• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

March Wrasslin' |OT2| The God-King Reigns, Baby

  • Thread starter Deleted member 47027
  • Start date
So waht's the consensus does the Lesnar resigning make it more likely that Brock retains at Mania? I know Vince seems to hate the idea of having a heel end WM with the belt but there's a first time for everything (like handing Taker an L at Wrestlemania)
 

Fox318

Member
So waht's the consensus does the Lesnar resigning make it more likely that Brock retains at Mania? I know Vince seems to hate the idea of having a heel end WM with the belt but there's a first time for everything (like handing Taker an L at Wrestlemania)

A heel win set up Rock vs Cena.

This "heel" could set up Rock Brock at cowboy stadium.
 
How about Brock vs Cena?

iboGmQXeqxp0uf.gif
 
And that should show you the real problem--people are losing interest with the guys WWE is promoting/building into stars. Those fans ARE out there. They watched when Rock came back. They didn't download or DVR. Creative just needs to learn how to build guys properly, and it will never happen until Vince steps down.

I mean, yes. The Rock is one of the 4 or 5 biggest stars in pro wrestling history. The fact that there are many fans who like him, but not other wrestlers shouldn't be a shocker. Even well-booked ones.

I think why I'm seeing this from a different perspective. I first got into wrestling in 1994/1995 - the very nadir of American professional wrestling by every metric. So, the fact that the business go's up and down isn't a shocker to me.

But, by the same token, I'm not expecting wrestling to stay as hot as it was during the Rock 'n' Wrestling or Attitude Era, when you had some of the biggest stars in history. Territories cooled down all the time after their biggest stars left - there was a drop after Bruno stopped being full-time, Mid-Atlantic had issues before Flair, Steamboat, & Valentine showed up. The difference is now, we're seeing that on a national scale.

Now, I'm not saying the WWE could've done better in writing. But, frankly, I don't see anybody in the past decade who could've really brought the WWE to new heights - yes, even CM Punk. Or Daniel Bryan. Or the latest IWC flavor of the week. Which is fine.

I think the WWE could find a hot, new star that could start a new boom period, but that boom period would likely be reflected in attendance and network numbers, not ratings, aside from a modest bump.

I don't think Roman Reigns is that guy. I also don't think Daniel Bryan or frankly, anybody on the current WWE roster is that guy. Maybe Nakamura from New Japan or Rush from CMLL could be that guy if they were white and spoke English, but beyond that, sorry, the talent pool isn't as deep as it used to be, and I just don't see the mega stars waiting out there.

I mean, if the Big Bang Theory or NCIS can't stop the cabbinalization of viewers in the long run due to other entertainment options, do you really expect even the best wrestling bookers to do so?
 

Paracelsus

Member
So waht's the consensus does the Lesnar resigning make it more likely that Brock retains at Mania? I know Vince seems to hate the idea of having a heel end WM with the belt but there's a first time for everything (like handing Taker an L at Wrestlemania)

wm2000matchcard.gif
 
I mean, if the Big Bang Theory or NCIS can't stop the cabbinalization of viewers in the long run due to other entertainment options, do you really expect even the best wrestling bookers to do so?

The problem with your analogy is that even the biggest, most popular scripted drama is designed to be finite and then replaced by something else. The WWE doesn't have that luxury. If 4 or 5% of its tv viewers leave on an annual basis then the company is going to have fewer network subscribers, sell fewer tickets to house shows, and sell less merchandise.
 
Do you guys think the WWE could every go away from the overarching "Authority" angle? If your really think about it, ever since Vince McMahon became a character in the mid 90s, the WWE's biggest heel has always been some sort of authority figure who tries to make life miserable for the top face or faces. Time to return to the days when Jack Tunney didn't do shit but show up for contract signings.
 

Fox318

Member
Do you guys think the WWE could every go away from the overarching "Authority" angle? If your really think about it, ever since Vince McMahon became a character in the mid 90s, the WWE's biggest heel has always been some sort of authority figure who tries to make life miserable for the top face or faces. Time to return to the days when Jack Tunney didn't do shit but show up for contract signings.

