Skip to main content

WWE as a Monopoly

I posted some thoughts on my blog that I think would mirror a lot of the posters on your blog. Basically, the product is terrible and nothing is change, so as a wrestling fan, I've resigned myself to that. And boy is that depressing.
http://stholeary.blogspot.com/2012/05/wwe-example-1a-why-monopoly-is-bad.html
 

Yeah, but now John Cena is gonna be on Smackdown every week, too.  If that doesn't make you rethink your whole stance, I don't know what will.  Plus if UFC has taught us anything, it's that too much of a good thing can never be bad, no matter how much you oversaturate the market with the same people, because everything is forever and nothing ever ends.  

Comments

  1. Pretty good blog entry, but it's what we already (unfortunately) know. 

    And that was a good catch on the Raw set. It is extremely outdated, but this is a company that thinks Nickelback is hip in 2012. What can you do?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought by the headline for a second if the WWE did a Monopoly board what people would represent which streets... that could be a fun excercise too do!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What is it that fans want the WWE to improve in?  They have young guys like CM Punk and Daniel Bryan on top.  No one ever thought that would happen. That have a few distractions like Santino Marella to provide entertainment.  The product really isn't that bad.  Why do people want the WWE to have competiton?

    My friends always complain that they want more wrestling and less stuff, but then I come back and tell then if wrestling was all that it was needed to be good then why the hell ROH is doing poorly?
    There cannot be people that actually miss WCW? Let's be real. WCW was never really competition until 1996 - 1998.  After that, the writing was on the wall in 1999 as theywould lose everything and go out of business in 2001. 

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm actually kind of surprised given all the other pop culture and sports entities that have custom Monopoly games that there has never been a WWE version.  

    And we all know Vince would be Boardwalk.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I wrote the blog post and there's a LOT want to be changed. Started with a complete overhaul of the "sports entertainment" dynamic that has been in place, basically unchanged, for going on a decade now.

    I want payoffs to feuds. I want blowoff matches. I want titles to mean something. I want new faces in the main event. I want guys like Zach Ryder & Dolph Ziggler an opportunity to get over. I want a guy like the Miz given an actual chance to get over as a main eventer, instead of just being put there to be Cena's bitch for 6 months.

    I don't want Big Show back in the main event. Or Kane. I don't want Johnny Ace redoing the "evil GM" schtick for the millionith time. I don't want to watch shows with endless Twitter pimping. I don't want to see inaccurate "Did You Know?" spots that are pure propaganda and usually inaccurate. I don't want to see potentially hot angles like Nexus shuffled aside for the same old, same old.

    I want competition. I want an alternative. I do miss WCW. I do miss ECW.

    I want another company like ROH to provide an option to watch them, other than online PPVs that barely work.

    I want Vince McMahon to say the word "wrestling" and acknowledge what his fanbase wants...now what he *thinks* they should want. I don't want crappy acting and pointless backstage segments. I want guys giving promos that engage me as a viewer and invests me in the storylines.

    But yeah, other than that, little for the WWE to improve on.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As long as there is self-legislation for Disciplinary Actions, Wellness hypocrisies, and Micro McMahon-agement, you can forget it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't blame the WWE for titles not meaning anything.  I blame the fans.  More fans care about who wins money in the bank than they do for a title.
    My friend Marco is a big time ROH sicko fan; loves everything they do and buys their dvd's and orders the ippvs, etc.  Around a year ago this time, he was telling me how, I think it was Davey Richard vs Roderick Strong, had the match of the year and how WWE could never touch that. A few weeks later, Money In The Bank PPV with Cena / Punk and RKO / Christian. 

    Point being, WWE has given us tons of great matches and moments in the past year.  I just think we are being too greedy and expect way too much.

    ReplyDelete
  8.  "Go to developmental, do not pass go"

    ReplyDelete
  9. Weyer makes a good point in that the WWE is still bringing the goods on PPV. We have had some thrilling stuff on PPV recently. However we seem to get a great RAW only once in a blue moon. 

