Recent WWE vs WWF in the 80's

[Fro 0]

Ultimately, people are going to want to see a ****+ match with two guys over a crappy match with the same two guys.

 

There's no question casual fans appreciate good wrestling matches.

[Guest Jason]

Loss:

 

I will never call Hogan a consistently great worker, but he has shown, when he's not up against a generic fat guy, that he's capable of putting on a decent match with a decent worker. That doesn't make him on the level of the best in the world, but it does mean he's better than he's given credit for. Wouldn't you agree that Hogan is a better worker than Luger? Than Warrior? Than the Powers of Pain? That's not a hard argument for me to sell.

 

In the beginning of Lex Luger's career, the days he spent working territories in Florida, he was a great in-ring worker, far better than Hulk Hogan. Hogan may be better than the Ultimate Warrior, he may be better than Barbarian and Warlord, but what is that saying, especially about a man who you're going to rely in to carry your entire wrestling promotion for a decade?

 

Savage advanced as high as a wrestler possibly could during an era where Hogan was the unquestioned top draw. Giving Savage a token reign when Hogan was selling out arenas, even when working with stiffs like Kamala, would have been ridiculous. Savage had a run in 1988 with the belt and drew well and had some good title defenses. He then turned heel and was probably the hottest heel in wrestling all through 1989, and that's a year when Rude, Luger, Funk and Muta were all riding huge waves of momentum. He got his due. He made great money and was always kept near the top of the card.

 

Exactly. Like I said, Savage was one of the few great wrestlers in the 1980's that got the credit he deserved. However, he was in Hulk Hogan's shadow for the majority of his career, from his time as his right-hand man in both the Mega Powers and the New World Order to the many times he did the job for Hogan. He was always kept near the top of the card. Right behind of Hulk Hogan.

 

He didn't deserve it. Hogan defending against Piper was a bigger draw than Hogan chasing Piper. In any other universe where Hogan did not exist, Piper would have been a terrific heel to run on top, but Hogan was the answer at this time.

 

Roddy Piper didn't deserve a reign as World Heavyweight Champion? That's not even worth arguing and a fan as knowledgable of the business as yourself knows it. Roddy Piper not only had the ability to tell a story just as well as Hogan but rather as the heel, but he could wrestle a million times better. Hulk Hogan served four years as the World Heavyweight Champion. One year could have easily been cut from this reign to make a man as deserving of the belt as Roddy Piper champion, and the business would not have faltered one bit, because Roddy Piper truly was that damn good and more than capable of carrying the World Wrestling Federation. There's nothing you can say that will convince me different of that.

 

This is simply not true. Vince went national in 1984. Wrestling was not a mainstream thing before that. You had Vince running shows in the Northeast, Watts running the Mid South, Ole running Georgia, Eddie Graham running Florida, Shires and Lebelle running California, Gagne running Minnesota, Geigel running St. Louis, the Crocketts running the Carolinas and Virginia, Jerry Jarrett running Memphis, Don Owen running Portland, Fritz running Dallas and the Funks running Amarillo. They all had the same World champion, with the exception of Gagne and Vince, and were all part of a larger umbrella. To compare them to modern day indies is to not understand what wrestling was at that time.

 

A modern equivalent would be if ROH, TNA, CZW, PWG, ECWA and whatever other indies are out there were WWE territories with local TV, and HHH or JBL would come through and set up angles with their top talent periodically. You have proven draws working on both small and large shows, which was the role of the NWA champ. The indies at this point are largely comprised of WCW has beens and talented, but unproven draws at this point. Most indies also don't produce weekly television or have ongoing storylines. It's a totally different animal.

 

Oh, but it is true. Aside from one promotion's ultimate champion, it's different territories ran on completely different angles. In fact, this worked to the promotions advantages during the kayfabe era, because an angle on one side of the nation would contradict an angle on the other. Wrestling fans on the east coast had no idea what was going on in the west coast, and this would be exactly the case with today's independent promotions if not for the internet.

 

Haas, Colon and Aguilera are bad examples, because they're nowhere near what Piper, Savage, Andre and Paul Orndorff were when the WWF went national on Hogan's back. They also weren't proven draws on the indy circuit. Even the territories during the time period I mentioned often ran shows in front of 6,000+, which no indy is doing today to my knowledge. WWE even struggles to pull those houses in some markets.

 

My point is that guys like Haas and Colon haven't headlined in their home promotions before jumping to WWE, and thus haven't gotten the main event experience that would be so vital. WWE is political, and admittedly, a big part of the problem with newcomers is that they make them pay needless dues much of the time, but perhaps they wouldn't feel the need to do that if they had younger wrestlers coming in who had already proven that they could sell out even the smallest arenas.

 

Lesnar is the only one of that group that could even compare to Savage and Piper, and he'd probably even fall a tad short, if we're looking at money drawn. As a worker, he's probably ahead of Piper at his best and behind Savage at his best. Savage was more athletic *and* already knew how to get heat, because he had experience working in front of molten Southern crowds and being in a pressure-packed position where he had to talk people to the next show. No one in WWE, with the possible exception of Rock, could actually talk people into arenas at this point with their interviews alone.

 

You're missing the point. I was proving to you that today's superstars do have past experience in various independent promotion and have earned the fundamentals of the professional wrestling industry before showing up in the WWE.

 

Olympic experience is good athletically, and it also gives Angle credibility. I'm with you that athletically, today's WWE guys are more impressive than their predecessors. But, being in the olympics teaches Angle nothing about how to work a crowd or play a great heel.

 

Angle is perhaps one of the biggest casualties of the modern system, because he would have thrived under a territory system where he could be shipped to a new town to be the top star when he was getting stale in one city.

