What ended the Late 90's Pro Wrestling Boom?

[Ed Wood Caulfield 0]

From 1998 until 2001, professional wrestling experienced a surge in popularity that it hadn't seen since the 80's and whose effects are still being felt today. Professional wrestling once again became cool. Buyrates shot up. Ratings for RAW IS WAR were normally in the 7.0 to 8.0 range. Wrestlers were on the cover of TV Guide and other magazines. The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin became household names, with The Rock using this popularity as the first step in his transformation from professional wrestler to serious actor. Kids were wearing Austin 3:16 and nWo shirts all over the country. MTV produced several specials featuring professional wrestlers from both WCW AND the WWF. The WWF logo was stamped on a ton of merchandise, some of which didn't even have anything to do with professional wrestling. They even made a reality show about professional wrestling called Tough Enough. I'm pretty sure WOW Wrestling was a result of the professional wrestling boom as well. Wrestling was so popular, a WWF themed resturant opened up in Times Square. WCW got an awful movie about professional wrestling made. The Rock even got to appear at the Republican National Convention! For a short while, 2000 was the most successful year, financially, for the WWF in its history. If you were looking for a fighting sport (even if it was fake), you went to wrestling not boxing or even MMA.

 

But then, something happened. Just as quickly as it started, the surge seemed to die down. Buyrates tanked. Ratings plummented. Wrestling was no longer being talked about on the playground or at the water cooler. The WWF (and then WWE) logo stopped appearing everywhere. MTV deemed professional wrestling unmarketable and cancelled Tough Enough. Other television networks were no longer interested in showing professional wrestling anymore. MMA buyrates have beaten professional wrestling buyrates more than once over the past few years. Nobody was wearing a professional wrestling T-shirt anymore. Professional wrestling no longer was cool.

 

What caused this? What made professional wrestling go from hip to unhip? Did the characters become stale? Did the storylines become less than stellar? Or was it simply overexposure? Did the general public simply have enough of professional wrestling? Or was it all of the above?

 

Some questions for you guys:

 

At one point, do you think the late 90's pro wrestling boom started dying down? What was the first sign that professional wrestling was starting to lose popularity?

Some people say that Stone Cold Steve Austin turning heel at WWF WrestleMania X-Seven is what led to the end of the late 90's professional wrestling boom? So, let's say Austin never turned heel. Would the boom have continued?

Do you think there will ever be another professional wrestling boom?

 

I look forward to reading your responses.

[Jericholic82 0]

Simple- ECW and WCW both die in the first months of 2001, leaving no competition for Vince and subsquently tanks the guaranteed money WWF vs WCW feud. That's a major reason IMHO.

[The Buzz 0]

I'd say it was a combo of a few things.

 

WCW and ECW Dying

Starrcade 97

Austin Heel Turn

Fingerpoke of Doom

Various WCW stars taking time off constantly. (Nash, Hogan, Sting, Savage, Goldberg, etc.)

WWE botching the WCW invasion angle.

The change from WWF to WWE

AOL/Time Warner merger.

[CookieMueller 0]

It's sort of bullshit answer but everything goes in cycles. Wrestling was popular in the mid 80s, had some of it's worst years in recent history in the early to mid 90s, shot back up in the late 90s/early 00s and will eventually become popular again even if some of us don't live to see it. Trends recycle themselves in pop culture as generations change. Wrestling just needs it's face, gimmick or angle that appeals to the people their show is aimed at (young males mostly).

 

I only bring that up because the stuff that you mentioned was all mainstream media like MTV, TV Guide, etc. But if you're asking a wrestling fan (who will watch no matter what) then they'll almost all tell you the downfall was the dissolving of WCW and ECW. And I would agree. Monopolies aren't good in any line of business, and wrestling is no execption.

 

But even if the "Big Three" still existed and competed with one another, the boom would have died out eventually just like it did in the 80s. Some scandal (like the most recent one) or errant storyline would have turned viewers off. Nothing lasts forever.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

I forget where I read it, but it was a great argument for saying that the whole "the business is cyclical" argument is bullshit. A promoter has an idea and forces it into a reality, using a certain group of stars to push his business forward. Sales grow as he continues pushing these stars, so he thinks that nothing can change so long as the show doesn't change. The crowds stop coming after a short while, though, because these same stars weren't the same as they were a few years ago. No new stars have been made. Now these stars don't shine as bright, yet the promoter still can't understand why the fans don't want to see the same people they saw doing the same thing they were doing years ago when they first became popular. So the promoter calls the business cyclical, just to make himself feel better, since there's no way he could do wrong given the money he's made only a few years ago.