WWE should have the brand and company have the same feel as ECW. Fans loved the company and the promotion. The heel authority gimmick got over with austin and they kept it because the USA Network President liked it and because Vince and co use it to push their family. Its why they mention Steph being on the board of various foundations.
 

Paracelsus

Member
The Corporation started in nov. 98 and ended in summer of 99, then it shortly resumed around WM2000 and disbanded at KOTR, three months later.

The authority has been going for two years straight, they need to go for good and they need a new Bischoff.
 

DMczaf

Member
Do you guys think the WWE could every go away from the overarching "Authority" angle? If your really think about it, ever since Vince McMahon became a character in the mid 90s, the WWE's biggest heel has always been some sort of authority figure who tries to make life miserable for the top face or faces. Time to return to the days when Jack Tunney didn't do shit but show up for contract signings.

Fuck Tunney. Motherfucker made Hogan vs Sid the main event over the god damn WWF title match!
 
The problem with your analogy is that even the biggest, most popular scripted drama is designed to be finite and then replaced by something else. The WWE doesn't have that luxury. If 4 or 5% of its tv viewers leave on an annual basis then the company is going to have fewer network subscribers, sell fewer tickets to house shows, and sell less merchandise.

Note I never said the network was a great idea.

But, I'll also point out there are likely millions of John Cena fans who might have stopped or will soon stop watching the WWE, just liked many people stopped watching the WWF when the Hogan era got too cartoony for them or they discovered girls, but eventually, when something new came up, they got bitten by wrestling again. So, it's entirely possible that Vince (or likely Triple H by that point) will stumble into another boom period when the current Cena generation enters college and resdiscovers wrestling and there's a talented guy at the top.

Because, even assuming that the WWE will continue its decline for now, wrestling lost a whole bunch of it's audience before. Hell, it was largely dead for long stretched of the 50's and 60's. But, there is something inherent within people that they like to see characters with strong personalities solve their problems with lots of violence, so there's always a bounce back.

The problem for the WWE is, when you have programs like Game of Thrones out there, are people getting that need filled in other ways?

Again, my argument isn't that the WWE has nothing but success that it has to look forward. But, my argument is, in the long run, the ratings were always going to drop and acting like it's the end of the world because they have a 2.7 now, instead of a 3.1 or 3.2 they had with mainstream superstar Daniel Bryan this time last year is kind of silly.
 
Do you guys think the WWE could every go away from the overarching "Authority" angle? If your really think about it, ever since Vince McMahon became a character in the mid 90s, the WWE's biggest heel has always been some sort of authority figure who tries to make life miserable for the top face or faces. Time to return to the days when Jack Tunney didn't do shit but show up for contract signings.

I think it would be cool if Vince (Or someone else) came out as the head honcho and just let everything run crazy. Someone who'd enjoy chaos, no matter where it came from.
 

Fox318

Member
I never understand why they didn't do Hogan-Flair at Mania 8.

Because it did bad on a house show they didn't promote?
 
WWE should have the brand and company have the same feel as ECW. Fans loved the company and the promotion. The heel authority gimmick got over with austin and they kept it because the USA Network President liked it and because Vince and co use it to push their family. Its why they mention Steph being on the board of various foundations.

No one wants any type of ECW feel back, doesn't matter if it's the original sex and violence fueled version or the watered down junior version.
 

Anth0ny

Member
heh, Meltzer is convinced that Reigns isn't going over this Sunday now that Brock has resigned. Alternatively, it'll be a double turn at Mania, with Lesnar going face and Reigns aligning himself with Heyman and/or the authority.



I'm pretty sure they're just going to grind it out and ignore those millennial idiots filling up Mania and the Raw after Mania.
 

DMczaf

Member
heh, Meltzer is convinced that Reigns isn't going over this Sunday now that Brock has resigned. Alternatively, it'll be a double turn at Mania, with Lesnar going face and Reigns aligning himself with Heyman and/or the authority.



I'm pretty sure they're just going to grind it out and ignore those millennial idiots filling up Mania and the Raw after Mania.