    Personally I'd love to see a mass exodus to TNA. Picture a scenario where say Randy Orton, Kofi Kingston, Miz, Zack Ryder and maybe some other over-but-stuck-in-a-rut wrestlers get picked up by TNA. Who knows? Maybe if they were used properly elsewhere it would get Vince to buck up his ideas.

    Basically what I'm saying is... there is no motivation without competition. Vince has all the money in the world and will keep making it. What he needs is a competitor's ass to kick so he can satisfy that arsehole streak in his heart.

    ReplyDelete
  10. GUYS LIKE YOU DO A GREAT SPIN JOB. YOU'RE HIRED.

    ReplyDelete
  11. And by arsehole streak, I don't mean shit stains

    ReplyDelete
  12. Fans care more about MitB because it means more than winning a title right now.

    Your last paragraph frightens me. I would certainly not characterize the WWE as giving us "tons" of great matches/moments. 

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Enough is enough... and it's time for a change.  Wooo!!!"

    ReplyDelete
  14. We have CM Punk, we have Daniel Bryan, but are they actually the top stars? No.

    In 1995/96 we had Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels and Razor Ramon and Jeff Jarrett and Shane Douglas and Owen Hart and British Bulldog... but the product was still horrible to watch, because of the stupid Gimmicks and stupid booking ala Diesel vs Mabel.

    Only difference to today is, that back then, you could switch over to WCW where Hogan, Flair, Sting & co were fighting. Ok, maybe it's not sooo different...*g*

    ReplyDelete
  15. I have stopped watching WWE after Brock's loss to Cena and that wretched loser promo Cena cut on Ace. I read the recaps and if something looks interesting, like a CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan match, I'll look it up on YouTube.

    I plan on this being my wrestling-following strategy moving forward. I just don't believe in Ce-nationalism.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I fucking miss that dude. Most underrated performer of all time.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If EVERYBODY who thinks that WWE has no competition, would watch Impact (LIVE on Spike 8 PM) today, they would have instantly higher ratings than RAW!

    So don't complain and just give it a try!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Here's a question...and I'm not trying to be mean or snarky by asking this.... 

    Why is everyone so focused on the WWE? We're all wrestling fans. We're not tuning into Raw for the comedy, acting, or dramatic story lines. There are a *lot* of good indie feds out there that offer strong wrestling with story lines that have logical pay-offs and logical booking. I know I'm invested in ROH for better or worse, but they're not the only option. PWG has great wrestling and good booking. If you enjoy the luchadore sensibility, CHIKARA is awesome. DGUSA is a good blend of Japanese and US wrestling. 

    I guess I don't understand why people spend so much time complaining about how WWE isn't offering what they want when alternative organizations are offering exactly what people say they want. Is it the high production values? The history of the WWE? 

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hey, when you dig your head out of the sand, come back and talk to us.

    The WWE has conditioned fans not to care about titles and now that fans don't care about them, it's the fans fault?  Ha ha, like Cranky Vince said below, you do a great spin job.

    ReplyDelete
  20.  The high production values - and it's available on TV, while the rest besides TNA is not.

    And it's WWE dammit!

    The main reason, because I want to have a real competition for the WWE is actually, that I want that the WWE has to improve their product, AND I don't want so see the same wrestlers over YEARS. Miz, Ziggler, Orton, Kingston, Cena... we see them since AGES.

    In the 80s or 90s we had new top stars every YEAR. And now we are forced to watch the same guys over and over again.

    ReplyDelete
  21. DIXIE. YOU'VE NOT RETURNED MY CALLS. I'M READY TO BUY.

    ReplyDelete
  22.  The same reason I watch NFL and not Indoor Football.

    ReplyDelete
  23. In Wrestling-themed monopoly, The dark blues of park place and boardwalk are WWF and WCW at their greatest heights.

    Less successful promotions like AWA, CMLL, ECW, ROH all the way down to CHIKARA and CZW could take up the other 3 blocks.

    The oranges could be ECW; while not appearin to be inherently valuable, you can win the game by getting a monopoly of that territory...

