|
Post by celticjobber on Nov 27, 2013 23:37:07 GMT -5
WWE thinks they know what the fans want better than the fans themselves do. But they often seem to have no idea. But what do the fans want? Is there really a hivemind? Bryan is getting great pops. So is Fandango from some crowds. Take that and tell me how to give people what they want. I would say the majority of fans want Daniel Bryan to be taken more seriously by WWE as a permanent main event star. And they certainly don't want Big Show as a main eventer instead, as WWE tried to force upon the audience with Survivor Series with disastrous results. And Daniel Bryan isn't comparable to Fandango, that's just ridiculous. DB is getting sustained pops and chants, even when he's not around. Fandango gets mild reactions by comparison, it's mostly just the "da da da" stuff during his theme and Summer Rae who get most of the reactions when he wrestles. And I can't remember hearing a "Fandango" chant before.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 27, 2013 23:49:18 GMT -5
Being fair on the "Bryan: Given a chance or not?" thoughts: Daniel Bryan's entire push was WWE doing what would have already happened with Bryan anyway. Every part of it- the shots Michael Cole took, the stupid angles, the firing, 18 seconds- it all was done for one reason: To make Daniel Bryan CM Punk. -A lot of times in the current era, it seems like the fans won't LET the WWE make anyone a new star who isn't one of OUR GUYS. Maybe that's an unfair blanket statement, but with how the IWC tends to react sometimes, you can't blame the WWE if they believe that's how the IWC is. -CM Punk went from being one of OUR GUYS, to a capable WWE superstar, to a main eventer, to one of the faces of the franchise in WWE. There IS proof that WWE can turn someone who's OUR GUY into THE WWE UNIVERSE'S GUY. -However, WWE, for better or worse, has their own distinct recipes to make main eventers. We see too often some of these recipes: The Shawn Michaels (tag team gets pushed, gets a buzz, team gets split up, and one of the two embarks on a singles career and gets pushed to the moon) and the Dwayne Johnson (babyface debuts as a generic happy-go-lucky babyface, doesn't get over, turns heel, then is allowed to show a personality- then is turned face again and pushed to the moon) are two of their favorite recipes. CM Punk, however, has dictated the newest recipe WWE has, and Bryan is the first example of how it works: 1-Hire standout on the independent scene. 2-Once they're under contract, do everything you can to make the fans truly believe that the WWE hates this wrestler, thinks they're terrible, and has no intent to see this guy succeed in WWE. Whether it's keeping them in development longer than possible, leaking reports to dirtsheets that the guy has "nuclear heatz", or whatever you have to do- MAKE THE FANS BELIEVE YOU DON'T WANT THEM TO SUCCEED. 3- Know that the IWC will then say "WE'LL SHOW YOU! We know how good [INDY STANDOUT] (NOT! [Copyrightable WWE-ized name] is, SCREW YOU VINCE!)is, and WE WILL MAKE YOU MAKE THIS GUY A SUPERSTAR!" 4- Watch the fans then proceed to be invested in whatever cockamamie story or angle you put this guy in, whether it's good or bad, solely because pretending to be invested in the story will get this wrestler over so that the fans will also believe in the guy without knowing his skills on the indy scene. 5- Everyone ends up happy. The indy star becomes a top guy, the WWE laughs their way to the bank knowing they turned the smaaaaaaaaart marks into marks with high IQs again, and the smarks get to feel like THEY were the ones who put one over on the WWE by making this guy a superstar. This is the post I was looking for in this thread. And while I think there are some more complexities to be discussed, I think it describes the current WWE more than anything so far. This is my interpretation of WWE's booking style when it comes to indy favourites. 1- Hire standout on the independent scene. 2- Give him a terrible name that sounds so generic and lifeless that he already starts his WWE career with an obstacle in front of him 3- If they don't do #2, grudgingly use the name or a similar one to the one he built the fame and persona upon that attracted WWE to sign him in the first instance. 4 -Once they're under contract, do everything you can to make the indy guy look and sound like a loser, to validate some carny mentality among WWE management that the guy sucks or some prison mentality that the guy must pay dues and go through some sort of bizarre initiation or hazing process first, wasting possibly several years of the guy's career in the process, along with any profits that would have possibly come with portraying him as a star right from the get go. Reports of nuclear heat are probably true. 5- Keep the guy buried in the developmentals, until he happens to be fortunate enough to have an advocate among the booking staff or road agents, who sees what the rest of management refuses to, that the guy has great talent and earning potential. 6- If they don't do #5, just throw him out there with a crappy main roster gimmick or as fodder to a less talented performer who management wants to push down the throat of the audience. 7- Fight and scratch with every possible effort to repeat #6 over and over until fan support simply overwelms the preferred booking, and forces management to push the guy, despite their desire not to. 8- Continue to do everything in their power to sabotage the guy, who is now succeeding despite management's booking, rather than because of it, and could be succeeding even further if management provided him with the means to do so.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Nov 27, 2013 23:49:23 GMT -5
