What are your personal politics

[Guest Dangerous A]

Where do you stand on these particular issues? Also, feel free to add other issues to see where people stand on.

 

I just wanted to get something like this going to see where posters stand on issues that divide us.

 

Where do you stand on.....

 

 

1) What marks want vs. what I want. When it happens to be different. Do you just go with it or do you prefer what is going to make you personally satisfied, regardless of what marks want or think. A lot of the times what marks and smarks want is the same, but if it came down to it, would you be willing to sacrifice what's good for business as opposed to what's good for you?

 

2) Accountability for the current bad product. We all know things are looking black and spiraling downward with no upward trend. Who do you hold most accountable? Vince, HHH, Steph, Heyman, other writers, shitty workers. Who do you personally blame during these troubled times?

 

3) What's good for the future vs what could be good right now? Which do you prefer in this unstable wrestling environment right now? Do you prefer WWE start taking chances with elevation in hopes of creating stars and draws for the future? Or do you think the crew should try doing hotshot type things in hoping something can get real hot and get back those illustrious casual viewers. Example: A week ago there was a debate as to what would be a better WM main, Angle vs Lesnar or Austin vs Hogan. A lot of people said Angle/Lesnar could be better for the future, but Hogan vs Austin would probrably pop a buyrate and have more markout moments and entertainment.(questionable) Which would you choose? Another would be the now squashed idea of Lesnar vs Boxer Lennox Lewis. If Lesnar won, it could turn him into a real next big thing. Would you prefer to see a hotshot type of deal like this with a risky payoff or stick with the basics and weather out the storm?

 

 

Where do you stand?

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

1. I want a product like New Japan was delivering in 93-96. A large promomtion with varied styles, a roster with popular stars and future stars, and emphasis on workrate. Charisma, promos, they are fine and they are bimportant. We need charismatic guys. What we don't need are stupid backstage skits.

 

2. Vince is the most responsible simply because he's the owner and the buck stops with him. He should have been more willing to make more stars than go back to the old guys, who can barely move.

 

3. Vince needs to start making money off his tape library so he can afford to COMPLETELY clear the deadweight and introduce a rebuilding period with a whole new crop of talent from OVW. He should be thinking LONG-TERM, not right-now. Trying to make a quick buck is what got them here in the first place.

[Guest notJames]

1. What I want.

 

As elitist as this may sound, I'd like to think I have a better grasp of wrestling than your average foam-finger-waving Joe Pukepail, both as an artform and as a form of entertainment. I've studied what has worked in the past, and how it could be applied to today's product. I know it would hurt business initially, but once you train your audience to follow a more intelligent product, they can appreciate it on a more visceral level, instead of just seeing it as just a couple of hours of mindless TV violence. I have no illusions about the wrestling industry; it's a niche market, catering to specific types of people. Vince and Co. wish it could be like it was in '98, but you can't manufacture that with quick fixes and illogical practices. I'd rather lose the puppy-clamoring yokels who would pack a 15,000 seat arena every once in a while than the 4-or-5000 loyal fans who can really appreciate what the wrestlers have to offer night in and night out.

 

2. All roads lead to Vince. Period.

 

3. It's always better to build toward the future. In this business you have to keep moving forward because you don't know how long your current crop will stay healthy and/or profitable. Hogan's run in wCw should have hammered that home to everyone. Case in point: everyone's favourite wHHHipping boy. You keep clinging onto whatever starpower you think HHHeMan has, and eventually you'll have no one who can either match up to his stature, or eventually take his place when he either breaks down physically or fucks up his sweet standing with the Billion Dollar Princess. It's so obvious that he's not the answer to RAW's woes, yet they've carved him into an unbeatable heel who can do no wrong, is never made to look bad (Katie Vick notwithstanding), and can only use his stroke to put over his friends. That more than anything is going to destroy the WW_ unless they wise up. And fast.

[Guest bob_barron]

1.What marks want

 

There are more marks then smarts so they're opinion should matter more.

 

If it was up to what I wanted- Regal would be the champ so yea- I'm not the best person to talk to.

