WWE and the "Wait And See Where It Goes" fan attitude

rovert

Brandon Stroud is a Raw and NXT columnist who went on a bit of a rant on "wait and see"being a misguided attempt at positivity.

Okay, so about that “wait and see where it goes” thing. Stop doing it.

If WWE has proven one thing in its 50 years of existence, it’s that you can never, ever wait and see where it goes. It doesn’t go anywhere good. Ever. The goodness of WWE is in the journey, not the destination. Every good story you can think of has a bad ending, partially because WWE doesn’t have seasons so you can’t cleanly separate a plot point from an “ending,” and the stories just go on and on forever until they get retconned or rewritten or forgotten.

Take the Summer of Punk for example. That was cool, right? Money in the Bank was amazing and ended with Punk leaving WWE with the WWE Championship, blowing a kiss to Vince McMahon. If that’d been the end of a season of television or the end of a story, it would’ve been great. We could start fresh with the next thing, and where it goes wouldn’t change the goodness of what happened. But it doesn’t work that way and we’re stuck in this static purgatory of always waiting and being in the middle, so “where it went” was:

1. CM Punk winning the title in a match special guest refereed by Triple H
2. a pinfall loss to Triple H thanks to interference from Kevin Nash
3. Punk never getting revenge on Nash, then teaming with Triple H
4. Punk and Triple H losing to R-Truth and The Miz, then Triple H shuffling himself in a feud with Nash
5. Punk hanging out in the mid-card for the rest of the year (whether he was champion or not)

If you want to really get into it, Punk held the title for 434 days in a reign that would’ve been important if we still lived in a time when title reigns were important until it was time to lose to the more important wrestlers, i.e. The Rock and The Undertaker. Of course these were high profile matches and wrestling is fake so it’s not like Punk was getting “buried” or anything hyperbolically stupid like that, but he did go from the Most Important Thing to a thing that loses to the More Important Things.

Now, let’s look at how Daniel Bryan. “Where it went” was:

1. Daniel Bryan winning the title in a match special guest refereed by Triple H
2. an immediate pinfall loss to Randy Orton thanks to interference from Triple H
3. Bryan never getting revenge on Triple H, followed by three consecutive bull**** PPV finishes
4. Triple H shuffling himself and Orton into a feud with The Big Show and eventually John Cena
5. Bryan hanging out in the mid-card for the rest of the year. With CM Punk.

Again, Bryan’s not being “buried” or anything ridiculous like that because he’s a popular guy who has great, often high-profile matches on every show, but he’s gone from the Most Important Thing to a guy who gets all his heat and moments and catchphrases usurped by the More Important Things. Cena, Orton and Triple H are all in the ring while the crowd chants DAN-IEL BRY-AN. Cena pipes in to say “want to know why these people are chanting Daniel Bryan?” The only acceptable answer should’ve been “because they love Daniel Bryan and would rather see him out here right now instead of all this bull****,” but nope, it was “because they’re tired of the AUTHORITY~!” Cena co-opts the crowd’s support of Daniel Bryan to justify a John Cena vs. Randy Orton match for BOTH TITLE BELTS under the supervision of Triple H.

So, without sounding melodramatic, “where it goes,” based on everything that has ever happened in WWE ever, is to the people WWE sees as its biggest stars. That’s it. If WCW invades, it leads to a “Winner Take All” Survivor Series match featuring 9 WWE guys and 1 guy from WCW. If the Nexus invades and instantly builds 8 new stars, it leads to John Cena and Bret Hart beating them to death until they’re worthless. If Punk catches fire, it leads to Triple H vs. Kevin Nash. If Bryan catches fire, it leads to Cena vs. Orton. I’m sorry, but it’s how wrestling works on this level, and no amount of you clapping your hands and wishing will change it.

Learn to love the journey and forget the destination, guys. I’m going to try to take that advice myself.

Read more: http://www.uproxx.com/sports/2013/11/best-worst-wwe-raw-112513/2/#ixzz2lqYbJsty

Anyone think he is dead on here?

Do you think this perspective too defeatist or just being realistic.

