wwf attitude - overrated

[stevieraymark]

Now then im going to try my best as to explain why i think the attitude era is overrated (please dont kill me lol)and i apologise in advance because my punctuation etc isnt the best so please dont jump on me for that ok so here goes

THE MCMAHONS- these days anytime the mcmahons appear on tv they are blasted by the iwc well back in the attitude era they were one of the focal points of the show you had stephanie being abducted by taker can anyone honestly say this wouldnt get crapped on by todays wrestling fans. you had shane mcmahon as european champ if that happened today (and the title wasnt defunct) people would say bla bla bla workrate this workrate that and how it devalued the belt. and worst of all vince being world heavyweight champion now remember when vince won the ecw title the iwc acted like hed raped their grandmother and thats only 3rd most important belt in the company at best.

IN RING QUALITY - yes at this time you had guys like austin rock etc putting on stellar matches but look lower down the card even at ic title level you had guys like big boss man billy gunn road dogg the godfather val venis chyna hardly great wrestlers are they

CRUISERWEIGHTS- people go on about the lack of cruiserweight divison today well attitude era didnt have one at all until 2000 when essa rios came in gillberg held it for about 2 years or so
can you imagine today how bad the iwc would go on about the belt being devalued.

STORYLINES- now this for me was why attitude wwf was enjoyable you had SOME fresh storylines today we talk about getting sick of seeing cena overcome the odds every week well you didnt back then because thats what was happening austin overcoming the odds against the mcmahons/ministry/nation/insert heel here.

anyway in closing i hope my post has been readable. and while i loved wwf at the time i think while yes the storylines right now are pretty stale (except save us x29) the in ring work at least lower down the card is of a higher level than it was then please give me your thoughts cheers .kyle

[molson5]

Amen

And the thing is, people were bitching about the product on the internet all through the Attitude era, just like they are now. And now suddenly it's remembered as some glorious time long gone.

[Brain Of F'n J]

Re: The McMahons. You're forgetting that, back then, it was fresh to see them on TV. Vince as the main heel, against everyman Steve Austin, was new and different. The Ministry storyline was cutting edge and shocking. Shane-O winning the Euro belt (a worthless belt anyway) was a clever stroke of neoptistic genius at the time.

Re: In-Ring Quality. I'd argue Val Venis was a pretty good wrestler.

Re: Cruiserweights. Essa Rios came in before 2000. And their Light Heavyweight Title was a joke when it was created; how is that any different now? Nobody said the Attitude era HAD cruisers.

Jed Shaffer
~Dude, try punctuation. Really.

[macdaddysquid]

THE MCMAHONS-after the attitude era ended so should their on screen time. To much of a good thing turns bad.

IN RING QUALITY - Was way better then today. guys like Val Venus are great wrestlers and had tv time and story. Outlaws were a great tag team in a good division.

CRUISERWEIGHTS- Gilberg was a rib on Goldberg, more power to them. The title is still a joke today. Hornswoggle

STORYLINES- Attitdue is without a doubt better

I respectfully disagree with everything you said.

[Joker]

Aren't we fogetting the rise of The Rock and Mankind. (Not to mention the attraction star power of the Big Show plus Ken Shamrock and of course the beginning of Kurt Angle.)

You say the midcard lacked wrestlers? I say Owen Hart, Jeff Jarret, X-Pac, Jericho & the Radicals would disagree.

Plus the tag team division began to become important again throughout the attitude era, or are we forgetting The brood, The Hardy's the dudleys .. etc ...

[jamofpearls]

Not gonna do a point by point...but i was way more excited to tune in during the Attitude days than today. Back then I HAD to watch...today, i'll catch the 2nd half after heroes.

[stevieraymark]

im not saying it was bad and believe me im not forgetting about rock and mankind and co but alot of what happened back then would get absolutely crapped on if it happened today was the points i was trying to make

[Hiroshi Hase]

I preferred the Attitude Era myself over today's stuff. It seemed as if it was important to watch each week as you didn't know what was going to happen.

And most of the storylines mentioned weren't done before, so it was original at the time. Nowadays if we see something like Austin driving a beer truck to the ring or the McMahons putting the babyface in a handicap match, we could change the channel as we've seen it many times before.

Also, everyone and their mother wasn't scripted.

[macdaddysquid]

drthv8r said:

i'll catch the 2nd half after heroes.

Is that because the E sucks or because Heroes is so good?

