DECEMBER 2015 WRESTLING DISCUSSION THREAD

[odessasteps]

It doesnt help that itunes rankings are dubious and perhaps a work. Its why i dont bother asking for reviews because i dont care.

If Chikarason reads this thread, he can do quite the rant about them.

[Ramsey]

Apparently, for what it's worth, Raw hit a new all time low for ratings since the 3 hour change.

[Craig H]

2.15 for the rating.

[Patrick B.]

I blame...

¬_¬

⌐_⌐

 

...no one in particular.

[JonnyLaw]

The thing that I miss most from the attitude era is the crowd heat, which was the product of giving the fans a reason to care about people up and down the card. I'll take maybe all but the bottom 5% of attitude angles over the current landscape where all but like 3 guys are interchangable and no one has any reason to get invested in anyone because the end game is always "will lose to Cena or a part-timer."

 

Part of the problem now with this is the crowd.  If anyone starts to get over, fans tend to demand they get pushed near the top instead of just being a solid, over midcard act.  I think Sandow was the last guy to get really over who the fans would have been happy to keep in the midcard, then Hogan happened.

[Tromatagon]

IT MADE NO SENSE

 

you don't need a fake Hogan to still have a fake Macho Man

[JonnyLaw]

It really is dumb that they've seemingly dropped both guys completely, not just the gimmicks.  They'd be fine together as a mid-card tag team.

[Patrick B.]

 

The thing that I miss most from the attitude era is the crowd heat, which was the product of giving the fans a reason to care about people up and down the card. I'll take maybe all but the bottom 5% of attitude angles over the current landscape where all but like 3 guys are interchangable and no one has any reason to get invested in anyone because the end game is always "will lose to Cena or a part-timer."

 

Part of the problem now with this is the crowd.  If anyone starts to get over, fans tend to demand they get pushed near the top instead of just being a solid, over midcard act.  I think Sandow was the last guy to get really over who the fans would have been happy to keep in the midcard, then Hogan happened.

 

 

Thankfully, now no one gives a crap about anybody.

[nate]

How can we, when everyone's the same?

I realized, trying to find it in me to be a fan of Reigns, that if he wins Sunday, I can't give a shit. My first impression is that I expect he'll get screwed out of the title before a week's over (it's happened twice, and all he's mostly done about it is take on a fruitless vendetta against the Wyatt jobbers, then made hyuck-hyuck tater tot jokes). Then, if he wins, I'm looking at a guy who needed three tries to get his hands on his destiny; if he was worth my interest, he'd have done it right the first time.

If he loses ... shit. He's worth all the boos that he gets now, plus some.

You can't be an underdog AND the "next big thing" simultaneously.

[JohnnyJ]

The thing that I miss most from the attitude era is the crowd heat, which was the product of giving the fans a reason to care about people up and down the card. I'll take maybe all but the bottom 5% of attitude angles over the current landscape where all but like 3 guys are interchangable and no one has any reason to get invested in anyone because the end game is always "will lose to Cena or a part-timer."

Part of the problem now with this is the crowd. If anyone starts to get over, fans tend to demand they get pushed near the top instead of just being a solid, over midcard act. I think Sandow was the last guy to get really over who the fans would have been happy to keep in the midcard, then Hogan happened.

But is that a problem? In a day and age when you can no longer dictate what will be over you should be thrilled that something is over and start catering to the fans that are excited about something.

Instead, WWE will keep on putting the focus on people who are not over and be mystified that fans are tuning out.

[Craig H]

It really is dumb that they've seemingly dropped both guys completely, not just the gimmicks.  They'd be fine together as a mid-card tag team.

 

Or by themselves. Every time I watch Up Up Down Down, I feel like WWE is missing big time with Sandow and Axel. Axel is such a smooth and cool guy and talks really good shit. He's a little bit of a frat boy, but I can't help but feel they're missing out on Axel being a bigger star.

 

Similar thoughts to Sandow. He's oozing with charisma and they can't find ANYTHING for him to do? 

[twiztor]

so, with "tater tot" being the key phrase for this week's Raw, it reminds me of the thing they did last year that everyone latched onto with dislike:

 

the Reigns-Lesnar "tug-of-war" for the title.

 

which was worse?

[HumanChessgame]

 

It really is dumb that they've seemingly dropped both guys completely, not just the gimmicks.  They'd be fine together as a mid-card tag team.