But what do the fans want? Is there really a hivemind? Bryan is getting great pops. So is Fandango from some crowds. Take that and tell me how to give people what they want. I would say the majority of fans want Daniel Bryan to be taken more seriously by WWE as a permanent main event star. And they certainly don't want Big Show as a main eventer instead, as WWE tried to force upon the audience with Survivor Series with disastrous results. And Daniel Bryan isn't comparable to Fandango, that's just ridiculous. DB is getting sustained pops and chants, even when he's not around. Fandango gets mild reactions by comparison, it's mostly just the "da da da" stuff during his theme and Summer Rae who get most of the reactions when he wrestles. And I can't remember hearing a "Fandango" chant before. Humming the music, chanting the name ... he's over. I'm not saying that he should be in Bryan's place, obviously, I'm saying he's obviously over -- and your reaction is "so what"? Which is exactly what a lot of people say the WWE has done when wrestlers are over and they havent taken advantage. But nobody on the internet is passionate about Fandango. We didn't see him toil in the indies, we didn't get his DVDs (and I own a couple of Bryan's from ROH myself) -- and yes I do realize he wasn't born into WWE and spent a few years in the low minor leagues before signing into developmental, but he wasn't on the big indie stage and you could probably count on a couple of hands people who saw him pre-WWE developmental and remember him. So nobody gets upset if Fandango isn't getting a huge, major push right now. Yes, the majority of fans probably do want Bryan to be in the main event scene ... but those same people did NOT want to see him wrestle Orton yet again at yet another PPV ... particularly if WWE isn't ready to put the title on him yet (so we'd have had to see another screwy finish). WWE's solution was to give Big Show -- who did also have an unresolved storyline against the the Authority -- a short turn. I don't see the big deal there. Could have been someone else, but it wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by celticjobber on Nov 27, 2013 23:55:02 GMT -5
I would say the majority of fans want Daniel Bryan to be taken more seriously by WWE as a permanent main event star. And they certainly don't want Big Show as a main eventer instead, as WWE tried to force upon the audience with Survivor Series with disastrous results. And Daniel Bryan isn't comparable to Fandango, that's just ridiculous. DB is getting sustained pops and chants, even when he's not around. Fandango gets mild reactions by comparison, it's mostly just the "da da da" stuff during his theme and Summer Rae who get most of the reactions when he wrestles. And I can't remember hearing a "Fandango" chant before. Humming the music, chanting the name ... he's over. I'm not saying that he should be in Bryan's place, obviously, I'm saying he's obviously over -- and your reaction is "so what"? Which is exactly what a lot of people say the WWE has done when wrestlers are over and they havent taken advantage. But nobody on the internet is passionate about Fandango. We didn't see him toil in the indies, we didn't get his DVDs (and I own a couple of Bryan's from ROH myself) -- and yes I do realize he wasn't born into WWE and spent a few years in the low minor leagues before signing into developmental, but he wasn't on the big indie stage and you could probably count on a couple of hands people who saw him pre-WWE developmental and remember him. So nobody gets upset if Fandango isn't getting a huge, major push right now. Yes, the majority of fans probably do want Bryan to be in the main event scene ... but those same people did NOT want to see him wrestle Orton yet again at yet another PPV ... particularly if WWE isn't ready to put the title on him yet (so we'd have had to see another screwy finish). WWE's solution was to give Big Show -- who did also have an unresolved storyline against the the Authority -- a short turn. I don't see the big deal there. Could have been someone else, but it wasn't. I never watched Daniel Bryan on the indies. I heard about "American Dragon" on the Observer radio shows years ago and read about him, but I never actually saw him wrestle until he was in WWE. So him being an indy guy has no bearing on me being a fan. But Fandango's reactions have never been anywhere near what Daniel Bryan gets. And even the singing along to his music thing died off dramatically a few weeks after that post-Wrestlemania RAW (it still happens, but not on the same level, unless they're overseas). From what I can tell, Fandango (or his theme music) seems to be far more over with crowds in the UK than those in the US.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Nov 28, 2013 0:03:36 GMT -5
