|
Post by King Richius on Sept 16, 2014 17:36:12 GMT -5
I will never understand why the WWE feels compelled to change the names of wrestlers who have earned a reputation already. I get that there are copyright and money issues behind it but that is just greed by the WWE. The WWE also has a philosophy that they don't import stars; they make them and that is just ego. So because of WWE's greed and ego we have to deal with a continuing line of renamed wrestlers who don't deserve the usually stupider WWE name they get stuck with. I'm not looking forward to the debuts of Steven Keen and Dunce Previtt.
I hope fans chant Kenta every time he appears until WWE has to acknowledge the name he built his reputation with.
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Sept 16, 2014 17:45:40 GMT -5
I believe what he meant was that to honor Kenta Kobashi (his hero), he was going to take a new name. The name itself isn't meant for anything.
That said, there was an old Japanese Olympic wrestler named Hideo Fujimoto. No clue if it's relevant.
Can't wait to see Steven Keen and David Prince debut at the next tapings though.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 7, 2024 21:35:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 17:59:25 GMT -5
I believe what he meant was that to honor Kenta Kobashi (his hero), he was going to take a new name. The name itself isn't meant for anything. That said, there was an old Japanese Olympic wrestler named Hideo Fujimoto. No clue if it's relevant. Can't wait to see Steven Keen and David Prince debut at the next tapings though. The Artist Formerly Known as Prince Devitt...book it!
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Sept 17, 2014 1:03:57 GMT -5
I will never understand why the WWE feels compelled to change the names of wrestlers who have earned a reputation already. I get that there are copyright and money issues behind it but that is just greed by the WWE. The WWE also has a philosophy that they don't import stars; they make them and that is just ego. So because of WWE's greed and ego we have to deal with a continuing line of renamed wrestlers who don't deserve the usually stupider WWE name they get stuck with. I'm not looking forward to the debuts of Steven Keen and Dunce Previtt. I hope fans chant Kenta every time he appears until WWE has to acknowledge the name he built his reputation with. Money. WWE now trademarks all the names. If KENTA was to seperate from WWE, he would no longer be able to use Hideo and be forced to go back to KENTA and thus stopping KENTA from making money off of the WWE name. And the WWE name is the name he will be most recognized as.
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Sept 17, 2014 1:40:47 GMT -5
Personally I wish he kept KENTA. Much more easy to catch on to for new fans, sounds more Main Event, and they'd already billed him and announced him as KENTA so I'm not sure why they felt the need to even change it. WWE doesn't want people to own their name, they want to trademark and own everything. Which is why Punk was the last person to keep his name. And will probably be the last for as long as WWE is around.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 7, 2024 21:35:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2014 1:45:09 GMT -5
Or because his real name is Kenta too. His ring name was after his idol, Kenta Kobashi was his idol not Hideo Itami. KENTA is his real name but there is a back story about his ring name. His idol is Kenta Kobashi that is why he had his ring name KENTA KENTA's last name is "Kobayashi", so he stylized his ring name as KENTA to avoid confusion with Kobashi.
|
|
|
Post by Gazza on Sept 17, 2014 3:20:38 GMT -5
I will never understand why the WWE feels compelled to change the names of wrestlers who have earned a reputation already. I get that there are copyright and money issues behind it but that is just greed by the WWE. The WWE also has a philosophy that they don't import stars; they make them and that is just ego. So because of WWE's greed and ego we have to deal with a continuing line of renamed wrestlers who don't deserve the usually stupider WWE name they get stuck with. I'm not looking forward to the debuts of Steven Keen and Dunce Previtt. I hope fans chant Kenta every time he appears until WWE has to acknowledge the name he built his reputation with. It's not greed, It's just good business sense.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 7, 2024 21:35:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2014 3:30:19 GMT -5
I will never understand why the WWE feels compelled to change the names of wrestlers who have earned a reputation already. I get that there are copyright and money issues behind it but that is just greed by the WWE. The WWE also has a philosophy that they don't import stars; they make them and that is just ego. So because of WWE's greed and ego we have to deal with a continuing line of renamed wrestlers who don't deserve the usually stupider WWE name they get stuck with. I'm not looking forward to the debuts of Steven Keen and Dunce Previtt. I hope fans chant Kenta every time he appears until WWE has to acknowledge the name he built his reputation with. Well said. It especially annoyed me how in every single preview he was KENTA, on the tron in huge letters it was KENTA, the commentators were referring to him as KENTA..... then he says "Blahblahblah, now I'm Hideo Itami" and then the titantron says Hideo Itami. At least it doesn't look like they're gonna turn him into a joke. I don't have too much faith in what'll happen if he gets called up though.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 7, 2024 21:35:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2014 8:40:51 GMT -5
I believe what he meant was that to honor Kenta Kobashi (his hero), he was going to take a new name. The name itself isn't meant for anything. That said, there was an old Japanese Olympic wrestler named Hideo Fujimoto. No clue if it's relevant. Can't wait to see Steven Keen and David Prince debut at the next tapings though. Holy sh** buddy... I said to myself the other day that they'll probably change Steen's name to Keen. And David Prince isn't a bad name change at all.
