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

[Linsolv]

I'm very close to agreeing with the point.

 

The majority of any group are perfectly happy with what they're given. Complacency's a real problem pretty much everywhere.

 

The reason we're the internet wrestling community is because we're not part of that majority.

[Astil]

Yes, yes...only the intellectual giants that comprise the IWC can truly appreciate what great wrestling really is.

 

The WWE caters to the masses which means it obviously must be completely and totally without merit, despite the roughly 40 years or so that it's dominated the industry.

 

It's a wonder net fans don't dislocate their spines what with all the patting themselves on the back and saying how smart they are.

 

Y'know that might explain my recent back pain...

[PeterHilton]

I'm very close to agreeing with the point.

 

The majority of any group are perfectly happy with what they're given. Complacency's a real problem pretty much everywhere.

 

The reason we're the internet wrestling community is because we're not part of that majority.

 

By that logic everything that's popular is somehow of lesser quality becase the masses are all complacent and therefore not willing to chase after a higher standard of measure.

 

I think net fans need to get over themselves for the most part. It's wrestling. To most people its mindless entertainment; brain candy.

 

The WWE has been wildly successful for decades marketing themselves as just that.

 

If you want something different that's your prerogative. But that's all you're looking for: something different. Not better. Not smarter. Not scientifically superior. Just different.

[Slagaholic]

While I agree with your main point. That's not always true. There are some things in wrestling that aren't just different, but are terrible.

 

For example: A fan wanting unprotected chair shots in your wrestling isn't just wanting something different, they want something terrible.

 

It's not all a gray area.

[PeterHilton]

While I agree with your main point. That's not always true. There are some things in wrestling that aren't just different, but are terrible.

 

For example: A fan wanting unprotected chair shots in your wrestling isn't just wanting something different, they want something terrible.

 

Well, yes, we could go point by point and find varying examples of just 'terrible.'

 

But overall what I'm trying to say is that peope who hyperanalyze the WWE are missing the point. THEY are not the target audience.

 

Net fans criticizing the WWE is the wrestling equivalent of listening to bubble gum pop music and criticizing the lyrics.

[Stennick]

Peter oh how I've missed agreeing with you when you tell it exactly like it is. Some people can't be pleased I question why some of you even watch wrestling any more except to have something to complain about.

[Linsolv]

I like the E, but the statement [itself], regardless of any implications that may or may not be true, is [true]. If you're happy with what you've got, you don't go looking to fix it. In fact, if you're unhappy with what you've got, a lot of people will deal with it.

 

I'm not saying that the WWE is putting out a bad product. Light on the in-ring work, sometimes, when they put on 20 minutes of wrestling in a 2 hour show, but I like a lot of their guys enough that I can deal with that. But if the question is optimization, most people just don't care. The IWC, and especially the GDS forums, are predominantly people who want to optimize their product. The WWE is a business, and businesses are about costs vs. benefits. Quite simply, they wouldn't see a big benefit for making the perfect, wrestling-oriented show, and they would see a cost.

 

However, to criticize the GDS users for being those optimizing types is equally unfair. It's in their (our) nature.

[Hyde Hill]

Ad to that, that past makes you grow fonder. When people think attitude or 80's etc they will remember largely the good stuff and not all the bad that came with it. Combine that with the lifting of the veil aspect and you get critical and cynical people. Ad into the now almost 10 year monopoly of the E, sorry TNA lolz, and their less then stellar performance during that time.

 

Not that around here it is that bad as it is more critical analysis with the occasional overboard venting of frustration.

 

In the end there is only two ways to influence stuff short of getting a job in the industry. Your attention and your money.

[Hyde Hill]

I like the E, but the statement [itself], regardless of any implications that may or may not be true, is [true]. If you're happy with what you've got, you don't go looking to fix it. In fact, if you're unhappy with what you've got, a lot of people will deal with it.

 

I'm not saying that the WWE is putting out a bad product. Light on the in-ring work, sometimes, when they put on 20 minutes of wrestling in a 2 hour show, but I like a lot of their guys enough that I can deal with that. But if the question is optimization, most people just don't care. The IWC, and especially the GDS forums, are predominantly people who want to optimize their product. The WWE is a business, and businesses are about costs vs. benefits. Quite simply, they wouldn't see a big benefit for making the perfect, wrestling-oriented show, and they would see a cost.

 

However, to criticize the GDS users for being those optimizing types is equally unfair. It's in their (our) nature.

 

Don't even think it is much about cost but more effort and skill. Damn I wish Kreski hadn't died.

[crownsy]

Gotta love that a guy who has nothing to do with the wrestling business just determined somebodies (Danielson) career.

 

Gotta love that a Email sent from a freaking hotmail address is being used as legitimate news.

