Jump to content

APRIL 2022 WRESTLING DISCUSSION


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Log said:

When I think "draw", I think the person people pay/tune in/show up to see.  Rhonda and Brock appearances may have spiked ratings, so that's something.  I just think we're past the days of a wrestling promotion getting by on a Hulk Hogan-like draw.  I don't see that happening again.  

 

 

I don't disagree with you on the whole but the WWE is the only company on Earth that thinks this way. New Japan had its greatest financial period on the back of a massive draw in Okada. Ring of Honor had its hottest period with the Young Bucks and business immediately collapsed when they left. Everyone's mileage may vary on where Adam Page's reign is in relation to his star power but the first three AEW champions were/are guys who have been proven money draws in this country and internationally. 

Every other company on Earth from Japan to Mexico and in between is trying to find that long-term ace to build business around. The WWE, to their credit, developed a model where it doesn't particularly matter.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all of the WWE talk that the draw is the promotion and the parts interchangeable, AEW does a superior job of accomplishing this. They put the belt on a talent they believed in for a lengthy title reign even though I wouldn't categorize him as a draw and they consistently make lesser talents seem important. 

With respect to Brock, he had a fantastic run as a special attraction. It's important to keep in mind that he's now been back for a decade. You can only keep the aura and specialness for so long. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to Roman as a draw: I mean, he's the biggest full-time star and SD is doing fine but he's not the draw Cena was. Cena came back and sold like a shit ton of tickets. WWE has been resorted to doing 2 for 1s lately on tix. They had to tease a surprise for an MSG house show to get it up to a respectable number.  Night 1 on Wrestlemania outdrew Night 2, right? 

It just seems that if Roman is a mega-star you don't need break glass on Steve Austin, Pat McAfee, Vince McMahon, Johnny Knoxville and Jake Paul to try to move tickets. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a Roman Reigns Wrestlemania main event that doesn't involve a part-timer or legend that could "draw big money"?  Like, is there anyone on the roster that he could face that would generate ticket sales other than the "I'm going to Wrestlemania" ticket sales?  Do those kinds of ticket sales even exist for Wrestlemania?  Probably not, but indulge me here.

Anyone says Cody and I drive to your house and smack you.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Hagan said:

In regards to Roman as a draw: I mean, he's the biggest full-time star and SD is doing fine but he's not the draw Cena was. Cena came back and sold like a shit ton of tickets. WWE has been resorted to doing 2 for 1s lately on tix. They had to tease a surprise for an MSG house show to get it up to a respectable number.  Night 1 on Wrestlemania outdrew Night 2, right? 

It just seems that if Roman is a mega-star you don't need break glass on Steve Austin, Pat McAfee, Vince McMahon, Johnny Knoxville and Jake Paul to try to move tickets. 


I mostly agree with you, but not on the celebrity WM involvement. That would be like saying well if Hogan was a mega-star in 1985 they wouldn't have needed Ali & Liberace and shit. Wrestlemania is based around celebrity involvement. So them using Johnny Knoxville or Logan Paul would have happened regardless of how many tickets sold or how popular the brand is / how big of a mega-star Roman is.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Log said:

Is there a Roman Reigns Wrestlemania main event that doesn't involve a part-timer or legend that could "draw big money"?  Like, is there anyone on the roster that he could face that would generate ticket sales other than the "I'm going to Wrestlemania" ticket sales?  Do those kinds of ticket sales even exist for Wrestlemania?  Probably not, but indulge me here.

Anyone says Cody and I drive to your house and smack you.

No - hence they’ve changed their recruitment process. 
As with any business, the idea that the “brand” trumps “content” is a nice idea only in the very short term.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Log said:

Is there a Roman Reigns Wrestlemania main event that doesn't involve a part-timer or legend that could "draw big money"?  Like, is there anyone on the roster that he could face that would generate ticket sales other than the "I'm going to Wrestlemania" ticket sales?  Do those kinds of ticket sales even exist for Wrestlemania?  Probably not, but indulge me here.

Anyone says Cody and I drive to your house and smack you.

My first answer would prob be a mega pushed Rex Steiner. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NoFistsJustFlips said:


I mostly agree with you, but not on the celebrity WM involvement. That would be like saying well if Hogan was a mega-star in 1985 they wouldn't have needed Ali & Liberace and shit. Wrestlemania is based around celebrity involvement. So them using Johnny Knoxville or Logan Paul would have happened regardless of how many tickets sold or how popular the brand is / how big of a mega-star Roman is.

At the first Wrestlemania, the celebs were a pathway to get eyes on the wrestlers. 

I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's different now.  It's like, back then, the celebrities wanted to hang around this fun, cool new fad.  Now, WWE feels more needy about it. Like, "Hey, look! Logan Paul! You like him, right? Come watch him on our thing!" Whereas, in 84-85, it was more like, "Cindy Lauper is really popular.  She seems to be into this WWF thing.  I should check that out."  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

My first answer would prob be a mega pushed Rex Steiner. 

I think that's probably correct in a couple years, but I don't think that generates a huge buzz now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Log said:

I think that's probably correct in a couple years, but I don't think that generates a huge buzz now.  