 

I'd say the combination of pushing the same guys in '01 that he did in '98 (Austin, Rock, HHH, 'Taker) combined with the death of ECW and WCW certainly lowered the opinion of pro wrestling in the eyes of the casual fan, and the entire InVasion angle - while producing some very stellar matches - was botched due to none of the true-blue WCW stars being involved (save for DDP, who was always seen as upper-midcard at best, even when holding the WCW World title) and the WWF talent not wanting to do much to put them over since the feeling that "these guys just tanked a company, why should we help them out" seemed all too prevalent. Those, and Vince continued with the same format of the shows as what worked in mid-'97, when it was becoming more and more obvious that shock TV and show-opening promo's from the same people week after week was quite dull, and few want to watch a show that they feel is dull.

[Diamonddust 0]

Lack of competition was critical. Sure, there were a lot of other factors... but when McMahon put his rivals out of business... his "motivation" to survive wasn't as strong as it was during '97 and '98.

[cabbageboy 0]

WCW's whole awful year of 1999 was a key here. Some blame the Fingerpoke, or the Hogan/Flair double turn, or the bizarre decision to put the title on DDP, or guys being hurt or just not around. Or the No Limit Soldiers angle. Or the Hummer Angle. WCW just sucked so hard that year, it was 10x worse than 2000.

 

The WWF was still going strong in 2000, but there were several things they did later that year that hurt their business. I recall hearing about Austin's heel turn as early as Sept. 2000. Then of course there was the whole "Who ran over Austin?" angle that ended up being Rikishi, which was a letdown (ironically similar to WCW's own mystery Hummer angle). And of course the whole HHH/Steph/Angle storyline ended up going nowhere. Some of this stuff is why I don't consider Chris Kreski that great of a booker. People put the blame on Steph being named head writer, but I think Kreski was still head writer when the Austin return angle semi tanked with Rikishi and the Angle/Steph/HHH deal petered out.

 

And of course the move to TNN may have yielded the WWF some money but it also knocked their ratings down from where they had been on USA.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

From what I've noticed...

 

WCW really peaked from August 1997 through to April of 1999 looking at the Monday Nitro ratings.

 

WWF really didn't start their run until April 1998 through to May 2002 looking at the Monday Night Raw ratings. Their real peak was March 1999 - September 2000 (when they switched to TNN). They were consistently in the upper 5's and 6's range.

 

ECW's show on TNN even saw an uptick from December 1999 - February 2000.

 

IMO, it wasn't really about what the wrestling shows were doing right or wrong in terms of promoting stars, running great angles, running great wrestling matches. It was more about the fix of the TV audience and that substantially changed in 2000 and 2001. As crazy as it is, shows (and reality TV) helped kill the interest in wrestling.

 

- The Sopranos premieres on January 10th, 1999

- Who Wants To Be A Millionaire premieres on August 16th, 1999

- Survivor premieres on May 31st, 2000

- CSI premieres on October 6th, 2000

- The Weakest Link premieres on April 16th, 2001

- Fear Factor premieres on June 11th, 2001

- The Amazing Race premieres on September 5th, 2001

- 24 premieres on November 6th, 2001

- American Idol premieres on June 11th, 2002

 

And as much as it pains to say it, wrestling shows are essentially 3rd level TV shows ratings wise. At their peak, they're around 2nd level TV shows ratings wise (WWF was pulling in mid 6's and low 7's at their peak. For comparison, Buffy the Vampire Slayer's 3rd season in 1998 averaged a 5.3 on The WB). TV Ratings for 1998. Buffy was 120th so Raw would've been around the 110-115 range.

 

Although it didn't help that the "stars" were disappearing too. Steve Austin was gone from roughly November 1999 - March 2000. Triple H was gone from May 2001 - December 2001. The Rock was gone for parts of 2001 as well. Undertaker was gone from roughly September 1999 - May 2000. Mick Foley stopped wrestling in 2000 to serve as Commish.