    ... this seemed like a good idea in theory

    ReplyDelete
  24.  If I would be VKM, I would buy many indy leagues and let them just run to build new stars, which I would then use for the WWE. Not like a power plant like FCW, but how they want to run the company - like ECW. :)

    ReplyDelete
  25. YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT "SPIN" IS?

    I AM UNDERESTIMATING MY AUDIENCE.

    YOU'RE HIRED.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Except for the part about The Miz, this sums up my feelings too. One other thing I'd like to see is a few guys that work a different way than the "WWE style". Having most of the guys using the same generic moveset might make it easier for everyone to work together, but it also makes a lot the matches seem pretty much the same as the last and the next. Besides, who doesn't love a good trainwreck every now I then? I don't think it's coincidence that the two of the people that have a bit of freedom in what they can do (Punk and Bryan) are the two hot guys right now.

    ReplyDelete
  27. STUPIDEST FUCKING THING I'VE EVER HEARD.

    IF I DID THAT, I'D BE GIVING SOMEONE ELSE CONTROL.

    READ THAT SECOND SENTENCE AGAIN.

    ReplyDelete
  28.  You can still control them - just not let everybody know it... :)

    ReplyDelete
  29. Indoor Football...you mean Arena League? 

    If so, that answer just confuses me more. The NFL is clearly the best American football on the planet. It's also straight ahead football and doesn't sacrifice on field play for any of the side attraction stuff. Like, whether you sit down to watch an NFL game, a college game, or whatever else, you're getting the same amount of football, but the NFL has the best players in the world. 

    WWE, on the other hand, doesn't necessarily have the best wrestlers in the world. It also doesn't produce the best "on field" product. In fact, a lot of people whine and moan constantly about how bad the core wrestling product is. So, that's the question I'm asking...IF it's so bad, how come people continue watching? 

    ReplyDelete
  30. So, it's because it's available on TV and it's easy to access? That answer makes sense, but it reminds me of the old cliche "beggars can't be choosers." If you're only willing to restrict yourself to wrestling you can easily access, then are you entitled to complain about the quality? 

    I'm not trying to insult you or anyone. It's meant as a rhetorical question. 

    ReplyDelete
  31. Congratulations you won first prize in a WWE title tournament.. welcome to the midcard. 

    ReplyDelete
  32. I'm sorry, people (Scott included) need to get over the "inaccurate" DYK segments. What the FUCK does it matter? How much of the show does it take up?

    You don't like seeing WWE propaganda ON A WWE SHOW?!?!?

    I also think the Twitter hatred is overblown, but I can see where someone would find it annoying and detrimental to their viewing of the product. But the DYK segments are no big deal. If they wanna set specific parameters on tv records so that they can own them, so be it. Hell, if they want to outright LIE, so be it. If you're so insecure you don't like "having your intelligence insulted", then wrestling may not be for you.

    ReplyDelete
  33. There's a few things I'd like to change about today's product, so I understand the sentiment in this thread. But the notion that implementing these changes will result in the business improving (ratings go up, more PPV buys... those are really the only metrics we judge them by), I just can't go along with that. A lot if the stuff we complain about (titles devalued, no payoffs to storylines, bad wrestling) was present during Attitude, when the company was making tons of money.

    I think we sometimes forget the WWE only had 2 boom periods, and they came about primarily because of 2 individual people, Hogan and Austin. People latched onto those guys and ignored a LOT of bad stuff (by our standards).

    And the fact that we are now pointing to the UFC for examples of what NOT to do, when 3 years ago Dana White was a genius, should show how hard it is to capture the imagination of the general public. And I don't think applying the BOD's template for a wrestling company to the WWE would do it. Maybe I'm just a pessimistic cynic. Or maybe I'm just a realist.

    And for those of you who want to know, Vince's ass tastes just fine. Now how about telling me how Scott's ass tastes.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "how come people continue watching?"

    You're not allowed to ask that question. I'm serious, it really touches a nerve with a lot of people here.

