|
Post by PsychoGoatee on Nov 25, 2015 15:13:30 GMT -5
Between April and June 2000, Jeff Jarrett won 4 WCW world titles. That's what hotshotting brings. Or The Rock and Mankind trading it twice, that's another example of 4 title reigns. Picking a bad example, picking a good example. And I'm not necessarily saying extreme hot-shotting. Like I said, maybe four or five from now through the end of 2016.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 15:15:59 GMT -5
To me, the Attitude Era worked because if you watched 1998 WWF programming, it was completely different than 1993 WWF programming despite being only 5 years later. Different look, different stars, different advertising, different attitude (pun intended).
Now compare today's product with the shows 5 years ago. It's the same thing. Same stars, same format, same attitude. It's boring.
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,529
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Nov 25, 2015 15:18:28 GMT -5
For as much good as the Atitude era did, there was a lot of long term damage done
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 25, 2015 15:19:01 GMT -5
Between April and June 2000, Jeff Jarrett won 4 WCW world titles. That's what hotshotting brings. Or The Rock and Mankind trading it twice, that's another example of 4 title reigns. Picking a bad example, picking a good example. It was never good for those guys to be having such short reigns, especially since one of those title wins was the Halftime Heat match, one of the most embarrassing matches of the entire Attitude Era. Rock should have been champion from Survivor Series 1998 to Wrestlemania XV.
|
|
|
Post by PsychoGoatee on Nov 25, 2015 15:23:13 GMT -5
Or The Rock and Mankind trading it twice, that's another example of 4 title reigns. Picking a bad example, picking a good example. It was never good for those guys to be having such short reigns, especially since one of those title wins was the Halftime Heat match, one of the most embarrassing matches of the entire Attitude Era. Rock should have been champion from Survivor Series 1998 to Wrestlemania XV. I disagree personally, I'm very happy we have those Mick Foley reigns. And of course "that'll put butts in seats", it's considered part of the turning tide of WWE beating WCW. It's cool that we disagree, and I'm happy to keep quoting back and forth for eternity. And actually, this kind of goes with my point, us going back and forth like this, it's like hot-shotting the title. Two view points both getting to shine.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Nov 25, 2015 15:41:43 GMT -5
Attitude Era booking is the current booking with less cussing, partial nudity, stunts, and excessive violence. The show is formatted the same way. Characters less bawdy but no real change. Only real difference is a majority of the matches last longer than 3 minutes.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,984
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Nov 25, 2015 15:44:35 GMT -5
Either do this or cut back on ppv's and have the stars go against enhancement talent until then. You can't have feuds drag on when the guys involved wrestle each other for free on TV every week.
|
|
|
Post by Martin: #TeamBella Treasurer on Nov 25, 2015 15:45:25 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind seeing more IC/US/Tag/Divas title matches main eventing RAW. There's something "entertaining" when the final match has something on the line. Nothing is as soul destroying for a main event as "Here's a random Tag Match between some dudes that have separate feuds, faces on one side heels on the other". That's one thing I've really grown to hate. Why does the person in charge always arrange it that way? It's one thing when a promo war sets it up earlier or something, fine, but why would Triple H never decide, "Okay, at SummerSlam Cena's challenging Rollins and Big Show's challenging Ryback, so Cena and Big Show vs. Rollins and Ryback!"? It makes no sense, it'd be a nice change to the dynamic, show some combinations you don't see much, and nobody boos heels anymore anyway so don't need to worry about the crowd being confused or whatever. Lol, I do this ALL the time in TEW2013
|
|
|
Post by PsychoGoatee on Nov 25, 2015 15:45:57 GMT -5
Attitude Era booking is the current booking with less cussing, partial nudity, stunts, and excessive violence. The show is formatted the same way. Characters less bawdy but no real change. Only real difference is a majority of the matches last longer than 3 minutes. I don't agree with that, but for the record, this topic wasn't intended as a "go back to the Attitude Era" topic. More specifically bringing up the idea of going back to the faster paced booking style of the time, and also throwing in the idea of faster WWE title changes for a bit. I don't like how the Attitude Era often had very short matches and so often ended with screwy run-ins, but they wouldn't have to do it that way. Some have mentioned before how everybody had a character, and there were more engaging feuds going on, more of a midcard, really there were a lot of differences between the booking then and now I'd say. And some aspects were done better then. Some weren't. Ideally we could reincorporate some of those good things, such as being fasted paced. And with the endless three hour RAW, we could still have decently long matches too. Just move things along more week to week.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Nov 25, 2015 15:53:15 GMT -5
Attitude Era booking is the current booking with less cussing, partial nudity, stunts, and excessive violence. The show is formatted the same way. Characters less bawdy but no real change. Only real difference is a majority of the matches last longer than 3 minutes. I don't agree with that, but for the record, this topic wasn't intended as a "go back to the Attitude Era" topic. More specifically bringing up the idea of going back to the faster paced booking style of the time, and also throwing in the idea of faster WWE title changes for a bit. I don't like how the Attitude Era often had very short matches and so often ended with screwy run-ins, but they wouldn't have to do it that way. Some have mentioned before how everybody had a character, and there were more engaging feuds going on, more of a midcard, really there were a lot of differences between the booking then and now I'd say. And some aspects were done better then. Some weren't. Ideally we could reincorporate some of those good things, such as being fasted paced. And with the endless three hour RAW, we could still have decently long matches too. Just move things along more week to week. It is the same system from that era. The same booking tropes. Wrestlers put into stables to give them direction. Long promos to start off the show. Random time filling matches involving midcarders. Doing worked shoots. World champion on every Raw expect when Brock was champ. Nothing has changed and that is the problem.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Nov 25, 2015 16:02:02 GMT -5
My girlfriend has only been watching wrestling for about 18 months; she hasn't watched the show in six weeks; I told her the setup for Survivor Series; she predicted the tournament outcome, including the cash-in, the second I told her the setup.
