Little things to make wrestling more realistic

[HMARK Center]

We have a thread about what's "TOO fake", even for pro wrestling, but it got me to thinking about little things wrestling companies can do to add some more realism back to their product, or at least to improve the suspension of disbelief factor for the audience.

I think a lot of ideas can be concepts that used to be around in the old days, but there are certainly some newer ideas that could be explored.

I'll start with three: two concepts that are old school in nature, and one that's relatively new and could be applied to the modern wrestling scene.

(By the by, let's consider things that could be done by any or ALL wrestling companies, not just WWE...though since WWE is the biggest, it's cool if you want to focus on it.)

-Bring back the concept of a "winner's share of the money."
Very often things like managerial interference or desperation to win a seemingly meaningless match was often explained away, usually by Gorilla Monsoon, as somebody wanting to get the larger portion of the fight prize money.

They sometimes keep this alive by mentioning how the main champion tends to make more money/get more commercial exposure, but not very much.

-Makelong term on-air authority figures pretty neutral in terms of face/heel alignment.
Beyond the simple reality that the evil authority figure is just played out, it doesn't make much sense to have an authority figure who'd willfully alter the layout of a show just to put their favorite guys in more favorable situations, or visa versa. It applies to babyface authority figures, too; they're not quite so bad since they tend to act more fairly, but it's still silly if they lay out punishments for heels all the time.

-Make surefire submissions cause quicker tapouts.
With the rise of MMA, people see how quickly a juji gatame or a heel hook can tap even the toughest fighters out. While wrestling does need to have submissions held on for longer for drama's sake (most obvious example being Bret's sharpshooter on Stone Cold at WM XIII), it might add an interesting wrinkle to have certain submissions that simply get the job done faster, and the drama stems less from how long it's held on, and more from whether the guy can hook it on properly right away.

...I'd add "GET RID OF THE INVISIBLE BACKSTAGE CAMERA!", but I'd like this to be a list more about adding things and less about subtracting them.

[Nickybojelais]

No endless title matches for people who have already lost multiple times already.

Eg. Daniel Bryan -(loses title at WM28, rematch at Extreme Rules, then somehow loses match for the another World title at Over the Limit, No Way Out & finally(?) Money in the bank.

And also Del Rio with Sheamus.

[Arrow]

I find it really difficult to believe a guy like The Miz, a man who was once WWE Champion and main evented five pay-per-views in the year 2011 (one against The Rock, no less), would of his own accord stoop to wrestling for the Intercontinental Championship. Same thing with Christian. Why would both these guys go for a title that everyone knows is of a lower tier?

WWE has a real problem with establishing where a lot of their guys are on the pecking order. The Miz can be in the main event one night (Money in the Bank) and in the midcard the next (Raw 1000), and that makes absolutely no sense. What WWE should really consider doing is establishing a clear hierarchy within their own roster and can only go for certain titles within that hierarchy. My idea would be to establish certain divisions and separate wrestlers within that division.

For example, something like this:

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler}WWE Championship - Cena, Punk, Rock, HHH, Lesnar, Undertaker
World Heavyweight Championship - Sheamus, Orton, Rey, del Rio, Kane, Jericho, etc.
Intercontinental/US Championship - Kofi, Truth, Ryder, Santino, Cody, Swagger, etc.

After all, what's more realistic? Someone inexplicably losing the IC Champ one week, getting a World title shot the next? Or a clear division and ranking that explains why and how certain guys move up the ladder?

[SenorCrest]

WIth the rise of tout/twitter the GM can get on there and announce a few matches for Raw or ppvs.

[Dean-o]

Make wins/losses actually matter.

Crazy, I know.

[carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army)]

Among contracted, regularly appearing wrestlers on the roster, kill the hard and fast idea of any sort of tier or ranking.