DM_7

Generally: I think if you are thinking about it that much you will always end up pissed off.

It's only a tv show so not worth taking seriously imo. I read but don't bother engaging with a lot of the complaints on here for that reason (there was a time I did think about it and I was bothered by the booking and writing so am not having a go at anyone).

Specifically on this Topic, To be fair he makes legitimate points if it is something people want to think about and discuss in that detail. But nothing posters here wouldn't have already highlighted.

GTR63

Who have they handled well in the last 5 years besides the pampered veterans they so desperately rely on?

SirDelboy18

Well this is essentially true - I could trawl through the threads following Summerslam and pull up so many "the payoff will be worth it" posts - and guess what? We got no payoff, as usual. Never do.

Product is in a bad place right now, Orton and Cena in the big match AGAIN, just off the heels of The Big Show being in the main event. TV shows suck, PPV's are the worst they have ever been.

Don't think anyone could have any faith in creative at this point in time. The last Wrestlemania was the most predictable WM I can remember, and the amount of part-timers at the top of the card at that event (and the next WM) is testament to the failings of the booking at the moment. They even had a match to determine who competed for the streak. What. The. Actual. Fúck.

Only two people who have gotten significantly over in the past 5 years did so by themselves, 100 percent - Bryan and Punk.

The others, the more WWE endorsed people, who they wanted to get over, have failed to do so. Sheamus is a case in point, the 15 second or whatever match at WM supposed to elevate him, and instead the person who emerged from that best was Bryan. People don't care about Del Rio, or Ryback.

The only person that they have handled relatively well (outside of Orton, Cena, Taker, Michaels, HHH, etc) over the past few years is Mark Henry (and even he has been around longer than nearly all of the roster) in my opinion. If it wasn't for injuries he would probably be relatively higher up the card. Think they booked his monster persona in the Randy Orton feud pretty well.

In fairness to them, the don't seem to have messed up The Shield as much as I thought they would have, they are still good.

And basically everything I've said here, has been said in the past few months by me and others.

gnfnrhead

He's spot on, to be honest. I wasnt happy with the Summerslam ending, but was willing to wait it out a little. The more time that has passed, the less confidant I am of being proved wrong.

The funny thing is, a lot of people are still saying wait and see. Some people just refuse to accept what is in front of them.

Lord TSC

Its an arguement that really annoys me as well tbh.

For a more recent example, look at the Big Show angle; could have had control of WWE (according to kayfabe), gave it up for a title shot after weeks of build up. And then HHH screws him out of the title.

Does he get a rematch? No. He doesn't even get a promo to express his annoyance. Weeks of build up to a screwy finish and no closure on the story for fans or the character.

Machismo Fan

I don't see any reason why wrestling shouldn't be held to a higher standard. New Japan have proved that you don't need to reinvent the wheel to do well, just logical booking attempting to create new stars with, most importantly, follow through. And there's no reason major US company can't do the same. I have never liked the 'wait and see' approach because too often is it not worth it and you can see where they're going to go wrong from a mile away, plus the journey usually isn't that great either.

jaykhunter

DM-ICE wrote: »

Generally: I think if you are thinking about it that much you will always end up pissed off. It's only a tv show so not worth taking seriously imo.

This is very true. Wrestling is general is not a product that can stand up to any scrutiny, because of how poorly the storylines are run and constantly changed, and how shallow the characters are. It's general it's quite poor. We tend to overlook it due to some fine in-ring work and some things can be great.

WWE are very much of the ilk of "we'll tell you who you'll like" rather than listening to the fans. It's not a wait-and-see, there's resistance to pushing those WWE didn't intend to push. Daniel Bryan was crazy over (he's not as feverishly over now as a few months ago) as WWE insisted on quickly funnelling his heat to Triple H, Randy Orton and sidetracking into Big Show (who stole the YES chant and the main event spot). When Cena returned it was assumed his WHC run would make way for Bryan and the WWE title. No, he's been thrown into the tag division to build up others.

