Is AE the greatest Era in the history or Pro wrestling?

[Donald Trump_]

Those ratings did not come just from quality shows Steph. Most of it was shock value. People calling their friends saying "Dude! Turn on USA and watch this mongo get powerbombed through a burning table. Stupid idiots most likely gonna die". People were either appalled by what they saw or were just hoping to see someone get hurt or die.

Ironically, the highest rated segment was this is your life. :burns:

 

[Stopspot]

Ironically, the highest rated segment was this is your life. :burns:

That was a example of Quality writing and shock value working together. People did not expect it so when it happened they called their friends and told them to check out what the hell mankind was doing. I have stated that there was a lot of quality in the AE. But one cannot ignore it's faults either. RA was much better booked for example.

 

[Lockard 23]

In terms of ratings and money drawn, Attitude Era made more money than any other era of wrestling, and since wrestling is a business and thus all about making money, AE wins. But I, like a lot of others, think the 80's/early 90's boom period was more significant in a way because that's when wrestling first became acceptable as mainstream entertainment. Hulk Hogan, who was the biggest star of that era, is a name that almost everyone has heard at some point in their lives, wrestling fan or not, and they know to associate his name with wrestling. Ask a non-wrestling fan today would Steve Austin is, and most probably won't have a clue. Unless they've seen one one of his B-movies, that is (and even then, they'll associate him as an actor, not a wrestler, which makes my point.) There's even some people who were around when wrestling became huge during that era that still know names like Randy Savage, Jake Roberts and even Big Bossman. I mean, even Bossman. How many midcarders from the AE can a average non-wrestling fan (who was alive and aware that wrestling was in a boom period in the late 90's) name off the top of their head?

For me personally, it was never the more raunchy, shock value elements from the AE that appealed to me. Sure, Austin pushed the limits by cursing and flipping people off and drinking beer, and DX could get a bit raunchy, but those sort of things could exist without the whole product being 'edgy' per se. My favorite year personally was 2000, which is when a lot of the shock TV aspects of things was toned down quite a bit. I also think it's still WWE's most profitable year ever. In fact, other than the occasional bra and panties match, the year 2000 could have happened perfectly well in a PG environment. Which just proves that PG itself isn't the problem.

 

[Donald Trump_]

Good AE quote.

"The Attitude Era symbolizes all that can be rebellious, shocking and brazen about wrestling. In many ways it embodies the best of the industry, and was responsible for some of the greatest personalities and storylines of all time. During the late '90s, the WWE lived on the edge, and sometimes crossed the lines of decency, to beat its competition. The result was a period of unprecedented success."

 

[Crayo]

You can't use the ratings argument. The internet was only just starting back then. There were no IWC really, apart from Google groups. If you wanted to watch it, you watched it live. Otherwise you missed an episode. Now, you have YT, spoilers etc. If the AE took place now with the same talent etc, the ratings wouldn't be anywhere near as high as they were. That's pure fact.

 

[Lockard 23]

Maybe not as high, but definitely high. They might not have taken a hit at all, honestly. The biggest Wrestlemania buyrates all took place in a era of illegal streaming. They still scored high buyrates. Movies still make a killing at the box office (breaking records all the time, such as what the Avengers just did), despite movie pirating. And these are all things you have to pay money for, whereas Raw was a free TV show. If the show is really good, I think most people would watch it on TV.

 

[Donald Trump_]

You can't use the ratings argument. The internet was only just starting back then. There were no IWC really, apart from Google groups. If you wanted to watch it, you watched it live. Otherwise you missed an episode. Now, you have YT, spoilers etc. If the AE took place now with the same talent etc, the ratings wouldn't be anywhere near as high as they were. That's pure fact.

It wouldve not been as high, but still high. RAW is free so granted its good people will have reason to watch. #Entertainment. AE was so big was because of the time it happened, so if AE happened again in 2012 with internet if obviously wouldn't be as big. Timing is also one of the reasons AE can never be duplicated. Would Austin/Rock still thrive in PG era like they did in AE? Would they even be half as big? "More important than what you do, is when you do it."

If WWE still exists for the oncoming 200 years we will obviously see many eras. But will they ever duplicated the AE even in 200 years? No. That's part of what makes it so great. It's very extraordinary and rare. The timing/the WCW competition/the talent. Does lightning strike in the same place twice? Like StopSpot said 90% of the things they did would get RAW banned from TV today. The 90s were some of the best times, it was exciting. AE made it cool to be a wrestler, kids that never even dreamed of wrestling wanted to wrestle cuz of AE. The wrestlers in AE were idolized, where in PG era the closest thing you have to idolization is a bunch of 5 year olds thinking cena is a super hero.

 

[Donald Trump_]

Maybe not as high, but definitely high. They might not have taken a hit at all, honestly. The biggest Wrestlemania buyrates all took place in a era of illegal streaming. They still scored high buyrates. Movies still make a killing at the box office (breaking records all the time, such as what the Avengers just did), despite movie pirating. And these are all things you have to pay money for, whereas Raw was a free TV show. If the show is really good, I think most people would watch it on TV.

Yeah, if RAW is good and is on TV then people will watch it. :burns:

 

[Lockard 23]

If WWE still exists for the oncoming 200 years we will obviously see many eras. But will they ever duplicated the AE even in 200 years? No. That's part of what makes it so great. It's very extraordinary and rare. The timing/the WCW competition/the talent. Does lightning strike in the same place twice? Like StopSpot said 90% of the things they did would get RAW banned from TV today. The 90s were some of the best times, it was exciting. AE made it cool to be a wrestler, kids that never even dreamed of wrestling wanted to wrestle cuz of AE. The wrestlers in AE were idolized, where in PG era the closest thing you have to idolization is a bunch of 5 year olds thinking cena is a super hero.

I think the AE could be duplicated in a way, at least when you stop to define what the AE is. It's typically defined as an era where they pushed the limits and had more mature and sometimes sexually oriented storylines. So, could they (if they ever went back to TV-14) have another successful era where they pushed the limits so to speak? Yes. The tone would be different because it would be different wrestlers and storylines and such, but I'd think that's what people would want rather than just the same wrestlers and such. To say otherwise is to say they could never have another boom period under the PG banner only because that's technically already been done before in the 80's.

 

[Bort]

It was a wrestling perod where basically ANYTHING could draw some money, Hogan & nWo and Heyman's and Turner's ECW were Attitude before Attitude, but yeah - Vince McMahon's machine came up with the name for it, it was a long period of edgy wrestling, it just shifted it's focus from WCW to WWF. The product was not necessary better, but it definitely more entertaining and funny.

- midcard and lowcard stories and feuds
- strong f'n midcard
- great, electric crowds
- no babies in front rows
- edgy stories
- strong, believable heels
- superb promos
- credible main eventers
- tag teams
- tag teams
- tag teams
- pro wrestling was cool

So yeah, I wouldn't say it's THE BEST era, but it's certainly THE MOST ENTERTAINING era for this viewer, when we're talking about WWF/E.

 

[Crayo]

It was a wrestling perod where basically ANYTHING could draw some money, Hogan & nWo and Heyman's and Turner's ECW were Attitude before Attitude, but yeah - Vince McMahon's machine came up with the name for it, it was a long period of edgy wrestling, it just shifted it's focus from WCW to WWF. The product was not necessary better, but it definitely more entertaining and funny.

- midcard and lowcard stories and feuds
- strong f'n midcard
- great, electric crowds
- no babies in front rows
- edgy stories
- strong, believable heels
- superb promos
- credible main eventers
- tag teams
- tag teams
- tag teams
- pro wrestling was cool

So yeah, I wouldn't say it's THE BEST era, but it's certainly THE MOST ENTERTAINING era for this viewer, when we're talking about WWF/E.

Very nice post.

 

[seabs]

It had a lot of upsides but it was far from perfect for me. This whole being the best era screams of nostalgia a lot of the time IMO, after all was pro wrestling ever more enjoyable then when you're a kid?

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

 

[#Heel1]

The reason the attitude era won't come back is because Vince doesn't need to. He is past the stage of having to take risks because there is no competition. If you really want it back, then watch TNA exclusively and hope they get more edgy.

Also, I've always been a RA mark. Perfection for me was not when WWE was feuding with WCW, but when Smackdown was feuding with Raw.

 

[Donald Trump_]

I think the AE could be duplicated in a way, at least when you stop to define what the AE is. It's typically defined as an era where they pushed the limits and had more mature and sometimes sexually oriented storylines. So, could they (if they ever went back to TV-14) have another successful era where they pushed the limits so to speak? Yes. The tone would be different because it would be different wrestlers and storylines and such, but I'd think that's what people would want rather than just the same wrestlers and such. To say otherwise is to say they could never have another boom period under the PG banner only because that's technically already been done before in the 80's.

So who would replace ministry taker/austin/rock if AE was duplicated. fucking miz and wade barrett. sorry guys, but id rather not witness the AE with the current talent.

__________

The reason the attitude era won't come back is because Vince doesn't need to. He is past the stage of having to take risks because there is no competition. If you really want it back, then watch TNA exclusively and hope they get more edgy.

Also, I've always been a RA mark. Perfection for me was not when WWE was feuding with WCW, but when Smackdown was feuding with Raw.

AE was basically WWE's hat trick.