 

I think tonight, I'll write an email saying "to whom it may concern" and make it a mattel VP who is to scared to send it from a legit email source. I'm sure i can get that onto a least a few of the Wrestling rumor sites.

[Hyde Hill]

BTW congrats again and welcome back Peter.

[crownsy]

Well, yes, we could go point by point and find varying examples of just 'terrible.'

 

But overall what I'm trying to say is that peope who hyperanalyze the WWE are missing the point. THEY are not the target audience.

 

Net fans criticizing the WWE is the wrestling equivalent of listening to bubble gum pop music and criticizing the lyrics.

 

As usual, Peter is right on target.

[Hyde Hill]

Gotta love that a Email sent from a freaking hotmail address is being used as legitimate news.

 

I think tonight, I'll write an email saying "to whom it may concern" and make it a mattel VP who is to scared to send it from a legit email source. I'm sure i can get that onto a least a few of the Wrestling rumor sites.

 

I would try it. BTW what was the site that e mail was on? Gives you an immediate target.

[LoganRodzen]

Gotta love that a Email sent from a freaking hotmail address is being used as legitimate news.

 

I think tonight, I'll write an email saying "to whom it may concern" and make it a mattel VP who is to scared to send it from a legit email source. I'm sure i can get that onto a least a few of the Wrestling rumor sites.

 

Doesn't really matter whether it's legitimate news or not. Just that it seemed like a good enough reason for everything that's happening.

[Hyde Hill]

Seems the whole NXT/Bryan thing might have helped in the ratings department as they got a 3.4

[Linsolv]

@crownsy Hotmail still exists?

 

@Hyde - Effort and skill are a cost. You have to take the time (=money) and effort (=money) to put together a really reliable, good set of in-ring workers, then put together the right people to write/book it, then this, then that... As far as I'm concerned, it's something you can only solve with money, and then that begs the question, if you spend that money, will it help?

 

Answer: Not really. ROH has a really great setup. If they had slightly better production values, I'd declare them pretty close to perfect. They are a little too high-flying for me, but what can you do, amirite? That's not to say that a clearly superior product (one that is objectively better and preferred by the majority of the market) cannot be defeated by a clearly inferior one due to poor branding and advertisement and market placement.

 

If we decided to level the playing field a bit -- we put iMPACT on FOX and ROH on TBS (the number 2 and 3 prime time cable channels respectively), and gave them all equal advertising on their home channel, do I think WWE would be the far-and-away leader? No, I don't think it'd be that much of a rout. But would ROH be the far-and-away leader, now that's the question I think you're trying to say we're jumping to conclusions on. Still, it would be interesting.

[PeterHilton]

I like the E, but the statement [itself], regardless of any implications that may or may not be true, is [true]. If you're happy with what you've got, you don't go looking to fix it. In fact, if you're unhappy with what you've got, a lot of people will deal with it.

 

I'm not saying that the WWE is putting out a bad product. Light on the in-ring work, sometimes, when they put on 20 minutes of wrestling in a 2 hour show, but I like a lot of their guys enough that I can deal with that. But if the question is optimization, most people just don't care. The IWC, and especially the GDS forums, are predominantly people who want to optimize their product. The WWE is a business, and businesses are about costs vs. benefits. Quite simply, they wouldn't see a big benefit for making the perfect, wrestling-oriented show, and they would see a cost.

 

However, to criticize the GDS users for being those optimizing types is equally unfair. It's in their (our) nature.

 

The idea that the IWC is trying to optimize the product is a matter of opinion. For all we know using the ideas that most net fans put forth would drive away the majority of the E's viewers.

 

And it's totally fair. Especially on these boards:

 

I assume the people who post here play TEW. One of the basic tenets of the game is that your product needs to amtch the desires of your fans.

 

If you criticize the WWE for creating a product which appeals to the majority of its viewing audience, then you are -metaphorically speaking - telling them to play the game wrong.

[PeterHilton]

BTW congrats again and welcome back Peter.

 

Thanks. I keep meaning to post pics.

[Linsolv]

Fair enough, Peter. The criticism that people seem to be making is that the WWE is engaging in lowest-common-denominator pandering, which I'd say isn't really true. TNA is, I'd say, but that's neither here nor there.

 

EDIT: That said, if I were to say what I think that Vince would be best served doing, it'd be trying to bring back Kayfabe. If you have to make serious, sweeping changes to do it, fine. But wrestling fans shouldn't have to be in the closet because people who know it's fake think we're confused on the subject. This thing with Bryan has come dangerously close to being good for the business.

[PeterHilton]

If we decided to level the playing field a bit -- we put iMPACT on FOX and ROH on TBS (the number 2 and 3 prime time cable channels respectively), and gave them all equal advertising on their home channel, do I think WWE would be the far-and-away leader? No, I don't think it'd be that much of a rout. But would ROH be the far-and-away leader, now that's the question I think you're trying to say we're jumping to conclusions on. Still, it would be interesting.

