joeiscool
Unicron
Posts: 2,669
Member is Online
|
Post by joeiscool on Feb 1, 2015 22:33:41 GMT -5
I think from a marketing standpoint there is something people fail to realize, WWE is an entertainment company. They often see themselves Bigger than wrestling, and often look for characters and people that are bigger than life. They often trying to distance them selves from just being a wrestling show. People like CM punk are good wrestlers, but literally that's all he he is. I don't wanna see cm punk in a movie, hang out with him, or really see him do anything not in a wrestling ring. I admit, I kinda wanna see him in ufc but that is mostly because it seems like a car wreck waiting to happen. But if I want to see a movie star, I'll watch a movie. I watch wrestling so want to see wrestlers. That's the flaw. People don't watch RAW to see if a new guy turns up that would look great in a Transformers movie. YOU don't watch wrestling for that. Other people do.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 1, 2015 22:44:21 GMT -5
I just listened to Review an Impact, which has now became a must listen, with the wrestling discussion. I think it's good because they only talk to each other on the podcast once a week, and it's not over saturated with John and Wai, who I like, but some of their wrestling banter sometimes doesn't really come about due to how many podcasts they do. But they brought up Daniel Bryan, and Brian Mann brought up how a picture Daniel Bryan was tweeted out to by the Seattle Seahawks, which has 9 million twitter followers (or was it the NFL twitter, haha). Brian then asked Nate Milton, who does a podcast on sports in general, about the knowledge of Bryan to the mainstream sports public. And he said that he's known, though not as much as someone like Flair or Hogan, but the Yes chant is over with a lot of crowds, so that could go back to Bryan.
The thing is, Daniel Bryan is their mainstream top star, whether WWE believes it or not. Honestly right now, there is no "should he be the top guy". He's the top guy in the fans eyes, and I think he even has that over CM Punk when he was WWE Champion. While he was Champion, Cena was the top guy still over him. But right now, I think Daniel Bryan is the most over guy in the company, and he is the top guy. He's not being treated like one, and he's not viewed by the company as the top guy, but them's the breaks. He is their Steve Austin. He is their Rock. It's like, if in 1998, Steve Austin was the most over babyface, but they decided to go with, let's say, Ken Shamrock. They have it in their head that Ken Shamrock is the top guy (may not be the best example, Shamrock then is better then Reigns now, but work with me). And they pushed Shamrock as the top babyface, despite the fact that Austin was getting the loudest reaction. And on that podcast it was brought up about how people are mad because their guy didn't get in and the fans didn't get what they wanted. Well, in movies, you know what happens if the fans didn't get what they wanted? They don't see the movie, the movie does bad, and no one says, well, it's the fans' fault for not taking their medicine and going with the program in this shitty movie. Most TV shows, the successful ones for the most part, give the fans what they want. And also said on the podcast which was a great point, the backlash probably doesn't have to do with Roman Reigns, but it's years of bad writing and f***ing guys over that the crowd has pretty much no choice but to steer the ship in order to get what they want, which is what they're supposed to get in the end.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2015 23:01:54 GMT -5
But if I want to see a movie star, I'll watch a movie. I watch wrestling so want to see wrestlers. That's the flaw. People don't watch RAW to see if a new guy turns up that would look great in a Transformers movie. YOU don't watch wrestling for that. Other people do. Where are these other people? John Cena has an extremely marketable look, yet in his time on top the mainstream hasn't cared this little about pro wrestling since the New Generation. I know he sells t-shirts, but overall what they've been doing with Cena hasn't worked. If they try to do it again with Reigns for the next 5-10 years, it still won't work. The average Raw viewer is 41 years old and that number gets higher every time that statistic is released. WWE isn't bringing in new fans and the ones that have have slowly but steadily stopped watching. And it's not just because of the internet - other shows have seen their ratings hold steady or increase these last few years.
