Thread Tools

jcmmnx · 10-10-2012, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Chapo

People don't realize you can only look superior based on how you're booked. WWE's booking was 10 times better in 2003, compared to today. And IMO, the guys today, in total, are better workers when given the chance. What made 2003 stand out was the characters & storylines. Guys were utilized to their full potential, whereas now, WWE only shows interest in a hand full of guys and their development.

I disagree; Ziggler is booked like a clown that loses 90% of his matches but he got over because of his talent. Punk got himself over with a replay of his summer of Punk angle from ROH. Bryan was know as a workrate guy with no charisma, but he worked on his game and now is entertaining out of the ring as well. The cream always rises I don't buy that there are super talented guys on the current roster who are being buried. If they have the talent and drive that guys like Punk, Bryan, and Ziggler have then they would be over.

**Sho'nuff** · 10-10-2012, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcmmnx

I disagree; Ziggler is booked like a clown that loses 90% of his matches but he got over because of his talent. Punk got himself over with a replay of his summer of Punk angle from ROH. Bryan was know as a workrate guy with no charisma, but he worked on his game and now is entertaining out of the ring as well. The cream always rises I don't buy that there are super talented guys on the current roster who are being buried. If they have the talent and drive that guys like Punk, Bryan, and Ziggler have then they would be over.

And that all falls back on the booking.

Look at the greatness that was Steve Austin in WCW and ECW. But, when he got to WWE, he was just another guy. He possessed all the tools to become a star but it wasn't until creative took the chance on him.

You can't say that the current roster doesn't have the talent & drive, when it's not their fault that creative is not utilizing the abilities they do have. The proper booking can get anybody over. Austin as the ring master wasn't over, Rocky Maivia wasn't over, Hunter Hearst Helmsley wasn't over but when booked properly, Stone Cold, The Rock and HHH in DX were 3 of the most over guys in history. All because creative capitalized on what they had.

Can't say the rest of the roster isn't talented, when they are rarely given the opportunity to shine.

chbulls1_23 · 10-10-2012, 07:39 PM

The current roster isn't to bad honestly. Zigger is a perfect example of poor booking. I just think the roster needs some drive and motivation though. Like Stone Cold and Daniel Bryan said about the current roster, that some of them just do pro wrestling to be on TV and for the money. None of them really wanna be top dog besides Punk and Cena at the moment.

**DesolationRow** · 10-10-2012, 07:49 PM

So, what the OP is saying is that... The roster that was predominantly shaped by one of the absolute biggest, most successful periods of time in the history of the wrestling industry, in which huge stars and midcard mainstay stars and legitimate drawing diva stars and stars of one sort or another, was a more visibly impressive roster than today's roster of largely woefully untapped talents? You don't say.

Guess what, it still comes down to writing and booking. Primarily. During the heart of the era that shaped so many stars that remained in wrestling in 2003, the writing and booking was strong. Guys like Kurt Angle were given character arcs that drew fans to them. Stars who were big in one promotion would go to another and be big. It was just a very different period of time than the one in which we are now.

Wrestling02370 · 10-10-2012, 10:47 PM

dont worry. In 10 yrs we'll be looking at the 2012 roster and think how great it was too. Give it time.

nevereveragainu · 10-11-2012, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wrestling02370

dont worry. In 10 yrs we'll be looking at the 2012 roster and think how great it was too. Give it time.

explain yourself mister

Interceptor88 · 10-11-2012, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RevolverSnake

Well, they do have some amazing talent.

- CM Punk
- John Cena
- Randy Orton
- Alberto Del Rio
- Dolph Ziggler
- Cody Rhodes
- Rey Mysterio
- The Miz
- Michael McGillicutty
- Drew Mcintyre
- Alex Riley
- Antonio Cesaro
- Dean Ambrose
- Wade Barrett
- Damien Sandow
- Ryback
- Sheamus
- Curt Hawkins
- Daniel Bryan
- Ted Dibiase
- Tyson Kidd
- Hunico
...

These being in the top of today's talent is a living proof: WWE suck.

Marv95 · 10-11-2012, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcmmnx

Yes imagine boring 20 minute HHH promos where he burries the entire face roster and moves any heels that may threaten his top spot to Smackdown. Then works 30 minute HHH epicz with 30ref bumps, 20 broke tables, 5 run ins, and sledge hammer shot to "protect" the face as HHH keeps the belt. yawn.

Yet Raw was still getting almost a point higher in the ratings than today on a network that wasn't available everywhere in the country. Did I like HHH's run in 03? No. But compared to today it wasn't that bad and there would be a payoff at the end.

The booking WAS obviously 10 times better in 03 despite the boring storylines for the 1st half of the year, but it takes two to tango and the talented roster also deserves credit besides creative.

YES! YES! YES! · 10-11-2012, 09:40 AM

The roster is as good as the writing.

Shawn Morrison · 10-11-2012, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YES! YES! YES!

The roster is as good as the writing.

this, Writing is the important thing. Roster needs to have some talent, but at the end of the day its how you book them that counts. For example, Nexus had a large number of shit talents, but because of the writing and the whole angle they got over and were very interesting to watch. Then they ruined Wade Barrett's push by sending him to mid-card to then lose to Ezekiel Jackson, which was again the writers fault, not the talent's.