 

Even with his lack of experience of professional wrestling, Kurt Angle is excellent at working a crowd. He's an excellent speaker, can manipulate an audience just as well as the greats have, and proof of this is his ability to successfully get over as both a heel and face character.

 

My problem with this statement is that you probably see charisma as something different than I do, based on the names you mentioned below, which I'll go through in a minute. Charisma is not humor, or the ability to create catchphrases, or mic skill for that matter. It's more the ability to involve a crowd in one's matches, and Savage's stalling tactics accomplished that far more effectively than just about anyone in modern WWE could hope to do.

 

Look at HHH/Maven and how transparent that match was. It was the major underdog against the biggest star on the show, a story as old as wrestling itself. And they couldn't be bothered to work a smart match where the work speaks for itself and gets the crowd believing in Maven. They had to rely on outside interference, ref bumps and every other overdone trick in the book to get even a fraction of the reaction I've seen wrestlers get in the past.

 

Charisma is a term I use the same not only in the wrestling business, but in real life. A charismatic person is a likable person, someone with a colorful personality that makes you want to befriend them. By definition it is, "a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure." A personal magic ... A quality. Of leadership ... Leadership brings followers, or people who want to befriend you. Arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure ... Arousing that colorful, CHARISMATIC personality that the superstars I listed have. In the ring, heels can have charisma, but that does not mean that people will like them. In the ring, charisma is that colorful personality about them that gives them their spark on the microphone. But the Triple H/Maven match has nothing to do with charisma, so I'll just pass that by.

 

There's a strong case for that. I wouldn't put him as the very best, but he's proven he can deliver a money promo. NO ONE who is on the full-time WWE roster at this point, aside from Flair, has ever proven their ability to do a money promo.

 

Christian can cut a money promo. Eddie Guerrero can cut a money promo. John Bradshaw Layfield can cut a money promo. Chris Jericho can DEFINITELY cut a money promo. And if you think different, you don't have much of an argument.

 

Christian is excellent on the mic. Christian is also misused. He's a snoozer in the ring. He does have strengths, but he has virtually no offense. He would be excellent in a Michael Hayes-ish half manager/half wrestler role. He might even draw in that role. Hayes was sometimes a wrestler, sometimes a manager and sometimes a color commentator. We even saw HBK in that role in WWE once upon a time. Christian would thrive as the jack-of-all-trades entertainer if he got such an opportunity.

 

Did you not just say that no one currently on the WWE's roster can cut a money promo? And now you admit that Christian is an excellent mic worker. Tsk tsk. As for you calling Christian a snoozer in the ring, I'm sure many people would agree with me when I say that this is completely false. He's a true "ring master," if that's the correct term and in every match takes the offense, carrying random opponents on his shoulders through great matches. In the ring, Christian is far better than your Hulk Hogan's and Ultimate Warrior's of the 1980's.

 

I love Jericho, but his humor is part of the reason he's not a draw. He can be entertaining at times, and he's also been known to deliver a few stinker interviews at times. Jericho is too good to be a comedic sidebar, which is what he's been reduced to after all these years, and it's because they put him in roles where he tries to be funny. I love Jericho's dark side and I think he's excellent when he's doing serious or angry stuff, but how often does he get to do that? The fact that you consider him a great promo because of his humor should answer that question quite nicely.

 

Now you're just babbling. Chris Jericho's hilarity is what makes him so entertaining on the microphone, and it has definitely not reduced him to no more than a comedic sidebar. It's inflated him into one of the most over superstars on the entire RAW roster. He's loved and hated as a result of his excellent mic skills. Every superstar has a "stinker" interview, and in some cases, every interview a superstar cuts is a stinker. But Chris Jericho has few, and is one of the greatest on the mic of all time.

 

Booker T has probably had his connection with the audience severed more times than any wrestler in WWE, and that's saying something. Booker was in a storyline with HHH, where he was buried btw, where he could have come out the following week and delivered a serious, focused promo against HHH and gotten the crowd firmly on his side and made people excited about seeing that match. He was never given the opportunity to do that. I know Booker has the ability to do such interviews. Interviews that make him a little deeper than the black guy who's fun to watch dance. Interviews that might add a few buys to the upcoming PPV. Interviews he never gets the chance to do.

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm trying to spread the positivity about the WWE, because fans bash them at every chance they get. You have no right to complain about Triple H's dominance in recent WWE. Why? Because just like Hulk Hogan, he can manipulate a crowd and force them to hate him. He can tell a story in the ring. But unlike Hulk Hogan, he's a great in-ring worker, and hasn't dominated the product nearly as much as Hogan did in the 80's. Triple H may have held Booker T and others back, but not nearly as many others as Hulk Hogan as throughout his career.

 

Cena's style nicely covers up the fact that he has nothing to say. He's 100% gimmick and 0% character, and until the writers make him someone the audience respects and can relate to, he's going to continue to be a midcard novelty act who never reaches his full potential. Cena would be exposed in a matter of weeks on RAW, the second Evolution attacked him in the parking lot and he spoke his mind through a rap the following week.

 

That's just dandy, but who cares? John Cena is probably the most over superstar in the WWE and the crowd's response to him is proof of that. While you or I may think some of his promos are retarded, the fans love him, because he does have a charismatic personality. And many fans can relate to his gimmick, because truth be told, the majority of twelve-fourteen year old boys in the world today are wiggers, just like John Cena.

