The Problem with Modern Wrestlemanias

[Some Baritone guy IS REDEEMED!]

I was thinking the other day about comparing Wrestlemania when I was growing up in the mid 2000s-2010s to Wrestlemanias at this point, and I've come to realize that Wrestlemania just doesn't feel special like it used to.

Back then speculation over Wrestlemania plans felt so huge. You'd always have this speculation about what was going to fill out the card, because there was multiple big attractions. I always remember wondering, what was Undertaker's match going to be. It was always a highlight of the show and always was well worth looking forward to. Although he retired shortly after I started watching, Shawn Michaels was in a similar scenario because he pretty much always stole the show. That being said, while they were certainly a selling point the weren't the ONLY selling point.

One thing WWE did very well for a long time when building Wretlemanias in the past was keeping the top matches on the card fresh, or at the very least giving them the kind of build which justified their culmination at Wrestlemania. Plus at least one major undercard match which made you think "Damn I have to see this!" Sure part timers and legends had their part in the build up, and certainly added to the interest, but the majority of the time they were there as a support to the people who were going to be there every week.

Then around Wrestlemania 27 that changed. The build to the Main Event between Cena and Miz was overshadowed by the appearance of the Rock. And in spite of The Miz's efforts to make the show about him and Cena the whole thing just ended up being a commercial for next year's Wrestlemania with the REAL main event of Rock Vs. Cena. Since then there's only been one main event that was contested entirely between full timers in Bianca Belair and Sasha Banks (which didn't really even close that year's Wrestlemania) and a couple of debatable cases such as WM 30 and 35 (Given Batista and Ronda were pretty much working full schedules leading into it but gone shortly after). This year will continue the trend with Ronda Vs. Flair which is a match between two people nobody in the audience likes and Lesnar Vs. Reigns, which will be headlining its third Wrestlemania in seven years.

The worst of it is that the undercard doesn't look promising either, with them being so creatively barren that they have no plans for practically the entire roster outside of the top 4 people.

Wrestlemania has nothing must see on it, which is a problem that has been getting progressively worse over the years, but has never quite slapped you in the face quite as bad as it has right here. At least by this point in most builds there was one Wrestlemania story you could invest in, even in the weakest build (Styles Vs. Nakamura, Kofimania, Edge's comeback story, followed by his road back to the title the following year) But here none of it has even started being built yet with about a month and a half before show time. At the rate we're going WM 9 and WM 32 might have some company in the worst ever category.

And if this trend keeps going like it is, they may not even end up being particularly bad in the grand scheme of things.

[Bo Rida]

Yeah I agree that nobody in The Undertaker or HBK role is a huge part of that.
'Taker's hard to replace but Bryan should have been the HBK style role while he was there and AJ Styles could now. How Bryan was often an afterthought added late I'll never understand.

The other issue is the lack of first time, or at least not overdone big matches. Strangely they played that card at the rumble instead.

Talking of the rumble those being lacklustre and multiple ppvs being inserted between doesn't help either, harms momentum.

[smokinvokoun86]

It sucks, because, on paper a match with Brock vs Roman, title for title, that SHOULD feel monumental. And I know that’s what they are going for.

But it’s all so blah.

Also, with now having multiple PPVs in giant stadiums. Like I think Money in the Bank is gonna be a stadium show. It really does take away the spectacle of what a WrestleMania should be. Now the only thing that sets it apart from SummerSlam is that it’s two nights.

[xCompackx]

Feb 12, 2022 11:35:52 GMT -5 smokinvokoun86 said:

It sucks, because, on paper a match with Brock vs Roman, title for title, that SHOULD feel monumental. And I know that’s what they are going for.

But it’s all so blah.

Also, with now having multiple PPVs in giant stadiums. Like I think Money in the Bank is gonna be a stadium show. It really does take away the spectacle of what a WrestleMania should be. Now the only thing that sets it apart from SummerSlam is that it’s two nights.

I really don't see the appeal of stadium shows. I mean, outdoor shows can provide an admittingly cool appearance for pyro and stuff, but not only do you lose on a lot of crowd noise, but you're at the mercy of weather. I dunno, you can make arena WrestleMania shows work, I think.

[Jaws the Shark]

I think part of the problem with the past fifteen or so Wrestlemanias is that it's no longer sold on the card anymore, it's sold on the brand. Before the pageantry was garnish, it was extra that made the show a bit more special, now it's the whole selling point; the matches and the storylines and the idea of this being the payoff to everything is less important now, certainly secondary to it being "The Grandest Stage of Them All" or whatever marketing bollocks they've got as a tagline now. So I don't know, it just sort of feels like they aren't trying anymore, or they are but they're focusing too hard on creating a "spectacle" and "Wrestlemania moments" and not enough on having a good coherent show.

