|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 20, 2008 17:08:58 GMT -5
It probably is true. I would also venture to say that every PPV from March, 1998 until 2002 featured Austin, Rock or Taker or Foley. I would also suggest that every PPV title match from January of 1984 to April of 1990 featured Hogan or Savage. I bet every PPV the NWA held in the 1980s that was headlined by a World title match featured Ric Flair or Sting, save for a couple. What is so shocking, and apparently disturbing, that one of three guys would be be in the RAW title picture over the past six years? Just to be devils advocate here, in the Hogan era, there was only ever a maximum of 4 pay per view events per year. Up until 1988 (when the Rumble and SummerSlam debuted), there were only two. So to say Hogan and Savage headlining 80s PPVs is the same as HHH, Cena and Orton dominating a total of 36-48 PPVS in the last few years is pretty much off the mark. I personally think it's sick, and a prime example of why WWE is so stale these days. Sure, during 1998 and the Attitude era, the main event scene revolved around Austin, but at least there was some variety. WM XIV - wins the title from HBK Unforgiven - defends against Mick Foley Over the Edge - defends against Mick Foley with Vince as referee and Stooges as officials King of the Ring - vs Kane From there it was Austin feuding with Kane and Taker in the conspiracy angle, the Highway to Hell with Undertaker, then moving to the Survivor Series tournament where the Rock was crowned champ, and then The Rock was introduced into the main event scene. From there the Corporation took off, etc. So it's fair to say that during 1998-1999, the main event scene revolved around a mix of Austin, McMahon, Foley, Taker, Kane, HHH, Big Show, and The Rock. So again...to compare the Orton/Cena/HHH monopoly to the Attitude era is also inaccurate. Face it, Triple Ache, Bore-ton and Weiner are the exact reason the wreslting main event scene is more stale than Chyna's week old underwear. You sir, are correct. Dispite Austin/Rock (who are the ONLY two you can use from the Attitude Era to compare to the HHH/Orton/Cena stats) being in over 48 PPVs (I'm counting from 1998-2002, which is a bit generous) there was still a shit-load of variety. You had title matches with stips (and not just gimmicks, actual stips that increased the value of the PPV, you can't say that about HHH/Cena 879587979 but now in a CAGE!!!1!!). You also had a massive undercard, several hot story arcs (Austin vs McMahon, Rock vs HHH) and a lot of variety in the ME scene. Compare that to today. While people flow in and out of the ME scene (and then E doesn't know what to do with them), it's not as momentous and ubiqioutus as it was back then. Now you see someone like Jericho lose a ME match and he has a black-mark on him for life. I can't see him in the ME now after being buried by Orton and JBL. Also, they run the same shit over and over, and barely add new stips to it. There are no "never can challenge again" matches, no "special enforcer" and the odds for the faces to overcome get worse and worse every month. Why? The build up to these matches are horrible. Here's a typical month of RAW with the ME: Week One: Challenger announces his intent to win title. Has to beat other guys to get shot. Week Two/Three: Challenger and Champ cut promos declaring their intent to win. Boss makes them team together. Week Four: Challenger/Champ are put in "Pick your poison" situations and overcome the odds. Heel beats up face to either DQ the match or after the match. Rinse, wash, repeat. Ad infinum. Now you take that repetitive forumla we have to deal with 12 times a year and barely switch out the main players. Add in that this is the primary focus of RAW and there is little else to pad it with, causing major over-exposure. Can you see why we complain?
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 20, 2008 0:58:04 GMT -5
1. No I don't consider it a redneck sport, I think a lot of rednecks like it. If anything it's childish, like Spongebob or Backyardigans. 2. I'm from Colorado, but my whole family is from the south. I was born in Tennessee. I consider myself a southern delgate, I live in New York now. (first of my family to live nroth of the Mason Dixon.) 3. I like watching poker if there's nothing on. I do enjoy country music, Cash, Williams (1 and 3,) Jennings (both Waylon and Shooter,) Steve Earle. It's no the only music I like but like all music, there's good and bad. I was discussing this with my wife, the kind of people who discuss wrestling on the internet, are not the kind of fans the public percieve as a wrestling fans. They still associate them with rednecks. A closer comparison would be DnD and video game nerds. Which brings up a good discussion topic? Why do you think 'nerds' are attracted to half-naked guys fake fighting?
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 19, 2008 23:48:24 GMT -5
I was just talking to a friend about how, for one time only, they do a retro show. Blue Blood HHH, Justin Hawk Bradshaw, hell, even Cena can be in as the Prototype or the rapper or something... Bring back Masked Kane on Raw, then have him unmask, and have Jerry Lawler yell "That's my dentist!" followed by JR yelling "BAH GAWD, KANG! THAT'S NOT YOUR DENTIST! IT'S DIESEL! IT'S BIG DADDY COOL! SLOBBERKNOCKER! GOVERNMENT MULE! FRUITY FRUITY FRUITY SKITTLES!!!!!!!!!" I think my brain just died a little reading this string of conversation.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 19, 2008 21:09:48 GMT -5
Umm...my friend has a wrestling domain he's trying to sell ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 19, 2008 13:27:53 GMT -5
I liked him before they switched him to Smackdown. And I liked Cena before they switched him to RAW.
Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 18, 2008 19:24:29 GMT -5
Can't blame them for trying to boost traffic. My advice is to put in any site you want to go to through the search. Even if it's the full URL.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 17, 2008 19:17:32 GMT -5
Thanks a bunch!
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 17, 2008 17:17:35 GMT -5
No help? :-(
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 16, 2008 12:51:17 GMT -5
Now I know I'm not one of the most popular crappers here (or at least that's how I see it), but I'm asking for some help.
A few years back I "wrestled" in an e-fed called Underground PRO. It's long since deceased. My friend, the guy who co-ran it, bought a domain (http://ugpwrestling.com). He just told me via IM that the domain rolled-over without him realizing it, and is stuck with the domain for a year. He asked me if I wanted the domain, and I'm not up for a revival. Most of the other guys have moved on as well.
Anyway, I told him he should look into selling it. I told him that he could possibly sell it as a "NEWZ" site. It's an easy domain to remember, and not terribly long either.
I also told him I would post a topic here asking for opinions and advice for what to do with the domain. Where would you even go to sell the domain, and how do you find people interested in starting up a NEWZ site, or whatever would have to be done?
I figure since this forum is full of indy wrestlers, well-educated smarks (well-educated in the subject of how these sites are formed/run/etc) and promotors it would be a great place to ask. So any help or input at all would be helpful.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 15, 2008 19:31:50 GMT -5
I know that Daivari is only in for the X-Cup, but why do I have the feeling that Russo would love for him to be signed so he could write a romance angle between the two or at least pair them. The promos. Oh, the promos they could have. I remember reading that when Cheerleader Melissa was getting tryouts for WWE, the idea was for her to play another Muslim character and team up with Muhammed Hassan and Daivari. WTF? She doesn't look muslim to me.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 15, 2008 19:27:08 GMT -5
You obviously don't get it. Therefore, you shouldn't participate in this thread. True, he never really did anything awe shocking, but neither did a lot of the lame ducks in the HoF. Does ANYONE remember his matches with Liger that pioneered crusierweight wrestling in the states? crap, isn't there that match from 1991 that many claim to be the best US match of all time or some crap like that? But no, he doesn't deserve HoF because of pioneering an entire subgenre of pro-wrestling. Not at all. Because, you know, it's the same kind of accomplishment that Ted Arcidi or Kato have done. If he did live, I'm sure he would have taken HHH's place as Austin's longtime fued after the Rock. I could see it now, it would have been Austin with Pillman by his side but then Pillman would have gotten sick and tired of always playing second fiddle to Austin and then the two would have feuded. Would have blown the roof off of the crapty McMahon-Hemsley era. And it could have kept Rock fresher by turning him back heel. There's a lot of stuff he could have done with his gimmick/ability. Like taking on Show when he first debuted because he's so nuts that he wants the challenge. Or a nice pyschotic fued with Mankind that would trigger Foley's faces to come out randomly to try to mess with Pillman. Lots of stuff. Shouldn't participate? I'm sorry, the title of the thread ended with a question mark. I thought that allowed me to give my opinion on the subject no matter what it was. And I watched Pillman's entire career. I'm basing my opinion on that and not his 90 minute DVD or a whole bunch of 'what ifs.' It's just my opinion. It's not a fact. It differs from yours. And that should be cool. That shouldn't bar me from participating. Then you shouldn't come off as such an ass. You come off preachy when you made your statement. And it sure as hell seems like you intended it to be. Oh, well if Brother Love had a DVD then he should be in the HofThat kind of a claim is the defintion of ignorance.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 15, 2008 16:23:32 GMT -5
I'm begining to think that if WWE made a Ted Arcidi DVD people would be calling for them to put him in the Hall of Fame. You obviously don't get it. Therefore, you shouldn't participate in this thread. True, he never really did anything awe shocking, but neither did a lot of the lame ducks in the HoF. Does ANYONE remember his matches with Liger that pioneered crusierweight wrestling in the states? Shit, isn't there that match from 1991 that many claim to be the best US match of all time or some crap like that? But no, he doesn't deserve HoF because of pioneering an entire subgenre of pro-wrestling. Not at all. Because, you know, it's the same kind of accomplishment that Ted Arcidi or Kato have done. If he did live, I'm sure he would have taken HHH's place as Austin's longtime fued after the Rock. I could see it now, it would have been Austin with Pillman by his side but then Pillman would have gotten sick and tired of always playing second fiddle to Austin and then the two would have feuded. Would have blown the roof off of the shitty McMahon-Hemsley era. And it could have kept Rock fresher by turning him back heel. There's a lot of stuff he could have done with his gimmick/ability. Like taking on Show when he first debuted because he's so nuts that he wants the challenge. Or a nice pyschotic fued with Mankind that would trigger Foley's faces to come out randomly to try to mess with Pillman. Lots of stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 15, 2008 0:25:29 GMT -5
I know he was talented and all that, and I know that for some reason, once a wrestler dies, the people on these boards seem to want to remember them as being better/more important than they really were. But what exactly has Pillman done to warrant inclusion into the HOF? He was a low-to-midcarder in WCW, and was one of Bret's lackeys in the WWE. The most memorable thing he did was the "Pillman's got a gun" angle which will probably never be acknowledged again, and his last angle centered around him wearing a dress. He had solid matches, but none where we sit here and say " Remember that Pillman vs. <whoever> match? Wow, that stole the show!" Talented?? Yes. HOF worthy? Don't think so. Then again, the same thing could be said for half the guys who are in there anyway, so who knows. I still don't think he's worthy though. Pillman vs. Liger. Nuff said.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 14, 2008 19:38:31 GMT -5
He and Rico had the best tag team in ages. Why did they have to release Rico? It made no sense at all.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 14, 2008 0:37:32 GMT -5
...I think Vince should put an "age" limit on wrestlers. Like guys who have main evented for over 2 "eras" (like HBK, HHH, Undertaker) should have to back out of the frontburner and be used to only elevate new guys. New guys should be in the ME scene, and the ratings are so low as it is, that they should be using this time to build up new guys, not try to rehash old guys as quick-fixes. Use this time to build up the new guys who'll bring in a new "boom period". Because like it or not, HHH isn't going to do it. He never did, never will. Just won't be as synonomous as Rock, Hogan or Austin.
