|
Post by slickster on Mar 22, 2010 22:36:40 GMT -5
I'm not sure that the card *has* to draw in casual fans in order to be the best ever. You've got four top storylines, each with at least four months of buildup and development. You've got every single top star of the past five years healthy and booked onto the card. None of the top four angles have really been derailed or lost much in the way of crowd heat en route to the PPV.
|
|
|
Post by madness50 on Mar 22, 2010 22:36:58 GMT -5
17 wins this one, but this Mania will be a good show and has a fantastic lineup.
|
|
|
Post by slickster on Mar 22, 2010 22:42:53 GMT -5
17 is overrated with respect to its card. Remember, Angle-Benoit was booked a week before the PPV, Austin-Rock was dragged down by the inclusion of Debra as Rock's manager, Chyna-Ivory was dragged down by Chyna's 'neck injury' angle, Tazz/APA-RTC was a thrown-together match...there are some dumb things that dragged down that show's momentum.
|
|
|
Post by The Great El' PANDA King on Mar 22, 2010 23:12:28 GMT -5
It's by far the best since 19.
Not one match that I'm not looking forward to in some way.
|
|
|
Post by biggdeez40 on Mar 22, 2010 23:56:14 GMT -5
I'm not sure that the card *has* to draw in casual fans in order to be the best ever. You've got four top storylines, each with at least four months of buildup and development. You've got every single top star of the past five years healthy and booked onto the card. None of the top four angles have really been derailed or lost much in the way of crowd heat en route to the PPV. Agree. I can't remember the last time non of the top guys were injured. To me a full roster and long term storylines beat out any celebrity involvement or media hype.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Mar 23, 2010 0:18:13 GMT -5
With the possible exception of the Undertaker, I don't think there's a single real, major *STAR* on this card. It's probably the best card that can be assembled with the current roster, but we're nowhere near a boom period and there's very little on here that's going to draw in anyone who isn't already following the product. In what wrestling world are these guys not stars? Taker, HBK, HHH-the established stars. Cena, Batista, Orton-the newer stars. And WrestleMania shouldn't be drawing in people that aren't following the product. Do you honestly believe that anyone not following the product would drop 50-60 bucks for any possible card you could book?
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on Mar 23, 2010 1:05:33 GMT -5
In what wrestling world are these guys not stars? Taker, HBK, HHH-the established stars. Cena, Batista, Orton-the newer stars. In the world of Hulk Hogan, Andre the Giant, the Ultimate Warrior, Stone Cold Steve Austin, and the Rock, among others. I don't think it was just the diehard fans who tuned in to see if Hulk could slam Andre. Again, I think the current Wrestlemania card is the strongest possible with the roster, but there really isn't anyone in the current crop of main eventers (with, again, the arguable exception of Undertaker, but he's always been more a special attraction than a headliner) who has that star power to rope in people who don't already care about pro wrestling in general or make them go "Wow, I *HAVE* to see this." We've got several guys who are on a level of popularity and recognition equivalent to Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels during the mid-'90s. And that's nothing to be ashamed of, but I'd hardly call a card headlined by those names the biggest Wrestlemania in history.
|
|
barley96
Dennis Stamp
This is the biggest Mickie James mark
Posts: 4,170
|
Post by barley96 on Mar 23, 2010 1:10:23 GMT -5
No but we are supposed to think so.
|
|
variable
AC Slater
Stroke Me Lady Fame
Posts: 123
|
Post by variable on Mar 23, 2010 1:18:46 GMT -5
can't really know until we see the matches play out.
|
|
|
Post by slickster on Mar 23, 2010 1:20:49 GMT -5
In what universe is John Cena not a star on the level of Stone Cold or Hulk Hogan? Dude's won more WWE titles than either of them and is the #1 merchandise guy in the company. In kayfabe he is on their level. Just because you didn't grow up watching Cena matches doesn't mean he's not good.