The WWE hired these guys. Anyone they would hire should have the potential of fairly beating anyone else they would hire. Yes, that means Yoshi Tatsu should be able to beat John Cena (though that doesn't mean necessarily it shouldn't be kind of surprising if he did).
This would help everyone, and it would take away the deadening fact that losing one big match can utterly destroy a face's momentum. It relates to the OP's tapping-out issue: It shouldn't be that bad to lose a match: the roster is filled with the best of the best, so why would losing to someone like that be so bad?

This would have the added benefit of removing the phenomenon where the bookers apparently get confused about the inherent worth of a person and the competence they themselves have previously booked him to possess.

[The Doctor]

I'm not sure I want it to be too realistic. I prefer wrestling when it's a more stylised version of reality.
That is sort of what makes it so fun.

[Hit Girl]

- Stop breaking the fourth wall or allowing what should be backstage references and ribs being aired. We don't need to hear Michael Cole laughing at Howard Finkel or other dumb stuff like that which, without explanation to the audience, makes no sense at all.

- Stop cueing someone's entrance music before they run out for a surprise attack or save.

- Stop referring to the on-air product as "entertainment". WWE should use sporting terminologies and the kayfabe product should be promoted like a sporting organisation.

[Krimzon]

Jul 30, 2012 11:07:37 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

...I'd add "GET RID OF THE INVISIBLE BACKSTAGE CAMERA!", but I'd like this to be a list more about adding things and less about subtracting them.

Can't believe I'm about to say this, but TNA has it right on this one. The way they shoot backstage stuff is exactly how it should be: the wrestlers are aware the cameras are there and have actual interaction with them.

[The Doctor]

Jul 30, 2012 12:17:14 GMT -5 Hit Girl said:

- Stop cueing someone's entrance music before they run out for a surprise attack or save.

That is one of my very favourite things in wrestling.
It doesn't matter to me in the slightest that it's not realistic. It's exciting and fun.

To me taking away all the silly little quirks wrestling has built up over the years is to take away pretty much everything that is unique and fun about it.

[HMARK Center]

Jul 30, 2012 12:24:08 GMT -5 The Doctor said:

Jul 30, 2012 12:17:14 GMT -5 Hit Girl said:

- Stop cueing someone's entrance music before they run out for a surprise attack or save.

That is one of my very favourite things in wrestling.
It doesn't matter to me in the slightest that it's not realistic. It's exciting and fun.

To me taking away all the silly little quirks wrestling has built up over the years is to take away pretty much everything that is unique and fun about it.

Thing is, though, I don't think anybody wants to get rid of some of the ridiculousness; I still love watching 80's/90's wrestling and seeing the insane gimmicks, the promos that involved tons of yelling and hoarse voices, and things where I as an audience member can say "that's SO fake...but I don't care right now, it's working."

I just think a lot of us here feel there's been too much a dismantling of the suspension of disbelief since the Attitude Era; it's not about making wrestling just like MMA, but it's about taking wrestling's core concepts and keeping that suspension of disbelief intact in the modern era.

[The Doctor]

Jul 30, 2012 12:28:05 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

Jul 30, 2012 12:24:08 GMT -5 The Doctor said:

That is one of my very favourite things in wrestling.
It doesn't matter to me in the slightest that it's not realistic. It's exciting and fun.

To me taking away all the silly little quirks wrestling has built up over the years is to take away pretty much everything that is unique and fun about it.

Thing is, though, I don't think anybody wants to get rid of some of the ridiculousness; I still love watching 80's/90's wrestling and seeing the insane gimmicks, the promos that involved tons of yelling and hoarse voices, and things where I as an audience member can say "that's SO fake...but I don't care right now, it's working."

I just think a lot of us here feel there's been too much a dismantling of the suspension of disbelief since the Attitude Era; it's not about making wrestling just like MMA, but it's about taking wrestling's core concepts and keeping that suspension of disbelief intact in the modern era.

I feel like better writing and utilisation of the roster would be better for WWE than changing the established concepts.

Personally I think the more WWE attempts to look like a genuine sport the less people it will attract. Because people will just sneer and laugh at it because it fundamentally is not a real competitive sport. In my opinion WWE should, if anything, be highlighting the overblown, comic book aspects more. That way more would-be fans are likely to realise "Oh look, they get it. They aren't trying to fool me, this is just a show."

