WWE worried about the backlash

[Jericholic82 0]

You know justcoz is absolutely right. Remember that other thread about the wwe's identity and we went over all the phases the company went through? Well, the wwe is not using the internet properly anymore. During the last boom the wwe would use the heat of backstage stuff on the television which made things become more realistic to fans from the cartoon crap of Doink The Clown a few years prior.

 

Look this is what I'm talking about.......................

 

1994

Bret Hart and Owen Hart have the best feud in the company and it's realistic where it kept people wondering how true some of the remarks were(such as Bret wanting Owen to wear a mask not to steal his last name*does seem like a Vince mindset for those days*)

 

1995

Shawn Michaels gets beat up in Syracuse. The wwe uses this in a storyline and HBK returns too soon and collapses on RAW. This angle was well recieved and an early indication that fans wanted a more mature product.

 

Diesel who fans started to love as a heel big guy turns face and becomes corporate. The fans do not take to this as champion. He loses the belt and he starts to act more tweener by taking jabs at Vince for turning him soft. He goes to wcw and plays up his real personailty more and gets even more over.

 

1996-1997

Austin starts to berate Bret Hart. Bret Hart rags on HBK about being champion and feeling betrayed about losing the belt. The bickering continues on the net with backstage info and Bret and HBK end up having one hot ass feud. Austin jumps into the fray calling Bret a whiner and fans start to turn on Bret. Bret starts slamming America about turning on him for a hyena with no morals in what was becoming a cess pool in America. Hart family values.

 

In wcw, they played up things that Hall and Nash were sent by the "new generation" wwf to make war on Nacho Man and the Huckster. It turns out Hogan joins Hall and Nash as he becomes the third member who "came from a great big organization up north". Then they brought Piper in to counter Hogan being the man who made wrestling and so on.

 

1998

Austin and Vince is rooted in Vince wanting his "champion" HBK retaining against the pr nightmare of the bird flipping Austin. Vince was also getting heat for what he did to Bret Hart. He throws challenger after challenger and Vince's master plan works with The Rock whom he saw as a corporate champion. The wwe used the knowledge some fans through his push to the moon as IC champ to make it realistic that Rock was wwe bred for the role as champion the way Vince saw it with his background. There is realism to it although it's all storyline. The wwf makes one of the greatest comebacks of all-time that year.

 

1999

This is where it all went downhill with the overscripting and unrealistic storylines.

WCW is in the same boat with stuff that aren't related to the internet AND the masses.

 

2000

HHH and the Mcmahons are also rumoured to becoming together. It seeps into the storylines along with HHH's workrate and he is the greatest heel champ they ever had that year.

 

2001

It went straight to hell again with storylines, but the only thing on the net that fascinated fans was the growing relationship with HHH and Stephanie.

 

2002-2005

Things on the net are non-existant and so is the buzz for wrestling in the mainstream. Can all this be coincident or that the wwe just doesn't have someone like Russo who can turn real life incidents into compelling television that makes fans emotionally involved with something they might believe to be real?

You made me think, why would Vicne want shawn over austin as champ. I mean Shawn was in fullblown DX mode at the time. Crotch chopping, dick jokes, etc. That exaclty wasnt a PR dream either.

[justcoz 0]

Things on the net are non-existant and so is the buzz for wrestling in the mainstream. Can all this be coincident or that the wwe just doesn't have someone like Russo who can turn real life incidents into compelling television that makes fans emotionally involved with something they might believe to be real?

 

I read a quote of Russo from a recent interview and really agreed with him on one particular point. It's ridiculous for WWE to not acknowledge the HHH/Stephanie relationship on-air. How is it not within his current character that HHH is so freaking power hungry that he's married into the McMahon family? The reasoning he gets constant camera time and gets to make matches at his own will, all the way down to assigning Coach as a referee, is because of that connection. Maybe even make Stephanie the GM of RAW to add more fuel to his dominance. Vince, as CEO of the company, would grow so disgruntled by Stephanie and HHH's power trip, that he would have Shane and Eric Bischoff bring back WCW, perhaps Paul Heyman (but they'll be stupid and not renew him) to bring back ECW and in Vince's words "shake things up".

 

Just an idea that I've had for years.

[Promoter 0]

In kayfabe it made sense for Vince wanting HBK holding the title over Steve Austin. It stems with Vince's screwjob of Bret Hart. Bret Hart disobeyed him by not doing what's best for business with passing the torch to HBK whom he wanted. You got to also take into context HBK as the new generation leader of 1996. Bret suddenly became anti-American. Austin was another person who disobeyed what he was told by Vince Mcmahon. The only hole in the storyline was HBK telling Vince he did not need his backing for the match against Austin. HBK kind of rebelled against Vince with that one, but HBK was seen as more corporate and ass-kissing even though he did his DX stuff. He was young, talented, and seen as the leader of the youth. Austin seemed much more hard to control.

