MizMasta3000
Guest
here we go again. Not necessarily attitude era but from like from late 80s to late 90s about a decade
-
Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!
I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register
Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board
Airfixx
Guest
"Here we go again"
...Indeed. Maybe if the rest of that paragraph made some kind of coherent point I'd have understood what you meant rather than having to take what you wrote on face value. (I've re-read and re-read your post hoping to debate rather than gun it down.)
Your comment that WWE "has never really changed since 1980s" is complete madness.
The crux of my contradiction is that the era/s of WWE from which Taker & HBK were born are as far away from the Attitude product as wrestling probably ever got. The raw, hardcore/ecw inspired Attitude era is in some respects the upshot of a reaction against early 90's WWE and it's ever increasing cartoon-ish nature.
regardless of how many HIAC matches there are at the HIAC PPV, the point of naming PPVs things like HIAC, TLC, EC and so on is for ease of marketing... These are the matches that peeps are most likely to throw money at so from a WWE point of view if peeps aren't buying PPVs that contain such 'prestigious' gimmick matches then they need to find a better way to market them.
This way, even someone that doesn't watch WWE TV from week to week, will be less likely to miss the PPV that hosts said matches with names like these.
...Indeed. Maybe if the rest of that paragraph made some kind of coherent point I'd have understood what you meant rather than having to take what you wrote on face value. (I've re-read and re-read your post hoping to debate rather than gun it down.)
Your comment that WWE "has never really changed since 1980s" is complete madness.
The crux of my contradiction is that the era/s of WWE from which Taker & HBK were born are as far away from the Attitude product as wrestling probably ever got. The raw, hardcore/ecw inspired Attitude era is in some respects the upshot of a reaction against early 90's WWE and it's ever increasing cartoon-ish nature.
regardless of how many HIAC matches there are at the HIAC PPV, the point of naming PPVs things like HIAC, TLC, EC and so on is for ease of marketing... These are the matches that peeps are most likely to throw money at so from a WWE point of view if peeps aren't buying PPVs that contain such 'prestigious' gimmick matches then they need to find a better way to market them.
This way, even someone that doesn't watch WWE TV from week to week, will be less likely to miss the PPV that hosts said matches with names like these.
noumenon
Guest
KOTR??? Why so we can have a different person with a king gimmick every fucking year? No thank you.
Airfixx
Guest
You're forgetting what the KOTR PPVs were actually like.
Hell, I think the last person to wear a crown before Booker became KOTR was Mable (aka Viscera) in 1995!
Angle, Edge, SCSA, Brock and such... None of them rocked the King gimmick.
KOTR was always a great way to build a guy and for quite a while the KOTR winner would get the title shot at SSlam.
+ One night tourney's kick ass!
Hell, I think the last person to wear a crown before Booker became KOTR was Mable (aka Viscera) in 1995!
Angle, Edge, SCSA, Brock and such... None of them rocked the King gimmick.
KOTR was always a great way to build a guy and for quite a while the KOTR winner would get the title shot at SSlam.
+ One night tourney's kick ass!
MikeRaw
Guest
2 things...
-If you think that this is them trying to create the new Attitude Era, you're wrong. And if they are, they're failing.
-Im sick fo the whole "drop the PG" shit. It makes sense, goddamit.
I havent watched wrestling in months. Im no longer a fan, which explains my inactivity. BUT, the PG thing makes sense. When did most people here start watching? As a kid. Now, most of the people who started watching as kidsin the 90s have moved on, and are no longer fans. That's why WWE's ratings went down. All the people who grew up in the attitude era moved on about 5 years ago, so even while WWE continued to be 14+ (which they did, until last year) they had a very small group of fans, compared to the past.
So really, this is just part of the cycle. The old group of fans, are, for the most part, gone, and because of that, the ratings are down. In order to get new fans, the WWE needs to market towards kids (the same way they did in the 80's and early 90s) to get young fans. Now, in a few years, as those fans get older, the WWE will have an edgier product again. But really, rtight now, aiming towards kids is the right thing to do, because the old fans have mostly moved on.
