|
Post by decadofdistruction on Feb 13, 2009 23:03:50 GMT -5
so i was thinking about this earlier but what do you think has ruined wreslting or is a disgrace cuz i cant watch todays wrestling anymore its just trash so i think the NWA/golden era was the best wreslting so what do you think is the disgrace what ruined it?
for me:the storylines are intellectually- disabled,half the people cant even wreslt,cant cut promos,divas(i love girls but not in wrestling!)
|
|
|
Post by James Hetfield on Feb 13, 2009 23:05:28 GMT -5
If anything, the biggest disgrace to wrestling is the internet.
|
|
|
Post by ICW on Feb 13, 2009 23:09:44 GMT -5
If anything, the biggest disgrace to wrestling is the internet. Could not be more true.
|
|
|
Post by decadofdistruction on Feb 13, 2009 23:10:28 GMT -5
If anything, the biggest disgrace to wrestling is the internet. Could not be more true. because were finding out stuff we shouldnt or what???
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Feb 14, 2009 0:04:45 GMT -5
Wrestling isn't ruined. But if I had to picj something that's turned it downhill, I'd say the death of WCW. Vince got complacent without competition.
|
|
|
Post by carly1988 on Feb 14, 2009 1:43:03 GMT -5
-The Internet (There is no "surprise" in wrestling anymore)
-Lack of competition ( TNA is entertaining (sometimes) but isnt on the level of WWE)
-Its too "soap opera" (Storylines are ok but little things like who is dating who or who is whos daddy)
-Stupid storylines (Things like "Kanes Sack", "Katie Vick", "HBK being broke" is just silly. Try to keep things as "realistic" as you possibly can)
|
|
|
Post by fdamage: Elite Trader on Feb 14, 2009 1:48:57 GMT -5
-The Internet (There is no "surprise" in wrestling anymore) -Lack of competition ( TNA is entertaining (sometimes) but isnt on the level of WWE) -Its too "soap opera" (Storylines are ok but little things like who is dating who or who is whos daddy) -Stupid storylines (Things like "Kanes Sack", "Katie Vick", "HBK being broke" is just silly. Try to keep things as "realistic" as you possibly can) This.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 6, 2024 12:00:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2009 7:30:12 GMT -5
-The Internet (There is no "surprise" in wrestling anymore) -Lack of competition ( TNA is entertaining (sometimes) but isnt on the level of WWE) -Its too "soap opera" (Storylines are ok but little things like who is dating who or who is whos daddy) -Stupid storylines (Things like "Kanes Sack", "Katie Vick", "HBK being broke" is just silly. Try to keep things as "realistic" as you possibly can) couldnt agree more. when Vince won the MNW he got lazy........and when he appointed Stephanie as head of creative the whole WWE went to
|
|
Grapple Arcade
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
Joined on: Dec 30, 2001 10:53:53 GMT -5
Posts: 2,680
|
Post by Grapple Arcade on Feb 14, 2009 7:47:00 GMT -5
If anything, the biggest disgrace to wrestling is the internet. 1).. Its a long time argument now, one which i have always agreed with, but keep in mind, the ones who complain that the internet has ruined wrestling are the ones who go and post on wrestling related sites. We dont have to, but we do and then are frustrated about it, i am anyway. 2).. We are not kids anymore, a lot has happened in wrestling since we were and it can never be changed back. 3).. I think the death of WCW, the death of ECW, & the direction TNA has taken. Cant blame them really as they are trying to be like the WWE, seeing as the WWE make the billions, its business sense to mimmic the top dogs, the ones who won the battle so to speak. Its the most insane business in the world, there really isnt ANYTHING like it. I think/hope some point this decade will bring a major change as it seems to happen every 5 - 8 years or so. I think directing towards kids is strange these days, if you think, you had the fans in the 80's to early 90's. As these kids got older, WWE changed its focus to work with that audience. When those kids got to 16 or so, WWE aimed at adults. Is it a case of: ME (5 years old) = 1989 - WWF, kid friendly, Hogan, Warrior, Facepaint, Mullets etc ME (15 years old) = 1999 - WWF, adult audience, swearing, alcohol, T&A ME (25 years old) = 2009 - WWE, aiming to be kid friendly again. Do they presume i may now have kids... i.e, not me in particular, but they are broadcasting to every stage of my/our life? I was a kid, as i got older, its programming changed with it, now i am at an age where kids are a potential, do WWE take this in to consideration? I dont know, and i know this has wandered, but it got me thinking as i was replying.
