I wrote back in October that the WWE hates its fans and they keep coming back for me...Chicago's crowd last night was the personification of that: http://stholeary.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-wwe-hates-its-fans-and-they-keep.html
Does a win over HHH at Mania do anything for Bryan? I mean he's won the WWE title from Cena before. Outside of beating Undertaker at Mania, that Cena win for the belt is about as big as it gets.
"The cruelest thing I can tell a passionate, dedicated smark is that the more he knows the less he matters to WWE. The smark is the one person the company knows will be watching the show every week, no matter what. They're buying the licensed merchandise to complain about it on podcasts and paying the extra $20 at TV tapings to stand in an autograph line and tell their favorite disrespected mid-carder just how he should be used in the main event. Even at the emptiest of house shows (non-televised events usually packaged as tours) we could spot the dedicated IWC member on hand to record completely meaningless* match results for one of the "insider" news sites."
Only way WWE changes is it the "smarks' revolt and just stop watching. That won't happen because us "smarks" all just signed up for a $9.99 subscription for the WWE Network.
"Creative finally did figure something out for Chris. They paired him with a veteran wrestler for a multi-week storyline in which he was the young and stupid kid challenging the wise old sage. One week, much to his personal embarrassment, they made him wear just a diaper to the ring and cry like a baby. The Internet howled in protest."
The only cruiser named Chris was Caylen Croft, who was Chris Cage and from Ohio. He was never a smark darling and not that special to begin with though.
I don't think the author of this piece worked for WWE. "A few of us used to call these comments "Truman Show Shit" because our coping mechanisms for working in minor league pro wrestling had been reduced to the half-belief we were trapped in our own reality TV show."
"The WWE doesn't care, because you're buying their product anyway. I've been in these meetings, albeit for another company, but it's the same perception:"
Even though he wasn't from the mid-west, 22 year old around 2006-2007 when "everybody hates chris" was popular that was thrown into a multi-week storyline with a veteran, could be Kenny Dykstra who was in a quick storyline with Flair.
"Angry that Daniel Bryan or CM Punk isn't in the title picture at WrestleMania because of Batista? The WWE doesn't care, because you're buying their product anyway. I've been in these meetings, albeit for another company, but it's the same perception: You're an assumed gain, a given."
" Even when you swear you're never watching the show again (which focus groups told us is an empty threat),"
"Wasn’t Chris Sabin actually wearing the diaper to mock Jerry Lynn’s age?"
by Aaron Wrotkowski on Mar 4, 2014 | 11:52 AM reply
"Not claiming I know what you're talking about, but the terrible bit worked on both levels."
by Steven Godfrey on Mar 4, 2014 | 11:55 AM
The writer never says that he worked for the WWE. The whole artocle is about him taking the attitude that his company had against the fans and saying that the WWE feels the same. He's trying to be coy about exactly who 'Chris' is but from the details he did give it makes sense.
I started the speculation stuff because someone came off as a complete know-it-all ass yesterday and tossed that out to everyone who disagreed with him. It is a lazy comeback.
can scott amend the post to reflect that the author worked for tna and was talking about sabin? that will kill the "who was chris?!" stuff out of the gate the longer the thread goes and people don't read all of the comments
Even if you say this is an example of the WWE "catering" to the smarks, the fact that some have said "the current product sucks, so I guess I'll sign up for the Network to enjoy classic stuff" really hammers home the point. When Steph said "We own you all", she was pretty much on point.
The article is speculative, too, really. It makes a lot of assumptions about how WWE works based on how WE perceive it to work, without any real knowledge (as he didn't work for the 'E). I say ban it, too!
I know some have argued that beating HHH at WM would be huge, since HHH only wrestles top-level talent (and Curtis Axel!), but the only way it becomes huge is if DB destroys him to pay back for everything since SS. I WANT this to be how Sting-Hogan at Starrcade 97 should have been, with Sting finally obliterating Hogan and the nWo 4 life (ahem). Instead, I think we'll be getting what Sting-Hogan ended up being.
What this perspective never seems to understand is that the smarks are the ones who are going to dictate whether WWE gets more popular or not.
If WWE started putting out a product that we loved--Bryan with the title, etc.--we'd be a lot more likely to go back to our casual-fan network and say "guys, you have to start watching WWE again." But if we're ignored or even mocked, then we're not going to have that same drive to spread the word.
Every other form of entertainment has learned to embrace fan service--not too often, but enough--for this exact reason. Popularity starts with the hardcore fans and grows outward.