|
|
|
Post by The Mask of Truth on Sept 18, 2014 1:08:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Sept 18, 2014 2:51:33 GMT -5
I will never understand why the WWE feels compelled to change the names of wrestlers who have earned a reputation already. I get that there are copyright and money issues behind it but that is just greed by the WWE. The WWE also has a philosophy that they don't import stars; they make them and that is just ego. So because of WWE's greed and ego we have to deal with a continuing line of renamed wrestlers who don't deserve the usually stupider WWE name they get stuck with. I'm not looking forward to the debuts of Steven Keen and Dunce Previtt. I hope fans chant Kenta every time he appears until WWE has to acknowledge the name he built his reputation with. It's not greed, It's just good business sense. Maybe in 1997. What the hell is keeping your ring name going to do for you now? People who watch Indy wrestling know who you are without WWE and there is no where else to go. WWE has a monopoly and its killing wrestling. I mean, they don't even want independents in the same city during wrestlemania weekend.
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Sept 18, 2014 21:20:46 GMT -5
It's not greed, It's just good business sense. Maybe in 1997. What the hell is keeping your ring name going to do for you now? People who watch Indy wrestling know who you are without WWE and there is no where else to go. WWE has a monopoly and its killing wrestling. I mean, they don't even want independents in the same city during wrestlemania weekend. Yeah, because they have events going on all of Wrestlemania weekend and want people at them...
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Sept 18, 2014 21:37:24 GMT -5
Maybe in 1997. What the hell is keeping your ring name going to do for you now? People who watch Indy wrestling know who you are without WWE and there is no where else to go. WWE has a monopoly and its killing wrestling. I mean, they don't even want independents in the same city during wrestlemania weekend. Yeah, because they have events going on all of Wrestlemania weekend and want people at them... And people go. It's like the NFL banning high school games on Sunday in their town.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 7, 2024 21:35:11 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2014 21:39:15 GMT -5
Yeah, because they have events going on all of Wrestlemania weekend and want people at them... And people go. It's like the NFL banning high school games on Sunday in their town. It is not even remotely close to that.
|
|
|
Post by The Yes Man on Sept 18, 2014 21:40:29 GMT -5
And people go. It's like the NFL banning high school games on Sunday in their town. It is not even remotely close to that. Pretty much the exact same thing actually.
|
|
|
Post by rustyy on Sept 18, 2014 22:09:18 GMT -5
And people go. It's like the NFL banning high school games on Sunday in their town. It is not even remotely close to that. Except it is, the WWE is about as close to a monopoly as you can get. And trying to block local indies and RoH from having shows is just sad. They draw 500 people on the Saturday BEFORE Wresltemania, that has no affect what so ever on their big day.