With regards to "where it went" theory, the Summer of Punk was great for approximately 3 weeks, from the pipebomb, to the huge mistake of immediately crowning a new champion, and a new champion again, and returning. Cue months of terrible booking designed to KILL Punk and Triple H/Nash trying to trip up Punk on air. You can't learn to love the journey, because the journey sucks. The end is mercy. WWE can shoot a great start, and that's about it. Like the Nexus. Great start, kill the heat (SummerSlam '10) and try pick up the pieces until it mercifully ends (TLC '10). WWE constantly lower the bar and fans (including myself) lower the bar for what'll be acceptable.

SirDelboy18

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

For a more recent example, look at the Big Show angle; could have had control of WWE (according to kayfabe), gave it up for a title shot after weeks of build up. And then HHH screws him out of the title.

They had his house!

SirDelboy18

I don't think they always messed things up in the end - like if you look back to 2009 and Punk v Hardy, from the start right down to the way it ended with Undertaker under him when celebrating, was great (what happened after was a joke obviously).

Jericho and Michaels a year before, same thing, was good from start to finish if I can recall correctly.

Then I guess for every one of those, you have not pushing The Straight Edge Society and having them lose to Rey rather than push a fantastic heel group. You have Randy Orton fresh off the Rumble win and a punt of Vince, playing a chicken**** heel to Shane McMahon and barely surviving him, then losing at WM.

They really don't do much of anything right. I wish TNA had their act together because I would consider watching that more. As it stands I'll probably just end up watching more New Japan.

Lord TSC

Jericho and Michaels a year before, same thing, was good from start to finish if I can recall correctly.

IIRC, the two of them pretty much did that story themselves. And it showed.

DM_7

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

IIRC, the two of them pretty much did that story themselves. And it showed.

It wasn't the main storyline and they tend to be the ones that get less screwed up. Jericho had a good feud with Punk as well but again was a secondary storyline.

Sirsok

Wwe audience isn't the 18-35 year old demographic anymore, sure they cater to out needs as intelligent viewers with some pops every now and again but in general they cater for the kids who don't think about storylines to much, they just wanna see their favourite characters battle it out.

Sure it can down right suck but hey they ain't gonna change for us anytime soon

D.Q

Haven't watched any wrestling since a week or two after Summerslam and don't miss it in any way shape or form. Sick to death of the same pointless matches for three hours every Monday.

This argument of the in ring stuff being good doesn't float either. If you want a genuine athletic contest watch mma or amateur wrestling. Pro wrestling needs drama and without compelling characters and stories it's just kofi v del Rio for the umpteenth time and no one has cared for any of them.

Maybe it's just me, but I feel pro wrestling has had its day. It can't compete on a dramatic level with the TV shows of today, and it can't compete on an athletic level with ufc and boxing.

I still enjoy reading about it, and hearing people's opinions and whatever, but I'm sick of waiting for it to change and the false dawns of new eras. I really can't see myself being drawn back in this time. Which is a shame.

gnfnrhead

D.Q wrote: »

Haven't watched any wrestling since a week or two after Summerslam and don't miss it in any way shape or form. Sick to death of the same pointless matches for three hours every Monday.

Well there's your problem. :pac:

Try NJPW. You dont need Japanese to enjoy it. The stories are basic enough and you'll figure it out quick enough.

TNA is also an option. At worst, it is worth a shot rather than just giving up.

BohsJohnny

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Well there's your problem. :pac:

Try NJPW. You dont need Japanese to enjoy it. The stories are basic enough and you'll figure it out quick enough.

TNA is also an option. At worst, it is worth a shot rather than just giving up.

Spot on except swap TNA for PWG.

DM_7

When it comes to WWE, Three hours of a TV show every Monday, two on Friday, one on Wednesday and one on thursday (also ppvs plus next) is the problem rather than wrestling not being able to compete on a drama or athletic level with other shows. Breaking bad would be **** if it was on three hours every Monday never mind the rest.

Others that are doing the athletic side briallintly were already mentioned.

gnfnrhead

BohsJohnny wrote: »

Spot on except swap TNA for PWG.

