Big change

[Promoter 0]

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.

[JN News 0]

Make Edge a cool, cocky, ladies man heel.

Like Dean Malenko?

 

 

 

 

 

No, make him dress up in black leather, and give him an entourage of Divas to flock around him.

Make Dean Melinko..... SHAWN MICHAELS?!? Huh uh..... bad idea. He'll be ruined forever and thus forever branded as gay boy till kingdom come. I'm serious............ NOOOOOOOOOOO LEATHER. Shawn should even cut down on the leather. It's just toooo.......er...... GHEY.

 

KJ

No, I mean the black leather jacket, black shirt, and black leather pants, and shades. That's what I mean.

[BHK 0]

Shawn Michaels vs. Eddie Guerrero

Shawn Michaels vs. Kurt Angle

Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker

Kurt Angle vs. Ric Flair

 

 

Michaels/Taker has been done before. Flair is too old to run a program with angle at this point. There are only two "money" matches left in WWE in my opinion. those being HBK/Angle and HBK/Rock. Nothing else comes close that I can think of at the moment. Although, if done right, 2-3 years from now, Cena-Orton could be just as huge.

[Promoter 0]

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.

[Fökai 0]

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.

In my mind, there are no "sure fire" dream matches left, but there are a few potential matches left that would do huge business if played out correctly. Again, any combination of Rock, Orton and Cena would draw.

 

And as mentioned, HBK/Angle...or Angle/HBK...either way.

 

[Australian Pride 0]

They need to stop wasting time on things nobody cares about (Diva Search). When it's obvious who the winner is going to be, and people dont care then why let it continue to chew up TV time, especially when that time could be used to put on some wrestling matches.

 

Anything to do with pregnancy should be given the flick. There has never been a good pregnancy angle, and there never will be.

 

If you build a monster heel, keep him that way. Dont let him be punked out by someone who isnt even a trained wrestler (coughShaneMcMahoncough). He is eventually going to have to lose to someone, but they should always be a trained wrestler of main event calibre.

 

Dont have pointless T&A matches. The only time a womens match of this type has even been remotely significant was at Invasion in 2001, and that's because they were keeping score on who was winning each match.

 

Dont overuse gimmick matches. Hell in a Cell should be kept for extreme cases only. I can understand HBK/HHH having their blow-off in the HIAC, but Nash/HHH was ridiculous. Let the gimmick matches mean something, so that when they do happen people are interested enough to buy the PPV on that match alone.

 

Storyline continuity. Use Kane for an example here on how insignificant WWE regards continuity.

[justcoz 0]

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.

 

You are totally right. However, I think the lack of acknowledgement of the "smart" Internet wrestling community is a terrible mistake. The people who post here are for the most part the diehards. While they don't make up the total percentage of WWE's audience and the product shouldn't be totally catered toward them, it's a vocal and knowledgeable crowd who watch weekly and would like to buy every PPV.

 

With that in mind, what we typically see as "crap" should be somewhat listened to. I'm not saying that Internet fans are never wrong but for the most part, the finger is on the pulse of the larger audience. For instance, we were crapping all over the Diva competition and now you see casual fans, marks I guess, booing the contestants, chanting over their skits, etc.

 

Let me take you back to 1997. WWF is losing to WCW in the ratings. Who did they try to target? The smart wrestling community. Vince McMahon was on television saying they wouldn't insult our intelligence with good guy vs. bad guy. They created a working relationship with ECW. Work rate was suddenly noticed among the talent on their roster after years of pushing roided up stiffs. They had "insider" digs at WCW. They created Byte This which in it's early stages wasn't all that concerned with kayfabe. In turn, the Internet community supported them against WCW.

 

 

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.

 

Again... I don't want to come across like I'm disagreeing with you because I agree with almost every point you make. Let's just say this is healthy discussion/debate. You are correct, wrestling no matter what goes on in the ring and the athleticism displayed by the talent, will always be seen as a circus and it will always have circus like elements. Larger than life characters and scenerios.

 

But as a company they have to know what type of circus aspects work with their target demographic and current audience. You have to know how to read your audience pretty much. If the arena is booing or mocking what they are seeing, for instance the Lita-Matt-Kane angle and the Diva competition, you have to read that and make the appropriate decisions. Cut the intended plans short so you don't turn away your audience. They don't do that. They literally and sometimes blatantly disregard signals that the audiences, and I'm talking the Internet and beyond, for their own jollies. Case in point, how they went on with Katie Vick and thought they hit a "home run".

 

Stone Cold and The Rock may have not worked if the product around them was The Goon, Sparky Plug, MVP and Bastian Booger. They worked because their characters and the company itself were in touch with what was going on in pulp culture around them. Ditto for Hogan/Piper and the Rock n Wrestling/MTV connection.

