Sports Entertainment killed Wrestling

[LadyHotrod]

Wrestlers have been on the mic for a long time, even in NWA.....Granted, it wasn't as much as now, though.

 

[CenaMark54]

The inring product is as good now as it's ever been. Stop trying to look for stuff to complain about.

 

[straight_edge76]

No matter what anybody says we all watch wrestling for the entertainment aspect of it. I am sure if we all name our favorite wrestlers of all time names like HBK, The Rock, Austin, Hogan and Flair would all show up at least once. What do they all have in common? A character. The hamburger analogy that Nino made was a good one. Nobody just wants the meat, they want everything that comes along with it that makes it a hamburger.

 

[LadyHotrod]

No matter what anybody says we all watch wrestling for the entertainment aspect of it. I am sure if we all name our favorite wrestlers of all time names like HBK, The Rock, Austin, Hogan and Flair would all show up at least once. What do they all have in common? A character. The hamburger analogy that Nino made was a good one. Nobody just wants the meat, they want everything that comes along with it that makes it a hamburger.

^ Exactly, that's another thing I don't get. Yes, we all want to see wrestling, but we also love it when guys like The Rock bring some big entertainment to the table. If the entire show was just wrestling and no talking, I'll bet they wouldn't be getting the ratings they get. Everyone wants to be entertained and, as much as all of us here love wrestling, we would all fall asleep if there were no talking involved or backstage shit going on.

 

[straight_edge76]

My point exactly, I mean yes I do love watching guys like Jericho and HBK do what they do best and that is wrestle but the thing that hooks most people and keeps them tuning in every week is the enertainment aspect of it. If it was just wrestling for a 2-3 hour show/PPV they would be nowhere close to as successful as the wrestling buisness is. Anybody who says the watch 'for the wrestling' is lying to themselves. Look at MMA; I love watching it and all but after an hour or so (if I'm lucky) I start to grow bored and wonder what else is on; that is I believe due to the lack of story telling and entertainment involved in the sport.

 

[Double J]

I grew up with wrestling in the late 80's through the 90's and I really think wrestling today is more like the 70's - early 80's than ever before. The 90's was a giant cartoon while the 2000's has been more of a soap opera. The late 80's and 90's was cartoon characters, comic books, and action figures hell they even had a few cartoons based off the WWF guys. Tatanka, The Million Dollar Man, Razor Ramon, Hulk Hogan, The Macho Man, the GI Joe Sgt Slaughter, ect, ect.

As it's been said the 70's - early 80's had (Taken from Enzo) "Flair was the Nature Boy, Dusty was the "American Dream", Tully was a playboy, the Freebirds were some good ol' Southern Boys. Their gimmicks were down to earth, more human than cartoonish"
That's what we have now and have had really since the end of the attitude era. "The Legend Killer" Randy Orton, John Cena, Chris Jericho, Shawn Michaels, John Morrison, hell even all the rookies in NXT had normal names. The only cartoon characters I can think of still in the WWE is Kane and The Undertaker (Hornswoggle doesn't count, he shouldn't be there anyway...)

I think the problem people have with wrestling now adays, besides the stories sucking, is that we get force fed the same matches year after year. In the 80's-90's there were a ton of main event status guys, the main event always had new match ups. Hell even when Hogan held the title for a year he at least was constantly against new people, give Cena the title for a year and he fights Orton for 6 months and HHH for the other 6. Back in the day Hogan was really the only guy who was calling shots so it was easy to push new people. Was easy for a guy to be a main eventer for a month, back to a midcarder for a month, then back to main eventing a few months later. Now we got 7-8 guys who run things and don't want to loose their spot so we see events like the failed push of Jack Swagger.

Wrestling overall will be better if they just start pushing new guys and start getting a little more fresh.

 

[LadyHotrod]

I think part of the problem is the split roster bullshit. You get the same fucking guys fighting over and over again just because they are on the same show and can only go for a certain title. I liked wrestling better when it was just one big ass roster where they could work with more people in feuds than this same old shit they are doing now. I understand what they wanted to do with the split but it's still the same main guys, anyways, so you might as well make the roster one big one again and try to create new feuds.

 

[Airfixx]

^^^^Whilst I agree - we all want fresh fueds - it's not that simple... We've all seen how WWE happily piss away big matches....

Cena/Batista... Enjoyable match @ Summerslam, but entirely forgettable bearing in mind we're now expected to get excited about it as a WM ME.

