Defending the WWE building new stars

[Andrew is Good]

It was said before, but basically guys are being pushed too quickly. Generally, the opinion of Bobby Lashley here (and I did a poll about this actually), is that he's very talented, but has been pushed too quickly and too early into the main event position. A lot of people, myself included, saw a lot of star potential, and in his feuds with Finlay and King Booker, he showed that he can carry the ball. Sure, he probably had a lot of help from Finlay and Booker, but if you're not talented enough to run with the ball, then you're gonna fail. And Lashley got over pretty well, because he's talented and had potential. They should have feuded him with Ken Kennedy, MVP, and many others in the Smackdown midcard to help fully establish him, and slowly move him up. Then face off against a main eventer, and not quite win, but do pretty well.

I was actually excited for the King Booker/Bobby Lashley World Title match at No Mercy, for the sole reason that I felt that while Lashley wouldn't likely be given the belt, I feel if he put on a good match with a World Champion calibar wrestler and vetern like King Booker, then he would have some potential in the future. I feel making it a fourway knocked Lashley down a peg, because he wasn't given the ball in that kind of situation.

They have great talents, and they push those young talents, it's just, they push everyone in the same way.

[BrianZane]

sinister1 said:

I don't think people hate WWE building new stars.

Most people just think some of the new stars......suck.

Well, hindsight is 20/20. Like it said in the original post, everyone here praises The Rock to no end today, whereas when he debuted as Rocky Maivia, no one on earth could stand him. You have to give people time to develop over the years, or you're never going to be satisfied.

[Smark]

swarm said:

vanvader said:

My problem is that they aren't doing much with Masters, Nitro or Kenny at the moment, guys I happen to like.

I feel the same way you do here. Add SB to that list too.

If any of those 4 guys had any charisma or didn't get Conway pops, they'd probably be pushed too.

[Michael Coello]

brianzane said:

sinister1 said:

I don't think people hate WWE building new stars.

Most people just think some of the new stars......suck.

Well, hindsight is 20/20. Like it said in the original post, everyone here praises The Rock to no end today, whereas when he debuted as Rocky Maivia, no one on earth could stand him. You have to give people time to develop over the years, or you're never going to be satisfied.

The difference is Rocky Maivia was a cheery faced good guy, while the Rock became this heely antihero guy who was all Hollywood.

Also, the whole thing relies on the people WWE wants to push vs the people the crowd react to. Sometimes, those 2 are very different, and sometimes it's the same.

[The F'N Captain]

joe said:

sexualwalking said:

Basically, WWE is in a rock/hard place situation. They DESPERATELY need a Rock or Austin. A guy who comes up who is universally either liked or at least respected.

My following comments are not necessarily directed at you, but that is simply not going to happen.

There was not a Rock or Austin before they hit the stage, and there probably won't be one for a long while, if ever.

John Cena and Triple H are/ were close, in that they excell in virtually every facet of pro wrestling.

In truth, though, there were a lot of members of the IWC who did not like Rock and/ or Austin, especially the Rock. Shocking as it may seem, being liked by the IWC is not a prerequisite for someone being a star or headliner in pro wrestling. Usually, it is just the opposite. If someone is a top level guy, a great portion of the IWC is going to hate him.

I swear, I wish the IWC had been around in 1984.

"What? Can you believe those bastards Jim Crockett and Fritz Von Erich are still trying to shove Kerry down out throats???!!! Mike is the one that should be getting the push! After all, he looks like one of us instead of some roided up freak like his brother does!

"And Flair put him over with a backslide! A freaking backslide! This sucks! Those 50,000 people at Texas Stadium are a bunch of sheep!

"Kerry's just getting over because his brother's dead! This is the most tasteless thing I have ever seen! It was gonna be David, but they just painted by numbers and used Kerry in his place! Heartless Bastards!"

Yep. It would have been great.

Well to rebut, it wasn't supposed to happen to Rock or Austin. They really did seem to come out of nowhere to superstardom. And while it's not a big deal to be an IWC darling, true, I'm still hearing boo's when Cena comes out(enough that they even try to incoporate it into his character). At Rock and Austin's peak I never heard a boo when they spoke. Hell after a point Austin couldn't get booed for running a 90 year old nun down while she picked a cat with a broken leg off the street.

[eJm]

slammu said:

swarm said:

I feel the same way you do here. Add SB to that list too.

If any of those 4 guys had any charisma or didn't get Conway pops, they'd probably be pushed too.

As someone once said, it's all because they don't get much time to get put over on TV.

Basically, it's a Catch 22. They can't get over because of the lack of charisma, but they aren't given the oppertunity to improve their charisma.

