Flair throws punch at Foley backstage

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

But they already insult their audience's intelligence almost weekly because they take for granted that many of their fans are smarter than the average mark. This is painfully obvious when live audiences routinely crap on things like the Lita/Kane pregnancy or know when the swerve is coming with the Evolution breakup. When they know HHH "deosn't lose" and they chant WHAT during the supposed "serious" Arab-American angle that someone in creative probably spent a considerable amount of time writing lines for.

 

Here’s a novel concept: don’t insult the audience’s intelligence. The casual audience is smarter, not necessarily in terms of insider wrestling knowledge, but in terms of sensible and logical thinking, than a lot of people give them credit for. The casual fans will get into an angle if they can credibly suspend their disbelief and let themselves believe it. They know wrestling is not real, but, just as they know movies and tv shows are not real, they will still lose themselves in a storyline or angle if it’s believable. The difference between wrestling and movies or TV, though, and this is a difference that a lot of people don’t get, is there is a different internal logic in wrestling than in movies or TV.

 

The Lita pregnancy angle didn’t get over, not only because it was something that just shouldn’t have been in wrestling (fans will not get into any angle that doesn’t ‘belong’), but also because it was filled with so many holes and logic gaps that it wasn’t even possible to suspend your disbelief, even if you wanted to. The Arab angle isn’t getting more than the standard “USA” chants because, for one, there is no backbone to it. Sure, Arab American have been discriminated against since 9/11, but has this Arab American been discriminated against ? We haven’t seen it if he has. It would be nice to have something that shows him being discriminated against, because so far, he just comes across as a moaning bitch, and that doesn’t get anything but the most limited of heat. In any event, I don’t think any angle that capitalizes on 9/11 would get over a lick, regardless of how well it was executed, simply because, once again, it doesn’t ‘belong’.

 

If marks were still marks in the traditional sense they wouldn't be chanting "Baby Killer" at Gene Snitsky. They'd be concerned about Lita's health and grieving for her and Kane's loss

 

If marks were still marks, they’d be disgusted with what happened, but not in the ‘right’ way. They wouldn’t want to tune in or spend money to see Snitsky get beat; they’d tune right out and wouldn’t pay one cent to see the guy. Why would they ? He just killed a baby, and, logically, would any mark spend money to see someone who had killed a baby ? And why would they feel for Kane’s loss ? He raped Lita. That’s one of the biggest holes in the entire deal; we’re meant to feel sorry for a rapist. That fact alone, that the rapist is being pushed as the face, is enough to make people unable to suspend their disbelief.

 

You say that a small "smart" portion of the MSG crowd began the Goldberg-Lesnar chants and everyone followed. Well, they became smart then. "Why is everyone chanting Nah, Nah, Nah Goodbye"? "Well, Brock is leaving for the NFL, it's been all over the Internet and this is Goldberg's last match on his contract."

 

Have you been to any events at all where a chant as started out small, then gotten huge ? Judging from that, I don’t think you have. If a section of fans, no matter how small, keep chanting something for long enough in a crowd like the one in MSG, rabid and wanting action during a match that is boring, then the chant will slowly begin to get picked up by the rest of the crowd. They might not know what’s behind the chant, and they might not even care, but with a match that is boring them silly, they’ll get behind the chant, just to get some excitement.

 

There are more smart fans out there then they think.

 

There are less smart fans out there than you think. I keep trying to get the point across that they make up a tiny percentage of the audience out there, but it doesn’t seem to get through. There might be a lot of smart fans in terms of numbers, but as far as their total audience goes, they make up just a minute fraction.

 

The casual fan that you say they lost after the boom wasn't necessarily a mark. They were watching because cool things were happening. Because people were talking about so and so showing up in WCW or somebody doing this on Raw. They were watching to be entertained more so than "believing in the product"

 

And that is why they were fad fans, and why they won’t come back. They were the crash TV type fans, looking for that immediate buzz of something cool happening right there and then, and weren’t the type to stick around for a long and intensive storyline. Don’t bother trying to get those fans back, because it isn’t going to happen. They tuned out long ago, and aren’t tuning back in.

 

… and you can't tell me that when they searched "WWF" or "Sunny Photos" on AOL that they didn't stumble upon Scoops site.

 

Chances are that any wrestling fan on the ‘net already knows about any one of a million wrestling news sites. And if they did, and went to that site religiously, then they’re into the product so much that they are no longer the fad fan that isn’t coming back.

