|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 8:08:55 GMT -5
I saw someone (elsewhere) complaining about WWE having to use celebrities nowadays like Gronk and Fury. But lets be honest, every wrestling company has used celebrities at some point or another. From Kaufman in Memphis. To Mr T, Lawrence Taylor, and Mike Tyson at Wreslemania. wCw had Rodman, Malone, Leno, and Robocop. TNA had Toby Keith. I mean AEW gets praised for bringing in Rick and Morty for Christ's sake. It's nothing new.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 11:13:23 GMT -5
I saw someone (elsewhere) complaining about WWE having to use celebrities nowadays like Gronk and Fury. But lets be honest, every wrestling company has used celebrities at some point or another. From Kaufman in Memphis. To Mr T, Lawrence Taylor, and Mike Tyson at Wreslemania. wCw had Rodman, Malone, Leno, and Robocop. TNA had Toby Keith. I mean AEW gets praised for bringing in Rick and Morty for Christ's sake. It's nothing new. it’s how you use them. no one wants to see some recycled NFLer acting like a bro in a feud with the industry’s largest stain Baron Corbin. whole thing is dumpster fire trash. don’t forget, Lawrence Taylor actually got pops against Bam Bam.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 22, 2020 11:37:11 GMT -5
I saw someone (elsewhere) complaining about WWE having to use celebrities nowadays like Gronk and Fury. But lets be honest, every wrestling company has used celebrities at some point or another. From Kaufman in Memphis. To Mr T, Lawrence Taylor, and Mike Tyson at Wreslemania. wCw had Rodman, Malone, Leno, and Robocop. TNA had Toby Keith. I mean AEW gets praised for bringing in Rick and Morty for Christ's sake. It's nothing new. Difference is guys like Mr. T, Taylor, Kauffman, and Tyson were temporary acts to gets eyes on the product. They weren’t sticking around long term to be automatically inserted into a top spot. By all reports, Gronk will be a long term investment and pushed heavily. With someone like Ronda, this worked as she has a fighting background. Most of these celebrities don’t, and even Furry showed most celebrities with a fighting background cannot transition seamlessly to pro wrestling like Ronda (or someone like Angle or Brock). By all accounts, Gronk has not background is wrestling or fighting. This isn’t to say he’ll be bad, but the other problem is that these celebrities only seem to get eyes on the product temporarily. They are a band-aid solution, as Ronda even showed she didn’t have a drastic change on viewership. Many fans simply want the WWE to focus on building their stars and not give time to celebrities that most fans (casual or diehard) don’t care for. Even if they cannot make mega-stars such as Austin or Rock any longer, they have shown that they can make draws by what they did with Batista and Cena in 2005, and what they did with Brock this past decade (yes the UFC stuff helped his credibility but they did turn him into a legit monster to many people).
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 13:54:48 GMT -5
I saw someone (elsewhere) complaining about WWE having to use celebrities nowadays like Gronk and Fury. But lets be honest, every wrestling company has used celebrities at some point or another. From Kaufman in Memphis. To Mr T, Lawrence Taylor, and Mike Tyson at Wreslemania. wCw had Rodman, Malone, Leno, and Robocop. TNA had Toby Keith. I mean AEW gets praised for bringing in Rick and Morty for Christ's sake. It's nothing new. it’s how you use them. no one wants to see some recycled NFLer acting like a bro in a feud with the industry’s largest stain Baron Corbin. whole thing is dumpster fire trash. don’t forget, Lawrence Taylor actually got pops against Bam Bam. How they use him? He's been on once for 5 minutes and we're already complaining about him headlining Wrestlemania next year? For all we know he's going to host and have one tag match in 7 months.
I know I wasn't interested in seeing Rodman or Malone in wCw, but it worked. I wasn't interested in seeing Kevin Federline defeat John Cena, but I lived. I didn't want to see Lawrence Taylor in a feud with Bam Bam, but it was passable. Celebrities have always been a part of wrestling, and probably always will be.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 14:00:57 GMT -5
it’s how you use them. no one wants to see some recycled NFLer acting like a bro in a feud with the industry’s largest stain Baron Corbin. whole thing is dumpster fire trash. don’t forget, Lawrence Taylor actually got pops against Bam Bam. How they use him? He's been on once for 5 minutes and we're already complaining about him headlining Wrestlemania next year? For all we know he's going to host and have one tag match in 7 months.