This is the post I was looking for in this thread. And while I think there are some more complexities to be discussed, I think it describes the current WWE more than anything so far. This is my interpretation of WWE's booking style when it comes to indy favourites. 1- Hire standout on the independent scene. 2- Give him a terrible name that sounds so generic and lifeless that he already starts his WWE career with an obstacle in front of him 3- If they don't do #2, grudgingly use the name or a similar one to the one he built the fame and persona upon that attracted WWE to sign him in the first instance. 4 -Once they're under contract, do everything you can to make the indy guy look and sound like a loser, to validate some carny mentality among WWE management that the guy sucks or some prison mentality that the guy must pay dues and go through some sort of bizarre initiation or hazing process first, wasting possibly several years of the guy's career in the process, along with any profits that would have possibly come with portraying him as a star right from the get go. Reports of nuclear heat are probably true. 5- Keep the guy buried in the developmentals, until he happens to be fortunate enough to have an advocate among the booking staff or road agents, who sees what the rest of management refuses to, that the guy has great talent and earning potential. 6- If they don't do #5, just throw him out there with a crappy main roster gimmick or as fodder to a less talented performer who management wants to push down the throat of the audience. 7- Fight and scratch with every possible effort to repeat #6 over and over until fan support simply overwelms the preferred booking, and forces management to push the guy, despite their desire not to. 8- Continue to do everything in their power to sabotage the guy, who is now succeeding despite management's booking, rather than because of it, and could be succeeding even further if management provided him with the means to do so. I think the reply proves the initial post. And of course the WWE treats people who come in through tryoungs or who weren't well-known in the indies completely differently. They give them super-cool names and hotshot them right to the top, every single one of them. The Shield is made up of two indy darlings and one guy who got his start in developmental. The Wyatt Family has two who basically were unknown before developmental and one indy darling (I don't know if you can call Brodie Lee/Luke Harper a darling, but a lot of people were aware of him before he got to developmental). That's a .500 batting average for guys from the indies on two very pushed, very over teams. And there's Cesaro who came from the indies and has been given a great push. Frankly I don't see how WWE is killing these guys. Is Dean Ambrose a terrible name and Jon Moxley the coolest ever, or what?
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Nov 28, 2013 0:04:42 GMT -5
This brings back my question from before. What is over? What crowd's reaction counts toward who gets pushed on TV? IS it MSG? Is it Chicago or Philly? Or is it Beaumont, Texas or Iowa?
Every time a crowd goes batshit crazy for someone that isn't being pushed a top guy, I hear about crowds "just getting themselves over" and "marking for themselves". When a crowd takes a massive dump on a storyline it's "just a bunch of smarks".
Yet if a crowd goes nuts for the top storylines, reacts exactly as they "should" (cheers faces, boos heels) then it somehow proves WWE knows what they're doing.
If the crowd is just dead, for all but the main event, I see it tossed around that it shows how weak the midcarders are and how they can't draw, and thus deserve to be where they are on the card.
Point is, WHERE does it matter? If MSG is packed, and absolutely brutalizes a storyline, does that mean it should be dropped on the spot? It's the "home crowd" after all, and the place where Vince will often use as a barometer.
If a crowd of 17,000 just cheer like mad for the top guys, and it's a sea of positivity, does that mean more than if a crowd of equal size boos the main angle and reacts backwards?
Honestly, we can take Bryan, Big Show, or any other interchangeable part out of this. Storyline is Triphanie doing what they do, being heels. Babyface X gets screwed over. It goes back and forth, but then Cena becomes involved and we wind up with Cena/Orton/Triphanie as the main focus of the angle.
Everyone else is inconsequential. Those four are the focus. If the crowd loves it in one town, does it prove those four should be the focus? If the crowd hates it, does that prove anything?
Small sample sizes, I know, but if I'm trying for a statistical analysis, then what variables matter?
|
|
|
Post by Straight Edge Scrotum on Nov 28, 2013 0:13:06 GMT -5
I honestly think it all starts and ends with Vince himself.
You look back in the past when some guys would become huge stars in the WWE, then suddenly up and jump ship to somewhere else (mostly to WcW). In every DVD that talks about that era, everyone mentions how much Vince struggled with what he felt was a betrayal. And while that's probably not as big a problem now with the lack of competition out there, Vince McMahon is definitely someone to hold a grudge and I don't think he ever forgets something like that.
