Is this the worst year WWF/E has had since 1995?

[JoeDirt 0]

I think we look back on stuff more fondly than what we're currently getting. I'm not saying that 2004 WWE is fantastic by any means, and there are a LOT of improvements that need to be made. But look at it this way...televised wrestling is way better now than the two minute matches from 1998 and 1999. Younger, new guys are starting to get pushed now, where as the past few years we've seen guys like Goldberg, Piper, the return of the nWo, etc. We've seen title reigns for Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero, and even if they weren't handled wonderfully, at least they had their moments at WM20. No, it's not how great the first half of 2000 was by any means, but it's shown some signs of life.

 

Another thing that hurts is the fact that there's no competition. Honestly, looking back I think the WWF looked great just because of the crap WCW put out. And looking back, at least WCW had more good wrestling than the WWF had in the Russo days. Now with no competition, all of the internet's ire is focused directly on the WWE.

 

The WWE is rebuilding, something necessary because of the horrible booking since Steph look over. They're looking for their stars to carry them through the rest of the decade. It's going to be interesting to see what happens, and who catches on with the fans and who flops.

[Guest LooneyTune]

The only years in the last 5-6 years that compete with 2004 are 2000 (which ruled) and 2001 (which was a conbination of suck and awesome).

 

1998, although having a great WM And Summerslam, was watered down with crappy PPV's and 2 feuds for most of the year.

 

1999 out-right sucked.

 

2002 sucked, but not as much as 1999.

 

2003 barely had 3 matches that would be considered "MOTY" type matches, and featured more shitty PPV's than 1998.

[mike546 0]

From the night Benoit came to Raw, to about the middle of June, Raw was totally on fire. It slowed down a bit after Michaels/Benoit, then came to a halt during the Eugenge/HHH feud.

[1234-5678 0]

I haven't even glanced at a Raw or Smackdown in quite some time, but from what I read, it's nothing but Triple H, Taker, the same people as always being held down (RVD, Booker, Jericho) and a bunch of green stiffs who no one cares about. Does that about sum it up?

[Guest LooneyTune]

In a nutshell... yes.

[1234-5678 0]

Little things like the two opening match results at this last Philly house show bother the shit out of me.

 

They put the Arab guy over Rhyno, and some schmuck doing a "Rick Rude" gimmick over on Tajiri..........

 

So, put the untalented, heatless green guys over on two skilled veterans who are loved in the town you are running..........

 

No wonder these dumb fuckers keep killing towns and lowering attendance all over the country.

[SuperJerk 0]

96, 02, and 03 are all contenders, but they all had something that kept my interest.

1996 had the Austin/Hart feud...

 

2002 had the Smackdown 6...

 

2003 had...?

The only thing I can think of were some really good Angle matches and that's it.

[Guest fanofcoils]

Of course 1999 was better, look at the numbers WWE did then. Only wrestling freaks think 2004 is better. I am no wrestling freak, I'm just a person who likes to get the inside wrestling information from websites who likes entertainment better than a solid match with little/no story going into it (which is a majority of WWE matches now). I'm just amazed that it seems everyone here is an inside wrestling info and a wrestling match freak (since they prefer 2004 over 1999). Isn't there any just inside wrestling info freaks who likes entertaining storyline/gimmicks like me? If a match doesn't have a good story leading up to it I will only likely watch it if it is heralded as a 4.5-5 star classic.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The best year, money wise, WWE did was in 2000-2001, when the in-ring product was at its peak, and was way above 1999.

[Guest fanofcoils]

2000 was better than 1985 money wise? 2000 might have been bigger than 1999 money wise if it was because of the Rock and his mainstream value to attract new fans, not the better wrestling. 2001 was better than 1999 money wise?