I know I wasn't interested in seeing Rodman or Malone in wCw, but it worked. I wasn't interested in seeing Kevin Federline defeat John Cena, but I lived. I didn't want to see Lawrence Taylor in a feud with Bam Bam, but it was passable. Celebrities have always been a part of wrestling, and probably always will be.
rodman and malone were insanely culturally popular and it was a massively smart move on wcw's part, just as some of wwe's celebrities in the past have been a major success like tyson. kevin federline was brutal. lawrence taylor was popular and bam bam did an amazing job selling that feud. you can try to wash it away with 'that's just wrestling!', but nobody wants to see gronk. it sucked in 2017 and it sucks now.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 14:02:12 GMT -5
I saw someone (elsewhere) complaining about WWE having to use celebrities nowadays like Gronk and Fury. But lets be honest, every wrestling company has used celebrities at some point or another. From Kaufman in Memphis. To Mr T, Lawrence Taylor, and Mike Tyson at Wreslemania. wCw had Rodman, Malone, Leno, and Robocop. TNA had Toby Keith. I mean AEW gets praised for bringing in Rick and Morty for Christ's sake. It's nothing new. Difference is guys like Mr. T, Taylor, Kauffman, and Tyson were temporary acts to gets eyes on the product. They weren’t sticking around long term to be automatically inserted into a top spot. By all reports, Gronk will be a long term investment and pushed heavily. With someone like Ronda, this worked as she has a fighting background. Most of these celebrities don’t, and even Furry showed most celebrities with a fighting background cannot transition seamlessly to pro wrestling like Ronda (or someone like Angle or Brock). By all accounts, Gronk has not background is wrestling or fighting. This isn’t to say he’ll be bad, but the other problem is that these celebrities only seem to get eyes on the product temporarily. They are a band-aid solution, as Ronda even showed she didn’t have a drastic change on viewership. Many fans simply want the WWE to focus on building their stars and not give time to celebrities that most fans (casual or diehard) don’t care for. Even if they cannot make mega-stars such as Austin or Rock any longer, they have shown that they can make draws by what they did with Batista and Cena in 2005, and what they did with Brock this past decade (yes the UFC stuff helped his credibility but they did turn him into a legit monster to many people).
How do we know this is long term? How do we know "he will be pushed heavily"? He's been on once for five minutes. We have no idea what he signed up for or what they have planned for him.
Why does having Gronk around mean they can't still try to build up their own talent? Doesn't have to be one or the other.
I'm not a fan of Gronk & I don't care if he ever comes back or not. But as I was saying complaining about celebrities in wrestling is a moot point. They've always been around.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 14:08:12 GMT -5
How they use him? He's been on once for 5 minutes and we're already complaining about him headlining Wrestlemania next year? For all we know he's going to host and have one tag match in 7 months.
I know I wasn't interested in seeing Rodman or Malone in wCw, but it worked. I wasn't interested in seeing Kevin Federline defeat John Cena, but I lived. I didn't want to see Lawrence Taylor in a feud with Bam Bam, but it was passable. Celebrities have always been a part of wrestling, and probably always will be.
rodman and malone were insanely culturally popular and it was a massively smart move on wcw's part, just as some of wwe's celebrities in the past have been a major success like tyson. kevin federline was brutal. lawrence taylor was popular and bam bam did an amazing job selling that feud. you can try to wash it away with 'that's just wrestling!', but nobody wants to see gronk. it sucked in 2017 and it sucks now. I mean I don't like Gronk either. But I was unaware you spoke for everyone everywhere. My bad. Carry on.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 14:17:37 GMT -5
rodman and malone were insanely culturally popular and it was a massively smart move on wcw's part, just as some of wwe's celebrities in the past have been a major success like tyson. kevin federline was brutal. lawrence taylor was popular and bam bam did an amazing job selling that feud. you can try to wash it away with 'that's just wrestling!', but nobody wants to see gronk. it sucked in 2017 and it sucks now. I mean I don't like Gronk either. But I was unaware you spoke for everyone everywhere. My bad. Carry on. well, do a brief count of who really wants to see him in the wwe in this thread. then check out reddit and elsewhere. he's not exactly in ing demand here lol but those same few here will defend any terrible move wwe makes.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 14:20:53 GMT -5
I mean I don't like Gronk either. But I was unaware you spoke for everyone everywhere. My bad. Carry on. well, do a brief count of who really wants to see him in the wwe in this thread. then check out reddit and elsewhere. he's not exactly in ing demand here lol but those same few here will defend any terrible move wwe makes. You do know that we're only a small portion of the fan base right?
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 14:22:35 GMT -5
well, do a brief count of who really wants to see him in the wwe in this thread. then check out reddit and elsewhere. he's not exactly in ing demand here lol but those same few here will defend any terrible move wwe makes. You do know that we're only a small portion of the fan base right? by 'we're', are you talking about the collective online fanbase or this particular forum? because i did state to check out reddit and elsewhere online, and the online fanbase is actually huge...