[Enigma 0]

Some of this stuff is why I don't consider Chris Kreski that great of a booker. People put the blame on Steph being named head writer, but I think Kreski was still head writer when the Austin return angle semi tanked with Rikishi and the Angle/Steph/HHH deal petered out.

 

Kreski left in the middle of September 2000. WWF was still on USA when he left. He was gone before they even started Foley's investigation about who ran Austin over.

 

I think Unforgiven was Kreski's last show. After that, Stephanie took over. She was at the helm when Rikishi was revealed as the driver and the one who let the love triangle die with no resolution. HHH probably persuaded her to kill it because he admittedly doesn't like being a babyface.

[Beto Chavez 0]

I'd definitely say Austin's heel turn. I remember so many people were upset at the time.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Some of this stuff is why I don't consider Chris Kreski that great of a booker. People put the blame on Steph being named head writer, but I think Kreski was still head writer when the Austin return angle semi tanked with Rikishi and the Angle/Steph/HHH deal petered out.

 

Kreski left in the middle of September 2000. WWF was still on USA when he left. He was gone before they even started Foley's investigation about who ran Austin over.

 

I think Unforgiven was Kreski's last show. After that, Stephanie took over. She was at the helm when Rikishi was revealed as the driver and the one who let the love triangle die with no resolution. HHH probably persuaded her to kill it because he admittedly doesn't like being a babyface.

Unforgiven was Stephanie's first show as head writer.

 

I hate talking about the love triangle storyline because the ending really pissed me off. It was an awesome storyline that slow built over almost a year and was right on the cusp of being one of the best of the modern era. And then it gets squandered because of ego. I think this one turned off a lot people, at least in terms of getting emotionally invested in angles, because they'd spent nine or ten months on this one only to get the one ending they absolutely did not want instead of the one that virtually everybody was dying for.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

The thing is the company managed to survive the damage of botching the love triangle storyline and the Austin heel turn. We know that from the huge buy they got for the Invasion PPV. The interest was definitely still there at that point, and that is where the blew it. It was when they blew the one storyline that fans were waiting for for over a decade that things fell apart. The hot period was over by the time the angle ended at Survivor Series. If I was to point to one single thing about it that led to the decline, it would be Austin's heel turn to join the Alliance. That one was far more damaging in the long run than the one at Wrestlemania.

[Enigma 0]

By the time August 2001 rolled around, it was already dead. I specifically remember a Raw in Long Island, NY. The show was fucking terrible and the crowd was D-E-A-D. Long Island is usually hot no matter what, and they were pindrop quiet the whole show for everything. It was so bad, they had Paul Heyman start talking shit about the crowd between commercial breaks about how quiet they were.

[muda345 0]

I'm not sure about the late 90's, but right around 03-04, I feel wrestling really took a hit. I mean I stopped watching after 2001 but even then you could tell it was losing momentum. IMO I feel that a lack of top "big name" stars at the time were the problem. I mean didn't Bob Holly wrestle Brock Lesnar at a pay-per-view one time in 2004? I mean Bob Holly? Thats just one example. I just don't think you could taske your average mid carder and throw him into a feud with one of the top names and have people get interested

[foleyfanforever88 0]

I just don't think you could taske your average mid carder and throw him into a feud with one of the top names and have people get interested

 

Triple H vs. Taka

[Bigelow34 0]

I think the AOL/Time Warner merger was a huge blow. If Turner maintained control of his company, he would never have pulled the plug on WCW. Even if their product was waning, there would still be competition, a place for guys to go and the chances that one of the two promotions would rise up and fall into something like they did in the 90s are higher than they are with just one major company that can eschew and use up talent at will knowing that if they quit/leave there is nowhere prominent for them to go.

[Damaramu 0]

Well here's the thing.

 

Is wrestling right now creating new fans or are old ones still hanging on? Like ratings and buyrates drop as the old hanger-ons drop off. Or are a lot of those people gone and new fans come and go too quickly? You gotta think they aren't making a ton of new fans.

 

I know I quit watching around June 2004. I don't know why, I just got tired of the same old same old and quit. I have tried to come back and catch up on what I missed every year or so and then I just don't like what I'm watching and I quit again. Like right now I'm getting hardcore into the DVDs and trying to figure out everything I've missed since June 2004, but the more I'm finding out the more I'm not liking. I still like older stuff, but I really started disliking it in 2002 but just stayed on out of habit until 2004. And what has happened over the past 5 years since I stopped watching doesn't exactly grab me nor does what's happening right now.