|
|
raz2005uk
Main Eventer
Over 15 UK refs & 14 INT. refs now too! 1st WFUK member to get Rock Family 3 Pack :)
Joined on: Nov 20, 2005 7:57:02 GMT -5
Posts: 3,500
|
Post by raz2005uk on Feb 14, 2009 10:57:32 GMT -5
1).. Its a long time argument now, one which i have always agreed with, but keep in mind, the ones who complain that the internet has ruined wrestling are the ones who go and post on wrestling related sites. We dont have to, but we do and then are frustrated about it, i am anyway. 2).. We are not kids anymore, a lot has happened in wrestling since we were and it can never be changed back. 3).. I think the death of WCW, the death of ECW, & the direction TNA has taken. Cant blame them really as they are trying to be like the WWE, seeing as the WWE make the billions, its business sense to mimmic the top dogs, the ones who won the battle so to speak. Its the most insane business in the world, there really isnt ANYTHING like it. I think/hope some point this decade will bring a major change as it seems to happen every 5 - 8 years or so. I think directing towards kids is strange these days, if you think, you had the fans in the 80's to early 90's. As these kids got older, WWE changed its focus to work with that audience. When those kids got to 16 or so, WWE aimed at adults. Is it a case of: ME (5 years old) = 1989 - WWF, kid friendly, Hogan, Warrior, Facepaint, Mullets etc ME (15 years old) = 1999 - WWF, adult audience, swearing, alcohol, T&A ME (25 years old) = 2009 - WWE, aiming to be kid friendly again. Do they presume i may now have kids... i.e, not me in particular, but they are broadcasting to every stage of my/our life? I was a kid, as i got older, its programming changed with it, now i am at an age where kids are a potential, do WWE take this in to consideration? I dont know, and i know this has wandered, but it got me thinking as i was replying. That's pretty insightful and interesting mate. But I do feel wrestling has always reflected the change in society and it will continue to do so to connect with the young fans (it's their main audience whether WWE admit it or not)
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 6, 2024 12:00:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2009 11:18:30 GMT -5
I sometimes think that if i didnt see the wrestling side of the internet , wrestling would still be entertaining
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Bateman on Feb 14, 2009 12:02:15 GMT -5
That's pretty insightful and interesting mate. But I do feel wrestling has always reflected the change in society and it will continue to do so to connect with the young fans (it's their main audience whether WWE admit it or not) Yep, hence the PG rating.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 6, 2024 12:00:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2009 12:39:29 GMT -5
-Stupid storylines (Things like "Kanes Sack", "Katie Vick", "HBK being broke" is just silly. Try to keep things as "realistic" as you possibly can) It's unrealistic for Shawn to be poor lol
|
|
redypiper
Main Eventer
bravery over timidity
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 19:51:33 GMT -5
Posts: 2,946
|
Post by redypiper on Feb 14, 2009 14:58:22 GMT -5
i agree with what most of you guys are saying, but for me it's not just wrestling that is ruined. music, baseball ect. many things seem to have lost there luster. i guess you can never like another era more than the one you grew up in. the youngsters out there think that current wrestling is great and in ten years they'll feel like we do now. maybe?
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Feb 14, 2009 21:01:02 GMT -5
-The Internet (There is no "surprise" in wrestling anymore) -Lack of competition ( TNA is entertaining (sometimes) but isnt on the level of WWE) -Its too "soap opera" (Storylines are ok but little things like who is dating who or who is whos daddy) -Stupid storylines (Things like "Kanes Sack", "Katie Vick", "HBK being broke" is just silly. Try to keep things as "realistic" as you possibly can) HBK being broke could definitely have happened, considering many stars are borderline broke from his era. Kane's sack was a good story and was shocking to find Rey's mask in the sack.
|
|
geroge86
Main Eventer
Joined on: Oct 21, 2005 12:38:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,038
|
Post by geroge86 on Feb 15, 2009 4:01:08 GMT -5
The biggest disgrace to wrestling is Triple H married to Stephanie burying up and coming talent in the process
|
|
gtm
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 10, 2006 11:38:30 GMT -5
Posts: 2,706
|
Post by gtm on Feb 15, 2009 7:51:43 GMT -5
havin people shoved in our face. Wrestlers at one time would get the top spots because they could really wrestle and where over with the fans but now the top guys are chosen for us and pushed and pushed even when they still arent popular.
|
|
Grapple Arcade
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
Joined on: Dec 30, 2001 10:53:53 GMT -5
Posts: 2,680
|
Post by Grapple Arcade on Feb 15, 2009 10:41:02 GMT -5
havin people shoved in our face. Wrestlers at one time would get the top spots because they could really wrestle and where over with the fans but now the top guys are chosen for us and pushed and pushed even when they still arent popular. i see what your saying, but i dont agree. Warror - could not wrestler, but very popular Hogan - not a great worker but very popular (mixed opinions, but he was not technically sound, just the merch seller of the day) Andre - not a great worker, but played the part well and had a great natural gimmick It was still similar back then really, big dudes that stumble around the ring, they get pushed and were given the top spots. Difference was, we soaked it up, we loved it and bought in to it. Thats when we were 10 year olds, now its aimed at another generation of 10 year olds, hence why we have an issue with it.
|
|
|
Post by markallenkellner on Feb 15, 2009 11:04:42 GMT -5
Exactly. Not only that, but internet wrestling fans who think they know everything about the "business", but have never been directly involved. If anything, the biggest disgrace to wrestling is the internet.
|
|
gtm
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 10, 2006 11:38:30 GMT -5
Posts: 2,706
|
Post by gtm on Feb 15, 2009 11:31:21 GMT -5
havin people shoved in our face. Wrestlers at one time would get the top spots because they could really wrestle and where over with the fans but now the top guys are chosen for us and pushed and pushed even when they still arent popular. i see what your saying, but i dont agree. Warror - could not wrestler, but very popular Hogan - not a great worker but very popular (mixed opinions, but he was not technically sound, just the merch seller of the day) Andre - not a great worker, but played the part well and had a great natural gimmick It was still similar back then really, big dudes that stumble around the ring, they get pushed and were given the top spots. Difference was, we soaked it up, we loved it and bought in to it. Thats when we were 10 year olds, now its aimed at another generation of 10 year olds, hence why we have an issue with it. All very true. I think i got my main point across wrong tho what im saying is years ago it was mainly upto the fans to choose there top guys, now it seems we dont have as much input and its almost chosen for us regardless of wether we want to see said wrestler in main events and on PPV in big matches all the time.
|
|