    ReplyDelete
  35. But I want a minimum level of production quality. That means at least a ring, which doesn't jiggle, dangle, waggle, wiggle and wobble like pudding.:-) And HDTV ain't so bad either. :-D

    ReplyDelete
  36. This makes me wonder what is better, being in the upper card of TNA, or being in the midcard or lower in the WWE...

    ReplyDelete
  37. I don't have a Nielsen thingamajig in my home, therefore my opinion doesn't count.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Ce-nationalism. Awesome.

    Seriously, they had a video package on Raw where they showed "just how much John Cena loves the troops!" At this point it's really sad how far they're trying to go to make Cena likable.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Sorry, but if Hulk Hogan, Sting, Kurt Angle, Jeff Hardy, Christian, Ric Flair, and Mick Foley didn't make a lick of difference, guys like Zack Ryder, Miz, and Kofi Kingston aren't going to do anything.  A guy like Orton MIGHT get an immediate ratings pop, but nothing more than that.

    ReplyDelete
  40. The boom in the WWF came with Austin, but without the nWo, and the pressure of the WCW, they would never have changed from their family friendly PG Style of 95.

    The boom back then was nothing, that came from space. It was created by the bookers. And it only came, because they allowed big current stars to leave the WWF. If TNA could afford to get hands on Randy Orton and Batista, they maybe could make some noise for the casual non wrestling fan.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Why would I pay to watch some indy geeks when I can watch the All Japan guys they're ripping off on Youtube for free?

    ReplyDelete
  42. I have watched TNA. I don't like TNA because it's not an alternative. It's just a smaller company trying to be the WWE. And Im not really fond of the WWE at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Well actually, a lot less people are watching the WWE. 

    The difference in sports is that if the product sucks, people can move on to a different sports. It's not a football vs. football game, it becomes a football vs. baseball or football vs. basketball or football vs. NASCAR game.

    If you don't like WWE, how else are you going to watch wrestling on your HD tv?  The only other option is TNA and TNA isn't any better.

    ReplyDelete
  44. the WWE should sell an actually monopoly game featuring WWE superstars.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I think those booms were basically "lightning in a bottle". you need the right time, the right setting, the right guy etc. for example, I guess it's pretty obvious that the attitude era wouldn't have been as big without Austin (or even more specifically, Austin vs. McMahon). but Austin wouldn't have been (as) big without that booking surrounding him as well.

    ReplyDelete
  46.  Jabber2 should write his own column on this site (BigNasty96 posts are really good too, don't get me wrong).  I don't think he's just being a contrarian or devil's advocate, either.  I think he's basically asking us to reflect on some very real points before we get all huffy/pissy/whatever.

    It is hard to find that spark that can catch wrestling on fire again.  I think a few people made the point that they are bringing the goods for the PPVs--in a sense, making me a satisfied customer.  Raw isn't necessarily making me a satisfied viewer, though.  I wish they'd just follow flow and sway of the crowd a little more.

    I think they really have something with Punk and Bryan, though.  This isn't a IWC God Benoit thing from 8 years ago--these guys have loads of personality, charisma, ideas, and can talk.  There's a hipster movement and an alternative movement that can be capitalized on with those two as well.  T-shirt sales prove it.  Fan reactions, for the most part, prove it.  Maybe they could be that spark.  Or possibly Ziggler and Ryder can be that spark with their use of every media available like youtube, facebook, tumblr, twitter, etc. (and you could even put Kofi and AJ Lee on that list because they're hardcore gamers).

    Give me one more Punk or Bryan segment a week and one less Big Show or Kane segment (no one buys them as main eventers, sorry), and I think I'd actually be okay with the product. Not super happy; but okay.    

    ReplyDelete
  47. it was called "ROH on HDnet" for a reason.

    ReplyDelete
  48. where's the difference to now? the problem ain't that there aren't enough good workers out there.

