|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Nov 13, 2013 18:12:42 GMT -5
I've read a few comments on here about cutting down on promo's and having more wrestling. That suits US. The casual fan? Not so much. I know a guy who "watches" wrestling and he says he only watches it FOR the drama and storylines, and he zips through the matches. I obviously don't speak to him much. Check whenever there's a ratings result in though. The ratings dip heavily whenever there's an actual wrestling match. That can't be a coincidence.Emphasis mine. I'd say that's totally related to a whole bunch of issues WWE has that people have already mentioned. If you treat your wins and losses like they don't matter (until they do)... If you treat the rest of your wrestlers as inconsequential filler no matter what they do... If you make your promos two to three times as long as they should be... If you fill your show with a bunch of recaps of that one really important segment you had surrounding the same few really important wrestlers... IF YOU TREAT 2/3s OF YOUR ROSTER AS FLOUNDERING FILLER WHO NEVER DO ANYTHING OF IMPORTANCE... The only time people will watch your ****ing show is when John Cena is on or that time Vince McMahon comes back or whenever Hunner takes a shit (a literal shit, not a metaphorical one, i.e. when he cuts a promo) because why the hell else would anyone follow a match featuring a majority of your wrestlers? To see who wins? If you ain't in the WWE title picture or in a main event story what you do doesn't really matter. When you start mattering just a little bit, your momentum is sacrificed to put over dudes who don't need it. See how frustrated I sound? I hardly even watch Raw, imagine how much caps would be in this post if I did. Just want to add that, while I agree with all your points, it's worth noting that historically speaking, the soap opera type/talky talky segments have always gotten the bigger ratings on RAW. That's kinda true for pro wrestling in general. |
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 13, 2013 18:16:25 GMT -5
The only major issues I have with WWE as of now is there not being enough anarchy or spontaneousness, and a lack of over-the-top characters. It doesn't matter if they're well conceived or stupid, just as long as it's something outrageous like Fandango and not something pedestrian like Curtis Axel.
But as for this accusation of them getting "cold feet" when it comes to creating a new face of the company? There's just one problem with that: they've already got a face of the company, and he's arguably the best all around talent in the industry. Until he's obviously and clearly no longer able to compete, why should they try to push him out the door? We joke about Cena never wanting to take time off, but in reality, he's not in any danger of dying in the ring or becoming Dynamite Kid, let alone WWE allowing that to happen.
And as for when he does retire, they can figure out who the next big star is then. They always eventually emerge.
|
|
|
|
Post by xxshoyuweeniexx on Nov 13, 2013 18:36:30 GMT -5
Yes. Even after the long title reign, Punk is still not as big a star as he should be. WWE have come close, but they often bog him down with weak angles, feuds and storylines which slow his momentum and progress. The Wyatts will never be at levels that Bryan and Punk can get to. A feud with them can only be a demotion for Bryan and Punk Eh, the only way he could be pushed further would be to make him the face of the company, and that's not happening for a variety of reason (his dickish attitude, him probably retiring when he contract is up, etc). Being the number 2 baby face behind Cena isn't a bad spot to be. As for WWE's problems, it's literally punishing guys for getting over. Who cares if Zack Ryder's not the best wrestler? He's passable and an over midcard act. Why is Kofi the only midcard face allowed to win things? Why can't Ryder or Kidd also be presented that way. Like, I don't get it. They could get MORE MONEY if they pushed the dude cause he sells merch pretty damn. I don't understand why WWE doesn't WANT MORE MONEY. I don't know if they think "we didn't build you up so we don't want the millions you bring us" or what, but it's f***ing retarded. And don't get me started on Ryback. No, he was never going to be Goldberg, chants and winning streak aside, but why was it so bad to have a main event face that was a no-nonsense asskicker? Why turn him into a pussy heel no one gives a crap about? Why bury the guy? |
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Nov 13, 2013 18:43:50 GMT -5
