The Official WWE / NXT Discussion Thread *May Contain Spoilers*

[djthefunkchris]

No, even if everyone left the same time, WWE has gotten past the curve where they need to have superstar talent.

 

Remember Miz is mostly green. Cena is mostly green.

 

WWE could go full soap (opera) or full divas division if they need to and they can turn in a profit. This is not to say they are perfect but there are Potato Chips and then there's Starbucks and Mcdonald's. WWE is the latter two. They know how to do the same crap and they have reframed their audience's minds to look forward to that standard.

 

See, this is the only thing I totally dissagree with you about. That is entirely your opinion, and of course your welcome to it, but your putting it out as fact... as if they have had a group of people in the office going "We need to downgrade our talent and brainwash our customers!" Note: I do realise your probably including the fact that they have their hands in alot more then just wrestling, and so they wouldn't fall apart if even all of their wrestling shows were cancelled.

 

No... I totally dissagree with that. My opinion is that they have done studies, and realised a long time before anyone else, that storylines are what keeps people's interest, and the better the storyline the more interest that will follow. They've been doing this "reality" based thing since Vince took over, and although I hated it at first (Get on with the dang show already, I want to see some wrestling!), I can't deny now that I know so much more about the bussiness, I don't think I would be into it at all if it was "Purely" about wrestling... fact is, I know I wouldn't be. As a kid I would have been, as an adult, no way... because everyone has known wrestling was pre-determined since the 1920's (anyone with common scense).

 

What they did is realise that "in-ring" work is not as important for mainstream television. Charasmatic, entertaining "Heroes" and "Villains" is what is important.

 

Your going on the basis that everyone thinks entertaining to them is the same as it is for you, as if what YOU personally want to see is what the masses really want. The fact is, it's not what you or I want, and the masses don't agree with either one of us. Do they do studies? Sure, but it's not to "brainwash", it's to see what people are into... and right now "reality tv" is what people seem to be into, and so we are seeing a bit of "reality wrestling" now.

 

This is not to say I dissagree with your thoughts overall... I just dissagree with this one part.

 

Perhaps I should have used Pepsi instead of Frito Lay, as Pepsico owns Frito lay... but I was just trying to make a simplified example of what I was saying.... and how ridiculous it would be to take John Cena off the shelf.

[djthefunkchris]

But these people's shirts would sell, quite a bit better, if not for every one of them endlessly jobbing to Cena. Every time WWE proves these guys aren't worth squat by having Cena destroy them in six moves, they crap on their merch sales in the process. Surely there's a better way to go about this.

 

I'm positive there has to be a better way... Not so sure if your correct on the merchandise sells though. I don't care who wins or loses (for example), if I buy merchandise... I'm going to buy who I like, not who other's like. IF I like The Miz, for example, I'm not going to care if he lost, I'm buying Miz Merchandise.

 

proven by the Nexus shirts right? Sales were high regardless of if they were jobbing or dominating Cena. Don't know exact numbers but I think they were selling out fast at lots of live events.

 

Doesn't matter really.... Arrows point is not really about merchandise, he's just stretching. Cena (the person this is all about) does alot more then merchandise selling, and although he probably wouldn't be where he is without it, it's not the sole reason for him being where he is. The merchandise example he is using is a way to get around that one thing, to make a bigger point.

 

His point (And feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Arrows) is that the WWE have invested everything into John Cena, when they could be investing just as much in other's, and elevate them to John Cena's level. I think the percieved viewpoint right now is here is John... 20 miles up... People like HHH and Taker are around 19 miles up, and everyone else (Miz, Punk, etc.) is 10 miles or below. He's just trying to think of a way to "fix" this, as he see's it as a problem.

[Arrows]

I only use merch sales because that seems to be the common point in the "Why Cena is God" topic.

 

It just seems to me like Cena can't possibly get any more over. He can't possibly go up from where he is. He's Hogan. There's no where to go from there. It's time to USE this, and start bringing other guys up just a little bit.

 

Instead, they use those guys to try and push Cena further by attempting to make him look even better. That's not gonna get them anything. Outside of this run with Punk, Cena's booking has been ineffective at best.

 

Like Taker's streak. They've been looking for someone who deserves to end it, to give them that rub. It's time. The streak is not helping Taker any more. The man is a god. He can not go any higher. There's no point in continuing to try and keep it alive now, even if he still had a decade left in his career. It's doing no one any good at all.

 

I guess you could say CM Punk's the man to end Cena's run, but that's yet to really be seen. Getting hopeful, but I've got a bad feeling this is going to wind up looking a lot like what he did to the Nexus(If the ROH invasion winds up true), where seven(five for ROH?) talents get completely buried so one guy gains, nothing.

[Teh_Showtime]

I think the thing with Cena is that they ARE trying to get people closer to him, there is only so much they can push without dropping Cena down some. It would be an ugly middle period if that happens.

[Arrows]

I think the thing with Cena is that they ARE trying to get people closer to him, there is only so much they can push without dropping Cena down some. It would be an ugly middle period if that happens.

