|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Jan 29, 2013 21:33:38 GMT -5
But the present has to be thought about, too - just as much as the future, because if you're not putting on a product people want to watch now, they might not see a reason to come back in the future - especially when you realize that you're paying Rock and Brock plenty of $$$ and in order to make good on that they need to be used to their full potential. I agree with you on that. But the problem is that they just KEEP bringing back the old names because they're trying to avoid or delay having to push anyone new. And I don't like the "Everyone gets bumped down a level" effect that it has on the roster as well. Over the past month we've seen Miz on Superstars, and Kofi pulling Superstars duty three weeks in a row, which means a spot on Superstars is taken from someone on the lower end as well. Big deal. Kofi is never going to be a big star. He doesn't have the it factor ever be the level of a Cena or WWE champion period. I like Koji he is a talent in ring wrestler. But he been pushed several times and failed each time. Why? because he lack mic skills or in anyway showing character. What is his character? The smilling black guy from othe islands? The Miz has falling a lot of whatever reason. I can make more a case on his as he does have it. He was an awesome heel WWE champion. He can cut promos and work in the ring. I find it funny the "old" guys people are complaining about. Are 40 look at every wrestler at that age and tell me where they where on the card. I'm talking not the Rock or Lesnar. How most of them where Champion.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on Jan 29, 2013 22:30:34 GMT -5
With all due respect, that's a crock of crap. Even for our "savior," the Rock, if he had to make Rocky Maivia work, he wouldn't be one of our great ones. It really isn't. Plenty of people get dumb stuff to work with and do it. For example, when you get right down it, Kane's gimmick is incredibly stupid and he's had horrible storylines. And yet he's made it all work. That's no excuse. That never answered my question; in fact, it practically dodged it. Plenty of people are able to work with dumb stuff; Kane's one of them. But clearly Rock wasn't one of them, yet rather than being released for not being able to make the Blue Chipper thing work, he got something else to work with and now he's treated like the greatest man that ever lived. So what about the guys who have gotten over using scripts? I assume that guys like Sheamus, Orton, ADR, Kane, Bryan, Ryback are all cutting promos using the scripts that the same writers give everyone else and they've done rather well for themselves. Having license to say whatever you wanted wasn't a guaranteed way to get someone over back in the Attitude Era, and having a script isn't going to cripple your ability to do well either. Kane isn't exactly a spring chicken; he has heat still from the 90's and I'd wager he isn't even being fed scripts. Of the other people you noted: RyBack got over by being a complete beast, as did Sheamus who, both as a heel in 2010 and as a face in 2011, was booked very strongly. Same with Randy Orton, who ended up getting over as a face during his psychopathic run in 2009, which saw him nailing Triple H with a sledgehammer and putting him on injury a month later. Who does that leave in your list? A technical genius in Bryan and a similar veteran ebbed and flowed based on booking; he was hot originally, then he got bulls***ted into apathy, and now that he's being booked to matter, he's getting reactions again (like common sense would predict "magic"). Booking and wrestling, that's what got them over; I'd be pleasantly surprised if anyone on this entire board could come up with a significant promo between the five of them during the time in the WWE. Further, even if they weren't able to get over on their own words, so what? That means they just don't have it. Whatever happened to sink or swim? Keep in mind, we never got the Attitude Era or all these other gilded eras with the "let 'em float because we're afraid to cut the tethers" mentality.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jan 29, 2013 23:32:31 GMT -5
Honestly, I think you can make a case that WWE keeps going askew because they keep trying to get back the same generation of fans: those of us who began as little Hulkamaniacs, grew into nWo-ites or Stone Cold fans, and then grew up, period.
It's funny how it worked: ECW, the nWo, and the Attitude Era were largely resultant from responding towards the "Hulkamania generation" reaching puberty and early adulthood, and being smack dab in the middle of the post-modern, deconstructionism heavy late 90's. The tonal shift to swearing, scantily-clad women, "hardcore" violence, etc., was all something that stemmed from that trend.
Yes, Vince has since shifted his show to a "PG" tone; one could argue this was an attempt to cultivate a new generation of fans, as the Hulkamania kids are now into their 20's and 30's, but it's pretty clear that it was a proactive move to set the stage for Linda's Senate campaigns.