For the life of me I don't see how Daniel Bryan winning clean over Cena, then beating Orton twice, then losing by a screwjob, then teaming with CM Punk makes him a midcarder. Maybe that's the problem with WWE. They've conditioned the fans that if it doesn't involve Cena or the WWE Title, it is not important. The problem was, the wave of popularity demanded that Bryan get and keep the belt NOW. That was what WWE f***ed up. Sometimes you need to strike while the iron's hot and when the crowd WANTS it. And the same story could have been told with Bryan as Champion, fending off corporate interference, until he finally gets robbed, wherein you do the WrestleMania chase. When you crown a new king, you need to ride that out a bit. Austin did. Bret did. HBK did. Cena and Batista did. Instead, WWE orchestrated a ton of hokey screwjobs that pissed off a lot of people and segued Big Show into Bryan's role as corporate destroyer. It was Show who who had the much stronger angle to take down the Authority. It was Show they built up as finally having enough. It was stupid. Show being filler is fine. But he's gotten much stronger character booking and motivations than Bryan. Right now, Daniel Bryan is Lex Luger in '93. We'll see what happens by 'Mania. And if he's not winning the WWE Title, there's going to be a lot of people eating crow. I think basically, they didn't bury Bryan because he still looked like an unbeatable force the whole time. what they failed to do was deliver the outcome the fans were clamouring for, and then expected us all to just forget about it and cheer for a noticeably aging Big Show and Randy Orton as a boring-as-hell heel instead when we could've gotten something fresh instead. |
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Nov 13, 2013 18:47:22 GMT -5
I say the single biggest problem is the move to 3hrs. When they did that they traded away the quality of the show, knowingly, because it was 'better for business'. And it was. It's meant more money for WWE and more money for USA. But it's taken a huge toll on the quality of the product. The show is practically unwatchable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Nov 13, 2013 18:54:18 GMT -5
Yes. Even after the long title reign, Punk is still not as big a star as he should be. WWE have come close, but they often bog him down with weak angles, feuds and storylines which slow his momentum and progress. The Wyatts will never be at levels that Bryan and Punk can get to. A feud with them can only be a demotion for Bryan and Punk Eh, the only way he could be pushed further would be to make him the face of the company, and that's not happening for a variety of reason (his dickish attitude, him probably retiring when he contract is up, etc). Being the number 2 baby face behind Cena isn't a bad spot to be. As for WWE's problems, it's literally punishing guys for getting over. Who cares if Zack Ryder's not the best wrestler? He's passable and an over midcard act. Why is Kofi the only midcard face allowed to win things? Why can't Ryder or Kidd also be presented that way. Like, I don't get it. They could get MORE MONEY if they pushed the dude cause he sells merch pretty damn. I don't understand why WWE doesn't WANT MORE MONEY. I don't know if they think "we didn't build you up so we don't want the millions you bring us" or what, but it's f***ing retarded. And don't get me started on Ryback. No, he was never going to be Goldberg, chants and winning streak aside, but why was it so bad to have a main event face that was a no-nonsense asskicker? Why turn him into a pussy heel no one gives a crap about? Why bury the guy? leaving aside the argument for a second, if I'm CM Punk I'm happy as hell I'm not "the face of the company". he gets paid better than everyone except Cena and maybe Orton, gets featured prominently and do what he likes doing with little oversight, his value to the company as its #2 guy is through the roof(lets not kid ourselves about it being Orton anymore). all that and he doesn't have to run himself ragged or force himself to come back from an injury early because he's "needed" the way Cena does. it's really not a bad place to be, and complaining that he isn't featured as much as Cena is is silly because after Cena and whatever idea du jour Triple H is involved with (which isn't going to be a weekly thing, because I don't see him showing up every week after this story is done) he's probably the most featured guy on the roster. |
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Nov 13, 2013 18:59:33 GMT -5
Wait the guy who has one of the longest title reigns in modern WWE history, who in this calender year has faced Rock/Taker/Brock is the guy who need a major push? And he went 0-4 against them, what a hot streak. In all of Punk's big pushes he has 0 clean wins over top tier guys. He has been as aggressively defined as upper midcard as anyone could be. Good think they can always bring in Chris Jericho or Ryback to let everyone know that yes, he can beat some people but not anyone who matters. |
|
|
|
Post by I've got some bad news... on Nov 13, 2013 19:05:24 GMT -5
Not striking when the iron is hot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Nov 13, 2013 19:08:46 GMT -5
Hm, I never even noticed the fact that Punk has never beaten a huge star cleanly. That's...really interesting. Dude is still easily the second/third biggest star in the company but I think that lack of a HUGE win is absolutely worth noting.
|
|
Sparkybob
King Koopa
I have a status?