PWG only do ~ten shows a year. I thought he wanted a little more common than that.

rossie1977

D.Q wrote: »

Maybe it's just me, but I feel pro wrestling has had its day. It can't compete on a dramatic level with the TV shows of today, and it can't compete on an athletic level with ufc and boxing.

yep its done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T26veP-O02A

Ridley

Machismo Fan wrote: »

I don't see any reason why wrestling shouldn't be held to a higher standard. New Japan have proved that you don't need to reinvent the wheel to do well, just logical booking attempting to create new stars with, most importantly, follow through. And there's no reason major US company can't do the same. I have never liked the 'wait and see' approach because too often is it not worth it and you can see where they're going to go wrong from a mile away, plus the journey usually isn't that great either.

It should be held to a higher standard of TV show as well.

There may not be clearly defined seasons but there are story beats, character arcs and Royal Rumble to WrestleMania definitely has a narrative (otherwise we wouldn't have a thread for booking it).

And I disagree with Stroud that every good story has a bad ending. I'm happy with, for example, HBK's attempts to defeat The Streak and the Undertaker's later desire to take on Triple H again because, despite winning, he didn't walk out on his own. The Shield are no longer unstoppable but they've been depowered gradually enough that they don't appear weak when they are defeated.

Sure, I've been disappointed plenty - in an ideal world I'd have seen fallout of Daniel Bryan successfully defending the WWE title against Triple H at Survivor Series this week - but I'm not going to resign myself to a belief that things can't/won't ever improve either.

I don't need the extremes of the Attitude Era back but I would like to see everyone having a role and getting a reaction again. And it would have been nice if Korporate Kane was a product of whatever the Wyatts had done to him rather than, y'know, largely ignore it.

rovert wrote: »

Do you think this perspective too defeatist or just being realistic.

You're the self-professed WWE apologist, what's your opinion?

gerTheGreat

I don't see why the WWE doesn't focus RAW against one market (say the teenies) and Smackdown at the 18 - 32 year olds. Smackdown could be a haven of excellent wrestling, story arcs and engaging characters while RAW could continue to do musical chairs and fart jokes.

D.Q

rossie1977 wrote: »

yep its done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T26veP-O02A

Obviously I'm aware it's still doing tremendously well. I should have specified that I meant artistically, rather than financially.

Soft Falling Rain

I was saying "wait and see" for quite awhile but I have now given up hope at this stage of the likes of Bryan and Punk having a prominent (and when I say prominent, I mean being in the central storyline) position going into WMXXX. You know, actually rewarding the guys the fans adore.

Eddie Guerrero once bemoaned of how WCW and the NWO became the same old shit every week. Here we are though, in 2013, and it's John Cena and Randy Orton duking it out for like the millionth time in a title unification storyline.

AND once again, as with trying to force Ryback down our throats over the past year, it's now Reigns and Big E who look to be getting primed for that over the next year. Both men with potential, but also both men who have done nothing to warrant the apparent monster push both could get over the next few months.

This is why I only check the results of shows with fleeting interest as there's no way I am willing to become a number WWE can add to their ratings crap or put a dime in their pocket (won't be buying WWE2K14). It's a shame that all these guys on the internet who bitch and moan about the "product" every week won't do the same and vote with their feet.

LOTD

Continuity seems to be missing from most of the storylines, it's hard to get invested into anything more. I mean at TLC there is going to be a unification match for the WWE and WHC titles, and it only gets a three weeks build.

Stop telling us that we shouldn't like Bryan and CM Punk, WWE thrives on fan interaction. It's like WWE head office can't get there heads around why fans cheer for good wrestling/wrestlers.

Promos now are painfully long and dull, when Dusty Rhodes was building up the feud between The Rhodes family and The Shield/Authority ,he gets told off for veering from the script yet it was a great promo and got people interested. The Rhodes and The Shield has been some of the best stuff this year.

SimonQuinlank

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I was saying "wait and see" for quite awhile but I have now given up hope at this stage of the likes of Bryan and Punk having a prominent (and when I say prominent, I mean being in the central storyline) position going into WMXXX. You know, actually rewarding the guys the fans adore.