Yet look at the DVD's that keep coming out, look at the old names that keep getting trotted out, and listen to the overall tone: "the old days were better, and we know it". That's the message, loud and clear, very often.
For as much as I look back fondly on the 80's and early 90's, and wish aspects of it would come back, you can't just keep going back to the well for us 80's/early 90's kids. We're grown up: some of us are pushing 40. Many of us have families of our own, careers, other interests. For the vast majority of kids, wrestling doesn't stick as a long-term hobby, it just doesn't.
Put simply: all of us, from about ages 25-40, we're dinosaurs at this point. We had what appealed to us, we had the stars that appealed to us, but even if you trot them out for cameos and now for title runs...sorry, most of us ain't coming back.
|
|
|
Post by woowoowoox on Jan 29, 2013 23:41:33 GMT -5
It's their own fault. We don't wanna see the stars they have now because they're boring. Thus, we want the old guys back who are actually fun to watch. It's simple, really.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 29, 2013 23:45:26 GMT -5
It's their own fault. We don't wanna see the stars they have now because they're boring. Thus, we want the old guys back who are actually fun to watch. It's simple, really. I'm sure there were old school wrestling fans who felt that way about the talent in the Attitude Era - that shouldn't stop them and it's definitely not an excuse. And, because it didn't, we have the legends from that era that we do. If the WWE did that in the 90's - we don't get The Rock, Kane, Undertaker or Stone Cold. Instead, everybody would just rehash their love for Hogan, Warrior, Backlund and Bret Hart. It's just that they don't want to commit, they'd rather go the nice, easy nostalgic route. And it makes money, so they're going to, but it's not the fault of the current crop of talent.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 5:06:21 GMT -5
That never answered my question; in fact, it practically dodged it. Plenty of people are able to work with dumb stuff; Kane's one of them. But clearly Rock wasn't one of them, yet rather than being released for not being able to make the Blue Chipper thing work, he got something else to work with and now he's treated like the greatest man that ever lived. On Rock's DVD, concerning the anti-Rock chants he was getting during that time, Pat Patterson said something to the effect of, "at least they're chanting your name" (paraphrased, obviously). Even if Rocky Maivia wasn't ideal and Rock wasn't really "ready" yet (remember that Kane went through a couple different gimmicks before landing on one that worked), Rock still clearly had the potential, which is why WWE could continue to use him. That doesn't sound like he wasn't able to make it work. What's really important is that, whether they liked him or hated him, even as the Blue Chipper he still got people to care about him in the end. Most times any one of those guys end up cutting a promo, they get reactions based on what they say, reading from the scripts written by the same writers that everyone else gets. That's the point. I'm not talking about why they got over (something that "good booking" isn't automatically going to afford to you. We have enough failed pushes in history to realize that this isn't true. Why do people still cling to this?), I'm talking about the fact that they - Orton especially - can still get entire crowds to cheer the things they say, not matter how silly the jokes are or how monotone the delivery is. The scripts don't hinder any of them. Therefore, they shouldn't hinder anyone else who has the ability to engage an audience. That mentality still exists. There are plenty of guys WWE sees nothing in who don't get to show up on Raw. Those are the people who weren't able to work with what WWE gave them. I prefer the Attitude method of letting people get their own characters over without scripts, but people have shown that they're able to succeed in spite of them.
|
|
|
Post by celtics543 on Jan 30, 2013 14:37:37 GMT -5
No doubt the new guys are getting over but they never seem to rise above anyone. I mean back in the Attitude era you had Rock, Austin, Undertaker, Kane, Foley, HHH, Angle, Jericho, Benoit, etc. who were all booked as top guys and all were credible in matches against each other. No one was ever brought in from the outside that was booked above all of them. That's the problem. Rock and Brock, and even HHH and Undertaker are being brought back and booked above everyone else on the roster. It's as if no one has a shot against them. In the long run this is going to hurt the product. When those guys aren't around people are going to be saying, "ya these new guys are ok but they'd never be able to hang with the guys I used to watch". That's what everyone from the 80's said about the Hogan era until they got to the Attitude era and let guys prove themselves again.