 

You say that you can't credit smarts for the wrestling boom.

 

Actually, I said you can’t credit smarts to the wrestling boom. And you can’t. You seem to have this idea that smart fans were a creation of the Internet age, which just isn’t true. There were smart fans around long before the Internet came along. They just didn’t have a place online to congregate and share their views. They used newsletters for that.

 

That small smart audience that will tune in regardless knows the product and their reactions to certain things ultimately leave an impression on the marks.

 

You can say that about any fan, regardless of their mark/smarkdom. If any fan, regardless of their level of inside knowledge, is loud and boisterous enough, they’ll leave an impression.

 

"Rocky Sucks" wasn't started by the teenage girl who liked his Kid n Play hair.

 

You give way too much credit to the smart fans. That one was started, not only by smarts, but marks too, because Rocky was being shoved down their throats. People didn’t need to be smart to feel that he was getting push that they didn’t think he deserved. If you’re old enough to remember, check the reaction that Erick Watts got in WCW when his father was pushing him to the moon. WCW fans were still mostly marks back then, and even they knew when a guy was getting a push that he didn’t deserve and they didn’t think he warranted.

 

It's not about "fooling" them as much as it's about getting them to talk and care about the show.

 

They already talk about the product. And they do care about the show, when it’s good. Why are those points lost on you ?

 

Their interest will carry over to the mark once they hear the supposed backstage gossip.

 

What will get the marks interested is a quality product, angles that don’t insult their intelligence and/or aren’t in bad taste, and people they can get behind and will pay money to see. You keep giving smart fans way too much credit, and I’m beginning to see why now.

 

But you are here now posting in the smartmarks forum.

 

Which shows he already cares enough about the product to talk about it, something that you want to happen, but here it is, and you don’t seem to get that it is happening.

 

Would you be more inclined to watch Raw if an Internet story was posted regarding Chris Benoit "shooting on HHH during a house show in Long Island, giving him a black eye and cuts on the face. Would you tune into Raw to see HHH's condition? If it was addressed that Chris Benoit was responsible?

 

Would you tell that friend to check it out?

 

If they did, would they be interested in chipping in for that upcoming PPV match between the two of them?

 

There are so many faults with that idea. For one, if anyone did that to Hunter, they’d be fired right away. If they weren’t, then the smart fans that you seem hell bent on wanting to fool for no good reason, would think it was a work, and wouldn’t ‘believe it’, or wouldn’t care, because fake shoots lost their buzz long ago. Even if they were ‘fired’ to further the angle, for the angle to get over as a shoot means treating it in a way that wouldn’t get it over with the casual fans, and that doesn’t make the company any money with an angle that doesn’t get over to the casuals. And even assuming the angle is played out as a shoot, and does fool some smart fans, because it won’t fool them all, and they do want to see them wrestle, you’re still only fooling a small percentage of a segment of your audience that is very small to begin with, and whatever money you make from fooling them isn’t worth the time and energy that the whole angle used up.

 

Angles and storylines don’t get over because they fool people, as much as they get over because are something that the fans, both casual and smart, are able and willing to let themselves suspend their disbelief over. Angles based solely on fooling people either don’t get over a lick, or get over to such a tiny degree that it’s a waste of time doing them in the first place.

[Quit Calling My Mama 0]

If this is true you really can't blame Foley for not shaking Flair's hand. I wouldn't either if someone just kept bashing me for my career...if i had one.

I think you will find that Foley bashed Flair A HELL OF A LOT MORE in his books before Flair made any of his comments.

[Precious Roy 0]

If this is true you really can't blame Foley for not shaking Flair's hand. I wouldn't either if someone just kept bashing me for my career...if i had one.

I think you will find that Foley bashed Flair A HELL OF A LOT MORE in his books before Flair made any of his comments.

He bashed Flair as a booker and politician, but went out of his way to praise him as a performer. Flair shit all over Foley's in-ring career, it's a huge difference.

[Guest Loss]

Adding to that, I don't think Flair totally understood the criticism being levied his way. He never claimed Flair used his pull in an attempt to bury him. He just saw him as a poor judge of talent because he felt he deserved a bigger push than he got. He also criticized him as a person for his lack of tact, and said he was hard to work for. It's important to get past the fact that Foley dogged Flair and look at the actual point he was trying to make.