Eddie Guerrero once bemoaned of how WCW and the NWO became the same old shit every week. Here we are though, in 2013, and it's John Cena and Randy Orton duking it out for like the millionth time in a title unification storyline.

AND once again, as with trying to force Ryback down our throats over the past year, it's now Reigns and Big E who look to be getting primed for that over the next year. Both men with potential, but also both men who have done nothing to warrant the apparent monster push both could get over the next few months.

This is why I only check the results of shows with fleeting interest as there's no way I am willing to become a number WWE can add to their ratings crap or put a dime in their pocket (won't be buying WWE2K14). It's a shame that all these guys on the internet who bitch and moan about the "product" every week won't do the same and vote with their feet.

That's bollocks,what would they have to do to warrant a push in your eyes?piss around the indy scene for 10 years?

I'm not totally sold on Big E because I think he looks a bit odd to be Cena level marketable,but Reigns has looked like the next big thing since The Shield debuted,and has now developed the charisma and in ring skills to back it up.Crowd seem to be digging him too.

Soft Falling Rain

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

That's bollocks,what would they have to do to warrant a push in your eyes?piss around the indy scene for 10 years?

I'm not totally sold on Big E because I think he looks a bit odd to be Cena level marketable,but Reigns has looked like the next big thing since The Shield debuted,and has now developed the charisma and in ring skills to back it up.Crowd seem to be digging him too.

Never said anything about the indy scene, I chose Bryan and Punk as examples purely because they are the two most popular superstars that they have.

With Reigns, he's good, but right now I don't see anything that suggests he should be in the main event. He doesn't seem to have much in the way of mic skills and will probably be a "too cool for school" face in the mould of Kevin Nash, who I was never a fan of tbh.

I can agree on Big E, the guy looks quite ridiculous.

LOTD

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

That's bollocks,what would they have to do to warrant a push in your eyes?piss around the indy scene for 10 years?

I'm not totally sold on Big E because I think he looks a bit odd to be Cena level marketable,but Reigns has looked like the next big thing since The Shield debuted,and has now developed the charisma and in ring skills to back it up.Crowd seem to be digging him too.

Woah ease up, Punk and Bryan seem to be getting the best reaction and they are brilliant wrestlers to boot. Don't dismiss the indy scene a lot of talented people got their break there .

B.A._Baracus

WWE sucks these days.
I've been watching it since I was 4 years old (as I am sure alot of you guys have been watching since a young age too) But here I am, well over 20 years later and I can barely stand it. It's still in my heart. I will always watch the Royal Rumble, 'Mania and generally read various wrestling websites. But what happened?

Actually, the same thing happened to my brothers and a few guys I knew. Maybe we all grew out of it. Maybe that when you've watched WWE for any significant amount of time you've seen it all or maybe since there is no competiton WWE will suffer.

If there was another big promotion you would have to figure alot of the usual suspects would have signed for the other. Certain wrestlers wouldnt be stale, story lines and angles would be better, more fresh talent etc.

I mean, back in the old territory days a wrestler would stay for a couple of years and when they peaked and started to get stale, off to another promotion. This was in an era were there wasnt ppv's and lesser tv time. But in todays wrestling we have guys like John Cena, Randy Orton, big show etc around for years and just stale.

Cena has been running wild the last 8 years. If you went back a futher 8 years (1997) WWE was completely different in product and talent. Go back a futher 8, (1989), and totally different again. Competition brought the best out in not just WWE, but wrestling.

LOTD

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

WWE sucks these days.
I've been watching it since I was 4 years old (as I am sure alot of you guys have been watching since a young age too) But here I am, well over 20 years later and I can barely stand it. It's still in my heart. I will always watch the Royal Rumble, 'Mania and generally read various wrestling websites. But what happened?

Actually, the same thing happened to my brothers and a few guys I knew. Maybe we all grew out of it. Maybe that when you've watched WWE for any significant amount of time you've seen it all or maybe since there is no competiton WWE will suffer.

If there was another big promotion you would have to figure alot of the usual suspects would have signed for the other. Certain wrestlers wouldnt be stale, story lines and angles would be better, more fresh talent etc.