[Todd's crazy , Man.]

Jul 30, 2012 12:36:26 GMT -5 The Doctor said:

Jul 30, 2012 12:28:05 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

Thing is, though, I don't think anybody wants to get rid of some of the ridiculousness; I still love watching 80's/90's wrestling and seeing the insane gimmicks, the promos that involved tons of yelling and hoarse voices, and things where I as an audience member can say "that's SO fake...but I don't care right now, it's working."

I just think a lot of us here feel there's been too much a dismantling of the suspension of disbelief since the Attitude Era; it's not about making wrestling just like MMA, but it's about taking wrestling's core concepts and keeping that suspension of disbelief intact in the modern era.

I feel like better writing and utilisation of the roster would be better for WWE than changing the established concepts.

Personally I think the more WWE attempts to look like a genuine sport the less people it will attract. Because people will just sneer and laugh at it because it fundamentally is not a real competitive sport. In my opinion WWE should, if anything, be highlighting the overblown, comic book aspects more. That way more would-be fans are likely to realise "Oh look, they get it. They aren't trying to fool me, this is just a show."

But that's not right. As Cartoony as people think the Rock N Wrestling Era it was far less Cartoonish then the New Generation which was the lowest point in the company's history up until (in some people's opinion) today.

Plus even during the Rock N Wrestling you still had legitimate wrestlers like Steamboat and Harley Race on the roster. Even at wrestlemania 3 , the pinnacle of the Rock N Wrestling Era you had The Dynamite Kid , Bret Hart and Steamboat on that card , All guys known for there serious workrate.

[DragonMasterP]

Am I the only one here who hates worked shoots?

[carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army)]

Jul 30, 2012 12:36:26 GMT -5 The Doctor said:

Jul 30, 2012 12:28:05 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

Thing is, though, I don't think anybody wants to get rid of some of the ridiculousness; I still love watching 80's/90's wrestling and seeing the insane gimmicks, the promos that involved tons of yelling and hoarse voices, and things where I as an audience member can say "that's SO fake...but I don't care right now, it's working."

I just think a lot of us here feel there's been too much a dismantling of the suspension of disbelief since the Attitude Era; it's not about making wrestling just like MMA, but it's about taking wrestling's core concepts and keeping that suspension of disbelief intact in the modern era.

I feel like better writing and utilisation of the roster would be better for WWE than changing the established concepts.

Personally I think the more WWE attempts to look like a genuine sport the less people it will attract. Because people will just sneer and laugh at it because it fundamentally is not a real competitive sport. In my opinion WWE should, if anything, be highlighting the overblown, comic book aspects more. That way more would-be fans are likely to realise "Oh look, they get it. They aren't trying to fool me, this is just a show."

But someone with that mindset just isn't ever going to like wrestling, because kayfabe does have to be involved somehow. Someone who's just made up their mind that suspension of disbelief and getting tricked are the same thing is just someone who's already decided they're too cool for wrestling.

I think tales-of-the-tape and the like are welcome... it gives a sense of importance and adds to the drama. What DOESN'T help is this strange need to present wrestlers as tough guys. It's been at least two generations of performers since there was any need for these guys to seem like "real fighters" or like any actual respect was involved in winning a fake fight, but it's still desperately celebrated in "the business." The stars are all a bunch of hipsters and drama nerds.... admit it and work with it.

[HMARK Center]

Jul 30, 2012 12:56:37 GMT -5 DragonMasterP said:

Am I the only one here who hates worked shoots?

You're certainly not the only one. They tend to suck.

[The Doctor]

Jul 30, 2012 12:52:32 GMT -5 Todd's crazy , Man. said:

Jul 30, 2012 12:36:26 GMT -5 The Doctor said:

I feel like better writing and utilisation of the roster would be better for WWE than changing the established concepts.