 

Angle has largely been an underachiever in WWE, and I blame it on the business changing, and him throwing too many suplexes, thinking highspot-after-highspot made him a great worker. Angle didn't have a chance to work through the system in Japan and the indies and hone his skills and work styles other than the mundane WWE style of headlocks, ref bumps, armbars that go nowhere, spinebusters and belt shots. Angle has been flat as a babyface. They've tried putting the title on him as a face, after 9/11 mind you, and it failed. As a heel, he's always been portrayed as so much of a joke that the audience doesn't see him on the same level they've seen Austin, Rock, HHH and Taker, despite the fact that he holds victories over all of them

 

Kurt Angle never failed at getting over as a babyface. As a babyface, he was one of the most over superstars in the WWE. His alignment change wasn't because he failed, but because he can do so well as a heel as well, because of his versatility as a character. Kurt Angle was beloved by the fans during his feud with the monster Brock Lesnar and during his return, prior to his heel turn when he betrayed his friend Eddie Guerrero.

 

Warrior is a horrible example, but Hogan, Piper and Savage were all just as good, if not better than anyone talking in the company now. Not only could they be entertaining, which should only be a side effect of a great promo, but they were able to do interviews that made an audience really want to see an upcoming match. That's the reason promos even exist. WWE has warped that into something else, where promos have become a commercial of sorts for the wrestler himself, a chance to spiel all the catchphrases so his t-shirts sell better.

 

The Ultimate Warrior is a perfect example, because he certainly wasn't known for his great in-ring abilities. Fans loved him because of his ability to cut a money promo, and get audiences riled up. Today's WWE's best mic workers all can make people want to watch an upcoming match. But it isn't mic skills alone that make a superstars want to watch an upcoming match, it's also the in ring talent of the participants in the up-coming match, something guys like Hulk Hogan lacked.

 

An impressive lineup, for the most part. Probably better than the 80s WWE roster. Nowhere near the best workers on Crockett's roster, which I'm including for the sake of this argument, since we're in a monopoly now, and Vince has sort of taken on all of that.

 

Don't get off topic. Crockett's roster has no importance at all to this argument, because the thread is Recent WWE vs WWF in the 1980's. I have no complaints about the National Wrestling Alliance in the 80's.

 

Hogan/Warrior delivered just fine at Wrestlemania VI. The heat was great. It wouldn't have been great had it been a horrible match.

 

The heat? Hogan/Warrior was face vs face. There wasn't a boo throughout the entire match. There's no doubt that the emotion was great in this match. It told a story. But the in ring work throughout the match was not great at all.

 

Neither. I don't pick between evils. And besides, when is the last time WWE had a great match? Considering the talent involved, they should never go below *** on PPV in any match, and main events should never go below ***1/2, but somehow, they find a way.

 

I see great matches on WWE programming week after week. Superstars like Shelton Benjamin, Charlie Haas, Christian, Chris Jericho, Triple H, Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero deliver in the ring consistently, and put on great matches on RAW, SmackDown and on Pay Per Views.

 

Winning a title in itself is meaningless, and it would be hard to argue that the belts mean as much now as they did 10-15 years now. The IC title was headlining B-shows in the 80s and that doesn't happen now because guys at that level aren't placed in a position to draw. Savage and HTM drew money, even on shows without Hogan, because they were given the star treatment on TV. Benjamin is not treated like a star, and the idea of him headlining house shows defending the IC title against Christian is preposterous at this point.

 

Winning a title in itself is meaningless? The World Heavyweight Championship is what these professional wrestlers work for throughout the entire careers. They work their asses off every night, some striving to put on a quality matchup so eventually, they can become champion. And quit bringing Savage up in your arguments. It's not Randy Savage that I have a problem with. He was most deserving of his title reign. And so was Hulk Hogan, however, Hogan did not deserve to headline the company as long as he did with ring work as piss poor as his was.

 

Again, the tag titles and tag teams meant so much more then than they meant now. The belts have been devalued to a point where winning the tag titles means nothing. Suzuki and Dupree aren't exactly approaching Demolition in the heat department.

 

But even then, the tag team titles were restraining superstars like the Dynamite Kid and Bret Hart who were so much better than Hulk Hogan, who was the reigning World Heavyweight Champion.

 

Hogan was the best option from a business standpoint though, and you're forgetting wrestling is a business, which is something you can't forget when you decide to start doing pieces like this. Again, you're putting too much emphasis on winning the belts. Do you think fans see guys like Jericho, Benoit, Guerrero and Angle, all former champs, in the same light they see Austin, Rock, HHH and Taker?

 

Wrestling is a business. But it is wrestling, as well. Superstars like Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, Kurt Angle and Triple H are all great from a business standpoint AND from an in ring standpoint. Hulk Hogan was ONLY a great wrestler from a business standpoint.

 

The objective of this thread was to single out the many complaints by people who bash current WWE. I love the current WWE product and I am sick and tired of people complaining.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

Christian can cut a money promo. Eddie Guerrero can cut a money promo. John Bradshaw Layfield can cut a money promo.

Eddie - yep. But Christian and JBL? When & where have they ever cut a money promo?

[Vyce 0]

Christian can cut a money promo. Eddie Guerrero can cut a money promo. John Bradshaw Layfield can cut a money promo.

Eddie - yep. But Christian and JBL? When & where have they ever cut a money promo?

Are you kidding me?

 

JBL's promos from the past 6 months are so have been VASTLY superior to the stuff Eddie G's been doing lately.

 

Not to say I don't love Eddie as much as the next smark, but his little Spanglish comedy routines haven't touched JBL's promos. JBL's promos have been quality.

[what 0]

Jason, your lack of wrestling knowledge is amazing. I'm baffled as to why you're arguing that the WWE is better now than it was in the 1980's when you obviously have seen very little of 1980's WWF.

[Guest Ransome]

Jason, your lack of wrestling knowledge is amazing. I'm baffled as to why you're arguing that the WWE is better now than it was in the 1980's when you obviously have seen very little of 1980's WWF.

Personally, I agree. His knowledge displayed in his post seems almost phony, especially when compared to the quotes from Loss. It's hard to explain, maybe it's his (Jason's) matter-of-fact style of writing, which makes him sound like a first-year English student. Either way, to use a JR-like expression, I ain't buying what he's selling.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

He isn't efficient with his words, too much filler and fluff. It appears he thinks length = quality. It's pretty common stuff, easy to spot, and god awful to read.

