Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 4:27:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2014 8:40:36 GMT -5
One other thought. If they insist on having an authority figure- and we all know WWE loves to promote the idea of "fans being in control"; why not have a new "WWE President" every single year from Wrestlemania to Wrestlemania?
You could have candidates announces that they are running around December, have them do debates and "commercials" about what they would do differently with RAW and other things leading up to the election on TV with the election taking place the week before Wrestlemania, and then on Wrestlemania night announce the winner. This would be a way to keep the show fresh each year and provide from some pretty fresh and interesting storylines along with possibly keeping some of these legends around making them relevant and not stale. I think that's the only way to properly run an authority role figure angle without it seeming boring. Let the "WWE Universe" vote who they want to be their president every year. Have Vince come out or HHH, or Steph and say we are giving full control to the WWE president after the election. Have the president do media appearances and promote the product. Hell, Hogan's already doing a lot of that stuff so this role might be good for him in a one year capacity. It would keep the fans involved and provide a yearly storyline that has not been done before.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 4:27:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2014 8:56:43 GMT -5
If anything, I think there is just too much now. 2 hour RAW and SD is all you need I think. NXT of course I suppose.
Then there's the constant product shilling. It just gets to be too much.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Sept 12, 2014 9:22:50 GMT -5
Yes. I think overall is my opinion to the question. - Vince is too old. Triple H is really getting too old. That's not a knock on either of them, more just reality. Do what Vince did in 97, let the guys on your roster in their 20s-30s tell you what is cool. - Stop trying so hard. The harder you try to be cool, the less cool you actually are. That's just life. Nobody gives a what you got trending on Twitter, cookiepuss. - Shake up the routine. Stop approaching the product the same way you have since the late 90s. The format is stale, the characters are stale, and everyone knows it. If heel and face are gone or passé, give us more feuds where up is down, black is white. - Make a concentrated effort to create suspense, build cliffhangers and make kayfabe work again. Work the dirt sheets and work them hard. If the internet expects A, give us B, just for the of it sometimes. - Over-saturation is an ongoing problem. I don't care what anyone says, Smackdown, Main Event, Superstars, Total Divas, even NXT, all just extensions of Raw, which is already an hour too long of nonsense content. Differentiate your products. Don't present me with the same product 5 times a week. Cut the replays to a minimum, don't repeat what happened on Raw for the later shows, and, for the love of all things holy, stop giving us the same matches over-and-over again. WWE has been monotonousness for years now. There is always that segment or two that keeps you enthralled but when is the last time you watched an episode from start to finish and went, damn! It's the only show I know that can get away with not being very good for months at a time where we keep coming back. I'm just as guilty, I can't tune out. The problem is if we all tune out, WWE might get the hint, but then when they do change we won't see it. So it's that constant back-and-fourth as to why we are in this position now. But yes, I think wrestling is extremely outdated, the format, the matches, the routine of how segments, matches, reactions are presented. We are watching the longest running episodic TV show of all time, that doesn't feel like they've made an effort to actually do anything different for at least a decade, probably more.
