|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Feb 26, 2015 8:12:41 GMT -5
Isn't the OP basically the same stuff many here have posted roughly once every 2 minutes since the Rumble? If you were able to read the full article, then no. It's very in-depth and makes several points that haven't been touched on. And yeah, it was behind a paywall. Didn't realise, my bad. I recommend subscribing to the Observer or at least getting a free trial or something (they do those right?). It's a very good read.
|
|
|
Post by N E O G E O B O Y S on Feb 26, 2015 9:06:40 GMT -5
In some senses, I understand Vince point of view of using Reigns as "the guy" beyond Bryan, he thinks that Bryan will not increase his viewership in the same way than a guy like reigns will, and I was in part convinced with that this month, with fans giving up the fight and with Bryan at points not being very over like people here try to claim, as a matter of fact, Bryan isn't as over as he was last year when people went full force to see him winning the title, now I had the feel that most people where happy to see his big moment last year and they were done with it, also is true like meltzer said that his chant overall was bigger than him (not saying that he wasn't over per se, but the chant became a symbol of rebellion, now it doesn't)
Now, my big problem and like Meltzer said, is that reigns isn't over, people don't cheer wildly for him and don't boo him that hard neither, people don't care, he doesn't had the momentum, and that imo is a bigger sin that not putting bryan in the main event, I really think that the WWE killed the reigns project like they did with luger, if they waited one year and used him with more expertise and crowd connection as a singles guy, people would have clamoring for him, but now that's gone, and he got cena hate without getting cena support.
The WWE did an amazing job at killing the momentum of all their superstars with their booking, Bryan, Reigns, Ambrose, Cesaro, Ziggler could have been way more over than they are today and they never capitalized with that, in some senses, I'm starting to think that this generation will be lost just like the new generation and the OVW/ FCW generation (the one after cena, batista, lesnar and orton appeared), one just had to hope that the NXT guys who seem to had lots of potential, could be saved for the f***ing job that the WWE did.
The WWE could be profitable, but as an company, I can't see them growing in the way on how operate their business and when a company can't grow, they had more probabilities of going down that staying afloat
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 26, 2015 9:17:39 GMT -5
I may be in the minority who isn't upset at Reigns in the main event. I agree that he isn't ready, maybe they should have used Bryan instead and waited a year on the mega-push, but I still am optimistic that this could be a fun match. The thing that I'm more upset about is that the people like Bryan, Ambrose and Ziggler are floating around with nothing to do because the WWE has forgotten how to book the midcard. Particularly in Ambrose's case where he was this close becoming a mega-star, and they instead turned him into a comedy character and fed him to Bray Wyatt (who will subsequently job to the Undertaker). None of these people have to necessarily become the face of the company, but the fans need to be given some kind of payoff to the investment they are making in these guys. Otherwise, people just lose interest. Yeah, it's a double whammy here: not only have they reserved beating Lesnar for Reigns, the ultimate "anointing the new top guy" victory of the modern era, but they've also begun the final month before Wrestlemania...and guys like Ziggler, Ryback, and even Daniel-freaking-Bryan don't have matches for it yet, let alone feuds, let alone even angles for it. Say HBK was still around on some level, and they decided to have him and Bryan have a match, play off Bryan having been a student at Michaels' wrestling school back in the day; that'd at least be a sign that Daniel Bryan still matters, because that'd be a main event level match that Bryan would likely go over in. But they have one month to do something, and there's jack squat in the offing. The SD spoilers hint at something, but nothing of particular note. I think the issue is moreso a matter of them not wanting to do another big Authority vs Everyone else match with the amount of times they've done that recently. Because even if you look at Mania last year, there were only 7 matches on the main show and 1 was a divas match. Last year you had Title match, Triple H match, Undertaker match, Cena match, battle royal, and Shield match. This year you already have Title match, Triple H match, Undertaker match, Cena match, and Randy Orton match already set. All 5 of these pretty much have to happen no matter what, so some guys would have to be pushed back simply due to the amount of room. I mean even if it was Bryan vs Lesnar, then what would Reigns be doing? He'd be in the same spot of "Nothing to do either" so the issue still would exist in terms of stuff for guys to do. But as of right now Big Show and Kane both have nothing to do so maybe they'll play a role in something or everyone will be in the battle royal. If they make the battle royal worth something then maybe they can get away with it. Ziggler by the way was in the battle royal last year. Couldn't remember what he did last year and I guess that's why
