JULY 2020 WRESTLING DISCUSSION

[Mr Harms]

It may be the case that WWE, in terms of fan good-will, just can't win whatever they do. But, whose fault is that really? If you push the idea that the brand is the draw, and no wrestler is bigger than the company, then you're telling the fans "what you like doesn't matter". So, in that respect, why should I have any sympathy for WWE that whatever they do will face backlash?

It came about, in my opinion, because Vince saw/heard some bad reactions from the crowd at their creative decisions and thought "thats HEAT!", and thought that if the fans are booing the end of a show, they must be engaged. I guess that's what they told shareholders and TV executives, and it worked there. 

I can't comment on their current shows, because I don't watch them. But i can't imagine the lack of a crowd makes any difference to Raw, because when I was watching the crowd didn't make any noise anyway. 

 

 

[Casey]

5 minutes ago, Mr Harms said:

then you're telling the fans "what you like doesn't matter". 

Careful, some people 'round these parts actually think the fans shouldn't be catered to!

[For Great Justice]

I can’t think of a better analogy to WWE than NASCAR’s 15 year decline:

- “the brand is bigger than the stars’” and the inability to (or lack of desire to) make and promote stars

- homogenization of the presentation (WWE in ring style and stage setup, NASCAR car of tomorrow and all but two courses being ovals)

The whole thing comes down to letting stars organically do their thing. The brand being the star is what the Globetrotters and Monster Jam (is Grace Digger a draw?) do, not what the most successful sports in the world (worked or otherwise) do.

[Log]

I know it’s just a typo, but “Grace Digger” made me wonder if Grave Digger had found Jesus and had a gimmick change. 

[SorceressKnight]

1 hour ago, AxB said:

I was thinking about this earlier. If the most loyal WWE fans are all over 50, that means that these aren't the people who were under 10 year old Hulkamaniac kids in the mid-late 80s, and late teen/ early 20s fans in the Monday Night Wars/ Attitude era. That generation is still early to mid 40s. The most loyal WWE fans were already teens or young adults during Hulkamania, and in their 30s when it was all DX Suck It. So for basically their entire wrestling fandom, the biggest company (their favourite company) has been targeting an audience 10+ years younger than them. If WWE wants to please the audience it actually has, Set Rollins should be trying harder to wrestle like Bob Backlund used to.

That just represents something that's effecting all of society, not just pro wrestling, and It ties back to how when we talked about the board history, people were mocking the person who said they got rid of everything except for polo shirts and khakis because "that's how an adult is supposed to dress". People naturally mocked that because that's just no longer the case, and wearing what you want is fine.

Examples like that are a picture of the problem seen here: WWF really became big as early as the 1980s, and the children of the '80s and beyond are the first generation that didn't put away their toys when they grew up. That really shows the point of these problems: Traditionally throughout pop culture that has had a lasting influence on the world, the viewers usually go through that same circle of life. Using WWE as that example: You grow up as a Hulkamaniac in the 1980s as a child, in the 1990s as a teenager you grow up and idolize Steve Austin or the Rock in the Attitude Era. Maybe you're still around in the 2000s to watch John Cena, but in all likeliness, by the 2010s you would have likely married, had kids of your own, and be taking those kids to WWE shows with your kids becoming Roman Reigns fans, and from there the circle continues for your children. 

By contrast, since society would see nothing wrong with an adult still loving WWE at this time, it's kind of thrown that circle of life out of wack. WWE is a kids' show at heart. It always has been, and honestly it always will be. Part of accepting WWE is related to the claims made about demographics in the Wednesday Night War, because to accept WWE you have to realize: It's not ABOUT us anymore. WWE's a kids' show, it's always been a kids show, and we didn't notice that because when we grew up, it did listen to our generation. Because we were kids, watching a kids' show. You can't expect WWE to make shows cater exclusively to an older demographic any more than you can expect Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles to start making episodes about having to deal with the mortgage on the sewer while having enough to put in their 401k, and now the doctor told them how much sodium is in pizza and now they're trying to deal with changing up everything before they have a heart condition.

[Beech27]

I know we’re all sick to death of demo talk, but I’m not sure WWE can be a kid’s show in any meaningful sense if kids don’t watch the show. And they overwhelmingly don’t. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Beech27

[AxB]

Yeah, exactly. They market to the audience they want, not the audience they have.

[Octopus]

10 hours ago, Casey said:

What the fuck did I just read.

 I suck

4 hours ago, Ryan said:

A college essay entrance test for WWE University?

The dream is to score a job doing tape transfer for the Network and get yelled at for wearing shorts.