I mean, back in the old territory days a wrestler would stay for a couple of years and when they peaked and started to get stale, off to another promotion. This was in an era were there wasnt ppv's and lesser tv time. But in todays wrestling we have guys like John Cena, Randy Orton, big show etc around for years and just stale.

Cena has been running wild the last 8 years. If you went back a futher 8 years (1997) WWE was completely different in product and talent. Go back a futher 8, (1989), and totally different again. Competition brought the best out in not just WWE, but wrestling.

WWE 20 years ago was fairly bad in all fairness bar a few guys like Michaels, Taker and Hart.

I think this post captures WWE and wrestling in a nutshell, people get really nostalgic about wrestling. Holding a certain era on a pedestal. Whatever about the product itself, there is a lot of talent on the current roster a lot of it being underused though.

Talk of the old territories, though I'm willing to bet not many here saw the glory days of the 70's and 80's of American territories. It's been dead since the late 80's.

WWE has no competitor of course they are going to play it safe, but they are doing great business at the same time

gnfnrhead

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

WWE sucks these days.
I've been watching it since I was 4 years old (as I am sure alot of you guys have been watching since a young age too) But here I am, well over 20 years later and I can barely stand it. It's still in my heart. I will always watch the Royal Rumble, 'Mania and generally read various wrestling websites. But what happened?

Actually, the same thing happened to my brothers and a few guys I knew. Maybe we all grew out of it. Maybe that when you've watched WWE for any significant amount of time you've seen it all or maybe since there is no competiton WWE will suffer.

There are literally hundreds of other promotions out there if you are willing to look for them. The grew out of it argument is bullshit when the only thing most people have watched is WWE.

LOTD

gnfnrhead wrote: »

There are literally hundreds of other promotions out there if you are willing to look for them. The grew out of it argument is bullshit when the only thing most people have watched is WWE.

Agree with this totally if you like Wrestling and WWE isn't doing it for you, there are so many good promotions out there.

I just want to add one thing I think WWE is doing wrong, they are not presenting it like a combat sport they are using this entertainment tag. In a way it almost diminishes the physical and athletic nature of it.

B.A._Baracus

LOTD wrote: »

WWE 20 years ago was fairly bad in all fairness bar a few guys like Michaels, Taker and Hart.

I think this post captures WWE and wrestling in a nutshell, people get really nostalgic about wrestling. Holding a certain era on a pedestal. Whatever about the product itself, there is a lot of talent on the current roster a lot of it being underused though.

Talk of the old territories, though I'm willing to bet not many here saw the glory days of the 70's and 80's of American territories. It's been dead since the late 80's.

WWE has no competitor of course they are going to play it safe, but they are doing great business at the same time

I mentioned the territories because its well known that it was good business sense to move on when a wrestler got stale. But where will guys like Orton or Big Show go now? :P No other promotion that's going to pay the same if not more. Competition brings out the best in so many ways.

But yup, WWE are raking it in Can't take that away from them.
But since we are bringing business into it. How come WWE doesnt pull in the same audience as mania time, all year around? It's well noted that WWE gets more a casual audience around mania but also 'returning' audience.

B.A._Baracus

gnfnrhead wrote: »

There are literally hundreds of other promotions out there if you are willing to look for them. The grew out of it argument is bullshit when the only thing most people have watched is WWE.

I watched WCW and ECW (original) when they were still active. I am a wrestling fan... not a "WWE fan"

But you are wrong to call it bull****. You grew out of playing with action man didnt you? ... people grow out of going to clubs. People stop listeng to certain bands. Peoples tastes change.

LOTD

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I mentioned the territories because its well known that it was good business sense to move on when a wrestler got stale. But where will guys like Orton or Big Show go now? :P No other promotion that's going to pay the same if not more. Competition brings out the best in so many ways.

But yup, WWE are raking it in Can't take that away from them.
But since we are bringing business into it. How come WWE doesnt pull in the same audience as mania time, all year around? It's well noted that WWE gets more a casual audience around mania but also 'returning' audience.

Competition is good, in fairness they all bankrupted themselves I think Vince McMahon must one of the few promoters/owner of a wrestling company who hasn't gone bust.