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Sept 18, 2014 22:10:42 GMT -5
Yeah, because they have events going on all of Wrestlemania weekend and want people at them... And people go. It's like the NFL banning high school games on Sunday in their town. No, it's smart business sense. Why let other companies piggy back off of you and take money you could be making? Clearly ROH, etc. are no "competition" to WWE on a grand scale, but when they try to put their event in the same town as WWE when they are hosting an event, they are trying to "compete." It's smart to not let anyone steal your thunder, so to speak. Fans are only going to spend so much $ on wrestling during Wrestlemania weekend, why wouldn't WWE want to get all of it? A more applicable comparison is the NFL not letting other companies host anything in the city during Super Bowl week. If there's anything we've learned in Minnesota with getting to host the Super Bowl coming up, it's that the NFL basically wants to run the city during that week. They pretty much have to approve of all events.
|
|
|
Post by King Richius on Sept 18, 2014 22:35:26 GMT -5
And people go. It's like the NFL banning high school games on Sunday in their town. No, it's smart business sense. Why let other companies piggy back off of you and take money you could be making? Clearly ROH, etc. are no "competition" to WWE on a grand scale, but when they try to put their event in the same town as WWE when they are hosting an event, they are trying to "compete." It's smart to not let anyone steal your thunder, so to speak. Fans are only going to spend so much $ on wrestling during Wrestlemania weekend, why wouldn't WWE want to get all of it? A more applicable comparison is the NFL not letting other companies host anything in the city during Super Bowl week. If there's anything we've learned in Minnesota with getting to host the Super Bowl coming up, it's that the NFL basically wants to run the city during that week. They pretty much have to approve of all events. Your definition of smart business sense is almost exactly the same as my definition of greed. Using the most recent WM week as a model, the Saturday before Wrestlemania is the HoF show which takes place in a smaller venue than the WM venue for Sunday. Not all of the people attending WM on Sunday can fit into the HoF show and by Saturday night most people who want to go to the fan access stuff have done so except for the late arrivals. Therefore, an indie show like ROH or PWG or whatever taking place in a small venue for 500-1000 fans isn't going to affect the WWEs bottom line for the week in any noticeable way. If those people don't go to an indie show, they probably spend the night doing a non-wrestling activity (drink more beer!) or maybe they stay in their hotel room and watch the HoF show on the WWE Network (I love my Mother!). The only people who suffer financially from a ban on other wrestling shows is those who would host those other shows. This is exactly the same logic that says it is good business sense to rename every new signee and trademark that name so the wrestler can't use it or the recognition it provides if they leave the WWE. In both cases the WWE isn't increasing their bottom line one penny but the indie wrestling companies and departed wrestlers take a loss. Indie promotions lose a chance to have a show in front of a larger than usual crowd of fans, some of whom may come from a place that promotion doesn't get to visit for live shows. This costs them exposure and profit. Departed wrestlers go back to their original name and never profit again from their WWE name while the WWE can still use the name and sell merchandise with it (unless the departed wrestlers are Kevin Nash and Scott Hall and the WWE decides to create new Diesel and Razor character which causes the WCW to panic and throw more money at Nash and Hall - they profited to the tune of $400k each per year of their contracts). I'm not going to discuss this any further because I don't think I can state my argument any more logically or eloquently. Also, I don't think anybody is here to have their mind changed (myself included - hangs head in shame at being close-minded).
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Sept 18, 2014 22:41:06 GMT -5
No, it's smart business sense. Why let other companies piggy back off of you and take money you could be making? Clearly ROH, etc. are no "competition" to WWE on a grand scale, but when they try to put their event in the same town as WWE when they are hosting an event, they are trying to "compete." It's smart to not let anyone steal your thunder, so to speak. Fans are only going to spend so much $ on wrestling during Wrestlemania weekend, why wouldn't WWE want to get all of it? A more applicable comparison is the NFL not letting other companies host anything in the city during Super Bowl week. If there's anything we've learned in Minnesota with getting to host the Super Bowl coming up, it's that the NFL basically wants to run the city during that week. They pretty much have to approve of all events. Your definition of smart business sense is almost exactly the same as my definition of greed. I'll just stop you there. Because you're right. Greed = trying to make as much money (in this case) as possible Smart business sense = trying to make as much money as possible. End of story. WWE has no moral need to help out indie companies like ROH. If those companies want to run shows, they can go just outside the non-compete territory, and if fans REALLY want to go see them, they still can. WWE does not and should not care whether ROH succeeds or fails when they are trying to take WWE's business from them.
|
|
|
Post by RybackV1 on Sept 18, 2014 22:50:09 GMT -5
Well I usually hate the double footstomp. Looks like such an unsafe move. How can you not get hurt in some form ?
But Hideo made it look both phenomenal and safe at the same time. Hard to explain. I like him though.
|
|