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 14:34:22 GMT -5
You do know that we're only a small portion of the fan base right? by 'we're', are you talking about the collective online fanbase or this particular forum? because i did state to check out reddit and elsewhere online, and the online fanbase is actually huge... All of it honestly. I just checked and the clips on YouTube. The WWE on Fox account has 2.3K thumbs up and 217 down.
The video WWE uploaded has 9K up and 1.6K down.
The video from WM a few years ago has 39K thumbs up and 3.2Kdown. So while we may not like Gronk, seems like maybe there are actually some out there that do... gasp!
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 22, 2020 14:39:57 GMT -5
Difference is guys like Mr. T, Taylor, Kauffman, and Tyson were temporary acts to gets eyes on the product. They weren’t sticking around long term to be automatically inserted into a top spot. By all reports, Gronk will be a long term investment and pushed heavily. With someone like Ronda, this worked as she has a fighting background. Most of these celebrities don’t, and even Furry showed most celebrities with a fighting background cannot transition seamlessly to pro wrestling like Ronda (or someone like Angle or Brock). By all accounts, Gronk has not background is wrestling or fighting. This isn’t to say he’ll be bad, but the other problem is that these celebrities only seem to get eyes on the product temporarily. They are a band-aid solution, as Ronda even showed she didn’t have a drastic change on viewership. Many fans simply want the WWE to focus on building their stars and not give time to celebrities that most fans (casual or diehard) don’t care for. Even if they cannot make mega-stars such as Austin or Rock any longer, they have shown that they can make draws by what they did with Batista and Cena in 2005, and what they did with Brock this past decade (yes the UFC stuff helped his credibility but they did turn him into a legit monster to many people). How do we know this is long term? How do we know "he will be pushed heavily"? He's been on once for five minutes. We have no idea what he signed up for or what they have planned for him.
Why does having Gronk around mean they can't still try to build up their own talent? Doesn't have to be one or the other.
I'm not a fan of Gronk & I don't care if he ever comes back or not. But as I was saying complaining about celebrities in wrestling is a moot point. They've always been around.
You’re giving the WWE too much credit. When in the last 10 years have they built their own Stars to success outside of D-Bry or Punk (who they also tried to sabotage both). The only internal guy they try to push hard is Roman and we know how that has gone (and to the detriment of their other home grown talent). Brock came in after a decade outside of the company and became their Shao Khan. Ronda came in and ran through every woman on the roster in 1 year. Tyson Furry came in and was immediately given a win over Bruan (who despite booking is seen as a credit top midcarder at worst). Whether short or long term, what from the WWE’s recent past tells you that Gronk won’t be dominating the card in due time? We know he’ll likely go over Corbin soon after Smackdown. Probably take the tag title with a crappy Mojo at some point, and if it’s a long term deal, who’s to say we won’t get Gronk going for a midcard or world title at some point. Celebrities have always been used by promotions, but many have been used to the rest of the rosters detriment.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 14:42:48 GMT -5
by 'we're', are you talking about the collective online fanbase or this particular forum? because i did state to check out reddit and elsewhere online, and the online fanbase is actually huge... All of it honestly. I just checked and the clips on YouTube. The WWE on Fox account has 2.3K thumbs up and 217 down.
The video WWE uploaded has 9K up and 1.6K down.
The video from WM a few years ago has 39K thumbs up and 3.2Kdown. So while we may not like Gronk, seems like maybe there are actually some out there that do... gasp! your best ammunition is thumbs ups or downs on youtube? i rest my case. why don't we just let views decide what's most popular too? some people would like to see Pikachu as world champion. that does not mean that the wwe should do that at the expense of the rest of their audience and the product's quality. but hey, i bet it would get thousands of thumbs ups on youtube so why not! hopefully vince doesn't see this post and get any ideas...
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 14:47:09 GMT -5
All of it honestly. I just checked and the clips on YouTube. The WWE on Fox account has 2.3K thumbs up and 217 down.
The video WWE uploaded has 9K up and 1.6K down.
The video from WM a few years ago has 39K thumbs up and 3.2Kdown. So while we may not like Gronk, seems like maybe there are actually some out there that do... gasp! your best ammunition is thumbs ups or downs on youtube? i rest my case. why don't we just let views decide what's most popular too? some people would like to see Pikachu as world champion. that does not mean that the wwe should do that at the expense of the rest of their audience and the product's quality. but hey, i bet it would get thousands of thumbs ups on youtube so why not! hopefully vince doesn't see this post and get any ideas... Oh, so votes on YouTube is frowned upon, but using generalizations based on Wfigs and Reddit comments is all good? Ha!