[fw91]

Two nights and the pandemic really took a lot of luster out of it. Like I prefer not to have 7 hour shows, but two nights kind of cheapens it imo.

[Citizen Snips Has Left]

Man, you think it’s bad at your age? Imagine growing up and tuning in on Saturday morning and getting pumped because they just announced Mr Perfect vs Brutus the Barber.

[EoE: Well There's Your Problem]

Feb 12, 2022 12:21:38 GMT -5 fw91 said:

Two nights and the pandemic really took a lot of luster out of it. Like I prefer not to have 7 hour shows, but two nights kind of cheapens it imo.

I feel like the two-night thing is the best solution in terms of pleasing as many people as possible. You go back to one-night and you end up with one of these things:

*An eight-hour show that drags on forever and everyone is exhausted at the end of it (see WM35)
*A show with a whole bunch of short matches to squeeze everyone in
*A show with your top eight/nine/ten matches on it that will all get time, but most of them will be part-timers and all of your favourite full-time guys from the upper-midcard and below will miss out completely

[fw91]

Feb 12, 2022 12:28:03 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

Feb 12, 2022 12:21:38 GMT -5 fw91 said:

Two nights and the pandemic really took a lot of luster out of it. Like I prefer not to have 7 hour shows, but two nights kind of cheapens it imo.

I feel like the two-night thing is the best solution in terms of pleasing as many people as possible. You go back to one-night and you end up with one of these things:

*An eight-hour show that drags on forever and everyone is exhausted at the end of it (see WM35)
*A show with a whole bunch of short matches to squeeze everyone in
*A show with your top eight/nine/ten matches on it that will all get time, but most of them will be part-timers and all of your favourite full-time guys from the upper-midcard and below will miss out completely

I get it and agree with you, but yet it still feels less special for some reason. I guess that perhaps it's like two separate shows instead of one. It's makes it kind of hard to look back at in terms of rating the show. Not that it really matters though.

[thehottag]

The problem with modern Wrestlemanias is the same issue with modern WWE.

Everything feels stale, the same people in the same spots every year (that includes part-timers), constant rematches, forced & repetitive commentary, & it doesn't feel like there's stakes to anything because everyone will be back where they were in (at most) 3 months.

[GuyOfOwnage]

As soon as the term "WrestleMania moment" was coined, it was all over. Instead of just letting moments happen organically, they're manufactured and micromanaged to the umpteenth degree. Honestly, they feel so contrived that it almost seems disrespectful to the more organic moments from earlier shows to lump them in together.

[xCompackx]

Feb 12, 2022 18:11:01 GMT -5 GuyOfOwnage said:

As soon as the term "WrestleMania moment" was coined, it was all over. Instead of just letting moments happen organically, they're manufactured and micromanaged to the umpteenth degree. Honestly, they feel so contrived that it almost seems disrespectful to the more organic moments from earlier shows to lump them in together.

WWE has a big problem in general with not letting things be moments on their own. When Ronda Rousey debuted, Michael Cole was screeching about how big a moment it was and how exciting it is, like, letting fans be excited is better when you don't talk about how exciting it is. Or how Kofi is supposed to have a big Royal Rumble save and it became expected and WWE loved to talk about it, and then it gets to a point where dude f***s it up this year (not his fault, shit happens).

[Jedi-El of Tomorrow]

Feb 12, 2022 12:21:53 GMT -5 Citizen Snips Has Left said:

Man, you think it’s bad at your age? Imagine growing up and tuning in on Saturday morning and getting pumped because they just announced Mr Perfect vs Brutus the Barber.

But that match had actual build, and Beefcake was the number 3 or 4 face at the time (depends on if you think Bossman had surpassed him).

From the same show we got Rick Martel vs Koko, in a match with no build. Early Manias were full of matches where 2 guys were just thrown into a match against each other with no angle or build.

[Urethra Franklin]

I think the other thing, too, is that Mania used to be the blow-off to all blow-offs.

We used to get matches that were months in the making and we would get a definitive winner in the feud.

Today, we get matches that we’ve seen before and will see again as soon as the next PPV that is now called WrestleMania Backlash. The stakes are so much lower than they used to be.

The big match that is supposed to headline the two nights is Brock Lesnar vs. Roman Reigns. It’s a match that we’ve seen seven times before (on two occasions, it was a multi-man match) and it’s one that we saw as recently as October. While the build-up has been good because Reigns and Lesnar and Heyman have all been very good, the lustre isn’t there.