 

Cena's so strong with the kiddies these days, I don't know if they could drop him down without a heel turn. Some losses wouldn't hurt his image at all. Tapping/losing I quit matches might, but heels cheating to win wouldn't.

[Astil]

Cena's so strong with the kiddies these days, I don't know if they could drop him down without a heel turn. Some losses wouldn't hurt his image at all. Tapping/losing I quit matches might, but heels cheating to win wouldn't.

 

Who would you say deserves to go over Cena? I have a list myself but I'm curious who you think should.

[bigtplaystew]

Face vs Face feuds work to elevate a face worker. Maybe if he dropped a clean series of losses to another big face some day then it might happen.

 

Thing is, there's no one with that status right now. I mean Punk's doing great and he's got a very good selling Tshirt right now. He might be the guy if they work this right.

 

They'll heel turn him if he gets too stale and the sales go down though. I always say they won't heel turn him as long as he sells merch like he does.

[VTial]

See, this is the only thing I totally dissagree with you about. That is entirely your opinion, and of course your welcome to it, but your putting it out as fact... as if they have had a group of people in the office going "We need to downgrade our talent and brainwash our customers!" Note: I do realise your probably including the fact that they have their hands in alot more then just wrestling, and so they wouldn't fall apart if even all of their wrestling shows were cancelled.

 

This is the first part of my lengthy post:

 

I'm not saying my version is correct

 

Edit: Oh and just to clarify, I do mean specifically the wrestling part of their business. That means specifically the wrestling shows and not some side business.

 

Also, yes, that's not only what I'm saying but it's something that's part of the diatribe Punk said. Why else do you think Punk referred to anything as Vince opting to be rich instead of richer?

 

The whole thing is common practice for corporations and it's not some new tactic. Even low budget flash games often have games where some try to make a better pro version out of a cheap flash game. Even videogame companies add things like DRM and disguise downloadable contents. Even Hollywood films when tasked with preferring the better but riskier film versus the more easily categorized concept would opt for the latter.

 

It is only silly if you interpret brainwashing as them intentionally scripting horrible stories that make them so unpopular they lose all their audiences within a year.

 

Poor stories don't mean horrible stories though, poor stories can just as much be:

 

a. Good stories with bad pay-off

 

b. Mediocre stories that add nothing but get cancelled or make you complain until the next feud

 

c. Tasteless stories like Vince in an exploding car

 

d. Bad stories that cause entire gimmicks to be scrapped

 

e. Bad stories that set up a hardcore/ladder match

 

f. Stories that start out good but take too long and seemingly gets forgetton

 

g. Decent stories that started having potential but just keeps getting repeated over and over again.

 

...the list can go on and on. Such examples if applied to a mainstream topic can groom audiences to the point of brainwashing the direction and opinions people have of a product.

 

No... I totally dissagree with that. My opinion is that they have done studies, and realised a long time before anyone else, that storylines are what keeps people's interest, and the better the storyline the more interest that will follow. They've been doing this "reality" based thing since Vince took over, and although I hated it at first (Get on with the dang show already, I want to see some wrestling!), I can't deny now that I know so much more about the bussiness, I don't think I would be into it at all if it was "Purely" about wrestling... fact is, I know I wouldn't be. As a kid I would have been, as an adult, no way... because everyone has known wrestling was pre-determined since the 1920's (anyone with common scense).

 

What they did is realise that "in-ring" work is not as important for mainstream television. Charasmatic, entertaining "Heroes" and "Villains" is what is important.

 

Your going on the basis that everyone thinks entertaining to them is the same as it is for you, as if what YOU personally want to see is what the masses really want. The fact is, it's not what you or I want, and the masses don't agree with either one of us. Do they do studies? Sure, but it's not to "brainwash", it's to see what people are into... and right now "reality tv" is what people seem to be into, and so we are seeing a bit of "reality wrestling" now.

 

I'd counter this but you're totally off base with interpreting my post.

 

You're combining too many generations together.

 

It also doesn't help that you're bringing up a subject that I didn't include. This whole reality tv thing.

 

As far as in-ring work not being as mainstream, that's up for debate honestly.

 

WCW and TNA killed itself by ignoring their in-ring wrestlers. WWF in order to compete with WCW had to re-invent it's wrestlers to be better in-ring workers that rely less on gimmicks.

 

Even right now, regardless of where you rate Punk vs. Cena in your scale, it is generating interesting because it is trying to bring up this greater interest in the in-ring work and not the promos. The promos become better for some because they're talking about in-ring work, not "storylines" and the result of that is that the storylines have more impact.

 

 

Perhaps I should have used Pepsi instead of Frito Lay, as Pepsico owns Frito lay... but I was just trying to make a simplified example of what I was saying.... and how ridiculous it would be to take John Cena off the shelf.

 

Even if you use Pepsi, there's a huge difference in the way the two brands are.