 

As for justcoz's idea, I have been thinking about that ever since they brought back Bischoff and had the Vince/Shane segment post Hogan/Vince match. I thought they would split things up where Shane went up against Stephanie. I still think they will do HHH/Steph sometime. They are acknowledging thheir marriage in the media purposely now. Usually they try to sweep it under the rug like the Lita/Edge fiasco. The problem I think they might see with doing it for storylines again is that it might really be too realistic where fans will get even more apathetic towards advancement. The aura is already there with HHH's dominance and to flirt it in people's faces might cause more indifference. I actually think Russo is damn right though. They should have just stuck with the Mcmahon/Helmsley Era and have the split between the Mcmahon siblings where Vince and Linda are overthrown.

[Steve J. Rogers 0]

Was there a reason for even finalizing the "character's" diviorce? I mean this is the same company that droped Vince and Linda's diviorce proceedings when it appeared that angle was going no where and the HHH-Steph "diviorce" dragged out for months

 

Steve

[justcoz 0]

And wouldn't Stephanie seeking control of the company (or brand) fit into the overall concept of Evolution? Perhaps even have Shane tied in with the Evolution for a few months, pitting them against Vince, before Shane eventually realizes that Stephanie and HHH are determined to run the show, associates himself with Bischoff and restarts WCW. Throw Shelton Benjamin in there as the new young prospect to succeed HHH in Evolution. Use Batista as the face that respects Vince Mcmahon and tradition. I dare a Beverly Hills 90210 writer to come up with something seemingly so logical (I'm sure some of you could pick it apart as to why it wouldn't work). It has insider elements but would you, as a smart fan, be more interested in how such an angle would play out as opposed to Batista fearing the pedigree? That's what I'm talking about. Not angles designed specifically for a smart audience but angles with a touch of real elements. The backstage/insider stuff shouldn't be more interesting than a creative team with dozens of members.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

That's what I'm talking about. Not angles designed specifically for a smart audience but angles with a touch of real elements. The backstage/insider stuff shouldn't be more interesting than a creative team with dozens of members.

From you, earlier in the thread:

 

I'm not necessarily saying that you have to fool the smart fans, just use them in the whole grand scheme of things. They are a target audience just like the marks. Their emotions can be manipulated just like the marks

 

Coming up with an angle to use smart fans and manipulate their emotions would mean the angle would have to be designed specifically for the smart audience, because of their nature. You might want to think things out a little more.

[justcoz 0]

That's what I'm talking about. Not angles designed specifically for a smart audience but angles with a touch of real elements. The backstage/insider stuff shouldn't be more interesting than a creative team with dozens of members.

 

From you, earlier in the thread:

 

QUOTE

I'm not necessarily saying that you have to fool the smart fans, just use them in the whole grand scheme of things. They are a target audience just like the marks. Their emotions can be manipulated just like the marks

 

 

Coming up with an angle to use smart fans and manipulate their emotions would mean the angle would have to be designed specifically for the smart audience, because of their nature. You might want to think things out a little more.

 

And I would suggest you do the same because you aren't following me at all.... You are still talking about building entire angles out of fooling smart fans and no where did I suggest that. I'm again just suggesting that you use the internet and smart fans as an instrument in your storytelling. You can manipulate their emotions by playing off of real situations and use that in your storytelling to build an angle. There would be some kind of scripted/fictional elements as well but it's not as difficult as you make it sound to fool smart fans.

 

When a worker is injured or has a falling out with their company, even when they die, there are those on the net who still think they are being worked and it's a storyline. There are those who won't believe a single thing until it's reported by someone like Meltzer, Keller or Scherer. So when one of them report of tension between Eddie and Kurt Angle, where is the harm in playing off of that on-air? It's something that would manipulate a smart fans emotions, get them more intrigued by a PPV match, while not going over the head of a mark. Remember when Bret and Shawn had their backstage scuffle at the Raw taping? Do we know if that was real or not? Do we really know that Shawn was jumped in a Syracuse parking lot? Did we see Flair attack Bischoff? Jericho take down Goldberg? Neither did Meltzer or Keller. We are just going on second, sometimes third party info, fed to us by some pseudo wrestling journalist that are sitting at their homes in California, Minnesota or New Jersey, no where near the arenas, creative team meetings, etc. I don't see it being difficult at all to play them or smart fans in general into believing something or at least talking about whether they think it's a work or shoot and watching to see how it plays out. It seems more logical than ignoring that segment of your audience and having creative write around situations like Lita being in front of a live audience because the chants from that "small minority" of their audience are damaging to her babyface push.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

You are still talking about building entire angles out of fooling smart fans and no where did I suggest that. I'm again just suggesting that you use the internet and smart fans as an instrument in your storytelling. You can manipulate their emotions by playing off of real situations and use that in your storytelling to build an angle. There would be some kind of scripted/fictional elements as well but it's not as difficult as you make it sound to fool smart fans.

