BIG DUNC
Trap-Jaw
Wrestlecrap's #1 duncan Ferguson Mark
Posts: 445
|
Post by BIG DUNC on Jan 11, 2011 18:15:08 GMT -5
Love the logic going on, under 30, go to WWE, over 40, to to TNA, sure must suck to be 31.
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Jan 11, 2011 18:16:18 GMT -5
It's WWE making this decision if there is any truth to it, so of course they can make exceptions to it at will.
|
|
Remix
Trap-Jaw
Posts: 384
|
Post by Remix on Jan 11, 2011 18:17:12 GMT -5
*shrug* if you're in your thirties and have spent your life in the indies, chances are you suck and weren't going to get hired anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Slingshot Suplay on Jan 11, 2011 18:21:51 GMT -5
I guess the WWE is like Logan's Run now. When a wrestler turns 30, their only chance to Renew in a major fed is TNA.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Jan 11, 2011 18:33:39 GMT -5
Yeah, not buying this. WWE loves money too much for them to adhere to something like that.
|
|
|
Post by N E O G E O B O Y S on Jan 11, 2011 18:38:18 GMT -5
I think that the logic is that they only will hire rookies who are younger than 30
A semi famous indy superstar will get signed anyway
|
|
|
Post by itssoeasy23 on Jan 11, 2011 18:40:21 GMT -5
If this become's finalized, I'm sure their be some exceptions.
They should have it be under 40, or atleast 35. 30's a bit young.
If they had a chance to sign Sting, I'm sure they would.
|
|
andy82
Trap-Jaw
andy82, by request only
Posts: 429
|
Post by andy82 on Jan 11, 2011 19:11:35 GMT -5
Dirtsheets getting on the wrong end of the stick as usual.
It's good business practice to get young talent which they can take time to mold into what they want, rather than taking on older guys into development where they would most likely get no more than a few years at their peak. After all, do you see NFL teams drafting 30 years old's in the high rounds (Chris Weinke is the only exception I can think of) or soccer clubs having them in their youth system? I don't think so.
Plus, I would doubt they would turn down Indy/Foreign/Unsigned Stars if they have the chance to sign them (Could you imagine them in the recent past turning away Dos Caras Jr, Danielson, Jericho etc).
Dirtsheets will blow any bit of news out of proportion to fill up space on their crappy websites (Remember the day by day updates on WWE merging every single title just because they merged their crappy Tag/Womens Divisions?)
|
|
|
Post by abundantchoice on Jan 11, 2011 19:17:28 GMT -5
I guess the WWE is like Logan's Run now. When a wrestler turns 30, their only chance to Renew in a major fed is TNA. I can see the Impact Zone chanting "TRANSCEND! TRANSCEND!" With each new crop of age-related hires.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 19:20:07 GMT -5
Newz.
Just like the chop thing. It sounds believable at first but when you think logically about it, it doesn't make any sense at all.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Jan 11, 2011 19:23:22 GMT -5
Well, there goes any hope that Hoyt or Croft are gonna come back. I don't think the rule would apply to previous employees. They're already somewhat established.
|
|
|
Post by Alex Shelley on Jan 11, 2011 19:29:51 GMT -5
Well, there goes any hope that Hoyt or Croft are gonna come back. I don't think the rule would apply to previous employees. They're already somewhat established. I don't think either man could be considered "established", though
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Jan 11, 2011 19:34:15 GMT -5
I don't think the rule would apply to previous employees. They're already somewhat established. I don't think either man could be considered "established", though Sorry, I should have clarified. I didn't mean on TV, I meant established with the company as in they already know what both guys bring to the table.
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Jan 11, 2011 19:35:22 GMT -5
This would be awesome...if they weren't canceling NXT. That's what Tough Enough is for
|
|
|
Post by Alex Shelley on Jan 11, 2011 19:37:21 GMT -5
I don't think either man could be considered "established", though Sorry, I should have clarified. I didn't mean on TV, I meant established with the company as in they already know what both guys bring to the table. Ohh, okay, I see what you mean. This could be true.
|
|
nisidhe
Hank Scorpio
O Superman....O judge....O Mom and Dad....
