Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

MAY 2016 WRESTLING DISCUSSION THREAD


Recommended Posts

New Day were  supposed to be heels when they started but got over and then jumped back and forth between heel and face.  Now they pretty much do whatever they want because if merchandise sales.  

Separately, they were struggling to get on TV.  Together, they are one of the most over acts today.

51 minutes ago, DTTW said:

Let us remember Austin had to practically beg for merch, ditto for the New Day. The company can creatively prevent anyone from making money simply by not putting out merch.

Sometimes you wonder about usage.  The Big Show has a great sense of humor but you rarely see it on television.  Kane gets a wide variety of roles despite being this disfigured evil beast.

 

You don't have to make everyone's base the same which is what everyone suggests but should a heel be compensated through a slightly higher base in return for being a foregoing merchandise sales?  It is a good question to ask and discuss.

Go back to my post about villains.  Not every actor can play a villain and those that do get more roles just by accepting that spot and doing a good job.  In the end they make more money in total.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what does it say about Dave Pirner from Soul Asylum that Prince kept bringing him in to work together, than shelved everything they did? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, evilwaldo said:

You don't have to make everyone's base the same which is what everyone suggests but should a heel be compensated through a slightly higher base in return for being a foregoing merchandise sales?  It is a good question to ask and discuss.

Kevin Owens is a heel and still shifts merch.

Sheamus has been (at times) a top pushed face and not sold shit for shirts.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

So Prince had a Rock Album titled Bockwinkle and a Morris Day-narrated documentary about Koko B. Ware in his Vault?

What a time to be alive.

SquawkHallelujahWhoa 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DTTW said:

Let us remember Austin had to practically beg for merch, ditto for the New Day. The company can creatively prevent anyone from making money simply by not putting out merch.

 

20 minutes ago, AxB said:

Kevin Owens is a heel and still shifts merch.

Sheamus has been (at times) a top pushed face and not sold shit for shirts.

I have always thought their merchandise decisions have been questionable at best.  

How do you push women yet have no women's clothing?  Not one set of leggings.  No workout attire.  No Bayley bows.  Just t-shirts.  While they may be pushing the women the merchandise as a whole is completely lacking and shows a lack of understanding of women's apparel.  

Sadly, this criticism is coming from a guy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys in WWE nowadays get a lot of flack from the oldtimers by not being creative and coming up with their own stuff and getting themselves over but you got guys like New Day and Ryback openly admitting that they come up with stuff all the time , even after Vince challenging his locker room to grab the brass ring. Ofcoarse New Day is now over since then , but Ryback not so much. Even Sasha has kept herself over even though right now she isn't in a program you got people cheering for her in other women's matches, she's got more merch in 9 months than over half the roster too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, evilwaldo said:

 

I have always thought their merchandise decisions have been questionable at best.  

How do you push women yet have no women's clothing?  Not one set of leggings.  No workout attire.  No Bayley bows.  Just t-shirts.  While they may be pushing the women the merchandise as a whole is completely lacking and shows a lack of understanding of women's apparel.  

Sadly, this criticism is coming from a guy.

Man United sell a women's footy strip, despite not having a women's football team. Although other than that, WWE and Man U have a lot in common. Ownership and management being completely out of touch with the fanbase, for example.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

I had thought WWE could offer the performers whatever and if the performers don't like the deal then they can refuse it. It's like modeling or acting. Well, this model COULD be as popular as Kendall Jenner but she's not, she didn't receive the industry "push" so it is what it is.  Does Sam Worthington deserve the industry push he received?  No, he sucks. There are a billion actors better than him. Can an actor argue "well I wasn't given the roles!"

 

4 hours ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

I had thought WWE could offer the performers whatever and if the performers don't like the deal then they can refuse it. It's like modeling or acting. Well, this model COULD be as popular as Kendall Jenner but she's not, she didn't receive the industry "push" so it is what it is.  Does Sam Worthington deserve the industry push he received?  No, he sucks. There are a billion actors better than him. Can an actor argue "well I wasn't given the roles!"

This argument only works if the industry in question is largely controlled by a single entity. People can make money modeling or acting for many different companies. WWE is the only show in town. 

44 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

 ...,.even after Vince challenging his locker room to grab the brass ring. 

I'm pretty sure there is enough evidence to prove Vince meant "have great looks and hair" right here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

I guess the argument for Ryback is "Hey, I could have been Goldberg 2.0 but you guys fucked it up" but that's a strange argument to try to make. The industry has never been about fair and equal pay. There's no way to calculate how much Ryback would be worth if he beat Punk for the title five years ago.

The point is that there's no reason it shouldn't be at this point.  It shouldn't stay the same solely because its always been that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, joseph2112 said:

 

I'm pretty sure there is enough evidence to prove Vince meant "have great looks and hair" right here.

But in terms of merchandise it is the exact same thing for NXT.  Just women's t-shirts.  No women's apparel.  

You cannot hang that on Vince when the women in WWE and NXT have the same apparel line.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, evilwaldo said:

I have always thought their merchandise decisions have been questionable at best.  

How do you push women yet have no women's clothing?  Not one set of leggings.  No workout attire.  No Bayley bows.  Just t-shirts.  While they may be pushing the women the merchandise as a whole is completely lacking and shows a lack of understanding of women's apparel.  