 

I've talked about more than "building entire angles out of fooling smart fans.". I've said that depending on how far you want to go to get this type of angle is a dangerous game, because it can cause even more distrust among the wrestlers towards management. To manipulate the emotions of smart fans would require constructing the angle in a different fashion to a normal angle, because manipulating the emotions of smart fans is a little different to manipulating the emotions of casual fans, simply because of the nature of the beast. And while it may not be super difficult to fool the smart fans, by their very nature, smart fans can't be fooled in the same manner as casual fans, hence the need to have to lay the angle out differently.

 

When a worker is injured or has a falling out with their company, even when they die, there are those on the net who still think they are being worked and it's a storyline.

 

That has more to do with individual people who are paranoid about being worked than smart fans in general.

 

So when one of them report of tension between Eddie and Kurt Angle, where is the harm in playing off of that on-air? It's something that would manipulate a smart fans emotions, get them more intrigued by a PPV match, while not going over the head of a mark.

 

Except that that part of the angle would be specifically designed for smart fans, because marks don't have a clue what Meltzer and co report, which is how, if the angle you're pushing is designe to try and fool smart fans, the whole angle would have to be laid out, or you tip your hand to smart fans that it's a work.

 

Remember when Bret and Shawn had their backstage scuffle at the Raw taping? Do we know if that was real or not?

 

Yes, we do, considering both men have talked about it, and it's a well known story among the wrestlers.

 

Do we really know that Shawn was jumped in a Syracuse parking lot?

 

Considering there were real arrests made on this matter, amd charges were filed at first, are you seriously asking that question ?

 

Did we see Flair attack Bischoff?

 

No, but given that it was the talk of the insider wrestling world, and both parties have since talked frankly about it and have been consistent in their stories, I'm guessing it's a fair bet to say it was real.

 

Jericho take down Goldberg?

 

Considering that both wrestlers have talked about it, and that Goldberg doesn't strike me as the type of person who would maintain the illusion that Jericho got the better of him if it was a work, I'd again say this was real.

 

We are just going on second, sometimes third party info, fed to us by some pseudo wrestling journalist that are sitting at their homes in California, Minnesota or New Jersey, no where near the arenas, creative team meetings, etc.

 

I can see some credibilty at taking shots at Keller, but the Meltzer one is so far off base, considering that Vince McMahon himself has been know to call Dave from time to time, and has also been known to run major angles past Dave.

 

I don't see it being difficult at all to play them or smart fans in general into believing something or at least talking about whether they think it's a work or shoot and watching to see how it plays out.

 

It probably isn't all that difficult, but unless the angle in question is one they really want to pay to see get concluded, it's ultimately pointless.

[{''({o..o})''} 0]

I can see some credibilty at taking shots at Keller, but the Meltzer one is so far off base, considering that Vince McMahon himself has been know to call Dave from time to time, and has also been known to run major angles past Dave.

Since this was brought up, do you know the last time Vince has called Dave? I heard Dave mention on WOL that he was called before the Invasion, But I'm curious to know if there has been much, if any, real contact since.

[justcoz 0]

I've talked about more than "building entire angles out of fooling smart fans.". I've said that depending on how far you want to go to get this type of angle is a dangerous game, because it can cause even more distrust among the wrestlers towards management. To manipulate the emotions of smart fans would require constructing the angle in a different fashion to a normal angle, because manipulating the emotions of smart fans is a little different to manipulating the emotions of casual fans, simply because of the nature of the beast. And while it may not be super difficult to fool the smart fans, by their very nature, smart fans can't be fooled in the same manner as casual fans, hence the need to have to lay the angle out differently.

 

Yes, depending on how far you want to go with these type of angles, it could get dangerous and create distrust among the wrestlers towards management - if you go THAT far to the point where you are constantly working the boys in the locker room. I'm not suggesting that. I'm more or less suggesting taking real aspects of the locker room/outside of the ring/behind the scenes and relay them into current storylines in a manner that doesn't go over the heads of the marks and intrigues the smart fans. I do disagree that occassionally working the locker room would create that much distrust and negativity towards management. Having your top star married to the creative director of the company get 30-0 minutes of air-time on a 125 minute show is more damaging to locker room morale than the locker room being worked somewhat in an angle that could draw them money. I really see no difference between something like that and actors on a teleivision series not knowing if their character is getting killed off of until they shoot the season finale - which happens all the time in Hollywood.

 

>>When a worker is injured or has a falling out with their company, even when they die, there are those on the net who still think they are being worked and it's a storyline.<<

 

 

That has more to do with individual people who are paranoid about being worked than smart fans in general.