Posts: 5,725
|
Post by nisidhe on Jan 11, 2011 23:29:46 GMT -5
I see why WWE would do this, and I'm really hating what their likely goal would be.
WWE may be looking to monopolize wrestling; get the rookies when they're young; train them for the WWE style of wrestling, oversee every aspect of their schedules and appearances, basically own them for the next 20 years. Meanwhile, they starve the indies of drawing power and ticket sales because other promoters can't get WWE "Legends" anymore - or for nearly as cheaply. Not to mention the pool of independent talent drying up because everyone wants into WWE's farm system because it's there or bust. Kiss the schools goodbye.
I'm not saying that this would be the inevitable scenario or that we'll see this right away. It makes sense, though, for the world's largest sports-entertainment company to try to dry up the last vestiges of North American competition. The result, however, would be a much poorer product from WWE, lacking in creativity or history. Much of wrestling as art has been lost already. Something like this could kill it entirely, even for WWE.
|
|
Fiddleford H. McGucket
El Dandy
My Mind's been gone for 30-odd years! Can't Break what's already broken!
Posts: 8,748
|
Post by Fiddleford H. McGucket on Jan 12, 2011 0:07:27 GMT -5
You know what....it might not be as bad or as far reaching as we're making it out to be.
Perhaps.....it's that they don't want rookies over 30. They seemed to stress the Developmental System in this edict. Maybe, like many have said they simply don't want to sink training time and energy into someone that will be "Too Old" in as few as 5 years down the line.
Face it, wrestling is an industry where retiring at 50 because of injuries is a REAL possibility, WWE simply wants to be able to get the rookies in thier formtive years, train them to "their" style, and have a roster once the Older ME starts retiring.
With a lack of Territories in this age, it makes sense to basically have an in-house "Breeding Ground" rather than simply poach from other companies.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Jan 12, 2011 0:09:13 GMT -5
Perhaps.....it's that they don't want rookies over 30. They seemed to stress the Developmental System in this edict. Maybe, like many have said they simply don't want to sink training time and energy into someone that will be "Too Old" in as few as 5 years down the line. That is pretty much how I was reading it. If your talented you still get your shot, they just don't want talent over 30 they have to groom and make ready.
|
|
|
Post by RI Richmark on Jan 12, 2011 8:51:47 GMT -5
I see why WWE would do this, and I'm really hating what their likely goal would be. WWE may be looking to monopolize wrestling; get the rookies when they're young; train them for the WWE style of wrestling, oversee every aspect of their schedules and appearances, basically own them for the next 20 years. Meanwhile, they starve the indies of drawing power and ticket sales because other promoters can't get WWE "Legends" anymore - or for nearly as cheaply. Not to mention the pool of independent talent drying up because everyone wants into WWE's farm system because it's there or bust. Kiss the schools goodbye. I'm not saying that this would be the inevitable scenario or that we'll see this right away. It makes sense, though, for the world's largest sports-entertainment company to try to dry up the last vestiges of North American competition. The result, however, would be a much poorer product from WWE, lacking in creativity or history. Much of wrestling as art has been lost already. Something like this could kill it entirely, even for WWE. With all due respect, I think you're reading way too much into this. First, I don't think the WWE cares that much about small indy promotions, which are no threat to them, that they have to take steps to crush them. Second, the WWE can't sign all the young wrestlers starting out. There are only so many spots in it's development system. The report is just saying that if the WWE is interested in someone they would prefer that person be in their 20's.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,142
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jan 12, 2011 9:42:43 GMT -5
Considering that if a guy isn't a main eventer by 37, we say he should be a jobber forever, it makes sense not to hire rookies over 30. If they spend 2 years in developmental, they'd have 5 years to work their way into the high-midcard with WWE's see-saw yo-yo booking, and ALSO have to hope that the main eventers that WWE was already riding gets out of their way.
They want 18-22 year olds that they can indoctrinate in the "WWE TV" style right away, and not have to make thm "unlearn" an indie style that doesn't play to the WWE Hard Camera setups first. Guys where they can take them and set their diet/eating plans, workout routines, etc... from their first day of training forward.
|
|