Not anything can happen in WWE any more. Some specific things WILL happen, regardless of what the fans think.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Nov 25, 2015 16:06:26 GMT -5
I think a hot shot or two doesn't have to be a problem. Rock and Mankind traded it a few times but it didn't seem, to me, to be hot-potatoing; this was two guys at the top of their game and you never knew which one of them was going to get the better of the other one.
|
|
|
Post by celtics543 on Nov 25, 2015 17:31:08 GMT -5
Attitude Era booking is the current booking with less cussing, partial nudity, stunts, and excessive violence. The show is formatted the same way. Characters less bawdy but no real change. Only real difference is a majority of the matches last longer than 3 minutes. Completely disagree. Perhaps the main event is booked the same way, with heel authority figures and the like but the midcard is WAY worse today. Look at the reactions that guys like Val Venis, D'Lo Brown, Ken Shamrock, and those guys got compared to any of the mid card guys today. Attitude era booking would be nice because it would give the mid card guys something to do rather than just trade wins and tread water. I disagree with the constant trading of titles but give us stories, give us reasons that guys are feuding. I'm sick of having two guys wrestle for no reason or having a feud for no reason. Most feuds now are only explained if they're main event feuds and even those are just usually, because the heel doesn't like the babyface and the babyface is upset because the heel attacked him. Heels never win clean so there aren't any strong heels to compete with the top babyfaces and it's killing the business. In short, give the mid card something to do and write better stories for all levels. Give some back story on the characters instead of just backstory on the real person. It worked for Mick Foley but now you have 90% of the roster whose backstory is just that they were big fans as little kids and now they're living out a dream. If one guy has that backstory it's fine, but we need some variety. I hate to say it but a little bit of kayfabe would be nice once in a while.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Nov 25, 2015 22:43:34 GMT -5
I think they need to have shorter matches. The long, 2-3 segment matches get boring to most casuals, and with so many other sources of media, they change the channel/go to an iPad, etc.
|
|
|
Post by 111111 on Nov 25, 2015 23:11:22 GMT -5
If they're going to take ideas from the attitude era they need to look at the latter half of it (ie circa 2000)
|
|
schma
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,896
Member is Online
|
Post by schma on Nov 26, 2015 1:01:01 GMT -5
Part of what made the Attitude Era as exciting as it was, was WCW. Their competition forced both companies to try new things and upset the status quo. Both companies had fumbles but that constant competition was great for business. It forced people like Vince to think outside the box and prevented complacency.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Nov 26, 2015 1:26:36 GMT -5
Is it bad idea week or something?
No.
No hotshotting the belt around, no bringing back Russo and Oklahoma, just no.
Everybody stop, take a breath.
|
|
|
Post by "Mr Wonderdick" Dick Dastardly on Nov 26, 2015 1:31:13 GMT -5
The Attitude Era was the product of the time period.
Ratings were huge in the late 80s. By your logic, they should go back to 5 minute squash matches on their shows and they need to have some of their wrestlers bring animals to the ring.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,137
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Nov 26, 2015 2:28:54 GMT -5
Attitude Era booking is the current booking with less cussing, partial nudity, stunts, and excessive violence. The show is formatted the same way. Characters less bawdy but no real change. Only real difference is a majority of the matches last longer than 3 minutes. I don't agree with that, but for the record, this topic wasn't intended as a "go back to the Attitude Era" topic. More specifically bringing up the idea of going back to the faster paced booking style of the time, and also throwing in the idea of faster WWE title changes for a bit. I don't like how the Attitude Era often had very short matches and so often ended with screwy run-ins, but they wouldn't have to do it that way. Some have mentioned before how everybody had a character, and there were more engaging feuds going on, more of a midcard, really there were a lot of differences between the booking then and now I'd say. And some aspects were done better then. Some weren't. Ideally we could reincorporate some of those good things, such as being fasted paced. And with the endless three hour RAW, we could still have decently long matches too. Just move things along more week to week. Honestly, I'd say the run ins and short matches helped at the time. I've argued this before, it was another way of putting off the "real" matches till you had to pay for them. In the 80s, you had jobber matches, so if you wanted to see the real fights between the big stars, you had to go to the house shows. In the Attitude era, you had all these run ins, nothing settled, so if you wanted to see the big matches, you had to buy the PPV. They need to find some way of doing that for now, a way of building anticpation, so that people want to get the network to see the big events and things of real consequence.
|
|
|
Post by StormanReigns on Nov 26, 2015 2:33:08 GMT -5
I don't think making Sheamus a 58 time WWE Champ will fix anything.
You had great characters who were really over in 1999. You simply do not today.
Daniel Bryan was a cool character, and he is gone. What ever John Cena is as a character (neo Superman thing) is a great character, he is gone. CM Punk a great character, he is gone.
They are so desperate for characters, that they use old ones on their big PPV's.
|
|