Posts: 11,005 
|
Post by Sparkybob on Nov 13, 2013 19:19:51 GMT -5
Wait the guy who has one of the longest title reigns in modern WWE history, who in this calender year has faced Rock/Taker/Brock is the guy who need a major push? And he went 0-4 against them, what a hot streak. In all of Punk's big pushes he has 0 clean wins over top tier guys. He has been as aggressively defined as upper midcard as anyone could be. Good think they can always bring in Chris Jericho or Ryback to let everyone know that yes, he can beat some people but not anyone who matters. I don't see how a guy who gets those spots and opportunities is an upper mid carder at all. -I forget which Rock match it was, but I think it was the EC one where he had the rock beat clean in the ring, down for a 3 count but the ref was done. It wasn't like it was shown Punk was no match for the Rock. And I'll mention again there is no shame in losing to the rock who is kayfabe like the 2nd strongest guy in the company. -No shame what so ever in losing to Taker at mania. It should be honor just to get a match with him when it's clears he is nearing the end of his career. -He had Brock beat if it wasn't for Heyman's interference. Plus I'll add he was booked stronger in his with Brock than Cena was with him due to the fact Punk got good offense in while Cena got his ass kicked 99% of the match. My main point is, how much more over can he get with another push? I'll say it's very marginal. On any given night he could be the most over baby-face in the company. Realistically he will only get slightly more over which again isn't as valuable as getting a guy getting little to mid card pops like Cesaro/Cody/Kofi/Ziggler/Wade/Biggie to main event overness. That has a lot more value to the company. Punk realistically is going to stop being a full timer in the next 3-4 years while those guys I listed could still have 8+ more years at the top. Your comparison to Ryback/Jericho are quite flawed. Neither of those had competitive matches that they should have won with with attractions like the Rock and Brock. No Ryback and Jericho lost frequently on TV and never had any big matches against returning stars like Punk did. Hey if you want Punk to get another push to the top that's cool, we as fans all have the guys we want to see at the top, but I don't see how Punk should be one of the first guys mention for people who need another title push. There are ton of mid card guys who will provide the company much more value if they get the rub of a big title program and keep getting pushed afterwerds. |
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Nov 13, 2013 19:23:14 GMT -5
And he went 0-4 against them, what a hot streak. In all of Punk's big pushes he has 0 clean wins over top tier guys. He has been as aggressively defined as upper midcard as anyone could be. Good think they can always bring in Chris Jericho or Ryback to let everyone know that yes, he can beat some people but not anyone who matters. I don't see how a guy who gets those spots and opportunities is an upper mid carder at all. -I forget which Rock match it was, but I think it was the EC one where he had the rock beat clean in the ring, down for a 3 count but the ref was done. It wasn't like it was shown Punk was no match for the Rock. And I'll mention again there is no shame in losing to the rock who is kayfabe like the 2nd strongest guy in the company. -No shame what so ever in losing to Taker at mania. It should be honor just to get a match with him when it's clears he is nearing the end of his career. -He had Brock beat if it wasn't for Heyman's interference. Plus I'll add he was booked stronger in his with Brock than Cena was with him due to the fact Punk got good offense in while Cena got his ass kicked 99% of the match. My main point is, how much more over can he get with another push? I'll say it's very marginal. On any given night he could be the most over baby-face in the company. Realistically he will only get slightly more over which again isn't as valuable as getting a guy getting little to mid card pops like Cesaro/Cody/Kofi/Ziggler/Wade/Biggie to main event overness. That has a lot more value to the company. Punk realistically is going to stop being a full timer in the next 3-4 years while those guys I listed could still have 8+ more years at the top. Your comparison to Ryback/Jericho are quite flawed. Neither of those had competitive matches that they should have won with with attractions like the Rock and Brock. No Ryback and Jericho lost frequently on TV and never had any big matches against returning stars like Punk did. Hey if you want Punk to get another push to the top that's cool, we as fans all have the guys we want to see at the top, but I don't see how Punk should be one of the first guys mention for people who need another title push. There are ton of mid card guys who will provide the company much more value if they get the rub of a big title program and keep getting pushed afterwerds. I'm not saying Punk is like Ryback or Jericho. I'm saying that Ryback and Jericho have defined the ceiling for Punk in the past year, those are the only big wins he's had. I agree that CM Punk doesn't really need another push, but I also would say that they've been really hesitant to actually have him beat people, to the extent that he's been shown to be one step below that upper tier of guys, over and over and over again. They've defined him as a second class guy. He's the guy where it just happened that HHH had to beat him at the height of his momentum, he's the guy that for some reason could never main event a PPV in his title reign, etc. There's always a reason, but he's basically a Dolph Ziggler to the stars. |
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Nov 13, 2013 19:26:45 GMT -5
