|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jan 3, 2015 10:16:12 GMT -5
Something brought up again by CATCH_US IS the Conversation in the Reigns thread recently was that Reigns is only over because WWE forced him to get over. When Ryback was in his original hot phase, a lot of folks on here said the same thing - anyone would be this over if they were put in Ryback's position, WWE wants them to be over, they've been crammed down our throats. I, for one, think this is nonsense. Yes, occasionally guys will get over while having WWE's rocket strapped to them. Reigns and Ryback are two examples. But how often does WWE plan huge things for a guy and try to force them down our throats only for them to not really get over at all? That Russian guy from a few years ago (name escapes me) who actually ended up main eventing PPVs despite barely being over, Del Rio and his frequent drifts into being over with nobody (which wasn't the entire time at all). WWE tries this all the time and it rarely ever works. If Ryback and Reigns couldn't connect with the fans then they would be beating everybody left, right and centre and still not be over at all. |
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Jan 3, 2015 10:21:08 GMT -5
Vladimir Kozlov is your mystery man, I believe.
But I say yes, because wrestling in its very nature is them forcing us to like someone, regardless of whether it's a company pet project like Reigns or a supreme fan favourite like Bryan. I mean, Bryan doesn't get that underdog following unless he's put in storyline scenarios and matches that reflect that.
|
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jan 3, 2015 10:23:04 GMT -5
Yes, because wrestling in its very nature is them forcing us to like someone, regardless of whether it's a company pet project like Reigns or a supreme fan favourite like Bryan. I mean, Bryan doesn't get that underdog following unless he's put in storyline scenarios that reflect that. Then why can't they force us to like everyone they want us to like? It's happened time and time again. And Bryan has admitted that he was supposed to put Orton over at Summerslam and that be the end of the angle, it wasn't meant to get him over - and with how late in the day he actually got added to the Mania main event angle, it was obvious they weren't putting him in it. Summerslam to Mania was not some giant orchestrated angle to get Bryan the most over man in the company, they didn't want him in that main event. |
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417 
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 3, 2015 10:26:10 GMT -5
Yeah they can try and it sometimes works, other times it doesn't. Despite what some fans want to think we don't scour the indies looking for our next guy to support. We often make a pick out of the limited options WWE give us, their own shortlist. What I don't get is this idea that WWE somehow resent pushing certain guys. Why would they care? It's all going to the same pocket - theirs. Boo this guy? They'll get someone else. Want to cheer someone else louder? The $45 for the ticket is still going in the same place.
It's like the difference between songs on an album. As long as you buy the album the artist likely gives not a toss which song you most like to listen to.
|
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Jan 3, 2015 10:26:16 GMT -5
Yes, because wrestling in its very nature is them forcing us to like someone, regardless of whether it's a company pet project like Reigns or a supreme fan favourite like Bryan. I mean, Bryan doesn't get that underdog following unless he's put in storyline scenarios that reflect that. Then why can't they force us to like everyone they want us to like? It's happened time and time again. And Bryan has admitted that he was supposed to put Orton over at Summerslam and that be the end of the angle, it wasn't meant to get him over - and with how late in the day he actually got added to the Mania main event angle, it was obvious they weren't putting him in it. Summerslam to Mania was not some giant orchestrated angle to get Bryan the most over man in the company, they didn't want him in that main event. I do agree with that. But how do you think Bryan got so over that people got so pissed off about all that in the first place? By the sheer fact of being put on TV in matches and in major storylines, at its absolute basic core, it's WWE saying "Here's a guy we want you to support", even if they may not actually mean it. I hope that makes sense. I know what you mean when you're saying "forced push", in the sense of "a push that isn't quite taking, but they're still doing anyway because". |
|
Thaal Sinestro
Hank Scorpio
In Brightest Night, In Blackest Day. Etc.
Posts: 5,012
|
Post by Thaal Sinestro on Jan 3, 2015 10:29:00 GMT -5
Yeah. I'm wearing a Roman Reigns T-Shirt right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jan 3, 2015 10:29:58 GMT -5
Then why can't they force us to like everyone they want us to like? It's happened time and time again. And Bryan has admitted that he was supposed to put Orton over at Summerslam and that be the end of the angle, it wasn't meant to get him over - and with how late in the day he actually got added to the Mania main event angle, it was obvious they weren't putting him in it. Summerslam to Mania was not some giant orchestrated angle to get Bryan the most over man in the company, they didn't want him in that main event. I do agree with that. But how do you think Bryan got so over that people got so pissed off about all that in the first place? By the sheer fact of being put on TV in matches and in major storylines, at its absolute basic core, it's WWE saying "Here's a guy we want you to support", even if they may not actually mean it. I hope that makes sense. But that's the opposite of what I'm talking about. That's not forcing us to like anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Jan 3, 2015 10:31:56 GMT -5
I think there might be wires crossed somewhere, so I'm just going to bail out. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just thought I had a point.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 3, 2015 10:36:11 GMT -5
People got pissed about Bryan because it was a 'thing' to be pissed about Bryan. I'm not meaning to troll but it was. Ratings hardly fell off a cliff, attendances didn't suffer.
