What year did WWE start to lose their edge?

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

2000 was the best in-ring year in WWF history and much better than the crap we were forcefed in 1998-99, so it looked even better in comparison. Solid matches up and down the card, which is something you only got in WCW up to that point.

[Guest Fook_Theta]

Whenever I started watching 24/other shows on Monday exclusively. What year did 24 start? 2001-2002.

 

Which is pretty interesting considering most people put the downfall during that time, with a considerable amount of nods towards 2000 being the beginning of the end.

[Guest I miss Test.]

The invasion was the big sign of things going downhill... but, I look to the botched HHH-Angle-Steph love triangle in summer 2000. WWF was freaking huge at the time, and even non-wrestling fans were deeply in that angle. But, it was dropped out of nowhere, and HHH basically squashed Angle dead. Combined with the phantom Jericho title win, even the mark I was then could see where things were going.

 

Plus, Rock's act was growing stale then, which only ended up getting worse. Angle's 1st title run was a total joke and he was never booked strong during it.

[imajackoff? 0]

The slow transition from Russo to Steph as head of Creative was the death knell for WWF.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Russo sucked too. I think you mean Kreski.

[Dangerous A 0]

Another thing here is that Kreski wasn't fired IIRC. I thought he moved on to the greener pastures of Hollywood, where ironically enough, Heyman is rumored to want to go after his contract runs out and stint in OVW is over. Word is he's burnt out on wrestling and wants to use his creativeness in writing for Hollywood since he's never done that.

 

I could see him succeeding in Hollywood at first, but since he's kind of crazy and loves the business too much, I could see him back in a few years if he leaves for Hollywood.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Although it was personally my favorite year of wrestling, I think 2000 was the year when things starting going downhill. All the friends I had that had become interested in the product during the Attitude era slowly drifted away over the course of the year. The things in 2001 and 2002 just exacerbated the problem

 

The 20 mintue HHH promos each wekk, over-exposure of the McMahons, the halting pushes of Jericho, Angle and Benoit, heel retaining at Mania, Rikishi's heel turn, the botched Austin return, Rock getting stale, the move to TNN, the failed love triangle, Survivor Series and the Sports Entertainment finish, etc... All these things slowly starting driving fans away. The move to Stephanie as head of creative was the beginning of the end.

[Guest MikeSC]

Another thing here is that Kreski wasn't fired IIRC. I thought he moved on to the greener pastures of Hollywood, where ironically enough, Heyman is rumored to want to go after his contract runs out and stint in OVW is over. Word is he's burnt out on wrestling and wants to use his creativeness in writing for Hollywood since he's never done that.

 

I could see him succeeding in Hollywood at first, but since he's kind of crazy and loves the business too much, I could see him back in a few years if he leaves for Hollywood.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heyman's creativity is, honestly, laughable by Hollywood standards.

[Guest Ransome]

1999 - The Higher Power, Vince McMahon: WWF Champion, Chyna: Intercontinental Champion, Austin gets injured, Bossman/Al Snow, Big Show/Bossman, over 10 WWF champions in one year (14 to be exact), Big Show: WWF Champion to end the millenium.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For the record, there were not 14 WWF champions in 1999. There were 'only' 11 WWF champions, or 12 if you count Foley's title win from December 1998 that aired January 1999. (http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wwf/wwfworld.htm)

 

It's the popular choice, but as far as I'm concerned, it's got to be the spectacular fuckup that was the Invasion that lead to the downturn. That said, I'd say 2002 was the year that cemented their downfall, swiftly ensuring WWE will not get out of the rut they're in anytime soon.

[El Psycho Diablo 0]

Personally, they killed it toward the end of 2000, when the McMahon-Helmsley Regime bit started to drag. A sign of things to come?

 

2001 was just terrible. Heel Austin as the leader of WCW/ECW, and the Invasion in general.

[Precious Roy 0]

Personally, they killed it toward the end of 2000, when the McMahon-Helmsley Regime bit started to drag. A sign of things to come?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Agreed. The "who ran down Austin" angle really killed it for me.

[cabbageboy 0]

I think the coincidence is that the WWF started to decline in quality right around the same time WCW was really in dire straits. It was almost like "Well, the war is over so we can now coast."

 

2000 was a solid year for in ring action, but very little of it really mattered in the end. I mean yeah Jericho and Benoit wrestled each other 500 times that year, but what good did it do? The Hardys and E and C wrestled each other 500 times that year but I dunno if any of it really mattered.

 

2000 started the decline in my view, while 2002 was the most damaging (becoming WWE, the split angle that exists even now).

[Guest MikeSC]

That was terrible --- but they did have some good shows leading up to WM 17.

