Sorry, but unlike 1995, 2012 set out on a mission to fuck up, destroy and then do the worst possible job of reinventing some of the most simple fucking wrestling concepts that a 2 year old could figure them out. Things like "don't beat the heel twice clean on television in the weeks preceding the PPV and expect people to pay $55 to buy the PPV just to end up seeing the heel win." Yeah, 1995 didn't fuck up that badly.
1995 was just a bad year. 2012 made people seriously question why they were still wrestling fans, the WWE has made wrestling THAT uncool, uninteresting and so completely devalued and meaningless.
Are you sure you're not talking about 2009? Because I'd rather watch WWE 2012 than RAW 2009, damn that shit was terrible. Months and months of Orton/Cena main eventing and horrible hosts in a VERY PG environment. But I guess you forgot about 2009? Suffering from a clear case of recency bias. 1995 did fuck up badly, a lot. It wasn't "just a bad year", it sucked, hard. WCW did too. That's what this topic is about, wrestling in a whole sucked arse. Sure ECW was doing well but ECW was also very small.
2012 is even worse than 1995 but I didn't want to start a talk about 2012 in a 1995 thread but I'm not surprised it's already mentioned because it's true.
In 1995 we had shitty gimmicks but at least the wrestling shows were about wrestling. They mentioned the make-a-wish stuff 1-2 times in a year but it was all about the wrestlers and the matches no matter how good or bad they are unlike today.
We had some hilarious match types like the hog pen match or the kiss my foot match but at least every match had a real storyline why they had this match.
Today it's just "I will fight you for the 500th time to see who the better man is" or "I want you in this type of match because that match type is also the name of the next PPV"
WWE accomplished to have a shitty year depite appearances by The Rock, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels and Paul Heyman. The big names in 1995 like Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Randy Savage or Sting were unavailable because they were in WCW and the stars who were in WWE during that time like Bret Hart, The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Razor Ramon and Diesel didn't disappoint when they had a match against each other.
1995 had a wrestler vs football star but even that match had a good storyline. Lawrence Taylor is in the crowd at the Rumble and Bam Bam pushed him because he was frustrated that he lost, they had an emotional face to face confrontation and they agreed to the match. Today you had The Rock appearing and saying "I will get a titleshot in 8 months" with no real explanation why (because of the movies). You had Triple H appearing and saying "Brock I hate you so much that I want to fight you in 3 months" with no real explanation why not earlier if he hates him so much (because of Lesnar's contract).
You had shitty matches like Undertaker vs Kama, Bret Hart vs Isaac Yankem or Diesel vs King Mabel but at least they tried it with established stars vs "not established wrestlers" matches. Today you have only 5-6 established guys like The Rock, Lesnar, Triple H, Undertaker, Cena and Punk who already had matches and they will have multiple matches in the future against each other without letting anybody else getting a chance.
There are many other examples why 2012 is probably the worst year, even worse than 1995. 1995 was just a bad year like Bossy said
You failed to make an actual point once. Saying in 2012 we only had established guys is ridiculous anyway. We had a Daniel Bryan World Title reign, and Bryan chasing the WWE Title for a few months. We've had the rise of Ryback. Punk on a 1+ year long title reign (I wouldn't put Punk among the likes of Rock, HHH and Taker just yet). Lots of debuts of promising great wrestlers in general and most are being pushed (e.g. Cesaro).
Saying Taylor/Bam Bam's storyline was decent doesn't make it right. A fucking non-wrestler headlined WM and WON. I don't even know who this guy is and probably a lot of other foreigners didn't who make up a large portion of the audience. You say they constantly put on shitty matches in 1995, which is true, hell Mable won the KOTR and faced Diesel for the WWF Title for fuck sakes. But somehow that's still better than 2012 because in 2012 established wrestlers were used.....eh? At least 2012 had some great matches. Hell, 2012's roster is much much better than 1995's in general. The Rock (after beating Cena) declaring he received a WWE Title shot from the board and using it at the Royal Rumble is the reason 2012 sucks? First of all, he just headlined WM and beat the WWE's poster boy John Cena clean, so that pretty much constitutes a title shot. Secondly, why not announce it in advance and have the match at one of the biggest PPV's of the year? Just makes sense.
Also lets not forget 1995 had a few guys who would go on to be big superstars in the attitude era
Matt & Jeff Hardy
So? They were all underutilized in 1995 or not ready yet.
I had a lengthy post about why WCW 2000 was better than WWE 2012 and did a bunch of these comparisons. Let me see if I can find it.
I remember that, that didn't make much sense. Russo fully exposing the business with horrible storylines, constant World Title switches, shitty wrestling or 2012? Come on.
I've yet to see a real good reason why 2012 is worse than 1995. Unbelievable, it's the same thing every year.