 

2.Vince of course

 

3.They need to combine both. Do Rock v. Hogan, Rock v. Austin whatever but make sure you always have the future being showcased well and not being pushed too hard or too little. If you can find a way to get them over do it. For example- teaming Edge with Hogan was brilliant. The fans got to see Hogan, Hogan didn't have to do any work and could basically make the hot tag and hit one or two moves and it made the fans think higher of Edge since well he must be good since Hogan is teaming with him. Do more stuff like that basically

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

1. What marks want. Because marks don't won't Albert or Big Show...but DO want Angle and RVD. I can't lose.

 

2. All of the above.

 

3. Step 1: Fire Taker and HHH. Good for NOW and REALLY GOOD for LATER. You can't elevate around them. Period.

[Guest bob_barron]

bps- You can't just fire Taker and HHH. I mean they are two very popular wrestlers and I think it could hurt them just firing both of them.

 

Taker may play politics but he's not half as bad as HHH. HHH fucks around with RVD and Y2J all the time. Taker fucked with Brock but did end up putting him over in the end. I'd like to see HHH do that

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

Fine. Keep them and keep business the same.

 

There is a reason that the two biggest business booms came from a time period when the old guard wasn't holding on to the top spot.

 

I've been saying this for almost a year now, and in that time I've only seen things get worse and worse.

 

So my opinion remains: Step 1: Fire Taker and HHH.

 

Austin didn't have someone preventing his rise to the top. Neither did Hogan.

 

Those seemed to work out okay.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

bps- You can't just fire Taker and HHH. I mean they are two very popular wrestlers and I think it could hurt them just firing both of them.

 

Taker may play politics but he's not half as bad as HHH. HHH fucks around with RVD and Y2J all the time. Taker fucked with Brock but did end up putting him over in the end. I'd like to see HHH do that

They should just let taker bow out at WM XIX and get a job as a road agent.

[Guest nikowwf]

1) I'd like a product that generally tries to have good workrate matches and entertaining storylines that center around WRESTLING, not sexuality, the owners kids, etc.

 

Doesnt have to be all cruiser matches. Brock/Taker Hell in the Cell was entertaining for me. Summerslam to me was a good card. It tried, for the most part to match up people who would have good matches. Wrestlemania was not a good card for me. Thrown together without any care about match quality.

 

2) Vince is ultimately responsible. I think Stephanie is doing terrible things to her dads business, putting him in a situation that he would have to slam both her and her boyfriend to really make the product better. I hope I don't have such a selfish child someday.

 

3) Plan a wrestlemania card that has two wrestlers who have never headlined a wrestlemania in each main event. Follow through with that at all costs. Wrestlemania should be about crowning your new stars, and letting your old stars have compelling matches that don't overshadow the new stuff.

 

niko

[Guest treble charged]

1) What marks want: That's easy, since marks (or, at least, non-smarks) easily out number the internet smarks. However, most smarks are probably the WWE's most loyal customers, so they shouldn't just completely ignore that demographic.

 

2) Vince: You can bitch all you want about HHH and his behind the scenes games, but Vince is the one who lets him get away with all that shit, so he's to blame when business is bad, and, when business turns around, he should get the praise.

 

3) What could be good right now: You need to turn business around NOW. Worry about the future when the present looks good.

[Guest El Satanico]

1. I'd try to keep it in the middle.

Do what i like, but be willing to adjust to what the marks want. The marks currently seem to be shitting on alot of the stuff we are so it wouldn't be that bad.

 

 

2. Vince and Stephanie.

If Vince didn't allow it to happen HHH wouldn't be in his current position. If not for Stephanie HHH wouldn't have something that gets Vince to listen to him.

 

 

3. Plan for the future.

It's obvious that hot shotting isn't working. When WWF was still good they planned for the future.

[Guest jester]

Where do you stand on these particular issues? Also, feel free to add other issues to see where people stand on.

 

I just wanted to get something like this going to see where posters stand on issues that divide us.

 

Where do you stand on.....