 

And WOW do I think you'd be wrong. Or at least incredibly disappointed.

 

For all of it's criticisms, the E has been the industry standard since the early 80s.

 

They took over the market during the Rock n Wrestling Era despite the fact that their in-ring product was honestly not that great for the most part..definitely not what net fans would look at today as being 'quality'

 

The Attitude Era was based more on characters than ring work (ironically the WCW's greatest success was also based more on characters and names than ringwork, although they did a great job of blending things)

 

And today, they draw far more fans than other companies despite formulaic and largely predictable matches.

 

I think net fans should realize that - as crazy as it sounds - most people DON"T watch wrestling for the actual ..y'know...wrestling. There's a segment of the audience that does...but most people want the soap opera.

 

That's it.

 

Fair enough, Peter. The criticism that people seem to be making is that the WWE is engaging in lowest-common-denominator pandering, which I'd say isn't really true. TNA is, I'd say, but that's neither here nor there.

 

EDIT: That said, if I were to say what I think that Vince would be best served doing, it'd be trying to bring back Kayfabe. If you have to make serious, sweeping changes to do it, fine. But wrestling fans shouldn't have to be in the closet because people who know it's fake think we're confused on the subject. This thing with Bryan has come dangerously close to being good for the business.

 

Even if it IS pandering to the lowest common denominator, who cares? It works. They are a publicly traded company with a responsibility to generate profits, not to please wrestling nerds.

 

I think kayfabe is an impossible dream, especially with the advent of MMA.

[Hyde Hill]

The idea that the IWC is trying to optimize the product is a matter of opinion. For all we know using the ideas that most net fans put forth would drive away the majority of the E's viewers.

 

And it's totally fair. Especially on these boards:

 

I assume the people who post here play TEW. One of the basic tenets of the game is that your product needs to amtch the desires of your fans.

 

If you criticize the WWE for creating a product which appeals to the majority of its viewing audience, then you are -metaphorically speaking - telling them to play the game wrong.

 

There is a difference between the IWC and here though hehe. Also if done over time would it cost that much more money to optimize their product? As they are paying mediocre writers and talent etc as is. And they have a structure which looks for better talent in all departments as is.

[PeterHilton]

There is a difference between the IWC and here though hehe. Also if done over time would it cost that much more money to optimize their product? As they are paying mediocre writers and talent etc as is. And they have a structure which looks for better talent in all departments as is.

 

Again..optimize is an opinion.

 

But as to cost: it may not be much, but what are you gaining, really? The net fans who bitch sand complain generally tune in regardless and the current product keeps their fans happy.

 

So if you added more wrestling and more "smart mark" storylines etc how many more fans will tune in?

[Hyde Hill]

Well Peter you are ignoring the kind of cyclical effect that the WWE/F's dominance has had over the long amount of years as to what "wrestling" fans want as what the E gives is perceived as to be what wrestling is and vice versa. The only time they did a true change in formula and product was when they where realistically challenged.

 

That same problem would also be one of the things that would have them win the ratings etc for quite a while if Linsolv's plan would be implemented.

 

WWE/F = wrestling = WWE/F = wrestling ad nauseam.

 

I also do not think that the most on these boards want or expect the WWE to become a niche entertainment product like let's say Firefly, but would like it to be more like say X-Files or at least Friends and not the Power Rangers Power Hour.

[Hyde Hill]

Again..optimize is an opinion.

 

But as to cost: it may not be much, but what are you gaining, really? The net fans who bitch sand complain generally tune in regardless and the current product keeps their fans happy.

 

So if you added more wrestling and more "smart mark" storylines etc how many more fans will tune in?

 

8.1 ratings? lol, at least that is what they got at their height, although agreed that was not with predominately wrestling but at least better characters and storylines.

 

Edit: And of course it is on opinion and you are right that their main objective is the bottom line but atm due to their near monopoly position and the lack of a viable threat at this time, sorry TNA not yet, they are choosing the bottom line over quality and thinking short to medium term instead of very long term.

 

A current example would be the theme ppv's yes it has increased buys in comparison to the non themed ones, but look a couple of years down the road and the novelty has worn off and you are forced to book in order to accommodate the ppv instead of the story itself and I expect buys to be even lower.

[Linsolv]

I LOVE the soap opera. It's my favorite part. I actually, after posting that, decided that I should probably give an example of maintaining kayfabe. Then I thought, "I've been learning all this video editing stuff the past few days, I've got an idea that could be entirely fun!" And that's about as far as that got but you know...

 

Going out for a bit, though. I'll rejoin this debate in an hour or two.