 

I skimmed some of what he wrote,

 

- An excellent promo and a money promo are two different things. Christian is one of the best actors they have, his delivery is great as is his timing, he doesn't flubb his lines nor does he sound rehearsed. His promos, however, don't make me want to (a)see his matches, let alone (b)pay to see his matches. I also disagree (with Loss) on Rock cutting money promos for the same reason. 95% of Rocks promos are "entertaining" promos rather than "money promos", no doubt Rock *can* cut these promos, but I really only can name a few that he actually *has* cut. And there really hasn't been one since his Hogan promo "..With THE ROCK?", and even then, I mean c'mon, it's Hulk fucking Hogan and his returning Wrestlemania, not that hard to make.

 

- Christian was not better in-ring than Hogan. Aside from crazy bumps (and even then Jeff Hardy and Edge usually outshined Christian in terms of reaction), Christian has been unable to get a fraction of the excitement and emotion out of a crowd that Hogan could and can. Hogan was a fantastic dramatist, which is a huge part of in-ring wrestling.

 

-_Wrestlers_ will say that the territorial system was better for developing talent than todays system. It's just logical.

 

- "Heat" is the crowd reaction, it doesn't just relate to boos. You are way out of your league here, it would be best for everyone if you just stop. "In-ring" storytelling is a HUGE part of wrestling. Do you watch a movie and say "God, that SUCKED but the storytelling and emotion were great"?

[Guest Loss]

In the beginning of Lex Luger's career, the days he spent working territories in Florida, he was a great in-ring worker, far better than Hulk Hogan. Hogan may be better than the Ultimate Warrior, he may be better than Barbarian and Warlord, but what is that saying, especially about a man who you're going to rely in to carry your entire wrestling promotion for a decade?

Luger was NEVER, at any point in his career, a better worker than Hulk Hogan, nor was he ever a great wrestler. Comparing Luger and Hogan, you have two guys who are both athletically limited to basically the same moves and have the same look. So why did Hogan become a bigger star than Luger ever dreamed of? Because he knew how to work a crowd, which makes him an effective wrestler. Luger has never been in Hogan's league in that category. To argue so is insane.

 

Exactly. Like I said, Savage was one of the few great wrestlers in the 1980's that got the credit he deserved. However, he was in Hulk Hogan's shadow for the majority of his career, from his time as his right-hand man in both the Mega Powers and the New World Order to the many times he did the job for Hogan. He was always kept near the top of the card. Right behind of Hulk Hogan.

 

No one deserved to be higher on the card than Hogan. If wrestling were purely based on in-ring talent, yes, Hogan would probably be a midcarder at best. But it's not. Giving up on Hogan midstream and going with Savage as the top guy would have been disastrous for business, and I guarantee you that Savage's legacy would be that of the guy who killed the WWF.

 

Roddy Piper didn't deserve a reign as World Heavyweight Champion? That's not even worth arguing and a fan as knowledgable of the business as yourself knows it. Roddy Piper not only had the ability to tell a story just as well as Hogan but rather as the heel, but he could wrestle a million times better.

 

HOGAN PUT 78,000 PEOPLE IN THE PONTIAC SILVERDOME! HOGAN IS THE BIGGEST DRAW IN AMERICAN HISTORY! ARGUING THAT OTHERS DESERVED HIS SPOT MORE BECAUSE THEY'RE BETTER IN THE RING REEKS OF IGNORANCE.

 

*whew* I feel better.

 

Hulk Hogan served four years as the World Heavyweight Champion. One year could have easily been cut from this reign to make a man as deserving of the belt as Roddy Piper champion, and the business would not have faltered one bit, because Roddy Piper truly was that damn good and more than capable of carrying the World Wrestling Federation. There's nothing you can say that will convince me different of that.

 

Fine. Let's look at year-by-year:

 

1984 - Hogan had to be champ. Vince was running house shows in new markets where he had never run house shows, and Hogan was the most recognizable wrestler in the country. He was also the biggest draw. He was the image Vince wanted people to associate with the WWF. He had to be in that position. So 1984 is out.

 

1985 - Wrestlemania, an enormous gamble at the time, is getting off the ground. Business is picking up more than anyone could have ever predicted. The WWF got everyone's attention in 1984, and 1985 was its chance to do something with that attention. People were buying tickets because of Hulk Hogan. Not because of Roddy Piper. I'm a Piper fan, but WWF World champion Roddy Piper would have caused business to go down at this point, because the audience wanted Hogan, Hogan, Hogan and Hogan on top. Everyone else was in their roles with the specific purpose of making Hogan look good, bumping for Hogan and giving Hogan an opponent. This is exactly how it had to be for business to thrive.

 

1986 - Piper, a top heel, turns face and gets over like wildfire. Hogan/Orndorff, meanwhile, is going around the horn and breaking its own records at the box office. The feud was constantly picking up momentum. Switching the belt to Piper when the Hogan/Orndorff feud wasn't even played out would have been ridiculous. Also, the WWF/NWA competition was pretty stiff at this point, and Piper would have compared unfavorably as a world champion to Ric Flair. Hogan did not, because of his star power alone.

 

1987 - Hogan/Andre was the story of the year, put 78,000 people in the Silverdome and broke even more records. Hogan HAD to be the champion going into 1987. Andre losing at Wrestlemania had to happen. Hogan/Andre was a dream match fans never thought they'd see, something which fans of today's product couldn't fully comprehend if they weren't around for it. Piper was over working with Adrian Adonis and was great in the role he was in, but Hogan/Andre HAD to be for the belt. As much as Hogan needed the belt at this point, the belt needed him.