[Quit Calling My Mama 0]

Foley wrote a book, and had some unkind things to say about Flair, alot of which weren't even true or Flair's fault.

 

Flair ignored it until he wrote a book and offered his opinions on Foley right back. He didn't say anything bad about Foley as a person, but as a worker. And even then, he didn't say Foley was bad at what he did.

 

Mick, being the ever so humble creature that he is, of course got all pissy and called Vince McMahon and was outraged that they'd allow a WWE guy to bash another wrestler in a book, ignoring that he bashed Flair and many others himself.

 

Mick then did shoot interviews and such talking about Flair.

 

There were talks of making it into an angle.

 

Foley shows up on Raw, and Ric offers him a handshake, probably because it's the courteous thing to do.

 

Foley doesn't accept and makes a snide remark.

 

Flair hits him.

 

I'd do the EXACT SAME THING.

[Guest Loss]

There was definitely some hypocrisy in Foley complaining about being bashed, but Flair showed how out of it he was when he totally fucked up the timeline where he was discussing Mick, and confused his 1990 and 1994 booking runs with each other. He only served to make himself look foolish, and an editor who had a clue of Flair's career timeline (this should have been Madden's role) should have caught that. Foley's criticisms of Flair seemed genuine, while Flair's seemed to be more of a retaliatory thing. Flair criticizing Brutus Beefcake and Randy Savage and even Hulk Hogan came across much better than Flair criticizing Bret Hart and Mick Foley.

 

It surprises me that he bashed Hogan and Savage though, considering that he made great money with both of them and that Hogan was very complimentary toward Flair in his own book. Hogan, though, at least understood that it was all business and didn't take the comments personallly.

[Quit Calling My Mama 0]

If i am dragging this off topic i apologise but:

 

Foley should be happy so few people have bashed him for being a fat, out of shape guy who takes crazy bumps and doesn't really wrestle.

 

Foley ripped Bischoff repeatedly in his books, but I'd bet MY LIFE that if Foley extended his hand to Bischoff, he'd expect Eric to ignore everything he had said about him and shake hands, despite the fact that the things Foley said about Bischoff were FAR worse than what Flair said about Foley.

 

BECAUSE MICK FOLEY IS THE MOST HUMBLE MAN IN WRESTLING!

[Guest Loss]

Foley has major delusions about how he thinks he deserves to be treated. I won't deny you that. But Foley didn't bash Bischoff as much as you'd think, actually. He called him a friend at one point in the book and also admitted that he had previously said bad things about Bischoff that, while they weren't lies, weren't entirely accurate either. His criticism of Bischoff lied only in the fact that he felt he was owed more money since everyone else was getting a raise.

 

It's also important to note that Foley has admitted, many times, that he wasn't a great wrestler and had to do other, more daring things to hide his many weaknesses. He has no delusions about his own ability.

[justcoz 0]

Here’s a novel concept: don’t insult the audience’s intelligence. The casual audience is smarter, not necessarily in terms of insider wrestling knowledge, but in terms of sensible and logical thinking, than a lot of people give them credit for. The casual fans will get into an angle if they can credibly suspend their disbelief and let themselves believe it. They know wrestling is not real, but, just as they know movies and tv shows are not real, they will still lose themselves in a storyline or angle if it’s believable. The difference between wrestling and movies or TV, though, and this is a difference that a lot of people don’t get, is there is a different internal logic in wrestling than in movies or TV.

 

So we are pretty much in agreement here. They underestimate the intelligence of their audience. I guess my question here would be what is your definition of a "smart" fan? Someone doesn't have to be posting on message board forums or be a subscriber to Observer to be aware of "inside workings" any more. Plenty of homes have computers out there and plenty of those people watch wrestling and may browse news sites.

 

Have you been to any events at all where a chant as started out small, then gotten huge ? Judging from that, I don’t think you have. If a section of fans, no matter how small, keep chanting something for long enough in a crowd like the one in MSG, rabid and wanting action during a match that is boring, then the chant will slowly begin to get picked up by the rest of the crowd. They might not know what’s behind the chant, and they might not even care, but with a match that is boring them silly, they’ll get behind the chant, just to get some excitement.