HHH/Edge... Throw away angle to fill time during HHH's dull as fuck title reign on SD in 08 (All the while there were fresh contenders not being considered for a one match shot... OK so we did get the green-as-fuck Koslov vs The Game... wow!).

Taker/Jericho... 3 screwy, throwaway matches on SD without any real storyline ramifications.


Kinda expect them to fuck up the potential Edge/Christian clash when it (pressumably) eventually happens too

I grew up with wrestling in the late 80's through the 90's and I really think wrestling today is more like the 70's - early 80's than ever before. The 90's was a giant cartoon while the 2000's has been more of a soap opera. The late 80's and 90's was cartoon characters, comic books, and action figures hell they even had a few cartoons based off the WWF guys. Tatanka, The Million Dollar Man, Razor Ramon, Hulk Hogan, The Macho Man, the GI Joe Sgt Slaughter, ect, ect.

As it's been said the 70's - early 80's had (Taken from Enzo) "Flair was the Nature Boy, Dusty was the "American Dream", Tully was a playboy, the Freebirds were some good ol' Southern Boys. Their gimmicks were down to earth, more human than cartoonish"
That's what we have now and have had really since the end of the attitude era. "The Legend Killer" Randy Orton, John Cena, Chris Jericho, Shawn Michaels, John Morrison, hell even all the rookies in NXT had normal names. The only cartoon characters I can think of still in the WWE is Kane and The Undertaker (Hornswoggle doesn't count, he shouldn't be there anyway...)

I think the problem people have with wrestling now adays, besides the stories sucking, is that we get force fed the same matches year after year. In the 80's-90's there were a ton of main event status guys, the main event always had new match ups. Hell even when Hogan held the title for a year he at least was constantly against new people, give Cena the title for a year and he fights Orton for 6 months and HHH for the other 6. Back in the day Hogan was really the only guy who was calling shots so it was easy to push new people. Was easy for a guy to be a main eventer for a month, back to a midcarder for a month, then back to main eventing a few months later. Now we got 7-8 guys who run things and don't want to loose their spot so we see events like the failed push of Jack Swagger.

Wrestling overall will be better if they just start pushing new guys and start getting a little more fresh.

Lots of nice points there regarding the different eras.... I agree about the current era being more like 70s/early-80s... Some time ago (I think it may be Montana or CenaMark54) one of the guys here coined it the "realism era"; something that rang true with me, and if anything I think WWE trying to bring a little bit of the old skool kayfaybe back to (bearing in mind their target age-group they might actually achieve a degree of success here too.).


...Anyone else notice the realism creeping back into finishes too? ...Ziggles rockin' the sleeper, DDT a plausible finisher once again thanks to Drew, Maryse and such, Big Show knockout punch and so on.


IMO the two biggest problems with WWE today are:

The 'Creative' Department.
Half-ass pushes effectively 'punishing' the fans for emotionally investing in certain characters.

 

[MizMasta3000]

I think part of the problem is the split roster bullshit. You get the same fucking guys fighting over and over again just because they are on the same show and can only go for a certain title. I liked wrestling better when it was just one big ass roster where they could work with more people in feuds than this same old shit they are doing now. I understand what they wanted to do with the split but it's still the same main guys, anyways, so you might as well make the roster one big one again and try to create new feuds.

Then even MORE guys are going to get buried every week. The combinations of Taker, HBK, HHH. Cena, Orton, Batista, Edge, Jericho, CM Punk, Rey Rey, Big Show feuds will be endless. No Morrisons, Miz's, Christians, DiBiases, Rhodes', etc will not be able to break into the first list of guys for a LONG time.

 

[He who knows more than Nation]

^^ Exactly. That's what I just finished posting in the Dear WWE thread!

 

[Mister J]

There is still good wrestling all around the world. You just need to know where to find it.

 

[kimball99]

Is focusing purely on charisma, instead of trying to turn out and push wrestlers who are decent in a technical sense, killing wrestling?

Is it easier to build a star out of someone who is charismatic but limited in the ring, then it is to take someone who is technically sound and make them likable?

On the first point, it ain't killing wrestling. Charisma draws. I mean, as much as I hate Cena, I'd rather see him as the champ or top guy then having, say a guy like Chavo. Chavo may be far superior in the ring, but Cena has the charisma and thus makes him more entertaining. Lest we all forget that we watch wresling because of the characters and the stories more so then because of wrestling ability? I mean the attitude era will always be remembered for the stories and the people, the matches were just secondary.

