Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

OCTOBER 2019 WRESTLING CHAT.


 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, LoneWolf&Subs said:

Jeez, did you guys forget Camp WWE, or that stop motion animated program? All currently featuring extremely outdated rosters.

...And probably why they haven’t really invested in more original content? It’s because they’ve all bombed, they’re expensive, and no other network wants to pick them up. Also the WWE Network isn’t going to be a channel anytime soon, as they originally wanted.

TNBC wasn't animated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JohnnyJ said:

I think about this a lot and how it flies in the face of how WWE does things. A generational talent could get signed tomorrow and he/she would spend the next 6 months to a year sitting in developmental waiting to debut on NXT. Then the next 1-2 years in NXT waiting to get the call. If the fans take to him/her add a year so NXT has someone to headline Takeovers. When they do move up to the main roster, unless the office sees you as a top talent you're lucky to get stuck in 50/50 midcard hell. It's a process that is pointless and actually hurts the chances that the generational talent will ever become anything. 

It's not just how it flies in the face of WWE doing things, but also: No one ever gets excited about that band in the buzz bin/Find them First bin at CD stores. People may like them, but the really big acts don't spend multiple albums on "they're going to be a big hit one day, trust us..."- they take a new album and take the world by the balls.

This ties to wrestling, because as said- to really click as a generational talent: You probably need 1-2 years on the indie scene to catch a bit of buzz. Then, the 6 months to a year in developmental, then 1-2 in NXT, then a year to headline Takeover, then the main roster...and by main roster time, even the guys the office think will become something usually will take about 3 years to get to the main event...IF they're lucky, and IF they see you as a main eventer.

With all of those things, what should have taken "3 years for a meteoric rise to take the world by the short hairs and run roughshod" is suddenly an 8 year career, AT LEAST, to get to the top. Keep in mind there that Kofi Kingston was seen as notably big for having an 11 year career to make it to the WWE Title, and it was long enough it seemed like a huge deal there to give the belt to a deserving worker...and you see the problem.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they have commercials on the WWE Network in Canada? If they do, is it like G4 was when all they could advertise were metal detectors, and other junk? I can’t imagine enough people are watching a WWE Network channel at this point to entice companies to buy ad space.

Edited by LoneWolf&Subs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, West Newbury Bad Boy said:

The actual channel is exactly the same as the live feed on the Network.

Oh, then forget it. Fans are lucky that it became a streaming service. If not, then the wrestling side of WWE would’ve been swallowed up by the films in an attempt to make the network profitable. It’s funny looking back at those movies, and remembering that they would take hot acts off TV to shoot a movie for two months.

Edited by LoneWolf&Subs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind paying an extra 3 dollars a month for the convenience of having the Network as a regular channel. It's also great for older people and non techies, like my father, who wouldn't have such easy access to the Network otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Infinit said:

I don't mind paying an extra 3 dollars a month for the convenience of having the Network as a regular channel. 

What convenience? The appeal of the service is mainly the archival content these days.

But at least Rogers gets their cut. 

Edited by West Newbury Bad Boy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, West Newbury Bad Boy said:

What convenience? The appeal of the service is mainly the archival content these days.

But at least Rogers gets their cut. 

If you had quoted my whole post you would see a convenience that clearly stated lol

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly stated? Someone who's that tech adverse can barely use the service because most of it is online.

But getting into that would mean I'd need to be the asshole and point and laugh at the notion that a person would need to be a "techie" to figure out how to use a streaming service in 2019. So I cut that part out. Maybe the older people in my life are different, but I explain things once or twice and they catch on. And I'm certainly no "techie."

Edited by West Newbury Bad Boy
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I clearly stated that based on my own personal experience, having the Network as a channel is a convenience that I don't mind paying a few dollars extra. I also stated earlier that having it as a channel avoids buffering issues. And I think you still bitching about my opinion that having the Network as a channel does kinda sorta make you an asshole lol. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday, pal.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RIPPA locked and unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...