It would've been like if Hogan had come back at Wrestlemania 18 and beaten the Rock. Hogan outpopped Rock that night and many people probably bought the ppv to see Hogan again. I know I did. But Hogan lost to the Rock to put over the new generation of guys, which the Rock was a part of then. Austin put over Rock on his way out to put over the newer generation. Rock has ALWAYS been willing to job to guys, I don't see why the feuds that they build up always have to end with Rock getting his hand raised. At least have him lose once so it looks like he could lose.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on Jan 30, 2013 15:13:34 GMT -5
That never answered my question; in fact, it practically dodged it. Plenty of people are able to work with dumb stuff; Kane's one of them. But clearly Rock wasn't one of them, yet rather than being released for not being able to make the Blue Chipper thing work, he got something else to work with and now he's treated like the greatest man that ever lived. On Rock's DVD, concerning the anti-Rock chants he was getting during that time, Pat Patterson said something to the effect of, "at least they're chanting your name" (paraphrased, obviously). Even if Rocky Maivia wasn't ideal and Rock wasn't really "ready" yet (remember that Kane went through a couple different gimmicks before landing on one that worked), Rock still clearly had the potential, which is why WWE could continue to use him. That doesn't sound like he wasn't able to make it work. What's really important is that, whether they liked him or hated him, even as the Blue Chipper he still got people to care about him in the end. Most times any one of those guys end up cutting a promo, they get reactions based on what they say, reading from the scripts written by the same writers that everyone else gets. That's the point. I'm not talking about why they got over (something that "good booking" isn't automatically going to afford to you. We have enough failed pushes in history to realize that this isn't true. Why do people still cling to this?), I'm talking about the fact that they - Orton especially - can still get entire crowds to cheer the things they say, not matter how silly the jokes are or how monotone the delivery is. The scripts don't hinder any of them. Therefore, they shouldn't hinder anyone else who has the ability to engage an audience. That mentality still exists. There are plenty of guys WWE sees nothing in who don't get to show up on Raw. Those are the people who weren't able to work with what WWE gave them. I prefer the Attitude method of letting people get their own characters over without scripts, but people have shown that they're able to succeed in spite of them. Well, I guess that's just a difference of opinion. You think it's okay for them to lean on the Attitude Era stars and rest on their laurels - that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I just have a different opinion. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 15:23:08 GMT -5
That's not my opinion at all. What I'm saying is that they're using their special attraction guys for a boost now while putting their younger, more promising talent in memorable non-main event spots so that they can use them in the future. For some reason, people seem to think current guys must be in the Top 3 matches at WrestleMania NOW or they won't mean anything in the future. Which makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on Jan 30, 2013 15:30:45 GMT -5
What exactly is the future, though? This argument about bringing back the all-stars to raise buyrates was what was used last year! We had Rock/Cena and HHH/Taker II last year, supposedly to attract new viewers for when they eventually (if ever, it seems like) push new talent. Today, we're looking at Rock/Cena II and HHH/Lesnar II, again, to attract new viewers for when they eventually - again, if ever - push new talent. Yet, for some reason, I fear I have no reason to believe that we're gonna be seeing the exact same people in the main event for WrestleMania XXX; and again, the same reason will be given as it was two years ago: To attract new viewers for when they eventually, if ever, push new talent.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 16:11:34 GMT -5
The "future" is whenever one of the upper-card guys gets popular enough that WWE feels he'd make them more money than Cena/HHH/'Taker/Rock/Brock (or whenever they decide that they just can't/don't want to go anymore). That's when new people will finally see the main event of shows like WrestleMania. Until then, those five are the people WWE's going to rely on to sell their big shows.
No one on the current roster has reached their level yet. And it's not because WWE is misusing Sheamus/Ryback/ADR/Ziggler/Bryan, or not showcasing them enough, it's that the aforementioned five are just that good.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on Jan 30, 2013 16:19:08 GMT -5
Well, of course they're "that good." When all the other guys you mentioned take a backseat to the all-stars whenever they come around (and they don't have to deal with the crap booking of the new generation), why wouldn't they be seen that way? The Attitude Era didn't happen because someone said "okay, they're over enough now. We can stop using Hogan," it happened because they had no choice. Tragically, they do now - I say tragic because since they can, they will. They'll use Rock and Taker and Triple H and everyone else they can to temporarily jump ratings while their future floats in the undercard, rather than being given a chance to sink or swim. Meanwhile, everyone will talk about how they can't hold a candle to the guys given a chance to sink or swim and, predictably, stop watching whenever said all-stars aren't there to keep interest.
