Where's this decade's boom period?

[theryno665]

You know, I've been thinking something lately that might stir up some conversation. In the 80's, wrestling blew up with the Hulk Hogan/Rock N' Wrestling period. In the 90's, it blew up again with the whole Stone Cold/Attitude/Monday Night Wars period. But now that we're nearing the end of the 00's, there hasn't been a boom period where wrestling really broke out into the mainstream. I mean, the closest wrestling ever really got into the mainstream during this time period was with John Cena and his rap album, but that's kinda a stretch.

So how come? That's what I'm trying to figure out. Is it because there's no competition on the scale of the Monday Night Wars until TNA figures out a way to compete on the same level of WWE? Is it because the main draws (ie Triple H and John Cena) don't quite stack up to the likes of Hulk Hogan in the 80s and Stone Cold and The Rock in the 90s? Is it some other reason? Honestly, I can't figure it out myself. The odd thing is, it's not like the in-ring action is suffering. I don't watch regularly but it seems like the product is solid all around. But is it lacking the flash to catch the eye of new fans or old fans that have written off wrestling since the Attitude era died down? Are we on the cusp of a boom right now?

[Lance Uppercut]

Because every decade where there was a resurgence in Pro wrestling, something drastic happened to make it fresh again.

The 90's updated the product for it's aging audience who grew into a mature audience. Also the cable television landscape had improved drastically and the rise of the internet increase inside knowledge a great deal making it easier to keep up with what was going on and catch up.

The 80's presented Sports Entertainment for the children instead of the dirty wrasslin of years gone by. Not to mention the influx of cable television. Also the VCR was just introduced and Tape trading made it easier for wrestling fans to get foreign and hard to find programming. Not to mention Syndication was a bigger deal back then in North america, not the "not good enough for network tv" stigma we have going on now.

The 60's and 70's had the red hot territories and easing relations with foreign countries so we had the foreign evil heels.

Pro wrestling was hot until the 40's when people started suspecting it to be fake and it died down. It picked back up in the 50's with the advent of television. Studio Audiences and filming shows helped to save money and better plan out their programming also.

What could they possibly do to make things fresh for those of us who've already seen it a million times and the art of Kayfabe being dead? Not to mention the rise of MMA that's providing people with their need for organized violence without the "Oh it's fake" stigma attached to it. Not to mention the overexposed product that's actually making it easier to miss a show and catch up later.

[The Genesis of KoOS]

At the HO-TEL BAR!

[Krimzon]

It'll happen when Stephanie divorces HHH and marries John Cena. The McMahon-Cena Era will be in full swing!

[franchisedavis]

I don't think there will be one this time. I think alot of people/mainstream media focuses on UFC now and its going to hinder a boom period

[Nacho STAYS Hyped]

JR: My ass!

[rnrk supports BLM]

It's UFC. Just because it isn't technically called pro-wrestling doesn't mean it isn't appealing primarily to the exact same audience that watched wrestling for decades.

[BorneAgain]

Well what do you call those special couple of weeks on ECW in mid-July 2008? They had their chance to expand upon that boom period, and they blew it.

Seriously though, there's not been either a strong media opportunity (the 80s boom) or an impetus (90s boom) to really have the next big wrestling explosion.

As ridiculous as it may sound, WSX may have been the best chance for a strong change in a televised wrestling product, given how unconventional it was.

[Deleted]

the multiple deaths and scandals have definitely brought mainstream attention to WWE...but on a positive note WWE is branching out to show that normal celebrities are hardcore fans as well...with Trump, Seth Green, and now ZZ Top...wow

[rzombie1988]

Nothing has changed in years, which is part of the reason. Watch any WWE show and it feels like a rehash of the stuff from 10 years ago. Instead of pushing new stars and trying new things, WWE is relying on b-list celebrities and gimmicks to try and grab new fans, which will not and hasn't worked(minus the one commercial free raw).

UFC/MMA is the boom in every way, but it's not wrestling. There's no way you can look at it and say it's not the boom. It's making money even through small scale promotions, selling many PPV's, selling a ton of merchandise(go to any big public place and you'll see a few Affliction/Couture related shirts), and basically just doing what wrestling used to be able to do.

[Hanzo]

This decade's boom period ended with WrestleMania 17.

[The Summer of Muskrat XVII]

Jul 13, 2009 22:18:15 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

It's UFC. Just because it isn't technically called pro-wrestling doesn't mean it isn't appealing primarily to the exact same audience that watched wrestling for decades.

That's what I've been saying for a few years, and no one ever believes me. The kids who loved Hogan in the 80's/early 90's became the teens who loved the Attitude/MNW era and then became the 25+ crowd that loves UFC. I know very few male UFC fans who weren't at one point in time or another big fans of wrestling.

Although, that's not to say that WWE doesn't have a big audience, but I have a feeling it will never reach the levels it has in the past. It also doesn't help that during the Rock and Wrestlin' Era there was like 20 channels to choose from. During Attitude Era there was like 100. Now, there's like 500,000 plus indemand, plus computers that can stream video.

[The_Punisher]

It was supposed to come in 2007, but Benoit killed it.