Mania used to be a destination and culmination for programs. It just isn’t anymore.

[bob]

it'd also help if feuds were planned well in advance to have a proper end at Wrestlemania for all over the card instead of only a 2 months issue being resolved at the show of shows

[HMARK Center]

Feb 12, 2022 19:10:20 GMT -5 Jedi-El of Tomorrow said:

Feb 12, 2022 12:21:53 GMT -5 Citizen Snips Has Left said:

Man, you think it’s bad at your age? Imagine growing up and tuning in on Saturday morning and getting pumped because they just announced Mr Perfect vs Brutus the Barber.

But that match had actual build, and Beefcake was the number 3 or 4 face at the time (depends on if you think Bossman had surpassed him).

From the same show we got Rick Martel vs Koko, in a match with no build. Early Manias were full of matches where 2 guys were just thrown into a match against each other with no angle or build.

Yeah, Martel vs. Koko and Earthquake vs. Hercules were matches meant to get two rising heels over ahead of spring/summer programs that would put them in a bigger position, as Martel would eventually be feuding with Jake Roberts by later 1990 and Earthquake of course got his program with Hogan. They served a purpose, but it's true that they were "jobber to the stars" matches on a WM card.

Still, it worked back then because WWF pay per views were still one of the few places where you could see televised matches that were just between "name" wrestlers, no enhancement talent in sight. That alone was a big selling point, for sure, but then you'd obviously need something as big as Hogan vs. Andre to make sure you can sell 70,000 or whatever tickets to the Silverdome, along with major midcard feuds culminating like Savage vs. Steamboat.

Obviously the 80s-early 90s model won't work as well today, since the weekly shows aren't just episodes of Superstars and Wrestling Challenge with only a couple of "name" wrestler matches mixed in on Prime Time or something. Still, every year I get pumped as hell for Wrestle Kingdom, NJPW's version of WrestleMania, and they manage to make that feel like a huge deal even after having a full calendar of major events and marquee matches spread out over the course of a year. There's really no reason WWE couldn't do the same, but you need to tell stories people want to see culminate, and you need your marquee matches to be between your tip top stars while giving them something tangible to fight over.

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

This resonated a lot with me. Part of my issue recently has been seeing half of the big names just disappear from TV right after the show.

[Push R Truth]

One of the things that takes the meaning out of the event is just how rarely Modern Mania is the start or finish of anything. It's hard to get hyped up to care when there's an entire PPV a couple weeks later dedicated to finishing Mania.


There's a reason the Super Bowl is massive... that's it. One game. You know it's the end.
There's a reason Game 7's in the NBA/MLB/NHL are the best ratings. Because the drama is ending. It's the finale. There is no "come back in 3 weeks to see the rematch!"

[eJm]

Feb 12, 2022 12:28:03 GMT -5 EoE: Well There's Your Problem said:

Feb 12, 2022 12:21:38 GMT -5 fw91 said:

Two nights and the pandemic really took a lot of luster out of it. Like I prefer not to have 7 hour shows, but two nights kind of cheapens it imo.

I feel like the two-night thing is the best solution in terms of pleasing as many people as possible. You go back to one-night and you end up with one of these things:

*An eight-hour show that drags on forever and everyone is exhausted at the end of it (see WM35)
*A show with a whole bunch of short matches to squeeze everyone in
*A show with your top eight/nine/ten matches on it that will all get time, but most of them will be part-timers and all of your favourite full-time guys from the upper-midcard and below will miss out completely

Agreed, if you’re going to do these shows where you want to fit everyone on, this is the best way to go with it. Especially since last year’s two night shows (besides some of night two) were considered two of the best of the year. Especially night one’s main event (and yes, Michael Hayes, it main evented WM, get over it).

It only cheapens the idea if you make it absolutely uninteresting and don’t spice it up every so often. It’s why I think Roman/Seth and Brock/Lashley Night One leading to the title vs. title match is way more interesting because a) you have built in stories from the Rumble going into those matches and b) Seth and Bobby are at least people you could set up as people who can beat the Roman and Brock so it adds some intrigue to proceedings.

[Deleted]

I know that for me, each Wrestlemania felt like the ending of a year. If you go back and look at the cards of older Wrestlemanias, in each of those events you can see changes whether it's wrestlers or status of said wrestlers compared to the previous year, it's like a timeline. These modern Wrestlemanias always feel like they're all within the same "Wrestling Year" if that makes any sense. It doesn't feel like it's a completely new year we're dealing with. It feels like they just did another Wrestlemania 2 months later from where they were previously.

Look at this upcoming one. It feels like it could have taken place 2-3 years ago.