 

They took the belt off of him in 1988 to freshen things up when they got an influx of new main event talent in named Ted DiBiase and Randy Savage. Hogan was also getting more and more movie offers and wouldn't be able to work as many shows over summer because he was going to be in Atlanta filming No Holds Barred. This was the ONLY possible time they could have allowed someone else to run with the belt, and they made the right decision in who they chose.

 

1989 - Piper wasn't even around for most of the year, and Hogan was still riding high by year's end. They were also grooming the very over Ultimate Warrior for the top spot, and Piper was toying with the idea of jumping to WCW.

 

1991 - Piper was doing color commentary part of the time and wrestling part of the time at this point. The company was going back to Hogan to level out business after the Warrior's unsuccessful run with the title.

 

Tell me where, during that time, Piper could have held the belt.

 

Oh, but it is true. Aside from one promotion's ultimate champion, it's different territories ran on completely different angles. In fact, this worked to the promotions advantages during the kayfabe era, because an angle on one side of the nation would contradict an angle on the other. Wrestling fans on the east coast had no idea what was going on in the west coast, and this would be exactly the case with today's independent promotions if not for the internet.

 

Each promotion has their own heavyweight champion though, and the indies aren't expected to sell tickets based on ongoing storylines. Maybe ROH, but they have their own champion, and aren't a member of a larger governing body. Ditto for TNA.

 

You're missing the point. I was proving to you that today's superstars do have past experience in various independent promotion and have earned the fundamentals of the professional wrestling industry before showing up in the WWE.

 

And you're missing the point, which is that they were getting a better education working territories where there was no bigger national wrestling company that made them look minor league by comparison. Let's see some of the gates for Haas and Aguilera working the indies to show where they were ever put in a top position and had great success.

 

Even with his lack of experience of professional wrestling, Kurt Angle is excellent at working a crowd. He's an excellent speaker, can manipulate an audience just as well as the greats have, and proof of this is his ability to successfully get over as both a heel and face character.

 

Kurt has NEVER gotten over as a face. EVER. In fact, attempting to turn him face was such a huge bomb that they had no choice but to put the belt back on Austin.

 

Charisma is a term I use the same not only in the wrestling business, but in real life. A charismatic person is a likable person, someone with a colorful personality that makes you want to befriend them. By definition it is, "a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure." A personal magic ... A quality. Of leadership ... Leadership brings followers, or people who want to befriend you. Arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure ... Arousing that colorful, CHARISMATIC personality that the superstars I listed have. In the ring, heels can have charisma, but that does not mean that people will like them. In the ring, charisma is that colorful personality about them that gives them their spark on the microphone. But the Triple H/Maven match has nothing to do with charisma, so I'll just pass that by.

 

You're passing it by because it's an example of modern workers not being as good at their craft as their predecessors.

 

Christian can cut a money promo.

 

Then, how come he hasn't? He has done some great interviews, but show me one that has directly influenced a pay-per-view buyrate.

 

Eddie Guerrero can cut a money promo.

 

I'm sure he can, but how come he hasn't. He has done some great interviews, but show me one that has directly influenced a pay-per-view buyrate.

 

John Bradshaw Layfield can cut a money promo.

 

Then, how come he hasn't? He has done some good interviews, but show me one that has directly influenced a pay-per-view buyrate.

 

Chris Jericho can DEFINITELY cut a money promo.

 

Yes, he can, but how come he hasn't? He has done some outstanding interviews, but show me one that has directly influenced a pay-per-view buyrate.

 

And if you think different, you don't have much of an argument.

 

I have a great argument. An argument you refuse to acknowledge.

 

Did you not just say that no one currently on the WWE's roster can cut a money promo? And now you admit that Christian is an excellent mic worker. Tsk tsk.

 

Cutting an entertaining promo and doing a promo that says, "Wow, he really hates this guy. I can't wait until they wrestle at the PPV. I'm going to make sure I buy the show" are two different things.

 

As for you calling Christian a snoozer in the ring, I'm sure many people would agree with me when I say that this is completely false. He's a true "ring master," if that's the correct term and in every match takes the offense, carrying random opponents on his shoulders through great matches.

 

In every match? Name a "great" Christian match where he's carried an inferior opponent to something outstanding. Just one. I've seen him get better-than-expected matches out of limited opponents, but not great, and hardly every match. His batting average comparing his number of good matches to bad matches isn't that great.

 

In the ring, Christian is far better than your Hulk Hogan's and Ultimate Warrior's of the 1980's.

 

How so?

 

Now you're just babbling.

 

I'm not babbling. You don't understand what pro wrestling is.

 

Chris Jericho's hilarity is what makes him so entertaining on the microphone, and it has definitely not reduced him to no more than a comedic sidebar.

 

Is that why Chris Jericho is the biggest star in the company, they've created an image around him, he's seen as the best they have and he's headlining show after show? HHH is the one they've put in the top role, not Jericho. He's an entertaining guy who's not seen at the same level as Austin, Rock, HHH or the Undertaker, and that's because of bad booking.

 

It's inflated him into one of the most over superstars on the entire RAW roster.

 

Jericho remains over because of Jericho, not because of anything the company does.

 

He's loved and hated as a result of his excellent mic skills. Every superstar has a "stinker" interview, and in some cases, every interview a superstar cuts is a stinker. But Chris Jericho has few, and is one of the greatest on the mic of all time.

 

Calling him funny and great are two different things. Jericho hasn't gotten the opportunity to do stunning interviews too often. When he has, he's delivered, but I can only think of a few:

 

* His debut

* His poolside promo

* His "I am not a joke" speech to The Rock

* His pre-WM XIX promo where he paralleled himself to Shawn Michaels

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm trying to spread the positivity about the WWE, because fans bash them at every chance they get.