But as for this accusation of them getting "cold feet" when it comes to creating a new face of the company? There's just one problem with that: they've already got a face of the company, and he's arguably the best all around talent in the industry. Until he's obviously and clearly no longer able to compete, why should they try to push him out the door? We joke about Cena never wanting to take time off, but in reality, he's not in any danger of dying in the ring or becoming Dynamite Kid, let alone WWE allowing that to happen. And as for when he does retire, they can figure out who the next big star is then. They always eventually emerge. The problem is that, there "is" a problem with the WWE's cold feet, even though all of those things are true. John Cena is arguably the best all-round talent in the industry. Having said that, though- there is a world of difference between "make someone else THE face of the company and make some other viable, capable faces"- and even though WWE has forgotten that, a lot of the fans have forgotten that too. The CM Punk/Daniel Bryan point is a problem for it right now- in fans' views, the fact that Punk and Bryan are feuding with other top names- even names like Lesnar [or even lower like the Wyatts] is a burial and they're now no higher on the card than Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd are- and this IS a problem that needs to be worked on as well. They don't need to REPLACE John Cena as the face of the company, but they do need to compliment Cena with other talented, capable babyfaces as well who can be OTHER very good, credible top-tier babyfaces, even if they're not exactly THE FACE of the company. Having John Cena as the modern day Hulk Hogan is not a problem at all. When the WWE's booking plans become "YOU WILL LOVE JOHN CENA AND NO ONE ELSE BUT JOHN CENA", there's a problem. |
|
Sparkybob
King Koopa
I have a status?
Posts: 11,005
|
Post by Sparkybob on Nov 13, 2013 19:28:00 GMT -5
I don't see how a guy who gets those spots and opportunities is an upper mid carder at all. -I forget which Rock match it was, but I think it was the EC one where he had the rock beat clean in the ring, down for a 3 count but the ref was done. It wasn't like it was shown Punk was no match for the Rock. And I'll mention again there is no shame in losing to the rock who is kayfabe like the 2nd strongest guy in the company. -No shame what so ever in losing to Taker at mania. It should be honor just to get a match with him when it's clears he is nearing the end of his career. -He had Brock beat if it wasn't for Heyman's interference. Plus I'll add he was booked stronger in his with Brock than Cena was with him due to the fact Punk got good offense in while Cena got his ass kicked 99% of the match. My main point is, how much more over can he get with another push? I'll say it's very marginal. On any given night he could be the most over baby-face in the company. Realistically he will only get slightly more over which again isn't as valuable as getting a guy getting little to mid card pops like Cesaro/Cody/Kofi/Ziggler/Wade/Biggie to main event overness. That has a lot more value to the company. Punk realistically is going to stop being a full timer in the next 3-4 years while those guys I listed could still have 8+ more years at the top. Your comparison to Ryback/Jericho are quite flawed. Neither of those had competitive matches that they should have won with with attractions like the Rock and Brock. No Ryback and Jericho lost frequently on TV and never had any big matches against returning stars like Punk did. Hey if you want Punk to get another push to the top that's cool, we as fans all have the guys we want to see at the top, but I don't see how Punk should be one of the first guys mention for people who need another title push. There are ton of mid card guys who will provide the company much more value if they get the rub of a big title program and keep getting pushed afterwerds. I'm not saying Punk is like Ryback or Jericho. I'm saying that Ryback and Jericho have defined the ceiling for Punk in the past year, those are the only big wins he's had. I agree that CM Punk doesn't really need another push, but I also would say that they've been really hesitant to actually have him beat people, to the extent that he's been shown to be one step below that upper tier of guys, over and over and over again. They've defined him as a guy who can't get Eh, he's been booked competitively enough against those top guys where it didn't seem like Punk didn't belong. I'll agree if Punk got absolutely destroyed in his big matches against Rock/Brock but he should have won 2 of those 3 matches if it weren't for forces outside of his control. I guess it will be nice for Punk to get a big win over those attractions but I don't really see it as necessary for him. Ever since his push n 2011 he's gotten over Cena a couple of times in singles matches which I count the same as beating those attraction due to Cena's kayfabe power level. |
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Nov 13, 2013 19:31:26 GMT -5
I'm not saying Punk is like Ryback or Jericho. I'm saying that Ryback and Jericho have defined the ceiling for Punk in the past year, those are the only big wins he's had. I agree that CM Punk doesn't really need another push, but I also would say that they've been really hesitant to actually have him beat people, to the extent that he's been shown to be one step below that upper tier of guys, over and over and over again. They've defined him as a guy who can't get Eh, he's been booked competitively enough against those top guys where it didn't seem like Punk didn't belong. I'll agree if Punk got absolutely destroyed in his big matches against Rock/Brock but he should have won 2 of those 3 matches if it weren't for forces outside of his control. I guess it will be nice for Punk to get a big win over those attractions but I don't really see it as necessary for him. Ever since his push n 2011 he's gotten over Cena a couple of times in singles matches which I count the same as beating those attraction due to Cena's kayfabe power level. Gotten over Cena = Stealing wins due to distraction. Punk has never beat Cena clean. Even in his biggest moment, when they should have just let Punk beat him at MITB, they couldn't do it. CM Punk as presented by WWE is a second class guy. Which is fine, that's the story they're determined to tell, but that is the story they're determined to tell. |
|
|
|
Post by kingoftheindies on Nov 13, 2013 19:54:46 GMT -5
I think a huge issue is WWE quite often doesn't understand the demographic of their audience. I've said it with Total Divas, it's fine on E!, but then when they try to push those Divas on Raw, they're shocked that the only Diva getting reactions is AJ Lee. Granted part of that is most of the Divas are treated like crap, but their thinking for a lot of this is backwards.
