Is WWE relying on the past?

  • 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


Dat Kid1

King of smurf Style
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
22,647
Reaction score
5,892
Points
0
Location
New York, NY
Website
youtube.com
I like what they're doing now. They have a good balance of old and new going on right now. They hve talent being pushed, new talent coming in, and old talent keeping the fans into the show so that they are there to witness these new guys who'll be at the forefront in 1 or 2 years. I can't complain about how they've been doing this.
 

BaraaKhalaf92

Champion
Joined
Nov 24, 2012
Messages
3,928
Reaction score
122
Points
0
Age
32
It's true that they rely too much on the past, but if that gives them money and gives us the joy of watching the likes of Rock , Brock and Jericho, then that's okay.
 

Saylor

Champion
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
4,760
Reaction score
193
Points
63
Age
29
Website
www.wweforums.net
Crayo said:
No they wouldn't. What happens when Rock doesn't want to keep appearing? What happens when Brock gives it up? Taker & HHH have more or less given up or are on their last legs... Who do they turn to then for dream matches?

Omg.. :downer:

He uses the money that he makes to hire stars that aren't actually boring. He hasn't got his company that far without using a business mind. He know's what he's doing - he's a genius. Alternatively, he can use that money to bring back other ex-stars. It's not Vince's fault that his stars aren't drawing enough to headline WrestleMania's. This is the only reason he's bringing back previous stars is because the current star's aren't running with the opportunity they're given.
 

Mustafar Reginald

The Lunatic Fringe
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
1,325
Reaction score
628
Points
0
Yep, and while this might seem to contradict everything I've posted prior to this, there is nothing wrong with relying on past or returning stars if they're going to be working a program and not there solely for a cheap pop or so.

The problem is the method on which WWE is utilizing these past stars are mostly just short term profits rather than utilizing them to help solidify wrestlers as stars so that they won't lose as much viewers when Rock and crew take their leave of absence. Out of Brock, Rock, & Jericho, the only one who'll be working to elevate someone rather than face someone that doesn't need the rub is Jericho, who isn't on the level of drawing power as Lesnar/Rock. I still think Rock vs. Ziggler (though it's way too late now) could be amazing at Mania had the built it up right the months preceding, and as previously mentioned, Ryback/Brock could be very well and garner interest in my opinion. Yeah, it isn't the safest bet as the other alternatives but it could still be great and end up more profitable. Also, I'm not suggesting WWE should do both of those. They have two big stars, they could easily focus one for a pure dream match to fall back and take a "risk" with the other than what they're going for.

Finally, I feel the need to point out that people just want to see Rock & Brock in action, it doesn't necessarily have to be with one of the top guys like Cena & Trips. I mean, a big part of the audience Rock is bringing in are people who lost interest in the product for the last few years for whatever reason, a significant portion will actually clam Cena is the reason. So realistically, the portion of the audience is tuning in to see The Rock. They're not tuning in because John Cena is facing the Rock. They weren't tuning in because CM Punk was facing The Rock. They were tuning in, and the continue to tune in, because Rock is back and wrestling [on PPVs]. My point is that the people who are tuning in mainly because Rock is on, obviously doesn't rank Cena or Punk that high above someone like Ziggler because if they did they'd still be watching or won't stop when Rock goes. I'm not saying someone like Santino should be, but someone on the cusp of greatness like Ziggler would be ideal for Rock. And the same thing goes for Brock. People are tuning in because they want to see Brock. Those people aren't going to be turned off because you're pitting him against Ryback because they are mainly watching to see Lesnar.

Granted, they doesn't cover the entirety of the audience they pull in, but I still think it's worth bringing up.
 