 

True, it's pro wrestlings equivalent of someone starting the wave at a stadium, I guess. Perhaps some of those people did jump on the chant just to play along. Perhaps a large percentage of those in attendence did actually know what was going on in the rumor department leading into the match. Neither of us really know. What we do know is a crappy boring match with no effort was made memorable by the crowds reaction to the rumors and behind the scenes gossip. They didn't mention on television that this would be Goldberg's last match in WWE and that Brock was quitting to go to the NFL. Yet, a good bit of that arena knew the deal. You can argue by saying that they were just blindly joining in on a chant but you really don't know, do you? Unless you conducted some sort of survey at the Garden that night.

 

There are less smart fans out there than you think. I keep trying to get the point across that they make up a tiny percentage of the audience out there, but it doesn’t seem to get through.

 

It gets through. I just don't necessarily agree. The era of the true mark is over. People are smarter now and access to insider information is easier. The audience they have right now are there loyalists, the people who will watch no matter what and I imagine plenty of those people are smart fans.

 

And that is why they were fad fans, and why they won’t come back. They were the crash TV type fans, looking for that immediate buzz of something cool happening right there and then, and weren’t the type to stick around for a long and intensive storyline. Don’t bother trying to get those fans back, because it isn’t going to happen. They tuned out long ago, and aren’t tuning back in.

 

If the product becomes fresh and interesting again and a character takes off in the same way a Rock or Austin did - some of them just may come back.

 

The point I'm trying to make, that you don't necessarily get, is that plenty of those fans were also into the behind the scenes/insider stuff at the time they were watching. They may have stopped watching but that doesn't stop them from browsing a wrestling site from time to time. I know this because I work with several guys like this. I was also listening to a college radio sports show and the subject of wrestling came up. The hosts all stated they grew up watching but will no longer watch as long as Stephanie is head of creative, HHH and John Bradshaw Layfield are world champions. So, yes, they are "smart" fans, or should I say former fans?

 

Chances are that any wrestling fan on the ‘net already knows about any one of a million wrestling news sites. And if they did, and went to that site religiously, then they’re into the product so much that they are no longer the fad fan that isn’t coming back.

 

True, they may very well come back but right now they aren't watching. You stated previously that it's useless trying to do something of interest to the smart fans because they are the minority and will watch regardless. The problem with that statement is not all of them are watching any more.

 

Actually, I said you can’t credit smarts to the wrestling boom. And you can’t. You seem to have this idea that smart fans were a creation of the Internet age, which just isn’t true. There were smart fans around long before the Internet came along. They just didn’t have a place online to congregate and share their views. They used newsletters for that.

 

No... I don't have an idea that smart fans were a creation of the Internet. I wrote for newsletters and even published my own for a brief period in the early 90's. The Internet made it more accessible for others to get insider info in addition to building communities of these types of fans. It played a big part in ECW's cult following and was also, as I stated previously, a target for WWF when they were trying to overcome WCW in the Monday night ratings.

 

They already talk about the product. And they do care about the show, when it’s good. Why are those points lost on you ?

 

They aren't lost on me. Why do you not get my point that you need to offer something of appeal to all demographics of your audience? I'm not saying "target smarts exclusively". But if you can get both the marks talking and the smart fans interested then that's only a plus, IMO.

 

Which shows he already cares enough about the product to talk about it, something that you want to happen, but here it is, and you don’t seem to get that it is happening.

 

I GET IT. It still doesn't mean that there are others like him who only have a passing interest in the product right now and aren't watching it OR talking about it.

 

QUOTE 

Would you be more inclined to watch Raw if an Internet story was posted regarding Chris Benoit "shooting on HHH during a house show in Long Island, giving him a black eye and cuts on the face. Would you tune into Raw to see HHH's condition? If it was addressed that Chris Benoit was responsible?

 

Would you tell that friend to check it out?

 

If they did, would they be interested in chipping in for that upcoming PPV match between the two of them?

 

 

 

There are so many faults with that idea. For one, if anyone did that to Hunter, they’d be fired right away. If they weren’t, then the smart fans that you seem hell bent on wanting to fool for no good reason, would think it was a work, and wouldn’t ‘believe it’, or wouldn’t care, because fake shoots lost their buzz long ago. Even if they were ‘fired’ to further the angle, for the angle to get over as a shoot means treating it in a way that wouldn’t get it over with the casual fans, and that doesn’t make the company any money with an angle that doesn’t get over to the casuals. And even assuming the angle is played out as a shoot, and does fool some smart fans, because it won’t fool them all, and they do want to see them wrestle, you’re still only fooling a small percentage of a segment of your audience that is very small to begin with, and whatever money you make from fooling them isn’t worth the time and energy that the whole angle used up.