Again, it seems like we're going in circles, so I'm gonna go with my earlier sentiment and agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 30, 2013 16:20:21 GMT -5
ArrowBut that goes back to the Attitude Era argument - look at the two biggest (arguably, I guess) names from the Attitude Era - The Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia. Gimmick hell if I'm ever seen it. But, when given the chance to shine (mainly because WWE didn't have a choice thanks to WCW taking all of their top guys), they made it happen and became household names. Hell, Hollywood put aside, The Rock is still a household name because of what he accomplished in the Attitude Era. These guys aren't really being given that chance, in my opinion, because WWE would rather go the nostalgic route. It's not even that those guys are that good, it's that nostalgia blinds people and makes them want to relive the "good ol' days". And because of this, we'll never see a future of the WWE, because Vince and Co. are so damn hell-bent on rehashing the Attitude Era and all of its stars. The Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia were given the chance to make it work - WWE isn't giving the current crop of guys the same chance because they're so hung up on past relevance and success.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 16:31:05 GMT -5
ArrowBut that goes back to the Attitude Era argument - look at the two biggest (arguably, I guess) names from the Attitude Era - The Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia. Gimmick hell if I'm ever seen it. But, when given the chance to shine (mainly because WWE didn't have a choice thanks to WCW taking all of their top guys), they made it happen and became household names. Hell, Hollywood put aside, The Rock is still a household name because of what he accomplished in the Attitude Era. These guys aren't really being given that chance, in my opinion, because WWE would rather go the nostalgic route. It's not even that those guys are that good, it's that nostalgia blinds people and makes them want to relive the "good ol' days". And because of this, we'll never see a future of the WWE, because Vince and Co. are so damn hell-bent on rehashing the Attitude Era and all of its stars. They are that good. In order to even get to the point where they could be used the way they are now, they have be "that good", otherwise nobody would even pay to see them. Notice how Chris Jericho never gets the same treatment when he comes back, despite being around almost as long as the Rock. Because, good as he is, he's not as talented as they are. And he's had several chances. The current roster gets plenty of chances. In 2012, Rock, 'Taker, HHH, and Brock competed on three out of the twelve pay-per-views. The current guys got the rest. That's not including for Raw, SmackDown, Saturday Morning Slam, NXT, Superstars, and Main Event. With so much programming and pay-per-view time, are you really going to tell me they don't get chances? Bryan, Ziggler, Orton, Sheamus, Punk, and ADR get plenty of mic time and title reigns. They get their opportunities to get noticed in the same that the attractions aren't there. And WWE is still using Rock/Brock/everyone else in their main events despite that, because they're still more likely to make WWE money. And Vince knows that. That's not a slight on any of those guys. I acknowledge their talents, and I personally enjoy seeing some of them (well, Bryan), but Cena and the attractions are just currently better.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 30, 2013 16:35:16 GMT -5
ArrowBut that goes back to the Attitude Era argument - look at the two biggest (arguably, I guess) names from the Attitude Era - The Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia. Gimmick hell if I'm ever seen it. But, when given the chance to shine (mainly because WWE didn't have a choice thanks to WCW taking all of their top guys), they made it happen and became household names. Hell, Hollywood put aside, The Rock is still a household name because of what he accomplished in the Attitude Era. These guys aren't really being given that chance, in my opinion, because WWE would rather go the nostalgic route. It's not even that those guys are that good, it's that nostalgia blinds people and makes them want to relive the "good ol' days". And because of this, we'll never see a future of the WWE, because Vince and Co. are so damn hell-bent on rehashing the Attitude Era and all of its stars. They are that good. In order to even get to the point where they could be used the way they are now, they have be "that good", otherwise nobody would even pay to see them. Notice how Chris Jericho never gets the same treatment when he comes back, despite being around almost as long as the Rock. Because, good as he is, he's not as talented as they are. And he's had several chances. The current roster gets plenty of chances. In 2012, Rock, 'Taker, HHH, and Brock competed on three out of the twelve pay-per-views. The current guys got the rest. That's not including for Raw, SmackDown, Saturday Morning Slam, NXT, Superstars, and Main Event. With so much programming and pay-per-view time, are you really going to tell me they don't get chances? Bryan, Ziggler, Orton, Sheamus, Punk, and ADR get plenty of mic time and title reigns. They get their opportunities to get noticed in the same that the attractions aren't there. And WWE is still using Rock/Brock/everyone else in their main events despite that, because they're still more likely to make WWE money. And Vince knows that. That's not a slight on any of those guys. I acknowledge their talents, and I personally enjoy seeing some of them (well, Bryan), but Cena and the attractions are just currently better. Chris Jericho doesn't get that same treatment because he doesn't want that same treatment. He doesn't want to be in that demigod bubble. He wants to use his star power to make people look good. While the attractions don't directly take anyone's spot, a huge problem I see is is that guys like Bryan, Ziggler, Miz, etc. get bumped down to the C-shows, and thus limiting the C-show regulars' opportunities to shine.