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Feb 26, 2015 9:22:35 GMT -5
...I...eh...guys, really? Ok, a wrestler that won a world title last year is probably going to compete for a second ranked title this year. And people are on the verge of tears? Please, please don't take this as an attack, but I'm genuinely shocked if that's serious. It's not like Daniel Bryan is a Walking Dead character and he just got killed by a walker. He just can't win the shiny thing he wants this time. Imagine you've spent 10+ years loving someone with all your heart, and then one day realising that they've stopped loving you back. Then the doubt creeps in, maybe they never loved you? I think it's the realisation setting that WWE doesn't value them as fans any more, and that maybe they never did. It doesn't matter who they cheer for any more, because the cream only rises to the top if management says it does. As I said earlier in the thread, I've known for a long time now that what I want from WWE is not what they want to give me, and I've made my peace with that and tried to enjoy WWE's programming as best I can (with less than satisfying results). I suspect a number of posters on this thread are going to be doing something similar in the coming months. I've felt I'm no longer the target audience of certain things I enjoyed in the past as well, but I'm sorry, this example is too melodramatic for me, especially for something as innocuous as the WWE.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 26, 2015 9:31:49 GMT -5
The problem in WWE is more widespread than just Daniel Bryan. He's the most prominent example, but evidence of popular, talented guys who have got over, and still been marginalised or outright buried is obvious.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,664
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Feb 26, 2015 9:52:21 GMT -5
I'll never get the business arguments.
Traditional logic is that the champion is responsible for ratings, buy-rates and general business.
Unless Daniel Bryan is involved then it's down to him as the title chaser not the champion Orton who according the article is good for business even though buy-rates were down during his reign because of Bryan? It also doesn't matter if one of those events is as badly built as Battleground.
Reigns is also responsible for business as a chaser and gets credit for the network subscriptions going up even though he's not champion. However that was at the time the network launched in the UK which is one of WWE's biggest markets and they had a free trial on top of that. Curtis Axel could have took his rightful place as the rumble winner and subscriptions would still be up, WWE would be in massive trouble if they weren't in that situation.
Then apparently The Rock being on a PPV makes him responsible for a buy-rate but even he got a bad one with that S.Series tag-match, that turned out to be Awesome Truth's fault though. Either way it had nothing to do with the champion.
It all makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Feb 26, 2015 9:57:38 GMT -5
Imagine you've spent 10+ years loving someone with all your heart, and then one day realising that they've stopped loving you back. Then the doubt creeps in, maybe they never loved you? I think it's the realisation setting that WWE doesn't value them as fans any more, and that maybe they never did. It doesn't matter who they cheer for any more, because the cream only rises to the top if management says it does. As I said earlier in the thread, I've known for a long time now that what I want from WWE is not what they want to give me, and I've made my peace with that and tried to enjoy WWE's programming as best I can (with less than satisfying results). I suspect a number of posters on this thread are going to be doing something similar in the coming months. I've felt I'm no longer the target audience of certain things I enjoyed in the past as well, but I'm sorry, this example is too melodramatic for me, especially for something as innocuous as the WWE. Yeah but no offence, this is coming from the guy who makes threads saying he can't enjoy WWE because Cena is being booed exactly like he has been for the past 10 years.
|
|
Crimson
Hank Scorpio
Thank you DWade
Posts: 6,511
|
Post by Crimson on Feb 26, 2015 10:00:24 GMT -5
Sure, you may not be Hulk Hogan. But there's nothing the f*** wrong with being Mr. Perfect.
|
|
Crimson
Hank Scorpio
Thank you DWade
Posts: 6,511
|
Post by Crimson on Feb 26, 2015 10:08:55 GMT -5
Honestly, I just find the entire concept of "The Guy" to be completely toxic, from both a business and a fan standpoint. Business-wise, you run the risk of having your Brock Lesnar's who feels he's outgrown the company and decides to bail. From the fan end, you get people who resent one wrestler getting pushed at the expense of another.