Yeah. You’d need like 2+ years of a Goldberg push, but they already ruined the chance of the undefeated gimmick with him. I guess they could do it for Steveson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since BTS has recently done shows on both WM 2 and 3, it’s interesting to see how they went so overboard with celebrities at 2 and how it really didn’t do anything for them and then they pulled way back at 3, where they had a humongous match to sell the show. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some think AEW will have to cut down on the blood and lang. I think only hardway and blood capsule would be used after then. AEW PPV's probably will be extempt from those possible changes.

At least AEW doesn't have to worry about the defunct Standards and Practises like WCW did. Which axed angles and contents. 

WCW was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Turner. AEW is an independent production company, so they're not too beholden like WCW was, and have less to worry about in changes to creative and can support themselves financially.

The only reason I posted about the Warner Bros. Discovery news days ago, is because what the future holds for Rampage.... if WBD decides to cut costs or move the show to TBS or elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, caley said:

Oh good the "is he a draw?/who is a draw?" conversation is still...going...

You can not read it.

I'm not really interested in who can/can't draw.  I just think it's interesting discussing how the metrics of what constitutes a "draw" in pro wrestling has changed over the years.  Used to, you could point to hard numbers in attendance, ticket sales or ratings (though we all understand that they're not objective). Now, it's more nebulous.  Sure, a company may get x dollars for their tv deal while this guy was champ, but how much of x was because of him? 

Judging by the amount of replies, I'd say a lot of us are interested in this conversation.  It's cool that you're not, but maybe contribute something more worthwhile or don't post?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Blue Dragon said:

Some think AEW will have to cut down on the blood and lang. I think only hardway and blood capsule would be used after then. AEW PPV's probably will be extempt from those possible changes.

At least AEW doesn't have to worry about the defunct Standards and Practises like WCW did. Which axed angles and contents. 

WCW was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Turner. AEW is an independent production company, so they're not too beholden like WCW was, and have less to worry about in changes to creative and can support themselves financially.

The only reason I posted about the Warner Bros. Discovery news days ago, is because what the future holds for Rampage.... if WBD decides to cut costs or move the show to TBS or elsewhere.

The standards of what is allowed on basic cable has changed drastically since WCW was on, as well.

I swear I've heard some "fuck"s on movies shown on FX and maybe TNT.  Sometimes I'm shocked at how not-edited some movies are that they show.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Log said:

Is there a Roman Reigns Wrestlemania main event that doesn't involve a part-timer or legend that could "draw big money"?  Like, is there anyone on the roster that he could face that would generate ticket sales other than the "I'm going to Wrestlemania" ticket sales?  Do those kinds of ticket sales even exist for Wrestlemania?  Probably not, but indulge me here.

Anyone says Cody and I drive to your house and smack you.

Cody...

...There's an ocean between us.

😉.

In all honestly I'm drawing (pun not intended) a blank.

Edited by The Natural
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

Since BTS has recently done shows on both WM 2 and 3, it’s interesting to see how they went so overboard with celebrities at 2 and how it really didn’t do anything for them and then they pulled way back at 3, where they had a humongous match to sell the show. 

Wonder how much of having 3 sites for Wrestlemania 2 involved having more sites than the 2 site Starrcades

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to combine all of the metrics or use few of them to see who is the top draw. 

Anyway American Pro Wres has moved away from attendance being the main driving thing. In Japan attendance still matters more, still even they want the tv money and the other means of making or getting money nowadays as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, caley said:

Oh good the "is he a draw?/who is a draw?" conversation is still...going...

Nah, we settled that conversation by noting the different contexts in which Roman is or isn't a draw.

Now we're onto discussing the company's influence on Roman's ability to be a draw. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoFistsJustFlips said:


I mostly agree with you, but not on the celebrity WM involvement. That would be like saying well if Hogan was a mega-star in 1985 they wouldn't have needed Ali & Liberace and shit. Wrestlemania is based around celebrity involvement. So them using Johnny Knoxville or Logan Paul would have happened regardless of how many tickets sold or how popular the brand is / how big of a mega-star Roman is.

Fair point though I don't think Ali or Liberace meant a whole lot. Cyndi and T did, obviously but as we transition in '87 the celebrity involvement wasn't needed as a focal point. Hogan used that celebrity exposure to become an all time star. 

Austin is another good example. The Tyson thing was huge in launching him but WM 15, 16, 17 you didn't need an outside celebrity to carry the ball. Austin and Rock and the gang WERE the celebrities. 

John Cena main evented for over a decade and aside from the Donald Trump angle when did the WWE load up the celebrities at the big shows as the main draw? This is definitely a more modern trend because they don't trust their stars to be able to bring in fans. If they believed in their guys you don't pay whatever they pay Bad Bunny or Ronda Rousey or Logan Paul or Johnny Knoxville or STEVE AUSTIN to bail out these shows.  I mean, this UK show...they're totally gonna try to get Tyson Fury in there. You think they're going to trust Roman vs Drew alone to sell (even though they probably won't need Fury because the pent-up demand is so great)?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hagan said:

John Cena main evented for over a decade and aside from the Donald Trump angle when did the WWE load up the celebrities at the big shows as the main draw? 

The next year with Mayweather. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Morganti said:

You could probably build to Roman vs Big E or Xavier Woods using the history of the new day/usos and create a buzz.

Big E is WWE's biggest miss, IMO.  That guy has "It" and a LOT of it.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...