June
Main Eventer
High Fives All Around!!!
Joined on: May 31, 2009 10:54:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,457
|
Post by June on Jan 31, 2012 17:10:37 GMT -5
Most people on here seem to feel that younger talent is more entitled to bigger pushes than established veteran talent that draw money.
These same people have been pining for several years for Takers streak to end at the hands of the unproven, un-over likes of Sheamus, and Wade Barrett because it will "propel them to stardom".
The majority of the youth movement people are convinced that placing a title on some uncharismatic youngster get them over as a star and draw.
The only draws in the WWE are:
The Rock
Cena
Undertaker
Triple H
Randy Orton
Rey Mysterio
CM Punk
Chris Jericho
The guys listed above are the only men entitled to huge pushes, Such as title runs,
mainevents, Rumble wins, and headlining spots at Wrestlemania, and shots at the streak, or even the right to end the streak.
They all got themselves over by making people care about them. The youngster in the roster that I did not list Have failed to standout, and make people care.
Since 1991 only the biggest stars have won the Rumble, until last year and that carried on to this year.
The current World Champion is a joke, and his match curtain jerked the Royal Rumble.
Prestige, tradition and quality are in their twilight in the WWE, and IMO it's due to the WWE catering to the types of people that feel younger = better.
I know new stars have to be created, but crapping on tradition and playing musical chairs with titles, and pushing talent too fast are not the way to save it.
|
|
thespecialone
Main Eventer
Joined on: Apr 8, 2009 17:48:05 GMT -5
Posts: 2,762
|
Post by thespecialone on Jan 31, 2012 17:34:44 GMT -5
Those you mentioned come from a golden era that will not be repeated so soon.
During that time it was easy to create star power. Which is something that today WWE just cant do.
They must try though because the guys you mention will all retire one day. And not too far away.
|
|
|
|
Post by extreme on Jan 31, 2012 17:50:23 GMT -5
The current World Champion is a joke I disagree. |
|
@3CountRadio
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 9, 2011 12:19:14 GMT -5
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by @3CountRadio on Jan 31, 2012 17:51:59 GMT -5
Yes! It's all our fault! It's all our fault that the Undertaker said he wants to put over a younger talent if he does end the streak! Damn it! All our fault!
|
|
|
|
Post by orton1994 on Jan 31, 2012 18:12:40 GMT -5
Its called building up stars...you would have said the same thing back then when those guys were starting up. If you continue keeping older people in the main event, they're eventually gonna be gone, and then what? You're gonna have no other main event talent. Now Orton, Cena, and Punk arent that old, but they can't be in the main event forever so..
|
|
|
|
Post by Irish Wrestling Entertainment on Jan 31, 2012 18:24:50 GMT -5
Personally, I think that it is almost factual that the Attitude Era was better than PG era and the majority of the superstars you named featured in that Era.
But new stars have to be built. It is essential - so I disagree entirely with your point. It would be senseless to continue to invest in the same superstars whenever these guys will have to retire soon. A fallback is needed. If I was in charge of the WWE, there would be a complete re-haul of the creative team first and foremost. That's the main problem. There is literally no focus on anything other than John Cena and the World Titles. 1 hour and 30 minutes of Smackdown/RAW is usually missable crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by DontHassleTheHoff on Jan 31, 2012 18:35:09 GMT -5
Sheamus is going really well at getting over. Wade is doing well as a heel, so are Rhodes and Ziggler. Miz already put himself in the main event. Kofi always seems to get over with the fans, Sin Cara was doing well before he got injured.
Sure, some title reigns don't go as planned, like Swaggers, he has potential but didn't work out first time around, but they had to try them because those wrestlers you mentioned wont be there forever. Mysterio, HHH and Taker will be gone within the next few years, not to mention names like Kane, Big Show, Henry and even Jericho and Christian not long to follow, we don't have 5 years to build people.
I'm glad HHH is in charge of new characters, he's done well at hyping them up before they debut. Sin Cara and Khama got a great reaction when they shown up.