Man, it's really smart that WWE has this attitude! In fact it must be the reason that PPV buyrates and TV ratings have increased over the last decade. Except, you know, the opposite of that.
These kind of statements make a lot more sense if the company hadn't been on a downward trend in all their metrics (live attendance, TV ratings, PPV buys) for the last decade.
Vince just became a billionaire again. You know how? By creating other revenue sources besides ad revenue.
And besides, the Neilson rating system is so laughably outdated in this day and age I can't believe ANY company, much less WWE, are still beholden to it.
Chris Sabin - The writer acknowledges it in the comments section.
ReplyDeleteI wrote back in October that the WWE hates its fans and they keep coming back for me...Chicago's crowd last night was the personification of that: http://stholeary.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-wwe-hates-its-fans-and-they-keep.html
ReplyDeleteDoubt it was Sabin.
ReplyDeleteHe isnt known for speaking.
Does a win over HHH at Mania do anything for Bryan? I mean he's won the WWE title from Cena before. Outside of beating Undertaker at Mania, that Cena win for the belt is about as big as it gets.
ReplyDelete"The cruelest thing I can tell a passionate, dedicated smark is that the more he knows the less he matters to WWE. The smark is the one person the company knows will be watching the show every week, no matter what. They're buying the licensed merchandise to complain about it on podcasts and paying the extra $20 at TV tapings to stand in an autograph line and tell their favorite disrespected mid-carder just how he should be used in the main event. Even at the emptiest of house shows (non-televised events usually packaged as tours) we could spot the dedicated IWC member on hand to record completely meaningless* match results for one of the "insider" news sites."
ReplyDeleteFrom the midwest
ReplyDeleteLikes video games
Sure sounds like him. I just never knew he was in the WWE
Only way WWE changes is it the "smarks' revolt and just stop watching. That won't happen because us "smarks" all just signed up for a $9.99 subscription for the WWE Network.
ReplyDeleteHe never has been in the WWE
ReplyDeleteHe has been in TNA since 2003
"Creative finally did figure something out for Chris. They paired him with a veteran wrestler for a multi-week storyline in which he was the young and stupid kid challenging the wise old sage. One week, much to his personal embarrassment, they made him wear just a diaper to the ring and cry like a baby. The Internet howled in protest."
ReplyDeleteI don't remember this at all.
I wonder who is this "Chris"
ReplyDeleteThe only cruiser named Chris was Caylen Croft, who was Chris Cage and from Ohio. He was never a smark darling and not that special to begin with though.
Is this Chris guy Brian Kendrick?
ReplyDeleteChris Hero maybe?
ReplyDeleteI don't think the author of this piece worked for WWE.
ReplyDelete"A few of us used to call these comments "Truman Show Shit" because our
coping mechanisms for working in minor league pro wrestling had been
reduced to the half-belief we were trapped in our own reality TV show."
"The WWE doesn't care, because you're buying their product anyway. I've been in these meetings, albeit for another company, but it's the same perception:"
Seems like its Chris Sabin from TNA.
ReplyDeleteHe wore a diaper to mock Jerry Lynn
Even though he wasn't from the mid-west, 22 year old around 2006-2007 when "everybody hates chris" was popular that was thrown into a multi-week storyline with a veteran, could be Kenny Dykstra who was in a quick storyline with Flair.
ReplyDeleteI stand corrected.
ReplyDeleteThis guy thought Sabin would be a very media savvy star?
Was that ever a general belief among Sabin?
"Angry that Daniel Bryan or CM Punk isn't in the title picture at WrestleMania because of Batista? The WWE doesn't care, because you're buying their product anyway. I've been in these meetings, albeit for another company, but it's the same perception: You're an assumed gain, a given."
ReplyDelete" Even when you swear you're never watching the show again (which focus groups told us is an empty threat),"
LOL, is this blog one of those focus groups? =)
I've been trying to tell you guys this for years.
ReplyDeleteThe guy worked for TNA.
ReplyDeleteSabin did an angle with Lynn where he wore diapers to mock him.
Kenny is from Massachusetts and Ken is his real name
ReplyDeleteand the storyline makes sense for what sabin did in tna
ReplyDeletedid the author forget what company he worked for?
very confusing
Only diaper angle that I remember was 123 kid.
ReplyDeleteI know that, I just figured this guy was trying to disguise who he was actually talking about
ReplyDeleteThis isn't really new. WWE has our money, why would they cater a product to us?