|
|
joeiscool
Unicron
Posts: 2,669
Member is Online
|
Post by joeiscool on Feb 2, 2015 0:26:18 GMT -5
YOU don't watch wrestling for that. Other people do. Where are these other people? John Cena has an extremely marketable look, yet in his time on top the mainstream hasn't cared this little about pro wrestling since the New Generation. I know he sells t-shirts, but overall what they've been doing with Cena hasn't worked. If they try to do it again with Reigns for the next 5-10 years, it still won't work. The average Raw viewer is 41 years old and that number gets higher every time that statistic is released. WWE isn't bringing in new fans and the ones that have have slowly but steadily stopped watching. And it's not just because of the internet - other shows have seen their ratings hold steady or increase these last few years. I think you are confusing age with being a smark. Just because you are 41 does not mean you dislike John Cena, or Roman Reigns, or even the wwe product. Also it's not about what the majority wants as much as certain demographics. So if most of the advertising money is for people lets say under the age of 25, and wwe has enough of that demographic to get advertising dollars they are going to try to cater to them, more than the older audience even if they make up the majority. Also I wouldn't call what the wwe is doing failing. They are consistently one of the the top rated programs in the country, their apps are doing millions, and the Network seems to be gaining steam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 0:40:21 GMT -5
Where are these other people? John Cena has an extremely marketable look, yet in his time on top the mainstream hasn't cared this little about pro wrestling since the New Generation. I know he sells t-shirts, but overall what they've been doing with Cena hasn't worked. If they try to do it again with Reigns for the next 5-10 years, it still won't work. The average Raw viewer is 41 years old and that number gets higher every time that statistic is released. WWE isn't bringing in new fans and the ones that have have slowly but steadily stopped watching. And it's not just because of the internet - other shows have seen their ratings hold steady or increase these last few years. I think you are confusing age with being a smark. Just because you are 41 does not mean you dislike John Cena, or Roman Reigns, or even the wwe product. Also it's not about what the majority wants as much as certain demographics. So if most of the advertising money is for people lets say under the age of 25, and wwe has enough of that demographic to get advertising dollars they are going to try to cater to them, more than the older audience even if they make up the majority. Also I wouldn't call what the wwe is doing failing. They are consistently one of the the top rated programs in the country, their apps are doing millions, and the Network seems to be gaining steam. If WWE had the demographics they needed they would have gotten the US television rights fees they thought they were going to get last year.
|
|
joeiscool
Unicron
Posts: 2,669
Member is Online
|
Post by joeiscool on Feb 2, 2015 0:57:25 GMT -5
I think you are confusing age with being a smark. Just because you are 41 does not mean you dislike John Cena, or Roman Reigns, or even the wwe product. Also it's not about what the majority wants as much as certain demographics. So if most of the advertising money is for people lets say under the age of 25, and wwe has enough of that demographic to get advertising dollars they are going to try to cater to them, more than the older audience even if they make up the majority. Also I wouldn't call what the wwe is doing failing. They are consistently one of the the top rated programs in the country, their apps are doing millions, and the Network seems to be gaining steam. If WWE had the demographics they needed they would have gotten the US television rights fees they thought they were going to get last year. You don't know that to be a fact... I don't even know that to be a fact... My point how ever is there is more to the WWE than just doing business to please smarks. Yes smarks are a part of the equation, but they will probably never be the target audience for any of the main shows, and probably for good reason.
|
|
Welfare Willis
Crow T. Robot
Pornomancer 555-BONE FDIC Bonsured
Game Center CX Kacho on!