 

Angles and storylines don’t get over because they fool people, as much as they get over because are something that the fans, both casual and smart, are able and willing to let themselves suspend their disbelief over. Angles based solely on fooling people either don’t get over a lick, or get over to such a tiny degree that it’s a waste of time doing them in the first place.

 

Okay, take HHH out of the equation then and put JBL or someone of less influence. You aren't even mentioning it as a "fake shoot" on television. Only the Internet reports it as a possibility of being a shoot and people go off on their own little discussions about it... just as we are seeing right now with Foley-Flair... I'm not saying this is something to do often but what's the harm in trying it from time to time? It isn't about "fooling" your audience as you keep repeatedly stating. It's about generating interest within each sector of your audience.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

You can argue by saying that they were just blindly joining in on a chant but you really don't know, do you? Unless you conducted some sort of survey at the Garden that night.

 

If they were all smart fans well aware of the news, a lot more people would have been making that chant to begin with. The fact that it started out small, and then grew big is a pretty good indication that the bulk of those chanting were just joining in.

 

It gets through. I just don't necessarily agree.

 

Why not ? Why don’t you think that smart fans make up such a tiny percentage of WWE’s audience ?

 

You stated previously that it's useless trying to do something of interest to the smart fans because they are the minority and will watch regardless. The problem with that statement is not all of them are watching any more.

 

Because the product, as a whole, just isn’t anywhere near as good as it used to be. If you want to get smart fans, or any fans back, you have to put on a quality product. However, you shouldn’t focus a whole lot on doing something specifically aimed at smart fans, or craft an angle designed purely for smart fans, because the audience you might get back just isn’t worth the time and effort. It’s a whole lot better to come up with an angle designed for a wrestling fan, because, at heart, that is what everyone is, be they casual or smart, and the dividends are very likely to be that much greater. A minor angle aimed at a niche segment of your audience is fine every once in a while, but it is foolish to pull something major aimed at said niche segment, because you’re trying to pull in a very small segment of your audience, who will likely tune in anyway.

 

Why do you not get my point that you need to offer something of appeal to all demographics of your audience? I'm not saying "target smarts exclusively". But if you can get both the marks talking and the smart fans interested then that's only a plus, IMO.

 

As I stated above, a minor angle aimed at a small section of your audience is fine once in a while, but it’s stupid to do something major for that same small niche, because the rewards just aren’t worth it. And instead of looking at the audience as casual fans, smart fans, smark fans or whatever, try looking at them as wrestling fans. Regardless of their level of inside knowledge, or ‘smartness’, they are still wrestling fans at heart, and they all want to be wrestling fans. Treating them as such, and giving them what they want, would go a long way to turning things around.

 

Okay, take HHH out of the equation then and put JBL or someone of less influence. You aren't even mentioning it as a "fake shoot" on television. Only the Internet reports it as a possibility of being a shoot and people go off on their own little discussions about it... just as we are seeing right now with Foley-Flair... I'm not saying this is something to do often but what's the harm in trying it from time to time? It isn't about "fooling" your audience as you keep repeatedly stating. It's about generating interest within each sector of your audience.

 

You know what will generate interest among ‘smart’ fans ? Not trying to make them guess if something is a shoot or not, which is pointless and serves no real purpose, but putting on a good wrestling product. Not an SE product, but a wrestling product. And no, I’m not talking about wall-to-wall wrestling, as those who like to attack the ‘IWC’ in general without any real foundation to their argument like to keep insisting is all they want. I’m talking letting the wrestlers wrestle, and letting them be themselves, and keeping the convoluted SE bullshit out if it.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

You don't really see Tom Cruise acting like Vincent when he's out promoting Collateral, and getting in fights with Jamie Foxx and bossing him around with a gun to his head. There's a reason why there is a line drawn between fantasy and reality; because when you cross that line, you could possibly erase that line and never go back. I can't recall anything like that happening in the film or television industry, though I am sure it has happened before. But it's only once-in-a-while "inside heat" is ever used to the shows advantage, where they'd be "working" shows like ET and Extra; if it was done all the time, the audience would become numb to it.