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 16:38:07 GMT -5
Well, of course they're "that good." When all the other guys you mentioned take a backseat to the all-stars whenever they come around (and they don't have to deal with the crap booking of the new generation), why wouldn't they be seen that way? But they were good even before that, otherwise they wouldn't be where they are now. Even if Hogan, Savage, Warrior, etc. weren't working for WWF in the Attitude Era, they were still very much in the public's eye. They were working for WCW. And Austin and Rock become more popular through their own talents, enough that they got fans to stop watching Hogan and the nWo and watch them instead. Because Hogan and everybody else where directly competing against them. They needed guys who were better than Hogan was (at that time, obviously. Neither Austin nor Rock were the draws Hogan was overall). The stars of Attitude didn't get over because WWE passed the torch and the old guys went away, they were just good enough to get fans to stop watching Hogan. Now the situation with current WWE is there doesn't seem to be anyone good enough to get fans to stop wanting to see Rock and Brock, and see them instead. So WWE uses the best people they have. But they have been given the chance. I mean, what, the other months when the special attractions weren't around weren't enough chances? What else can WWE realistically give them?
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on Jan 30, 2013 16:40:04 GMT -5
Sigh. I can't say anything I haven't said already, and I'm not gonna repeat myself. So again; going in circles, agree to disagree.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 16:41:11 GMT -5
Chris Jericho doesn't get that same treatment because he doesn't want that same treatment. He doesn't want to be in that demigod bubble. He wants to use his star power to make people look good. If Jericho were on the level of Rock/Brock/HHH/'Taker, I have real doubts Vince would willingly leave money on the table and not use him to his fullest potential. Jericho also seems like a smart enough guy to know how terrible an idea that would be (judging by his past comments on Rock, anyway). Jericho's at a point where he's a credible, popular name but unlike any of those aforementioned guys he was never someone who was ever big enough to carry a show, and his one WrestleMania main event had him getting overshadowed by The Rock and Hulk Hogan. So WWE doesn't lose a lot by having him put over other guys.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 30, 2013 16:52:37 GMT -5
But they have been given the chance. I mean, what, the other months when the special attractions weren't around weren't enough chances? What else can WWE realistically give them? Arrow, the problem isn't them being there - it's the elevated status they get when they come back. You're right, WWE spends the majority of the year building up their own stars, but what good does all that buildup do when the special attractions waltz in and they're immediately downgraded? All that buildup gone to waste, because they're treated like lowly rookies compared to the big, bad veterans. All that shows fans is that those guys shouldn't be taken seriously when the special attractions aren't around.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 30, 2013 19:21:49 GMT -5
But they have been given the chance. I mean, what, the other months when the special attractions weren't around weren't enough chances? What else can WWE realistically give them? Arrow, the problem isn't them being there - it's the elevated status they get when they come back. You're right, WWE spends the majority of the year building up their own stars, but what good does all that buildup do when the special attractions waltz in and they're immediately downgraded? All that buildup gone to waste, because they're treated like lowly rookies compared to the big, bad veterans. All that shows fans is that those guys shouldn't be taken seriously when the special attractions aren't around. But what I'm saying is the reason they step back is because more fans pay for the attractions. So WWE, in their eternal quest for more money, have to cater to them as well. And the reason the attractions are more popular is because of how good they are, and their current booking on Raw is an effect of that, not the cause for it. The current guys have their fans who'll pay for them throughout the year, but when we're dealing with the biggest show of the year, WWE has to cater to Rock and Brock's fans as well.
|
|