Why is it I can watch crappy wrestling

[DMann2003 0]

I don't understand it, but I have a more fun time watching stuff from 88 than the stuff from today. I mean the matches were probably worse than the average match today, there was still a roided ugly monster with the initials HHH dominating everything (I know he wasn't Hollywood till 96 but go with it) and some of storyline's made even less sense.

 

So why do I enjoy watching SNME, Superstars and PPV's from the 80's easier than say, popping in a RAW from 2 weeks ago.

 

1)Nostalgia, I guess because this was the age I became a fan, I'll always connect fond memories with it.

2)Not oversaturated, angles could take their time, so even if they were stupid, they weren't rushed.

3)The aura of mystery, I know more about what's going on behind the scenes of the current product than I do the backstory behind stuff from 15 years ago. Suspension of disbelief is easier when you don't know who's trying to bury who to protect their spot.

 

Anyone else get the same feeling as I do?

[Steviekick 0]

I'll agree with your nostalgia reason. But at the same time, I'll fast foward through slower paced matches. Certain stuff still sticks out to me as being good.

[Exslade ZX 0]

This I can never understand either. (I for one don't) But I ask, just about everyone complains about RAW every week now, and SD, and PPVs and just about everything about the WWE. They talk about how their long time fans and all of that...and now WWE is crap, and they're saying F them or something like that, but it's just like..come on, you've been a fan all your life? Have you not seen the older CRAP. Which was what a lot of it was. And yet, a lot of stuff that comes on today..that's better, people seemingly think it's 'crap'.

 

Also they talk about how they like the old school style so much (this is just in general) and then, if two people do decide to work a slower paced...old style sort of wrestling match, people shit on it, or it 'wasn't exciting/good enough'.

 

And IMO not only for the wrestling, but the angles and stuff. People complain about a retard being in wrestling (which could be possible) but then look back, and smile when they picture, a fuckin dude in a bull (I think that's what it was) suit.

 

I for one am not really entertained by classic wrestling much, because, even though I know this isn't what it is, all that registers in my mind is 'chop, punch, DDT, possibly a dropkick, repeat'. And minus your occasional finisher, which most consisted of one of the things I listed, those were 'high spots'.

[Guest Staravenger]

I'll have to credit it with Nostalgia. I too tend enjoying watching older tapes than a RAW or SD from a few weeks back. Even if something is horribly bad I can find it entertaining somehow.

 

 

Edit: Although the current WWE isn't old school, I still enjoy Heat & Velocity a whole lot more. Just give me a few "superstar" matches without run ins, brief recaps of feuds and I'm happy.

[Guest Loss]

You were given reasons to care about the participants before. You're not really so much now.

[justcoz 0]

The product is just over-exposed right now and they rush things too quickly and take the meaning out of everything.

 

While the nostalgia factor does play a huge part in why I feel the same as you when I watch wrestling from the 80's or 90's, I think the above sums up my overall opinion.

 

Back in the day, the booking teams, not creative teams led by Hollywood writers, made sure there was an established main event, upper card, mid card and low card. All of the talent was used. Rarely would there be a performer they would be doing nothing with. Wrestlers would be programmed against someone on a similar level as them and they would feud for sometimes months leading into one of the big four PPV's. You got the most out of each talent.

 

There was the Hogan-Savage or Warrior-Rude level of the card but also a Billy Jack Haynes-Hercules level or a Danny Davis-Sam Houston level. A talent could come in, win some squashes on TV, work an angle with another talent and then feud with them until it was time to be programmed against someone else. Depending on how they were getting over, they would move either up or down the card. Someone like Mr. Perfect could go from feuding with The Red Rooster or The Blue Blazer to an IC title reign to challenging Hogan.

 

The use of managers was also important. If someone debuted with Bobby Heenan or Jimmy Hart as their manager, you would assume they'd be challenging for one of the championships in time. Even while they worked their way up the card.

 

The title reigns were longer and the champions could build their credibility by taking on varying challenges. For instance, in modern day WWE, if they don't feel RVD is worthy of a WWE championship reign, you won't see him in the main event picture challenging for the title. In old days, he would still get a program against the champion for a month or two and just come out on the losing end. Think of all the guys who feuded with Hogan but never won the title. From Piper to Orndorf to Studd to Dr. D to Perfect to Dibiase to Bad News Brown. They still got chances at main events even if there was never any intention of putting a belt on them.

 

If they didn't have anything to do with someone, say Bret Hart or Jim Neidhart or Paul Roma and Hercules, they'd package them into a tag team. Guys just weren't wasted and doing nothing.

