RadicalOneO said:
The fact is, fans of the AE were imbred, cousin-loving, foul mouthed alcoholics who enjoyed low brow entertainment
Hmmmm.......this is almost too easy. And that's without pointing out that "inbred" is misspelled. Maybe if you'd stop cussing and screwing Cousin Susie so much, and put down the Bud Light with the Jack Daniels chaser while you're watching reruns of Jackass and Beavis and Butthead, you could learn how to spell. But maybe Auntie-Mama and Uncle-Papa didn't teach you right.
Either way, yes, Heyman was right. The reason he was right is that a lot of people forget what made the Attitude Era what it was. It wasn't the beer-drinking, the cussing, or the TV-14 rating. The Attitude Era's attitude (for lack of a better word) was built around a greater level of realism than the "Hogan Era" (which makes it somewhat ironic considering that one of the greatest Attitude Era wrestling figures was "Hollywood" Hulk Hogan....yes, WCW was part of the Attitude Era), where all pro wrestling babyfaces were saintly figures who wanted all the kids to say their prayers, take their vitamins, etc., etc., and all pro wrestling heels were Snidely Whiplashes twirling their sinister mustaches while hatching the next plot to steal the girl and wreck Dudley Do-Right. The Attitude Era gave us "bad guys" who were actually good guys (Kurt Angle) and "good guys" who were actually bad guys (Austin). The lines were blurred between good and evil, thus making the product more realistic, as there are very few human beings who are 100% good or 100% bad, most o us being shades of gray (or "grey" for my British friends).
And that, my friends, is what Heyman was talking about. WWE blurred a few lines (something guys like him and Punk are good at), and some fans rebelled. Why? Because they're not tough enough to handle the greater level of realism. Because, realism creates unpredictability. And a lot of modern WWE fans don't want unpredictability. They want to know that, at the end of the night, Cena's going to be standing tall with the title or that Sheamus is going to have Brogue-Kicked the Big Show back into obscurity. Then, they see Punk being successful and Show being WHC and they rebel somewhat violently (at least as violently as they're capable of being) against the disorder/unpredictability/reality of their nicely-ordered little world.
Basically, Heyman was calling the average WWE fan a tool. And, again I'll say it, he was right.
wk