Like any major star they go stale after a while, WWE problem is not making superstars like they use to. So new people coming into the mix isn't really happening anymore.

Mania is like a heritage event it's going to pull in bigger numbers, like the World Cup or the Superbowl, if you want to use sporting events. Plus Rock, Lesnar and The Undertaker are huge names that people want to see. But this is the main problem not creating enough new stars

gnfnrhead

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I watched WCW and ECW (original) when they were still active. I am a wrestling fan... not a "WWE fan"

But you are wrong to call it bull****. You grew out of playing with action man didnt you? ... people grow out of going to clubs. People stop listeng to certain bands. Peoples tastes change.

No...... :pac:

If you now only watch WWE, you're a WWE fan. Doesnt matter what you watched 15 years ago.

B.A._Baracus

gnfnrhead wrote: »

No...... :pac:

If you now only watch WWE, you're a WWE fan. Doesnt matter what you watched 15 years ago.

You're acting like a nerd who views video gaming - "oh man, you aint a REAL gamer if you just play xbox" :pac: Seriously, what gives dude? how old are you? :pac:
Oh and if you read my other post you would have seen that I struggle to watch WWE now. Thanks for reading what I said before quoting it :pac:

gnfnrhead

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

You're acting like a nerd who views video gaming - "oh man, you aint a REAL gamer if you just play xbox" :pac: Seriously, what gives dude? how old are you? :pac:
Oh and if you read my other post you would have seen that I struggle to watch WWE now. Thanks for reading what I said before quoting it :pac:

What "gives" is you posted about WWE as if all of wrestling was the exact same as it. You didnt grow out of wrestling, you grew out of WWE. Major difference. Dont be throwing all of wrestling into the WWE basket.

riffmongous

I wish WWE was a proper tv show then it might have to start making some f***ing sense. It's really mind boggling how bad the writing is most of the time, even with a kids show I would expect some more continuity.

And I think there clearly is a series structure, long term between the big 4 ppvs and even really each month between regular PPVs is a mini series that deserves better writing, instead 90% of the cast take part in random matches or job and how in a 3 hour long program they cant spend from 30 secs -5 minutes giving some context to a midcard match is ridiculous, but I guess then they couldn't do an ad break every 10 minutes :rolleyes:

Mr.Nice Guy

I disagree with the majority of this person's complaints and I would have thought the wait and see approach was pretty obvious: the biggest show of the year is Wrestlemania. It stands to reason that people wish to wait and see what the plan is then before damning them.

I'm of the view that the long-term plan is for Bryan to face Hunter at Mania. I think a lot of others have said the same thing. If that doesn't happen I would say it's extremely dumb, but I don't think there's anything wrong in saying let's wait and see what happens until then.

The WWE have worked several storylines very well and had situations where the journey and ending were equally satisfying. Off the top of my head, Rock vs Austin in 2001, the Taker/HBK feuds, HHH vs Batistia...

Frankly some fans aren't going to be content unless and until Bryan and Punk are beating all before them. There has to be some give and take, though.

In late '02/03, Lesnar lost the title to Big Show and Angle if I recall correctly was in a tag angle with Benoit. Jumping ahead to the Road to Mania and Angle and Lesnar were set on a main event title feud that I recall they handled with pretty impressive care, and which resulted in a good match (Lesnar dive aside).

It stands to reason that the pay-off for this whole authority angle is for Hunter and Steph to get their comeuppance at Mania. If that is the plan, and I suspect it is, I don't have an issue with the heels being dominant at this stage.

If, however, they go down some route where Rock or Taker is taking on the authority and Punk and Bryan are left at the wayside then yes I would have to say it has been a waste. I would reserve judgement for now, though.

gnfnrhead

The Angle comparison isn't really valid. He wasn't feuding with Lesnar, then tagging with Benoit, before going back for more. He was feuding with Lesnar from somewhere around November as best I can recall. He didn't go down before going back up for the finish, he just went up and up. Bryan was in a perfect spot to be the number one guy. Now he is wasted trying to save the Wyatt's from being complete and utter failures, with hardly a mention of his main event run.