Fasy forward to WWE buying out WcW and ECW. This is the era where the WWE demands to own everything about its wrestlers. From their name to their image to any and all marketing opportunities that they can come up with. Guys like El Generico and Daniel Bryan (both of whom I'm 'meh' about) have very well known gimmicks and followings. And both were repackaged by the WWE machine so that Vince could own their names and current likenesses. Now I don't think it's pure greed or short-sightedness on their part, I think it's part of a system designed by Vince to keep people in check.
I believe Vince micromanages everything to make certain that EVERY person who works for WWE, from the top to the very bottom, all know who can potentially make or break them. Yeah, there's the indys but there aren't many people who would willingly say 'whatever' without at least a second thought. Vince knows people want to get to the WWE and make that money, they want to be a star on that level with a huge Tv audience.
So I think Vince makes them eat shit for a little while at the start to feel them out. Then when they get bigger and start to gain some popularity, they get the ominous losing streak (see MVP, Ziggler, Sandow) to keep that popularity in check. Now when you get to the top, it gets better. Because guys like Orton and Big Show and Cena? They're company guys to the core. No way they'd ever go against the WWE because they were MADE there (not so much Show, but you know what I mean). Guys like Punk or Bryan could go back to the indys in a moment and instantly raise the credibility/visibility of any promotion they wanted to, thanks in part to the exposure they've gotten on the WWE level. So when somebody like Bryan gets big and gets an Austin-like following, he gets put in his place by the WWE or HHH directly as a means of re-establishing the system.
Bryan as the weaklink (which didn't exist, in my opinion) of Team Hell No? Part of that message. Not to get too far ahead of yourself, to always remember who's the boss. Guys like Rock and Taker? They get the special treatment because there's no way they'd ever wrestle for anyone else. No threat there, so they get the nod for the big events and they get to go over anybody because it's the safe bet. The whole Super Cena thing? It's another safe bet because it's all but guaranteed that he'll never come back to bite Vince in the ass somehow.
Could you imagine Bryan and Punk both going to TNA (don't know how, but just imagine it) and the shot in the arm those two give that promotion? It's a headache Vince doesn't need and I don't think is about to risk without something in place to keep things going the way he wants. That's why the Summer of Punk was torpedoed, because he was saying things a lot of fans felt and when it started to get too big (around the time of him 'leaving' as champ) I think Vince thought about it and decided to put the safety measures into play by bringing in HHH (company man) and Nash (someone who would do whatever, so long as the check was good).
I'm sorry if I went off on a tangent, but I honestly think that's the jist of things in the WWE right now. It is a "You'll take what I give you" to a certain degree. But like how Bryan and Punk are both presented and have been pushed, it is clear that the WWE does gives the fans what they want. It's just enough to make sure nobody gets any ideas of going into business for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Nov 28, 2013 0:23:52 GMT -5
I honestly think it all starts and ends with Vince himself.
You look back in the past when some guys would become huge stars in the WWE, then suddenly up and jump ship to somewhere else (mostly to WcW). In every DVD that talks about that era, everyone mentions how much Vince struggled with what he felt was a betrayal. And while that's probably not as big a problem now with the lack of competition out there, Vince McMahon is definitely someone to hold a grudge and I don't think he ever forgets something like that.
Fasy forward to WWE buying out WcW and ECW. This is the era where the WWE demands to own everything about its wrestlers. From their name to their image to any and all marketing opportunities that they can come up with. Guys like El Generico and Daniel Bryan (both of whom I'm 'meh' about) have very well known gimmicks and followings. And both were repackaged by the WWE machine so that Vince could own their names and current likenesses. Now I don't think it's pure greed or short-sightedness on their part, I think it's part of a system designed by Vince to keep people in check.
I believe Vince micromanages everything to make certain that EVERY person who works for WWE, from the top to the very bottom, all know who can potentially make or break them. Yeah, there's the indys but there aren't many people who would willingly say 'whatever' without at least a second thought. Vince knows people want to get to the WWE and make that money, they want to be a star on that level with a huge Tv audience.
So I think Vince makes them eat shit for a little while at the start to feel them out. Then when they get bigger and start to gain some popularity, they get the ominous losing streak (see MVP, Ziggler, Sandow) to keep that popularity in check. Now when you get to the top, it gets better. Because guys like Orton and Big Show and Cena? They're company guys to the core. No way they'd ever go against the WWE because they were MADE there (not so much Show, but you know what I mean). Guys like Punk or Bryan could go back to the indys in a moment and instantly raise the credibility/visibility of any promotion they wanted to, thanks in part to the exposure they've gotten on the WWE level. So when somebody like Bryan gets big and gets an Austin-like following, he gets put in his place by the WWE or HHH directly as a means of re-establishing the system.