I know it won't happen. But I can dream, right?
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 12, 2008 16:59:55 GMT -5
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY NO SMARK SHOULD BOOK WRESTLING. EVER.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 11, 2008 17:32:26 GMT -5
Watch for summerslam 08: return of Hogan. This time, he'll job (he needs the money).
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 11, 2008 17:29:18 GMT -5
A lot of what people are saying is totally obvious stuff that isn't really going to help that much at all. 'Stop the boring promos!' and 'focus more on wrestling!' are hardly new ideas, and it's not like anybody in that company hasn't thought about them. There was a thread on here a few weeks ago and a lot of people in it said this was probably the best year since 2000. This year is no where near as bad as it has been before, and since the attitude era, but just because the ratings are low people use it as some sort of justificaiton. Last year, with a tonne of injuries was far worse than what we are getting now (last night's Raw not included) but the ratings were higher. The ratings don't indicate the quality of the product, they indicate the interest in it. Obviously it's easier to gain interest with a quality product, but it's much easier to lose interest than it is to gain it. When you see angles cut short because of suspension, death and injury people will lose interest quickly. Getting them back is the difficult part. That's why this giveaway was a good idea in theory. It could have created some sort of interest again. The time with Regal going crazy was a great time to watch Raw, but ratings were still going down. We had fresh people in important positions with Regal and Hardy, we had interesting angles (turning the lights out, cutting the show off the air) and the wrestling was good, and the segments were funny. Ratings were still going down, even though it was far superior to anything we saw last year, especially second half of 2007. They needed a stunt like this to create interest and just get some people back. People needed an excuse not to miss Raw, because it was proved that even with a damned entertaining product, people were still doing other things instead. There is no simple fix to these ratings. There's nothing that anyone could think of that will just guarentee they go back up. It's going to be difficult. Exactly. Its gets me a little annoyed how some people on these forums predict when a boom period is going to happen, newsflash IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PREDICT. During the mid-90s, nobody could've predicted the change in direction the WWF would have later in the decade, its just being looked at in hindsight. The company will have to do something that will garner fan interest, and using the "Stone Cold" example, they can unknowingly strike gold. You can tell when it's going to stay on a boom. And you can tell when they change direction. Like right now, they are catering to kids. A remarkably small portion of the TV audience. With BEDTIMES, HOMEWORK, TV LIMITS, KID SPECIFIC CHANNELS and PARENTS WHO CONTROL THE TV its not hard to see why the ratings fall. And how old do you have to be to participate in the giveaway? If it's 18, then most of the audience will tune out for it since THEY ARE f***ING MINORS.
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 11, 2008 16:35:41 GMT -5
very sad. I get the impression Vince only knows about his company and gets told other stuff by those around him. I believe Shane actively watches stuff that his daddy doesn't produce......at least someone with a wider midset will take over eventually. \ Err....Steph?
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Jun 10, 2008 21:16:48 GMT -5
A lot of people are saying that ratings have no say in how well WWE is off but I have to totally disagree. Ratings are the very reason WWE almost went out of business eleven years ago. Want to know why they call it the Monday Night RATINGS War? Because RATINGS are what matters and I'm sure WWE is in a huge panic right now after seeing this rating result. WWE needs to step up. They need to change the entire face of WWE just like how they did eleven years ago by starting the Attitude Era. They need something new. Well you can't argue that these ratings meant nothing. In the past WWE has covered their ass by blaming the all-mighty TiVo, but if you're running a LIVE CONTEST for money where all you need to do is sign up and give a number and you LOSE VIEWERS that means something is wrong with the product. Let's see the breakdown. I bet the highest segment is the beginning where they announce the passweord.
|
|