s l i k : bold prediction about the future of WWE

[tna]

we've got some good discussions going, let's keep on going

[Big DSR Energy]

WSX, as much as I hate to say it, is more likely to trigger a boom than either of these companies, because at least their product is something different....people might tune in to check it out.

WSX is something different? That's funny, from what I've seen, WSX is essentially just a commercial for the indies. With the exception of explosions, WSX is pretty much just a bunch of indy wrestlers working matches with the psychology edited out. The explosions and "fake independent" style of the show make it feel like a cheap knock-off of the original ECW (which, ripping off other people's ideas isn't innovative). While I think the show may be able to attract the MTV audience to wrestling, I don't think the show is really all that groundbreaking.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I would love for the WWE to change their "style," but I think we will be seeing more of the same. WWE is still doing pretty well financially, even if it is not doing the same type of business that they were doing from 1998 to 2001. As long as the company is doing well, I don't see WWE changing too much. Their purchases of video libraries over the last six years or so has really allowed to them profit through the home video department and through their on demand service. I think it is time for a new direction in pro wrestling. I don't like that TNA is trying so hard to be like the WWE instead of focusing on some of the things WWE doesn't focus on as much (such as actual wrestling). I was always hoping TNA would find their niche and create a bigger following. I still support them, though I am frustrated with their direction. I was hoping they would become a competitor to WWE and force Vince and company to work harder and to change some of their ways.

[Big DSR Energy]

Yeah, both times the WWE had a "boom" there was a reason behind it. In the 80s, Vince had taken over his dad's wrestling business and decided he'd rather do a tv show (with wrestling). Not that that's a bad thing. Vince Jr. tapped the mainstream and combined a lot of showbiz polish with a certain Mr. Hogan's unbridled over-the-top charisma to create a sensation.

In the 90s, WCW had overtaken WWF in the ratings and became a huge success. Vince apparently made sport of it, and competed with WCW every week, creating a better product. WWF wins, and takes WCW with it.

Nowadays? WWE is the biggest wrestling show on now. No competition in sight, no need to change.

How the business changes from here depends on who comes up to compete with WWE (which is possible, if no wrestling promoter wants to risk getting bought by Vince, and losing their precious company). If no one challenges WWE, expect more of the same.

[Drillbit Taylor]

I don;t want Lucha I hate Lucha . Id rather have a stronger Japanese style

[knightboat]

"The MMA audience is very, very small. They can't fuel a boom period. The fact is that getting casual fans will fuel a boom. Casual channel surfers outnumber MMA fans by a lot. Thats why WWE goes after them so much. Thats why the attitude era blew up like it did.....casual fans were tuning in to check out the new product, and they stayed with it. "

I disagree with this, and I believe the PPV buys for the UFC shows the amount of MMA fans and their willingness to spend money on a product they enjoy.

[tna]

grapplercrappler said:

I don't like that TNA is trying so hard to be like the WWE instead of focusing on some of the things WWE doesn't focus on as much (such as actual wrestling).

I agree with you so much on this. I feel the quality of talent they have is fantastic, but they really hold themselves back with their obsession with discussing the WWE on-air and their very "sports-entertainment" way of booking feuds/storylines.

[Legion]

dothebird said:

vaderbomb91 said:

3.) Safe style MUST be abandoned. It isn't 1987 anymore, and the days when a wrestler can get over on gimmick alone are OVER WITH. When your live TV crowds are chanting "We want wrestling," it doesn't get much more straightforward than that.

Outside of the ECW shows in the Hammerstein Ballroom (a building whose fans have been trying to get themselves over via chants since 1998), the ONE instance of an audible "We Want Wrestling" chant on live WWE TV was during Rosie/Donald. It had absolutely nothing to do with safe style. It had to do with arguably the worst segment in WWE history taking up 20 minutes of a wrestling show.

It was ten minutes, bang on, im sad, i timed it

[Mr. Zombie]

dsr said:

WSX, as much as I hate to say it, is more likely to trigger a boom than either of these companies, because at least their product is something different....people might tune in to check it out.

