Is this the worst ever period in the WWE - Page 7 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Indy Wrestling, Lucha Underground, Women of Wrestling Forums

LinkBack Thread Tools
post #61 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 06:38 PM
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,897
Points: 57
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

2012 wasn't that bad in my opinion. 1995, alongside with 2010, were the worst years in WWE history.

Bryan D. is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #62 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 06:45 PM
Searching for a new identity
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,661
Points: 3,232
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

I don't know why people who don't enjoy it still watch it and know everything about it.

You can't give me all of this, "I've stuck with it, I hope it will change," bullshit. If you don't like Jim Carrey movies in 2012, you don't watch every single one that's release and wait in line because you thought The Truman Show was superb, and then spend the rest of your week complaining about it.

If there are people genuinely unimpressed with WWE, turn your lights out. Don't watch, Don't Tweet, don't support it in any way and you will be heard. Tweeting 20 times an hour whilst watching Raw, no matter what you say, goes towards their media score.

I don't think this is anywhere near the worst time. I enjoy things. I'm enjoying Punk and excited for Punk/Rock, I'm enjoying Dolph Zigglers work. I like Rhodes Scholars and Daniel Bryan and Kane. I'm really interested in what they're going to do leading upto Wrestlemania. I'm wondering what Brock will do next. The Shield and Ryback are at least new and trying to change the main event scene.

I just feel that when I read Twitter and see everyone complaining, and on here and other forums, I just have to think why waste your life doing it?
Issues_Sunshyne is offline  
post #63 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 06:50 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Woodsboro High
Posts: 2,598
Points: 0
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

They've dropped a lot of storylines since 2009/2010. Has really annoyed me as a viewer.
  • Punk/'Taker/Vince screwjob conspriacy. Also heel Teddy Long.
  • Kane vs. 'Taker come to a premature end due to injury and never mentioned again.
  • Wade Barrett literally buries 'Taker - never mentioned again.
  • The Nexus' bigger picture.
  • Nexus vs. Corre
  • Sheamus injures Triple H for nearly a year; 'The Game' returns and is more interested in 'Taker.
  • No direction for the mystery GM. Quickly rehashed in a 'what the fuck' skit.
  • Punk shoots on a feuds with McMahon. It turns into a feud between two middle aged former clique members.
  • The confusing power shit with Vince McMahon and Triple H.
  • Awesome Truth conspiracy theory.
  • Brock Lesnar suing the WWE.

That is WCW Spring to Summer of 1999 level bullshit.
JigsawKrueger is offline  
post #64 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 06:54 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
paulborklaserheyma's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 823
Points: 0
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

2002-2004 were considered transitional era and they very entertaining.
Don't know if now is considered a transitional era, but if it is, the direction is going nowhere.

paulborklaserheyma is offline  
post #65 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 07:16 PM Thread Starter
Asking SCOTT STEINER for Wrestling Advice
Swindont's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: England, Oxfordshire
Posts: 400
Points: 0
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

I think its easy to compare the eras talent pools, to years such as 1997 and even 2007, but at least there was some structure to storylines. It seems now the WWE really couldnt care less you get emotionally attatched to a wrestler in the main event for a couple of months then there losing to Evan Bourne. Look at The Miz, who had a good part of a year as WWE champion won the main event at WM, then a couple of months later hes consistantly losing in 5 minutes. Im pretty sure this inconsistancy wouldnt of occured in 97.
Swindont is offline  
post #66 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 07:20 PM
Marv95's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Near KOP, PA
Posts: 5,004
Points: 4,121
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

Originally Posted by Choke2Death View Post

People say 2009 and 2007 were worse. I can understand the 2007 hate due to the Benoit tragedy and all the injuries but I can't agree at all on either cases. In 07, we had some good stuff like Cena's ring work being great, Randy Orton's permanent main event rise, a good first half and other good stuff like Taker and Batista's series of matches.
It wasn't just because of the Benoit tragedy and injuries. Yeah they certainly didn't help but those weren't the only things wrong in 07. SuperCena's reign, Trump vs Rosie, ECW being bastardized thanks to Vince and a Hollywood star wannabe on a hardcore show, Booker, Lashley and RVD leaving, Kennedy dropping MITB, horrible PPVS like No Way Out and Summerslam, a leprechaun getting pushed more than 90% of the roster and helping to end the crusierweight division and of course Khali as world champ. Got better ironically when Cena got injured. But the bad overshadowed the good that year.

But of not for Brock and Rock 2012 would have easily topped it.

Originally Posted by blazegod99 View Post
You fucking politically correct morons are quick to defend WWE for every pussy ass decision they make, but complain about the show lacking attitude and intensity... SMH.
Right on!
Follow if you dare:

Last edited by Marv95; 01-01-2013 at 07:23 PM.
Marv95 is offline  
post #67 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 07:33 PM
Working on my abs
-trav-'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,717
Points: 0
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

All this "rebuilding mode" stuff is garbage. Its a TV show, they shouldn't have a rebuilding phase. You don't hear other TV shows saying "oh guys, just excuse us for a bit while the show sucks, we're rebuilding it". WWE is specifically set up with a midcard/mid event structure to build new guys quietly while the top guys are pulling the product. Plus there is a whole indy scene building new guys that are perfectly capable that WWE could pick from.