 

When they had Austin & HHH team up --- and Austin play Hunter's sidekick to boot --- then you had problems.

[KingPK 0]

Yeah, I'd put the exact moment that the WWE started to lose it as the night after Wrestlemania X-7, when HHH stormed the ring as Austin and Vince were beating on Rock.....and hit Rock. It just did not make any logical sense. The two guys (meaning HHH and Austin) just finished a blood feud only two months ago and now everything is peachy? It seemed like they finally came around to realizing their mistake in that tag match....but then the quad tear happened.

[Kurt Angle Mark 0]

Creative wise: The day the Rikishi as the driver angle bombed because it gave HHH an excuse to go in there and "save" the angle. Thus the love triangle is set aside and he doesn't have to lose Steph to Kurt, killing the WWF's best story.

 

Business Wise: The day after WM 17. HHH not turning face and the HHH/Austin vs. Kane/UT feud that followed just killed the WWF. The ratings almost fell by 2 points and except for a few blips here and there it has never recovered from it.

[cabbageboy 0]

I think bookers should take a look and never do these "Who ran over _____?" angles. In my view the Hummer angle really killed WCW in the Summer of 99 and some here mention the "Who hit Austin?" angle as having started the WWF's decline.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Business Wise: The day after WM 17. HHH not turning face and the HHH/Austin vs. Kane/UT feud that followed just killed the WWF. The ratings almost fell by 2 points and except for a few blips here and there it has never recovered from it.

 

1 point, but it is still one of the biggest drops in the shows's history like you said.

 

The other big one from the era we are talking about is in 2002 after Hogan won the Undisputed Title. When he won it they were consistantly doing in the 4.8 range, by the time he lost it RAW was down to a 3.7.

[Precious Roy 0]

Creative wise: The day the Rikishi as the driver angle bombed because it gave HHH an excuse to go in there and "save" the angle. Thus the love triangle is set aside and he doesn't have to lose Steph to Kurt, killing the WWF's best story.

 

Business Wise: The day after WM 17. HHH not turning face and the HHH/Austin vs. Kane/UT feud that followed just killed the WWF. The ratings almost fell by 2 points and except for a few blips here and there it has never recovered from it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think you hit the nail on the head with both

[pochorenella 0]

I really wanted to be nice and say 2003, since it was really a sub-par year in all aspects. But even though I love the Smackdown 6 period with all my heart (I was just watching stuff from August - November, absolutely top-notch), the emergence of Brock Lesnar as a main-eventer, the introduction of Team Angle, and somewhat regular cruiser action, I found 2002 to be the year that cemented the decline with a poor RAW show almost every week, the failed RVD push (thanks HHH), Rock's irregular schedule (although he was great for the times he showed), the Katie Vick crap, Chuck & Billy, and HHH being World Champ out of the blue.

So even if WWE tried to salvage the damage by mid-late 2002 (specially on the SD! brand) the damage itself was to just too much to regain the viewership. 2003 was mostly terrible, 2004 was pretty good IMO.

[Karc 0]

Didn't HHH/Angle have a proper blow-off? Didn't they have a blow-off match at Unforgiven?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The "proper" blow-off would have for Stephanie to backstab Triple H, and then for Angle to go over and win the match. Think about the No Mercy PPV right after that, where Angle won the title. It would have made a LOT more sense, and it would have definately given a larger rise to his career (beating HHH and Rock). As it was, it put the champion, Angle, in the number three or four spot right out of the gate, as the business partner thing with Stephanie didn't even make it to Survivor Series, and Triple /Austin became the focal point.

 

Reason I say all of this was because this was the point where I really began to notice that the focus of the company being put solely on Triple H was starting to HURT it. And it did. Continously. For about five years now. And it's not going to stop. A similar thing (only far worse) happened to Jericho, Benoit, Booker T, and Orton.

[Precious Roy 0]

Yeah, they built a whole angle where the only payoff was Steph ending up with Angle.....and then failed to deliver on the months and months of build up. Stuff like that will, and did, piss off the audience. Swerves, aborted angles, non-deliveries, it's representative of the horrible "crash TV" syndrome where the accepted attitude was that you could just jump from one thing to the next, every inaccuracy can be corrected with re-writes, and that only the present moment matters. It's the most self-destructive form of booking.

[Rendclaw 0]

I think the coincidence is that the WWF started to decline in quality right around the same time WCW was really in dire straits.  It was almost like "Well, the war is over so we can now coast."

 

2000 was a solid year for in ring action, but very little of it really mattered in the end.  I mean yeah Jericho and Benoit wrestled each other 500 times that year, but what good did it do?  The Hardys and E and C wrestled each other 500 times that year but I dunno if any of it really mattered. 