WSX is something different? That's funny, from what I've seen, WSX is essentially just a commercial for the indies. With the exception of explosions, WSX is pretty much just a bunch of indy wrestlers working matches with the psychology edited out. The explosions and "fake independent" style of the show make it feel like a cheap knock-off of the original ECW (which, ripping off other people's ideas isn't innovative). While I think the show may be able to attract the MTV audience to wrestling, I don't think the show is really all that groundbreaking.

Maybe to us regular fans who have watched a lot of indy stuff, or for those of us who have been around for a while, its old hat....but to the casual viewer, it is different. Its a half hour episode of fast paced action, with a small live performance. The format of the show is different than anything I've seen to this point....and yes, I have been around and seen my share of wrestling. Granted, said formula is like watching Vince Russo on crack....its still a break from the traditional format. Its wrestling almost in sitcom form. Yes, I understand the commercial for the indies.....but that in itself is different. Nobody has tried to make a telelvised show with wrestling like that before. Even ECW still relied on a traditional presentation of wrestling, in which there was crowd interaction and the psychology remained in the ring.

WSX.....its different in that its entirely produced for TV....other shows still have that live crowd feel, and we just happen to be watching. I wouldn't call it an ECW knockoff.....ECW was still focused around intense wrestling and feuds. Yeah, it takes some of the more well known elements of what ECW became known for, but its trying them out in a different arena...that of episodic TV. This is just a spotfest, pure crash TV. The psychology element has been somewhat removed, so I'm curious to see how matches play out when traditonal restholds and stops are put on the back burner, and crowd interaction is placed on the backburner. Will it work over the course of 6 months? We'll see. Also, the psychology has been taken out of the ring and placed into the production of the show....editing, sounds, camera work. The wrestlers are now just actors, plain and simple. Its up to production to get them over.

I can't recall another show that has been entirely produced inside a studio with an episodic format, where the live element and crowd interaction is nil. I'm aware that TNA is produced in a studio, but its still got that traditional pro wrestling look and feel. WSX is trying something different, and I'm curious to see where its headed.

WSX is more likely to spark a boom because it is different than what wrestling has traditonally been presented as. Its a half hour spot-spot-spot, enough story elements, and then its over....whereas other shows are becoming a bit repetitive in their format. Boom periods happen when something new comes along and casual viewers turn in. I'm not saying this will definitely happen with WSX. I'm just saying its more likely to happen here than with ROH, TNA, WWE.

[Mr. Zombie]

nightboat said:

"The MMA audience is very, very small. They can't fuel a boom period. The fact is that getting casual fans will fuel a boom. Casual channel surfers outnumber MMA fans by a lot. Thats why WWE goes after them so much. Thats why the attitude era blew up like it did.....casual fans were tuning in to check out the new product, and they stayed with it. "

I disagree with this, and I believe the PPV buys for the UFC shows the amount of MMA fans and their willingness to spend money on a product they enjoy.

Right, but their numbers aren't going to fuel a boom period. Also, a lot MMA fans don't enjoy the WWE....they tend to look down on it. Thats what it comes down to. Numbers of viewers are what fuel those periods, people who tune in when the product gets hot and people are talking about it. MMA is getting bigger, but it doesn't have those numbers of people, and it doesn't have a well rounded fanbase for WWE to draw off of. Its mostly males from 18-36.

During the attitude era, when there was something for everyone (great wrestling, drama, characters), I went to school tuesday mornings, and most everyone was talking about what happened the night before, guys and girls, as well as some teachers (to the students). Thats what fuels the periods....when a huge cross section of people (all ages, races, genders, and interests) checking out the show. If you cater to MMA fans, you're going to get mainly males 18-36, and its pretty much the same demographic as who already watches WWE....it does you no good from a marketing standpoint.

My overall feeling is that the next boom is going to come from a drastic change in presentation and style. In ring action needs to be strong, but it doesn't have to reinvent itself all that much. During both booms, the product was drastically different looks-wise (look at the difference between '98 RAW and any event from '94), in ring wise (look at an episode of RAW from '98 compared with Superstars from the end of the 80s boom, or even as early as '93), and story wise. A complete reinvention of the product is whats needed for a boom.