    ReplyDelete
  49. yeah, because they haven't been doing the tribute to the troops etc. for years. *sigh*

    ReplyDelete
  50. Louie Spicolli says hello.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I guess CulturebUlly was talking about them all pretty much leaving at the same time or a very shot time span. I mean, it would have been a much bigger deal if Christian, Angle and Hardy would have jumped from the WWE to TNA at the same time.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I am pretty sure that financially, WWE wins this one by a mile.

    ReplyDelete
  53. so you pretty much want an updated 2012 version of the 80s WWF formula?!

    no insult, because so do I.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Yeah, but the rent cheques on the ECW properties always bounce, and they're just secretly financed by the WWE properties anyway.  

    ReplyDelete
  55. "One other thing I'd like to see is a few guys that work a different way than the "WWE style"."

    this.

    and I don't want most of the matches like someone was playing a video game (for example: I HATE that just about every big match comes down to trading finishing moves).

    ReplyDelete
  56. They weren't too spread apart.  Christian joined TNA in November 2005, and Angle joined less than a year later.  And Hulk Hogan, Eric Bischoff, Ric Flair, and Jeff Hardy all made their TNA return/debut on the same night, and it didn't make much of a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I was talking more about the span of a few weeks/days. Christian > November 2005. Angle > December 2005 with Hardy following shortly after (and, also important, not coming out of retirement but jumping the promotion).

    ReplyDelete
  58. Community Chest-Go to the Divas locker room and...oh, wait, that is the Community Chest.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Owen Hart vs. Louie Spicolli.

    Come on, man. I am not gonna get into this.

    They both were great wrestlers, but that's a little bit of apples and oranges, only because Louie never really had any exposure on a worldwide level, so he really couldn't be overlooked, you know?

    ReplyDelete
  60.  I'm with you on that. An easy fix would be to get DVR, wait a few minutes, fast forward through the commercials, and fast forward through those segments. Or do the easy thing and just don't read them, because they never have anything interesting to say anyway. If they disappeared tomorrow it'd be at least another 2 or 3 weeks before someone went "Hey you notice they stopped showing "Did You Know?'s"

    ReplyDelete
  61.  And Ken Anderson, with RVD soon to follow. Plus "The Band".

    ReplyDelete
  62.  Bullshit. There aren't enough that work the WWE style with a WWE-friendly physique. There are still tons of great workers who've either settled for easy paychecks in TNA, still grind it out on the indie scene, or go to Japan or Mexico to make better money and wrestle in the style they want. I would say that several of the top 20 best wrestlers of the 00s, dare I say even half, have never even worked for WWE.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Thissity this this. TNA will always suck if it doesn't try to be different.

    ReplyDelete
  64. That's a good answer. I can certainly understand that. I had a hard time with that at first and now I rarely notice it. 

    ReplyDelete
  65. Good point. I hadn't thought of it like that. 

    ReplyDelete
  66. In that case, you're still watching something other than WWE and enjoying good wrestling. 

    ReplyDelete
  67. I'm definitely with you on that. It seems weird to me that in a world where more and more people consume their movies and TV shows through web-enabled devices, indie wrestling companies are still wary of embracing the internet. I don't know if it's old-school carny mindset or just a lack of knowledge over how to do things differently than they've always been done. Everyone has a hard on for the idea of a live show, so they sign up with iPPV companies that can't handle the demand. They want to sell DVDs, so they try to police YouTube for unauthorized video. They'll air their TV show on their websites, but only if they already have a regular syndicated deal with a real TV station and only after it's already been aired. Shit, tons of people use Netflix and Hulu plus for streaming, and all you can stream on there for wrestling is WWE documentaries.