 

Mcdonald's or Starbucks is a place where they can serve you several repeated items and the fanbase will love it.

 

Pepsi on the other hand is stuck with a specific flavor. If Pepsi wants to bring something "several" like Frito Lay or some other product, they may have the backing of the WWE like XFL or Tough Enough has, but they can't stand on that image where as WWE can stand on the WWE image. Whatever you put there that's part of the WWE product, whether it gets vastly hated or cheered for, is going to garner in enough numbers to generate a profit especially if they are on the verge of toning up a product like Mcdonald's adding a new limited edition toy or food to the menu temporarily.

[Astil]

 

WCW and TNA killed itself by ignoring their in-ring wrestlers. WWF in order to compete with WCW had to re-invent it's wrestlers to be better in-ring workers that rely less on gimmicks.

 

Hm. Maybe I missed this, but I would disagree on this point. Who exactly are you speaking of, because I always thought WWF won the War on the backs on great characters.

[djthefunkchris]

I only use merch sales because that seems to be the common point in the "Why Cena is God" topic.

 

It just seems to me like Cena can't possibly get any more over. He can't possibly go up from where he is. He's Hogan. There's no where to go from there. It's time to USE this, and start bringing other guys up just a little bit.

 

Instead, they use those guys to try and push Cena further by attempting to make him look even better. That's not gonna get them anything. Outside of this run with Punk, Cena's booking has been ineffective at best.

 

Like Taker's streak. They've been looking for someone who deserves to end it, to give them that rub. It's time. The streak is not helping Taker any more. The man is a god. He can not go any higher. There's no point in continuing to try and keep it alive now, even if he still had a decade left in his career. It's doing no one any good at all.

 

I guess you could say CM Punk's the man to end Cena's run, but that's yet to really be seen. Getting hopeful, but I've got a bad feeling this is going to wind up looking a lot like what he did to the Nexus(If the ROH invasion winds up true), where seven(five for ROH?) talents get completely buried so one guy gains, nothing.

 

The problem is it's not just Merch sells.... That's just a scapegoat in my opinion. I don't know, but I'm guessing Zack Rider probably does more merch sells now then quite a few more people that get's more camera time (on the shows). That's just one part (although I'm pretty sure a big part) of the many.

 

Cena is witty... He can come back on anything, anyone says to him in a promo, and capture everyone's attention with one sentence.... A current example is when Punk was doing his thing, and Cena was boo'd and boo'd and boo'd before he got to speak.... then he spoke, the whole place felt the weight of the words. It might not have been the words themselves, but he has something about him that makes people listen, including the people that boo him... For example, when was the last time you heard the boo's over his voice (like with Vickie or Cole). Boo or not, everyone listens up when the man speaks. Has to do with mic skills, charisma, star quality, etc... in TEW terms. An example a little while ago is with The Rock... The Rock had everyone cheering himself, and boo'ing Cena. Yet again, Cena says one line, and the whole place laughs at The Rock. You can try to ignore these things, but all you have to do is youtube it to see what I'm talking about. Doesn't mean cuz you couldn't help laughing at the joke, that you like Cena better or anything like that. The point I'm making is he can hold his own, and he held his own against "the Great One"... something I've rarely seen anyone do, if I've ever seen it done.

 

There is the work-a-holic facter as well. He's willing to promote the company nonstop. He does everything someone in his shoe's can possibly do, and then you probably would have to times that by at least 2... I know I wouldn't do everything he does.

 

So far, as far as we know... There is no worries about anything happening with him that could do the company harm. No worries about drugs, steroids, etc. Not even a speeding ticket, at least not to my knowledge. This one thing is probably more important then people think. I can't help but to believe that Kennedy/Anderson could have really gone place's had he not failed in that area. Bassically, he's a safe investment as well as a good investment.

 

I could go on as could other's, but let me move to something else here... I get what your saying about the way his match's are booked, and I hate it as much as you do. I just hate it for a different reason. To me, your ignoring that most of the time that he wins, in this fashion, it's because the "Heel" makes a mistake, and ussually it's something similar to Swagger running around as if he already won the match, instead of putting him (Cena) away. This happens alot in these match's your saying he burries people in. I don't agree with you on that, as I believe the intention is to make the Heel look like they could have won, if only they wouldn't have let their ego get in the way, and bassically brag about winning before they won. To me this is important to understand. The idea is to get people to percieve that this guy had a legimate chance to win, but instead of getting the job done, they had to act like they already won it when it wasn't over. Kind of like bragging in any game before the game is over, because your ahead at the time... your so busy bragging that the other team has took advantage of your lack of attention to the matter at hand, and has overcome you. This has happened to Cena himself... Doing the "You can't see me" thing with Undertaker, and Undertaker grabbing him by the throat at that instant. What I'm bassically saying, is that most of the match's are booked in such a way, that the heel does something that backfires on them, and you walk away thinking if they didn't do that, they could have won. The Heels will always do something to take advantage of the situation, or something somewhere that backfires on them. A good example of the past is, I remember many match's having the heel take the padding off the turnbuckle, with he intention of throwing the face at it... But while they are taking off the padding the "Hero" revives enough to "accidentally" cause the "Villain" to land on it, and thus the good guy gets the advantage the bad guy was trying to utilize... IF only he didn't take that turnbuckle off, and concentrated on winning, he could have won that match.