[Andrew is Good]

The problem isn't with the talent. WWE has always used younger, newer talent, and have always pushed them. Another problem though is the fact that only a certain type of wrestler is pushed a certain type of way. The reason the Attitude era was so successful was because it was different from the kind of wrestling you used to see for awhile. The Rock n' Wrestling Connection was good for its time, but until the attitude era, the WWE was trapped in the 80s. It dipped into new things with Goldust (who was a major influence on wrestling because he was such a controversial and fascinating character and pushed a lot of buttons in the beginning), but generally, it was the same thing.

They had something with Steve Austin, but one of the reasons he was successful was he was a well traveled wrestler and a tremendous talent. Even though he was limited by his neck, he still knew how to work. They also benefitted from having a lot of talented main eventers and a strong midcard. Now, they do the same angle with every new guy overcoming the odds or facing off with the boss. The main reason I want Teddy Long to stay on as Smackdown GM because he's perfect in his role. He's mostly just there to be the decision maker, and while sometimes he has small little feuds with the heels (who tend to go one on one with THE UNDERTAKAH!!!!!!!!), he's there to be the Jack Tunney like figurehead who makes the matches.

They need to try new things and go in different directions, and not the tired old things that worked once before. The reason they aren't working now, is people want something new.

[The F'N Captain]

andrewisgood said:

The problem isn't with the talent. WWE has always used younger, newer talent, and have always pushed them. Another problem though is the fact that only a certain type of wrestler is pushed a certain type of way. The reason the Attitude era was so successful was because it was different from the kind of wrestling you used to see for awhile. The Rock n' Wrestling Connection was good for its time, but until the attitude era, the WWE was trapped in the 80s. It dipped into new things with Goldust (who was a major influence on wrestling because he was such a controversial and fascinating character and pushed a lot of buttons in the beginning), but generally, it was the same thing.

They had something with Steve Austin, but one of the reasons he was successful was he was a well traveled wrestler and a tremendous talent. Even though he was limited by his neck, he still knew how to work. They also benefitted from having a lot of talented main eventers and a strong midcard. Now, they do the same angle with every new guy overcoming the odds or facing off with the boss. The main reason I want Teddy Long to stay on as Smackdown GM because he's perfect in his role. He's mostly just there to be the decision maker, and while sometimes he has small little feuds with the heels (who tend to go one on one with THE UNDERTAKAH!!!!!!!!), he's there to be the Jack Tunney like figurehead who makes the matches.

They need to try new things and go in different directions, and not the tired old things that worked once before. The reason they aren't working now, is people want something new.

Well I think the entire IWC, non-web using fans, and even people who don't even WATCH wrestling anymore can agree, the "outgunned and underdog face" vs. EVIL VINCE is so played out it's ridiculous.

[-Lithium-]

I was wondering, was people in the IWC in the Attitude Era all saying "Oh man atleast back in 95-96 there was Michaels and Bret". And what did they complain about the most in 2000, cause 2000 was the best WWF year ever (then 2001), had lots of good wrestling and entertainment, in the undercard AND main events...

[Just Jay]

sinister1 said:

maxx420 said:

I'd just like to add at this point, Tommy Dreamer is younger than Monty Brown/ Marcus Cor Von.

In response to the Cor Von being youner than Dreamer, I would like to add that this gif needs a bold "Whatever." It seems so fitting.

[Blindkarevik]

There's actual age.. and TV age. While they have a fairly young roster with guys like Cena, Orton, MVP, Punk, etc,..... seeing the same people on TV every week can get tiresome.

I honestly think the "Not pushing younger talent" argument is just a poorly worded version of, "We wanna see some new guys debut."

There aren't many things in wrestling as exciting as a new, fresh, promising wrestler making their debut... so when things start getting dull, people look towards a good debut to gain interest back.

[BrianZane]

sinister1 said:

brianzane said:

Well, hindsight is 20/20. Like it said in the original post, everyone here praises The Rock to no end today, whereas when he debuted as Rocky Maivia, no one on earth could stand him. You have to give people time to develop over the years, or you're never going to be satisfied.

The difference is Rocky Maivia was a cheery faced good guy, while the Rock became this heely antihero guy who was all Hollywood.

Also, the whole thing relies on the people WWE wants to push vs the people the crowd react to. Sometimes, those 2 are very different, and sometimes it's the same.

The thing is, you didn't know that Rocky was going to become who he was. Nobody did. He was just one of those people you mentioned who WWE wanted to push really badly, yet the crowd wasn't into. Nobody knew Austin was going to go from being the Ringmaster to Stone Cold and sell out arenas for four or five years. Sometimes, all it takes is a turn or a gimmick tweak, and the person could get over like hotcakes. Who knows? Maybe Kevin Thorn will be the one main-eventing soon, and you'll all love him too!