[willywonka666]

Attitude is remembered fondly, you tend to forget the crap in favor of what was good, not in all cases of course, but that was a good prosperous time for the the WWF. What I miss about it is what we got a little of Monday:The Unpredictability-that's what made it a good time to me-they didn't seem to be going through the motions this week, you could tell they were trying to put forth their best effort, something that we were accustomed to during the Attitude Era

[Timmy8271]

Did you forget that WWE had Los Super Astros in the late 90's? Hell WWE even brought in Los Vipers and Los Space Cadets which is considered the best Lucha Libre feud in the 90's. Of course it doesn't compare to WCW's Crusierweight division and they got no time but still. And Taka Michinoku was awesome at the time.

Yes Attitude might be a little overrated but when you look at it, almost every wrestling generation is overrated when you grew up watching it. Attitude will always hold a special place in my wrestling heart because of that.

[stevieraymark]

willywonka i do agree with you on the point it seems that theyre goin thru the motions sometimes but with all the talent theyve lost since those days is it any surprise no more rock y2j benoit guererro owen austin (on a regular basis) foley (likewise)not to mention guys comin to the latter end of their careers taker kane michaels i do think the new talent has failed but because of what was before them it was impossible to live up to those expectations

[wwerules60]

I somewhat agree on the actual in ring wrestling being better now, but even back then you still wanted to see those guys wrestle because the storylines were quite interesting.

[molson5]

They had some decent wrestlers on the midcard but is everyone forgetting the standard-length 2 minute matches on RAW?

[The Captain]

The Attitude Era was not an era to watch purely for the wrestling. It was "sports entertainment" at its finest. Each RAW felt new, fresh, and unpredictable instead of the same ol', same ol' rut it's found itself in lately. The personalities shined and even the lower and midcard wrestlers were made to feel like superstars back then, especially compared to WCW's lower-midcard guys, who I really couldn't give two shits about 9 times out of 10.

[Kenny Brockelstein]

onyx said:

The Attitude Era was not an era to watch purely for the wrestling. It was "sports entertainment" at its finest. Each RAW felt new, fresh, and unpredictable instead of the same ol', same ol' rut it's found itself in lately. The personalities shined and even the lower and midcard wrestlers were made to feel like superstars back then, especially compared to WCW's lower-midcard guys, who I really couldn't give two craps about 9 times out of 10.

This is a good point. You could watch Raw and see some damn entertaining television, and if there was strong wrestling on the show then that was an added bonus. Raw Is War was often a thrilling show back then, with a whole host of interesting characters in compelling storylines. Just watch the episode that was posted on the board a few days. Just listen to the crowd's reactions to the shows. You could forgive the faults because more often than not Raw was a great show. Can you say that now? Not a chance, dude.

[Mozenrath]

The Attitude Era was a very good era, but yes, it is very overrated. I mean, it'd have to be.

Don't think it did any wrong?

1. Chyna/Mark Henry/Tranny. 'Nuff said.

2. Ho Train as an acceptible finisher.

3. Often a lot more promos and segments than actual wrestling.

4. The origin of attempting to use Billy Gunn as a solo star.

5. Trainloads of Dusty finishes.

6. Such brilliant choices for Women's champ as Hervina, Kat, and Debra.

[Avalanche Alvarez]

macdaddysquid said:

THE MCMAHONS-after the attitude era ended so should their on screen time. To much of a good thing turns bad.

IN RING QUALITY - Was way better then today. guys like Val Venus are great wrestlers and had tv time and story. Outlaws were a great tag team in a good division.

CRUISERWEIGHTS- Gilberg was a rib on Goldberg, more power to them. The title is still a joke today. Hornswoggle

STORYLINES- Attitdue is without a doubt better

I respectfully disagree with everything you said.

And I respectfully agree with everything YOU said.
Bravo.

[DiBiase is Good]

During that period some weeks 10 million people in the US were watching wrestling. The attitude era and of course WCW and it's nWo storyline brought a lot of Wrestling fans back and created millions more new fans. With the exception of the WWF's early days it's the most important wrestling period.

[Lenny: Smooth like Keith Stone]

I disagree that the Attitude era was overrated. I suppose I could do a point-by-point analysis, but everyone before me has already done it.

I will just sum up my feelings by saying that fans were flocking to wrestling during the Attitude era, and TV ratings were reaching record highs. Currently TV ratings are very low in comparison and almost all casual fans are gone leaving wrestling with mainly the diehards who are gonna watch no matter what. So clearly, the Attitude era did something right.