ReplyDeleteI just realized, we are all speculating about who "Chris" is.
ReplyDeleteIt needs to stop
This guy thought Sabin was going to be a major player?
ReplyDeletejust came back to say this. everyone just assumed the author worked for tna
ReplyDeletei didn't realize that tna had writers. i thought it was just a committee of wrestlers, either active or agents
What was that turd's name telling me I couldn't say anything because it was just pure speculation. The nimrod.
ReplyDeleteFrom the comments section:
ReplyDelete"Wasn’t Chris Sabin actually wearing the diaper to mock Jerry Lynn’s age?"
by Aaron Wrotkowski on Mar 4, 2014 | 11:52 AM reply
"Not claiming I know what you're talking about, but the terrible bit worked on both levels."
by Steven Godfrey on Mar 4, 2014 | 11:55 AM
The writer never says that he worked for the WWE. The whole artocle is about him taking the attitude that his company had against the fans and saying that the WWE feels the same. He's trying to be coy about exactly who 'Chris' is but from the details he did give it makes sense.
I started the speculation stuff because someone came off as a complete know-it-all ass yesterday and tossed that out to everyone who disagreed with him. It is a lazy comeback.
ReplyDeleteYea, he was starting shit with me.
ReplyDeletecan scott amend the post to reflect that the author worked for tna and was talking about sabin? that will kill the "who was chris?!" stuff out of the gate the longer the thread goes and people don't read all of the comments
ReplyDeleteYou were right, I was wrong.
ReplyDeleteBut, we were both speculating and must go
I will ban us both right now, it is the correct thing to do
Circle gets the Square.
ReplyDeleteEven if you say this is an example of the WWE "catering" to the smarks, the fact that some have said "the current product sucks, so I guess I'll sign up for the Network to enjoy classic stuff" really hammers home the point.
ReplyDeleteWhen Steph said "We own you all", she was pretty much on point.
The article is speculative, too, really. It makes a lot of assumptions about how WWE works based on how WE perceive it to work, without any real knowledge (as he didn't work for the 'E). I say ban it, too!
ReplyDeleteGood call.
ReplyDeleteI know some have argued that beating HHH at WM would be huge, since HHH only wrestles top-level talent (and Curtis Axel!), but the only way it becomes huge is if DB destroys him to pay back for everything since SS.
ReplyDeleteI WANT this to be how Sting-Hogan at Starrcade 97 should have been, with Sting finally obliterating Hogan and the nWo 4 life (ahem). Instead, I think we'll be getting what Sting-Hogan ended up being.
"Speculation" guest host of BoD mania!!!
ReplyDeleteHe will promptly be banned for speculating
ReplyDeleteListen to the Bret podcast with Renee Young; he's still more bitter than a CM Punk fan in Chicago last night
ReplyDeleteWhat this perspective never seems to understand is that the smarks are the ones who are going to dictate whether WWE gets more popular or not.
ReplyDeleteIf WWE started putting out a product that we loved--Bryan with the title, etc.--we'd be a lot more likely to go back to our casual-fan network and say "guys, you have to start watching WWE again." But if we're ignored or even mocked, then we're not going to have that same drive to spread the word.
Every other form of entertainment has learned to embrace fan service--not too often, but enough--for this exact reason. Popularity starts with the hardcore fans and grows outward.
Man, it's really smart that WWE has this attitude! In fact it must be the reason that PPV buyrates and TV ratings have increased over the last decade. Except, you know, the opposite of that.
ReplyDeleteI feel like this catering to "us" thing doesn't apply anymore. They're openly not catering to the majority of their fans anymore.
ReplyDeleteWho has the booking of the last year catered to?
But Smarks are RARELY ever satisfied. Seriously, this isn't hyperbole
ReplyDeleteWell, one of the first things you learn in Backwards Economics 101 is that new customers are more valuable than repeat customers.
ReplyDeleteThese kind of statements make a lot more sense if the company hadn't been on a downward trend in all their metrics (live attendance, TV ratings, PPV buys) for the last decade.
ReplyDeleteNot a great talker, but in his early days in TNA it did seem he could have the potential to become good on the mic.
ReplyDeleteHe can play a chickenshit heel well but that is a role others can play too.
ReplyDeleteHe sucks as a face.
Vince just became a billionaire again. You know how? By creating other revenue sources besides ad revenue.
ReplyDeleteAnd besides, the Neilson rating system is so laughably outdated in this day and age I can't believe ANY company, much less WWE, are still beholden to it.