    Why aren't any of these places creating their own TV specific for the web? Why haggle for DVDs when you can sell ad-space on a site and potentially make more than a sluggish DVD sale?  Why fight YouTube when you can use it to your advantage to spread the word about your product and use that to build a fanbase BEFORE you start trying to hook them into spending tons of money on DVDs and live shows? I just think none of them have thought of it. What little I've dealt with indie promoters on a small scale, I've found that most of them just don't have a keen business sense or any creative ideas for promotion and basically just want to try and do things the same way everyone else has, and that isn't helping anyone. Indies appeal to niche audiences, and generally niche products find their audiences on the internet, yet somehow a lot of these people think they'll get there by using promoting techniques from the 60s.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Community Chest.. go direct to Kelly Kelly.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I don't care as much about WWE improving their product as I want to see a place where the kind of wrestling I like can be matched with good storylines and decent production values, with attention paid to characters. There's this attitude with wrestling that "all roads lead to WWE" and that just shouldn't be the case. Every good wrestler to come down the pike, the discussion is "Would WWE sign them?" For the individual wrestler's own bank account, sure, but from a fan's perspective? Does every varied facet of wrestling need to somehow be represented on the 4 hours minus commercials that WWE produces? Why? Would wrestlers like Colt Cabana, Kevin Steen, Davey Richards, El Generico, or even AJ Styles or Samoa Joe ever work in WWE? Would really in depth, adult oriented storylines really be best told in the short segments WWE produces? Would long, technical, precise matches work well every week in that format? Would there be room for promos that are dramatic, serious, awe inspiring but also funny and relevant to advancing a great character in every segment? It just doesn't play out. I'm absolutely fine with  WWE being the place you go to see the giants battle the superheroes and things being pitched to kids. I just don't like that that's the only place to turn on your TV every week and see 4 new hours of wrestling, because I have to accept seeing less of what I want in favor of what other people want or what sells to kids.

    I don't think it's a pipe dream that a company based around new characters that wrestle in a unique technical friendly style and have more "adult" (not "adult" like sex and swearing but "adult" as in made for adults to relate to and not dumbed down for kids to follow) storylines, that also has good production values and a weekly show you can watch easily, be it on TV or the net. TNA actually came close during their best years, and if anything tanked them, it was trying too hard to be like WWE. Once I have a viable alternative, I'll accept WWE for what it is and watch or not watch accordingly. But trying to parse out the little fragments of what I like from a show filled with lots of stuff I don't is endlessly frustrating.

    ReplyDelete
  70. CM Punk also has no "WWE-friendly physique" but managed to become a star anyway.

    my point was: they don't even desperately need to try to "build" stars. there are plenty of guys out there that could easily be a bigger deal if they only had the chance.

    ReplyDelete
  71. that's EXACTLY why he is overlooked. Owen maybe underrated but there are TONS of guys - even a good portion of "casual fans" recognizing him as one of the greatest ever.

    Louie Spicolli on the other hand is a guy that a lot of people don't even remember or never knew after all.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I cosign this. And I add that I want one world title that main events nearly every show that it's defended on, a thriving tag team division, an end of the brand split, and something for everyone to do. If you're appearing on my television screen it should be for a reason; as part of an angle with a beginning, middle, and end.

    And along your lines of crappy acting, I want unscripted promos. Bullet points that need to be covered are fine, but the wrestlers need to be responsible for the content.

    ReplyDelete
  73. You, sir, have been killing it lately.

    ReplyDelete
  74. I think the fact that we never got a payoff to the laptop/anonymous GM is a perfect example of today's WWE not telling stories with a beginning, middle, and end.   It wasn't just a few weeks, but about a year.  Fans loved to boo the laptop and Michael Cole's reading of the emails.
    My son and I still say "May I have your attention please..." whenever we hear that computer noise.   A QW Lenws deom rhw doemwe qeirwe-  it all comes down to Vince and his whims. 

    ReplyDelete
  75.  Vince can't pronounce wrestling. He always says wrasslin, which probably causes him psychological distress.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmf3zUeYRW8

    ReplyDelete
  76. Hell yes. Video games are supposed to imitate life, not the other way around.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I'd like to see less promos, period, especially on PPVs. And enough with the Twitter bullshit. Not just on wrestling shows, but in life in general.

    ReplyDelete
  78.  Or imagine if WCW would have brought Hall and Nash not in as the Outsiders and the nWo, but as Texas Scott Hall and Vinnie Vegas or Oz?

    WWF thought that a black gladiator with blue armor would work. Then they saw the nWo and suddenly the gladiator was the leader of the Nation of Domination...