 

Right now, there is a reality tv craze. Didn't Paul Heyman want to tap into reality tv with ECW at one point? I remember it being reported that he was laying the foundation for such a show. I wonder what he had in mind. Vince McMahon would rather know what Bruce Pritchard is thinking though.

 

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).

 

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.

 

Competition is definitely needed, however, WWE does technically have competition. It's called other programming on television. Monday Night Football. Will and Grace. The OC. MTV Video Awards. CSI and Survivor. Vince always boasted that he's in the sports entertainment business, not the wrestling business. So it shouldn't matter if it's another wrestling company challenging him, right? While I definitely see your point and agree with your opinion I also believe it's really bad business to keep things so predictable and formulatic. What are we waiting for? A 2.5 Raw rating? When things went into high 3's and they didn't retain those Nitro viewers that should have been the first sign.

 

>>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. <<

 

Not sure about that because it also forces wrestlers who aren't actors to be actors. I just consider working a promo or interview directed towards a live crowd is more important to establishing a character. Sometimes they do hit an occassional gem with a backstage segment. For instance, the Flair and HBK exchange the night that Flair faced HHH. Then there are the segments like the Lita pregnancy stuff that just make it difficult to be a fan. Even embarrassing.

 

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.

 

HHH is a damn over heel but shouldn't anyone be with the amount of tv time he gets? And if he wouldn't have had his invincible reign, Benoit's title win at Wrestlemania wouldn't have been anywhere near as sweet or dramatic as it was.

 

I typically enjoy watching HHH but there comes a time when someone needs to put ego aside for the best interest of the business. Particularly if you are married into that business.

 

You may say, what about Benoit's title win or the Shelton Benjamin upset? Well, Benoit THE WWE WORLD CHAMPION spent the summer being a bit player in a feud between HHH and a retard. He will more than likely lose his title to Randy Orton at Summerslam and I ask you where are the quality matches we could have got with his championship reign? Christ, even a blow off tv match vs. Jericho. We instead got him playing second to HHH. As for Shelton, his upset and the push that should have coincided with it, lost any momentum when he was thrown out of the ring and became an after thought in a HHH vs. HBK brawl. Benoit also played second in that feud as well.

 

There may be HHH fans out there and I've been guilty of that from time to time throughout his career. I was a Hogan fan as well and I hated when he insisted on being dominating. Part of creating that next ONE BIG STAR is for the old ones to step aside. HHH has been near the top of the card since at least 1999. We are looking at Wrestlemania 21 featuring him vs. Randy in what will be ANOTHER World Title match more than likely. Let's just hope Randy goes over convincingly. If that's the case and HHH steps to the side and lets Orton actually have a solid championship reign and not play second fiddle to him - I'll be satisfied.

 

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.

 

I also love the JBL character as of late. I didn't care for it initially with the ethnic crap they did with Eddie. The best wrestling characters are extensions of their real life personalities. JBL is a Bush supporting, pro Iraqi invasion American. He plays the character to perfection because it's him amped up in campiness a bit.

 

I also liked the Eddie vs. JBL feud. My problem with JBL is that it's another example of the company not listening to their fans and pretty much doing as they wish. There were others on the roster with bigger pops, more established characters and personas, etc. They were bypassed because Vince and his company men wanted to push Bradshaw. Not a proven ratings draw or someone with a strong reaction from the audience.

 

And Eddie's title reign was aborted. He was a proven ratings draw with a strong ethnic following that actually helped Smackdown's ratings. He spent much of last year being the most popular guy on the roster who was on the verge of a championship push. Inexplicably he was put back into a tag team with Chavo at his peak in popularity. He finally got his reign and they put him immediately into a program with an average worker and a new character that wasn't established yet. On top of that, they also had that new character insult Eddie's personal struggles and that ethnic group he represented, essentially a good bit of the company's audience. Ratings tanked, Eddie's confidence did as well, now he's without the title with a lame duck reign after waiting years for it. The quality of the show gets better immediately after Eddie drops the title, ratings improve and the company looks at JBL and says, here's a long term champion? Oh, and let's put him in there with Taker because we need to establish new stars.

 

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.

 

It should also be noted that the Orton/Foley and Jericho/Trish/Christian storylines were written primarily by the Foley and Jericho/Trish - not the WWE creative team. The creative team is the main thing wrong with this company right now. Then the people like Pritchard in Vince's ear.

