|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Feb 3, 2013 13:21:17 GMT -5
The last several years WrestleMania has been outsourcing programs from its full-time roster to part-time big-namers whose drawing power is not as significant as perceived. While it's not a new practice, my newest blog entry proves that it certainly doesn't help the full-time roster get over. Please read and discuss this, as it is most likely a topic that will come up again when 'Mania rolls around the corner. badbookingblog.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-outsourcing-is-bad-for-wrestlemania.htmlEDIT: A new addition was made to answer a good question left in this thread. |
|
Cronant
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,556
|
Post by Cronant on Feb 3, 2013 13:23:09 GMT -5
I don't know why people think its a 'one or the other' type deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2013 13:41:11 GMT -5
It doesn't need the super stars (Rock, Brock) but as a business you'd be stupid not to use them if it meant an extra few hundred thousand buyers of an expensive PPV. Plus even the most jaded fans will pay to see arguably the biggest Attitude era star, and one of the biggest bad-asses/multi-sport-PPV draws in recent history.
The companies issue is not nostalgia or part time names, it's the time management and booking trends.
And Kofi Kingston doesn't deserve to be mentioned alongside Dolph Ziggler or Daniel Bryan. I know there's a vast difference between top tier star (Cena) and main eventer these days, but even over the last few months Sheamus has looked lesser than Ziggler or Bryan and you've regarded him as a main eventer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Feb 3, 2013 13:55:16 GMT -5
It doesn't need the super stars (Rock, Brock) but as a business you'd be stupid not to use them if it meant an extra few hundred thousand buyers of an expensive PPV. Plus even the most jaded fans will pay to see arguably the biggest Attitude era star, and one of the biggest bad-asses/multi-sport-PPV draws in recent history. The companies issue is not nostalgia or part time names, it's the time management and booking trends. And Kofi Kingston doesn't deserve to be mentioned alongside Dolph Ziggler or Daniel Bryan. I know there's a vast difference between top tier star (Cena) and main eventer these days, but even over the last few months Sheamus has looked lesser than Ziggler or Bryan and you've regarded him as a main eventer. Bona-fide doesn't mean full-on. I do understand that Sheamus has been a lesser-booked talent these days, but the fact remains that WWE has a high enough opinion of him where yeah he can flounder around the mid-card a bit and be main eventer the next day. It's what I like to call "The Chris Jericho". I still hold out promise in Kofi although I see the writing on the wall. |
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Feb 3, 2013 13:55:52 GMT -5
Bringing in big names like Rock, Lesnar, HHH, and Taker helps WrestleMania make more money. It helps make the show feel "special" as opposed to the other 11 PPVs of the year. It makes the shows more entertaining (my opinion). I see no problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 3, 2013 13:58:24 GMT -5
They have the rest of the year to build full-time new stars, but tend to waste it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Feb 3, 2013 14:23:27 GMT -5
Bringing in big names like Rock, Lesnar, HHH, and Taker helps WrestleMania make more money. It helps make the show feel "special" as opposed to the other 11 PPVs of the year. It makes the shows more entertaining (my opinion). I see no problem. Inspired by this, I made an addition. It talks about how it unrealistically sets the bar for the rest of the year. |
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847 
|
Post by Reflecto on Feb 3, 2013 14:26:27 GMT -5
But then, if they aren't forced to go back to the well and use established "big stars" on part-time for Wrestlemania, wouldn't using the rest of the year to build full-time new stars happen?
|
|
|
|
Post by BorneAgain on Feb 3, 2013 14:34:27 GMT -5
Probably too "reality based" to work, but I'd love to see a storyline based around Ziggler and others being resentful of major stars getting all the top spots at Mania and leading to a "young vs. old" story at something like WM30.
