the most consistently derided matches by group of people who talk about wrestling from what I can see so it's safe to say that their matches are not entertaining. People who like some good old T&A? Well, they're not really showing anything more than you can see most places, and with the internet being what it is, they're unlikely to titillate anyone beyond the tween boy market which maybe is what's keeping them there.

Women like Luna, Sherri, Madusa, Francine, Sable and more contemporary stars like Trish, Mickie Knuckles, Serena and Awesome Kong have/had what is sorely lacking in mainstream wrestling and that is personality. And personality is, in a word, in my opinion, what the main issue is. If the personality isn't there then we can't relate. If we can't relate, we don't care and if we don't care, we don't watch.

Dr. Ring

DM-ICE wrote: »

Regarding the cruiserweights. The cruiserweight division in WCW was exciting because it was such a contrast to the World Title scene.

WWE really don't need it as many of the wrestlers are so much smaller now. Now guys like Punk, Mysterio, Morrison, Bryan, Bourne, Gabriel, Kofi etc do cool spots in their matches.

Many of WWE's top starts look like Athletes rather than Bodybuilders and have integrated the cruiser style throughout the card, from top to bottom. The only way a cruiser match could stand out now is by having guys trying to kill themselves.

The WWE Champion, WHC, US Champ are barely billed over the 215lb weight limit. The Smackdown MITB holder would be a cruiserweight.

The cruiserweight division/ light heavyweight division was never that great in WWE anyway.

Very true. With that said, maybe a seperate division for curiserweights would not be a good idea. But I think they need to utilise these talents a bit more. I appreciate that some do cool spots in their matches but some of the younger guys could possibly do it a bit more (to get noticed/get over with the crowd). They have the ability to do things that the older guys (like Mysterio) cant. And that gives them an advantage. I'm not saying kill yourself by any means, but do something to stand out from the crowd. Some of the lighter guys have become too complacent over the years. They need to stop trying to act like heavyweights and embrace what makes them different.

krudler wrote: »

What bugs me most about WWE in recent years is assuming the audience are idiots. Its actually insulting the sh1t they've tried to pull off, my biggest bugbear is the invisible backstage camera, its fcuking retarded and should be gotten rid of, it was much better years ago where it would cut to a camera man running along trying to get footage of an in progress scrap or some spot backstage, not perfectly framed action shots and stuff that randomly happens as a camera crew is wandering about. Oh look heres HHH coming into the-oh my god a car appeared out of nowhere and ran him over! thank god we had this camera crew randomly shooting him doing nothing backstage! Its stupid, and insulting, or when Kane used to be around and all the rooms lights would go red, wtf?

Oh god, the cringeworthy moments. You know, it's embarrassing that in 2011, we still have to sit through corny **** like that. By now, you'd think that they would have realised what works and what doesnt. The "real-life" feel that comes with a cameraman having to run to the action is much more entertaining because it's more believable. It's not the 1980's anymore. WWE fans (or if you preferr 'marks') are much more critical and so you have to adjust your product accordingly. We dont need blood-inducing chair shots to the head, but dont replace that with phony drama.

jaykhunter wrote: »

I honestly don't know if WWE's configuration would "allow" another Attitude Era - which started in 98; was only one show per week (RAW) until after WMXV in 99; and stayed as a single roster until late 2002.

QUOTE]

I dont really like how the shows are split up. Ok, RAW is and always will be WWE's top priority. But I remember the days where there was no brand division and storylines would flow from RAW to SmackDown. Not only did it allow more time for storyline building but it gave SmackDown that "significant" feel. In 2001, SmackDown was as "must-see" as RAW was. And so it should be. If they're going to invest in the SmackDown brand, then why not do it with your best efforts? For tope talents in WWE right now, getting drafted to SmackDown is almost like signing the death warrent of your career. It's a shame.

DM-ICE wrote: »

The true test of any era is what is at the top of the card. With the promotion of Punk into that part of the card WWE have the potential to start a new era.