Posts: 44,259
|
Post by Welfare Willis on Feb 2, 2015 0:58:25 GMT -5
I think you are confusing age with being a smark. Just because you are 41 does not mean you dislike John Cena, or Roman Reigns, or even the wwe product. Also it's not about what the majority wants as much as certain demographics. So if most of the advertising money is for people lets say under the age of 25, and wwe has enough of that demographic to get advertising dollars they are going to try to cater to them, more than the older audience even if they make up the majority. Also I wouldn't call what the wwe is doing failing. They are consistently one of the the top rated programs in the country, their apps are doing millions, and the Network seems to be gaining steam. If WWE had the demographics they needed they would have gotten the US television rights fees they thought they were going to get last year. I don't know Noggy, I think there was several factors there. I think Vince (in typical Vince fashion) oversold the number. I also think advertisers have this idea of wrestling in their heads as extremely low brow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 1:21:00 GMT -5
If WWE had the demographics they needed they would have gotten the US television rights fees they thought they were going to get last year. You don't know that to be a fact... I don't even know that to be a fact... My point how ever is there is more to the WWE than just doing business to please smarks. Yes smarks are a part of the equation, but they will probably never be the target audience for any of the main shows, and probably for good reason. There's a lot of wiggle room between booking just to please smarks and giving us John Cena Jr, that's my point. My issue is with what they're doing with Reigns, not that Bryan isn't on his way to breaking Bruno's WWE title record.
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Feb 2, 2015 1:34:49 GMT -5
The thing is, Daniel Bryan is their mainstream top star, whether WWE believes it or not. Honestly right now, there is no "should he be the top guy". He's the top guy in the fans eyes, and I think he even has that over CM Punk when he was WWE Champion. While he was Champion, Cena was the top guy still over him. But right now, I think Daniel Bryan is the most over guy in the company, and he is the top guy. He's not being treated like one, and he's not viewed by the company as the top guy, but them's the breaks. He is their Steve Austin. He is their Rock. It's like, if in 1998, Steve Austin was the most over babyface, but they decided to go with, let's say, Ken Shamrock. They have it in their head that Ken Shamrock is the top guy (may not be the best example, Shamrock then is better then Reigns now, but work with me). And they pushed Shamrock as the top babyface, despite the fact that Austin was getting the loudest reaction. And on that podcast it was brought up about how people are mad because their guy didn't get in and the fans didn't get what they wanted. Well, in movies, you know what happens if the fans didn't get what they wanted? They don't see the movie, the movie does bad, and no one says, well, it's the fans' fault for not taking their medicine and going with the program in this shitty movie. Most TV shows, the successful ones for the most part, give the fans what they want. And also said on the podcast which was a great point, the backlash probably doesn't have to do with Roman Reigns, but it's years of bad writing and f***ing guys over that the crowd has pretty much no choice but to steer the ship in order to get what they want, which is what they're supposed to get in the end. This is why it's incredibly frustrating that TNA doesn't have their shit together and spent the last five years digging their own grave instead of slowly building their brand. If TNA were a respectable second banana who could make a play for Daniel Bryan under the condition that he become their top guy who would also be treated like their top guy? It would be seismic. Hell, Vince and crew might not be pulling this garbage with Bryan at all if that were a very real possibility. This industry needs a WCW. WCW's very existence allowed Austin and Rock to become the superstars they are. Daniel Bryan deserves that same chance. His FANS deserve to see that happen. I think an unspoken frustration about all of this is that, yes, wrestling is a worked sport. It's entirely predetermined and was born out of carnival huckstery. However, there's always been this implicit understanding that if a guy was talented enough at the craft, was able to connect with the fans enough that crowds would be chanting for him at every opportunity, then that guy would rise to the top. That's the REAL sport behind it, and why more and more fans have gravitated towards following the backstage news since kayfabe started to die. Now that's been proven to be fake as well, leaving many of us to wonder what's left in actually watching. It's certainly not for the compelling storylines or gripping television. Why should I care if Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler have a really good match when it won't afford them any opportunities?