Examples of fans being really pissed off with the booking directions are probably Goldberg's streak being ended and Austin turning heel. Bryan being held down, same as Cena being given relentless superman pushes - people act as if there was some kind of huge fan backlash/resentment/turn-off from them - but there wasn't. Fans just chanted stuff a certain parts of the night then they'd turn up the next week and do the same. And the week after. Point is they were still buying the tickets and watching the show. People being pissed at the product, genuinely, would be reflected in the numbers but it feels like those have flatlined for years. There hasn't been a guy that's really made a difference to the fan's interaction with the product since Austin.
We're in a world now where it's painted that a 0.2 ratings point margin of error is the difference between "YES! What a decision to push him they're on track" to "Ugh! Proof everyone hates WWE and resents their booking!!"
It's not just a Bryan thing - its an everyone since Austin thing. Yet it's different because with Bryan everyone pretends there are these huge fan-backlash/aftershocks/resentment with it. There never has been
|
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jan 3, 2015 10:37:48 GMT -5
I think there might be wires crossed somewhere, so I'm just going to bail out. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just thought I had a point. Oh no not at all! I'm not even slightly angry, I'm just debating back at you (and check my notifications immediately...), I see the point you're trying to make, I'm just not sure that it necessarily applies. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2015 10:39:11 GMT -5
No. They used to, but not anymore.
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,654
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Jan 3, 2015 10:41:55 GMT -5
The guy definitely matters, but the WWE has a lot to do with how he's perceived. You could have a guy that has the look, a cool set of moves, and a cool presence, but if they job him to people repeatedly, even the smarkiest of smarks will end of seeing him as a loser. On the other hand, if a dude just gets pushed, is allowed to win, and constantly talked about like he's important, even if he's limited, MOST fans will eventually come around. Call it the Kevin Nash effect (and I love Nash). The dude got really over in 1994 not doing a whole lot of anything, but he won every night and was billed as important (over being a relative term: he wasn't Steve Austin, but he was as over as anyone on that show except maybe Bret and Taker). He eventually improved and became a really strong character, but that is considerably easier once you've captured that platform.
|
|
|
|
Post by RI Richmark on Jan 3, 2015 10:49:40 GMT -5
They can't force us to like anybody. They can try to influence us to support a guy by making him look good, but they can't say CHEER HIM OR ELSE!!
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone.
Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,517
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jan 3, 2015 11:06:54 GMT -5
I think they can force us to a certain degree, however I think that's only for initial pushes lower down the card. At the top of the card it doesn't work, nor can they do it over a longer period of time.
It's like that Kid Rock quote at the start of the Lonely Road Of Faith video.
"If it looks good, you'll see it. If it sounds good, you'll hear it. If its marketed right, you'll buy it. But... If its real... you'll feel it."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2015 11:13:54 GMT -5
Yes. Since the beginning of time the promoters forced the audience to like someone from Bruno Sammartino, to Hulk Hogan, to John Cena. The art of it is being subtle about it. Hell the very concept of turning a wrestler a babyface or heel is the promoter literally telling you who to cheer for and who to boo
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Jan 3, 2015 11:32:44 GMT -5
Then why can't they force us to like everyone they want us to like? It's happened time and time again. And Bryan has admitted that he was supposed to put Orton over at Summerslam and that be the end of the angle, it wasn't meant to get him over - and with how late in the day he actually got added to the Mania main event angle, it was obvious they weren't putting him in it. Summerslam to Mania was not some giant orchestrated angle to get Bryan the most over man in the company, they didn't want him in that main event. You can fool all of the people some of the time, you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. Really, that says it all. Many times, the WWE can force us to like someone- and a lot of times (especially with younger kids, who don't have the same discerning tastes) they can force them to like most people they'd want- but it's not always guaranteed to work. |
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jan 3, 2015 11:51:15 GMT -5
In a way they can, yes. If they push somebody hard enough, I think casual fans will accept them. Either way, if somebody is on our TV often enough, crowds will form an opinion of him/her one way or another.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jan 3, 2015 12:45:24 GMT -5
They can get people to cheer for guys if they persist with their main event push for long enough, but they can't make people want to pay to see them headline a show. If they try to devalue Bryan to get Reigns over they're going to have a real problem should Cena succumb to injury.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Jan 3, 2015 12:48:17 GMT -5
Personally, the only reason why I defend Roman is that Vince said he'll ice my whole block if I don't.
|
|
deancubed
Don Corleone
Playing League of Legends
Posts: 1,350
|
Post by deancubed on Jan 3, 2015 13:13:05 GMT -5
Every single time someone likes a character on TV, it's because they liked how that character was presented on the TV show. Either the concept of the character (or 'gimmick') is intriguing or entertaining, or the performance by the actor draws viewers in.
WWE is no different. If you like a character on RAW, it's because the WWE has presented that character in a way you like, due to booking choices, actor choices, or the inherent character concept (gimmick).
So YES, not only can WWE make us like a superstar, they have made us like EVERY superstar.
EDIT: The Exception to this is when a character stops being liked. While motivations, booking, and writing can play a part, often in WWE superstars are disliked by fans because of meta-viewers worrying about backstage politics, rumours of future plans, etc. Those aspects of the character were never presented in the TV show. Right now Roman Reigns' gimmick is "Someday he's going to get a major push by Vince and creative, and some people don't think he deserves it". But that aspect of the character isn't a part of the show, that's all generated by meta-viewers.
|
|