Honestly, I think the company would be better off if they just dropped the entire idea of their being a number 1 and just push multiple people.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Feb 26, 2015 10:11:27 GMT -5
I've felt I'm no longer the target audience of certain things I enjoyed in the past as well, but I'm sorry, this example is too melodramatic for me, especially for something as innocuous as the WWE. Yeah but no offence, this is coming from the guy who makes threads saying he can't enjoy WWE because Cena is being booed exactly like he has been for the past 10 years. His boos represent the gap between me and too many WWE fans. I realize people are tired of the old guard and stalled pushes, but I don't have an issue with Superman characters if the guy playing them is good enough. Mainly I don't watch because I'm just a little bored with WWE now, but I also don't feel like watching crowd after crowd crap on that anymore.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,202
Member is Online
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Feb 26, 2015 10:26:19 GMT -5
Honestly, I just find the entire concept of "The Guy" to be completely toxic, from both a business and a fan standpoint. Business-wise, you run the risk of having your Brock Lesnar's who feels he's outgrown the company and decides to bail. From the fan end, you get people who resent one wrestler getting pushed at the expense of another. Honestly, I think the company would be better off if they just dropped the entire idea of their being a number 1 and just push multiple people. The worst of it is that that's part of what WWE wants. But not only do they want you to resent a wrestler, they want you to resent his fans, too. And they make it all too easy to do just that.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Feb 26, 2015 10:29:41 GMT -5
Honestly, I just find the entire concept of "The Guy" to be completely toxic, from both a business and a fan standpoint. Business-wise, you run the risk of having your Brock Lesnar's who feels he's outgrown the company and decides to bail. From the fan end, you get people who resent one wrestler getting pushed at the expense of another. Honestly, I think the company would be better off if they just dropped the entire idea of their being a number 1 and just push multiple people. It's ok to want an "ace" for your company; Hogan was that from 1984-1991 in WWF, Tanahashi has been in NJPW for awhile now, Samoa Joe was that in ROH from 2003-2005, followed by Bryan Danielson from 2005-2009, etc. Those are the guys you count on, who you know will perform and draw for you, and that's great. The issue is when you build up "the guy" at the expense of everybody else even being over, let alone anybody else being a main eventer. Hulk Hogan dominated 1980s WWF...but Randy Savage, the Ultimate Warrior, Ted DiBiase, and Mr. Perfect were all insanely over, as well. Hiroshi Tanahashi is NJPW's top ace (of the universe!), but he's had guys like Okada and AJ Styles shown to be on par with him, and ready to take over the top spot if Tanahashi needs to step back. Samoa Joe and Bryan Danielson had their runs as ROH champion, but guys like CM Punk, Homicide, and Nigel McGuinness were never shunted to the side or de-emphasized to make Joe or Danielson look bigger. That's where the problem comes in: John Cena was pushed to the top at the expense of many other wrestlers; yes, Orton had some time to shine, but that was also during the brand split era. But right now, if Cena stepped back (which Vince seems ready for), there's nobody to fill the void. Punk could have, but they chased him off; Bryan might have, but they decided he couldn't be the guy. He wants Roman in that spot, even if there's no real justification yet (not slamming Roman, but like Meltzer said, just gauge the crowd reactions). When you spend 10+ years telling the audience "most of these guys don't matter", then you create the toxic environment they're in right now.