[Godfrey]

1 hour ago, SorceressKnight said:

By contrast, since society would see nothing wrong with an adult still loving WWE at this time, it's kind of thrown that circle of life out of wack. WWE is a kids' show at heart. It always has been, and honestly it always will be. Part of accepting WWE is related to the claims made about demographics in the Wednesday Night War, because to accept WWE you have to realize: It's not ABOUT us anymore. WWE's a kids' show, it's always been a kids show, and we didn't notice that because when we grew up, it did listen to our generation. Because we were kids, watching a kids' show. You can't expect WWE to make shows cater exclusively to an older demographic any more than you can expect Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles to start making episodes about having to deal with the mortgage on the sewer while having enough to put in their 401k, and now the doctor told them how much sodium is in pizza and now they're trying to deal with changing up everything before they have a heart condition.

This is true except that during the Attitude Era they aimed a more adult audience and that's when they were the most popular. And then it regressed into more child friendly themes and the audience dwindled. Those adults watching now are the ones that tuned in in the late 90s as young adults, not kids. So yes, WWE seems like children's programming now and certainly in the 80s/early to mid 90s, you can't say that they can't do anything else and the real question is why don't they do something else given the evidence we have now?

[Spontaneous]

Really nothing changes because Vince is who he always has been and cannot get out of his own way. The writing, the production, the atmosphere. It is Vince. So I can't see them doing anything drastically different until Vince is gone. And sometimes, the devil you know, WWE could completely nose dive, because it is intrinsically Vince.

[nofuture]

Pretty interesting listen about Gallows and Anderson getting released by WWE.  In short, both bury Heyman pretty hard for being the one to put them on the release list.  Also talked about is their negotiations with AEW and New Japan before re-signing with WWE and the Saudi plane situation.

[RIPPA]

It is really amusing to me that them (and AJ Styles) actually bought Vince's line that it was Heyman's fault they got fired

And then that got trumped by this part of the interview

 

[Ziggy]

On 7/17/2020 at 11:35 AM, AxB said:

Hypothetically, if WWE decided to cut way, way down on the screwjob finishes, ref bumps (and visual falls therein), run ins, wrestlers getting pinned because someone else's music played et cetera, if they just went to clean, decisive finishes and did like one or two screwy deals a year maximum... would that affect the quality or popularity of their TV stuffing instead of potatoes at all?

It would definitely help. The reason this stuff is used is to get out of a clean finish, so that would mean WWE needs to stop booking themselves into a corner. Dont book the match in the first place if your not planning on giving a conclusive finish. Start booking 6mans 8man and 10 Men or Women tag main events every week to save themselves from booking PPV quality main events and keep doing squash matches too. Theyd have to commit to it long enough and fans would get on board. AEW is doing things like guys having more than one finishing move or just having actually tag teams main event  shows week to week on the same level as the top singles. It's going to help AEW down the road because their audience will be move invested in their tag teams and WWE might even have to consider putting more value in tag teams and not just Makeshift teams.

It's not difficult to reeducate your audience, its more so the Bookers committing themselves to having things make sense and not cheating the audience and getting rid of cheap booking habits that have not gone away in the past 25 years of mainstream wrestling.

Everything you mentioned was things WCW was doing at the peek of Nitro because the top guys wanted to protect themselves individually from losing credibility with the audience. In WWE it's used because the booker decided the day of the show or the week of the show, he wants to book two top guys to pop a rating only to decide not long before bell time he doesn't want to give away a clean finish yet. For WWE to go way from that it would take for  Vince to put more consideration more long term booking for a lot of guys.

[Ramo2653]

1 hour ago, RIPPA said:

It is really amusing to me that them (and AJ Styles) actually bought Vince's line that it was Heyman's fault they got fired

And then that got trumped by this part of the interview

 

Carny will always Carny. And Vince is the supreme Carny.

[AxB]

Monday Night Wars era WCW was so known for run-in finishers that, in any big match, whenever the babyface hit a big move, the audience's heads would all turn to look at the entrance ramp.

[mystman]

10 hours ago, SorceressKnight said:

 "The McMahon family are evil, and any top star they say is the right choice to be the top star is not to be trusted", how the hell are WWE supposed to get people behind the new era of top stars? 

All of this. Vince broke the WWE storytelling wise in 1998 and it was never the same. 

[Matt D]

@OctopusCinema, I don't know what this says about us, but we're better off for having you around.

[The Comedian]

6 hours ago, Infinit said:

NOAH Destiny featuring Kobashi vs Kensuke was 15(!) years ago today.

And they're still chopping each other to this day...

[SorceressKnight]

2 hours ago, Godfrey said:

This is true except that during the Attitude Era they aimed a more adult audience and that's when they were the most popular. And then it regressed into more child friendly themes and the audience dwindled. Those adults watching now are the ones that tuned in in the late 90s as young adults, not kids. So yes, WWE seems like children's programming now and certainly in the 80s/early to mid 90s, you can't say that they can't do anything else and the real question is why don't they do something else given the evidence we have now?