 

My frustration with the product now, especially in recent weeks, is how they don't pace ANYTHING. From Eugene/Regal to the Kidman-London tag team to Orton/HHH. They take interesting ideas and instead of pacing them over a course of several weeks or months, they blow their wad on them as if there is a gun to their head. The London-Kidman feud may see some good ring work but the crowd will shit on it because they never established the tag team, even with a short title reign. It's not The Rockers or even Strike Force splitting up.

[King Cucaracha 0]

Nostalgia I guess. Plus now, with the journalistic side of kayfabe so damaged, the bad parts of wrestling are so much more open, the whole backstage situation...where as the older wrestling, you know that for example Hogan changed the Rumble '90 ending...it's, just not that big of a deal when you're watching it. But now, it becomes a big deal because people have a place to discuss/rant.

 

But, yeah, mainly nostalgia.

 

EDIT: It's like adults who still watch Sesame Street, because it brings back childhood memories I guess. If you liked it at one point in your life, chances are you'll remember it fondly.

[Kapoutman 0]

I just love watching old tapes from the 80's. It feels like they were really trying to make you care about the wrestlers. Even if some of the guys sucked, they were able to make you connect with them. Today, since we have more knowledge of how it works, old tricks don't work anymore. We need to make our own ideas of the guys. I guess it killed some magic, like old-school wrestlers would say, but I still prefer a string of good matches from today than a string of bad matches from the 80's.

 

The problem is that there are 10 bad matches for every good matches.

[Promoter 0]

The product is just over-exposed right now and they rush things too quickly and take the meaning out of everything.

This quote says it all along with what Loss said. It even goes further than this. The wrestler's growth is also rushed. To illustrate what I mean I'll explain. Let's look at 2002 where the new crop of guys like Orton, Lesnar, and even throw in Angle came aboard.

 

If the wwe used the 80's formula with Brock Lesnar AND Lesnar had gone through the territories I truly believe Lesnar would have got the chance to live up to The Next Big Thing and possibly could have exploded. If Lesnar was displayed on the national scene before Vince picked him up in a simlar fashion that he was pushed originally and Vince "stole" him from the competition like he did with Hogan in 1984 and THEN ran Lesnar bumrushing the roster within six months to win the title he would have been WAY MUCH MORE OVER.

 

I say Lesnar really started to come into his own last fall where he seemed to belong in the main event scene. Imagine Vince had picked up Lesnar last fall and then run the exact same kind of angle he did with Lesnar in 2002 and have Lesnar be crowned champion at WM XX this year? The fans would be more willing to eat it up. He would be seasoned to go roughshod over legends like Rock and Hogan and then destroy Bill Goldberg at WM XX for the strap where fans would accept it. It kind of worked in 2002 with Rock, but it still had the vibe of being forced down our throats because he was not truly ready to match the hype.

 

The same thing with Kurt Angle. They gave him his proper push BEFORE he was ready for it and it sort of damaged him. Suppose Angle came in late 2001 and 2002 seasoned as he was and THEN Vince ran the storyline he gave him in his first year? Angle would have been accepted much more by the masses and the hype would match the push. That is the big difference back then compared to now.

 

When stuff like champion vs. champion/title for title(the two strongest forces in the universe collide) or The Mega-Powers Explode happened the hype and storyline matched the level of match and superstar draw that accmpanied it. Right now they are putting the horse before the carriage for the most part and putting a mark on the wrestlers as being over-pushed or shoved down our throats.

 

The Rock is the exception to this, BUT when he returned in 1997 after the injury and push from hell he DID improve and started to match the hype. The wwe are telling stories the fans aren't buying for the most part imo. Having a good match is one thing, but overhyping it and its relevance is another. It has to make people CARE.

[Guest NitroJMS]

When stuff like champion vs. champion/title for title(the two strongest forces in the universe collide) or The Mega-Powers Explode happened the hype and storyline matched the level of match and superstar draw that accmpanied it. Right now they are putting the horse before the carriage for the most part and putting a mark on the wrestlers as being over-pushed or shoved down our throats.

Here's the thing, when exactly was the last time an angle actually felt, let's say, magical, for a lack of a better term? There hasn't really been a match in the past two years that I can remember truly feeling like a little kid again while watching, with the possible exception of the Benoit/HHH/HBK match at WMXX. That hype for that match wasn't even that great and it was the match itself that drew you in.

 

I'd probably have to go back to Rock/Hogan for a storyline that actually seemed like it meant something and that captured some of the same feelings of the bigger angles of the past.