WWE had plenty of opportunities to build the next generation of stars while all the 90s guys were still around, but they didn't. For a whole variety of reasons. The next crop of guys to be the main event should have been the midcard from the late 90s/early 2000s. Wrestlers like Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Rob Van Dam, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, Edge, Christian, the Hardys, Lance Storm, Tazz. To go with this there was a bunch of brawlers who bring edge to the product, like Raven, Steve Corino, Rhyno Tommy Dreamer, JBL. Both categories of guys bring the physicality, not gimmicks.

Through the midcard of the late 90s, wrestling was naturally evolving into a more competition based, athletically focused show with less emphasis on physiques and more on athleticism, competition and personalities. WWE was naturally moving in a more reality based UFC inspired fight club style product with smaller wrestlers who worked faster. But Vince doesn't like things that way. He likes body builders and stupid gimmicks.

Through the mid 2000s he pushed the product in the absolute opposite direction to where it was naturally evolving, and that's how it turned into the terrible product it is today. So much time was wasted on pushing Batista, Randy Orton, Lashley, Umaga, Koslov etc etc, along with a countless range of generic bodies from the developmental territories. All the Garrison Cades, Mark Jindraks, Renee Dupree's, Tomko's etc. All the guys that the product should have been built around got a small run, but it was all in an effort to build them up to be fed to the body builders instead.

WWE had Rey Mysterio in 2002 who was massively popular, and a whole crop of crusierweights who were just dying for exposure. Instead of using Mysterio to build the whole crusierweight division around and make the other guys stars too, they yanked Mysterio out and let the division die. There was Tajiri, Kidman, Yang, London, Kendrick, Kash, Super Crazy, Ultimo Dragon and heaps more floating around, and they never got used.

WWE's top set of guys should be the ROH card from 2005/2006. CM Punk was too good for them to ignore and Bryan Danielson is heading up, but the rest of the place should be the top of the WWE card now too. Nigel McGuiness, Samoa Joe, Austin Aries, Homicide, Christopher Daniels, The Briscoes, Kings of Wrestling. They should have poached AJ Styles from TNA and let him run loose in WWE.

WWE's cards from 2005-2010 should have been Chris Jericho vs Austin Aries, Homicide vs Eddie Guerrero, RVD vs AJ Styles, Chris Benoit vs Samoa Joe, Christian vs Edge, Christopher Daniels vs Lance Storm. Imagine the rivalries between a crop of wrestlers like that. Prop it up with a midcard of the crusierweight guys and support from the established guys like Triple H, HBK and Undertaker, and you'd have an epic WWE. Even somebody like John Cena could thrive in that environment because the rest of the card could cover his weaknesses and carry him to a great match in their sleep. Paul Heyman was onto it in 2002, and his booking all the way up to the "big fight" feel with Brock vs Angle at Wrestlemania XIX was awesome and perfectly fitting, but Vince killed it because Heyman was continuing to evolve the product.

This is what Vince always does. He tries to dictate the product into what he wants it to be, rather than what it is naturally evolving into. All those guys from the midcard were over with kids and adults, and that is what the audience wanted to see. Instead of running with that, and raiding the indy talent to get a batch of new guys to supplement this direction, he killed it off because it doesn't fit with his personal view of what wrestling is. Its ridiculous that a publicly traded corporate company can be detrimentally dictated by an old man whose vision for the product has been dated since the late 1980s, but thats where we are.

Wrestling is creatively ruined now. Its natural evolution got sabotaged and it sits in a weird status quo trying to fulfil a style of product that has been dated for at least 25 years.

-trav- is offline  
post #68 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 07:42 PM
Ex Con With A Heart Of Gold
SPCDRI's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,496
Points: 771
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

Trav, marry me.
SPCDRI is offline  
post #69 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 07:44 PM
i ain't got no type
IJ's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 308 Negra Arroyo Lane
Posts: 1,490
Points: 18
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

Simply yes. I'd rather see the superstars of the previous era. It's a tough spot also because all the main superstars from the 2000's either are gone or retired (Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Batista, Edge, Chris Jericho, and The Undertaker), or sadly died (Umaga, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit). It's really pathetic to me that The Rock is back and I still couldn't care less about WWE's current product. They need to use The Rock, Orton, Punk, and Cena to bring up superstars that could be main event potential such as Ziggler, Kingston, Swagger (or is he gone?), Cesaro, and Cody Rhodes.

IJ is offline  
post #70 of 123 (permalink) Old 01-01-2013, 07:50 PM
Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
Phenom's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Death Valley
Posts: 4,078
Points: 927
Re: Is this the worst ever period in the WWE

2007 - present has been the worst, yes. 90-95 was much better than this crap.

He is the cornerstone of WWE and he is the reason that this business runs.
- JBL commentating on the Undertaker.
Phenom is offline  

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