 

You can't call it burrying someone when the match isn't booked to bury anyone. IF your going to bury someone, your not going to give them an out for losing.

[Fantabulous]

WWE, at least in the modern era, has always had a problem when it comes to replacing the current top babyface with the next guy to carry the mantle. They've invariably gone with a quick fix of some kind rather than steadily build a guy up and make a smooth transition from one top babyface to the next.

 

When Hogan left in 1992, they brought Warrior back to try and plug the gap instead of spending the previous year building a new young hope. While Warrior was there, and they did have Savage as well but he was no long-term solution, they didn't really build anyone up and when Warrior was fired they abruptly shoved Bret Hart into the top spot despite him being midcard fixture for most of his tenure. When that didn't take, they went with the quick fix of Hogan and when he walked out they immediately turned Lex Luger from relatively lukewarm midcard heel into the super patriot babyface that, for a short time, was really over but had no legs.

 

From there, they want back to Bret for a more serious run as the top guy but even then, when had a nice slow-build going with Diesel, when they did make the change, they turned Diesel and gave him the belt all in three days Whether a slower build to the title would have worked better for his reign is debatable but the results of what happened speak for themselves. From there, the title went back to Bret to keep warm for Shawn in a reign that did nothing to help Bret or the prestige of the title. Shawn did have a good build towards the title, which is unfortunately the example that proves the rule in this case.

 

When it comes time to replace Cena as the top babyface of the company, odds are pretty good it will be done rather abruptly and won't take liked they'd hope.

[lazorbeak]

Hm. Maybe I missed this, but I would disagree on this point. Who exactly are you speaking of, because I always thought WWF won the War on the backs on great characters.

 

Yeah the Monday Night Wars weren't won on the basis of "workrate." WWF had new, exciting characters doing things that audiences hadn't seen before. Not through an exhaustive EWR-style battle.

[djthefunkchris]

Hm. Maybe I missed this, but I would disagree on this point. Who exactly are you speaking of, because I always thought WWF won the War on the backs on great characters.

 

I seen that too. I don't know what he actually means there, because the way most see it, is that WWF re-invented their characters to be more "ECW'ish" in attitude, nothing to do with the ring work to be honest. Bassically, the opposite of what he's trying to say is true for that, and I wouldn't have brought it up if I were argueing points about in ring work. What I mean, is the whole "Entertainment" thing is what beat WCW, not the in ring work. WWF entertained people better, because much like TNA today, WCW did have some great in ring performers.

 

I also believe TNA ratings haven't actually dipped at all, in average.. they are relatively the same as always.

[Teh_Showtime]

TNA ratings have dropped the last 3 weeks or so. Not because they showcase their taleted wrestlers...because they hardly do. Their ratings were up through the DX build up.

[djthefunkchris]

TNA ratings have dropped the last 3 weeks or so. Not because they showcase their taleted wrestlers...because they hardly do. Their ratings were up through the DX build up.

 

In general, looks the same for the entire year... Yeah, they drop a bit here and there, but they come back up for whatever reasons. Steadily staying above 1.0 though, and that's new for them. IF you look at the yearly averages, I would say they steadily increased (Very Slowly), up till 2010, and since the "Hogan/Bischoff" era has took off, although there was a moment when it hit a record high, it's pretty much stayed the same with some ups and downs, but then again, so has RAW bassically.

 

01/6/11-- 1.16

1/13/11-- 1.25

1/20/11-- 1.15

1/27/11-- 1.28

02/3/11-- 1.31

2/10/11-- 1.2

2/17/11-- 1.13

2/24/11-- 1.26

03/3/11-- 1.36

3/10/11-- 1.25

3/17/11-- 1.28

3/24/11-- 1.23

3/31/11-- 1.19

04/7/11-- 1.15

4/14/11-- 1.14

4/21/11-- 1.17

4/28/11-- 1.1

05/5/11-- 1.15

5/12/11-- 1.27

5/19/11-- 1.17

5/26/11-- 1.2

06/2/11-- 1.08

06/9/11-- 1.0

6/16/11-- 1.25

6/23/11-- 1.17

6/30/11-- 1.27 (limited commercial interruptions)

07/7/11-- 1.1

7/14/11-- 1.19

7/21/11-- 1.25

7/28/11-- 1.19

08/4/11-- 1.14

[jjohns44]

Awesome facepop for Sheamus when he came out for the Christian match. Great to see he's relevant to the live fans and not someone they'll just there and not do anything when he comes out. One of my faves of this era!

 

and I do love they are finally remembering they have Intercontinental/U.S and Tag Team champions and are actually using them on a regular basis.