 

 

1) What marks want vs. what I want. When it happens to be different. Do you just go with it or do you prefer what is going to make you personally satisfied, regardless of what marks want or think. A lot of the times what marks and smarks want is the same, but if it came down to it, would you be willing to sacrifice what's good for business as opposed to what's good for you?

 

2) Accountability for the current bad product. We all know things are looking black and spiraling downward with no upward trend. Who do you hold most accountable? Vince, HHH, Steph, Heyman, other writers, shitty workers. Who do you personally blame during these troubled times?

 

3) What's good for the future vs what could be good right now? Which do you prefer in this unstable wrestling environment right now? Do you prefer WWE start taking chances with elevation in hopes of creating stars and draws for the future? Or do you think the crew should try doing hotshot type things in hoping something can get real hot and get back those illustrious casual viewers. Example: A week ago there was a debate as to what would be a better WM main, Angle vs Lesnar or Austin vs Hogan. A lot of people said Angle/Lesnar could be better for the future, but Hogan vs Austin would probrably pop a buyrate and have more markout moments and entertainment.(questionable) Which would you choose? Another would be the now squashed idea of Lesnar vs Boxer Lennox Lewis. If Lesnar won, it could turn him into a real next big thing. Would you prefer to see a hotshot type of deal like this with a risky payoff or stick with the basics and weather out the storm?

 

 

Where do you stand?

1) I'm more interested in my own entertainment than what the marks want. However, I don't mind WWE catering to them, in fact that's the smart thing to do. That's why I think they should try to sober up Jeff Hardy rather than can him, even though I personally don't give a rat's gonads about him. The female marks love him. Without him, there's not much to keep their interest.

 

2) Whenever they're asked about politics, the WWE line is that "This would never happen because everything has to get by Vince." Fine by me. Vince, WWE is in a really shitty state, and it's all your fault.

 

3) Right now very few people are getting any reaction, so it makes no sense to go with the same old guys. Try experimenting with new people. The older guys can be moved down the card so fans can still see them.

[Guest Razor Roman]

I may not be as outspoken or respected a poster as a lot of people on this board, mostly because I just don't like watching wrestling as much as I did a while ago. To be honest, my interest started to wane after Foley retired, then I was brought back in when he came in, and then again with the WCW invasion, and then again with Jericho winning the belt. But things haven't been the same for me since HHH won the ME at Wrestlemania 2000. On to your questions

 

1) What marks want vs. what I want.

 

Generally, I think I like things similar to the marks. I don't mind power matches or "hosses" as long as they tell some kind of a story in the ring. Hogan/Warrior wasn't Flair/Steamboat, but it kept you on the edge of your seat. The fun comes from the "ooh that looked like it hurt" or the "how can this guy still kick out from that!" I also think the marks like a balanced product with varying styles. I enjoy "extra-cirricular activities" when done well.. or at least if they are funny. I enjoyed Rock n Sock, I did not enjoy Katie Vick.

 

I also like wrestlers to have a clear motivation for their actions outside of the ring, and reasons to fight each other. Wether they hate each other or wether they just want the belt... I'm tired of "I want respect." "No, I want respect!" It's useless.

 

2) Accountability for the current bad product.

 

The buck stops with Vince McMahon. I think all the writers and wrestlers have gotten into a rut. They keep replaying the Austin/McMahon story line with different characters, they keep doing too many comedy charachters, because it worked for Foley, they never give the younger guys the "big win" they need to go to the next level. Everyone is always "screwed" by someone else.

 

3) What's good for the future vs what could be good right now?

 

I think the WWE needs a good mix of both right now. With all the talent the WWE has, they should be able to give us a mix of both. A WrestleMania with matches like Austin/Hogan (good for the short term), Angle/Lesnar (good for the long term), HHH/Steiner (short term), maybe Cena/Undertaker (long term), and for the hell of it (because I'd like to see it) Jericho/Savage, would be an awesome WrestleMania because it would give us both dream matches AND help build stars.

 

Like I said, they need to give NEW guys the wins over OLD guys to help establish them.

 

Jericho should have beaten either HHH or Undertaker or Austin at least once without outside help.

 

Maven eliminating 'Taker at Rumble was a good idea, but then at No Way Out maven should have had a match with Taker similar to the match Jeff Hardy had with him. Maybe let him win somehow. Taker was going on to fight with Flair at 'Mania anyway, and maybe a loss at no way out would have helped build a little more drama for that one. I dunno..

[Guest bob_barron]

Fine. Keep them and keep business the same.

 

There is a reason that the two biggest business booms came from a time period when the old guard wasn't holding on to the top spot.

 

I've been saying this for almost a year now, and in that time I've only seen things get worse and worse.

 

So my opinion remains: Step 1: Fire Taker and HHH.

 

Austin didn't have someone preventing his rise to the top. Neither did Hogan.

 

Those seemed to work out okay.

Keep him since he is over and have Vince regrow a set of balls and keep in check.

 

Taker really isn't presenting anyone from rising to the top and when Austin came in- Bret and HBK were being phased out.

 

So phase them out but don't just completely fire them

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Fine.  Keep them and keep business the same.

 

There is a reason that the two biggest business booms came from a time period when the old guard wasn't holding on to the top spot.

 

I've been saying this for almost a year now, and in that time I've only seen things get worse and worse.

 

So my opinion remains:  Step 1:  Fire Taker and HHH.

 

Austin didn't have someone preventing his rise to the top.  Neither did Hogan.

 

Those seemed to work out okay.

Keep him since he is over and have Vince regrow a set of balls and keep in check.

 

Taker really isn't presenting anyone from rising to the top and when Austin came in- Bret and HBK were being phased out.

 

So phase them out but don't just completely fire them

Taker isn't a problem since when he played politics, he was right. The Hell In The Cell win meant more for Brock than the Unforgiven match could have.

 

Plus, Taker deserves YOUR respect for threatening to beat up HBK if he wouldn't job to Austin at WM XIV.

[Guest creativename]

1) Smarks. It doesn't really matter, because both usually want the same things when it comes to the really important stuff. But if there was a situation where it mattered, I'd have to go with smark consensus, because there's more wisdom there.

 

2) HHH. You can say how the buck stops at Vince all you want, but if HHH wasn't there, things would be better. A lot better.

 

If there was no Vince, Steph would be in charge.

 

3) Both. The future would obviously win if you had to choose; no one will debate that. The problem with WWE though is that they just suck at everything they're doing right now. If someone intelligent, who knew what the fans wanted--and was willing to give it to them--was in charge, then business would pick up immediately as well as increase over time. Profits wouldn't even be close to their historical highs obviously, but that's because like others have said, it will take something really BIG to get wrestling "in" again. That won't happen for a few years, at the least. But given the built-in fanbase, there's no reason for revenues to be as putrid as they currently are.

[Guest Smell the ratings!!!]

1. Me. I don't give two fucks what other people want. If I'm supposed to blow hours watching, I want to be entertained. That means good matches, head drops galore, submissions, blood and no shitty backstage crap, period. Raw hasn't been about wrestling in a loooooooong time.

 

2. Vince. What do you want, he's in charge.

 

Honorable mentions

 

Stephanie - her unique brand of shit is creeping into both shows, even though she supposedly books neither.

 

HHH - I think we've been over this. Uh.

 

3. Future. Right now, WWE sucks, period. So obviously, they should be trying to change as much as possible. Right now, take a look at guys on top. HHH, Michaels, Taker, Kane, Show. Suck suck suck suck suck. Get rid of people who can't wrestle for shit, because the wrestling, in my opinion anyway, is pretty central to the show. I say put Booker and Eddy on top now, because they kick ass, and you don't know how long you have them for. Phase out all the worthless shit. And raise guys like RVD, Angle, Benoit, Rey, and....*shudder*...Edge.

[Guest Brian]

I think a diverse poduct would appeal to all ends. Different styles, people allowed to do their things, and promos and skits that focus on the ring (like last night's SmackDown main).

[Guest FeArHaVoC]

1) Both. There are many ways to work with both of us. Put the title on someone like Benoit, and have the Mark favorites like Rock, Edge, RVD, etc, chase him.

 

2) Vince McMahon Jr. btw, the Product isn't Total Garbage right now. I've seen worst.

 

3) It's time to face it. The Ratings are never going to be as high as 98-2000. At least not anytime soon.

 

WWE needs to build New stars, some faster then others. You don't take everyone young like Cena, Edge. Matt Hardy, Christian, O'Haire etc and put them into the Main Event. People get bored with the same guys (See; Taker/Triple H) Then a year down the road people are dying for something new, and these "Young" kids become stale. I understand when JR says "It's a Slow Process," But, not everyone should be treated like that. RVD should at least a World Champion by now. Jericho should have been dealt a better hand. Edge could probably get a shot and see how the fan react to him. Save others like Matt, Cena etc for down the road.

 

But, don't bury them in the meantime.

[Guest Brian]

I disagree. It would take a total shift in the way the WWE approaches their product, to what they did on SmackDown, to get the title on Benoit unfortunately. Though he could be an effective challenger and/or transitional champ.

[Guest The Hamburglar]

I disagree. It would take a total shift in the way the WWE approaches their product, to what they did on SmackDown, to get the title on Benoit unfortunately. Though he could be an effective challenger and/or transitional champ.

Out of interest, do you think he could have gotten the title on Benoit in his heel run in 2000? Bear in mind, they were pushng him real hard both as a technical master and an evil sadistic fuck, so it really could have worked out. He went over the entire midcard and also had Shane at his side. All in all, for that whole summer period, Benoit was monster over as a heel, sometimes even rivalling Triple H. On the occasions they teamed they got mega-heat on huge levels. In all honesty, although I still love his wrestling, Benoit hasn't shown me the same brutal viciousness this year that he did back in 2000. Where's the Benoit that stretched Lita in the Crossface, pushed the Rock to breaking point, and smashed a chair into a prone Jericho's head? The Benoit that was such an evil bastard he got heel heat for headbutting Stephanie freaking McMahon? WHILE SHE WAS STILL A HEEL AT THE TIME?! If ever there was a time when Benoit could've been a solid champion it was then. Although, a fully fledged heel turn could get him there now, what with Brock and Angle turning face, Slow being shite and Eddie not really being the world champion type. The space is there.

[Guest Brian]

They could have put the title on him, but Jericho was the guy who was hot then. But right now, there's going to be an awful lot of room for Benoit and I wouldn't be surprised if after Angle wins the title at Mania they reference back to the Benoit feud for at least a month before moving onto Eddy.

[Guest Super Pissed Smark]

1) I've got no problem with what the marks want. They chant for Angle, RVD, Booker T, and even Jericho, not for Albert or Big Show or Hoss McSlow. I've never enjoyed wrestling more (even when I was a kid) than the glory years of '97-'01. Since that was the WWF's biggest money-making period ever, I'd say the marks enjoyed it too. Even more, the vaunted casual viewer, the ones Vince is so pathetically desperate to win back, they liked it as well. So I've got no real complaints with what the few thousand left in the arenas want. If only Vince would listen.

 

2) Vince is supposedly the boss, so who else can you blame. Stephanie is totally oblivious to the difficult position her choice of fucks is putting her dad in, or perhaps she's too self-centered to care. Speaking of caring, where the hell is Shane? Doesn't it matter to him that his family's business is going down the toilet? Or hasn't he got any power over the situation? What's he waiting for?

 

3) There's really nothing left to hot-shot. Hogan-Austin? Lesnar-Lewis? I'm not sure I'm too thrilled with either ideas, and even if, by some miracle, for one magical night they did manage bring in the casual fans who stopped watching, so what? Those ex-fans are going to be even more horrified with the general product when they tune in to the next night's RAW (if you can even get them to go that far) than those of us still left, and they're not going to tune in a second time. Without a good product now, there's no reason to try and expose it to more people. The WWE has to start from scratch and re-build things totally before they start worrying about garnering publicity to bring people back. No matter how nicely you light the restaurant's sign, if all you've got is plates full of shit they'll never eat here again.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

1) What marks want vs. what I want. When it happens to be different. Do you just go with it or do you prefer what is going to make you personally satisfied, regardless of what marks want or think. A lot of the times what marks and smarks want is the same, but if it came down to it, would you be willing to sacrifice what's good for business as opposed to what's good for you?

I can moderate myself with marks pretty well.

 

For instance, I don't like SCSA. The guy is the walking wounded and while it's impossible not to be impressed by his draw, the guy and the gimmick does nothing for me. But I understand marks like him, and I don't mind seeing him main eventing again and Again and AGAIN and AGAIN because hey, he's good business. I do wish they'd drop "What?!?" though, because that interferes into other guys' promos and thus hurts the locker room.

 

In some cases though, I think the marks think they want something just because they've seen so much of it, in the case of Russo garbage. I'm sorry, but three years of Rikishi is enough. He's feuded with everyone from Matt Hardy to The Rock, and his pop doesn't translate to business (ever notice that all those white arms raising the roof when he comes out don't seem to ever dole out the money for his increasingly embarassing t-shirts every time he gets his cyclical push?)

 

2) Accountability for the current bad product. We all know things are looking black and spiraling downward with no upward trend. Who do you hold most accountable? Vince, HHH, Steph, Heyman, other writers, shitty workers. Who do you personally blame during these troubled times?

 

I blame Gewertz for ruining Raw. I blame Stephanie purely for being so conceited, as if she could take a more judgmental look at herself she'd see that she's in over her head with the Book. I don't know her personally, so there may be some business sense that I don't know about, but if so move her to another division of the company.

 

I blame Vince McMahon for the Hall of Shame ideas we've seen on both shows, as all reports say he's responsible for them. Chuckabilly was a terrible idea), Katie Vick was even worse. Vince strikes me as the kind of guy who touches an electric fence, shocks himself, and instead of learning not to touch the electric fence he throws his whole body against it instead.

 

3) What's good for the future vs what could be good right now? Which do you prefer in this unstable wrestling environment right now? Do you prefer WWE start taking chances with elevation in hopes of creating stars and draws for the future?

 

I was at my markiest back in 99 (of course, back then I didn't do anything more than read newsboards and I certainly didn't get bitter until I came to wrestling boards.) So i'd probably go down the Hogan/Austin path although I woudln't talk about it here. I totally marked out for Rock/Hogan and the confrontations leading up to it. I thought the Ambulance thing kind of spoiled their history-making promo, but I still marked out for the vehicular destruction and thought it added an air of unpredictability to the whole show. Then when Rock/Hogan left as friends in X8, I forgot that Rock just kissed and made up with the man that tried to kill him until I read Scott Keith's snarky comments.

[Guest Super Pissed Smark]

In all honesty, although I still love his wrestling, Benoit hasn't shown me the same brutal viciousness this year that he did back in 2000.  Where's the Benoit that stretched Lita in the Crossface, pushed the Rock to breaking point, and smashed a chair into a prone Jericho's head?  The Benoit that was such an evil bastard he got heel heat for headbutting Stephanie freaking McMahon?  WHILE SHE WAS STILL A HEEL AT THE TIME?!  If ever there was a time when Benoit could've been a solid champion it was then

 

That Benoit left when the head writer at the time, I forget his name, the one between VinnieRu and Big Steph, quit. Since then the current writing staff have shown little interest in resurrecting that version of the Crippler. I'm not sure why.

 

All in all, for that whole summer period, Benoit was monster over as a heel, sometimes even rivalling Triple H.

 

Oh, wait. I have a thhheory...

[Guest FeArHaVoC]

Maybe Benoit was working to "Stiff" or "Snug" and was asked to calm down?

[Guest SP-1]

1. Strike a balance. It can be done. We generally want what the marks want, we just generally want it for a better defined reasons. In the end, I think we all just want to be entertained.

 

2. I've made my stance on this clear before. While there may be politics, it's Vince's place to head them off and stop them in my opinion. He's the boss. We've heard that from people like Foley and such and so forth. Vince has to step in to get things changed and better.

 

3. Again. I think both can be achieved. But it requires the old guard working to bring the younger talent up to the level before bowing out. Some dream matches consist of just that. HBK vs RVD could have been better if not for the weak run-in, and alot of the booking could be better if not for things like that. An evolution from what's good for now to what's good in the long run, that balance, is what would work best, in my opinion.

 

SP

[Guest Human Fly]

1. There would be no problem reaching a balance between the two. Most smarks were clamoring for RVD to win the gold, so were the marks. I think part of that is the line between marks and smarks is blurred more every day. With the internet getting bigger all the time I wonder what percentage of the audience is smark now?

 

2. You've got to blame Vince. HHH, Steph, and JR are all players in this. I think JR is doing major damage to the company right now. He's the director of talent so when you look at a lot of the crap they've got he's to blame. The DeMott mini push makes some sense because of TE 3 but the Albert push is senseless, and you and I know who is to blame for that.

 

3. You've got to build for the future. The time between boom periods before was around 6 years. Why does anyone think it will be any different this time? They need to cut the deadwood on the roster, make an honest attempt to build stars and sooner or later something should come around.

 

That being said hot shot angles should still be used. Stone Cold was hugely over in '94 but the Mike Tyson incident is, IMO, what launched him into the mainstream.

[Guest deadbeater]

1. What I want is a good blend of solid storytelling and action. Who cares if it corny, if it is well done, they will still talk about it. Foley-type promos with Benoit-type logical matches. Also, get out of formulaic booking. Foley and Michaels became popular because the booking of the matches were different than anyone else's. They got the talent, the best talent of any organization ever. The guys are willing to make fools of themselves if it pleases the fans. They want to have their pants pulled down, play Crocodile Hunter and Don King or a superhero with green hair. They want to breakdance, take foolish pratfalls, dally with a mannequin (ok that was dumb). All that if it makes the fans happy.

 

2. Blame goes to Vince. He admitted as such when he said "Shock TV is dead". All stories and angles go through him, thus the shows are his, unfortunately not the fans.

 

3. Build for the future. Concentrate on solid epic-like storytelling, let those that wish retire gracefully and with a ceremony they deserve. They had some bright stories that should have been extended to its logical conclusion, and those that started well but went awry. Breathe and Start over.

[Guest TheyCallMeMark]

1. They should give the smarks what they want. It's entirely up to the WWE who they push for the fans to cheer or boo, so they can push smark favourites either way and the smarks and marks are both satisfied. Also, it's clear that great wrestling is more important to the marks than wether a person is heel or face (see; the standing ovation Eddie Guerrero got, cheering for their most hated villian Kurt Angle to get into the ring). Everyone wants good matches, just the smarks want it more than the marks. Vince should take a look at that Eddie/Edge match, I think, and realize that the great wrestling there got a bigger reaction and more respect from the fans than any contrived angle.

 

2. I blame Vince. He is hiring the bookers. As far as I'm concerned Cornette, Heyman, Malenko and his son should be handed the book. They would all emphasis wrestling, and they aren't selfish bitches who give themselves all this T.V. time (see Stephanie).

 

3. They need to fix the sitation now to set themselves up for the future, the way I look at it. The fixes are simple;

A. Don't give more T.V. time to people who aren't over than you need to, to build them.

 

B.Make sure more time is spent on matches than the combined total of time spent on skits and commercials (it's a WRESTLING show, so I better have the majoryity of two hours be WRESTLING).

 

C. Limit things that are over, but don't draw (ie Rikishi) to house shows and OCCASIONAL T.V. appearances.

 

D. Concentrate on pushing people who can have good matches. I'm not saying just remove big men entirely, but at least keep them battling eachother or other skilled people in real matches. I don't like watching squashes. All squashes can do is piss off fans who like the squashed wrestler.

 

Well, that stuff is what is wrong or right in my opinion.