Also, this is not 1992. WWE is not on the brink of bankruptcy or in the midst of a steroid controversy.
|
|
|
Post by slickster on Mar 23, 2010 1:23:45 GMT -5
And WrestleMania shouldn't be drawing in people that aren't following the product. Do you honestly believe that anyone not following the product would drop 50-60 bucks for any possible card you could book?
|
|
|
Post by perpetualn00b on Mar 23, 2010 2:00:44 GMT -5
On paper, yes. It doesn't spike like some others (there's no match with the sheer magnitude of Hogan-Andre or Rock-Austin), but the total package averages higher, IMO, on average then any other yet.
|
|
BxB
Unicron
Only the shift key stands between him and copyright infringement.
Posts: 2,849
|
Post by BxB on Mar 23, 2010 2:03:18 GMT -5
It's actually a very balanced card and looks pretty stacked on paper. Outside of WM 17, I'd say it's the biggest.
|
|
Fade
Patti Mayonnaise
Posts: 38,294
|
Post by Fade on Mar 23, 2010 2:28:29 GMT -5
Best card since WMXIX.
But this keeps getting compared to X7, which was not only one of the best WMs of all time, but easily considered the peak of the Attitude Era.
Seems like this is the peak of whatever-the-hell-we-call-this-Era.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Mar 23, 2010 2:36:51 GMT -5
In what wrestling world are these guys not stars? Taker, HBK, HHH-the established stars. Cena, Batista, Orton-the newer stars. In the world of Hulk Hogan, Andre the Giant, the Ultimate Warrior, Stone Cold Steve Austin, and the Rock, among others. I don't think it was just the diehard fans who tuned in to see if Hulk could slam Andre. Again, I think the current Wrestlemania card is the strongest possible with the roster, but there really isn't anyone in the current crop of main eventers (with, again, the arguable exception of Undertaker, but he's always been more a special attraction than a headliner) who has that star power to rope in people who don't already care about pro wrestling in general or make them go "Wow, I *HAVE* to see this." We've got several guys who are on a level of popularity and recognition equivalent to Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels during the mid-'90s. And that's nothing to be ashamed of, but I'd hardly call a card headlined by those names the biggest Wrestlemania in history. So you have to be in the top 5-6 best of all time to be a star now? You're crazy if you think that ANY person that doesn't care about pro wrestling would order a wrestling PPV because of the card- including Andre-Hogan. Andre could come back from the dead and fight Hogan and no one that doesn't care about wrestling would drop 50 bucks on it. Wrestlemania is about getting the wrestling fans excited enough to order the PPV, not to bring in new fans. And PS, John Cena is way above the level of mid-90s Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels popularity and recognition wise.
|
|
|
Post by corndog on Mar 23, 2010 2:40:49 GMT -5
17 is overrated with respect to its card. Remember, Angle-Benoit was booked a week before the PPV, Austin-Rock was dragged down by the inclusion of Debra as Rock's manager, Chyna-Ivory was dragged down by Chyna's 'neck injury' angle, Tazz/APA-RTC was a thrown-together match...there are some dumb things that dragged down that show's momentum. I agree, I was actually about to watch WM17 too, but still I don't see how it was a better card than this. Okay Angle/Benoit was a dream match. HHH/Undertaker was pretty good. But Austin/Rock was done to death before this match, it wasn't nearly as fresh as Cena/Batista. Angle/Benoit is matched, actually exceeded by Taker/Micheals because of the stipulation. HHH/Undertaker is not as good as Jericho/Edge. Then you add in Vince/Bret, a match people have been waiting for since 1997. Also the undercard was weaker than this WM, minus the TLC tag title match.
|
|
|
Post by Alex Shelley on Mar 23, 2010 2:43:52 GMT -5
Lolwat, John Cena isn't a star? HBK isn't a star?