 

The only problem I have with HTQ's post is the WM 20 thing. Most of that crowd knew. Chants like that don't get started if most of the crowd didn't know what "you sold out" means. There have been attempts at smark chants before and fell flat for that very reason (casual fans not knowing what they meant). I think you maybe diminish how many smarks are in the audience or that are in the WWE's fanbase. Not necessarily this level of smarkage with message boards and whatnot, but their website gets millions of hits every month and newssites like Rajah or WO.com are bound to get some run-off. Does that mean sell to them at the expense of the casuals? Of course not. But there is enough of 'us' to market to. They are attempting to do that now with their interactive raws, the fantasy league, the revamped website, but they're pretty far off the mark (pardon the pun) if they believe that's what will capture the imaginations of the internet crowd. Especially when they do worked interviews on their website.

[Guest Brian]

And besides, WrestleMania draws great crowds of the greatest hardcores, willing to drop lots of money.

[justcoz 0]

If they were all smart fans well aware of the news, a lot more people would have been making that chant to begin with. The fact that it started out small, and then grew big is a pretty good indication that the bulk of those chanting were just joining in.

 

All chants start out small. I can't think of one time where 1000 people or even several hundred were so in synch with each other that they all started the same chant in unison. It's like Rudo said, I just think you are underestimating the amount of smarts that make up WWE's audience. Especially with Mania, the weekend leading into the show and the $$$$ those people are spending for the event.

 

 

Because the product, as a whole, just isn’t anywhere near as good as it used to be. If you want to get smart fans, or any fans back, you have to put on a quality product. However, you shouldn’t focus a whole lot on doing something specifically aimed at smart fans, or craft an angle designed purely for smart fans, because the audience you might get back just isn’t worth the time and effort. It’s a whole lot better to come up with an angle designed for a wrestling fan, because, at heart, that is what everyone is, be they casual or smart, and the dividends are very likely to be that much greater. A minor angle aimed at a niche segment of your audience is fine every once in a while, but it is foolish to pull something major aimed at said niche segment, because you’re trying to pull in a very small segment of your audience, who will likely tune in anyway.

 

As I stated above, a minor angle aimed at a small section of your audience is fine once in a while, but it’s stupid to do something major for that same small niche, because the rewards just aren’t worth it. And instead of looking at the audience as casual fans, smart fans, smark fans or whatever, try looking at them as wrestling fans. Regardless of their level of inside knowledge, or ‘smartness’, they are still wrestling fans at heart, and they all want to be wrestling fans. Treating them as such, and giving them what they want, would go a long way to turning things around.

 

 

Flair vs. Foley appeals to some wrestling fans. More interest is generated however by using other outlets besides their television to create interest and heat for the match. So let's just say that everything we've seen up until this point between Flair and Foley is them working an angle. All the way down to Flair's comments towards Foley in his book. It's safe to assume that the wrestling fans who purchased and read Flair's book are smart fans. Not too many casuals want to read about the business or one particular wrestler in that way. This is another example of what I mean when I say that wrestling fans are "smarter" and have more access to inside workings than in the past. WWE aren't producing kayfabed books. So pretty much WWE targeted that segment of their audience with the books.

 

This carries over onto television with Flair making some remarks towards Foley during interviews and the announcers mentioning his comments to sell books. So now even the casuals know, if Foley and Flair meet in the ring, Flair has said some very negative things about Mick. On top of that, with the Flair punching Foley story leaking on the net, the smarts are talking about it as well. So if that story leaks out to the Meltzer's and then ends up being addressed on wwe.com it's only adding to the storytelling. It's not necessarily designed to fool any segment of your audience.

 

You seem to think that I'm praising the infamous ill advised Russo-shoot that goes over the heads of everyone not on the Internet and exposes the business with comments like, "I'm not jobbing to you", "the writers don't have anything for me", "I'm sick of this gimmick", etc. Those were definitely targeted towards one small niche of the total audience and never worked.

 

The scenario I described above with Flair-Foley doesn't go over anyone's head and plays to all wrestling fans. Granted, I'm not saying that WWE creative is this good but let's just assume for a moment that they are and this has all been a worked shoot. How is it harming the business and alienating one fan to appease another?