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Feb 2, 2015 1:53:39 GMT -5
I think from a marketing standpoint there is something people fail to realize, WWE is an entertainment company. They often see themselves Bigger than wrestling, and often look for characters and people that are bigger than life. They often trying to distance them selves from just being a wrestling show. People like CM punk are good wrestlers, but literally that's all he he is. I don't wanna see cm punk in a movie, hang out with him, or really see him do anything not in a wrestling ring. I admit, I kinda wanna see him in ufc but that is mostly because it seems like a car wreck waiting to happen. i don't think the "entertainers" need to be the absolute top guy. Miz is firmly in the Midcard and getting TV roles. The Divas barely get screen time yet Total Divas is a huge hit. I think if WWE wants people to be "more than wrestlers", they should look to the lower end of the roster rather than the top end. When an uppercard guy has to take a hiatus to do a movie, it affects the wrestling product. Give one of the lower tier guys a spot in a film, since they have fewer bookings on the wrestling show, they actually have more time to devote to those outside endeavors. Plus WWE doesn't have to come up with a contrived injury angle to write them out, which is ridiculous considering that said wrestler is apparently still healthy enough to work on a movie.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,493
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Feb 2, 2015 2:44:39 GMT -5
This is why it's incredibly frustrating that TNA doesn't have their shit together and spent the last five years digging their own grave instead of slowly building their brand. If TNA were a respectable second banana who could make a play for Daniel Bryan under the condition that he become their top guy who would also be treated like their top guy? It would be seismic. Hell, Vince and crew might not be pulling this garbage with Bryan at all if that were a very real possibility. This industry needs a WCW. WCW's very existence allowed Austin and Rock to become the superstars they are. Daniel Bryan deserves that same chance. His FANS deserve to see that happen. I think an unspoken frustration about all of this is that, yes, wrestling is a worked sport. It's entirely predetermined and was born out of carnival huckstery. However, there's always been this implicit understanding that if a guy was talented enough at the craft, was able to connect with the fans enough that crowds would be chanting for him at every opportunity, then that guy would rise to the top. That's the REAL sport behind it, and why more and more fans have gravitated towards following the backstage news since kayfabe started to die. Now that's been proven to be fake as well, leaving many of us to wonder what's left in actually watching. It's certainly not for the compelling storylines or gripping television. Why should I care if Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler have a really good match when it won't afford them any opportunities? I've seen people say this and I honestly don't get it. Daniel Bryan has never once showed any sign that he was unhappy or wanted to leave. Even if TNA were a huge company by now he still might now want to leave. Some people are quite happy working in the WWE and don't really care whether they wrestle in the main event or whether they wrestle the dark match, they just like to go out in front of an audience and get paid well to do so. All of this is really nonsense. Just because some fans are upset at the booking doesn't mean that Daniel Bryan, or any other wrestler, simply wants to quit. For all anyone knows Daniel Bryan could be extremely happy right now. He makes good money, is promoted well, gets to work and travel with his wife, a large fan base and a solid spot on the roster. There are plenty of people who would give anything to be in that position.
|
|
|
Post by ritt works hard fo da chickens on Feb 2, 2015 3:01:15 GMT -5
This is why it's incredibly frustrating that TNA doesn't have their shit together and spent the last five years digging their own grave instead of slowly building their brand. If TNA were a respectable second banana who could make a play for Daniel Bryan under the condition that he become their top guy who would also be treated like their top guy? It would be seismic. Hell, Vince and crew might not be pulling this garbage with Bryan at all if that were a very real possibility. This industry needs a WCW. WCW's very existence allowed Austin and Rock to become the superstars they are. Daniel Bryan deserves that same chance. His FANS deserve to see that happen. I think an unspoken frustration about all of this is that, yes, wrestling is a worked sport. It's entirely predetermined and was born out of carnival huckstery. However, there's always been this implicit understanding that if a guy was talented enough at the craft, was able to connect with the fans enough that crowds would be chanting for him at every opportunity, then that guy would rise to the top. That's the REAL sport behind it, and why more and more fans have gravitated towards following the backstage news since kayfabe started to die. Now that's been proven to be fake as well, leaving many of us to wonder what's left in actually watching. It's certainly not for the compelling storylines or gripping television. Why should I care if Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler have a really good match when it won't afford them any opportunities? I've seen people say this and I honestly don't get it. Daniel Bryan has never once showed any sign that he was unhappy or wanted to leave. Even if TNA were a huge company by now he still might now want to leave. Some people are quite happy working in the WWE and don't really care whether they wrestle in the main event or whether they wrestle the dark match, they just like to go out in front of an audience and get paid well to do so. All of this is really nonsense. Just because some fans are upset at the booking doesn't mean that Daniel Bryan, or any other wrestler, simply wants to quit. For all anyone knows Daniel Bryan could be extremely happy right now. He makes good money, is promoted well, gets to work and travel with his wife, a large fan base and a solid spot on the roster. There are plenty of people who would give anything to be in that position. Bret didn't want to quit either. Nor did HBK, but when someone else wanted them Vince paid attention to them. Macho and Vince were best of friends but because Vince wanted to retire Mach into a behind the scenes/commentator role and Mach still wanted to wrestle he had that opportunity. No one is saying they want DB to quit they just want WWE to make efforts to capitalize on what they do have like they did when they felt threatened. Complacency kills innovation. But it is unnecessary and arguably risky to break formula when you are ahead. It's a vicious circle. WWF took a lot of risks to kill off the territories and then became complacent and settled into a formula until Ted Turner decided he wanted to get into rasslin'. WCW took risks until they were winning then got real complacent themselves and started to leave people on the table that WWE began to capitalize on. Austin would have never been given a chance to main event Nitro, Vince loved driving home that point. Now he's in the Bischoff role of sticking to formula and ignoring the fans. By today's standards Vince could have kept Austin feuding for the IC title and he wouldn't/couldn't go elsewhere to earn the same money, and he could have stuck with main eventing Taker/HBK/Hart throughout the end of the 90s and probably into the start of the 2000s. Austin fans would still show up and spend money and he could still have his favs in the main so no problems right?
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,855
|
Post by Dub H on Feb 2, 2015 3:17:17 GMT -5
'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 12:13:30 GMT -5
I just listened to Review an Impact, which has now became a must listen, with the wrestling discussion. I think it's good because they only talk to each other on the podcast once a week, and it's not over saturated with John and Wai, who I like, but some of their wrestling banter sometimes doesn't really come about due to how many podcasts they do. But they brought up Daniel Bryan, and Brian Mann brought up how a picture Daniel Bryan was tweeted out to by the Seattle Seahawks, which has 9 million twitter followers (or was it the NFL twitter, haha). Brian then asked Nate Milton, who does a podcast on sports in general, about the knowledge of Bryan to the mainstream sports public. And he said that he's known, though not as much as someone like Flair or Hogan, but the Yes chant is over with a lot of crowds, so that could go back to Bryan. The thing is, Daniel Bryan is their mainstream top star, whether WWE believes it or not. Honestly right now, there is no "should he be the top guy". He's the top guy in the fans eyes, and I think he even has that over CM Punk when he was WWE Champion. While he was Champion, Cena was the top guy still over him. But right now, I think Daniel Bryan is the most over guy in the company, and he is the top guy. He's not being treated like one, and he's not viewed by the company as the top guy, but them's the breaks. He is their Steve Austin. He is their Rock. It's like, if in 1998, Steve Austin was the most over babyface, but they decided to go with, let's say, Ken Shamrock. They have it in their head that Ken Shamrock is the top guy (may not be the best example, Shamrock then is better then Reigns now, but work with me). And they pushed Shamrock as the top babyface, despite the fact that Austin was getting the loudest reaction. And on that podcast it was brought up about how people are mad because their guy didn't get in and the fans didn't get what they wanted. Well, in movies, you know what happens if the fans didn't get what they wanted? They don't see the movie, the movie does bad, and no one says, well, it's the fans' fault for not taking their medicine and going with the program in this shitty movie. Most TV shows, the successful ones for the most part, give the fans what they want. And also said on the podcast which was a great point, the backlash probably doesn't have to do with Roman Reigns, but it's years of bad writing and f***ing guys over that the crowd has pretty much no choice but to steer the ship in order to get what they want, which is what they're supposed to get in the end. How can WWE ever find the next Hogan/Rock/Austin etc. if they never even push their most popular stars to the top spot? The one thing those 3 have in common is that they were the most popular act in the company and got pushed to the moon. Thus, no top cultural icon type star has EVER been created by pushing a less popular act to the very top at the expense of their most popular act. So why even bother doing that?