 

Or by themselves. Every time I watch Up Up Down Down, I feel like WWE is missing big time with Sandow and Axel. Axel is such a smooth and cool guy and talks really good shit. He's a little bit of a frat boy, but I can't help but feel they're missing out on Axel being a bigger star.

 

Similar thoughts to Sandow. He's oozing with charisma and they can't find ANYTHING for him to do? 

 

 

Rybaxel was really the best use of both of them.  Neither guy has the skills to get above mid-card and putting them both together (and letting them show some personality) would definitely be a sum is better than the parts pairing.

 

Sandow was tremendous as the intellectual savior character.  It wasn't a schtick that was going to get him to the top of the card, but he was over and perfectly positioned as an arrogant mid-card heel.  The title match he had with Cena is really underrated and he was massively over during it.

[cwoy2j]

Who was the first pro wrestler to rock the leather jacket look? Someone had to do it before Piper right?

 

 

So I'm watching some Mid South and it strikes me, I miss the minimalism that used to be involved in pro wrestling. Am I alone in this?

 

I liked how a lot of guys wore hats to the ring. I was watching a match involving DiBiase and Matt Borne and Borne is wearing trunks and a fedora. Arn also used to wear a hat and his trunks when doing interviews. Someone needs to bring that look back.

[The Comedian]

I liked how a lot of guys wore hats to the ring.

 

[Go2Sleep]

Part of the problem now with this is the crowd.  If anyone starts to get over, fans tend to demand they get pushed near the top instead of just being a solid, over midcard act.  I think Sandow was the last guy to get really over who the fans would have been happy to keep in the midcard, then Hogan happened.

 

I'd say the bigger problem is the people at the top aren't over. Of course people are going to want the over guys to move up the card when they don't care about the people who are positioned at the top. No one was clamoring for the New Age Outlaws or Crash Holly to be pushed over Austin or The Rock.

[Burgundy LaRue]

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening.  WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate.  If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him.  So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends. 

 

In a perfect WWE Universe, there would be 5-6 guys at the top that would cover nearly all the bases for all fans.  Not everyone will like the chiseled-jaw pretty boy athlete with the family connections and the inside track to the good life.  But not everyone will like the scrappy little do-gooder new-age hipster with the glamour-girl wife, either.

 

There's room for both--in theory.  In practice?  Remains to be seen.

 

As for being over--nobody is over.  NOBODY. The most over guy only works 35% of the year and even he fell victim to 50/50 booking at Summer Slam.

[caley]

 

Part of the problem now with this is the crowd.  If anyone starts to get over, fans tend to demand they get pushed near the top instead of just being a solid, over midcard act.  I think Sandow was the last guy to get really over who the fans would have been happy to keep in the midcard, then Hogan happened.

 

I'd say the bigger problem is the people at the top aren't over. Of course people are going to want the over guys to move up the card when they don't care about the people who are positioned at the top. No one was clamoring for the New Age Outlaws or Crash Holly to be pushed over Austin or The Rock.

 

People weren't as unanimous of their love of Austin/Rock as one might think in hindsight.  A lot of folks on the IWC were pretty tired of Austin/Rock and clamoring for other people to be on top (Jericho, Benoit etc.).  JR's non-stop praise of Austin, even during matches that had nothing to do with him, were pretty off-putting.  And Rock was often viewed as a guy who dominated his opponents on the mic and never let them get the better of him.  Maybe an undeserved rap, but it's the way things often were.

[Cristobal]

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening.  WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate.  If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him.  So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends.

I've read this four times and I still have no idea what in hell you're saying, here.

[nate]

so, with "tater tot" being the key phrase for this week's Raw, it reminds me of the thing they did last year that everyone latched onto with dislike:

the Reigns-Lesnar "tug-of-war" for the title.

which was worse?

I'd say they're both equal. One looked stupid, the other sounded stupid, but they both pointed to Reigns' impotent attempts to effectively wrest the title away from the champion.

[nate]

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening. WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate. If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him. So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends.

I've read this four times and I still have no idea what in hell you're saying, here.

I think I got it; it's a parable about the same argument we have, that people can bust their ass and get over with the crowd but if it's not the "golden boy" then fuck the fans. Yet no one understands the basic stuff like decreasing ratings and fan disinterest.