Bryan as the weaklink (which didn't exist, in my opinion) of Team Hell No? Part of that message. Not to get too far ahead of yourself, to always remember who's the boss. Guys like Rock and Taker? They get the special treatment because there's no way they'd ever wrestle for anyone else. No threat there, so they get the nod for the big events and they get to go over anybody because it's the safe bet. The whole Super Cena thing? It's another safe bet because it's all but guaranteed that he'll never come back to bite Vince in the ass somehow.
Could you imagine Bryan and Punk both going to TNA (don't know how, but just imagine it) and the shot in the arm those two give that promotion? It's a headache Vince doesn't need and I don't think is about to risk without something in place to keep things going the way he wants. That's why the Summer of Punk was torpedoed, because he was saying things a lot of fans felt and when it started to get too big (around the time of him 'leaving' as champ) I think Vince thought about it and decided to put the safety measures into play by bringing in HHH (company man) and Nash (someone who would do whatever, so long as the check was good).
I'm sorry if I went off on a tangent, but I honestly think that's the jist of things in the WWE right now. It is a "You'll take what I give you" to a certain degree. But like how Bryan and Punk are both presented and have been pushed, it is clear that the WWE does gives the fans what they want. It's just enough to make sure nobody gets any ideas of going into business for themselves. You're not wrong, and psychologically it makes sense. It's what you've said, but in a way there are also some, frankly, Daddy issues there. Vince, it has been said, really wanted to be a wrestler but his father wouldn't allow it. That explains why when Vince gets in the ring, he goes balls out and will never ask his people to do things that he won't. It's endearing, and admirable. However, if I have a case where an individual grew up with an absentee father in poverty, only to reconnect with, and then surpass, his father despite some roadblocks being tossed in his way, then I get the worry over abandonment as an underlying issue. Then you have situations wherein Vince took people at their word, like the Luger and it was either Hall or Nash situations. He bought into a verbal agreement and got burned. Take someone who was cast aside and abandoned, then have them professionally burned over loyalty issues, and I get why Vince does what he does. Oh, and there's the issues that he's had with the government that have to make him nervous. I think it's obsessive, I think it's the mark of a control freak and a person with a developed mild persecution complex, but if I look at case history, I can see why.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 28, 2013 0:30:08 GMT -5
It really doesn't.
No, they don't, which indicates an even bigger problem with WWE's booking.
Occasionally they get it right. But unfortunately, for many, they don't, and it's entirely their fault.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Nov 28, 2013 1:07:06 GMT -5
It really doesn't. No, they don't, which indicates an even bigger problem with WWE's booking. Occasionally they get it right. But unfortunately, for many, they don't, and it's entirely their fault. It's things like this that prove "the FANS resent the WWE". There is a point where it becomes clear- nothing WWE could ever do could be good enough, and even if they did the fans will just clap their hands and say "I grow weary now. Take him back." And then, if they don't do it, they just decide "great. Thanks for pushing Bryan/Punk- I'm stealing this PPV!" I swear, sometimes it does seem like the only thing that will make a fan happy with WWE is if WWE went to "that" fan [not A fan, but them personally] and said "The book is yours. Do what you want."
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,479
|
Post by metylerca on Nov 28, 2013 1:17:24 GMT -5
It really doesn't. No, they don't, which indicates an even bigger problem with WWE's booking. Occasionally they get it right. But unfortunately, for many, they don't, and it's entirely their fault. It's things like this that prove "the FANS resent the WWE". There is a point where it becomes clear- nothing WWE could ever do could be good enough, and even if they did the fans will just clap their hands and say "I grow weary now. Take him back." And then, if they don't do it, they just decide "great. Thanks for pushing Bryan/Punk- I'm stealing this PPV!" I swear, sometimes it does seem like the only thing that will make a fan happy with WWE is if WWE went to "that" fan [not A fan, but them personally] and said "The book is yours. Do what you want." I also get this vibe. I seriously one day want HHH or Vince to call out a message board poster with notoriety and say… "To ____________ of the FAN Boards, the world is not your oyster!" It'd be the greatest day ever.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 28, 2013 1:19:09 GMT -5
It really doesn't. No, they don't, which indicates an even bigger problem with WWE's booking. Occasionally they get it right. But unfortunately, for many, they don't, and it's entirely their fault. It's things like this that prove "the FANS resent the WWE". There is a point where it becomes clear- nothing WWE could ever do could be good enough, and even if they did the fans will just clap their hands and say "I grow weary now. Take him back." And then, if they don't do it, they just decide "great. Thanks for pushing Bryan/Punk- I'm stealing this PPV!" I swear, sometimes it does seem like the only thing that will make a fan happy with WWE is if WWE went to "that" fan [not A fan, but them personally] and said "The book is yours. Do what you want." There's nothing in my post which proves this collection of strawmen arguments to be true.