Personally I think the more WWE attempts to look like a genuine sport the less people it will attract. Because people will just sneer and laugh at it because it fundamentally is not a real competitive sport. In my opinion WWE should, if anything, be highlighting the overblown, comic book aspects more. That way more would-be fans are likely to realise "Oh look, they get it. They aren't trying to fool me, this is just a show."

But that's not right. As Cartoony as people think the Rock N Wrestling Era it was far less Cartoonish then the New Generation which was the lowest point in the company's history up until (in some people's opinion) today.

Plus even during the Rock N Wrestling you still had legitimate wrestlers like Steamboat and Harley Race on the roster. Even at wrestlemania 3 , the pinnacle of the Rock N Wrestling Era you had The Dynamite Kid , Bret Hart and Steamboat on that card , All guys known for there serious workrate.

By no means am I saying to get rid of the technical wrestlers or anything like that.

I just feel like some of the suggestions in this thread are like trying too hard to come across as a genuine sport, which I think would be detrimental to the business. Embracing that it's a show and that each match is a story is the way to go, in my opinion.
By all means keep kayfabe strong and everything. But there's no need to work overly hard to make it seem deadly serious and real.

[Deleted]

What I would love to see is a ranking system. This heightens the drama, gets the audience invested in certain wrestlers, and most importantly, can be either a work-around reason not to, or a darn good excuse for having the same matches week after week. Cena loses to Big Show? He gets bumped down to #2 contender for the title, or even has to work his way up from the bottom, fighting guys like Heath Slater. This gives monthly PPVs a good reason to exist - always save the title matches for these.

Because of this system, add pre-determined line-ups for the following week's show. This takes away the idea that everyone shows up unaware of what's going to happen until the GM says, "you're having a match with so-and-so!"

On a related note, no more recurring, on-screen authority figures. Replace this with a board of directors. Guys in suits standing around yapping about corporate structure have no place being in a ring in front of a live audience. When the big-wigs actually appear on the show, it means what's going down is a huge deal.

[Deleted]

Jul 30, 2012 12:56:37 GMT -5 DragonMasterP said:

Am I the only one here who hates worked shoots?

I don't like them if they break kayfabe. A big thing I liked about CM Punk's "worked shoot" promo is that it didn't ever really break kayfabe. He talked about things such as not getting opportunities and the company preferring to invest in certain people, all things that are completely understandable and fit in kayfabe in their own way. In fact instead of breaking kayfabe it extended it, drawing things to your attention that (the average fan) may not have considered.

The idea of people being featured more prominently that can make more money doesn't mean "wrestling is fake" after all. It's no different than say...a boxing PPV being headlined by Mike Tyson (today) instead of a more talented but lesser known boxer.

[The Doctor]

Jul 30, 2012 13:01:44 GMT -5 carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) said:

Jul 30, 2012 12:36:26 GMT -5 The Doctor said:

I feel like better writing and utilisation of the roster would be better for WWE than changing the established concepts.

Personally I think the more WWE attempts to look like a genuine sport the less people it will attract. Because people will just sneer and laugh at it because it fundamentally is not a real competitive sport. In my opinion WWE should, if anything, be highlighting the overblown, comic book aspects more. That way more would-be fans are likely to realise "Oh look, they get it. They aren't trying to fool me, this is just a show."

But someone with that mindset just isn't ever going to like wrestling, because kayfabe does have to be involved somehow. Someone who's just made up their mind that suspension of disbelief and getting tricked are the same thing is just someone who's already decided they're too cool for wrestling.

In my experience there are people who just don't 'get' wrestling. When it is explained that it's a show and it's all one big story people start to understand it more. To this day, the question I get asked most when I say I like wrestling is 'You do realise it's fake, right?' to which I just laugh and make the point that 'Yes, I do. That's why I watch it'.

There are still a lot of people out there who just don't can't quite get their heads around what WWE/Wrestling actually is. If it was made slightly clearer that no one believes it's real any more and that we all just watch it in the same we watch films or read comics etc I think those people would see the appeal more.

Although I do agree that there are many people who just refuse to get it. But you can't do anything about them.