Sirsok

gnfnrhead wrote: »

The Angle comparison isn't really valid. He wasn't feuding with Lesnar, then tagging with Benoit, before going back for more. He was feuding with Lesnar from somewhere around November as best I can recall. He didn't go down before going back up for the finish, he just went up and up. Bryan was in a perfect spot to be the number one guy. Now he is wasted trying to save the Wyatt's from being complete and utter failures, with hardly a mention of his main event run.

Bryan will win the rumble, and get his pay off at mania....

chopperbyrne

Roman Reigns is the only guy I see winning the Rumble, going on to beat Orton or Punk at Mania.

Bryan will face Hunter in a high profile match and beat him clean.

Cena will job to Taker.

Whichever of Punk/Orton isn't in the title match will be in a match with a returning star like Rock or Lesnar.

Lord TSC

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I disagree with the majority of this person's complaints and I would have thought the wait and see approach was pretty obvious: the biggest show of the year is Wrestlemania. It stands to reason that people wish to wait and see what the plan is then before damning them.

I get your point and in fairness you're covering yourself by saying "If this happens, then get annoyed".

But this problem isn't just limited to the feuds you mention or Mania season. It's year round up and down the card; characters get randomly pushed and then jobbed out, stories go nowhere all year round, and there's no reason to have faith in WWE when it comes to "Wait and see". Mania usually comes good on the night, but for the 8 months after Mania, shows go all over the place.

It's not just about seeing "Bryan and Punk are beating all before them"; that's very unfair. I think what people want is anyone getting a sustained, logical push.

I was thrilled last year when Ryback was getting pushed up the card; while it may have been too much too quick, it was something new and fresh....and then for some reason, WWE just gave up on him. People win the money in the bank and go on massive losing streaks. They might win the title but usually they just continue to look bad. WWE identify someone as their possible next big star, start on them and then just abandon the project.

It's not about wanting Punk and Bryan at the top; it's about wanting someone new at the top, built up logically and credibly. And it's about being teased with the possibility time and time again, only for WWE to fall back on the likes of Cena and HHH and give up on whoever they were starting to push.

I'd give anything to see Reigns get a Batista style push between now and Mania....

B.A._Baracus

gnfnrhead wrote: »

What "gives" is you posted about WWE as if all of wrestling was the exact same as it. You didnt grow out of wrestling, you grew out of WWE. Major difference. Dont be throwing all of wrestling into the WWE basket.

WTF?
Reread my post ( post #28 )
I kept saying WWE, WWE, WWE ... but somehow your mind read "all of wrestling" instead of wwe...

I honestly thought you just misinterpreted my words. Nope, i think you are reading what you want to read.

riffmongous

I think Ryback is a prime example of the problems with WWE, pushed too soon, he went on a ppv losing streak that for some reason had him lose to Mark Henry at Wrestlemania, only to hit his finisher AFTER the match???
He was then booked against Cena for some reason, had a strong first attempt, then lost, then continued to lose, was given a bitch-heel gimmick for a few weeks, then a bully that didnt really do anything, then jobbed, then pushed and made a Paul Heyman guy, then very quickly jobbed again.

And as for Ziggler.. the only logical explanations are that management is punishing them, or the non Cena/Orton creative department is a team of monkeys frantically hammering away on their type writers

GTR63

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Roman Reigns is the only guy I see winning the Rumble, going on to beat Orton or Punk at Mania.

Fucking love Roman Reigns but I hope around Mania he is feuding with Ambrose, don`t want him to be given too much too soon.

Sirsok wrote: »

Bryan will win the rumble, and get his pay off at mania....

For me beating Cena clean at SummerSlam is a way bigger deal than beating the semi retired HHH at Mania

Lord TSC

GTR63 wrote: »

Fucking love Roman Reigns but I hope around Mania he is feuding with Ambrose, don`t want him to be given too much too soon.

Don't want them to rush The Shield's split. If anything, I'd quite like to see Reigns win the title while still part of the group, have the group do a run together with the title, and then slowly split Reigns away from the other two ala Batista and Evolution.