CM PUNK ADMITS WHAT GOHAN DENIES

[Rogue]

It certainly does, if you didn't experience it when it was happening you won't have the same appreciation for it. If your first taste of pro wrestling was the AE, you jumped right into edgy, limit pushing wrestling where the match quality was nowhere near as high as the era that preceded it. The art of story telling in the ring is practically dead these days, but Bret Hart was the absolute master. He made Kevin Nash look Kurt Angle ffs.

Trust me,his first taste of wrestling was not during the Attitude Era.

 

[Snowman1]

It certainly does, if you didn't experience it when it was happening you won't have the same appreciation for it. If your first taste of pro wrestling was the AE, you jumped right into edgy, limit pushing wrestling where the match quality was nowhere near as high as the era that preceded it. The art of story telling in the ring is practically dead these days, but Bret Hart was the absolute master. He made Kevin Nash look Kurt Angle ffs.

Man, is the generation gap in wrestling fans wide or what? Was just hearing how people who watched during years like 1994 have a much better appreciation for shows like todays' WWE than the Attitude Era generation.

Can you give some examples of what stories were told in the ring for those of us who didn't see that era? Heard so much about how Hogan used to overcome the odds on a weekly basis but that kind of stuff doesn't work today (as we see with Cena). How were they able to tell different stories inside the ring and keep it fresh?

 

[Senhor Perfect]

Man, is the generation gap in wrestling fans wide or what? Was just hearing how people who watched during years like 1994 have a much better appreciation for shows like todays' WWE than the Attitude Era generation.

Can you give some examples of what stories were told in the ring for those of us who didn't see that era? Heard so much about how Hogan used to overcome the odds on a weekly basis but that kind of stuff doesn't work today (as we see with Cena). How were they able to tell different stories inside the ring and keep it fresh?

:notsure: if sarcasm but I'll answer anyway.

Guys like HBK and Hart would take you on an emotional journey during the match by just doing simple stuff like working over their opponent properly. For example, Hart would constantly work on a guys back/midsection during a match to set him up to eventually put on the sharpshooter. There was a purpose to every move. Taking Cena as the example for today, do his 5 moves of doom do anything to set up the opponent to be "finished off" by the AA? I would say no. Same goes for selling. Cena could take 46 shots to the head during a match, then all of a sudden pops up just fine and hits his moves. Back in what I like to call "the day", if you were working over Perfects arm, you better bet your ass he'd have a hard time pulling off the perfectplex because of it, and sell the pain in his arm often enough for us to notice.

Also, with the heels and faces being so much more defined in those days, being a sympethetic face was a bit easier to pull off.

 

[Snowman1]

:notsure: if sarcasm but I'll answer anyway.

Guys like HBK and Hart would take you on an emotional journey during the match by just doing simple stuff like working over their opponent properly. For example, Hart would constantly work on a guys back/midsection during a match to set him up to eventually put on the sharpshooter. There was a purpose to every move. Taking Cena as the example for today, do his 5 moves of doom do anything to set up the opponent to be "finished off" by the AA? I would say no. Same goes for selling. Cena could take 46 shots to the head during a match, then all of a sudden pops up just fine and hits his moves. Back in what I like to call "the day", if you were working over Perfects arm, you better bet your ass he'd have a hard time pulling off the perfectplex because of it, and sell the pain in his arm often enough for us to notice.

Also, with the heels and faces being so much more defined in those days, being a sympethetic face was a bit easier to pull off.

Haha it wasn't sarcasm, great answer. They still try some storytelling (why the heels normally dominate matches for the faces to come out ahead in the end), but it normally comes across as bullshit. This wouldn't.

Basically both performers acted in ways that make sense haha. We've been so accustomed to seeing stuff like the 5 Moves of Doom that we just ignore all the stuff that doesn't make sense and praise the few things in wrestling that do (especially us TNA marks). Pretty sad when you think about it.

That being said, don't think that style of wrestling will work in this era (too stale, too slow, etc), just like the Attitude Era style won't to an extent. But they really need to find a style that does work in this era and what we're getting isn't it.

 

[Lockard 23]

I personally don't think there's much wrong with the wrestling today. Maybe guys sell a lot of stuff less, which is the only thing I'd harp on improving, but I can go without the extra slow technical stuff. I was watching and re-watching some old stuff earlier today, and saw the Bob Backlund/Hulk Hogan WWF Title match from the Philadelphia Spectrum in 1980. While I enjoyed it for what it was, it was still a 35 minute match that moved quite slow and they spent more than half the match lying on the ground. A match like that today would easily get boring chants ten minutes in. I guarantee that if I posted it here, anyone who bothered to click on it at all would probably turn it off just as quick or at least fast forward to the last five minutes or something to see the final stages of the match and how it ends.

Was quite a fun match to see because it told an interesting story - the smaller but more technical Bob Backlund has to outsmart and out maneuver the larger and more powerful Hulk Hogan by avoiding any sort of lock ups or toe to toe action and has to instead take him down to the canvas by going for his legs and then try to wear him down with more mat based maneuvers - but even I couldn't be arsed to watch that kind of slow paced match ALL the time. There was a time when most matches period were like that (if you go back to Sammartino's era, you'll see what I'm talking about.)

I think a lot of the matches from years back (even a couple from the New Generation Era in the mid 90's) are somewhat overrated. I'd personally say that some of the greatest matches (in the WWF/E at least) have come out of the past 10-15 years.

 

[Donald Trump_]

He was just being humble. It's like if Tim Duncan said Chris Bosh is better than him. Is he really better, or is he just being humble? He was probably thinking, "I'll let my friend Bryan Danielson take this one."

CM Punk, what a legend man.

 

[Shadie T]

It certainly does, if you didn't experience it when it was happening you won't have the same appreciation for it. If your first taste of pro wrestling was the AE, you jumped right into edgy, limit pushing wrestling where the match quality was nowhere near as high as the era that preceded it. The art of story telling in the ring is practically dead these days, but Bret Hart was the absolute master. He made Kevin Nash look Kurt Angle ffs.

I never stated watching current wrestling for a while, When I first got into it I was watching old AE and Golden Era stuff online and from old video tapes my dad had, I didnt experience it while it happened, I watched it around 2006.

 

[seabs]

In grew up in the AE but prefer the 80s to it in all honesty. The whole blending different dynamics was cool sure but everything was so bish bash wallop a lot of the time it was annoying. Some times I just want to see this is a good guy, this is a bad guy they're going to put on a Damn good match for my entertainment. Savage / Steamboat or Michaels / Razor entertain me more than most AE matches barring the WCW guys in all honesty.

 

[Farooq]

To be honest, the Attitude Era was solely based more on Entertainment. It was more focused on segments rather then matches. Yes the Attitude Era did have some good matches, but it felt like wrestling became important again in the Ruthless Aggression era, where it was equaled out on wrestling and segments. The Attitude Era put the E in WWE before it even got it to my belief.

 

[Danielson]

:notsure: if sarcasm but I'll answer anyway.

Guys like HBK and Hart would take you on an emotional journey during the match by just doing simple stuff like working over their opponent properly. For example, Hart would constantly work on a guys back/midsection during a match to set him up to eventually put on the sharpshooter. There was a purpose to every move. Taking Cena as the example for today, do his 5 moves of doom do anything to set up the opponent to be "finished off" by the AA? I would say no. Same goes for selling. Cena could take 46 shots to the head during a match, then all of a sudden pops up just fine and hits his moves. Back in what I like to call "the day", if you were working over Perfects arm, you better bet your ass he'd have a hard time pulling off the perfectplex because of it, and sell the pain in his arm often enough for us to notice.

Also, with the heels and faces being so much more defined in those days, being a sympethetic face was a bit easier to pull off.

What did you think of Austin getting his ass whooped all match and then a thesz press followed by stompin the mud hole, and then the stone cold stunner, but most of the time he could skip the first two steps and just pull out a random stunner, orton style. I agree with you for the most part but they still had guys like cena in the AE. Stone Cold was just way cooler and had matches with guys like Brett Hart that were simply amazing.

 

[Danielson]

To be honest, the Attitude Era was solely based more on Entertainment. It was more focused on segments rather then matches. Yes the Attitude Era did have some good matches, but it felt like wrestling became important again in the Ruthless Aggression era, where it was equaled out on wrestling and segments. The Attitude Era put the E in WWE before it even got it to my belief.

Get the "f" out!

 

[Crayo]

I personally don't think there's much wrong with the wrestling today. Maybe guys sell a lot of stuff less, which is the only thing I'd harp on improving, but I can go without the extra slow technical stuff. I was watching and re-watching some old stuff earlier today, and saw the Bob Backlund/Hulk Hogan WWF Title match from the Philadelphia Spectrum in 1980. While I enjoyed it for what it was, it was still a 35 minute match that moved quite slow and they spent more than half the match lying on the ground. A match like that today would easily get boring chants ten minutes in. I guarantee that if I posted it here, anyone who bothered to click on it at all would probably turn it off just as quick or at least fast forward to the last five minutes or something to see the final stages of the match and how it ends.

I think there is in WWE. There is a massive difference between WWE wrestling and TNA wrestling. TNA do it right, and WWE don't. There is little effort on WWE's part to make free-TV matches exciting, but you can almost guarantee one great match a week with TNA. The PPV's however are fine; WWE do great on PPV match quality imo.

 

[Danielson]

I think there is in WWE. There is a massive difference between WWE wrestling and TNA wrestling. TNA do it right, and WWE don't. There is little effort on WWE's part to make free-TV matches exciting, but you can almost guarantee one great match a week with TNA. The PPV's however are fine; WWE do great on PPV match quality imo.

I actually think WWE has a great match every week, but it could of course be better. Everytime DB is in the ring it's easily MOTY imo. I know i'm being a mark maybe, but seriously every week his match is the best (unless it's some kind of squash/interference number right off the jump.

 

[Crayo]

I actually think WWE has a great match every week, but it could of course be better. Everytime DB is in the ring it's easily MOTY imo. I know i'm being a mark maybe, but seriously every week his match is the best (unless it's some kind of squash/interference number right off the jump.

Lol bit unfair to judge WWE on Daniel Bryan . I honestly rate TNA TV matches so much higher than WWE, apart from the odd-occasion of course. We're going through a good spell right now with Daniel Bryan performing well with The Shield, and with those three on TV we are more or less guaranteed a good match weekly, but generally WWE can have plenty of shows with lacklustre wrestling. Thinking about it, it's not acceptable, as they have an extra hour of television.

 

[Danielson]

Lol bit unfair to judge WWE on Daniel Bryan . I honestly rate TNA TV matches so much higher than WWE, apart from the odd-occasion of course. We're going through a good spell right now with Daniel Bryan performing well with The Shield, and with those three on TV we are more or less guaranteed a good match weekly, but generally WWE can have plenty of shows with lacklustre wrestling. Thinking about it, it's not acceptable, as they have an extra hour of television.

I think it's a little fair to judge wwe on daniel bryan when comparing to tna. WWE has him, and TNA does not. Roster quality is a big reason why WWE>TNA any day of the week. It's wwe's beneifit to have the shield/daniel bryan. They are more likely to have better matches and that's something to point out while comparing to tna. TNA might put on more exciting wrestling but from what i've seen the past month and half it's not that stark of a difference. Just what i've noticed, and I know others have opinions that are different from mine. Just throwing mine into the mix. :