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,479
|
Post by metylerca on Nov 28, 2013 1:26:19 GMT -5
It's things like this that prove "the FANS resent the WWE". There is a point where it becomes clear- nothing WWE could ever do could be good enough, and even if they did the fans will just clap their hands and say "I grow weary now. Take him back." And then, if they don't do it, they just decide "great. Thanks for pushing Bryan/Punk- I'm stealing this PPV!" I swear, sometimes it does seem like the only thing that will make a fan happy with WWE is if WWE went to "that" fan [not A fan, but them personally] and said "The book is yours. Do what you want." There's nothing in my post which proves this collection of strawmen arguments to be true. There's 21,000 other posts I'd have to sift through in order to produce a compelling proof to feeling that way, but I digress. I've noticed your post patterns the same way I noticed a lot of posters here. You can count on certain people to have certain viewpoints and to fill their designated niche bit part in WWE current almost as if it was on que. I enjoy your attention to explaining why you dislike WWE, a lot, but also find it off-putting the dismissive demeanor in posts questioning claims that WWE is as terrible as you say. I can account for my post in saying I just wish someone in WWE would call out a smart mark and put them in their place (to which they'll probably mark anyways) because the loudest and longest viewpoints that come off as obnoxious are always the best to see put down. And there's nothing more obnoxious than consistently bashing and berating something that doesn't even take itself seriously.
|
|
Phil Parent
El Dandy
Your Favourite Teacher
Posts: 8,508
|
Post by Phil Parent on Nov 28, 2013 1:44:55 GMT -5
WWE resents certain crowds...
They'll prefer crowds which have the expected reactions and react loudly. Any international crowd work here.
They don't particularly care for areas that don't react that much, as long as they pop for the main eventers. This is basically Anytown, USA; outside the big wrestling markets.
They probably don't like "smart" crowds.(See, Orton/Cena/Nipple H promo on monday)
They hate running in Toronto. Backward contrarian f***s... but running big stadium shows there is no problem, the locals get buried by tourists.
They REALLY hate running in Montreal. Smart, contrarian, vulgar, French-chanting crowd which WILL start to get rumbunctious if they get bored. Which usually happens by the time the first promo is happening, or the first diva match. Then, all bets are off, crowd reactions get completely random! Plus, you have a solid 20% of the audience that are either workers for local promotions or diehard fans of those promotions who pretty much are there to f*** with the show. Running Montreal is a guarantee to produce a memorable show, there has never been a boring TV show in Montreal. But they can't control it, they don't understand it, so they run TV here once every two or three year when they feel like having a bizzaro episode of RAW, which has become their way of telling the TV audience "Hmmmm... don't follow after these people okay?" While Toronto just tries to be smart, Montreal is actively HOSTILE to the WWE and WILL pay tickets for the privilege to mess with them.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 28, 2013 2:32:28 GMT -5
The problem is fans might think they're 'right' more than they actually are. Fans seem to think that someone getting a chant or a pop means popularity. What if the numbers showed that Bryan (for example) didn't poll well in the targeted demographic or wasn't a positive asset in ratings or in another sense?
All we know is "look, people chant his name and "Yes", so screw WWE for not pushing him". But they probably have more info than we do. We all have favourites we're disappointed aren't pushed but many of us do fall into this trap or thinking it's a 'outrage' if they're not. If a guy is capable of making money he'll be allowed to. Someone doesn't get into that position because of a catchy chant or being guy number 58,334 to become 'flavour of the month' with smarks.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Nov 28, 2013 2:34:25 GMT -5
It's things like this that prove "the FANS resent the WWE". There is a point where it becomes clear- nothing WWE could ever do could be good enough, and even if they did the fans will just clap their hands and say "I grow weary now. Take him back." And then, if they don't do it, they just decide "great. Thanks for pushing Bryan/Punk- I'm stealing this PPV!" I swear, sometimes it does seem like the only thing that will make a fan happy with WWE is if WWE went to "that" fan [not A fan, but them personally] and said "The book is yours. Do what you want." I also get this vibe. I seriously one day want HHH or Vince to call out a message board poster with notoriety and say… "To ____________ of the FAN Boards, the world is not your oyster!" It'd be the greatest day ever. If that contrived scenario ever took place, HHH and Vince would have to target someone who had no chance of being correct in their criticisms, with no evidence and examples to prove it, lest they be the one's who look foolish. I mean, Bob Costas made Vince look like an idiot years ago by simply bringing up certain facts Vince would like to forget. For your example to be true, it would have to just be a blowhard spouting things randomly for which they have no concept, and did no research. Any journalist worth their salt would see through the corporate double-talk and carny exaggerations and have counter arguments for their spin jobs.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Nov 28, 2013 2:39:54 GMT -5
Just saw something where Cena's brand generates $100 million a year for WWE -- that may include projections from his clothing line at K-Mart, but deals with major retailers like that likely include guarantees. And I know people will scoff at this (how do you know he's the reason someone bought the PPV? etc.) but major corporations like WWE do marketing research. They hire people who aren't wrestling people who know how to calculate value, there are tried and true accounting procedures and they can't afford to make it up because they are a public company and such things are vetted and can be exposed ... which would devalue the stock and could ruin a company.