 

We're given little to be excited about. I'd call most people at this board eternal optimists. It's why we even bother to continue watching.

 

You have no right to complain about Triple H's dominance in recent WWE. Why? Because just like Hulk Hogan, he can manipulate a crowd and force them to hate him. He can tell a story in the ring. But unlike Hulk Hogan, he's a great in-ring worker, and hasn't dominated the product nearly as much as Hogan did in the 80's. Triple H may have held Booker T and others back, but not nearly as many others as Hulk Hogan as throughout his career.

 

Hogan did make sure others stayed below him on the pecking order, but Hogan was also a draw. A major one. HHH is actively hurting the company by staying in that role. If HHH wasn't as influential as he is, the company would be better for it. He's not in Hogan's league in terms of overall value to the company.

 

That's just dandy, but who cares? John Cena is probably the most over superstar in the WWE and the crowd's response to him is proof of that. While you or I may think some of his promos are retarded, the fans love him, because he does have a charismatic personality. And many fans can relate to his gimmick, because truth be told, the majority of twelve-fourteen year old boys in the world today are wiggers, just like John Cena.

 

So now, you're a racist? Lovely.

 

Kurt Angle never failed at getting over as a babyface. As a babyface, he was one of the most over superstars in the WWE. His alignment change wasn't because he failed, but because he can do so well as a heel as well, because of his versatility as a character.

 

Were you even watching wrestling in 2001? This statement suggests that you weren't. Angle did fail to get over as a babyface. That's why he only held the belt for two weeks.

 

Kurt Angle was beloved by the fans during his feud with the monster Brock Lesnar and during his return, prior to his heel turn when he betrayed his friend Eddie Guerrero.

 

Just because he was a face doesn't mean he was loved. Angle didn't draw money in those roles.

 

The Ultimate Warrior is a perfect example, because he certainly wasn't known for his great in-ring abilities. Fans loved him because of his ability to cut a money promo, and get audiences riled up.

 

Are you honestly saying Warrior was great on the mic? That's ridiculous. It wasn't his in-ring ability or his speaking skills that got him over. It was his look, physique, energy and charisma. Talent was not something he had. He also failed as champ in 1990.

 

Today's WWE's best mic workers all can make people want to watch an upcoming match. But it isn't mic skills alone that make a superstars want to watch an upcoming match, it's also the in ring talent of the participants in the up-coming match, something guys like Hulk Hogan lacked.

 

I can't remember the last time I've really been excited about seeing a match in WWE because of the great buildup.

 

Don't get off topic. Crockett's roster has no importance at all to this argument, because the thread is Recent WWE vs WWF in the 1980's. I have no complaints about the National Wrestling Alliance in the 80's.

 

All the talent in the world is useless if you don't allow them to shine. WWE doesn't allow them to shine. Part of the reason WCW went out of business was because they didn't allow their talent to shine.

 

The heat? Hogan/Warrior was face vs face. There wasn't a boo throughout the entire match. There's no doubt that the emotion was great in this match. It told a story. But the in ring work throughout the match was not great at all.

 

The story and emotion is what makes a great match, not the number of times you can jump off of a ladder or go through a table.

 

I see great matches on WWE programming week after week. Superstars like Shelton Benjamin, Charlie Haas, Christian, Chris Jericho, Triple H, Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero deliver in the ring consistently, and put on great matches on RAW, SmackDown and on Pay Per Views.

 

There were no great matches at Armageddon. Or Survivor Series. Or Taboo Tuesday. Or No Mercy. Or Unforgiven. There were a few passable ones.

 

Winning a title in itself is meaningless? The World Heavyweight Championship is what these professional wrestlers work for throughout the entire careers.

 

1. Wrestlers wrestle to make money. I'm sure the recognition is nice, but while wrestlers can be quite delusional, I don't think any of them are so delusional that they spend years chasing a fake title.

 

2. And yes, winning a title in itself is meaningless. Jericho winning the belt hurt him more than it helped him, because he managed to become World champion while still being a midcarder.

 

They work their asses off every night, some striving to put on a quality matchup so eventually, they can become champion.

 

They work their asses off, if they do at all -- most of them don't, to try to steal the show and put on the best match, or to get the company to take notice of them. They want the title because the title means more money, not because they dream of being champion.

 

And quit bringing Savage up in your arguments. It's not Randy Savage that I have a problem with. He was most deserving of his title reign. And so was Hulk Hogan, however, Hogan did not deserve to headline the company as long as he did with ring work as piss poor as his was.

 

Wrestling is a business. This is the most ill-informed statement you've made yet.

 

But even then, the tag team titles were restraining superstars like the Dynamite Kid and Bret Hart who were so much better than Hulk Hogan, who was the reigning World Heavyweight Champion.

 

Are you really arguing putting Bret Hart and Dynamite Kid in main events during Hogan's peak? Seriously. I love both, and consider them both better than Hogan, but there are factors beside ring work that go into picking a headliner. The ability to sell out arenas is usually priority numero uno.

 

Wrestling is a business. But it is wrestling, as well. Superstars like Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, Kurt Angle and Triple H are all great from a business standpoint AND from an in ring standpoint. Hulk Hogan was ONLY a great wrestler from a business standpoint.

 

First, HHH is an above-average worker. That doesn't make him great. Second, Benoit, Jericho, Eddy and Angle aren't in a position to mean anything to business. They're midcarders. Third, HHH is not great for business. He's a cancer. Fourth, Hogan was SO great for business that nothing else mattered.

 

The objective of this thread was to single out the many complaints by people who bash current WWE. I love the current WWE product and I am sick and tired of people complaining.

 

I would stop complaining tomorrow if they put on a better product. They aren't, and I'm not going to be an apologist for them while they put out crap.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

All the talent in the world is useless if you don't allow them to shine. WWE doesn't allow them to shine. Part of the reason WCW went out of business was because they didn't allow their talent to shine.