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Feb 2, 2015 12:22:32 GMT -5
How can WWE ever find the next Hogan/Rock/Austin etc. if they never even push their most popular stars to the top spot? The one thing those 3 have in common is that they were the most popular act in the company and got pushed to the moon. Thus, no top cultural icon type star has EVER been created by pushing a less popular act to the very top at the expense of their most popular act. So why even bother doing that? Control. Pushing Reigns against the will of the live crowds and having him learn to be a champion on the job will limit his growth, he'll only get so far now because there'll always be a portion of the fans against him, but there's less chance of him outgrowing wrestling because of his limited growth potential as a forced star which is a plus for the WWE. There's little chance of him leaving to go do other media projects because there's more money or because he doesn't like how he's being treated and taking his fans along with him as people who had a more natural rise to the top have, guys like CM Punk, Rock and Jeff Hardy. He'll become like Randy Orton or Sheamus, champions without a fanbase who'll be theirs forever unless they screw up big time in public.
|
|
ICBM
King Koopa
Didn't know we did status updates here now
Posts: 12,288
|
Post by ICBM on Feb 2, 2015 13:03:52 GMT -5
Man this thread is on fire.
I just read a bleacherreport story on this topic that suggested WWE is using the backlash as part of the story going into wrestlemania. If they knew (they had to have, nobody is that dumb) that fans would react with heat againstReigns bc of Bryan, that is them taking one helluva chance man. I don't know if I believe it but it's possible that HHH could come up with that but Damn is that risky.
A few more cards need to flip before signs of successful manipulation appear. But if that was their plan going into the rumble and it works, than that is the greatest long con in wrestling history.
|
|
wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Feb 2, 2015 13:06:05 GMT -5
Man this thread is on fire. I just read a bleacherreport story on this topic that suggested WWE is using the backlash as part of the story going into wrestlemania. If they knew (they had to have, nobody is that dumb) that fans would react with heat againstReigns bc of Bryan, that is them taking one helluva chance man. I don't know if I believe it but it's possible that HHH could come up with that but Damn is that risky. A few more cards need to flip before signs of successful manipulation appear. But if that was their plan going into the rumble and it works, than that is the greatest long con in wrestling history. I think it adds a cool bit of depth that Roman not only has to go against the Beast, but has to prove himself in front of a sceptical fan base. I don't think it was really intentional, but it adds a nice bit of depth to his character. I think there's a good chance Reigns loses though in a heroic effort. Taking Brock closer than anyone else has managed is still a good way to be built up, then have Rollins cash in on Brock the night after, and Roman vs Rollins takes us into the summer.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 2, 2015 13:10:31 GMT -5
Bleacher Report is the Lord Haw Haw of wrestling. They will always find a way to defend the indefensible and are almost always wrong.
|
|
ICBM
King Koopa
Didn't know we did status updates here now
Posts: 12,288
|
Post by ICBM on Feb 2, 2015 14:14:16 GMT -5
Bleacher Report is the Lord Haw Haw of wrestling. They will always find a way to defend the indefensible and are almost always wrong. Wow brother, all I did was say they wrote an article. Relax man. I have read many true and correct statements and articles on bleacher. It was there I learned of Sting going to SS. Even if this isn't even close to true they suggest things against trends to incite discussion. Most news agencies do this as well. Just sayin you sounded pissed off. If you are mad about WWE's booking I understand
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 2, 2015 14:17:44 GMT -5
Their news reports may be correct, but their opinion pieces often defy all logic.
|
|