Sadly, this criticism is coming from a guy.

Excellent points.  They have women-friendly t-shirts, but they could do a better job with accessories.  And not those stupid ponytail weave caps they had for some of the women a couple of years ago, either.   The Bellas have had some stuff along those lines, but not everyone is going to want wear something that has a cartoon butterfly or slogan for getting sloppy drunk on it.

With the TapOut deal, you'd think they would do some specific workout gear for some of the talent, male and female.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ziggy said:

So Prince had a Rock Album titled Bockwinkle and a Morris Day-narrated documentary about Koko B. Ware in his Vault?

And albums based on all the Batman movies.  And an alt-country album.  And Purple Rain 2:  The Purpling, which just replaced Electric Boogaloo as my go-to movie subtitle joke.

I need all this stuff in my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If wrestlers got bonuses for stories that others workers tell about them on the Network or the YouTube channel, Ryback would be well compensated. If I hear another story about him eating at a buffet, or not knowing how to order at Panera Bread, et al. The man is a constant source of (be)musement to his co-workers.

Incidentally, what wrestler do you think that other workers tell the most tales about, publicly or to each other?Dusty? Andre? Flair? Funk?

- RAF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, thee Reverend Axl Future said:

 

Incidentally, what wrestler do you think that other workers tell the most tales about, publicly or to each other?Dusty? Andre? Flair? Funk?

- RAF

Probably Flair.  Out of everyone, he seems like he was the most perpetually "in character".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JonnyLaw said:

First, I'm not saying that is my argument, but the one Ryback seems to be making. That said, playing devil's Ryback's advocate...

Ryback's contention is that the main event guys are main event guys, and thus have value as main event guys, because the company decides they're main event guys.  Ryback's current value was damaged because the company booked him to lose a majority of his matches on PPV and booked him in Pre-Show matches.  Wrestlers' values are impacted by how they're portrayed on TV, so basing their compensation on that (in Ryback's mind a product of the company's whims) and not on how well they do their jobs, doesn't seem to make sense.  Cena should probably be considered an outlier, but Slater (or Ryback) could be just as productive and valuable as guys like Ziggler, Kane, and Ambrose given the right push.

Essentially, if what you're paid is contingent on your value to the company, and the company, through creative, controls your value, there is little room to negotiate contracts and the WWE controls the marketplace.  Ryback presumably wants to be paid closer to what he could be worth to the company; WWE (understandably) wants to pay him based on what he is worth to them now.

 

Ryback stated that guys should be paid for their merchandise.  It is the base pay that he thinks should more equal.

I absolutely agree with Ryback on that. It is up to the individual to get themselves over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JohnnyJ said:

Isn't the underlying problem that compensation in WWE is a little wacky? It's a worked sport that pays its talents based on position on the card and purse of the events as if it were the UFC or boxing.

This might have worked in the past but over the last few years the talent level in the WWE has really shot up and you end up with a upper-midcard logjam. Cena is the franchise and deserves every penny he gets. But when you start going down the line of your Ortons, Cesaros, Big Shows, Zigglers, Owens, Rusevs, etc.  it's hard to come up with a compelling reason why one is worth more than the others. Nobody is moving the needle or drawing in any measurable sense.  

How is WWE different from movies or TV shows.  Robert Downey Jr gets paid an assload for Iron Man 2 and Terrance Howard thinks he should get paid more.  They tell him to kick rocks and go get Don Cheadle.  They put a value on Howard that didn't match his.  Same with WWE and Ryback.

For everybody that thinks the WWE should adjust their pay structure, I need some suggestions on figures.  If Cena is 100%, what should other people be paid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, evilwaldo said:

New Day were  supposed to be heels when they started but got over and then jumped back and forth between heel and face.  Now they pretty much do whatever they want because if merchandise sales.

New Day were heels when they started out, and it took a little while for them to get over, it didn't happen overnight.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Trocar Slush Weasel said:

How is WWE different from movies or TV shows.  Robert Downey Jr gets paid an assload for Iron Man 2 and Terrance Howard thinks he should get paid more.  They tell him to kick rocks and go get Don Cheadle.  They put a value on Howard that didn't match his.  Same with WWE and Ryback.

For everybody that thinks the WWE should adjust their pay structure, I need some suggestions on figures.  If Cena is 100%, what should other people be paid?

I actually referenced this with Javier Bardem and character actors.  They may not make the most money but they will see an increased number of roles.  Not many people are willing to play the villain and not many actors can play the villain.

When you are worried about how being the bad guy looks in terms of your personal image you turn away roles.

If a guy is willing to be a 100% heel and forego merchandise should they get a bump in base vis-a-vis other wrestlers?  It goes back to the article I posted regarding why Cena will never go heel.  He brings in too much merchandise wise for the WWE for them to do the turn.  They are not going to risk losing millions in merchandise sales.

What happens when the Make-A-Wish sponsors call and ask why the #1 guy is a bad guy now and not a good guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, The Green Meanie said:

New Day were heels when they started out, and it took a little while for them to get over, it didn't happen overnight.

It's that long build to get over that keeps you over. 

Which is why Roman Reigns will be a footnote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...