 

That brings me to another point. Did I finally grow out of wrestling? Are the angles that happened between 2002-2009 really so much different than what happened in the 17 years previous that I watched? Is it really so much different at it's core? Or did I grow out of it? How many fans are growing out of it?

 

And if the thing is that I grew out of it and many other fans have, then is it possible for WWE to grow us back into it? Or do they need to keep going after new fans as much as possible?

[Papacita 0]

How much do we think the XFL factors into this? The WWF benefitted from a ton of mainstream media exposure in 2000, even if the wrestling stigma didn't completely go away. Stuff like the XFL and--to a lesser extent--the Bob Costas interview did a lot of damage to Vince McMahon's mainstream credibility, and outside of things like the Billy and Chuck Wedding or maybe the Mayweather stuff, I personally can't recall WWE even sniffing mainstream acceptance since.

 

Also, I'm a little surprised the Brand Extension hasn't been mentioned with respect to the boom. I remember back when I was running my e-fed, that was right up there with the Austin turn as far as why people were losing interest in wrestling.

 

At the end of the day, though, I think hardcore fans don't give enough credence to that "cyclical" argument, because for all the bullshit we got from 01-03 (and I'm being generous with that timeframe), there was no way they were gonna be able to sustain those 99-00 numbers because most of that was just fad interest. I've heard the argument that Laz brought up about promoters failing to push new faces and stuff like that...and while I'm sure pushing the same people all the time definitely hurts the company's drawing power in the long run, that kind of logic also kinda assumes that every new face that's pushed is gonna be as successful as the previous one, or that every new creative direction is gonna be popular when neither of those conclusions are by any means guaranteed. It takes a special set of circumstances to bring on a boom-like environment, and while stuff like Austin's turn and the botched Invasion definitely hurt fan interest, I don't think things would've been significantly better if they had either stayed the course they were going or if they suddenly decided to push an entirely new crop of stars because I'd bet that most of those fans who left weren't going to stick around anyway; it was really only a matter of when.

[Enigma 0]

I just don't think you could taske your average mid carder and throw him into a feud with one of the top names and have people get interested

 

Triple H vs. Taka

 

That wasn't a feud. It was a match that people go ballistic over because they thought HHH was just going to squash him and did a good job making you think Taka actually had a chance to win the WWF Title, especially with the APA patrolling ringside.

 

But it's where it is in people's minds because that's where it stopped. If they had extended that match into a feud and built King of the Ring '00 around Triple H vs. Taka Michinoku, people's reactions would have been a lot different. It's easy to get someone to suspend disbelief in the middle of a match that's already happening, but could you really convince people for 2-3 weeks that Taka Michinoku has a good chance to beat Triple H for the WWF Title and expect them to pay money to see it on a PPV? No.

[Nitro 24/7 0]

Lack of competition was critical. Sure, there were a lot of other factors... but when McMahon put his rivals out of business... his "motivation" to survive wasn't as strong as it was during '97 and '98.

 

Vince didnt put his rivals out of business, his rivals put themselves out of business.

 

It was a war. Talent jumping from different promotions, talent secretly jumping ship, trash talking , giving away results, big time matches up against other big time matches. The MNW era was the greatest era ever for wrestling fans. But Vince did not put anybody out of business. ECW went out of business for there own reasons (and there are many reasons), and WCW went out of business for there own reasons (and again there are many reasons) Vince was putting on a product that more fans decided to watch then WCW. Vince had better long term planning, built new stars into huge household names, made lots more money for his company, just simply made better business decisions then ECW and WCW. Its nobodys fault but there own that they went of business.

 

Look how much talent WCW lured from Vince from 94-98. Hogan, Hall, Nash, Piper, Savage, Luger, Bret, Henning, Rude, Bulldog, Anvil, Heenan, Mean Gene, Alundra Blaze, just to name a few. Look how much talent WCW lured from ECW, Benoit, Malenko, Eddie, Raven, Sandman, Saturn, Juvi, Pyschosis, Awesome, Storm, Douglass, Bam Bam, to name a few. WCW was clearly going in for the kill and trying to put both companies out of business. Vince on the other hand was financially helping ECW and giving them exposure. While WCW was luring away talent, Vince created huge stars like HHH, Austin, The Rock, Undertaker, Kane, The Outlaws, DX.