Crayo

The Boss
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
63,815
Reaction score
6,080
Points
1
Location
United Kingdom of Ambrose
Website
wweforums.net
Saylor said:
Omg.. :downer:

He uses the money that he makes to hire stars that aren't actually boring. He hasn't got his company that far without using a business mind. He know's what he's doing - he's a genius. Alternatively, he can use that money to bring back other ex-stars. It's not Vince's fault that his stars aren't drawing enough to headline WrestleMania's. This is the only reason he's bringing back previous stars is because the current star's aren't running with the opportunity they're given.

I'm not sure if serious. WWE isn't lacking money, so why would they wait to "hire stars that aren't actually boring"? Furthermore, what stars can you bring in on equal ground as HHH, Rock, Brock and Undertaker? None.

"It's not Vince's fault that his stars aren't drawing enough to headline Wrestlemania's" - Urm, yes it is... Or at least he has a huge part in why. Vince lost his touch a long time ago Saylor.
 

Captain Charisma

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
1,960
Reaction score
209
Points
63
Location
Europe
Website
wrestlingsmarks.com
Favorite Wrestler
bobbyroode2
Favorite Wrestler
kurtangle2
Favorite Wrestler
christian2
Favorite Wrestler
ajstyles2
Favorite Wrestler
austinaries2
Favorite Wrestler
hhh
Of course because new guys doesnt have that legendary charisma, they dont attract fans. Most of them. They are talented for sure but they are not Rock, Brock, Jericho, Taker etc. WWE is making money on this way which is a good for WWE but bad for me.
 

Stopspot

Now I’m a big, fat dynamo!
Joined
Apr 1, 2012
Messages
42,192
Reaction score
8,467
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Sweden
Farooq said:
I like what they're doing now. They have a good balance of old and new going on right now. They hve talent being pushed, new talent coming in, and old talent keeping the fans into the show so that they are there to witness these new guys who'll be at the forefront in 1 or 2 years. I can't complain about how they've been doing this.

This. There are currently a nice mix of old and new, with a lot of new talent being pushed and coming into the company.
 

Saylor

Champion
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
4,760
Reaction score
193
Points
63
Age
29
Website
www.wweforums.net
Crayo said:
I'm not sure if serious. WWE isn't lacking money, so why would they wait to "hire stars that aren't actually boring"? Furthermore, what stars can you bring in on equal ground as HHH, Rock, Brock and Undertaker? None.

"It's not Vince's fault that his stars aren't drawing enough to headline Wrestlemania's" - Urm, yes it is... Or at least he has a huge part in why. Vince lost his touch a long time ago Saylor.

The current stars aren't Undertaker, Y2J, Brock Lesnar or Triple H. They aren't as great as the previous stars. Have you seen the current state of the roster? WWE is a business. A businesses main objective is to make as much money as possible. WWE bringing back previous stars is what they shall do if they want to see them notes.
 

Crayo

The Boss
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
63,815
Reaction score
6,080
Points
1
Location
United Kingdom of Ambrose
Website
wweforums.net
Saylor said:
The current stars aren't Undertaker, Y2J, Brock Lesnar or Triple H. They aren't as great as the previous stars. Have you seen the current state of the roster? WWE is a business. A businesses main objective is to make as much money as possible. WWE bringing back previous stars is what they shall do if they want to see them notes.

Yes I know... I have said that so many times in this thread alone. They aren't like the Taker's, the Lesnar's, The Rock's etc, SO BUILD THEM UP TO BE, lol. You're probably the only person I've encountered that thinks WWE's method of using former legends now is actually right.

Rock went over Hogan. Brock went over Rock. The "passing the torch" formula has been existent for years and it works. That will make a lot more money in the long run than just shoving these stars with Cena and HHH - already established stars reaching their end.
 

Saylor

Champion
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
4,760
Reaction score
193
Points
63
Age
29
Website
www.wweforums.net
Crayo said:
Yes I know... I have said that so many times in this thread alone. They aren't like the Taker's, the Lesnar's, The Rock's etc, SO BUILD THEM UP TO BE, lol. You're probably the only person I've encountered that thinks WWE's method of using former legends now is actually right.