So, yeah, turn him heel. Or reduce his role because he's getting 'stale' -- and risk that income reducing dramatically.
Because, you know, that's what the people want. But that money is coming from somewhere, so I assume there are people who actually dig into their pockets and spend money on WWE products who cast their votes that way.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Nov 28, 2013 2:50:30 GMT -5
This brings back my question from before. What is over? What crowd's reaction counts toward who gets pushed on TV? IS it MSG? Is it Chicago or Philly? Or is it Beaumont, Texas or Iowa? Every time a crowd goes batshit crazy for someone that isn't being pushed a top guy, I hear about crowds "just getting themselves over" and "marking for themselves". When a crowd takes a massive dump on a storyline it's "just a bunch of smarks". Yet if a crowd goes nuts for the top storylines, reacts exactly as they "should" (cheers faces, boos heels) then it somehow proves WWE knows what they're doing. If the crowd is just dead, for all but the main event, I see it tossed around that it shows how weak the midcarders are and how they can't draw, and thus deserve to be where they are on the card. Point is, WHERE does it matter? If MSG is packed, and absolutely brutalizes a storyline, does that mean it should be dropped on the spot? It's the "home crowd" after all, and the place where Vince will often use as a barometer. If a crowd of 17,000 just cheer like mad for the top guys, and it's a sea of positivity, does that mean more than if a crowd of equal size boos the main angle and reacts backwards? Honestly, we can take Bryan, Big Show, or any other interchangeable part out of this. Storyline is Triphanie doing what they do, being heels. Babyface X gets screwed over. It goes back and forth, but then Cena becomes involved and we wind up with Cena/Orton/Triphanie as the main focus of the angle. Everyone else is inconsequential. Those four are the focus. If the crowd loves it in one town, does it prove those four should be the focus? If the crowd hates it, does that prove anything? Small sample sizes, I know, but if I'm trying for a statistical analysis, then what variables matter? Going by the reactions that some people on here had a couple of weeks after WrestleMania 28 regarding what to do with Bryan and Sheamus, then yes, that is definitely what some people unfortunately think.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Nov 28, 2013 10:55:31 GMT -5
Just saw something where Cena's brand generates $100 million a year for WWE -- that may include projections from his clothing line at K-Mart, but deals with major retailers like that likely include guarantees. And I know people will scoff at this (how do you know he's the reason someone bought the PPV? etc.) but major corporations like WWE do marketing research. They hire people who aren't wrestling people who know how to calculate value, there are tried and true accounting procedures and they can't afford to make it up because they are a public company and such things are vetted and can be exposed ... which would devalue the stock and could ruin a company. So, yeah, turn him heel. Or reduce his role because he's getting 'stale' -- and risk that income reducing dramatically. Because, you know, that's what the people want. But that money is coming from somewhere, so I assume there are people who actually dig into their pockets and spend money on WWE products who cast their votes that way. Well, as far as the "how do you know if he's the reason someone bought the PPV?" argument- the big issue is- WWE does marketing research, they hire non-wrestling people who know how to calculate value- but WWE is still afraid to do the one market research that can really determine OTHER draws- "plus-minus draw": Assume you know, for example, certain draws (John Cena's a draw.) Once you know Cena IS a draw, then you compare the buyrates of PPVs Cena is on to PPVs Cena is not on, to determine the draw value of other guys (example: HIAC 2011 had 182k with Cena fighting ADR/Punk in the main. HIAC 2012 had 199k with CM Punk fighting Ryback in the main. Therefore, CM Punk is likely a "draw" as well, as Punk in the main had 17k more buys than Cena.) This form is an important way to see who the real draws are and who aren't the draws- but the big issue is that NO ONE- neither fans or the WWE- wants to try using it simply because both sides are terrified that the results will destroy their talking points, so neither fans or the WWE truly WANT to know this information (For example: TLC 2011 [smark heaven: CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and Zack Ryder walk out with titles- Punk and Ryder's booked beforehand, John Cena not on the card] vs. TLC 2010 [the blowoff of the Nexus angle: John Cena vs. Wade Barrett. 2011 did 182k worldwide, 100k domestic, but 2010 did 191k worldwide, 101k domestic: Therefore, John Cena, in 2010, was worth 9,000 buys worldwide and only 1,000 buys in North America. Therefore, either the draw difference was relatively imperceptible from what the "smarks" want and what the "WWE Universe" want [which WWE doesn't want to know], or Wade Barrett is undeniably NOT a main event-caliber guy [which the "smarks" don't want to know.]