Punk, Cena and Orton have well defined Gimmicks that provide a nice contrast. If WWE can Promote another wrestler from Christian, Del Rio, Sheamus or Miz then you have four big stars well backed up be good performers all the way down the card.

I think WWE have the best roster of Athletes they have ever had and they need to make full use of those capabilities to back up the guys at the top, providing variety on each show.

This is what I dont get. Clearly there are a lot of guys on the roster who can peprform but they are not being utilised correctly (if at all). Look at the Uso's? Daniel Bryan (ok, he's getting a push now but he was a jobber for too long).

GTR63 wrote: »

Wwe would want to start working on how to get the majority of the roster over quickly then the reaction or lackthereof the likes of the Corre got at MitB was humiliating in front of the best crowd in a long time

Look at how they're burying the new Intercontinental Champ Ezekial on SmackDown? Why on earth would you give someone the title so they could get destroyed by guys much smaller than them?? It makes no sense.

rossie1977

Jazzy wrote: »

hing is cool & good, but the rest is sh1t compared to 10 years ago. i know, i know some of you guys really dont want it to be as it will offend your sensibilities and taste but its crap. simple as

yeah nothing on a par with the mark henry/mae young angle that played out about 5 segments every raw

Vince135792003

Just speaking for me personally, I think one of the reasons why I get bored of wrestling easy is that I am over exposed to it.

When I was 11, I did not have Sky Sports and it was more or less 1 hour of Livewire on a Saturday and 1 hour of the Action Zone on a Sunday. That was it and I craved for more. The less I saw, the more I wanted.

Today leaving aside the internet and youtube, the WWE is on virtually all the time. Raw, Smackdown, NXT, Superstarts, the recap shows, the classic show and then you have TNA aswell. It's almost too accessible with nothing really being must see.

ciano316

Looking like things are about to pick up in the WWE and changes are about to start under the HHH 'regime'. It started getting stale when they decided PG was a good idea. Hopefully there going to let boundries be pushed again and have storylines that are interesting, maybe this is just the beginning with the CM Punk storyline. The titles need to stop changing so much and face and heel turns need to stop being so frequent. Thats just my input.

thebostoncrab

Just on the thought of bringing back the European title, I hope it stays far far away. In fact I sometimes think the IC/US belts should be retired.

I just don't see why someone would want to be European Champion. When you join a company you want to be the top dog. If you hold a lower belt you are not cementing your place as one of the best, because everyone views the world champion as being the best. Like when Low Ki wastes his NXT title shot on the US Title. Why on Earth would you say "OK I have a chance to become vowed as the number one guy in this company, but heck I'll settle for king of the midcard."

I would instead replace it with a TV Title or a title with certain rules attached to it ala the ROH Pure Title or the Light-Heavyweight Title. These are all belts that, if booked correctly, can be viewed as an equal to the world title or can be held without being viewed as just a stepping stone belt.

the groutch

a large part of the problem is the genericism of wrestlers in the midcard.
you have your few main eventers, but after that there are few wrestlers with decent personas, they're all very samey.
at least during the attitude era, even the jobbers had their own persona/gimmicks
a good example is Too Cool, they won very few titles (couple of tags and a light heavyweight afaik), but they were more over with the crowd than most of the WWE roster are now

the groutch

thebostoncrab wrote: »

Just on the thought of bringing back the European title, I hope it stays far far away. In fact I sometimes think the IC/US belts should be retired.

I just don't see why someone would want to be European Champion. When you join a company you want to be the top dog. If you hold a lower belt you are not cementing your place as one of the best, because everyone views the world champion as being the best. Like when Low Ki wastes his NXT title shot on the US Title. Why on Earth would you say "OK I have a chance to become vowed as the number one guy in this company, but heck I'll settle for king of the midcard."

I would instead replace it with a TV Title or a title with certain rules attached to it ala the ROH Pure Title or the Light-Heavyweight Title. These are all belts that, if booked correctly, can be viewed as an equal to the world title or can be held without being viewed as just a stepping stone belt.

they could bring back the Hardcore 24/7 title, could be used to properly tap into the internet end of things