Unfortunately, Vince et. al can always pull out the "look what happened the last time we listened to the fans argument."

[Vincey Greene]

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening.  WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate.  If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him.  So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends. 

 

In a perfect WWE Universe, there would be 5-6 guys at the top that would cover nearly all the bases for all fans.  Not everyone will like the chiseled-jaw pretty boy athlete with the family connections and the inside track to the good life.  But not everyone will like the scrappy little do-gooder new-age hipster with the glamour-girl wife, either.

 

There's room for both--in theory.  In practice?  Remains to be seen.

 

As for being over--nobody is over.  NOBODY. The most over guy only works 35% of the year and even he fell victim to 50/50 booking at Summer Slam.

 

 

There's one man on the roster who is truly over besides Brock. I have a sneaking suspicion that man will be a surprise entrant in the Royal Rumble. That man exemplifies the Staleness Era but is himself the 2nd most over person on the payroll.

 

 

Don't have to like it, but Cena's still way more over than anyone not named Burock.

[Burgundy LaRue]

 

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening.  WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate.  If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him.  So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends.

I've read this four times and I still have no idea what in hell you're saying, here.

 

I've been here 10 years, and  you don't understand my gibberish by now! Bah, I is insulted!

 

You know the old saying there's three sides to every story?  The same applies to WWE.  What Vince/shareholders want, what the more vocal fans want, and what is the reality of the situation.  And right now, those three sides can't even agree to disagree.

 

I did think about Cena--he is indeed over but I imagine the current WE WANT CENA BACK cries will turn into GO AWAY CENA chants.  Again.

[supremebve]

 

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening.  WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate.  If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him.  So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends. 

 

In a perfect WWE Universe, there would be 5-6 guys at the top that would cover nearly all the bases for all fans.  Not everyone will like the chiseled-jaw pretty boy athlete with the family connections and the inside track to the good life.  But not everyone will like the scrappy little do-gooder new-age hipster with the glamour-girl wife, either.

 

There's room for both--in theory.  In practice?  Remains to be seen.

 

As for being over--nobody is over.  NOBODY. The most over guy only works 35% of the year and even he fell victim to 50/50 booking at Summer Slam.

 

 

There's one man on the roster who is truly over besides Brock. I have a sneaking suspicion that man will be a surprise entrant in the Royal Rumble. That man exemplifies the Staleness Era but is himself the 2nd most over person on the payroll.

 

 

Don't have to like it, but Cena's still way more over than anyone not named Burock.

 

As much as people complain about Cena, he is so much more over than everyone else on the show it is stunning when you go to a live show.  Of all of the people on the roster he's the only one who gets a reaction from everyone. 

[Ace]

 

Perhaps one of the biggest problems is that everyone, from Vince McMahon to fans, want things to happen in ways that often conflict with what's actually happening.  WWE has become the perfect microcosm of the Twitter is Great/Twitter Sucks Balls debate.  If you can't get over with 140 characters or less, you ain't shit with fans but because Vince doesn't fully understand Twitter, your overness in that capacity doesn't mean shit to him.  So basically, you're shit out of luck on both ends. 

 

In a perfect WWE Universe, there would be 5-6 guys at the top that would cover nearly all the bases for all fans.  Not everyone will like the chiseled-jaw pretty boy athlete with the family connections and the inside track to the good life.  But not everyone will like the scrappy little do-gooder new-age hipster with the glamour-girl wife, either.

 

There's room for both--in theory.  In practice?  Remains to be seen.

 

As for being over--nobody is over.  NOBODY. The most over guy only works 35% of the year and even he fell victim to 50/50 booking at Summer Slam.

 

 

There's one man on the roster who is truly over besides Brock. I have a sneaking suspicion that man will be a surprise entrant in the Royal Rumble. That man exemplifies the Staleness Era but is himself the 2nd most over person on the payroll.

 

 

Don't have to like it, but Cena's still way more over than anyone not named Burock.

 

 

People should like it. Cena's been one of the few brightspots of this entire year with his open challenges. His matches actually meant something and got people over. Cena is Jay Leno. Daniel Bryan is Conan' O'Brien. WWE's problem is that they not only do not have their Jimmy Fallon, but don't even know to look for one.