|
|
kidkamikaze10
Dennis Stamp
Trying to think of a new avatar
Posts: 4,286
|
Post by kidkamikaze10 on Feb 26, 2015 10:33:09 GMT -5
Honestly, I just find the entire concept of "The Guy" to be completely toxic, from both a business and a fan standpoint. Business-wise, you run the risk of having your Brock Lesnar's who feels he's outgrown the company and decides to bail. From the fan end, you get people who resent one wrestler getting pushed at the expense of another. Honestly, I think the company would be better off if they just dropped the entire idea of their being a number 1 and just push multiple people. In that sense, I like how NJPW handles it. They usually have multiple figures. Chono, Mutoh/Muta, and Hashimoto for instance. Or Tanahashi, Nakamura, Shibata/Goto/Makabe/Okada. They still have their stale moments, but at least they know if one guy gets injured or leaves the company, they still have some guys, and can build another. Hence the Shibata/Goto/Makabe/Okada thing.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Feb 26, 2015 11:05:00 GMT -5
Imagine you've spent 10+ years loving someone with all your heart, and then one day realising that they've stopped loving you back. Then the doubt creeps in, maybe they never loved you? I think it's the realisation setting that WWE doesn't value them as fans any more, and that maybe they never did. It doesn't matter who they cheer for any more, because the cream only rises to the top if management says it does. As I said earlier in the thread, I've known for a long time now that what I want from WWE is not what they want to give me, and I've made my peace with that and tried to enjoy WWE's programming as best I can (with less than satisfying results). I suspect a number of posters on this thread are going to be doing something similar in the coming months. I've felt I'm no longer the target audience of certain things I enjoyed in the past as well, but I'm sorry, this example is too melodramatic for me, especially for something as innocuous as the WWE. Is it melodramatic? Sure. But when people are breaking down in tears over something as "innocuous" as WWE it doesn't make the point any less valid. It's all a matter of how emotionally invested in your fandom you are; I'm not terribly invested, so I'm merely weary of it all. Those breaking down in tears about it are evidently extremely invested, just as someone whose team loses in any particular big sports game might break down in tears.
|
|
|
Post by Paco S. Loco on Feb 26, 2015 11:08:33 GMT -5
I'll never get the business arguments. Traditional logic is that the champion is responsible for ratings, buy-rates and general business. Unless Daniel Bryan is involved then it's down to him as the title chaser not the champion Orton who according the article is good for business even though buy-rates were down during his reign because of Bryan? It also doesn't matter if one of those events is as badly built as Battleground. Reigns is also responsible for business as a chaser and gets credit for the network subscriptions going up even though he's not champion. However that was at the time the network launched in the UK which is one of WWE's biggest markets and they had a free trial on top of that. Curtis Axel could have took his rightful place as the rumble winner and subscriptions would still be up, WWE would be in massive trouble if they weren't in that situation. Then apparently The Rock being on a PPV makes him responsible for a buy-rate but even he got a bad one with that S.Series tag-match, that turned out to be Awesome Truth's fault though. Either way it had nothing to do with the champion. It all makes no sense. That sums up how the fanboys want it to be. The WWE's chosen one golden boys= 100% responsible for any good rating, buyrate, or network subscription numbers, but are 0% responsible if the numbers suck, no matter how prominently featured they were. In these situations, the highest featured "IWC" favorite is 100% responsible. "Well of course the PPV got lousy buys! Daniel Bryan was there! If it had just been 3 hours of Roman Reigns standing in a ring staring blankly at the camera, it would have gotten at least 238233823 trillion times the world's population in buys! Yes, more buys than there are people on the planet! The fact that he's the WWE's chosen one to be our new lord and savior conclusively and scientifically proves this!"
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 26, 2015 11:25:28 GMT -5
I'll never get the business arguments. Traditional logic is that the champion is responsible for ratings, buy-rates and general business. Unless Daniel Bryan is involved then it's down to him as the title chaser not the champion Orton who according the article is good for business even though buy-rates were down during his reign because of Bryan? It also doesn't matter if one of those events is as badly built as Battleground. Reigns is also responsible for business as a chaser and gets credit for the network subscriptions going up even though he's not champion. However that was at the time the network launched in the UK which is one of WWE's biggest markets and they had a free trial on top of that. Curtis Axel could have took his rightful place as the rumble winner and subscriptions would still be up, WWE would be in massive trouble if they weren't in that situation. Then apparently The Rock being on a PPV makes him responsible for a buy-rate but even he got a bad one with that S.Series tag-match, that turned out to be Awesome Truth's fault though. Either way it had nothing to do with the champion. It all makes no sense. That sums up how the fanboys want it to be. The WWE's chosen one golden boys= 100% responsible for any good rating, buyrate, or network subscription numbers, but are 0% responsible if the numbers suck, no matter how prominently featured they were. In these situations, the highest featured "IWC" favorite is 100% responsible. "Well of course the PPV got lousy buys! Daniel Bryan was there! If it had just been 3 hours of Roman Reigns standing in a ring staring blankly at the camera, it would have gotten at least 238233823 trillion times the world's population in buys! Yes, more buys than there are people on the planet! The fact that he's the WWE's chosen one to be our new lord and savior conclusively and scientifically proves this!" It's also the opposite though a lot of the time. When CM Punk's segments did horrible in the ratings in 2012, it was never his fault. "No one's a draw so ratings don't matter"
|
|
JTH
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 3MB
Posts: 4,467
|
Post by JTH on Feb 26, 2015 12:03:28 GMT -5
I get sick of the take of throwing fan's opinion out the door for the "we know nothing of the business side" argument.
