Promoter

No, not really. I think it's down to booking. Whenever the wwe has a super strong face like a Hogan or Austin or Rock it's better to have the strap around their waist then the heel imo. If they build up credible heels and storylines the face overcoming the odds can be just as exciting as the face chasing the heel champion. It's not by accident that in general the business has done better with a super face champion leading the company instead of the top heel being the champion. I think only Triple H has been the exception for the wwe in the last 20 years.

Vince's wrestling vault.

I guess I'll jump in with my predictions as well. World Hvt Championship: Benoit vs. Orton I think Orton is going to go over for the simple reason they probably want him to get the record of youngest champion ever over The Rock(for future storylines) and Brock Lesnar(who left them hanging). It will also be done perhaps for the Triple H long term story arc where Orton defeats Benoit in his first try, while Triple H couldn't beat him in multiple rematches. Should win: Chris Benoit as he's starting to get the general audience to believe he's "fa real". WWE Title Match: JBL/Taker This match is hella weak, but JBL is going to win by disqualification when Orlando Jordan and some new member for JBL's group is discovered to interfere. Should win: The mark in me says Taker, but putting the title on him will kill smackdown even more. Eddie Guerrero vs. Kurt Angle I actually believe Guerrero needs to win this one. Kurt Angle has screwed him out of the title. A pain in the ass all summer long. Eddie has to get some retribution. Eddie is going to win and Angle will go ballistic extending the feud. Another reason is for the face to win in an important match since the two title matches I see the heels going over. Triple H vs. Eugene Eugene will win, but Triple H will murder him post match to also extend this feud. If Trips wins I can't see them extending this feud with it having any heat left at the level it's at now. Plus, it's another face going over and it will tie into Orton winning and Triple H losing at the second biggest show of the year. Booker T vs. John Cena John Cena wins for the faces again. I-C Title Match Edge wins here for the faces in his hometown, but it sets up his heel turn when I think he will cost Benoit the title. Kane vs. Matt Hardy Kane will win and marry Lita against her will. It's the Brian Pillmam/Terri Runnels angle for 2004. Rey Mysterio/Paul London will win again for the faces.

Actually, I said I didn't read ALL of it. Just saying.

I didn't even bother reading all that crap between the two. All I have to say is why are damn wrestlers on the net ripping on a fanbase that is quite honestly the most loyal. Leave it alone man. Why go on the net to attack the so-called kids who write stuff. The acknowledgement of the articles tell me that it does hurt wwe in someway and the negativity on thet net is seen as a problem. Look in the damn mirror I say and don't come on the net trying to war with writers who are really fans in disguise. When they do this it reflects on them most of the time not being able to take any sort of criticism. Remember our other thread about changes and whatnot? This Matt Hardy column was exactly what I was talking about in terms of the company attacking fans for not liking what they think is entertaining. How can you make war with your customers for being satisfied or unsatisfied? How about stuff like ratings not making sense because it was a good show in their minds? Who cares what any of the two had to say really as I don't understand why they are even bickering when the wwe has the second biggest show of the year coming up on sunday. Is the drama and excitement lacking that much for this ppv? Damn, I don't see in other forms of entertainment people like Al Pacino or Denzel Washington going in newspapers or internet sites ripping on fans who don't like the entertainment they are providing.

Okay, I'm ripping this off from somewhere, but I felt you guys here are well versed on the business and would come up with good stuff. Since many were describing problems that the wwe has what do you feel can be done to create GOOD change that would get people watching? I have seen some on the net give ideas like this..... -I'd like to see Bischoff come up with a 'code of conduct'. They can blatantly steal Ring Of Honours gimmick here, because WWE casual fans dont even know who TNA are, let alone ROH. It doesnt have to be full on, just a few guide rules... like: NO RUN-INS between bells. After the bell, go for it, but during the match.... no. Shake hands before and after the match? maybe. I just think it'd be interesting to see, obviously the rules would be broken from time to time, but generally... -Use the same premise as an Iron Man match with different time limits for different types of matches. Standard matches: 5-10 minutes. Title matches: 20-30. Most decisions in that time wins. When a feud has gotten too huge to be contained, break out the trusty old Iron Man. Adding a point system to matches is drastic, yeah, but we are talking about a BIG change. It harkens back to a time when matches were timed and had multiple falls, but also adds a level of drama that is lacking in the majority of matches today. Look at the positive things that would change: • Squashes are no longer a forgone conclusion. If a Goldberg type comes out and destroys a guy in 30 seconds, who's to say that the guy won't be able to even the score in a couple minutes when the hoss is blowin' up all over the place. Not to say that the squashee will actually WIN, but it adds drama. • The concept of the "cheap win" is altered. No longer will a heel (or Edge) be able to steal a win by using the ropes or pulling the tights and making a quick exit (unless the time is almost up). It'll give him a leg-up, sure, but his opponent gets an opportunity for immediate revenge. • Longer matches and a more defined "sport" feel. This is a personal preference, but pretty much every event that at least pretends to be a sport has some kind of scoring system. I'm curious to see how it would work in wrestling. • You don't have to alter other special matches. Elimination Style, Three Way Dance, Cage, Hell in a Cell, Elimination Chamber, Battle Royals... they can all stay the same. Hell, you can even throw in a "regular" match here or there to keep things interesting. Call it an "Old School" match, or "Sudden Death." I dunno, it might even elevate the status of a regular match by calling it "Sudden Death." Now, of course there would be problems with adopting the Iron Man rules set for most matches as well: • There's the possibility of the match that lasts 10 minutes with only one fall scored early in the match: "The Anticlimatch." But then, if people get accustomed to the way these matches work, that could develop into a surprise of it's own. • The guarantee of a 5 minute long John Hrrnnrr match. nothing can stop it once it starts and if it's awful, there's no turning back 'til it's done. • The time management on shows would have to be altered to accommodate specific time allotments. Which either means cutting back on the entertainment aspect of the show a bit, or reducing the number of matches so that HHH can cut a 20 minute promo on why the Diva Search is pregnant. Which do YOU think will happen? This concept would change a lot of the predictable formulas that we've gotten used to seeing in wrestling matches, without altering what makes "traditional" wrestling fun (like six-sided rings). At the same time, it wouldn't alter the "entertainment" side of things much at all. Storylines could continue as they always have. It would simply emphasize the competition aspects of the matches without straying too far away from what people are used to. --- Watching Cena/ RVD on SD last week, and then thiking of Edge/ Jericho on Raw, got me wondering... What if the WWE went with a face/ face format? This idea would involve breaking up the traditional heel/ face dichotomy of wrestling to introduce a new dynamic more akin to real sports. If each wrestler had his or her own set of fans matches would become less predicatble and arguably more exciting. It would also have the potential effect of readdressing the "sports" to "entertainment" balance. If you think back to that Cena/ RVD match Cole and Tazz had no choice but to call the match as a pure wrestling match. They had to get over each man as a wrestler rather than a chracter or as an integral part of some bizarre soap opera style story-arch. Of course there is always the worry of a dead crowd in this situation (see Tito Santana vs. Koko B. Ware circa 1991) but I think you'll find that the crowd was pumped AND markedly divided for Cena/ RVD and for Jericho/ Edge as well as, might I add, Angle/ Haas. A divided crowd, in my opinion, is the more natural state for a crowd to be in. And the situation we have now is surreal to say the least. Since Kayfabe is long dead the fans who attend wrestling matches pretty much "know" who they are supposed to be cheering and who are they are supposed to boo. But with this knowledge comes power, as soon as the crowd feel they are being fed a dud story they can refuse to participate in the right way and mess up the fed's plans. The WWE need the fans to be complicit in order to keep the product seeming fairly legitmate, right now this is frequently not the case (see Edge/ Orton where the face/ heel dichotomy got totally f**ked up by the fans). By removing this power you also remove the focus of wrestling from all this nonsense back to the actual in-ring action. I'm not saying they should try to emulate the crowd at a football grudge match, say Manchester United vs. Arsenal, but they should try to take something of that. Think of Bret Hart vs. Bulldog, think of Warrior vs. Hogan, Hogan vs. Savage, Warrior vs. Savage - these matches all show wrestling at its most exciting and entertaining, they are all magic because of the face versus face dynamic. If played right this could take wrestling into brave new realms, the WWE could achieve possibilities that have, as yet, only been glimpsed at in the sparkle of Vince's money-making eye. ---------------------------------------- So, would any of these bright ideas work?

I've heard that rumour as well. However, if this is true then why did have a hissy fit about not getting main billing for WM 18? It's said he was upset at where he was placed and that he was asked to job for Hall(which would have been the storyline reason for the split when Vince cost him the match leading to the split). Then it was also said he didn't want to work with Nash, but after he returned he said him and Nash were friends. Austin took pictures with Hogan, Hall and Nash, so who the hell really knows. There was even an off camera storyline with Hogan and Austin I think. I'm a Hogan mark(off and on through the years), but honestly he doesn't fit with the wwe today unless he does something as Flair is doing. He isn't going to do that, so he should sit home. I think Hogan's perfect timing to return would have been MSG and WM XX this year. The opening was there even in current storylines as that is the place Hogan got fired by Vince for showing his mask(and Hogan is/was actually playing that up as a shoot). That same show was also Roddy Piper's last appearance. That is why I think there were rumours that they would return for WM XX for months and months. I actually think it would have made more sense for Orton to be in a tag match against Hogan and Foley and use Piper at ringside to play off the first WrestleMania. Again, there were so many rumours and expectations for Mania it was ridiculous. I think the early promotion about it being the celebration of 20 years and that it would be the past/present/future colliding kind of set them up for a fall when Vince couldn't come to agreement with the past stars. We know it had to be that after the rumours of Vince talking to all the past stars fell through he changed gears towards "pushing the new talent". Hell, I remember the posts here had me all hyped and most of it didn't even happen except for Goldberg/Lesnar.

I think some are forgetting that the wwe has to fill up 2 hours for each brand every week. That is why there are longer matches than say in 2002. The depth is just not there or unless we want more stuff like the Diva Search nd gasp Tough Enough for filling time.

Okay, so somehow Lita knows Kane is the father. The match on sunday is to see who gets to marry Lita. Can I ask where in the hell is the drama in this? If Matt wins and marries Lita he is a punk-ass for doing it. If Kane wins and marries Lita he is marrying the mother of his child. Lita could turn heel, but so what she is already associated with Kane through their child. I think Stephanie came up wit this silly idea. Too much plotholes for drama even for wrestling. Nothing has been this riveting since Taker's "mistress" outed him out before his match with Brock. Yeah, that went over well too. Leave it to the brothers of destruction for great television.

Just put it in line with all the other blown opportunities. Honestly, this match would have blown away Rock/Hogan WM 18 at MSG with those crazy fans. Make it Hogan and Austin's legitimate last match as well? It would be legendary. You wouldn't have to turn any of them heel. Just let them go out and do what they do for the fans. The aura of the match would be the storyline. I even heard Rock wanted to do something with Randy Savage, but Vince balked. No need to turn this into what Mania XX's hype of a whole year had potential of.

I think Vince and Hogan have bigger problems such as keeping the Hulk Hogan name. Hogan will be back. I can bet on it, but for something like the Hall of Fame some time or other. The ridiculous raiding wwf with the help of Ted Turner is funny. He thinks it's still 1994 perhaps.

This is funny as at another website this topic came up sort of in terms of heels and faces in other sports(Yanks/Sox was the first to be brought up).

Justcoz, those comments you were responding to were not my posts. I just took those responses from another wesbite to the same question. Ironically, I think in the same vien as you and some of your responses would have blown away some of the responses that did not agree with some posters at this site. I'll post more of some of their responses because I actually think this has caused some really great debate on different viewpoints on what the wwe should do. I can imagine what some in the company feel. I agree with a lot of what you had to say. This is my post now about this topic. I think the wwe has a fundamental problem with creative and that is the nepotism in the company. I don't think there is any one major change that will change the tide, but a plethora of changes have to be made. Sometimes other fans think it's bashing for just the sake of bashing, but I honestly think some smarks know exactly what they are talking about. I agree 100% the wwe should listen to what the COMPLAINTS are from smarks. Not so much in who to push because the net fan can be seriously different in tastes to the general audience. The point you made about Vince going to the smart audience in 1997 and creating a grass roots type of feel is 100% correct. WCW was not listening to what the net fans were saying in having guys like Benoit, Guerrero, Jericho, and even Goldberg not getting the proper limelight would be their downfall because Hogan and company were advancing in age turned out to be exactly the reason they ended up in the position they did. I agree net fans and casuals aren't really that much different in not liking the BS they try to shove down our throats. It's ironic there was less of this in 97 and 99 when Vince needed to win back the wrestling populace from wcw. The thing the wwe is doing now is ignoring the net fans which is exactly what wcw did. They are showing signs of having an attitude that they know more than what the actual fans know what they want. This could come back to haunt them. The blueprint is already there with another company that they actually own. I think it's telling that the internet crowd is nowhere as big as it was in 1997-1999. How about all those other smarks that don't even bother to come online anymore because they don't like the product. What happened to men like Scoops and Micasa? The wwe ARE doing things that only amuse them the fans be damned, but they are also trying to do things as well such as pushing new guys in the main event like Benoit, Eddie, Orton, and JBL. The problem is of course who they choose to push seriously and who they want to push as guys just getting a taste of main eventing. As for the comments about the circus like atmopsphere I kind of disagree with the notion that it was always there. I know angles have always been there and some wacky characters, but for the most part the wrestling business in the 60's and 70's was trying to portray a sporting atmosphere. It even led into the 80's when you watch certain cards back then. I believe the circus like atmosphere should stick to things like Piper's Pit or the High-Lite Reel. The strong storylines like Savage/Steamboat in the 80's. I think many fans DO NOT like the silly pranks like Triple H and The Rock surviving friggin death. For all the talk about the 80's being a cartoon era I truly believe the real cartoonish atmosphere did not take over until after WM 5 when Vince broke kayfabe in courts which probably made him feel he had to be more Walt Disney. In 1990 and 1991 the wwe became a lot more cartoonish and the market did not respond strongly. From 1986-1989 the wwe did monster business and for the most part the wwe produced a more solid SPORTS entertainment product. The fans came in droves. I think that is a double edged sword for Vince because he probably thinks when he changed in 1989 that was the best move because like 10 years later it did the best year for financial status. He forgets that he built up his empire the years prior with a different approach. The circus atmosphere imo turns people off after a short time. Then as you stated Vince "got it" in 1997 and 1998 and the wwe turned the tides in the summer of 1998. If you watched the product in 1997 and 1998 when they drew fans back into the fold the wwe completely changed up in 1999. Sure, 1999 was a year that was financially the best perhaps, but just as 10 years prior the wwe forgot what built up the momentum. A lot of fans on the net were complaining about the stupidity that was going on in 1999, but since the wwe was making money hand over fist they couldn't bother what the same grass root fans were complaining about. Within 2 years the wwe was back to the same kind of problems that brought them down the tubes in the first place with insulting and unbelievable storylines like Jericho undisputed champion with Stephanie Mcmahon and the nWo. The terrible thing about it is that the net was telling them why it sucked and the ratings weren't really moving, but they still went ahead. The wwe should look at 1985 and 1998 imo to see how things should be done. That was the best of times for the attention they received from the media. It was also the time of the wwe being in vogue with the mainstream. This is not to say to copy the angles per se, but how the presentation attracted the new audiences. All those other years that they fell out of favour they did not do what they did to get "cool". Some of this nonsense they are doing now is just plain silly and as someone stated above is why the average age of the demographic is 37 years of age. I think ever since Triple H really took the reigns in 2002 as the champion of choice by Vince Mcmahon the audience has told the wwe they do not want it. From 1997-1999 it was Austin leading the charge. 1999-2001 was Rock. The popularity started to dip in 2002 from face Triple H. I think it was all good for Benoit to get the victory at the major stage of WM XX, but Vince should have seriously built someone to take his spot as he has failed in garnering the level of return that Rock and Austin did. I'm a Triple H fan more than not, but the truth is the truth. The problem is Triple H is family though. The same with Stephanie Mcmahon leading creative. I agree fully that the format is the problem. I mean what is the purpose of shows like Velocity and Heat? The thing is that Vince and company probably are afraid to make a big change because they are afraid of what will happen. In 1984 and 1985 Vince had already seen what Hulk Hogan could do in the media through his popularity in the Rocky III movie and the stupid move Verne Gagne did in not putting the strap on Hogan in the AWA. In the 90's Vince saw Bsichoff and Heyman take the chances first. That is the thing with Vince Mcmahon. He is a great at taking someone else's idea and improving on it. I will say this Vince probably has tried to do the "big change" with turning Austin heel in 2001, bringing in wcw, bringing in Ric Flair, bringing in nWo, and the brand split. As been pointed out here there are things that need to change on the show first before any big radical change has to happen to make any kind of impact. Producing stars with the drawing power of Rock, Hogan, or Austin wouldn't hurt either. However, that's easier said than done.

I agree that the only two major dream matches left with people that have something in the tank still is Angle/HBK and HBK/Angle. I wouldn't mind Rock/Angle now since the last time they feuded Angle was not as seasoned. However, given some time you are right that Orton/Cena could be huge. I also think if done at the right time Rock/Cena is money, but that depends on what they do with Orton in the next year or two.

You guys are great as these responses have been hotter here than the actual original place that asked this question. Here are a couple of responses from the posters there. NOTE these are not my posts, but just adding the diversity of what smarks think. I will give my response later on in another post. ---------- keep in mind that smart fans on the net are not always who the WWE sees as it's hardcore fanbase. The people on the Randy Orton board or an Undertaker fanboard are likely more the type that the WWE will cater to. Seriously, the people who will buy ANYTHING with their favorite star on and go to every show and signing in their area aren't normally the people you see on this type of forum. To comment on "the BIG change" I would like to point out that wrestling from the early 1900's to present day has always been about two guys hugging each other while wearing form fitting tights. In it's history their have been times when certain areas were hot, and others not so much. So if thinks weren't super hot in Memphis, they might have been doing really good in Minnesota. The WWE being national though needs an entire nation to be hot for the product for it to look like a big upward swing for business. When you look at the history of the WWF, NWA, WCW, and WWE one thing becomes clear...wrestling upswings on a national level don't happen because WRESTLING is over...but typically because one WRESTLER or ANGLE is over. Back in the 80's at the first WrestleMania, outside of Hogan there wasn't really a whole lot of guys on the card that were super over. The 2nd biggest match was the bodyslam challenge between Big John Studd and Andre the Giant. And really, there wasn't too much different between this show and other "super cards" that the WWE hd put on at MSG previously. But yet must view Mania as the start of a huge upswing. The reason? Hogan. The same thing happened again with the nWo, Austin, and then The Rock. Yes, Goldberg, DX, and Foley were all over durring the same time frame, but really when you look at any of the nation wide wrestling booms, it's mostly about one guy. When you think of Hogan making movies and him being WWF champ it gave the media somebody they could showcase to the public. It gave them a face to use when talking about wrestling. The same was true of Austin and Rock later on for the WWF, and for Hogan with WCW. Sadly right now no matter what directgion the WWE goes in, it needs another star that people will think of the moment they hear WWE. It's the reason why the WWE has pushed Cena and Orton so hard when they both have some serious on screen issues (Cena is a 1/2 assed wrestler, Orton is a 1/2 assed interview). In the mean time the WWE will likely do what always sells...present wrestling in a circus like envorment. You think the WWE having matches at Shea Stadium wasn't a big circus act in the 70's? What about guys like Gorgeous George, SuperStar, or Jesse The Body? And like always, the circus like elements of pro-wrestling will be centered around two guys in tights and business will do it's steady best. Sure, some places (like say Ontario) will be hot while others are not...but it's the way wrestling work when it lacks that one identifiable face. --------------------- Man I get tired of this. Is there a whole bunch of shit in the current product? Yes. Do I complain about it? Yes. Do I expect Vince to fire all his yes men, hire a head writer that doesn't suck goat ass, and start giving a shit about what I think? No. No I don't. And here's why: 1) Let's imagine we're all on a ship. La dee dah, cruising along, when all of a sudden, it gets all rough and choppy. We get thrown all over the place, there's a little water in the boat, all that jazz. Here's you guys: "HOLY FUCK THE BOAT IS SINKING! Here's the fact: the sea got a little rough. The business is 'down', folks. In natural, cyclical patterns, you've got to be down sometimes. Vince isn't going to run around changing everything just because wrestling isn't incredibly popular now. He's going to fiddle here and there, (brand split, anyone?) and bring in as many new people as he can, if they work (Cena, Orton, Eugene) and pull the plug if they don't (Matt Morgan, Mordecai). 2) Vince keeps everything the same and doesn't take any chances because he can afford to. He has no competition. Yes, because Vince, like any competant businessman, just loves to sit on his ass and watch his product go stale. Doesn't take any chances?! EUGENE!?! I marvel at the balls it took to pull the trigger on that character. Vince isn't coming up with stellar ideas because he isn't under pressure. Aries mentions that he needs competition, and I believe this is true. Eventually, it'll happen. Also, I believe we expect too much from Vince. The pairing of Regal and Eugene was great. I loved it. Seeing Kurt Angle back in the ring last week thrilled me down to my testicles, and seeing him face Hass was a decent part of it. I'm going to be satisfied with that, instead of expecting another Rocky. But tell you what: you go wait over there, and if another Rocky, Ricky Steamboat, Nick Bockwinkle, or Killer Kowalski show up, I'll let you know. -------------------- I like backstage segments - they make me give a shit about characters. Much more than interviews, especially since skits with THINGS HAPPENING can disguise people's weakness on the mike. I like women's wrestling - the existence of a semi-credible women's division is one of the two reasons I started watching WWE again. I like RAW better since Wrestlemania, in pretty much every way. To steal a phrase, the absence of Austin and Goldberg alone would make a pretty good show out of a show that had nothing else going for it. I think the Internet fans are largely out of touch with reality. For everyone's favourite examples, everywhere on the Net are people saying to depush HHH to the midcard, and most want him out of wrestling altogether. He's been referred to as the "Wrestling Anti-Christ" by dear old RD Reynolds, just to name an example. Of course, he does happen to be the most over heel on either roster and one of the most over wrestlers period, and the crowd pops for everything he does, and he has been consistantly putting on great matches all year, so...yeah. I like La Resistance. The webmaster of this site adores Tajiri and Rhyno. The crowds pop for Hurricane despite him being a total jobber. I'm happy to know all their segments are pointless to YOU, but you are not the living embodiment of what the audience likes. I don't think everyone wrestles "in the same boring style". In fact, I think you're nucking futs if you actually believe that. HHH does not wrestle like Shawn Michaels does not wrestle like Jericho does not wrestle like Benoit does not wrestle like Kane does not wrestle like Eddie Guerrero does not wrestle like Trish Stratus does not wrestle like Booker T does not wrestle like Rey Mysterio. Period. "Everyone stopped caring, as did I". Right. Which is why RAW's ratings got BETTER after Wrestlemania, and have generally remained better, excluding the blip in the radar of last week. Smackdown didn't, but I think we all know why that is, and they're recovering. Speaking of Smackdown, let me present an unpopular opinion on that subject. The WWE was right about Bradshaw. The internet fans were wrong. They're very bitter about being wrong, but they're wrong nonetheless. JBL is now quite over with the crowds; they boo him strongly. His segments have consistantly gotten more entertaining (Midget-Taker, and how JBL played it, was hysterical and more entertaining than anything Eddie's done for at least a month). He's played a good heel, established a strong character, and put on good matches. Yes, good matches. Sure, they were with Eddie, but so what? Has Eddie never had a bad match? I recall many predicting he couldn't "drag a good match out of Bradshaw". And yet, somehow, they did put on a good match. Repeatedly. Nothing that stole the show, but nothing that resembled HHH/Steiner either. It's clear JBL's stepped up his game in every way. Just like the WWE wanted and obviously expected when they gave him this push. That doesn't mean his push was perfectly handled, or couldn't have been done better, but the end results are that JBL is now a credible champion (something SD badly needed), now adds to the dynamic of Smackdown, and whether he loses the belt to UT or not, will almost certainly be a multiple time champion. Eventually, the Net fans might even notice there's no reason he shouldn't be. Anyway, back to the point. I don't disagree with everything you say, but about 80% of it, I do. I'd probably stop watching a show that took all your advice (maybe tuning in once in awhile for Jericho, who would probably be entertaining in any format). I doubt I'm the only one. The show could use some tweaks, like a new announce team, yes. But a revolutionary restructuring? No way. That's what they're TRYING to do by adding more reality show stuff - and that's going over horribly. Even if it was better-written and acted, it's still not what I watch wrestling for. What wrestling needs is consistent, coherent, well-built-up plotlines, something they actually are doing much better now than they ever did during the Attitude Era, spearheaded by things like Orton/Foley and Jericho/Trish/Christian. It's unlikely it'll reach the same heights of the Attitude Era in ratings unless they find another Austin or Hogan and push him properly, someone with incredible mainstream appeal...but frankly, that's not something that can be planned for. Wrestling's a fad with the mainstream sometimes, but it never lasts, and we're about five years before it's due to become in vogue again. I don't think quick fixes and destroying the format that the current viewers expect and tune in for is the solution to wrestling's "woes". Not, for that matter, am I particularly convinced it has ones that really require anything more than a few tweaks and better quality control. ------------ The "BIG CHANGE" is nothing that the WWE can do themselves. The change I would like to see would be another national promotion that could give Vince and Co. some legitimate competition. The reason RAW is the same almost every week is because Vince can afford to have RAW be the same every week and he knows that the hardcore fans will still watch and people will still buy tickets. Until there is a competitor that makes Vince change his product, he won't change it. Let the ridicule begin. --------------------- "cyclical patterns" argument I offer this: yes, the business is in a down cycle as it has been before. My question is did the previous down cycles end because of something that the industry did or did the industry do something because the down cycles ended? I think the original question read much more like "Business is down, what would you like to see WWE try to help bring it back up?" than "What would you have WWE change to increase your own enjoyment?" -------------------------- I for one wouldn't like to see any big changes to the rules or anything like that. Ref bumps, interference, run-ins, etc., to me, are all just part of wrestling. Sure, they may get old or over-used sometimes, but I wouldn't want to see some sort of "strict rules" thing enforced in WWE. Part of what makes a heel a heel are things like run-ins and cheating, so I think to take them away would be a bad idea. In my opinion, what WWE could really use is a shake-up of the rosters. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know that they just did the brand lottery about four months ago, but what did that really do? We got Rhyno on RAW and Booker T, Renee Durpee, Rob Van Dam, and The Dudleys on Smackdown. Okay (on the Smackdown side at least), but not exactly the most earth-shattering changes. What they need to do is have guys surprisingly jump from one show to the other, like back in the Monday Night Wars. That, to me, was one of the best things about that period: the fact that someone from WCW could always come to RAW and vice-versa. All they need to do would have Bischoff come out and say something like "If any of you came here to see Chris Jericho tonight, you can forget about it. His contract ran up and he's gone, so that takes care of that. Now, moving on to other matters, blah blah blah." Then, on Smackdown, they could have Jericho sitting in the front row, with Michael Cole playing the whole "That's Chris Jericho from RAW, what the hell is he doing here on Smackdown?" to which Tazz could reply "Haven't you heard Cole? The guy's a free agent, maybe he's here scoping out the talent on Smackdown." Then, the next week they could have Jericho's official contract signing with Teddy Long, and it's done. New guy on Smackdown, played very much like it would have been back in the WCW/WWF days. And also looking at this, there are a ton of feuds that either have never been done or haven't been done in a long time that WWE could do by switching the rosters up more than once a year. They are: Shawn Michaels vs. Eddie Guerrero Shawn Michaels vs. Kurt Angle Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker Kurt Angle vs. Ric Flair fresh feuds that WWE could do. Just by switching Shawn Michaels to Smackdown could be a huge change. Have him feud initially with a heel Kurt Angle (who wouldn't want to see THAT match), then maybe turn him heel and put him in a feud with Eddie Guerrero for the WWE title (and again, who wouldn't want to see THAT match). I guess my point is that WWE doesn't need some sort of special occasion to shake up the rosters (like the draft lottery or whatever). They should play it up like it was back in the WCW/WWF Monday Night days, in that any guy could jump to the other show at any moment's notice. What would you do if you turned on Smackdown and Shawn Michaels was in the ring cutting a promo or if at the begining of RAW, John Cena's music hit and he came out announcing himself as the newest addition to RAW? I think WWE needs to play this up more. ------------------------------------ I think the best one was that back in the 80's there was more than one company. I think people tend to forget that the wwf style was not as popular in certain nwa regions and vice versa. The diversity helped to bring in more fans. Obviously, this can't be done with today's market. The wwe has a stranglehold on the market and to be honest TNA and ROH or any other organization would have a hard time going up against Vince Mcmahon simply because of brand name and brand loyalty. The wwe has the track record of being the big leagues. The only time it was really challenged was when it was raided of talent and even then it stayed afloat because of its brand legacy. You are correct about the wwe not seeing these type of fans as hardcores probably. I think it is a mistake however to dismiss what some of their more knowledgeable fans are saying. I tend to think the number is bigger than what is believed. The reason I say this is that during the big boom of the 90's there were a helluva lot more websites devoted to wrestling and places like Online Onslaught. Look, how much of these sites are here today? It has diminished quite a lot. There are no more people like John Petrie, Scoops, or even Micasa. I know probably some have "outgrown" it or just moved on to other things, but I can't believe ALL of them have left for this reason. A lot of their pissing and moaning about wcw came to show the company did have its problems, but mowed along and did not bother to think what this fanbase had to say mattered. The wwe actually made the product smarter because the fanbase got smarter in general by the attitude era. I agree the forumla of using that one major star has been successful, but I've read where Vince thinks it's also a double edged sword. For example Bruno Sammartino according to Mcmahon was pushed too invincible and for the time the wwe tried to replace him it was hard. Vince somewhat followed the blueprint with Hogan, but I think by the time Austin came around Vince did not want another Hogan type monster because they are hard to replace. However, this does not take away the fact that it is indeed having a major star that the mainstream public can latch onto for the rest of the product is the key. Hogan then Austin and then Rock is a good example. Rock being the last man on top drawing in the mainstream audience is a good point because once 2002 arrives and Triple H is given the handle the popularity starts to fall. This is not all his fault, but as stated when things are hot the fans allow the suck to flow because it doesn't matter there is someone there at the top that overshadows it. For all the great stuff Trips did in 2001 it was still Rock's peak year of popularity. Once Rock and Austin's popularity started to dip, so did the rest of the roster. I think right now, Vince believes that man to be Triple H and honestly for all intents and purposes I can see why without even considering his family relation. Triple H was the guy who was in the mix during Austin and Rock's peak. I think some of the boredom of Trips' reign to some in 2002 and 2003 had something to do with Trips being seen above the other talent regardless how it was booked. The problem I think some had was Triple H not working to bring them onto his level to get things hot. I also agree with your analysis of Orton and Cena. The wwe probably sees more upswing with Orton because he doesn't have a gimmick like the rap for a crutch and it could make a difference long term. You see I do believe the company is trying to improve itself, but there are still elements that override the good in the general scope for a fan to really invest into it. I also believe Vince needs competition because the competition would do things that Vince won't do to become #1. They want to knock him off his throne and when that happens Vince sets things in motion. The problem with this is complacency though. Hulk Hogan once said that Vince told him he would never be as big as he was in the 80's and neither would wrestling just before Hogan got the axe from Vince the first time. History shows that Vince was wrong in his assumption. Of course, there was a lot of growth within that timeframe as well from the mondary night wars to Hogan turning heel to breaking kayfabe to attitude etc. That's why I think they shouldn't just settle. The roster moves can help, but I think they are doing the right thing here for the most part not mixing it up too much for now. Once the wwe has two strong brands it can work beautifully. Remember, the monday night wars in the initial stages didn't hae the back and forth war and the jumping ship. There was somewhat of a standstill and standard of not recognizing the other company, so when it did happen it was a big deal. The problem is increasing the depth on both sides. This is not actually Vince Mcmahon's fault as there just isn't as much talent as before. The killing of the territories in the 80's proved this as in the 90's there were less places to grab developing talent. I agree fully HBK should have gone to smackdown, but if reports are true Vince is using smackdown as a development brand and when the talent is ready in their mind they move over to raw. I can see this being somewhat true with pushing men like Bradshaw into the main events and using the history laden wwe title to give these guys some credence instead of the world heavyweight title. I don't think that eliminating run ins and ref bumps is wise because that is a good tool for cheating to gain victory by the heels, but I suppose cutting it down for certain times wouldn't hurt.

They would use the OTE title switch imo. If they wanted to be careful about backlash using any match from that event I think they would just edit the commentary pertaining to Owen Hart.

Hmm...I thought I was the only one noticing these things about the wwe. I watch, but no way do I talk about it with my friends who were casuals anymore. They did have something in February and March as someone stated. I haven't even watched a ppv since WM XX and No Way Out live which should say something. I had watched every single ppv live in the attitude era and federation years. My interest did start to fall in 2003 starting with the Nash/HHH cell match for the ppv cards. In my opinion they just weren't really worth all the trouble to go see. I knew things were bad when our group of friends stopped going to a friend's house earlier this year for Backlash when he got it for free. I agree the wwe should have done something with Jericho in Edmonton or Clagary the next night. It would elevate both men, but we know what happened. Someone stated the formatting being the same since the attitude era, well I think it's beyond that. It's back to the days of 1996 when Nitro was first doing it. They haven't changed since. It took the wwe to change the formatting to get people to watch again in 97 and beyond. They are like in 1991-96 mode where the formatting is the same like superstars having all the jobber matches and raw having a good match here and there with all the hype and solid stuff on the ppv. Bischoff came and changed up all of that redundant programming hate to say. The wwe has people like Bischoff and Heyman under the roof, yet they are not apart of the creative process? Make NO SENSE to me.

So, smackdown's suck is infiltrating raw Don't blame Orton. Blame jbl!

Come on we can't rule out the genetic jackhammer then if it isn't Kane or Matt's. Isn't it time for the annual Vince Mcmahon crappy storyline? Last year it was with Stephanie Mcmahon and this year he follows up on the storyline by trying to get a new daughter with Lita.

She was in Slaves of the Realm, The Final Victim, Ariana's Quest, AND Corky Romano!! Wasn't she also in an episode of that show "Relic Hunter"? However long THAT show lasted. All I knew about was Relic Hunter and weren't all these movies before her return to wwe ? Wasn't she bombing under "Rena Mero formerly the actress known as Sable"? The Rock is actually different as he actually has some charisma. Sable was over for other reasons obviously. That doesn't exactly translate into a movie career.

It's true that the wwe should be more concerned about long term ratings, but the problem I really see is this. The wwe just DOESN'T listen for the most part. If you really look at things from 1999 until now I see a few things that are constant. The wwe should realize that nonsense like Kane/Matt/Lita is not what people watch wrestling for. I even heard Matt Hardy on Starphone(the same line "Joltin" Joe does his line) state that he doesn't understand why some the hardcore fans are so negative toward the entertainment aspect of his storyline with Kane. They don't get that not only are the hardcores not liking it, but so are the casuals. They think it's the fans' fault for not liking what they think is entertaining. I also remember Vince saying in 2002-3 that the fans haven't really rallied behind Triple H as champion. It seems like they think its the fans who aren't getting it. Smarks and whatnot are just more vocal through the net becaue this group of fans watch anyways. Other fans just turn the crap off. How many damn times are they going to book Kane in these stupid storylines that don't entertain or bring in the money? They keep booking him in this crapola and why? Then as hardcore fans tell them that Eugene will wear thing very quickly they don't hear. They push these flavour of the month characters and within the next half year look for something else to pop the ratings. Thankfully, they have cut down on the ridiculous storylines that were around in late 2000, 2001, and 2002(Jericho undisputed lap dog and Rock dying come to mind). The fanbase is not only dwindling because of lack of heat and talent, but the wwe just push things that override the good in the product. They screw themselves anytime they run an angle in the media that gets them attention such as the BillyChuck stuff(which led nowhere after all the hype which gives people no reason to emotionally invest in the storylines as well). Another thing to tie into 2000 with Kane/Lita/Matt Hardy storyline is the love triangle with Trips/Angle/Steph that led nowhere. The net doesn't seem to be too much into this Randy Orton #1 contender and the casuals don't seem to be either. There are just so many things that they are doing that don't make people stick with the product. I'm a junkie, so I'm out of the equation, but I do know why people tune in and out. Sometimes it's just insulting to watch and they test the patience of the audience. Look how anytime they do something that seems like it will turn the tide the ratings are up and then soon after it drops(the latest incident was the draft lottery).

I know! I have never seen or heard UT going that long in a match in my life and I have been watching this stuff before UT was even in the company.

They are too wrapped up in telling the contractors to wear suits outside the arena to bother with these pathetic ratings. Many thought the ironman killed ratings, well this kills that idea in the bud. Maybe the Diva nonsense brought down the rating. From another website it seemed like last week's ratings were high for the Regal/HHH match, but as soon as the Diva stuff appeared following it dropped the rating for the quarter hour.

They are too wrapped up in telling the contractors to wear suits outside the arena to bother with these pathetic ratings. Many thought the ironman killed ratings, well this kills that idea in the bud. Maybe the Diva nonsense brought down the rating. From another website it seemed like last week's ratings were high for the Regal/HHH match, but as soon as the Diva stuff appeared following it dropped the rating for the quarter hour.

I'm not surprised to be honest. The wwe deserves this kind of feedback.