    It's true. You need the right guys, but also the right ideas. What if they thought that Ringmaster would work? What if they thought a tag team with Pillman would be better than Austin 3:16?

    ReplyDelete
  79.  In the USA, but not here in Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  80.  But they are all very similar. In the 90s the differences were much bigger, because the wrestlers had all different experiences and different wrestling coaches.

    ReplyDelete
  81.  Only if it comes with a condom!!! I hate to quote Family Guy but, "is it like throwing a hot dog down a hallway?"

    ReplyDelete
  82.  I agree, does Twitter have to be involved with everything now? You can't watch a TV show anymore without seeing hashtags and trending topics. It's ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  83.  Is it sad that the one match I remember most from Louie Spicolli was the handicap match with Giant Gonzales. The entire team bails out and Gonzales pulls Louie in the ring by the hair. I think this was the first TV match for Gonzales after the Rumble.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Amazing. Yet, when I point this out, and suggest that this shift in point of view COULD be because I grew out of it, it draws some heat. Even though I'm not definitively saying that...I don't know what the change was. But end result? I took two of my childhood LOVES (wrestling and comics) and put them on the shelf as active hobbies. Oh sure, I enjoy a match now and then, and I really loved Incorruptible/Irredeemable (Thanks for the rec, guys.) but I don't actively spend money on it anymore. 

    What do you suggest this shift is due to? Unrealistic expectations?

    ReplyDelete
  85. "
    IF it's so bad, how come people continue watching? "

    Exactly.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Ha!

    Where were you when I needed you three days ago?

    ReplyDelete
  87. Personally I am with you on the first point -- I *do* think it's something you can just grow out of -- it all just depends on what you got out of it to begin with I think.

    In some ways, the wrestling of today will always struggle to live up to my memories of the stuff I grew up with, because so much of what made it fun as a kid was that everybody I knew was into it and so there was a big social component that kept us motivated to watch it.  It was just 'fun' on every level. 

    For me, while the late 1990s run was a lot of fun, it was never quite the same for me because I didn't have the same unabashed, engaged enthusiasm for everything -- I'd developed critical thinking skills and could see the flaws in the product.  Compounding that was that I got online and got smartened up --- and I'm not sure that helped increase my enjoyment of the product, as so much of what I learned was negative or were spoilers (fully aware Hall and Nash were going to WCW, for example).

    One difference between the late 1990s and today though was that it was still fun because I was still emotionally invested in the characters, either because they appealed to me due to their nostalgic value or because they were portrayed in a way that was in line with my sensibilities as a more mature person.  That's where the WWE has lost me today -- there isn't very much about the product that appeals to my sensibilities and the things I value -- certainly not enough for me to watch so many hours of TV every week.  I stopped watching the WWF product in mid 1998 until 2000 for the same reason.  You went from truly edgy stuff like the nationalistic USA vs Canada angle that reflected some real tensions in society, and the unpredictable and possibly insane bad-ass rebel Steve Austin character pitted against uptight corporpate suit guy in Vince, to the 1999 version of the WWF which was all marketing and catchphrases -- nothing truly edgy, unless you were a thirtreen year old boy just discovering naked girls.

    I think in some ways what happened with Austin and the WWF in 1999 is similar to what happened with Hogan in his prime years -- they honed what worked in the gimmick to sell tickets and basically perfected the thing into a neat formula that people kept coming back for more.  I prefer the 'wild-west' days of those characters though, or the late 1991 and 1992 in the WWF when all hell broke loose with stuff like Jake Roberts and the cobra.  That's 'edgy' stuff to me, non-formula.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Yeah, continuity is a big issue these days.  The WWF/E was always one of the better promotions at maintaining it too, but I think as the pace of these angles has increased that it's become pretty bad.  When you screw it up on a big angle, I think it really devalues the whole product because it makes everything seem less important.

    ReplyDelete
  89. The one match where I got to see some classic Spicolli was "When Worlds Collide" when he played "Madonna's Boyfriend". Best stage name ever.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment