|
Post by Chip on Apr 15, 2017 16:04:41 GMT -5
imagine you took today's roster and gave them the storyline power from the AE, minus the ridiculous stuff.
but i think its pretty much agreed upon that the WWE has the best ring talent they have ever had top to bottom
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Apr 15, 2017 16:18:32 GMT -5
WWE has never had a more talented roster than they do today. HOWEVER, it doesnt make it better than the attitude era. Ratings/gates/revenue...ALL WAY more then than now. And when comparing revenue, you must look at the percentage and not the bottom line. In the attitude era, you could get a front row ticket at a PPV between $150-$200, depending on the PPV and where it was. Now, I think the min. is at least $350-$400, where they top off at $500-$600 a seat, minus WM.
The product as a whole is in the crapter. For every good thing they have, they have 3 turds on the show. Raw is more of a 3hr reel of commercials and marking for social media than actual wrestling. And there is hardly any storylines and the ones we get either become nonsensical or lose focus.
I think we are seeing better matches. I think we are getting more athletic styles. I think we are seeing the in ring work being 10X better than what we saw then. But the attitude era, with less tv time, developed more stories, provided more entertainment and drew more money.
|
|
The Hitman
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jan 24, 2006 17:12:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,377
|
Post by The Hitman on Apr 15, 2017 18:07:57 GMT -5
The in ring talent is way better today. The charisma and persoanality doesn't compare to the attitude era, those individuals had the ability to move you and make you want to to tune in, today's individuals seem so robotic and scripted.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Apr 15, 2017 18:20:15 GMT -5
The problem with todays stars is that they are oozing with talent but WWE refused to give them the ball to run with.
WWE's two main champions are lazy no show Lesnar and Randy Orton who hasn't had a decent feud since the mid 00's so how are todays stars meant to shine if they're being held back by part timers?
The Rock, Austin, Foley etc weren't being pushed aside for Hogan, Warrior and Macho Man, infact they were put in direct competition with them since they were in WCW and it was WWE that won.
|
|
|
Post by Escape The Rules on Apr 15, 2017 19:09:42 GMT -5
I actually agree and most others seem to feel the same way. My friend who's more of a casual fan that's gotten back into wrestling over the last 9 months has said the same thing: that the wrestlers they have are probably the best they've ever had in ring wise, it's just personality, good writing, storylines and the character depth that are lacking.
|
|
The Real Chillary
Main Eventer
Chillary since day one ish
Joined on: Aug 23, 2016 15:32:38 GMT -5
Posts: 1,184
|
Post by The Real Chillary on Apr 15, 2017 19:18:07 GMT -5
This is hands down the best crop of talent possible. But the writing is horrendous. Yes, the Attitude Era didn't have fantastic talent. If you look at the midcard back then, you've got guys like Too Cool, Gangrel, Val Venis, Road Dogg etc. Hardly the best wrestlers. But every single person from the top of the main event to the bottom of the jobbers had a storyline, and it was always compelling even on it's worst day.
|
|
AC1995
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Apr 2, 2017 14:56:13 GMT -5
Posts: 110
|
Post by AC1995 on Apr 15, 2017 20:53:46 GMT -5
If WWE trusted these guys more and pushed the boundaries with characters and storylines they could blow the AE era away. Maybe not in terms of ratings, but in every other aspect. The depth of the roster(s) is definitely the greatest its ever been or equal to the early 2000's.
|
|
|
Post by The Natural Eddy Valintino on Apr 15, 2017 21:12:03 GMT -5
When it comes to in ring talent, i agree with Sheamus. When it comes to getting over with the crowd for the most, i can't agree.
|
|
|
Post by Irish Wrestling Entertainment on Apr 15, 2017 21:37:26 GMT -5
Given that he is feuding with the Hardyz, I would imagine this is kayfabe.
Either way, he is right. But the overall product is much worse - which is a damning indictment on WWEs current situation creatively.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 9, 2024 16:46:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 22:36:47 GMT -5
None of the guys today would touch The Rock or Stone cold that's a fact
|
|
|
Post by greenjack1992 on Apr 15, 2017 23:54:37 GMT -5
He's right.
|
|
Jimmy Toucan (+ The Flipout)
Superstar
'They should just give us album of the year...right now.'
Joined on: Aug 7, 2016 17:04:33 GMT -5
Posts: 727
|
Post by Jimmy Toucan (+ The Flipout) on Apr 16, 2017 5:41:40 GMT -5
Vince mcmahon himself said that the company is comepltely different now to back then so I don't know why he would want to compare. lol
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Apr 16, 2017 8:36:48 GMT -5
I'll agree with the other posters here... Today's WWE roster, top to bottom, is far and away the most talented they've ever had as far as in ring work goes. It's hard to judge them on anything else because they simply aren't allowed to fully blossom and expand upon their basic characters and personalities. IMO, if WWE would take the governor's off these guys and gals and let them really shine in every aspect, you'd see a much different product and very well could usher in a new boom period for professional wrestling. 2002 and 2003 in-ring wise was far superior to today's roster. But I agree that today they are more talented than the AE.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Apr 16, 2017 8:38:40 GMT -5
Vince McMahon simply doesn't want larger than life characters anymore. He's the only show on town. It's sad but he doesn't need megastars any longer. Why deal with making huge stars and watching them go to Hollywood when he can keep them under his thumb.
Sad for us but good in his eyes.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Apr 16, 2017 9:44:52 GMT -5
it's the sport that evolved - not the talent. so why we most certainly have the most atheltic displays in wwe occurring now, there's no real trade for the territory days 80d wrestlers.
anyone who doesn't think that the 80s had everything a little better haven't watched enough of it. psychology still heavily existed, and no amount of high workrates can replace that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 9, 2024 16:46:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2017 10:47:15 GMT -5
None of the guys today would touch The Rock or Stone cold that's a fact Maybe on a mainstream drawing name, no... but on an in-ring talent basis, 75-90% (yes, that high) of the roster would perform circles around those 2.
|
|
|
Post by 5th Horsewoman on Apr 16, 2017 15:07:09 GMT -5
None of the guys today would touch The Rock or Stone cold that's a fact Maybe on a mainstream drawing name, no... but on an in-ring talent basis, 75-90% (yes, that high) of the roster would perform circles around those 2. The biggest draws have never been technical wizards so one of those matter more than the other.
|
|
|
Post by TheChamp420 on Apr 16, 2017 16:07:00 GMT -5
Totally agree,
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 9, 2024 16:46:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2017 16:26:27 GMT -5
Maybe on a mainstream drawing name, no... but on an in-ring talent basis, 75-90% (yes, that high) of the roster would perform circles around those 2. The biggest draws have never been technical wizards so one of those matter more than the other. Exactly. In-ring work is far more important in today's wrestling than a catchphrase or how much one can push the envelope. What Sheamus is saying is that the performances and in-ring product that they deliver is far better than that of the Attitude Era. Which is pretty much undeniable. Wrestling has evolved. WWE could be making even more money, but they refuse to let the talent become stars on their own. The things that gained interest in them in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by ARUN on Apr 16, 2017 16:40:47 GMT -5
I mostly agree, athleticly the roster is much better then the Attitude Era and probably the best ever been. Character wise it is well beneath. I agree.
|
|