[djthefunkchris]

I seen Aksana (I have no idea how to spell her name) has died her hair and was flirting with Teddy. Wonder what they are planning for her?

 

Kind of weird how it seems they are trying to get the Diva's division upgraded, or more attention, or something. Natalya teaming with Beth is something I honestly seen coming, but I wouldn't have seen that coming if not for recent events. Seems as though they are giving the same message that Kong did with the doll. Would be kind of weird if all three end up teaming up, but I have a feeling that Kharma is going to actually end up on the "Kelly Kelly" side of things when it's all said and done (The monster "Face"?!?!!), and that would be something unique as well.

 

Tomorrow will answer alot in the way of the current main fueds going,

[VTial]

Hm. Maybe I missed this, but I would disagree on this point. Who exactly are you speaking of, because I always thought WWF won the War on the backs on great characters.

 

No one in particular. It was just the trend.

 

We can use Austin for example. Was Austin a great "character"?

 

Not necessarily if you analyze it from the perspective of a kayfabe great character. Instead the character had to be updated because the character themselves weren't good enough to appease the fans anymore and updated in such a way that instead of the WWE selling you the idea that they had the best there is and the best there was or that they had the Ultimate Warrior or the mega Giant or any perception of a top guy.

 

Guys like Austin and the Rock and HBK towed the line for the first time of a Cena-like champion. A champion that wasn't based off on credibility of power and skill but on entertainment. It combined both the image of Flair and Hogan but this time there was less pretense on character building.

 

What made it tolerable and in some ways what made it mega-popular at the time was that these characters did a variation of what the Ultimate Warrior did which was a combination of the in-ring work adding to the promos and the promos adding to the illusion that the in-ring work was great...except Warrior still had to be a credible champion. Austin, The Rock, HBK...they didn't need to be.

 

Earlier they were still challenged. Like you believed Austin was someone who may not present the illusion that he's unbeatable but he backs up his talk. Later on however it was all about Austin's character being a caricature and what fans really look forward to was the energy of the moves. The anticipation of not only a Hogan doing a leg drop "to win" but instead the anticipation of Austin just doing a stunner even in promos. The Rock further stretched out this destruction of character.

 

When the Rock started doing the People's Elbow, it may seem like a similar move to Hogan's leg drop but for the first time it made everything seem like a joke where you as a viewer was seeing this guy pull off a pad where night in and night out he didn't even need to try to comeback like Hogan. He could just do a rock bottom, most of the time the opponent will be a zombie and the crowd will go wild with the move. A move that literally is an in-ring move and not a move sold by a promo and not a move that in any sense of a word is a finisher...a move that literally groomed fans to the idea of a trademark move being more entertaining then a character based wrestling match.

 

...And this transition worked because the guys that were doing it were great in-ring workers and often times the WWF was trying to elevate their characters whether successfully or not. It was only tolerable during HHH times and Cena's times because of what these guys already prepared the audience of a certain style of perception that combined both a weak champion that didn't have to have the Ultimate Warrior's muscles or Hogan's wins to pad up a mega-finisher that is equally less about devastation but a combination of "over-exposed" characters intermixed with a move that says "this is over" rather than "it is all over!".

 

This doesn't even start to address the booking. This is just talking about the gradual shift from the relevance of characters doing moves to the phenomenon of great in-ring workers redefining the necessity of gimmicks into mere mic talks whose exclamation points were not the moves itself but the intangible elements of exciting in-ring work that gives them illusion of a guy who can say the same catchphrase over and over again and still seem like a fresh character to the audience.

 

I seen that too. I don't know what he actually means there, because the way most see it, is that WWF re-invented their characters to be more "ECW'ish" in attitude, nothing to do with the ring work to be honest. Bassically, the opposite of what he's trying to say is true for that, and I wouldn't have brought it up if I were argueing points about in ring work. What I mean, is the whole "Entertainment" thing is what beat WCW, not the in ring work. WWF entertained people better, because much like TNA today, WCW did have some great in ring performers.

 

I also believe TNA ratings haven't actually dipped at all, in average.. they are relatively the same as always.

 

That's the common perception and it's not wrong but it doesn't address why

when WWF adopted the pattern, it took off where ECW still felt too hardcore for audiences despite the fact that they should have at least somewhat the same appeal if this were true.

 

It's like the Star Wars entry put here: http://www.cracked.com/article_18530_5-pop-culture-classics-created-out-laziness_p2.html

 

Anything that gets over is always based on entertainment. The in-ring work is part of that.

 

However that's why sometimes specifics tell a different story. If we just start talking about things from our perspectives rather than from what our general perspectives are, our opinions will always rise above anything beyond the taken for granted talking points that we read up or came to the conclusion to and saw many others came to the conclusion to.

 

It may produce lots of wall of text type of posts but if we strive for the lesser length then it may seem like we're talking lots of things above someone that simply says "Cena sucks cause he sucks" but really we're not. We just end up doing the same thing as what Fox News does to politics.

 

That's how the ECW reference mostly become a strengthened myth. It may have some factual backing but the "attitude" isn't enough as you see with some of the complaints with Cena. It also ignores that Heyman was not dealing with main eventers that were exposed in the television screen and the WWF at the time was. It just became the official myth because most people wanted to credit ECW as entertaining and in some ways a pioneer but no matter how anyone wants to present it, ECW just wasn't going to fly. It was not just the slight shift in attitude but just the difference in build-up and perception the two things give off.

 

It's not even limited to the WWE. The knife chops of Kenta Kobashi is a variation of stiff style. Yet the popularity of Kobashi somewhat surpassed stiff style because the in-ring work as a whole wasn't really just an NJPW type of execution and attitude. It was something like what the WWE had with Austin. Whether those wrestlers from time to time participate in something else, the truth is they were delivering a modified hybrid of in-ring work and not just an attitude copy or an entertainment shift that's why they endeared for so long not just in the memory of fans but in the level of popularity they retain even after they retired and were half-assedly added on-screen from time to time.

[Astil]

No one in particular. It was just the trend.

 

We can use Austin for example. Was Austin a great "character"?

 

Yes. Rebels sell. Kayfabe wise he was very protected.

 

Not necessarily if you analyze it from the perspective of a kayfabe great character. Instead the character had to be updated because the character themselves weren't good enough to appease the fans anymore and updated in such a way that instead of the WWE selling you the idea that they had the best there is and the best there was or that they had the Ultimate Warrior or the mega Giant or any perception of a top guy.

 

So you're saying WWE moved away from powerhouse cartoony characters to more realistic characters? Just want to make sure I'm following correctly.

 

Guys like Austin and the Rock and HBK towed the line for the first time of a Cena-like champion. A champion that wasn't based off on credibility of power and skill but on entertainment. It combined both the image of Flair and Hogan but this time there was less pretense on character building.

 

I disagree a lot. There was a huge pretense on character building. Rock, Austin, HBK, HHH, Mankind, Jericho, Taker, hell even Kane. These where not one dimensional characters. Austin was a man who wanted a good fight, not a technical prissy fight, a BRAWL. He'd go out, drink some Stevewiesers and look for a brawl. Eventually that morphed into fighting the man who tried to stop him from brawling, VKM. Which turned him into a sensation.

 

The Rock began as this bland face who was hated by the fans. So he turned on the fans, becoming all about himself. He disintegrated his faction with his selfcenteredness then blamed that on Farooq. From there he began to see himself at the top, only to falter a few times. He kept his swagger (as much as I hate the overuse of that word now) and the fans began to change there tune on him ... and he too changed his tune on the fans.

 

Both of those are but a few of the well developed intreguing characters I remember from what i've seen of the day.

 

What made it tolerable and in some ways what made it mega-popular at the time was that these characters did a variation of what the Ultimate Warrior did which was a combination of the in-ring work adding to the promos and the promos adding to the illusion that the in-ring work was great...except Warrior still had to be a credible champion. Austin, The Rock, HBK...they didn't need to be.

 

Earlier they were still challenged. Like you believed Austin was someone who may not present the illusion that he's unbeatable but he backs up his talk. Later on however it was all about Austin's character being a caricature and what fans really look forward to was the energy of the moves. The anticipation of not only a Hogan doing a leg drop "to win" but instead the anticipation of Austin just doing a stunner even in promos. The Rock further stretched out this destruction of character.

 

Austin wasn't a caricature until he was on his way out, and he wasn't a champ any more.

 

 

When the Rock started doing the People's Elbow, it may seem like a similar move to Hogan's leg drop but for the first time it made everything seem like a joke where you as a viewer was seeing this guy pull off a pad where night in and night out he didn't even need to try to comeback like Hogan.

 

If I remember correctly, he started doing the Elbow as a heel, mocking the 'People' and how they'd go crazy for theatrics.

 

He could just do a rock bottom, most of the time the opponent will be a zombie and the crowd will go wild with the move. A move that literally is an in-ring move and not a move sold by a promo and not a move that in any sense of a word is a finisher...a move that literally groomed fans to the idea of a trademark move being more entertaining then a character based wrestling match.

 

But the move was part of the character. If a character like say Kane had started doing it, it wouldn't matter.

 

If a character like Rock started flipping people off before there finisher, it wouldn't matter.

 

If a character like Austin 'Hulked Up' it wouldn't matter.

 

The moves match the characters. They are all a product of the gimmick.

 

...And this transition worked because the guys that were doing it were great in-ring workers and often times the WWF was trying to elevate their characters whether successfully or not.

 

Woah! I missed a logic leap somehow! The People's Elbow makes the Rock a great in-ring worker?

 

It was only tolerable during HHH times and Cena's times because of what these guys already prepared the audience of a certain style of perception that combined both a weak champion that didn't have to have the Ultimate Warrior's muscles or Hogan's wins to pad up a mega-finisher that is equally less about devastation but a combination of "over-exposed" characters intermixed with a move that says "this is over" rather than "it is all over!".

 

:/

 

Let me get this out of the way. HHH is better in ring than Rock.

 

Also HHH doesn't have a character specific move. He has a finisher, but unless we're counting the AA Spinebuster as a character move he doesn't have one.

 

The Five Knuckle Shuffle started the exact same way as the peoples elbow, from a heel, making fun of fans.

 

Hm, so you're saying Cena's F-U is more 'this is over' rather than 'it's all over'?

 

This doesn't even start to address the booking. This is just talking about the gradual shift from the relevance of characters doing moves to the phenomenon of great in-ring workers redefining the necessity of gimmicks into mere mic talks whose exclamation points were not the moves itself but the intangible elements of exciting in-ring work that gives them illusion of a guy who can say the same catchphrase over and over again and still seem like a fresh character to the audience.

 

I'd be interested to hear your take on the Undertaker.

 

I guess my conclusion is we have vary different ideas of 'great in ring work'. (Not trying to insult, just seems like the conclusion.)

[VTial]

So you're saying WWE moved away from powerhouse cartoony characters to more realistic characters? Just want to make sure I'm following correctly.

 

No. Like the statement with the WWF adopting an ECW attitude, that statement is not incorrect but it really wasn't realistic characters. Part of Austin's transition dealt somewhat with a shift to realistic characters but it was more of a shift to in-ring incomplete characters from a period where the characters may be cartoony but they tried to make them more complete (but not necessarily complete) characters.

 

I disagree a lot. There was a huge pretense on character building. Rock, Austin, HBK, HHH, Mankind, Jericho, Taker, hell even Kane. These where not one dimensional characters. Austin was a man who wanted a good fight, not a technical prissy fight, a BRAWL. He'd go out, drink some Stevewiesers and look for a brawl. Eventually that morphed into fighting the man who tried to stop him from brawling, VKM. Which turned him into a sensation.

 

I'd reply here but I believe this is just an extension of your assumption that I was talking about the age old shift from realistic characters.

 

Even this logic if you analyze it doesn't really make sense. It makes sense to us because this is how we often interpreted the shift.

 

The fact is: every feud are wrestlers wanting to have a good fight. Even way back then with the cartoony characters.

 

Both of those are but a few of the well developed intreguing characters I remember from what i've seen of the day.

 

They are well developed because we remember them as entertaining not because they are well developed.

 

Austin wasn't a caricature until he was on his way out, and he wasn't a champ any more.

 

That's a matter of opinion and frankly I don't think we really need to agree on that to discuss the subject matter.

 

Woah! I missed a logic leap somehow! The People's Elbow makes the Rock a great in-ring worker?

:/

 

Yes but not by the definition of smarks. The truth is a great in-ring move that can be done by a great in-ring worker is a move that not everyone can do.

 

We often attribute it to grappling and high spots because those seem like a degree of skill but showmanship is just as difficult a skill. Not everyone can mimic the People's Elbow (especially not regularly as opposed to trying to parody the move) and get the same reaction.

 

One thing that I should clarify is that I didn't say what you claim I'm saying. The topic originally was about the focus and relevance of in-ring work not whether a wrestler is a great in-ring worker or not.

 

Let me get this out of the way. HHH is better in ring than Rock.

 

Also HHH doesn't have a character specific move. He has a finisher, but unless we're counting the AA Spinebuster as a character move he doesn't have one.

 

I'm not really interested in wrestler A vs. wrestler B so no offense but I won't answer this as this has very little to do with why I was talking about in-ring work.

 

I'd be interested to hear your take on the Undertaker.

 

The Undertaker's tombstone is like Hogan's leg drop. It's a finisher. Maybe a weak finisher but it's not a fight ender. It's like a post-match taunt. It was always done after mostly a back and forth battle. It's not a sign to the crowd that the match is going to end as much as it gives the illusion to the crowd that the wrestler is going to finish his opponent. That he has beaten him enough that this move was going to end it. It's not a sudden sequence of moves.

 

I guess my conclusion is we have vary different ideas of 'great in ring work'. (Not trying to insult, just seems like the conclusion.)

 

No. That's the illusion because I'm not fitting the talking points. I get what you're saying with great in-ring work and I agree with that.

 

What you're missing is this:

 

My post that I was talking about:

 

WCW and TNA killed itself by ignoring their in-ring wrestlers. WWF in order to compete with WCW had to re-invent it's wrestlers to be better in-ring workers that rely less on gimmicks.

 

Your reply:

 

Hm. Maybe I missed this, but I would disagree on this point. Who exactly are you speaking of, because I always thought WWF won the War on the backs on great characters.

 

Neither of this is a topic about who is a great in-ring worker and who is not. It's a topic of why I attribute something that you feel doesn't match with your perceived notion of how the WWF shifted their eras.

[djthefunkchris]

Steve Austins character was simple to understand... He's that guy that said "Take this job and shove it!" It didn't have to be well developed...