 

It still means alot. In 1988, the WWF had Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, Ultimate Warrior, Ricky Steamboat, Andre, Rick Rude, Jake Roberts, Bret Hart, Curt Hennig, Shawn Michaels, Dynamite Kid, Ted Dibiase, Greg Valentine, Honky Tonk Man, Davey Boy Smith, Owen Hart, Don Muraco, Bad News Brown, JYD, Rick Martel, Harley Race...Vince would kill for that kind of roster these days. A fantastic mix of name guys (Hogan, Warrior, Andre) and the greatest workers of that generation (Perfect, Hart, Steamboat). Guys that were gold on the mic (Roberts, Dibiase, Rude).

[Guest Tjhe CyNick]

The one thing I notice about wrestling today vs the 80s or even during the Attitude era is that most of the guys seem interchangeable. There are very few "characters" that can get people's attention beyond what they are doing in the ring.

 

When I talk to friends who basically only watch wrestling when its hot (during Hogan's run, again during Austin/Rock's run) they love to talk about the "characters"; Dibiase, Duggan, Honky, Demoltion, etc.

 

Wrestling today is very bland, there's nothing to grab people's attention.

 

As for promos, I think its too hard to compare guys from eras that are as different as the 80s were to the late 90s. They had completely different jobs, one wasn't better than the other, they were just different. I know that sound slike fence sitting, but I think its the way it is.

 

Obviously guys now aren't able to do money promos because there aren't enough people watching to get attention. You need that guy or that concept that will get people to give wrestling a chance.

 

Hogan was an awesome "money" promo guy, but in 2003 he headlined Mania with Vince, and even though they cut some great promos, the show still did a terrible buyrate. Nobody would say Hogan is a bad promo just because that show was unsuccessful, but at the same time its tough to compare guys like Eddie to Hogan when Eddie is coming up at a bad time.

[Guest Big_Jay101]

I actually think guys do chase after the fictional titles, though they are fictional it means that they are the man, the main guy in thier company, yes they wrestle for the money and maybe love but they also want that title to be recognized as the man in their particular company.

[Promoter 0]

Pretty interesting stuff here, but I think if Vince Mcmahon had the choice of landscape to choose from he would pick the 80's for all the points made here and more. I think you have had to live through all the changes over the years to really appreciate each changing face the business went through. Seriously, the 80's imo especially 1985-1988 is the sole survivor as the golden years.

 

Here is my veiwpoint...

 

Jobbers in the 80's were over. JOBBERS! Guys like "Iron" Mike Sharpe and "Special Delivery" Jones are still talked about today. I can't even name one jobber today. Maybe Val Venis and he really isn't a jobber. They just don't know what the hell to do with the guy and job him out. The jobbers had characters and the fans knew it(yes even marks) and still watched. The tag team division even had its unique jobbers like the Conquistadors. We don't see that today and it hurts a ranking system for fans to latch onto wrestlers rising and falling on the "competive ladder". Now we have HHH and everyone else. You then got Orton and so on. Benjamin is the IC champion, but does anyone truly believe he is the second in command in terms of champions on raw? I can't even bring smackdown into this as both of their champions seem like midcarders parading with belts. This goes back to what someone said about everything just seemed important back then.

 

Look at the champion combinations of the 80's compared to now. You could differentiate the divisions, yet still see someone in one division contend in another division. It was easier to follow the path of the careers of the wrestlers. In 1986, the world champion was Hulk Hogan and his #1 contender was the I-C champion was Randy Savage, yet Hogan would be challenged by Bundy and Orndorff and Savage had his defenses against Steamboat and even heel Jake the Snake. Things just seemed more logical and perhaps that had to do with heavy kayfabe.

 

An example would be Kurt Angle getting a title match against JBL on smackdown last week. I liked the idea, but how would that be possible when the guy just lost a friggin hadni-cap match against Big Show? It's too scattered and nonsensical at times and I agree that the breaking down of the "fourth wall" has attributed to this.

 

I also see the argument that Hogan did not have monthly ppv shows back then, yet some do forget Hogan did have monthly house show appearances. I remember Hogan having a title defense against Kamala last month at Maple Leaf Garden and then returning this month for a special "Boxing day" matinee. Why didn't attendance go down for Hogan's house shows? It's the same as the monthly ppv shows. They don't do anywhere close to the number of house shows now that they did then.

 

Then bringing in the championship scene. The wwf use to headline house shows at times by breaking it down by the divisions or A,B,C shows. At one city the IC champion such as HTM or Savage would headline the card. Another city would be the British Bulldogs headlining by defending their titles and then of course the Hogan group. They are struggling right now with only two "A" shows running. Yes, the eras are different, but imo there are a lot of similarities and the bottom line is always making money anyways.

 

Exhbit A:

HHH is NO HULK HOGAN. Yeah, the argument people make is Hogan not drawing the same way as he did in the 80's. Well, who else draws as well as Hogan did in the 80's? Plus, I would not expect fans to be waiting in the same vien of anticipation for a 50 year old Hulk Hogan against an even older Vince Mcmahon. That is not appealing. It was the same mistake they did with Piper in the same year. According to Jim Ross nobody as he stated Hogan sold the most tickets for the company in its history. This coming from JR who loves Steve Austin. Even when Hogan didn't have the belt in 1988 to some people it seemed strange. Hogan and the belt were synomonous just as Hulkamania and WrestleMania. In fact, here in Toronto one of our channels shows re-runs of old news broadcasts and one episode from December 1986 gave Hogan accolades for Hulkamania and having it crossover into sports(CityPulse for Torontonians out there and fans across North America wonder why the man got cheered at WM 18). Hogan crossed over into sports illustrated in 1985. All I see Triple H doing now is forcing himself into movies like Blade 3 which even the main star won't promote. Let's not forget Vince seeing dollar signs on Hogan after the Rocky 3 movie. They have tried ever since to do the same kind of crossover and have never seen the success since. The Rock is close, but as we saw with WM 18 the fans still see Hogan as the bigger star taking all things into account.