Even then, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're two different things. The key for writing good children's entertainment the whole family can enjoy is getting into the sweet spot of "Children want to be treated like they're adults, adults want to feel like they're a kid again."  You can hit that sweet spot with a more family-friendly product if you actively try to work at it. 

Likewise, the "more adult-oriented show" claim is also the problem, since Heyman's run on Raw not being very good showed the problem. The Attitude Era was unpredictable, gave you a feeling that anything could happen, gave you a feeling everyone on the roster was important in their own way, and it felt like it worked. Most of the people who want the Attitude Era or a more adult-oriented program back, however, have been blinded by "Blood, swearing, and scantily clad women"- all the things that wrestling got away from for good reason, and it showed in Heyman's era (the Lashley/Rusev/Lana storyline was the most maligned thing of Heyman's run. Let the record show that storyline was also the single most Attitude Era storyline WWE has done in a long time.) For those things, it all makes sense. Blood no longer works because fans have made it clear they want the wrestlers to be as safe as possible in the ring. Scantily-clad women no longer work because the fans have made it clear that they want the women's wrestlers to be treated with respect, and every fan can realize "ten little girls who want to be Becky Lynch when they grow up" are far, far, far, far, far,  (there's not enough fars to really fathom how far this is) more important than "Hollywood Cybernetico in a raincoat." Even swearing could be used, but right now they use it right and have turned them into a high spot. (any time someone says as little as 'bitch' on WWE right now, it's seen as special.)

[thee Reverend Axl Future]

41 minutes ago, Matt D said:

@OctopusCinema, I don't know what this says about us, but we're better off for having you around.

Or at least where we can see you.

- RAF

[Curt McGirt]

2 hours ago, RIPPA said:

It is really amusing to me that them (and AJ Styles) actually bought Vince's line that it was Heyman's fault they got fired

Wait, so the guy that fired them told them that it was somebody else's responsibility for firing them, and they believed him? 

[Matt D]

3 minutes ago, Curt McGirt said:

Wait, so the guy that fired them told them that it was somebody else's responsibility for firing them, and they believed him? 

That sums up my parenting style, actually.

[Octopus]

44 minutes ago, thee Reverend Axl Future said:

Or at least where we can see you.

- RAF

7 hours ago, Infinit said:

NOAH Destiny featuring Kobashi vs Kensuke was 15(!) years ago today.

Also, the 33rd anniversary of El Hijo Del Santo vs Negro Casas

[Godfrey]

4 hours ago, SorceressKnight said:

Even then, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're two different things. The key for writing good children's entertainment the whole family can enjoy is getting into the sweet spot of "Children want to be treated like they're adults, adults want to feel like they're a kid again."  You can hit that sweet spot with a more family-friendly product if you actively try to work at it. 

Likewise, the "more adult-oriented show" claim is also the problem, since Heyman's run on Raw not being very good showed the problem. The Attitude Era was unpredictable, gave you a feeling that anything could happen, gave you a feeling everyone on the roster was important in their own way, and it felt like it worked. Most of the people who want the Attitude Era or a more adult-oriented program back, however, have been blinded by "Blood, swearing, and scantily clad women"- all the things that wrestling got away from for good reason, and it showed in Heyman's era (the Lashley/Rusev/Lana storyline was the most maligned thing of Heyman's run. Let the record show that storyline was also the single most Attitude Era storyline WWE has done in a long time.) For those things, it all makes sense. Blood no longer works because fans have made it clear they want the wrestlers to be as safe as possible in the ring. Scantily-clad women no longer work because the fans have made it clear that they want the women's wrestlers to be treated with respect, and every fan can realize "ten little girls who want to be Becky Lynch when they grow up" are far, far, far, far, far,  (there's not enough fars to really fathom how far this is) more important than "Hollywood Cybernetico in a raincoat." Even swearing could be used, but right now they use it right and have turned them into a high spot. (any time someone says as little as 'bitch' on WWE right now, it's seen as special.)

I think they’re trying for that sweet spot now. The Fiend, Edge/Orton, a recovering alcoholic angle, I’m not convinced these are for kids. The Lana/Rusev angle was bad because it was bad, not because it was geared to an older audience. The Tozawa ninja stuff is bad and that’s meant for children (I hope). So to your original point, I think they are still trying to appeal to “us”, and kids, and members of the AARP. It’s the scattershot approach that isn’t doing them any favours and shifting the maturity level, sometimes mid-segment, is bound to alienate someone.

[Casey]

For an hour, Joey Ryan addresses most of the allegations against him. Of course he denies all of them.