On the second point, of course it. Hogan couldnt wrestle, Warrior couldnt wrestle, Nash, Hall, Cena, Batista, Luger, Foley and so many others are from being great in the ring, but I cant imagine during there eras who drew more, them or a guy that can wrestle. I love wrestling ability, being an HBK fan and all, but a guy with no talent has always been, and will always be the one who moves up quicker.

And if you look at Bret and HBK, how long did it take them to get to the main event? Bret was from like 84 or 85 to 92 when he won his first WWE title. And HBK was like 88 to 96. Took both 8 years to get what it took guys like Warrior and Hogan a couple years to do. I'm not saying HBK and Bret aren't charismatic, just saying, that in these instances, the ones who displayed it more at the beginning got there sooner. I know Bret has charismatic, and HBK is arguably the most charismatic superstar in history, but they came in at a time when looks prevailed over talent. And not sure about anyone else, but it seems to me that were almost back in that same state again.

 

[LadyHotrod]

Then even MORE guys are going to get buried every week. The combinations of Taker, HBK, HHH. Cena, Orton, Batista, Edge, Jericho, CM Punk, Rey Rey, Big Show feuds will be endless. No Morrisons, Miz's, Christians, DiBiases, Rhodes', etc will not be able to break into the first list of guys for a LONG time.

I disagree....to an extent.

The only reason anyone would get buried or forgotten is because the writers are fucking dipshits who can't be original. With the split, the exact same assholes fight over and over and over again because each show has like 5 main guys to play around with. It makes no difference. Bourne is getting bitchslapped by the WWE so how is this any different than if the roster was one big roster? Same guys would be on top, same guys would be pushed into the shadows. Granted, I do think that this split worked out well for some guys and did get them the spotight they may have otherwise missed but the split seems so irrelevent now. Guys from both shows show up on the opposite show. The fuck? Why? What's the point of a brand split if guys are just going to hang out wherever they want?

If there is a fear of burials and not using every guy as much as possible, they can always make another show. Thing is, they focus so much on Raw and SD that they probably wouldn't throw any big names into a new show and they SHOULD. They don't need to have every big name on SD or Raw. They can do a lot with this, they just choose to be lazy.

If they want to keep the roster split, that's fine with me, but they should have kept Saturday Night's Main Event and moved some big names there mixed in with guys like Bourne. Throw Cena there, let him bring ratings to SNME, put Morrison there, Swagger, whatever, just pick some big names, keep big names on Raw, keep big names on SD, everyone is happy, everyone gets used.

I understand that the roster splits makes it 'easier' to write storylines but it's the same shit a million times over. You know as soon as Orton is done with Cena, he'll go back to Kofi, then maybe Sheamus, then back to Cena, possibly HHH, back to Cena, random fight with Legacy.....it's the same circle.

Knowing the WWE, even with one roster, they'd still end up being Blue and using the same big names over and over again, but, one would hope that they would use their brains and create new feuds that haven't happened yet and people wouldn't expect. I really liked the feud they did with Punk and Hardy and the Sheamus/Cena feud had surprises in it. It's awesome that they finally threw together some new shit (though the Cena/Sheamus one didn't really work out all that well because Sheamus's reign was lame, though I like him, they just didn't do much with it) but now it's just back to the same shit again and that circle will continue to happen.

Time for some surprises. Even if it doesn't make total sense, just try to make it make sense. I don't know, throw in some random feuds like Punk vs Bourne. Make some kind of storyline with that but don't use the same old SxE bullshit, just have Bourne walk out and say he's tired of Punk's shit, whatever, just get something started and make it good. Even if the wrestlers aren't exactly on the same level, it's at least something new.

 

[Mister J]

RAW just got rid of their best wrestler Jamie Noble.

 

[xFrenchKissx]

Another thing is, us wrestling fans will go for just about ANYTHING. Just give us a hint of a motive and we can spin out months worth of swerves and stories to sustain it.

Look at the Bret Hart thing. From the minute the announcement came that he would be guest hosting, all of us jumped on that shit like white on rice, speculating on what, if, when, why, how even though there was never anything set in stone about anything other than an appearance to guest host.

I'm all for trying new things, even if they don't make sense. It's a 50/50 chance, but in some situations it seems to be better not to have everything planned out in advance or too detailed because it leaves wiggle room for adjustments and trial and error.

And they have Superstars already, and do absolutely nothing with that. Not sure the number of shows is the issue as what they are showing on it.