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 14:48:10 GMT -5
How do we know this is long term? How do we know "he will be pushed heavily"? He's been on once for five minutes. We have no idea what he signed up for or what they have planned for him.
Why does having Gronk around mean they can't still try to build up their own talent? Doesn't have to be one or the other.
I'm not a fan of Gronk & I don't care if he ever comes back or not. But as I was saying complaining about celebrities in wrestling is a moot point. They've always been around.
Whether short or long term, what from the WWE’s recent past tells you that Gronk won’t be dominating the card in due time? Because we have no idea what kind of role he even signed up for. Simple as that. I'm more worried Mojo is going to get a push out of this than I am Gronk headlining Wrestlemania next year.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 14:56:39 GMT -5
your best ammunition is thumbs ups or downs on youtube? i rest my case. why don't we just let views decide what's most popular too? some people would like to see Pikachu as world champion. that does not mean that the wwe should do that at the expense of the rest of their audience and the product's quality. but hey, i bet it would get thousands of thumbs ups on youtube so why not! hopefully vince doesn't see this post and get any ideas... Oh, so votes on YouTube is frowned upon, but using generalizations based on Wfigs and Reddit comments is all good? Ha! yes, i hold opinions where people actually logically flesh out their perspectives over a click of a button. kinda weeds out those who actually have something to bring to the table and those that don't. unless you consider a generalized thumbs up from some bot an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 15:00:13 GMT -5
Oh, so votes on YouTube is frowned upon, but using generalizations based on Wfigs and Reddit comments is all good? Ha! yes, i hold opinions where people actually logically flesh out their perspectives over a click of a button. kinda weeds out those who actually have something to bring to the table and those that don't. unless you consider a generalized thumbs up from some bot an opinion. Lol. I mean I'd think that actual numbers is a far better approach than someone on a forum assuming to know how everyone feels.
|
|
|
Post by rkmo: 9 Month Warning on Mar 22, 2020 15:04:43 GMT -5
All of it honestly. I just checked and the clips on YouTube. The WWE on Fox account has 2.3K thumbs up and 217 down.
The video WWE uploaded has 9K up and 1.6K down.
The video from WM a few years ago has 39K thumbs up and 3.2Kdown. So while we may not like Gronk, seems like maybe there are actually some out there that do... gasp! your best ammunition is thumbs ups or downs on youtube? i rest my case. why don't we just let views decide what's most popular too? some people would like to see Pikachu as world champion. that does not mean that the wwe should do that at the expense of the rest of their audience and the product's quality. but hey, i bet it would get thousands of thumbs ups on youtube so why not! hopefully vince doesn't see this post and get any ideas... There's no way Vince would push Pikachu. Pikachu is too into getting himself over, too much of a diva backstage. Would never put the 'E above himself. Plus if you think Vince hates that Nak and Asuka can't cut promos in English...
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Mar 22, 2020 15:04:45 GMT -5
yes, i hold opinions where people actually logically flesh out their perspectives over a click of a button. kinda weeds out those who actually have something to bring to the table and those that don't. unless you consider a generalized thumbs up from some bot an opinion. Lol. I mean I'd think that actual numbers is a far better approach than someone on a forum assuming to know how everyone feels. that doesn't make sense. you went from comparing youtube numbers to reddit and wf opinions, to trying to compare youtube numbers to solely my opinion. go and read what people say. it is generally viewed as a very 'blah' decision. example: www.reddit.com/r/SquaredCircle/comments/fm1zll/a_look_at_rob_gronkowskis_first_set_of/ i can go on.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Mar 22, 2020 15:12:52 GMT -5
Lol. I mean I'd think that actual numbers is a far better approach than someone on a forum assuming to know how everyone feels. that doesn't make sense. you went from comparing youtube numbers to reddit and wf opinions, to trying to compare youtube numbers to solely my opinion. go and read what people say. it is generally viewed as a very 'blah' decision. example: www.reddit.com/r/SquaredCircle/comments/fm1zll/a_look_at_rob_gronkowskis_first_set_of/ i can go on. By all means, knock yourself out. That still doesn't speak for everyone though. As I keep saying I don't like Gronk either, but to sit here and pretend he's not popular or simply refusing to acknowledge that some people may actually be interested, is foolish.
And yes, YouTube numbers are not a perfect scale. But it's far better than assuming a few comments on some forums speaks for everyone who watching WWE.
|
|