Ruthless Aggression Era>Attitude Era - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Indy Wrestling, Lucha Underground, Women of Wrestling Forums
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 4 (permalink) Old 08-08-2010, 07:54 PM Thread Starter
Convinced Vince to make me a Main-Eventer
sharkboy22's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 10,462
Points: 1,422
Ruthless Aggression Era>Attitude Era

Okay am I the only one who believes that? Really am I? Here's why I think so if you want my reason:

1)Storylines were over the fucking top! Seriously, Ministry breaking in McMahon's house? Undertaker burning Stephanie's Teddy Bear?
2)This is a wrestling product right? Am I the only one who disliked the Attitude Era style of wrestling, sorry BRAWLING. How many wrestling matches did we get? It was nothing but slamming guys into tables, chairs, punch and stomp, punch and stomp, punch and stomp, interference and to top it off a finisher.
3)Title reigns. How the heck do people complain bout short title reigns and in the same voice praise the Attitude Era? Kane had a 24 hour title reign in 98. Undertaker had one in 99. Really wtf? Also title reigns lasted no longer than 2-3 months, pretty much like today.
4)Divas. What were there purpose besides flashing the crowd?
5)Midcard division. The IC title was a joke. Where the fuck did the lighheavyweight title disappear to? And the hardcore title well was the hardcore title.

Now let's look at Ruthless Aggression.
1) Storylines were kept simple yet still had meaning to them. HHH and HBK, Angle and Edge, Rock and Lesnar etc
2)Wrestling at it's finest! Really compare the 15 minutes of shit we saw in the Attitude Era to the 15 minutes of the Ruthless Aggression. Wrestling Ruthless Aggression>Attitude
3)Title reigns had more meaning. Now I would admit the Undisputed championship never had an owned for more than a month after Jericho lost it. But when Lesnar got it, things were good.
4)Divas were much better! Really Jaz, Molly, Lita> Debra, Sable, Terri
5)Midcard division at it's best. Tag teams such as Un-Americans, Evolution, World's Greatest tag team. List goes on. Also the IC title meant something!

So all in all I think Ruthless Aggression Era>Attitude. Now I know I'm probably alone on this but still at least I gave some reasons. And sure Rock and Austin left in 03 but what the fuck you want 'em to do? Wrestle till 50? People complain over and over they want new stars yet keep saying "Bring back Rock!, "Bring back Austin", "Bring back HBK". I don't get it.

sharkboy22 is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 4 (permalink) Old 08-08-2010, 09:13 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
axl626's Avatar
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 837
Points: 0
Re: Ruthless Aggression Era>Attitude Era

I agree with you. The Ruthless Aggression era, at least on Smackdown, was one of the few times WWE has focused on raw talent with wrestlers. Raw was kind of messed up at the time with Katie Vick, Kane unmasking, Goldust stuttering, Booker T as a lumberjack, HLA and other stories. The funny part is I've heard people blame Bischoff for that despite the fact that he never helped write an episode of Raw and had almost no creative presence, apart from I assume some of his character.

But Smackdown had Angle, Benoit, Undertaker during his best time to me, Eddie Guerrero, hell, even Chavo was interesting. That has to be some sort of record. The cruiserwieght division existed and was given time. The stories were normally more grounded than their Raw counterpart. Plus the wrestling was amazing. It's really something that Lesnar, in his short 2-year run with WWE, could match up with the best brand and become the star of it.
axl626 is offline  
post #3 of 4 (permalink) Old 08-08-2010, 09:22 PM
Bowing down to the BEAST INCARNATE
LegendofBaseball's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: MTL
Posts: 4,516
Points: 150
Re: Ruthless Aggression Era>Attitude Era

There's no doubt that wrestling wise, the Aggression Era was better than the Attitude Era... but, for me, a wrestling product, because of the expansion of it on National TV, is a product that needs to be entertaining first, storyline wise, before it is good in the ring. (Unless the wrestling is exceptional).

People tuned in, week in and week out during the attitude era because nobody knew what was going to happen next.

The aggression era had tremendous wrestling with some wrestlers in particular but, it wasn't the best in terms of having people follow it each and every week because a vast majority of its storylines was blatant crap.

WWWF is Coming...
LegendofBaseball is offline  
post #4 of 4 (permalink) Old 08-08-2010, 09:29 PM
Working on my abs
radiatedrich's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,629
Points: 45
Re: Ruthless Aggression Era>Attitude Era

I definitely agree that the wrestling and Divas division were better in the Ruthless Aggression era, and I also agree about the title changes. A few points I disagree on though...

1)Storylines were over the fucking top! Seriously, Ministry breaking in McMahon's house? Undertaker burning Stephanie's Teddy Bear?
I can see why that type of writing wouldn't attract everyone. Still though, (and a lot of people will probably disagree here) I actually liked many of the Attitude Era's over the top, intricate, soap opera-esque angles.

5)Midcard division. The IC title was a joke. Where the fuck did the lighheavyweight title disappear to? And the hardcore title well was the hardcore title.
The Attitude Era's midcard might not have been as good wrestling wise, but every single guy was over as fuck, and that made pretty much every match exciting. Hell, half the midcard matches on Raw from 99-2000 got better crowd reactions than Taker/HBK at WrestleMania 25. Not saying the matches themselves were better than Taker/HBK (many were flat out terrible from a technical standpoint), but you get what I mean.
radiatedrich is offline  

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome