Good article at 411

[Guest deadbeater]

What WWE should do is use the so-called spoilers to their advantage, and write compelling television to reflect that. That way we in the audience get the 'honey look at this' moments timed perfectly. Buffy and Angel are the most spoiled TV shows in history. Does it diminsh the watching of the episodes being by spoiled? No, because of the compelling writing in it. WWE should treat Smackdown spoilers as an aid in promoting the product, and work with it.

 

This is what I don't get: all but three people in the WWE either graduated or attended college (Booker T, Brian Kendrick and Molly Holly, and they are the better wrestlers). Why does the company insist on treating the audience as being stupid frats, instead of going for a higher, more educated and sophisticated clientele? We know it is entertainment; entertain us and challenge our perceptions, like Mick Foley did!! Promote T&A, shows like Girls Gone Wild and movies like Old School, the company shouldn't cry about the fans they attract.

[Guest ShooterJay]

Are you sure it's only those three? I'm pretty 'Taker, Orton and Benoit never went to college. Not sure about Bob Holly or Test either.

 

As for the comments themselves, spot on.

[Guest Brian]

I think Kendrick finished out his Community College degree.

[Guest graph9]

I agree with it to a certain extent..but the smart attitude is annoying at times, because anytime someone expresses that they like someone the smarts don't consider a "wrestler"..the "wrestling purist" comes out &..they start sharpening their knives to flame him, geez, wrestling is a joke in the real world..it's not that serious..at times they nitpick everything.."he didn't use good psychology"."he didn't do that ddt right"..they think they actually work for the WWF (E) or something..

 

But all in all it's cool..we need the smarts..marks..etc..to make interesting discussion..

 

 

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

geez, wrestling is a joke in the real world..it's not that serious..

Usually I find that the stuff that gets criticized are things that MAKE wrestling a joke. Why would anyone want to put up with something that makes what they like a joke?

[Guest mach7]

I must have missed the memo that says I should give a shit about what "Ken Anderson" or anyone at 411 says...

[Guest Goodear]

Okay, this is the last time I'm going to write something like this. This is the final time I ever go in arena of "Smarks vs. Guys who watch and enjoy the show" ... so take a picture or something.

 

As usual in a polarizing debate of this magnitude, both sides are as wrong as wrong could be. First off the "Watch and enjoy the show" people seem to think that it is the work of a veiwer to find entertainment in whatever they watch. Their arguments hinge on this principle and, quite frankly, it sucks. Because there are segments of television shows that I generally enjoy that I don't quite care for... I don't believe it makes me an ass to express that displeasure. In fact, quite the opposite. Caring enough to discuss and analysize a show is a halmark of viewer interest in your product. No one who actually would care enough about wrestling enough to actually pay money to see it should blindly love everything that is being produced. Not only is it almost impossible, it's counter to the entire 'three ring circus' booking philosophy. It's simply just not important for a WWE fan to love every WWE worker. It's only important that they like some of the action that gets presented on a weekly or even monthly basis.

 

On the other side, you have the Internet smarks whom on the fringe seem to hate every single thing that a federation does and, more often, detest certain parts of the program that aren't really catered to them in the first place. How many times have we seen calls to seen Rikishi fired dispite the fact that his act is almost completely relegated to the midcard and he seems to be very over with the live studio audience? It appears to an outside viewer that the Internet fan base is only interested in a few specific brands of wrestling and casually dismiss and seemingly despise everything else. But perhaps the Internet's biggest failing is that they refuse to believe just how big of a part the 'mark' portion of their being is truly integrated into their fandom. Because, quite simply, if you are truly looking at a wrestling match as a form of art with no semblance of competition... why would you care who has a title belt anyway? Yet this seems to be a key complaint regarding Internet posters.

 

So, if you ask me and no one did, both sides are wrong in this debate. Wrestling was never designed to appeal to any one person to be entertained the entire night. It is supposed to appeal in part to just about everyone who enjoys the product at some point during a show. And quite frankly, if you are never entertained by a wrestling show anymore from beginning to end, you should really stop watching. You are only hurting yourself in that case.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

How many times have we seen calls to seen Rikishi fired dispite the fact that his act is almost completely relegated to the midcard and he seems to be very over with the live studio audience?

 

This is iffy. I think the forum is split - some want him gone, some say keep him because he is over with the crowd.

 

It appears to an outside viewer that the Internet fan base is only interested in a few specific brands of wrestling and casually dismiss and seemingly despise everything else.

 

I don't think anyone here doesn't like "big guys wrestling" as long as they are good matches. The WWE generally doesn't have good hoss matches therefore they get bashed a lot. But you always hear Vader being put in a nice light because he was a big guy who could have a good match. It's not necessarily about styles so much is it about the matches those styles tend to present.

 

But perhaps the Internet's biggest failing is that they refuse to believe just how big of a part the 'mark' portion of their being is truly integrated into their fandom. Because, quite simply, if you are truly looking at a wrestling match as a form of art with no semblance of competition... why would you care who has a title belt anyway? Yet this seems to be a key complaint regarding Internet posters.

 

Wrestling is a 3 fold industry. It is an Art. It is a business. And it is a Sport. The title situation falls under business and sport.

[King Cucaracha 0]

I kind of agree with it, in that we should just relax a little and try and find the pros in everything. Although if we did that with some thigns, we'd miss the rest of the show thinking. Anyway, I think I might be 'part mark' cause I don't have any hate for any wrestler or match particularly. Hell whenever anyone mentions the Kennel From Hell, I remember...no wait, bad example. I can find the positive in most things. 'Mr Positive'...hmm, maybe I could use that as a 'gimmick'.

 

Anyway, I know come Wrestlemania it's mark time. I always 'mark' for a PPV by not reading any internet stuff for a while if possible. Worked for NWO, worked for Survivor Series, definatly worked for Rumble. Come Mania, I'm gonna have forgotten most of my pro-Jerichoness and as this guy put remember the old times. The old HBK. Same goes for Hogan. I'm looking forward to Vince-Hogan, and plan to mark like a bitch, even though the match itself will blow. Unless they make it No DQ(If they have already, please ingnore my ignorance!) Hell the only PPV match I've fastforwarded in like the past half year to a year was Steiner and HHH at NWO. I'll be watching Jones and Taker vs Show and A-Train. Basically, I'll remember when PPV's actually felt special. And hope to enjoy WM more

 

If I'm gonna watch it 'as a smark', then a HHH win would sour my whole watching of the show. I can see what he's saying about Mania, because I grew up on Hulk-a-Mania, on D-X, on Austin 3:16, on the HBK era, on the Deadman era.

 

But if you're a guy bitching about guy's bitching...doesn't that make you a guy bitching yourself?

 

I don't agree with the smark bashing...and the fact he's bashing the very people who'll read this. We can choose to like and hate what we want to. If I choose to mark for Goldberg when he coems back because I remember his good days from WCW, then I will. No smark or internet columnist is going to stop me from doing it nor making me do it.

 

Oh, and the problem with Rikishi is his act is O-L-D OLD! Hell when someone like Van Dam comes in in 2001 with his style, he got over very quickly. Now, it's the same stuff. Like Rikishi, it's over...but it's been seen too many times. The new stuff needs to keep coming through, and the breakout stuff isn't happening. And when it does (Mattitude, O'Haire, Jericho and Christian's double act to a smaller extent) it's not being used. WWE is about entertainment. We watch the wrestling to be entertained. Same for the gimmicks. Things can only entertain us so many times before we need a change. That's why The Rock and Austin are so highly thoguht of, and Rikishi and HBK aren't. If it's old, time for a change.

[Guest snuffbox]

If I end up watching WM...I will definitly be checking all smart attitude at the door.

 

And I know that if I see HBK hit a superkick, Ill mark like a lil bitch at an OLP concert.

[Guest El Satanico]

And I know that if I see HBK hit a superkick, Ill mark like a lil bitch at an OLP concert.

Well then you better slap your fool self when you realize Jericho lost to a cripple that has no business beating Jericho.

 

Yeah yeah, I know that was an example of being a "bitter smark" and that i'm such a terrible fan, but piss off(not directed at anyone).

[Guest Retro Rob]

Personally, I believe and have stated several times in the past that many of the people here are way too critical. This probably sounds funny considering I critique shows myself. BUT, when I watch Raw or SmackDown!, I'm not watching for fantastic workrate. All I ask is to be entertained, which I admit has not been happening all that often. Although, most of the shows have at least ONE positive aspect.

 

Now my problem is the part where 1000 people all start bitching and post about a dozen threads on whatever this week's scapegoat is. The main problem is that for the time being, everything has been done in the wrestling industry, so the WWE is trying to recycle the past. Until a new craze comes over the fans, the WWE will be stuck in this rut. There is really no way out. People are bored with the current style of wrestling, so until that changes they will stay bored.

 

Instead of just reacting to the program, you should try to be PRO-ACTIVE. On top of the inevitable bitching, offer ways to improve whatever you are complaining about. Also, posting here isn't helping anyone. The WWE has channels to go through in order to comment on their shows. All of you who say that Vince McMahon isn't listening to you... well the reason why is because MAYBE ten people here actually send in feedback directly to the WWE. What the hell do you expect? Vince McMahon himself to navigate through all the crap in this folder or even read the 25 page Raw/PPV threads?

 

Any time I watch wrestling for recreation, I forget all about the backstage crap and just try to enjoy the show as a casual fan. When I watch a show that I intend to write about, I go over with a fine-tooth comb because that is what a reviewer should do.

 

In conclusion, if you are just watching the WWE for fun; lighten up a bit and be pro-active, not just a whiny bitch.

[Guest El Satanico]

The advice of "write to WWe and tell them what you think" is good in theory.

 

The problem is that WWe has shown on many occassions that they just don't really care what the internet says about the product. You honestly think they'd start listening if more people started to send the complaints straight to them?

 

WWe got alot of complaints about KAtie Vick mailed to them and Vince acted like we were the idiots for hating it. You honestly believe he'll listen if you sent the complaints to WWe?

 

WWe would maybe listen to us internet fans if Shane or even Stephanie were in charge. They're younger and probably understands the value of the internet and if used correctly that it could be an important piece for the WWe more than Vince.

[Guest Retro Rob]

The advice of "write to WWe and tell them what you think" is good in theory.

 

The problem is that WWe has shown on many occassions that they just don't really care what the internet says about the product. You honestly think they'd start listening if more people started to send the complaints straight to them?

 

WWe got alot of complaints about KAtie Vick mailed to them and Vince acted like we were the idiots for hating it. You honestly believe he'll listen if you sent the complaints to WWe?

 

WWe would maybe listen to us internet fans if Shane or even Stephanie were in charge. They're younger and probably understands the value of the internet and if used correctly that it could be an important piece for the WWe more than Vince.

Well, the Katie Vick angle was essentially the end of Shock TV on WWE programming for the time being.

 

Look, if more people CONSISTENTLY complain directly to the WWE, you would get further than just bitching here. There is no denying that. Also, the WWE actually took a few fan's ideas last year into consideration, so they obviously read the feedback.

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

Well.....it's not like I sit down to watch RAW and SD! with a notepad and a magnifying glass waiting to analyze the matches and find fault with everything.

I just watch it and if something is not pleasing to me or a match is not entertaining then I know it. There's no searching.......I just know that I don't like it. He acts like we all go over the show frame by frame looking for faults. Hell no. If it isn't good then we notice it without having to look. And WWE TV has been really noticeably bad lately.

[Guest Dmann2000]

The feeling you got when Randy Savage hoisted Miss Elizabeth onto his shoulders after losing a retirement match at Wrestlemania VII.

How dare he compare ANYTHING that they have done in the last two years to that masterpiece?

Anglesault, I agree with you 100% on that. Savage/Elizabeth at WM VII is a masterpiece, nothing has come close to it in the past 5 years in my opinion (well, HHH/Cactus was pretty damn close).

 

As for the article, eh everyone's different. I might not be as upset with things as others here, but no one said we had to all agree. Opinions, assholes everyone's got one yada yada yada. You like it, you like it. You don't, you don't. You complain, you complain. Sky ain't falling ('cept in Bahgdad). Me, Wrestlemania looks interesting this year, moreso than last year. Not as much as XVII.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

Katie Vick was the end of shock tv? So the whole Dawn Marie/Torrie Wilson thing was just good ol fashioned storytelling?