Rock went over Hogan. Brock went over Rock. The "passing the torch" formula has been existent for years and it works. That will make a lot more money in the long run than just shoving these stars with Cena and HHH - already established stars reaching their end.

I'm not saying they're right as to the way they're using them HOWEVER they are right as to RELYING on past talent which answers the title in your thread. Brock Lesnar feuding John Cena was perfectly fine. Right now, who can Brock Lesnar feud? List me all competitors in your eyes that can put on a believable yet entertaining match. They're limited as to what they can do and as to what stars they can put him against.
 

Crayo

The Boss
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
63,815
Reaction score
6,080
Points
1
Location
United Kingdom of Ambrose
Website
wweforums.net
Saylor said:
I'm not saying they're right as to the way they're using them HOWEVER they are right as to RELYING on past talent which answers the title in your thread. Brock Lesnar feuding John Cena was perfectly fine. Right now, who can Brock Lesnar feud? List me all competitors in your eyes that can put on a believable yet entertaining match. They're limited as to what they can do and as to what stars they can put him against.

1) Not my thread.

2) Brock can face:

- Daniel Bryan
- Ryback
- Sheamus (although I hate him)
- CM Punk
- I guess Cena is okay
- Dolph Ziggler
- Alberto Del Rio
- Wade Barrett

Are they right to use talent like Brock & Rock to draw PPV buys? Absolutely. Are they right to put Rock up against Cena a second time and have Brock go up against someone who wrestles once a year? Absolutely not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snowman1

Danielson

Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
27,213
Reaction score
5,799
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Toledo, Ohio
Website
twitter.com
Relying? Hell no. People will tune in to WM even if it wasn't for the rock / brock / jericho / undertaker.... But is it much much better with them? YES!
 

Leo C

Backlund Mark
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
23,437
Reaction score
2,232
Points
0
Age
28
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
I agree with Crayo. One day Rock will be too old or will just don't want to come back, Lesnar may get tired of earning millions of dollars for two matches a year, HHH and Taker also won't last forever physically. Jericho will retire one day as well. And what do they do? Put Rock in a program with Cena, Lesnar with Cena then HHH, Taker always faces established guys these days... it's a waste. When those guys go away they'll have lost a big chance to put some youngsters over, and they should start doing that ASAP.
 

Saylor

Champion
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
4,760
Reaction score
193
Points
63
Age
29
Website
www.wweforums.net
Crayo said:
1) Not my thread.

2) Brock can face:

- Daniel Bryan
- Ryback
- Sheamus (although I hate him)
- CM Punk
- I guess Cena is okay
- Dolph Ziggler
- Alberto Del Rio
- Wade Barrett

Are they right to use talent like Brock & Rock to draw PPV buys? Absolutely. Are they right to put Rock up against Cena a second time and have Brock go up against someone who wrestles once a year? Absolutely not.

Where does that leave Kane? Daniel Bryan is currently attached with Kane at the moment. CM Punk is a name that WWE Officials have discussed to compete with Brock Lesnar along with Randy Orton. Sheamus and Ryback, yes. The rest no, not that the moment.
 

Crayo

The Boss
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
63,815
Reaction score
6,080
Points
1
Location
United Kingdom of Ambrose
Website
wweforums.net
Saylor said:
Where does that leave Kane? Daniel Bryan is currently attached with Kane at the moment. CM Punk is a name that WWE Officials have discussed to compete with Brock Lesnar along with Randy Orton. Sheamus and Ryback, yes. The rest no, not that the moment.

I was talking hypothetically, not now... Bryan would have been a fantastic choice. Hypothetically they could use ALL those names to feud with Brock. Give me a reason why ADR can't feud with Brock? An over as fuck underdog face vs a monster heel works perfectly.

@Danielson - People would still tune in, but not as much. You certainly wouldn't break 1 million buys without Rock or Brock.