 

NOTE: The Stone Cold character wasn't much different then his character in ECW... However, if your talking about the "Ringmaster" gimmick, that's another thing altogether.

 

The Rock developed similarly to Cena. I'd have to say The Rock's character is more developed then Austins looking at it like this, but here's the thing... Austin developed his character, and it was the perfect character for the time, with Vince. They elevated each other up, but you know this....

 

Neither one of them had to be "good" with "in ring" work because they weren't boring...

 

Cena isn't much worse then either one of them were at their highest popularity, as far as "in ring" work. I bring this up to make my point, not because I think you hate Cena or something, but let me give this scenario I gave people a while back, of what I feel would refresh Cena's character.

 

What if Cena was alot like Superman (The one that don't take any crap, in the comics not the movies). What if he was the guy that when he walked up, lesser heels tried to get as far away from him as possible. What if whenever a face was being mistreated, or bullied, they ran for Cena and the guy giving them problems got worried as soon as they seen Cena. What if when he had match's, he whipped lesser opponants (talking about the guys lower down the card, that aren't at the time in line for a push) in short bouts, where he didn't mess around... perhaps just did the five moves of doom and Bang! 1, 2, 3. What if even the "Boss" was carefull with the way they talked to him, because he might explode if it comes accross wrong?

 

These are things that made Austin big, and his character feel fresh... because we knew there was no way to predict what he did.... Was he going to sing the guy a song, or stun him? With Cena it's different.... We almost always know he's going to do whatever is the "right" thing to do. Even when it doesn't help him one bit. He's the ultimate good guy. Won't ever cheat, won't ever make excuses, even when everyone knows if not for him having to get out of the ring, CM Punk might have tapped.... Not going to here that out of his mouth, instead your going to here him say "Congratulations Son, Good Match!" What I'm saying is that his character is a "Push-Over". It's not unlike the guy in the Kenny Roger's song, "Promise me son, not to do the things I done. Walk away from trouble when you can. Now it won't mean your weak, if you turn the other cheek...." The problem is he never gets to the last line "I promised you dad, not to do the things you've done. I walk away from trouble when I can. Now please don't think I'm weak, I can't turn the other cheek. I sure hope you understand..." He never gets there. Nothing upsets him. He didn't even act like he was at all upset at what The Rock said about him, yet The Rock (his character) is of course UPSET with Cena.

 

Cena's character is the problem, not the history of HHH, Undertaker, The Rock, or Austin. Cena's the ultimate good guy, and an ultimate good guy is a boring guy.

[Fantabulous]

Was Austin a great "character"?

 

Give what Austin did for the company, this might be a one of the most absurd questions ever seriously asked.

[jjohns44]

It's probably a good thing I have to work tonight or I would tempt myself into forking over another 45 bucks for the pay per view. I am looking forward to how these stories evolve: particularly with the Christian/Orton feud and Cena/CM Punk match. I keep coming to the general conclusion that CM Punk made at the end of RAW 'so that's how it's going to be?' made me remember the attitude era with CM Punk basically being 'Austin' and HHH/Cena being the new corporation.

 

whoever wrote this stuff is great. Yeah, we've seen it before in the attitude era, but at least it's keeping me and hopefully a lot of you interested in 'wtf is gonna happen now'

[Arrows]

What if Cena was alot like Superman (The one that don't take any crap, in the comics not the movies). What if he was the guy that when he walked up, lesser heels tried to get as far away from him as possible. What if whenever a face was being mistreated, or bullied, they ran for Cena and the guy giving them problems got worried as soon as they seen Cena. What if when he had match's, he whipped lesser opponants (talking about the guys lower down the card, that aren't at the time in line for a push) in short bouts, where he didn't mess around... perhaps just did the five moves of doom and Bang! 1, 2, 3. What if even the "Boss" was carefull with the way they talked to him, because he might explode if it comes accross wrong?

 

If they used this and managed to turn around and make the bigger villains look solid against him(no five move loses, even if it is after 20 minutes), it'd work a lot better than what they're doing now.

 

Of course, I think Cena as a hero is an idiotic idea from the start. What kind of hero trespasses and assaults former co-workers for weeks?

 

What kind of hero makes 'package' jokes about the villains?

 

As a hero, he's teaching kids it's okay to break the law.

[SaySo]

If they used this and managed to turn around and make the bigger villains look solid against him(no five move loses, even if it is after 20 minutes), it'd work a lot better than what they're doing now.

 

Of course, I think Cena as a hero is an idiotic idea from the start. What kind of hero trespasses and assaults former co-workers for weeks?

 

What kind of hero makes 'package' jokes about the villains?

 

As a hero, he's teaching kids it's okay to break the law.

 

Supposedly he made a promise to get rid of these former co-workers. End Nexus (storyline at the time he did but eventually they came back under new leadership of CM Punk).

 

He kept his word. That would be equivalent to LeBron keeping his word and bringing a championship to Cleveland. But look how that turned out.