Take the Brie Mode stuff with Brie. She turns face cause she's engaged to Bryan and then the news comes out WWE is confused she or the Total Divas aren't getting reactions. Well let's take a look at the Total Divas. When on Raw 2 are portrayed as bitches, 2 were never seen until they were hired for Total Divas, 2 just dance for Brodus Clay, and 1 hangs with Khali and Hornswoggle. While the one whose getting boo'd has been heavily featured in angles for over a year and has shown herself to be passionate about wrestling... which is what the fans came to see... Gee, whose gonna get cheered?
A similar thing happened to David Otunga when he was a rookie on NXT and was being hyped constantly (more than any of the rookies) a report came out that WWE was confused because Jennifer Hudson's husband wasn't getting over. WHY THE HELL SHOULD WRESTLING FANS CARE THAT OTUNGA IS MARRIED TO JENNIFER HUDSON?!?
I don't agree that WWE can't make new stars as quite a few guys have made themselves pretty damn popular. Now taking the next step has been an issue though.
I also think the WWE doesn't really understand that a lot of people get over because they are damn good in the ring. Sure great charisma can mask ability in the ring, but eventually once the crowd realizes that you can't go when it matters, they're gonna stop caring (see Brodus Clay)
|
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 13, 2013 19:58:50 GMT -5
But as for this accusation of them getting "cold feet" when it comes to creating a new face of the company? There's just one problem with that: they've already got a face of the company, and he's arguably the best all around talent in the industry. Until he's obviously and clearly no longer able to compete, why should they try to push him out the door? We joke about Cena never wanting to take time off, but in reality, he's not in any danger of dying in the ring or becoming Dynamite Kid, let alone WWE allowing that to happen. And as for when he does retire, they can figure out who the next big star is then. They always eventually emerge. The problem is that, there "is" a problem with the WWE's cold feet, even though all of those things are true. John Cena is arguably the best all-round talent in the industry. Having said that, though- there is a world of difference between "make someone else THE face of the company and make some other viable, capable faces"- and even though WWE has forgotten that, a lot of the fans have forgotten that too. The CM Punk/Daniel Bryan point is a problem for it right now- in fans' views, the fact that Punk and Bryan are feuding with other top names- even names like Lesnar [or even lower like the Wyatts] is a burial and they're now no higher on the card than Zack Ryder or Tyson Kidd are- and this IS a problem that needs to be worked on as well. They don't need to REPLACE John Cena as the face of the company, but they do need to compliment Cena with other talented, capable babyfaces as well who can be OTHER very good, credible top-tier babyfaces, even if they're not exactly THE FACE of the company. Having John Cena as the modern day Hulk Hogan is not a problem at all. When the WWE's booking plans become "YOU WILL LOVE JOHN CENA AND NO ONE ELSE BUT JOHN CENA", there's a problem. But WWE's booking doesn't reflect any desire on their part to get fans to love Cena and only Cena. Or at least in the rare instances in which they do, like when they put Cena out there as their ambassador for cancer benefits and whatnot, they'll immediantly backtrack and go back to trying to egg on Cena's haters, like with the "you're not a wrestler" crap from Bryan or pretty much the entire Rock feud. As for that perception that Punk and Bryan are slumming it because they're not front and center at the tippy top of the card, that's mostly coming from diehard fans of Bryan and Punk. And since they tend to get so animated about it, perception sadly can become reality. But the truth is, WWE's already made Bryan and Punk into those other viable, capable stars that compliment the main company face- and I'd argue they've also done a good job of presenting them as such. When you wipe away all of the back and forth arguments, you've got two of the most well booked and celebrated superstars in WWE history. I can understand a fan maybe claiming that they failed to pull the trigger on Ryback, or Christian or Ziggler (as of now) or Kofi, or even JoMo. But at this point, trying to unironically argue that WWE are in any danger of "missing the boat" on Punk or Bryan is laughable to me. Vince has jumped on both those boats, sailed them like nobody's business and fired each of their ROH harpoons at whatever white whale he imagined at the time. Besides, there's also the possibility of there not being another potential top drawing guy right now that wants to tackle the Cena Workload, hence WWE not yet relinquishing the position. And as for Punk getting another "major" clean win over a part timer? It's about as necessary as giving Warren Buffett a raise. He's already a legend himself, I don't think him never pinning another fellow legend hurts him that badly. |