I don't need to know jack shit about the business to know that your most over guy should be the champion.
I also don't understand why these people don't take into account that most fans are doing what they are doing to try and save the dude, because the direction they are going with Reigns in the manner they are going, is going to destroy him. This is a ticking time bomb of disaster and it won't be pretty when it blows up. He'll never be embraced in the way the WWE wants if they continue the path they're going. Now no, you don't inherit to everything the fans want, but you should always allow the fans to guide the character along, and then take into account what works and what doesn't work, so when the time comes to get in the main event, you know exactly what will allow the character to succeed in the best possible way. They clearly have failed on all accounts with that, and everybody has said that, fans and experts alike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2015 14:24:43 GMT -5
Tough? It's f***ing borderline class segregation and eugenics. What's next for Vince, blonde hair and blue eyes only? Oh yeah, apparently Roman wears coloured contacts. Its one thing of Bryan is against Hogan but he isn't - he makes more money and quality work than Reigns. He just does not give Vince an erection so he is not good enough. It's a casting couch for that c***. *Edit - I am not ranting at you, just at Vince. Your message just fueled said rant so apologies if it came off that way.* Seriously? This is where we're at now? Going Godwin on people? Jesus F***. I'm on the quiet floor of my school's library and nearly yelled when I read "borderline class segregation and eugenics". I can't browse this section of the boards anymore. f***ing batshit crazy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2015 14:44:51 GMT -5
There's definitely an element of we as fans being smartened up too much as well. At Fast Lane the crowd was chanting for Randy Orton before he ever came out and hadn't been seen for a while, Meltzer and the other writers spoil every plan months in advance allowing people to make a decision before it ever gets to TV, the big news is never what happens on the shows it's always about the backstage goings ons. At this point it's almost like magicians performing for an audience of other magicians that already know all of the tricks and can't be wowed. Not sure what that has to do with the matter at hand but here we are.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Feb 26, 2015 14:51:59 GMT -5
There's definitely an element of we as fans being smartened up too much as well. At Fast Lane the crowd was chanting for Randy Orton before he ever came out and hadn't been seen for a while, Meltzer and the other writers spoil every plan months in advance allowing people to make a decision before it ever gets to TV, the big news is never what happens on the shows it's always about the backstage goings ons. At this point it's almost like magicians performing for an audience of other magicians that already know all of the tricks and can't be wowed. Not sure what that has to do with the matter at hand but here we are. I think it's a great point to bring up: the whole "good promoters listen to fans, great promoters manipulate them" thing is infinitely harder to do now that the audience is smartened up...and smartened up by the wrestling on TV, no less, given how things like Vince's "you're tired of having your intelligence insulted" promo helped officially slay kayfabe. I just don't think Vince is really cut out for this era, where there's almost no such thing as a fan over the age of 10 who isn't smartened up on some level. Like Meltzer says, you can't just put Roman in the top position and expect fans to take to it, not when fans of the modern era expect higher quality in-ring work and promos and can sense when they're being force-fed something by the office. That does NOT mean you should kowtow to every whim of the audience, not by any stretch, but you can't work around the fans being infinitely more genre savvy than they've ever been before by just trying to nakedly manipulate them ("You love Roman, not Bryan! Look, even Bryan loves Roman! LOVE ROMAN!"). Again, like Meltzer said, if Roman were getting huge reactions everywhere, every week, that'd be one thing, but Roman's reactions haven't matched Bryan's at all, and barely crack the top 3-5 in the company. So not only is Vince trying to manipulate the crowd, he's doing it in a way that he's never done before: pushing the guy who has minimal momentum with the crowd to be his anointed one. Given the smartened-up nature of the modern fanbase, that just makes it even worse.
|
|