 

But it's been a consistent thing with the online wrestling community since I first signed on to the net in 1995. It may be individual people but they are the same people joining in on conversations about workrate and botched angles, ie smart fans. There is always going to be a concern with online fans that they are being worked... you think this is a negative... they would rebel or alienate a wrestler they are a fan of (you pointed out Matt Hardy alienating his online fan base) if they find out they are worked... i disagree and think it's wishful thinking on their part that they are being worked because it makes it fun to be a smart fan... they would want to feel like part of the product, rather than the invisible minority.

 

Except that that part of the angle would be specifically designed for smart fans, because marks don't have a clue what Meltzer and co report, which is how, if the angle you're pushing is designe to try and fool smart fans, the whole angle would have to be laid out, or you tip your hand to smart fans that it's a work.

 

Michael Cole: Tazz, reports on the internet this week about a backstage altercation between Eddie Guerrerro and Kurt Angle, after one of their matches.

 

Tazz: Cole, sometimes the passions of WWE performers is difficult to restrict to just the wrestling ring. Kurt and Eddie, despite being opponents, typically respect each other on a professional level outside of the ring. They are both extremely competitive and carry egos however. It will be interesting to measure the intensity of tonight's match since things are gradually becoming a bit more personal in addition to the competitive element that already existed between the two men.

 

Cole: Both men reprimanded by WWE talent coordinators for the activity reported on the internet. Tonight, it goes from the locker room to the wrestling ring, stay tuned for Kurt Angle vs. Eddie Guerrerro.

 

Yes, you are tipping your hand to smart fans that they are working elements of a shoot situation (or was it a work all along and there really was no backstage tension, hmmmm) into the television production but it's more intriguing than what they are doing right now. It would initiate more discussion than Kurt dousing Eddie's ride in milk or whatever current creative comes up with. The marks would get it whether they read Meltzer or not.

 

Also, I think it's overestimated that just smart fans, who spend hours on the net discussing this stuff, like you and I, are the only people who can access the wrestling observer site. Anyone can google 'wrestling headlines' and become smart to elements of the business, without being part of the online community or subscribing to the Observer.

 

QUOTE

Do we really know that Shawn was jumped in a Syracuse parking lot?

 

 

Considering there were real arrests made on this matter, amd charges were filed at first, are you seriously asking that question ?

 

QUOTE

Did we see Flair attack Bischoff?

 

 

No, but given that it was the talk of the insider wrestling world, and both parties have since talked frankly about it and have been consistent in their stories, I'm guessing it's a fair bet to say it was real.

 

QUOTE

Jericho take down Goldberg?

 

 

Considering that both wrestlers have talked about it, and that Goldberg doesn't strike me as the type of person who would maintain the illusion that Jericho got the better of him if it was a work, I'd again say this was real.

 

You're missing the point. Smart fans believed all of this before police reports or before the respective parties acknowledged anything to the public. I think, although I may be wrong, they acknowledged the backstage Michaels/Hart situation on Raw. I can't think back to whether they did or if they created an angle based on it. There was a different kind of heat and intrigue whenever Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart were on camera together because even the marks understood the tension between the two. It wasn't just restricted to smart world.

 

It probably isn't all that difficult, but unless the angle in question is one they really want to pay to see get concluded, it's ultimately pointless.

 

A six minute segment where Simon Dean is talking about his patented Simon System is also pointless and probably requires the same amount of time from the creative team as it would to acknowledge anything like I've described or to post something on wwe.com or leak something to insiders. One is more likely to draw some kind of money, initiate some kind of conversation and generate some kind of drama and heat. I think it's what I'm suggesting more than Simon Dean getting his shake dumped on him by Rosey.

[justcoz 0]

QUOTE (Pope Benedict XVI @ Apr 30 2005, 12:34 PM)

I can see some credibilty at taking shots at Keller, but the Meltzer one is so far off base, considering that Vince McMahon himself has been know to call Dave from time to time, and has also been known to run major angles past Dave.

 

It wasn't a pot shot against Meltzer. It's the truth, Meltzer isn't in a WWE locker room and he isn't witnessing anything first hand. It's all based on his sources. Yes, Vince has called him from to time, because he's been following the trends of the wrestling business since what, the late 70's, early 80's? His sheet is like the the gospel to the industry so of course his opinion on the product would be valued to a point. Remember reading how Hogan would take the Observer so seriously? What I said however is true. He's just a glorified version of you and I, relying on info from sources, he just happens to have strong industry connections and respect within the industry for his knowledge of the business. He's essentially the jesus christ of all smart fans. The orginator. I wasn't dissing him, I was merely stating that we assume whatever he reports is the truth, when much of it is based more on the quality of his sources than anything.