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Nov 13, 2013 20:04:48 GMT -5
A similar thing happened to David Otunga when he was a rookie on NXT and was being hyped constantly (more than any of the rookies) a report came out that WWE was confused because Jennifer Hudson's husband wasn't getting over. WHY THE HELL SHOULD WRESTLING FANS CARE THAT OTUNGA IS MARRIED TO JENNIFER HUDSON?!? Because... because wrestling fans know who very famous people like Jennifer Hudson are? And if they're at all typical, they find her likable? I don't think "wrestling demographics" is what you're talking about. I think you're talking about "weird mutants." This argument would make more sense if they hadn't forced Clay to stop his mid-match posing and his call-and-answer talking during the matches because they wanted Ryback to get over by doing stuff like that instead. |
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Nov 13, 2013 20:08:34 GMT -5
^ There is a guy who wants to tackle the Cena workload.  |
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Nov 13, 2013 20:30:48 GMT -5
But as for this accusation of them getting "cold feet" when it comes to creating a new face of the company? There's just one problem with that: they've already got a face of the company, and he's arguably the best all around talent in the industry. Until he's obviously and clearly no longer able to compete, why should they try to push him out the door? We joke about Cena never wanting to take time off, but in reality, he's not in any danger of dying in the ring or becoming Dynamite Kid, let alone WWE allowing that to happen. And as for when he does retire, they can figure out who the next big star is then. They always eventually emerge. No, you need to figure it out as a contingency NOW. Any smart business does; and doesn't just assume that the gravy train will keep on rolling with no end in sight. You need to plan for the unexpected, because nothing is for sure. That doesn't necessarily imply you kick Cena to the curb --I mean, why would you? He's still valuable-- it just means that you create someone else as strongly booked and protected in the event your investment fizzles out or a disaster occurs. And as for them "already having the face of the company" and that guy being "arguably the best overall talent in the industry", that guy in 1996/97 was Shawn Michaels. But WWE was smart enough to also strap a rocket to Steve Austin at the time, and when HBK's career ended after a freak bump after all their invested building, they luckily had their ducks in a row to replace him with Stone Cold - and Austin ended up being a much bigger star because of this foresight. And this was after they did the opposite with Hogan in '93, and it created years of financial losses and plummeting buyrates, because they didn't see him not being there, and they never pushed someone on the level to step up when he did. Yet here we are again. |
|
|
|
Post by Capt. Internet Darling on Nov 13, 2013 22:34:21 GMT -5
Insane booking.
- Making your MitB holder look weak as hell for months, then look solid for the month before cash-in where the crowd inevitably treats that wrestler with apathy. Why should they be emotionally invested in a wrestler if they know he's just going to go on a losing spree?
- Obvious match outcomes. In the last three PPV's, I got 90-100% of the outcomes correct and RAW can be even more obvious. This might only affect the smarkier crowds, but it's still a problem.
- Boring boring BORING booking. "I want title! Give me title!" or "You hit me! I don't like you!" I remember feuds that were based off of wrestlers characters. Why don't we see Ziggler trying to outdo someone at showing off? Why isn't Sandow feuding over who's most intelligent?
- Book something lower than the uppermidcard for once. Following on from the above point, why can't they stick Fandango and Tons of Funk in a short 4 week feud about dancing or something? Why can't the Real Americans actually feud on Main Event/SD with some of the foreign contingent? Make every wrestler look important and the WWE will start to get somewhere.
|
|