 

Let me break down what you just said. Every time that wrestling has become vogue within pop culture it was due to one incredibly over personality. True. However, it was also based on there typically being a revolutionary figure behind the scenes. The product and format itself DID CHANGE to make way for that one recognizeable face to put with it.

 

In '84, it was Vince JR. finally doing what he wanted to do with daddy's passing. Raiding talent, going national on cable, getting Hogan, aligning with MTV, bringing in celebrities, doing something completely against the "wrestling format" with the TNT show.

 

In '95, it was Heyman creating this cult thing with Philly diehards that focused on raunch, violence and pushing workrate and diverse styles of wrestling.

 

In '96, it was Bischoff, going head to head with Raw, presenting glitzy live wrestling television each week, putting main event level wrestling on weekly television and ending the tv squash-a-thons, raiding WWF and ECW talent, creating the NWO.

 

In '97-98, it was Vince Russo stepping up to Mcmahon, Vince finally listening to someone who wasn't just a YES MR. MACMAHON type. Creating a creative force, taking elements of what Bischoff and Heyman were doing, altering the product and look, running with Stone Cold, Mick Foley and The Rock when opportunity presented itself.

 

So what we are all speaking of, altering the product, DID happen.

 

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.

 

IN TOTAL AGREEMENT WITH YOU HERE. There is no reason we can't have shocking defections from roster to roster. Frequent trades. Mix things up a bit. Get an HBK to Smackdown. I thought the point of the two seperate rosters was to create the illusion of a WCW/WWF rivalry. I liked the dueling GM's, particularly the early Stephanie/Bischoff stuff and the draft Heyman/Bischoff debates. The way they've handled the split rosters and have failed to pit them against each other on camera and create talent jumps, play off the drama we had legit on Monday nights, is WWE's biggest failure. Bigger than the NWO. Bigger than the Invasion.

[The Mandarin 0]

All the ideas sound great on paper, but if they were to be acted out in real life they'd be shit on.

 

Wrestling fans (including myself) always manage to find the negative side to everything that ends up on television.

[Promoter 0]

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.

[Guest curry_man2002]

Many of you will not agree with me on my ideas because im a smart fan in my knowledge of wrestling but a mark in what i like to see in wrestling.

 

So any way here are my ideas

 

I was watching my judgement day 2001 dvd today and i just finished watching the angle vs benoit 2 out of 3 falls match witch basically consisted of each man trying to lock on there respective holds anyway after that match came the hardcore triple threat match and i thought to myself this is brilliant because ive just had a technically sound match and now i am having a change of pace to a good ol fashioned hardcore brawl with plenty of weaponary (told you i was still a mark). And i thought this is why i almost fall asleep when watching wrestling these days its because EVERY match is the bloody same on most wwe ppvs today you dont get a single gimmick match i think every ppv needs one. Like most people after such a brilliant 2001 i was quite frankly bored shit less throughout most of 2002 and i think thats because 3/4 of 2002 didnt have a single bloodbath until no mercy then we had a hiac then next month we had the elimination chamber then the month after we had the 2/3 falls match and i was rejuvinated as a fan it felt exciting again seeing these wrestlers beating the living snot out of each other making each other bleed like pigs. Funny enough when i first started watching wrestling in 2000 my dad said to me this is so much better than the old days and thats the attitude that most people have about wrestling know because it isnt about 5 minute long rest holds anymore its about high octane stunts and acrobatics the wow factor that got myself and most peeps into wrestling between 1999 and 2001 in the first place.

 

My next thought is get rid of the womens championship i dont care how they do it just get rid of the title immediatly t means nothing it is worthless and it is just an excuse for the talentless silicone bags to shall we be kind and say attempt to wrestle. and that is the idea im trying to achieve that we dont need womens matches DO not book them anymore raw needs to take a leaf out out of smackdowns writing book here and use the women for bikini challenges they are of much more use to me WINK WINK

 

Bring back stephy mac as smackdown general manager she is a face gm as many of you are obviously crying out for plus she is a lot better looking than theodore long

 

now my final idea is going to be very controversial and many of you are going to just hunt me down an shoot me for saying this but wwe are bringing to many new wrestlers come in. when i first started watching you new who the stars were

(Triple h, the rock,stone cold,kurt angle,the undertaker) these were the only guys who really stood a chance at obtaining the title they seemed an elite group now you have guys like eddie,jbl,benoit. Now i know that you need to create new stars but wwe should have kept most of there stars from the boom of 2000 as there top tier stars,its

confusing for casual fans to see curtain jerkers on heat when they started watching being the top stars now. My dad watches wrestling now and he says to me whos the champ and ill say benoit and he will look at me walk off and laugh to himself "fucking benoit" my pops doesnt give a shit that this man was slogging his guts out in japan and ecw he jus sees hi as another bland midcarder whitch lets be honest is true he doesnt have that x factor of a rock or stone cold he doesnt have a gimmick that makes him different from everyone else eg taker.