 

Hogan's biggest matches in terms of historical significance blows away Triple H's. The man has never been in a match at the level of Hogan/Andre. It could even be argued in 2001 the wwf took the title off HHH to give the fans of the attitude era its Hogan/Andre type match in Austin/Rock. Hogan/Warrior also deserves a lot more credit when you take into account the chance the wwf took doing that match. They pitted their two top babyfaces which in those days were a no-no and and top of that put both their titles on the line. It worked out just fine due to the heat both men had. Hogan deserved all the championship glory right up until 1990 imo. After that he started to become a bit HHH-ish, but even then he was doing better business.

 

Exhibit B

The IC division was the equivalent of the lightweight wrestling today. That is why people like Perfect, Rude, Savage, and Santana etc competed in the division. Why not compare that division with today's division? You'll be hardpressed to even distinguish who's really in the division because there isn't one as I stated above. It's Triple H and everyone else. There was the Hogan division, but then there was the IC champ's division where the IC champ was always seen as the top contender which explained why a tough challenger would always go up against Hogan and be seen as a threat. The wwf even had a tag team division for the women for crying out loud. The one division they did screw up was the junior heavyweights though, but the argument could be that instead of mishandling it like they do now with the cruiserweights they just allowed Japan to take over the title in the J Crown.

 

Exhibit C

I think "Deserving superstars never to win the big one" is fantastic that it makes the title seem hard to gain. They wwe completely shattered this image in 1999 and the titles have not recovered since. It made those who got the title seem special which imo should be the basis of being a champion or acquiring a title. They are somewhat trying to get this back, but are having a hard time since a lot of the roster still held basically a title. 1999-2001 are the prime years of everybody and their mama having a title. Since we are talking 00's here 1999's blur doesn't count, yet the following years are still ridiculous.

 

Exhibit C

As someone stated both eras have their poster boys in this area. However, if we are including all of the 00's here I think this incarnation of the company takes the cake simply because they have screwed up "can't miss" chances. In the 80's they decimated guys like Terry Taylor and Outback Jack, but did not decimate their top talent and storylines. I fear what the wwe of today would have done with someone like Ric Flair heading into the wwf in 1991. Booker T is your example. Yes, he is not at his level, but the argument is the same as he was the competition's champion coming into the company.

 

I just felt some of this had to be said in overviewing the 80's compared to the new millennium wwe.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I just want to point out that when Hogan did a house show run with a heel, the second match usually drew a fair bit less than the first one. There were some exceptions, but, for the most part, the first match of a Hogan house show program almost always did a lot better than the second or third matches.

[Promoter 0]

Yes, but when you consider that sometimes they would run the same city with the same program that is to be expected. The program would be champ gets c/o or dq'ed with the rematch going the other way until the final match was gimmicked. That is how they ran even before Hogan. They milked it and then put the match on snme sometimes. Vince bled it and made his money. Nowadays, you see them go to a city once a season sometimes with completely different programs and not get full houses. This with dwindling ratings and I think we know who Vince would choose as champion if he had the choice of either era. Besides Hogan 4 year reign was considered to be short compared to guys like Backlund and Sammartino.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The problem wasn't the fact that it was the same program, as much as the fact that Hogan always drew best when his appearances weren't so frequent. And while it may have been the same way things were done before Hogan, and even for a while with Hogan, Sammartino, Graham, etc never had the kind of drop-off that Hogan did.

[Promoter 0]

That is somewhat true, but I also think a major problem came with how Vince started to operate. When Backlund was champion the wwf would run this same practice, BUT they would make sure to change the finishes of the matches. Fans started to catch on as believe it or not there were fanatics out there who went from city to city to watch Hogan title defenses. They also went to more pre-packaged entertainment from "working" as well(which is why I stated Hogan of 1985-1988 was the man at his strongest). The changes came in the summer of 1988*post SummerSlam* and took a radical makeover post Mania 5. Hogan kind of stated in an interview that he had a problem with today's product not "working with the audience" and the wrestlers going blow by blow with the layout of a match. To be fair this goes back to other comments on how the system of education has changed and that some of the guys now did not learn how to improv. Not to get back into that whole workrate thing again, but that element plays a big part into working a match. Hell, even the "bad workers" such as JYD knew how to work the crowd into their matches which is why they got over.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Jason, your lack of wrestling knowledge is amazing. I'm baffled as to why you're arguing that the WWE is better now than it was in the 1980's when you obviously have seen very little of 1980's WWF.

Personally, I agree. His knowledge displayed in his post seems almost phony, especially when compared to the quotes from Loss. It's hard to explain, maybe it's his (Jason's) matter-of-fact style of writing, which makes him sound like a first-year English student. Either way, to use a JR-like expression, I ain't buying what he's selling.

I think that's because Jason is probably a 12 or 13 year old trying to pass himself off as a 20something like several other people here.

 

As for you calling Christian a snoozer in the ring, I'm sure many people would agree with me when I say that this is completely false. He's a true "ring master," if that's the correct term and in every match takes the offense, carrying random opponents on his shoulders through great matches.

 

Actually that's completely wrong. Christian has maybe broken the *** barrier as a singles wrestler a handful of times. Hulk Hogan, who you give zero credit to, easily blows Christian out of the water as far as singles matches. You could take the main events from Wrestlemania V, VI and VII and you'll never find a Christian singles match that comes even close to the levels of these matches without some gimmick tagged on.