|
|
|
Post by kingoftheindies on Nov 28, 2013 11:42:36 GMT -5
This is my interpretation of WWE's booking style when it comes to indy favourites. 1- Hire standout on the independent scene. 2- Give him a terrible name that sounds so generic and lifeless that he already starts his WWE career with an obstacle in front of him 3- If they don't do #2, grudgingly use the name or a similar one to the one he built the fame and persona upon that attracted WWE to sign him in the first instance. 4 -Once they're under contract, do everything you can to make the indy guy look and sound like a loser, to validate some carny mentality among WWE management that the guy sucks or some prison mentality that the guy must pay dues and go through some sort of bizarre initiation or hazing process first, wasting possibly several years of the guy's career in the process, along with any profits that would have possibly come with portraying him as a star right from the get go. Reports of nuclear heat are probably true. 5- Keep the guy buried in the developmentals, until he happens to be fortunate enough to have an advocate among the booking staff or road agents, who sees what the rest of management refuses to, that the guy has great talent and earning potential. 6- If they don't do #5, just throw him out there with a crappy main roster gimmick or as fodder to a less talented performer who management wants to push down the throat of the audience. 7- Fight and scratch with every possible effort to repeat #6 over and over until fan support simply overwelms the preferred booking, and forces management to push the guy, despite their desire not to. 8- Continue to do everything in their power to sabotage the guy, who is now succeeding despite management's booking, rather than because of it, and could be succeeding even further if management provided him with the means to do so. I think the reply proves the initial post. And of course the WWE treats people who come in through tryoungs or who weren't well-known in the indies completely differently. They give them super-cool names and hotshot them right to the top, every single one of them. The Shield is made up of two indy darlings and one guy who got his start in developmental. The Wyatt Family has two who basically were unknown before developmental and one indy darling (I don't know if you can call Brodie Lee/Luke Harper a darling, but a lot of people were aware of him before he got to developmental). That's a .500 batting average for guys from the indies on two very pushed, very over teams. And there's Cesaro who came from the indies and has been given a great push. Frankly I don't see how WWE is killing these guys. Is Dean Ambrose a terrible name and Jon Moxley the coolest ever, or what? I dunno about indy darling, but you'll be hard pressed to have found anybody that didn't enjoy Brodie Lee kicking people in the face. Oh, and Mox is just cool no matter what =] On another note, I do think the WWE was rather resentful that the crowd never bought into Punk's heel turn. Why do I say that? They just went so over the top with ways to get him booed that it was incredibly transparent to me that it was driving people nuts he was getting cheered. And something I've thought about in comparison to the topic of the thread; the fans appreciate talent. even if you aren't "workrate" guy fans notice when somebody is good. Now again, that's not just in terms of in-ring talent, but also charisma. Now I believe being extremely charismatic can mask limitations in the ring, but only for so long. See Brodus Clay, dude has good charisma but his act got stale REAL quick when people realized he isn't much in the ring. Then you had guys like Shelton Benjamin who were insanely talented in the ring, but it was painful to watch him try to talk. I know a lot of non-indy fans get mad when indy fans go "let x be x and he'll get over". But it's really true. Punk didn't explode in popularity until he went into "I'm Straight Edge so I'm better than you" mode. Same with Bryan in a way as he started getting over when he started acting a bit like he did during his ROH title run. OR you need guys do fully embrace the gimmick they are given. Again going back to Shelton Benjamin, his mama was hilarious but you could tell Shelton just wasn't into the character while the Fandango gimmick in itself is dumb, you can tell Johnny Curtis is having fun.
|
|