|
|
snickelodeon
Superstar
Joined on: Nov 27, 2011 9:37:08 GMT -5
Posts: 956
|
Post by snickelodeon on Sept 12, 2014 9:51:05 GMT -5
Wrestling? No. The writers on the other hand...... This to an extent, writers aren't fully to blame though
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Sept 12, 2014 14:21:57 GMT -5
If the internet expects A, give us B, just for the of it sometimes. What if we really want A and we stop watching forever if they give us B though? The predictable course of action isn't always the wrong one. From the moment the Triple H vs Batista storyline began, everyone knew where it was going and how it was ending, and that was pretty much the perfect wrestling storyline and drew great money after the previous two WrestleManias had been financial disappointments. Same with Austin vs Michaels at 14 and Austin vs Rock at 15. Even Bryan this year, we all knew he was closing the show as champion but that didn't make it the wrong decision. I get what you're saying, though, and we could definitely use more surprises and intrigue to keep us guessing.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Sept 12, 2014 15:38:56 GMT -5
If the internet expects A, give us B, just for the of it sometimes. What if we really want A and we stop watching forever if they give us B though? The predictable course of action isn't always the wrong one. From the moment the Triple H vs Batista storyline began, everyone knew where it was going and how it was ending, and that was pretty much the perfect wrestling storyline and drew great money after the previous two WrestleManias had been financial disappointments. Same with Austin vs Michaels at 14 and Austin vs Rock at 15. Even Bryan this year, we all knew he was closing the show as champion but that didn't make it the wrong decision. I get what you're saying, though, and we could definitely use more surprises and intrigue to keep us guessing. 100% agree, that's why I said, and I probably should have emphasized, "sometimes," which I definitely don't want to be taken as any kind of Russo swerve comment. Agree completely with your Batista, Bryan, and what will certainly end up being Reigns assessment, but we need more unpredictability. I don't even have a good example, I just don't want to feel like I know where everything is headed all the time. I think creatively, it's WWE's job to take some left and right turns and build suspense and build intrigue. If I truly don't know who is going to win, I'm truly going to want to watch the guys wrestle on PPV. At least that's how I've always seen it. I guess it's kind of the 1-2-3 Kid over Razor scenario. It can't happen every week, but sometimes you just have to do stuff that will get people talking. Brock dominating Cena is probably the best recent example I guess. That approach specifically only works once but that kind of feeling after a PPV is good for fans imo. Also, so little of what happens really makes us stop watching forever. I mean we hear that all the time on hear but then people come right back. WWE is a bit like Teflon with the IWC in that regard. You can't make all people happy at all times, and I don't think WWE should operate in fear creatively, as that will only hold them back.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Sept 12, 2014 15:50:02 GMT -5
If I truly don't know who is going to win, I'm truly going to want to watch the guys wrestle on PPV. At least that's how I've always seen it. I guess it's kind of the 1-2-3 Kid over Razor scenario. It can't happen every week, but sometimes you just have to do stuff that will get people talking. Brock dominating Cena is probably the best recent example I guess. That approach specifically only works once but that kind of feeling after a PPV is good for fans imo. I think that comes down to the limitations of wrestling combined with being a longterm fan and having seen everything. There's only so many ways to skin a cat in sixteen/seventeen years of the same show, so anyone who has been watching since the attitude era (where the current format really started) has seen so much already. They still manage to come up with stuff now and again that surprises us and gets a buzz, like the Punk pipebomb, the Nexus debut, the 18 seconds Sheamus-Bryan match, Lesnar squashing Cena. It's just much rarer now than it was in 1998, because so much hadn't been done yet back then.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Sept 12, 2014 17:20:01 GMT -5
If I truly don't know who is going to win, I'm truly going to want to watch the guys wrestle on PPV. At least that's how I've always seen it. I guess it's kind of the 1-2-3 Kid over Razor scenario. It can't happen every week, but sometimes you just have to do stuff that will get people talking. Brock dominating Cena is probably the best recent example I guess. That approach specifically only works once but that kind of feeling after a PPV is good for fans imo. I think that comes down to the limitations of wrestling combined with being a longterm fan and having seen everything. There's only so many ways to skin a cat in sixteen/seventeen years of the same show, so anyone who has been watching since the attitude era (where the current format really started) has seen so much already. They still manage to come up with stuff now and again that surprises us and gets a buzz, like the Punk pipebomb, the Nexus debut, the 18 seconds