Wooooow. Looks like somebody ate their failcake this morning.
|
|
Fade
Patti Mayonnaise
Posts: 38,294
|
Post by Fade on Mar 23, 2010 2:51:49 GMT -5
17 is overrated with respect to its card. Remember, Angle-Benoit was booked a week before the PPV, Austin-Rock was dragged down by the inclusion of Debra as Rock's manager, Chyna-Ivory was dragged down by Chyna's 'neck injury' angle, Tazz/APA-RTC was a thrown-together match...there are some dumb things that dragged down that show's momentum. I agree, I was actually about to watch WM17 too, but still I don't see how it was a better card than this. Okay Angle/Benoit was a dream match. HHH/Undertaker was pretty good. But Austin/Rock was done to death before this match, it wasn't nearly as fresh as Cena/Batista. Angle/Benoit is matched, actually exceeded by Taker/Micheals because of the stipulation. HHH/Undertaker is not as good as Jericho/Edge. Then you add in Vince/Bret, a match people have been waiting for since 1997. Also the undercard was weaker than this WM, minus the TLC tag title match. Austin/Rock was the biggest match on that card. It didn't matter if it had been done before. Because those two were incredible performers, who on that night were at the peak of their game. The two biggest..in the industry..both loved...doing what they did best. Nothing and I mean nothing on this card or in the last few years touches Austin/Rock. Period. And how can you say HHH/Undertaker isn't as good as Jericho/Edge when that match hasn't even happened yet? And Vince/Bret? I'm sorry, but the story's been okay, but not nearly as good as it could have been and I think most realize that. And no way it touches Vince/Shane which was one hell of an entertaining match that told a dramatic story what with the involvement of Trish and Linda. What made WMX7 so amazing wasn't that it was ME match after ME match, it was that it built up to the ME. If you subscribe to Al Snows theory that every show has "One Pop", then WMX7 is your prime example. If we use 26 as an example, I'm pretty sure that "One Pop" is gonna happen with Taker/Michaels which will most likely (and unfortunately) not be The Main Event.
|
|
Thrillho
Dennis Stamp
0 Days since last "incident"james.anderson1989jamesandersonmusicJimBillAnderson
Posts: 3,740
|
Post by Thrillho on Mar 23, 2010 3:12:56 GMT -5
It's certainly got the most high profile matches in a long time, and except for the Triple Threat Hardbore title match, I'm looking forward to the whole card.
It's got every kind of big match you could ask for. The possible final outing of a legend*, the two biggest names in the business facing off for the belt, two former friends finally facing each other, the rookie taking on the veteran (The SHHHeamus match), and the culmination of one of the biggest feuds in history, and the aforementioned excuse to go put my traditional PPV nachos in the oven.
*3 legends. If HBK loses, he retires, and it's a foregone conclusion that Vince and Bret won't be getting in the ring again.
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on Mar 23, 2010 3:22:07 GMT -5
So you have to be in the top 5-6 best of all time to be a star now? Not necessarily; you may very well have a far more lenient definition of stardom than I do, it's hardly something set in stone. But that said, we've had Wrestlemanias in the past that have, indeed, been headlined by multiple stars who could easily be considered among the top draws the business has ever produced. Wrestlemania 26 has none of these men on the card. I'd say that in of itself makes it extremely unlikely, regardless of match quality, that this will be anywhere near the "biggest Wrestlemania in history". And you're taking an excessively simplistic outlook (or arguing with a strawman) if you're classifying people solely as fans and non-fans. There's a tremendous difference between the people who follow the various shows regularly and argue about the angles over the internet, and the people with a mild interest in wrestling, who might tune in now and then when they've got nothing better to do, are really only familiar with the main eventers, and aren't aware TNA is a separate company, if they've heard of it at all. There's a large portion of WWE's extended fanbase out there that wouldn't order Wrestlemania solely because it's Wrestlemania, but could have their interested piqued into buying with an appealing enough product. To take your analogy, drop any of the four big matches scheduled from Wrestlemania 26 and replace it with Zombie Andre vs. Hogan. I imagine that'd get a significantly larger buyrate than the current lineup would, and a fair amount of those extras buys wouldn't come from people who watch RAW every week, or who even explicitly identify themselves as "wrestling fans". Quite possibly, but I'd say his success is far closer to the level of those two than to Hogan or Austin. I don't exactly see another boom period around the corner. At any rate, since I seem to be inciting the ire of several other impassioned defenders of the stars of the "post-Attitude" era, and this discussion is veering off topic anyway, let's continue this via PM if you've got any more to add.
|
|