[Guest Dazed]

Dude, please learn to write properly.

[Guest GreatOne]

Just stop making  pro wrestling look like a joke.

 

Stop giving off and pandering to the image that the sport(yes vince, that's right, SPORT) is for the low brow, low IQ lot of people. Wrestling is viewed as a complete and utter joke by the general public. It gets no respect.  at all.

 

You need to work hard to undrcut that sterotype, but it should be done, because when done right it can look quite legitimate.

 

Sorry, but sports-entertainment actually is the most descpriptive term for the product because this isn't the NFL, NBA, or baseball where teams compete for a championship (although I've begun to wonder about how much 'real pro sports' are about competition and whether they aren't more like WWE in the vein of 'what draws' anyway the last few years). Yeah I'm sure that Vince McMahon is just dying to get back and 'cater to the lowest common denominator' after finally having beaten the Brent Bozells of the world. Who gives a crap about public opinion? that's like the people who continue to bitch about the 'low regard held towards the US around the world' (I'll save that for CE). He can pay his bills and put out his product I'm sure he really cares that the 'legit types' (who are bigger fakes in truth than he could ever be) don't like him.

 

I know that Austin's somewhat unpopular in the smark community (whether it be the Debra incident, the 300-pound special teams hopeful--that took a shit on the company just days before their biggest PPV of the year not two years later--that he wouldn't job to in a throwaway match, etc) but let's face the fact that some of his ideas from his book were pretty good.

 

The first part is where the actual talent comes in:

 

Promos: You can argue back and forth whether there are scripted promos on RAW and SD to this day. I'm not gonna say there aren't, but I don't believe that the majority are either. But history has shown that the best promo guys in the business (Hogan, Austin, Rock, Foley and hell even HHH and Nash) weren't just sitting around waiting for creative to come up with something for them. I mean I seriously doubt Chris Benoit would have been reprimanded if he'd ended his promo with 'that's good for me cause I'm gonna whip both your asses MYSELF!!!!!!!' instead of the generic 'WOL-ver-INE, I'll take on both you SOBs myself', especially when the former would actually foreshadowed the match. Flat-out using Rock promos in the other thread with the idea of Edge using them wasn't really my idea per ce, but it's really not anything different than the normal promos he gives--just minus the 'dorky' stuff. For instance the 'I haven't seen you dumped like that since Trish Stratus' line to Jericho, or the famed 'I could be just like you (HHH) and sleep my way to the top' that never went anywhere. It ain't that hard to coach these guys if they're lacking.

 

Projection of personas: Hogan's promos didn't really have the substance to them. But his charisma and everything else made up for it. Rock and Austin you can make the argument too (especially later on when they got stale). You can deliver on paper what looks to be the greatest promo ever, but if you deliver it with, as Foley called JJ Dillon, the flash and pizzazz of a UPS truck, or Test for lack of another example, you'll have people saying I gotta take a leak this guy SUCKS! faster than Rock's fans ragging on Big Show.

 

The other part is just making believable TV (where writers come in) which doesn't include 'If my sister got a hold of what I was doing to Eugene she'd hate me/Eugene I know you're sitting there watching with your mom' or 'Stacy, can you a keep my pregnancy a secret?'/Matt Hardy supposingly acting all shocked at Kane being the father when that was the jist of the storyline just three weeks ago.

 

Vince comes in by making the most of his talent, as the most successful people in life make use of their assets. I'm not gonna say he has but JBL and Eugene weren't the easiest things in the world to pull of, neither was ending the biggest PPV in the company with the last image of smark favs but seemingly no one else's Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero--you know those "held down WCW wrestlers"--as World and WWE champs. Of course credit is also due to Nick Dinsmore, John Layfield, Chris Benoit, and Eddie Guerrero for pulling those off as well (yes Benoit and Guerrero were put in that spot but it was everything from their killer promo that set it up to Benoit realizing his dream). Hell what was Red Sox fanboy's line about Benoit winning at Wrestlemania, it's like Hal Sutton winning the PGA? Oh Bill Simmons didn't like it too bad (More people probably wanted to see Chris Benoit win the world title than the Red Sox win the World Series)

 

I don't think WWE needs to emulate WCW (in reference to the post that went on about 'sport vs. sports entertainment'), I mean would that include burying your own company for the sake of a few short term bucks and signing the other company's big stars when all you're doing is 1)cementing the other company's rep and 2)pushing yourself down the shitter at the same time?