 

Its WCWs own fault they went out of business. Not Vinces.

 

Its ECWs own fault they went out of business. Not Vinces.

 

Like I said it was truly a war among all 3 promotions with all 3 trying to come out on top and put on the best product they could. In war there are casualties, and WCW and ECW are victims of the Wrestling War. Vince and WWE were victorious. The majority of wrestling fans decided that.

 

With all that said though, the death of WCW and ECW is what I believe ended the "wrestling boom"

 

Fans enjoyed watching 3 DIFFERENT great promotions putting on the best show they could. It was a very exciting time in wrestling.

 

All those promotions that Vince now owns (AWA, WCCW, SMW, CWF, WCW, ECW) went out of business because of there own poor business decisions/financial reasons. You cant hate Vince for putting on a superior product that more fans decided to watch then the other companies and for having much smarter business sense, and the ability to change with the times....(Im looking at you Verne Gagne).

 

I think WWE does a remarkable job in showcasing these promotions from there video library, much more so then the original owners did.

 

Remember this. Vince and WWE were very close to going out of business a few times from 94-97. Vince was competing against a Billionaire who owned his own TV Networks, and who was also signing the checks for Bischoff to lure over big name WWE Talent to Huge Money Contracts and less days to work. Its really amazing that WWE and Vince came out on top in this battle.

 

I think Vince said it best himself..."How do you compete with a Billionaire?...You become one yourself!"

[Enigma 0]

In fact, if it weren't for Vince's funding, ECW would have died a lot sooner than it did. I remember two months in early 1998 when they couldn't pay anyone.

[Craig Th 0]

And as much as it pains to say it, wrestling shows are essentially 3rd level TV shows ratings wise. At their peak, they're around 2nd level TV shows ratings wise (WWF was pulling in mid 6's and low 7's at their peak. For comparison, Buffy the Vampire Slayer's 3rd season in 1998 averaged a 5.3 on The WB). TV Ratings for 1998. Buffy was 120th so Raw would've been around the 110-115 range.

 

You can't really look at it like that.

 

The WB was available in more homes than USA Network was. I don't know the exact numbers (I will after someone hopefully reply's to me e-mail) but being a top of cable ratings with a 6 - 7 is really good.

[haws bah gawd 0]

Definitely Wrestlemania X-SEVEN. Starting the night after, things just didn't "feel" the same. Austin even said in his bio, "The Stone Cold Truth", that if he had to do it over again, after winning the title at WM17, he would have called an audible and Stunned Vince.

[Damaramu 0]

Well I for one always liked decent length title runs. That ended during the Russo era as did real long TV matches.

During 2000 it felt like titles meant more again and it felt like matches on TV were getting longer. It felt like some of the damage Russo had done was being repaired.

 

Then when the Invasion started there were 100 different titles and it felt like they all got passed around like a doobie at a Led Zeppelin concert. And TV matches just got shorter and shorter. And there seemed to be less and less quality angles and things felt slapped together.

Then came 2002 post-Invasion and I felt like everything was slapped together and nothing ever had any real build to it.

That's when my love started to die before it was killed in 04.

Yeah there were shorter matches and title merry-go-round during the Russo era but they did have a lot of the shock TV and shock value to keep people interested. The Invasion and post-Invasion really didn't have any of that for me.

 

Has any of this been repaired in the 5 years since I've watched? I know they have longer TV matches now, but titles still seem to be hotshotted and mean nothing in the long run. A lot of matches and angles still feel slapped together.

 

Like I said. I was a fan for so long that I keep going "What have I missed out on?" And I consider buying PPV DVDs and getting back into it but what I see from the main event level (it's hard to study the midcard after the fact for some reason) scares me away. They need a star or angle that's going to take jaded fans and drag them back in and not scare them off. I feel an angle like that will also bring in new fans as well and recreate the boom.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

In fact, if it weren't for Vince's funding, ECW would have died a lot sooner than it did. I remember two months in early 1998 when they couldn't pay anyone.

$1000 or so a week is not funding ECW. The idea Vince 'funded' ECW is way overblown.

[zhangmeijie 0]

I am tempted to say Vince Russo and his shit booking ended the boom period. At least on one side. I guess Austin and Rock taking a back seat had an effect on the other side.