|
|
Cronant
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,556
|
Post by Cronant on Feb 3, 2013 14:35:37 GMT -5
But then, if they aren't forced to go back to the well and use established "big stars" on part-time for Wrestlemania, wouldn't using the rest of the year to build full-time new stars happen? They aren't forced to do that though. They do it because the option is there, and it'd be stupid not to do it. If anything it stops them from forcing guys before they're ready. Its not like anyone thought Punk was built up enough to face The Rock back in 2011 when he first came back, but he got a good enough build to have a main event match with the guy later on. With some build its not hard to see guys like Ryback or Sheamus as being on that level in the future, but its just not the case right now. |
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Feb 3, 2013 14:45:40 GMT -5
When are people going to realize Wrestlemania is for the ultra casual fan? How many people watch the superbowl that haven't even watched a regular season game? Probably most of them. Same with Mania. The current, less famous full time talent gets EVERY OTHER PPV.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2013 15:01:39 GMT -5
When are people going to realize Wrestlemania is for the ultra casual fan? How many people watch the superbowl that haven't even watched a regular season game? Probably most of them. Same with Mania. The current, less famous full time talent gets EVERY OTHER PPV. Here's where it hurts. You know how WWE runs the same match into the ground, without the two even having a real program? For example, Sheamus/Barrett, Sheamus/Sandow, Orton/Barrett, Orton/Cesaro etc.? They wouldn't be doing that if they had to actually keep some of these matches special for a big Mania match. Instead, they just throw out their pseudo-main eventers all over Raw, Main Event, and SD, knowing that when it comes time to REALLY draw money, they don't need those guys to do it, they can just call Rock/Taker/Brock/Trips off the bench. It's a total crutch that hurts them long-term. |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 3, 2013 15:48:52 GMT -5
But then, if they aren't forced to go back to the well and use established "big stars" on part-time for Wrestlemania, wouldn't using the rest of the year to build full-time new stars happen? Not necessarily. The big stars will appear in two or three matches, but the rest of the Wrestlemania card is still open for new faces to do their thing, but WWE doesn't push anyone with starmaking momentum anymore. It's stop-start booking. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2013 16:07:36 GMT -5
They would do fine (900,000 buys or so probably) with just the regulars. I mean before Rock and Brock came back the shows headlined by just Cena and HHH/HBK/Undertaker before they were semi-retired all did around that mark and the ones with a celebrity like 23 and 24 went up a little bit more just like it goes up some when you add a special attraction wrestler.
Why do just fine though when you can do really good (a million+ buys) with Rock/Brock/HHH/Undertaker? Why throw money away like that?
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Feb 3, 2013 16:29:03 GMT -5
They would do fine (900,000 buys or so probably) with just the regulars. I mean before Rock and Brock came back the shows headlined by just Cena and HHH/HBK/Undertaker before they were semi-retired all did around that mark and the ones with a celebrity like 23 and 24 went up a little bit more just like it goes up some when you add a special attraction wrestler. Why do just fine though when you can do really good (a million+ buys) with Rock/Brock/HHH/Undertaker? Why throw money away like that? Because they're damaging the future. I'm not talking about the wrestlers individually, I'm talking about a WWE that doesn't allow the roster to become today's equivalent of them. It's like they may make money today at the expense of wasting it all tomorrow. WWE is looking a lot like WCW right now and not in a good way when it comes to booking talent. |
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,650
|
Post by The Ichi on Feb 3, 2013 16:36:40 GMT -5
The Rock is the only confirmed "past star" to have a match at Mania. The only other possible "past star" is Brock Lesnar, who is still only 35 years old, and guys that are past stars but still go on a regular basis, like Kane and The Big Show.
CM Punk, Ryback, Sheamus, Daniel Bryan, Dolph Ziggler, The Shield (most likely) and other current stars will all get spots.
Can we stop acting like an entire roster is getting screwed over? The only people that wont make the show are people that don't deserve to anyway.
Also, your sig is amusing considering what you're complaining about.
|
|
|
|
Post by youlookfly on Feb 3, 2013 17:07:06 GMT -5
They would do fine (900,000 buys or so probably) with just the regulars. I mean before Rock and Brock came back the shows headlined by just Cena and HHH/HBK/Undertaker before they were semi-retired all did around that mark and the ones with a celebrity like 23 and 24 went up a little bit more just like it goes up some when you add a special attraction wrestler. Why do just fine though when you can do really good (a million+ buys) with Rock/Brock/HHH/Undertaker? Why throw money away like that? Because they're damaging the future. I'm not talking about the wrestlers individually, I'm talking about a WWE that doesn't allow the roster to become today's equivalent of them. It's like they may make money today at the expense of wasting it all tomorrow. WWE is looking a lot like WCW right now and not in a good way when it comes to booking talent. Or maybe, WWE has already made all of the stars it can make on its current roster. Most of the current roster is nothing special and is the least charismatic and most bland group of wrestlers since the Sammartino days. |
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Feb 3, 2013 17:11:47 GMT -5
Also, your sig is amusing considering what you're complaining about. Oddly enough, that's the one dream match WWE blew big time. And that's while all four men were close to full-time in the company (I think Undertaker was just starting the one-day-a-year rule). |
|
|
|
Post by celticjobber on Feb 3, 2013 17:28:10 GMT -5
Having huge international stars like The Rock on the card, who is such a big movie star that he transcends pro wrestling means having more eyes on the PPV.
Leading to more people seeing guys like Dolph or Daniel Bryan, who are largely unknown to people who aren't regular viewers (basically it's like as if Bruce Willis had been a wrestler, made the Die Hard movies, then came back in 1995 or so).
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Feb 3, 2013 17:29:13 GMT -5
Probably too "reality based" to work, but I'd love to see a storyline based around Ziggler and others being resentful of major stars getting all the top spots at Mania and leading to a "young vs. old" story at something like WM30. Maybe it's because I've almost always seen this done by Vince Russo, but I've never seen a young crew vs old crew angle that actually worked. The bookers always push the young guys as the faces but the crowds always way prefer the old favorites. They usually don't even arrive at a resolution but just gradually fall apart without helping anyone. |
|