Sheamus-Bryan match, Lesnar squashing Cena. It's just much rarer now than it was in 1998, because so much hadn't been done yet back then. Yeah, that's a really fair point. We've seen some combination of just about everything. It just feels like there is an overall lack of creative drive. I think it would be easier to mix things up if more guys were actually doing stuff. At least give guys feuds, even if you're going to tell the same story you've told a hundred times before. Swagger and Rusev was a time old tale and I got into that feud pretty easily. We need that across the board imo. Then once we have that story, WWE can look for ways to repackage it to try and give us something new within the familiar story. It's not going to work every time out, but I would rather WWE make the effort and fail than just be stuck in their routine of sending guys out to the ring to have a pointless match. I don't know that the investors feel the same way, and maybe that's the overall idea is to not rock the boat.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Sept 12, 2014 17:56:37 GMT -5
It's not going to work every time out, but I would rather WWE make the effort and fail than just be stuck in their routine of sending guys out to the ring to have a pointless match. I don't know that the investors feel the same way, and maybe that's the overall idea is to not rock the boat. I would too, but apparently it's a lot easier to sell stuff internationally when it's not as reliant on dialogue so I get why they do it... I just don't like it. And to be fair, they have been trying more lately. Ziggler/Miz, The Bellas, Swagger/Rusev (and Swagger/Bo), Paige/AJ are all midcard feuds that have had quite a bit of character work and talking -- albeit nothing earth-shattering, but with some creative effort. I think WWE actually has enough happening over the last couple of months that they'd be knocking it out of the park if Raw only had to fill two hours.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 4:27:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2014 18:30:38 GMT -5
If I truly don't know who is going to win, I'm truly going to want to watch the guys wrestle on PPV. At least that's how I've always seen it. I guess it's kind of the 1-2-3 Kid over Razor scenario. It can't happen every week, but sometimes you just have to do stuff that will get people talking. Brock dominating Cena is probably the best recent example I guess. That approach specifically only works once but that kind of feeling after a PPV is good for fans imo. I think that comes down to the limitations of wrestling combined with being a longterm fan and having seen everything. There's only so many ways to skin a cat in sixteen/seventeen years of the same show, so anyone who has been watching since the attitude era (where the current format really started) has seen so much already. They still manage to come up with stuff now and again that surprises us and gets a buzz, like the Punk pipebomb, the Nexus debut, the 18 seconds Sheamus-Bryan match, Lesnar squashing Cena. It's just much rarer now than it was in 1998, because so much hadn't been done yet back then. Great point.....that has a LOT of truth to it man.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Sept 12, 2014 18:58:19 GMT -5
It's not going to work every time out, but I would rather WWE make the effort and fail than just be stuck in their routine of sending guys out to the ring to have a pointless match. I don't know that the investors feel the same way, and maybe that's the overall idea is to not rock the boat. I would too, but apparently it's a lot easier to sell stuff internationally when it's not as reliant on dialogue so I get why they do it... I just don't like it. And to be fair, they have been trying more lately. Ziggler/Miz, The Bellas, Swagger/Rusev (and Swagger/Bo), Paige/AJ are all midcard feuds that have had quite a bit of character work and talking -- albeit nothing earth-shattering, but with some creative effort. I think WWE actually has enough happening over the last couple of months that they'd be knocking it out of the park if Raw only had to fill two hours. This is so true. Raw is too much recap and filler. Two hours would be best.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 4:27:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2014 23:11:46 GMT -5
As far as the indies go wrestling is certainly dated and TNA for that matter looks like an out of date product. Is wrestling in general dated? WWE has moved with the times obviously but other than production value has it really evolved? The wrestlers have certainly evolved from the previous decades and eras but in regards to storylines and stuff theres only so much you can evolve. Its fully exposed and laid bare that i really feel theres no element of entrigue anymore. Anyone agree? Im not a fan of what i see despite a very good ppv every so often. Raw is so watered down its ridiculous i just feel wrestling has been on the wane for quite a few years now and i t doesnt look like ever getting to that spot where you could call it cool again. Thoughts? I question your knowledge of indy wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Sept 13, 2014 0:16:17 GMT -5
Vince is out dated, not wrestling. They need some attitude, new fresh stars, make it fun for everyone again and stop aiming for one demographic. It's not rocket science.
|
|