Oh, and the World title match didn't really curtain jerk, I think it was more of a "Start the show with a bang" idea...but the match didn't quite live up to it!
|
|
gawd6sic6™
Main Eventer
" I cross the lines you love to hate "
Joined on: Jan 13, 2009 13:50:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,868
|
Post by gawd6sic6™ on Jan 31, 2012 18:57:41 GMT -5
The current World Champion is a joke I disagree. i second that.... the way he is being booked , is cowardly .. but he is doing it perfectally.. and you say "Prestige, tradition and quality are in their twilight in the WWE".. and we have a wwe and heavyweight champ who are both greatly motivated and inspired by prestige and tradition.... |
|
D-Bry
Mid-Carder
Cavs 2013
Joined on: Jun 25, 2010 18:57:24 GMT -5
Posts: 488
|
Post by D-Bry on Jan 31, 2012 19:01:01 GMT -5
DANIEL BRYAN IS NO JOKE! DONT EVEN SAY THAT! SMH!
|
|
|
|
Post by 1992 on Jan 31, 2012 19:07:03 GMT -5
Since 1991 only the biggest stars have won the Rumble. Why thank you.  |
|
|
|
Post by kazoosandstreamers on Jan 31, 2012 19:54:47 GMT -5
I'm all for new talent, but the older ones that can still go are great to have around.
|
|
|
|
Post by juicewinslow on Jan 31, 2012 20:06:42 GMT -5
Daniel Bryan > CM Punk.
|
|
|
|
Post by wabarrett on Feb 1, 2012 10:48:01 GMT -5
The fact that he doesn't do anything other than go 'Yeeeaaassss! Yeeeaaassss! Yeaaaasss!' while pointing to his belt means that CM Punk > Daniel Bryan. As for the topic, I agree in part. There's this mentality around here that a young guy 'needs the win, needs a push, needs the Title', etc., while the established, big stars that are supposed to be the best of the best, and at the top of the company, should always be losing against the up-and-comers, because they don't need a win. I find it kind of stupid that people expect the Undertakers, Cenas, Triple H's and Randy Orton's of the WWE should be losing all the time, just because it'll make the young guns look good... nobody considers kayfabe for even a second, no one considers how stupid it would look if all the top guys were losing to all the guys lower of the ladder. |
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Feb 1, 2012 11:05:11 GMT -5
At technical wrestling, yes, at being a star, no. I love Bryan, but Punk is a far more equipped total package imo. Punk is closer to Macho Man and Roddy Piper, as to where Bryan is cut out of the Chris Benoit and Bret Hart mold imo. Nothing wrong with that, Bret is considered to be one of the all time greats by most, but I in terms of Sports Entertainment, I personally put Punk comfortably above Bryan. That's an entirely different subject though. As for younger is better, The Rock was WWE Champion within 2 years of his debut. So... It has been said, but Triple H, Rock, Jericho, Undertaker, were all "made" in different Eras when wrestling was more popular, specifically the Attitude Era 3. Cena, Orton and Punk are the only 3 legitimate stars that have been "made" in the last 10 years that are still around. Edge is gone, Batista, Eddie, Benoit, JBL, all gone. HBK is gone too and his popularity spanned nearly 3 decades. Sounds to me you are just pissed that WWE is in a rebuilding period. Additionally, I would say more people were disappointed when Sheamus beat Cena for the WWE Title than people who were excited by the move. You also said Dolph Ziggler didn't deserve to be in the WWE Title match against Punk, when I think Dolph Ziggler is the best wrestler on the roster. So your opinion means little to nothing to me. Also, news flash, Ziggler, Bryan, Sheamus, Wade Barret, and Alberto Del Rio, all over 30. So you have to push them at some point because guys don't wrestle well into their 40's anymore. Luckily for Punk, he cut a promo that launched him into the next level. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Feb 1, 2012 11:16:38 GMT -5
|
|
Bullgod
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 8, 2006 14:22:13 GMT -5
Posts: 1,014
|
Post by Bullgod on Feb 1, 2012 11:56:46 GMT -5
I really have no argument as to who is better out of Daniel Bryan and CM Punk, Im on the fence with this one by saying they're both awesome.