-If you think that this is them trying to create the new Attitude Era, you're wrong. And if they are, they're failing.
-Im sick fo the whole "drop the PG" shit. It makes sense, goddamit.
I havent watched wrestling in months. Im no longer a fan, which explains my inactivity. BUT, the PG thing makes sense. When did most people here start watching? As a kid. Now, most of the people who started watching as kidsin the 90s have moved on, and are no longer fans. That's why WWE's ratings went down. All the people who grew up in the attitude era moved on about 5 years ago, so even while WWE continued to be 14+ (which they did, until last year) they had a very small group of fans, compared to the past.
So really, this is just part of the cycle. The old group of fans, are, for the most part, gone, and because of that, the ratings are down. In order to get new fans, the WWE needs to market towards kids (the same way they did in the 80's and early 90s) to get young fans. Now, in a few years, as those fans get older, the WWE will have an edgier product again. But really, rtight now, aiming towards kids is the right thing to do, because the old fans have mostly moved on.
MizMasta3000
Guest
WWE can still appeal to kids and be edgy, that's why I don't like the lighter stuff. I don't know why everyone is looking to make things less violent for the kids. parents watched the same type of stuff and are just fine, not maniacal killing machines. like on kids cartoons, instead of having super badass Voltron or Ninja Turtles, kids have these crappy TV shows so they won't become violent.
noumenon
Guest
Not true, think of all of the kids who started watching wrestling during the Attitude era. A product doesn't run in one giant cycle, you can't think of it that way. The way you're thinking of it is that the WWE is a ride, bunch of kids get on the ride, they fill up all the cars, they grow up and get bored and then a whole new group enters.
WWE needs to work on marketing to ALL age groups and making life long fans rather than shifting their product to cater to only one age group or type of fan.
WWE needs to work on marketing to ALL age groups and making life long fans rather than shifting their product to cater to only one age group or type of fan.
Airfixx
Guest
^^^The only way they can do that is by pretty much doing what they're doing now... Tone it down from the Attitude days and still insert stuff like HHH's home invasion and the occasional, the more mature-themed storyline like the HBK/JBL thang which was routed in the current recession.
Seriously... Fuck the lack of blood... I must have seen blood 3 or 4 times max in the first 6 or so year of me being a WWF fan. Imo, given the realignment of the product, keep it off TV and just save it for 'special' occasions on PPV.
I agree with what you're saying about the "cycle" though, Noum'.... They can't operate by letting things fall to shit every 15-20 years or so and start building virutally from scratch each time.
Seriously... Fuck the lack of blood... I must have seen blood 3 or 4 times max in the first 6 or so year of me being a WWF fan. Imo, given the realignment of the product, keep it off TV and just save it for 'special' occasions on PPV.
I agree with what you're saying about the "cycle" though, Noum'.... They can't operate by letting things fall to shit every 15-20 years or so and start building virutally from scratch each time.
MizMasta3000
Guest
Airfixx
Guest
Not so sure about that... They'd still probably be gunning for advertising revenue and an increas in fanbase.
IMO WWE TV is only a matter of time tho'. Prob as some kind of subscription service like the sports channels are here in the UK. Maybe some option for reduced price PPVs should you commit to the entire year in advance... In fact I think that'd be a smart idea regardless.
IMO WWE TV is only a matter of time tho'. Prob as some kind of subscription service like the sports channels are here in the UK. Maybe some option for reduced price PPVs should you commit to the entire year in advance... In fact I think that'd be a smart idea regardless.
MizMasta3000
Guest
In US our Comcast cable has On Demand whcih has a subscription like WWE 24/7 where they dont hold back blood or cursing
Airfixx
Guest
Depending on what kind of shows they show, thats prob cos they don't have the same concerns about viewing demographics as WWE.
MizMasta3000
Guest
Airfixx
Guest
Nah, see above all the above talk of widening their target audience whilst tapping back into the kids to 'ensure' an audience another 5, 10, 15 years.