When was the WWE roster at its best?

[Lockard 23]

I was thinking Steph had taken over Creative by that point, but I wasn't sure. The Invasion angle started off so strong, but Vince just couldn't let guys WCW built beat his golden children. That wasn't the whole of the problem, but it was a big part of it.

I think, when we discuss rosters, we also should look at the writing. WWE had some great writing in 2000 and in 2003. I think the writers right now are doing a very good job, sometimes a great one. But, we wouldn't be talking about how great the rosters were in 2000, 2001, 2003, 2013, or 1985 if the writing was weak.

wk

I think it was Kevin Dunn who can really bear the blame for the Alliance guys getting jobbed out so badly. Vince and others were willing to let them go over his own WWF stars to look dominant, but Dunn said that since they spent all these years building up the WWF brand name and their own superstars, he didn't think it was right to let stars from another company (who previously just tried to put WWF out of business) just come in and go over their own stars. Stupid reasoning IMO - those guys were officially WWF stars themselves now and it's a fiction storyline on a wrestling show anyway. Unfortunately, Vince saw his point and agreed.

I'll try and find the huge ass article where someone spills the beans on what the original booking plan of the Invasion angle was. It originally involved stuff like Vince wanting to keep WCW open as it's own separate show and Vince also wanting USA Network to pick up a proposed ECW show and then building both those brands up (under real-life WWF management, of course) as separate shows wholly apart from WWF programming. Then, after a while, stars from both shows were gonna invade Raw and Smackdown and form an alliance with each other and then the Invasion angle would have been off and running. But TNN wouldn't green light a WCW show and USA wouldn't pick up an ECW show and so that idea was dead in the water. It was a bit more complicated than that but that's basically the gist of it.

I agree with your last point about the writing. It's why I mentioned specific angles and characters for why I consider 2000 to be such an awesome year.

 

[Senhor Perfect]

1991. Just watch the RR that year and tell me that's not the greatest collection of talent ever.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

1991. Just watch the RR that year and tell me that's not the greatest collection of talent ever.

I see 6 or 7 greats and a bunch of scrubs

 

[Crayo]

It's so weird looking back at that 2000 roster. It's pretty amazing how many top main event talents they had. I mean, today's roster isn't bad by any means, but in terms of main event talent who can step in when Cena is injured, it's very thin.

 

[Aids Johnson]

I'm actually watching 2000 RAW over again, and i couldnt agree more. Even the tag teams had nearly 100% cred, and the ones that didnt were still good single athletes (team head cheese had Blackman still in the Hardcore title scene the whole time) and there were more belts to = more storylines. Even the Mcmahon Helmsley regime part included 90% of the roster. Today the Corporation (same shit) has like 10% of the roster, max.

 

[Dat Kid1]

Yeah around 2000, with people coming in from ECW and WCW, who would be considered main event level today, being in the midcard and making it amazing. Then you had the main event which had 4 dynamic people in Austin, Rock, HHH, & Foley. Then there was the tag division, which was amazing at the time.

I think the reasoning for most of this was because the roster was made up of established superstars, who then shared their lessons with people who were not as established

 

[Aids Johnson]

1991. Just watch the RR that year and tell me that's not the greatest collection of talent ever.

That's not the greatest collection of talent ever.

 

[Senhor Perfect]

That's not the greatest collection of talent ever.

Well I think it was! ^_^

 

[Snowman1]

Gotta agree with Waco, when it comes to pure in-ring talent this may be one of the best times we've ever had (although Senhor's gonna ride up on his high-horse and talk about "back in his day", and probably have a damn good point in the process). Thing is, the style of work has changed so much throughout the years that it's hard to compare rosters. Take the Uso's, for instance. If they showed up in 2000 WWF and allowed to work more chaotic matches instead of dealing with a signature-spot offensive style and an archaic tag script, who knows what they could have accomplished?

 

[DK JAMES]

2004-2006 was my favorite for sure.

 

[Jose Tortilla]

2000 had a great roster.

You forgot Mr. Ass, though..

Imo 2002 till 2006ish was pretty badass as well.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Gotta agree with Waco, when it comes to pure in-ring talent this may be one of the best times we've ever had (although Senhor's gonna ride up on his high-horse and talk about "back in his day", and probably have a damn good point in the process). Thing is, the style of work has changed so much throughout the years that it's hard to compare rosters. Take the Uso's, for instance. If they showed up in 2000 WWF and allowed to work more chaotic matches instead of dealing with a signature-spot offensive style and an archaic tag script, who knows what they could have accomplished?

'pure in ring talent' is such a gay way to look at things lmao. So much more goes into being a talented worker than chain wrestling or how many submissions you can put someone in.

There are more technicians on the roster as of now, but as you touched on that is the style. Back in the 50s, 60s, 70s they wanted legit badasses who looked the part and the matches were mainly simple moves. Slams, punches, head butts, rest holds, ect. That started to change into more of a mix of brawling and technical styles with guys like Steamboat and Savage in the 80s and eventually HBK and Hart in the 90s. Now the roster is filled with guys who are primarily in ring technicians without the other aspects of having the look or having great charisma.

Take it for what it's worth, but that's my view. I don't think guys like Bryan or Punk or Cesaro are necessarily better workers than workers of yesteryear, it is just the style of the day that they work matches the way they do now. I also don't see a lot of depth on the roster today. There are maybe 10 guys I see now who could have even held a job, let alone gotten pushed, if they were around a decade ago.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

2000 had a great roster.

You forgot Mr. Ass, though..

Imo 2002 till 2006ish was pretty badass as well.

I didn't forget him lol. I hated him as a singles competitor. One of the biggest flops of all time as a singles push. WWE really loved him but he fell on his face. They let him feud with Rock but he just didn't have the mic work to get himself over without Road Dogg.

 

[Jose Tortilla]

I didn't forget him lol. I hated him as a singles competitor. One of the biggest flops of all time as a singles push. WWE really loved him but he fell on his face. They let him feud with Rock but he just didn't have the mic work to get himself over without Road Dogg.

Gotta give you that..

Wrong angles imo played a big part for me though. If he was booked differently it could've turned out better..


But looks > mic skills

:dawg:

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

and then they turned him gay. rofl