 

Isn't Shane in charge of 'digital media'? Which means he is in charge of Shopzone and WWE.com? Doesn't WWE.com suck? How exactly would he be good at using it if he were in charge? Steph doesn't even know how to turn on a computer.

[Guest Brian]

Paul Heyman didn't write either of those.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

No, Paul Heyman has never been associated with lesbianism and controversial 'shock' angles before.

[Guest Mad Dog]

You know these people just make me care less about wrestling.

[Guest goodhelmet]

I must have missed the memo that says I should give a shit about what "Ken Anderson" or anyone at 411 says...

in all fairness, if blake norton or dave dymond are writing the article then it is usually a pretty damn article. everyone else i could do without. in the meantime, go to the NWA folder and check out bps's commentary in his weekly nwa previews. NOW THAT is good commentary!

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/columns/...columns_id=1829

 

This guy did a mailbag on the column.

 

I *did* read Ken Anderson’s article and, with the greatest respect for Mr. Anderson, I thought it was a pile of toss.

 

Well, at least he's honest.

[Guest graph9]

It's funny as hell what the "smarts" do ..at times the attitude is to overzealous..(one time..someone actually counted the minutes HHH was on)..If there is a bad Raw..people are ready to boycott bitch & moan..and talk about the demise of the WWF (e)..but they somehow always come back & watch..hee..wrestling fans are fickle..

 

But if there is a good Raw..they are happy & satisfied again..until the next bad Raw..

 

If their favorite wrestler isn't getting pushed..there must be a conspiracy at hand..and if you say anything that disagrees with their "wrestling purist" views..they r ready to carve you up..especially if you are not hip to the fact..that it's a "shoot" or "work"..& your just a "mark"..because after all they know everything about the buisness..

 

The WWF (e) is a traveling circus..

 

I just sit back and laugh at the posts here and other places.. i am never bored..

 

 

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

If there is a bad Raw..people are ready to boycott bitch & moan..and talk about the demise of the WWF (e)..but they somehow always come back & watch..hee..wrestling fans are fickle..

Au contraire, I haven't watched a full RAW since August and several weeks went by in the fall when I didn't watch at all. I missed almost all of this week's RAW as well. And I don't feel like I missed much.

 

I liked the Mars Bar analogy in the article JOTW posted. "Yes, it is YOUR fault that the candy bar is different in the UK, and that's why you don't like it here in the US". Um, yeah.

 

Still not understanding how any of these new postings is supposed to get us to spend $40.........

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

Yes that's right. We should be happy when there's a good RAW and happy when there's a bad RAW. We should never have an opinion and never speak out when something obviously doesn't entertain us. We should just bend over and take whatever WWE gives us!

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

And another thing. Everyone acts like a smark spends there entire life on the internet bitching and moaning. A lot of people like me do it as a past time. When I get off work and I've got a few hours till I'm going to turn in I'll get online for a bit to see what's up.

It's not like most smarks spend there whole life with a notepad in front of the TV catching every little detail on WWE TV and then formulating there opinions before they run off to post it. We aren't all like that wanker Scott Keith.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

If their favorite wrestler isn't getting pushed..there must be a conspiracy at hand..

 

There usually is. Actually, the political game of the WWE is probably understated on this board.

[Guest Mad Dog]

It's not necessarily one person's favorite wrestler.

 

It's when wrestlers that you know get a reaction that get sacrificed to wrestlers that no one gives a damn about.

[Guest graph9]

I am not saying that the behaviors i described is indicative of all the "smarts"..but it can't be denied that a large number act that way..and we all of know there is politics in any buisness..but at times the "smarts" go overboard on the conspricacy theories..the WWF (e)..will do their own thing anyway regardless of the bitching..& at times to their detriment..

 

At times they just suck all the fun with overanlization of a buisness that's on the level of a circus..actually i think the circus is held in higher esteem than the WWF (e)..

 

[Guest bob_barron]

If their favorite wrestler isn't getting pushed..there must be a conspiracy at hand..

 

There usually is. Actually, the political game of the WWE is probably understated on this board.

What's the conspiracy behind the lack of push for Regal and Goldust??