 

Yes, in the end, the QUALITY of the product is the key to bringing back any fan, smart or mark. I would in no way dispute that nor would I encourage things like what I'm suggesting be used all the time. This all started out with me more or less being curious as to why they don't work the media and wrestling "insiders" more often. It doesn't seem that difficult to do and I wouldn't even say that it's exhausting a lot of energy even.

 

You know what will generate interest among ‘smart’ fans ? Not trying to make them guess if something is a shoot or not, which is pointless and serves no real purpose, but putting on a good wrestling product. Not an SE product, but a wrestling product. And no, I’m not talking about wall-to-wall wrestling, as those who like to attack the ‘IWC’ in general without any real foundation to their argument like to keep insisting is all they want. I’m talking letting the wrestlers wrestle, and letting them be themselves, and keeping the convoluted SE bullshit out if it.

 

I understand where you are coming from but I don't see what I'm suggesting as convoluted bullshit. It's just creating an illusion or even perhaps playing off of the fact that some "real" animosity exists between the two participants. Reality is a huge thing that is lacking in wrestling storyline today. Even if what I'm suggestion is the illusion of reality. They would accomplish so much if they acknowledged Stephanie and HHH's relationship on camera, HHH's obsession to be seen as the only star on Raw, their desire to overtake the company from Vince, etc. All of that would spark an interest in casuals and smarts, IMO because it's playing off of real life scenarios. If Jericho or someone makes a comment about HHH never drawing a dime in the business despite all of his tv time, the Internet goes into a fury as to whether or not it's a shoot and the casuals just take it as, "wow, Jericho doesn't like HHH and he's right, he takes up all of the tv time".

 

It's more logical storytelling to me than someone spilling coffee on another wrestler, someone accidentally killing someone's dog, a rape turned pregnancy turned terrible tragedy, necrophilia and whatever else creative comes up with these days. Yes, you still need traditional good ol' old fashioned wrestling storytelling but throwing a bone to one segment of your audience to chew on is better than trying to pretend that they don't exist and their opinion doesn't matter.

[haVoc 0]

Just for kicks,,,

 

From TheHonkyTonkMan.com:

 

When will WWe get enough of Saggy Boy's antics and 86 him? He is long overdue to be fired. His latest outrageous conduct against Mick Foley should be the last straw. I was in Singapore when I heard about the match of the decades that smartened the world up on the fakeness of wrestling. The one I am referring to is the Flair/Lawler match shown around the world. I heard this match was so horrible Dave Meltzer could not rate it as 1/2 a star. But matches do not make the man. Being a man makes the man.

 

I guess Flair is right. To be the man, you have to beat the man. Is that why he sucker punched Mick? The dirtiest player in the game was trying to be the man so he wanted to beat the man. I say Foley is the man because he found his niche outside the business. He does not have to have sh*tty matches such as Saggy Boy and Kink. Foley writes books. His books have outsold all the wrestling books written to this day. His books aren't about his bragging rights of being the man or being the Kink.

 

Flair made comments about Foley that were uncalled for. Flair made comments about HTM that were uncalled for. When I had a beef with Mick over some sentences he had written about me, we settled it in a civil manner, shook hands and went on about our business. Not Saggy Boy, he has to sucker punch. His anger at himself, his saggy body, his shitty matches, his same old lame ass interviews and the fact his book hasn't sold enough copies to pay for the printing drove him over the edge.

 

My critics will say Flair was doing the right thing by sticking his hand out for a shake and Foley was wrong to have commented he had rather have an autographed copy of Saggy Boy's book. Mick is a collector of all types of memorabilia. He was not being rude at all. He really wanted the book signed. Saggy Boy cracked and all his bottled up anger came out. Why would Flair punch instead of going off to the side and hash things out over a cup coffee? Jealous anger! That is why. I have been called an angry man, but I have not sucker punched anyone over this business.

 

Standing naked in front of airline flight attendants, trying to punch Bischoff (that's ok), making derogatory remarks about virgins in front of WWe advertisers, having a stinking match with the Kink, and sucker punching Foley is enough for WWe to tell Flair, "turn in your plane tickets, you are finished."

 

To be the man, you need to act like the man.

 

Til we meet again, Merry Christmas to all.

 

Adios

[justcoz 0]

You see, it's all an elaborate work leading into a No DQ/Falls Count Anywhere Wrestlemania tag team match with Flair and Lawler vs. Foley and HTM!!!!! God, this creative department is GENIUS!