Eh, I see where they are coming from. Watching that ESPN interview, dude was full on WWE smiling babyface.
 

Ithil

Member
I never understand why they didn't do Hogan-Flair at Mania 8.

Because it did bad on a house show they didn't promote?

It did great at house shows, big numbers. The problem was they started it at house shows right away, months earlier, so by WM season, it no longer drew, so they moved to Hogan/Sid.

Had they held off on it, it would have drawn big at WM 8.
 
I never understand why they didn't do Hogan-Flair at Mania 8.

Because it did bad on a house show they didn't promote?
That's kind of the "worked shoot" reason. Sid had already been promised a main event, and while everyone expected that to change when Flair was brought in, Vince tends to like guys of a certain size. Hogan/Flair was never officially considered a Mania main event at any point.
 

Anth0ny

Member
Eh, I see where they are coming from. Watching that ESPN interview, dude was full on WWE smiling babyface.

Oh, totally. From everything we've seen over the last few months, it makes complete sense for Lesnar to go full on babyface at or soon after Mania.





It's nice when things make sense. Doesn't mean they're going to happen, though. Certainly not in WWE.
 
There's no such thing as hearing a wrestling fan say they love WWE and not cringe. It wasn't when they thought woman deserved to get squashed by 3 minute warning and it doesn't now
 
Fans chanting 'WWE' make as much sense as fans chanting 'NFL' or 'NBA'.

The reason 'ECW' worked was because it was a cult underground thing.
 

Fox318

Member
For god's sake man no one should have to explain why this is a ridiculous, asinine statement

We have had some of the lowest raw ratings ever this year.

And Big Daddy Cool Diesel is going into the hall of fame with his spinoff winning the belt.

It truly is the end of times, friend.

The Vinnie Vegas fan club may continue to watch WWE but the main stream has moved off long ago to pursue Glen Jacobs style politics.
 
Fans chanting 'WWE' make as much sense as fans chanting 'NFL' or 'NBA'.

The reason 'ECW' worked was because it was a cult underground thing.

That and it was ultimately the cool thing to do. Chanting WWE doesn't have the same ring to it, but with that said I do see the original point. I think the backlash of the heel authority figure is that it has ultimately trained the fans to "hate the product and people in charge." It's had something of a negative effect.

I'd love to see them push away from the heel authority figure just because it would be something fresh at this point and lord knows that company needs to do something to freshen up. I think the authority figure has hurt the product in the long run. It's tired and dull. Time for a fresh start.
 
For god's sake man no one should have to explain why this is a ridiculous, asinine statement

Especially after last night.

If TNA ever got a 4.anything, Dixie would issue press releases about it years later.

If Lucha Underground ever got a 4, the show would never be considered for cancellation AND they could afford doctors to come to every show.

If ROH ever got a 4, Sinclair's owners would have gold boats they'd share with Bryan Alvarez.
 

Fox318

Member
Especially after last night.

If TNA ever got a 4.anything, Dixie would issue press releases about it years later.

If Lucha Underground ever got a 4, the show would never be considered for cancellation AND they could afford doctors to come to every show.

If ROH ever got a 4, Sinclair's owners would have gold boats they'd share with Bryan Alvarez.

I'm pretty sure Impact gets 4 viewers.
 

Chamber

love on your sleeve
heh, Meltzer is convinced that Reigns isn't going over this Sunday now that Brock has resigned. Alternatively, it'll be a double turn at Mania, with Lesnar going face and Reigns aligning himself with Heyman and/or the authority.

Do some of you actually want this to happen? Reigns turning heel means they have to revert back to Cena or Bryan as the top guy and we know which of those options is most likely.
 
Just watched the Brock espn interview. Guy is so good in this interview but can't cut a live promo, so strange. Regardless I'm glad he's back, most entertaining guy on the roster and it's not even close!!
 
There continues to be talk from within WWE NXT that
Finn Balor
is getting called up shortly after WrestleMania 31

Been saying this for a while now. I don't see a scenario where he stays in NXT much longer.
 
Top Bottom