|
Post by Orange on Jan 30, 2013 19:36:44 GMT -5
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. I just don't see why it has to be one or the other. Why can't you have your regular guys be seen as important when the big guns are around? There's no reason that the WWE has to all but shove their regulars in the corner when it's Rock and Brock's turn - but they do. It's a happy medium they have to find, but they won't. It's all or nothing, and that's where the problem lies. So, in theory, it does hurt the main roster having them around - because they're seen as unimportant during the most important time of the year. Why even build them up all year long if they're just going to be cast aside for yesterday's big stars? And, in the casual fans' eyes, that hurts the product going forward. Because, if they tune in at any time other than Wrestlemania season, they're going to wonder who these hacks are because WWE makes it known that they aren't important. It's almost as if the active roster is just a placeholder for The Rock and Lesnar - and that hurts the current stars. So, the WWE can spend all year building up Bryan, Sheamus, Del Rio, Ryback and Ziggler - but if they make it known that they're not as important as Rocky and Lesnar - why should a casual fan even bother to tune in and support the product? If it's the casual fan WWE's after, they're doing an awful job at holding their attention after The Rock leaves for Hollywood and Lesnar eventually leaves to do whatever it is he does.
|
|
"Magic" Mark Hurr
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Here, have some chili dogs
Not related to Phantasmo
Posts: 15,741
|
Post by "Magic" Mark Hurr on Jan 30, 2013 19:48:08 GMT -5
I support the this thread. I've had this conversation with some of my friends. It begins to feel like what's the point afyer while. We could go back five years with examples of why there is such stagnation with the overall plan to create a new generation of stars that could carry the load. Not to mention how most of the existing wrestlers aren't allowed to really evolve.
|
|
|
Post by RowdyRobbyPiper on Jan 30, 2013 23:55:40 GMT -5
I'm torn.
One on hand, it is smart business to have Rock on top even as a special attraction. Plus, Punk did not come out of the RR looking that bad at all (if I was scoring the match on kayfabe points, Punk would be ahead) and Rock has looked vulnerable against the Shield. The only reason why Punk lost the title is because Vince (in kayfabe) let it happen. It was hardly a squash.
On the other hand, how many of the 1980's Wrestlemanias featured that totally awesome dream match of Bruno Sammartino vs. Pedro Morales?
I think if the Ultimate Warrior had not bombed as the WWF champ, Vince would have had more confidence in his creative instincts and would not have felt the need to go back to the well of easy nostalgic pops.
|
|
|
Post by youlookfly on Jan 31, 2013 0:05:16 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that the fact that they've been in a constant business slump for about 12 years has something to do with the fact that WWE tries to push the nostalgia so much. It could also attribute to the 90s nostalgia that is prevalent in culture in general means that WWE will, and should, try to cash in on Attitude Era stars as much as possible until the 90s nostalgia trend ends.
This is the first time in a while that they've been timely with a trend in popular culture, so the former stars thing should continue until the trend ends. Then, when a new trend begins, WWE will cash in on it, too. This way, they have a successful business model and some more leeway to take some risks on new guys considering they're not barely hanging on anymore.
|
|
Arrow
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,122
|
Post by Arrow on Jan 31, 2013 12:41:26 GMT -5
So, the WWE can spend all year building up Bryan, Sheamus, Del Rio, Ryback and Ziggler - but if they make it known that they're not as important as Rocky and Lesnar - why should a casual fan even bother to tune in and support the product? If it's the casual fan WWE's after, they're doing an awful job at holding their attention after The Rock leaves for Hollywood and Lesnar eventually leaves to do whatever it is he does. I think you're really missing the point I'm trying to make. We've established that the "casual fan" (for lack of a better term) are only going to pay for certain people, because those are the guys who entertain them most. We can assume those people are John Cena, Brock Lesnar, The Rock, Undertaker, and Triple H. To those people, the ones who they pay for - the attractions - were already more important. They're the reason those fans are even paying after all. WWE didn't make those guys more important because Rock/Brock/HHH/'Taker were already on that level before they became "special attractions". It's just how it is. Every generation will have people who are better than others. And to those fans, those guys are just on a separate level than everyone else. And WWE books them how they do because they realize that. Think about it for a second. Would it make any sense for Vince to intentionally book the attractions to be better (which makes no sense at all, since booking can't automatically make people better)? No. He would probably prefer that people pay for Sheamus/Punk/Ryback/etc. over those attractions because they're around more, and he could make more money off of them. If he thought it was a good idea, he'd probably have the younger guys main event. But the reality is that they're the best guys WWE has, and Vince treats them like such. In the meantime, he pushes the current talent for the rest of the year in the hopes that they too can achieve the same kind of success that the special attractions have.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,286
|
Post by The Ichi on Jan 31, 2013 14:03:17 GMT -5
This is the WWEs fault.
For years they happily coasted by and put their eggs in one basket instead of trying to aim higher. They're relying on the last huge guy they did create because they failed to replicate that after he left. I know it's lightning in a bottle trying to make a new Hogan, but Vince only put one bottle out instead of many.
|
|