Thats the truth.

[H-Fist]

Jul 13, 2009 22:39:03 GMT -5 The Summer of Muskrat XVII said:

Jul 13, 2009 22:18:15 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

It's UFC. Just because it isn't technically called pro-wrestling doesn't mean it isn't appealing primarily to the exact same audience that watched wrestling for decades.

That's what I've been saying for a few years, and no one ever believes me. The kids who loved Hogan in the 80's/early 90's became the teens who loved the Attitude/MNW era and then became the 25+ crowd that loves UFC. I know very few male UFC fans who weren't at one point in time or another big fans of wrestling.

Although, that's not to say that WWE doesn't have a big audience, but I have a feeling it will never reach the levels it has in the past. It also doesn't help that during the Rock and Wrestlin' Era there was like 20 channels to choose from. During Attitude Era there was like 100. Now, there's like 500,000 plus indemand, plus computers that can stream video.

I think the boom officially started this past Sunday night. Lesnar flipping off the fans made him the full blown heel Dana White both fears and needs. And the horseshoe up Frank Mir's ass? Well, Austin 3:16 says you just got yourself a marketable catchphrase. Gimme a hell yeah, alongside 1.5 million buys.

[odysseus]

Jul 13, 2009 22:39:03 GMT -5 The Summer of Muskrat XVII said:

Jul 13, 2009 22:18:15 GMT -5 rnrk supports BLM said:

It's UFC. Just because it isn't technically called pro-wrestling doesn't mean it isn't appealing primarily to the exact same audience that watched wrestling for decades.

That's what I've been saying for a few years, and no one ever believes me. The kids who loved Hogan in the 80's/early 90's became the teens who loved the Attitude/MNW era and then became the 25+ crowd that loves UFC. I know very few male UFC fans who weren't at one point in time or another big fans of wrestling.

I agree with this. Adding to your theory, I believe the next boom will happen next decade, when the 25+ crowd start introducing their little ones to wrestling.

Anyway, just because their is a pattern of the past, doesn't mean there it's set in stone there will be a boom period every decade. Lets be happy that it has survived so long.

This decade was kind of forgettable, where the product was so bland, it didn't really give a viewer to want to stay tuned. A part of the problem this decade was that guys like Austin and the Rock left premature due to hollywood and injuries. Lesnar and Lashley left early too. Then there were the deaths culminating with Benoit. That one hurt.

But to say WWE didn't boom isn't to say it didn't do well. It did make quite a bit of money. Hizah?

[James McCloud IS John Godot]

Three boom periods in 100 years of professional wrestling and now we're expecting one a decade?

[The Charismatic Enabeler]

I think we're just gonna have to settle with the 90's spill over we got at the start of the decade.

[The Line]

Jul 13, 2009 23:15:45 GMT -5 H-Fist said:

Jul 13, 2009 22:39:03 GMT -5 The Summer of Muskrat XVII said:

That's what I've been saying for a few years, and no one ever believes me. The kids who loved Hogan in the 80's/early 90's became the teens who loved the Attitude/MNW era and then became the 25+ crowd that loves UFC. I know very few male UFC fans who weren't at one point in time or another big fans of wrestling.

Although, that's not to say that WWE doesn't have a big audience, but I have a feeling it will never reach the levels it has in the past. It also doesn't help that during the Rock and Wrestlin' Era there was like 20 channels to choose from. During Attitude Era there was like 100. Now, there's like 500,000 plus indemand, plus computers that can stream video.

I think the boom officially started this past Sunday night. Lesnar flipping off the fans made him the full blown heel Dana White both fears and needs. And the horseshoe up Frank Mir's ass? Well, Austin 3:16 says you just got yourself a marketable catchphrase. Gimme a hell yeah, alongside 1.5 million buys.

when all is said and done with UFC and its time to look back, to really look back in depth, at its history, UFC 100 will be one of the biggest moments, if not the biggest, and not because it was the 100th big event(the fact that it was seems kinda inconsequential).

The Lesnar interview was basically UFC's "Night the Line was Crossed"/Bash at the Beach 96/Austin KoTR interview/"Bret Screwed Bret" moment.

[Gopher Mod]

Jul 13, 2009 23:45:49 GMT -5 James McCloud IS John Godot said:

Three boom periods in 100 years of professional wrestling and now we're expecting one a decade?

It's more or less relative boom periods, especially considering the rest of the decade.

It will be a long time until we see another boom period akin to Hulkamania in the mid-'80s.

As for this decade, I would say that there was a boom from 2000 to X-7. Since then, it's been more or less on a decline.

[Cavs for Mavs Mafia]

They only thing I really don't like about the WWE right now is the never ending HHH-Orton feud and the generally stale Raw ME scene. The under card is the best it's been in a very, very long time, hell even Mark Henry is getting over. People forget with the mega stars of Austin and the Rock that the under card was made to look important during the Attitude era.

However, I don't see a boom period coming for a while. WWE has found a way to maximize profits with the current fan base and don't have real competition to kick them in the ass. Plus the average fan has a lot less disposable income nowadays compared to the late 90s.