 

2000 started the decline in my view, while 2002 was the most damaging (becoming WWE, the split angle that exists even now).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was just going to say that. When WCW started to seriously suck, you could almost hear Vince and company do a downshift.

 

And to whomever said about the Invasion angle being a "vague, orgsmic fantasy" or something close to that: This was an angle that could have *made* the E for years to come actually, and I do not exaggerate when I say that. Any one of us here could have booked that angle a lot better than they did, never mind guys that I think have the imagination, such as Rudo. It was almost a can;t miss opportunity, but because the established wrestlers could not put aside their own egos and the writers could not come up with an original thought either on their own or come up with one that Vince and his inner circle would not shoot down, it was fucked up totally. That angle could have been done even halfway decent for at least a year, maybe even two, but nope.

 

I would have to say right around 2000-2001 is where I really started losing faith in what the E was bringing to the table.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

You can argue that the "Who TRIED to run over Goldberg?" brief storyline from a late-Spring 2003 Raw also made Goldberg look bad, by making him talk a lot and having to be in the ring with the likes of Lance Storm (good talent, but nowhere near ME level).

[Guest I miss Test.]

Didn't HHH/Angle have a proper blow-off? Didn't they have a blow-off match at Unforgiven?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, it wasn't. HHH forced Stephanie to kick Angle in the nuts, and she still acted like she didn't want HHH after the match. The weeks after she was still helping both guys, and acted undecided. Plus, remember that Steph attempted to help Angle win the title at No Mercy, and they kept the angle going with HHH going to "save" her, while Steph was still with Angle as "business partners" after that.

 

Then, came HHH saying he orchestrated the running over Austin stuff... and it was probably written the last minute, because Angle defended the title against Crash on Heat that week, which seemed quite strange.

 

Then, I remember a couple weeks later in some tag match with HHH & Angle that Steph suddenly talked shit to Angle during the match, and I think even interfered against him. No explanation was given.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Even though I really don't like the guy, I'm going to say right around the time they decided to not put the belt on RVD, when he lost to Taker I believe. I'm not going to say it was just that one thing, but I remember a lot of people I knew quit watching around this time.

[Slayer 0]

2001.

 

Death of WCW.

 

Invasion.

 

Slayer ceases watching for the next year

[Guest Fook_Theta]

Yeah, they built a whole angle where the only payoff was Steph ending up with Angle.....and then failed to deliver on the months and months of build up.  Stuff like that will, and did, piss off the audience.  Swerves, aborted angles, non-deliveries, it's representative of the horrible "crash TV" syndrome where the accepted attitude was that you could just jump from one thing to the next, every inaccuracy can be corrected with re-writes, and that only the present moment matters.  It's the most self-destructive form of booking.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What is sad is that I'm to the point I would love to see a chain of swerves where any wrestler could be a contender for the titles. I liked the unpredictability of both WWE and WCW that brought some great angles and some abortions. I'd rather they took the chance rather than keep up with only one or two angles at any given time, and most of the angles have sucked. Throw shit at the wall and enough will stick all things being equal.

 

It's both a pro and a con, but at this point I'd gladly take seeing more entertaining stuff with the unfortunate downside of seeing shit I don't want to see.

[Dangerous A 0]

HHH didn't want Steph to leave him storyline wise because their real life off screen romance was in full tilt by then. Bad blowoff for the love triangle. HHH then wanted to be the guy who masterminded the Austin Hit and Run because even though the crowds were warming up big time to him as a face, he'd still be #3 on the face side with Rock and Austin still in the mix, so he went and cemented himself as the #1 heel.

 

Day after WM17 was a huge dropped ball oppurtunity because the crowd was so hot to see HHH 1) turn face because he had been booked strongly against Austin the month prior and 2) help out Rock, even though both men had been feuding for almost all their careers. It was something they had not seen yet and it was right in front of their face and WWF took it away for nonsense.

[Precious Roy 0]

the thing is, HHH was the only logical choice as the guy who ran over Austin, because Austin was the main obstacle to being world champion at the time.

 

It should have been HHH all along, it was the *fake* payoff with Rikishi that really killed it. The whole thing was handled incorrectly. They could have done Steph going with Angle followed by HHH being revealed as the driver and let the fans react naturally, but they got too cute about trying to manipulate the booking.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

the thing is, HHH was the only logical choice as the guy who ran over Austin, because Austin was the main obstacle to being world champion at the time.

 

Rock and Big Show were also logical. But Big Show wasn't around at that point in 2000 for punishment and Rock was in the hottest streak of his career.