I don't think people believe that younger is better, its just that people what the young guys to shine because they want to see stars The thing about pushing the young guys is because there the ones who are going to be carrying the company on there backs when those you mention are all retired and won't be there to draw money. WWE give alot of young guys great exposure, they have made CM Punk into a top drawing star, and I believe that people like Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler will be on that level in years to come, people crap on WWE saying they can't make stars anymore but I don't think there as bad as people think, they are capable but just spend alot of time looking in the wrong place.
TNA was doing great.. but then came hogan and all his crew and just burried the younger talent, You can take names like Kurt Angle, Triple H, Undertaker. Rey Mysterio, and while I am thankful to what they have done and as much as I apriciate seeing them on TV today when I watch them I know that I've seen them at there best and that I won't be seeing anything from them that will be better than something I have seen from them in the past.
Then look at the younger talent, CM Punk, AJ Styles, Daniel Bryan, Beer Money, Dolph Ziggler and more, I actually watch them regularly and I can still watch them and think the best is still yet to come, which gives me a reason to carry on watching them and in that sense they can be a draw.
I'm all for keeping the established stars to draw people in, but I think you also need to use the stage to give the young guys the chance to shine in order for them to become established stars. Too often wrestling has been almost destroyed by old guys hogging the spotlight and not giving the young guys there chance to shine.
|
|
jacktunney
Superstar
Joined on: Jan 3, 2012 22:50:33 GMT -5
Posts: 726
|
Post by jacktunney on Feb 1, 2012 20:06:30 GMT -5
The real problem is that all the great stars got to the top themselves. The crowd should be the one dictating who is a world champion, but now we have them throwing the belt on whoever is the flavor of the month.
It seems todays fans want to just throw a title on a guy because he either came from the indies or simply for the fact that they have been with the company for a while. There is nothing wrong with being mid/upper card for life – in the past that was a great job to have. Not everyone can be in the same realm as Cena/Orton and that is fine.
People seem to whine about Taker and Triple H but they get by far way bigger pops than everyone else on the roster and Id gladly watch them over 98% of the rest of the roster. If you have the young guys going over all the time it makes the wins meaningless. I feel like the older guys should keep their spots for a long time because when they are defeated then it will actually be a big deal for the first time champion. Wrestlers used to have to be in the business for 10 years working their way up the card to finally win a world title, now you have to be in FCW for a few years, win MITB and you are a “champion”. It makes it pretty meaningless.
|
|
|
|
Post by demolitionman on Feb 1, 2012 20:10:39 GMT -5
The real problem is that all the great stars got to the top themselves. The crowd should be the one dictating who is a world champion, but now we have them throwing the belt on whoever is the flavor of the month. It seems todays fans want to just throw a title on a guy because he either came from the indies or simply for the fact that they have been with the company for a while. There is nothing wrong with being mid/upper card for life – in the past that was a great job to have. Not everyone can be in the same realm as Cena/Orton and that is fine. People seem to whine about Taker and Triple H but they get by far way bigger pops than everyone else on the roster and Id gladly watch them over 98% of the rest of the roster. If you have the young guys going over all the time it makes the wins meaningless. I feel like the older guys should keep their spots for a long time because when they are defeated then it will actually be a big deal for the first time champion. Wrestlers used to have to be in the business for 10 years working their way up the card to finally win a world title, now you have to be in FCW for a few years, win MITB and you are a “champion”. It makes it pretty meaningless. They throw the belt on whoever to try and get the crowd to roar. It is almost like saying we will dictate to you who you cheer for. When the figure it out it does not work. They change it up. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 19, 2024 17:27:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2012 20:16:09 GMT -5
I think Shane Helms said it best. He said he spoke out during a meeting about this "youth movement" whilst he was still with WWE a year or two ago, and said "We don't need a youth movement; we need a talent movement." Couldn't agree more. I couldn't give two poops how old you are, it's whether you deliver in the ring and entertain me that matters. 20, 30, 40, it doesn't matter. I've never really got the "youth automatically = better" ideal either.
|
|
