Thread Tools

**Swindont** · 01-01-2013, 06:24 AM

Was thinking about this last night, is the current roster and storylines some of the worst in the history of WWE, in 2008 when WWE's roster wasnt held in too much regard there was still Edge, Shawn Michaels, Batista, HHH and Taker wrestling reguarly, Orton in a more significant role, Jericho, Jeff Hardy, and of course Cena.

You look to now and being honest the only real established stars left are John Cena, and now of course CM Punk, Orton has been downgraded to the upper midcard, Ziggler, Sheamus etc are being groomed to be stars but are still quite abit off, how poor the current roster is, is really demonstrated with how Kane and Big Show are being used, which is so much more significantly when before they'd just job to the top guys, and most of the time the up and coming young guys. The storylines are now so child based its almost embarassing watching WWE unless your under 10, i think the Christmas episode demonstrated this the most.

My point is i think significant recruitment and dedication and commitment into making new people stars is desperatly needed, or its going to get very difficult to care, its very poor to see the WWE relying on cameo appearances from HHH, Rock and Lesnar to make the major PPV's watchable. I honestly cant think of a worst period in the last 20 years possibily more than now

TeamHeadsh0t · 01-01-2013, 06:34 AM

WWE is in transition mode, they made the mistake of course by focusing on Cena for too long so that never helped. I think this time next year WWE will be in a good place, Ziggler is coming up, Ryback is over, we got the shield, cesaro, sandow plenty of good talent they just need time and I think that come 2014 WWE will be red hot.

austin316 G.O.A.T · 01-01-2013, 06:48 AM

WWE is in transition period.They are trying to build stars now.

Back in late 1996-1997 how many stars did WWE have?

Bret Hart already established himself as a great wrestler/legend while Shawn and Undertaker were not at his level yet.

Boygirl · 01-01-2013, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by austin316 G.O.A.T

Back in late 1996-1997 how many stars did WWE have?

Main eventers:
Bret Hart
Stone Cold
Undertaker
Shawn Michaels

... Yeh, that's pretty much it, but Raw back then was a great show (apart from the The Patriot getting a WWE Title shot which was just stupid and only fed Bret's anti-American gimmick).

**Swindont** · 01-01-2013, 07:01 AM

Being in a transitional period still means the product is poor.

Srdjan99 · 01-01-2013, 07:03 AM

They try to rebuild the roster and that's a goo thing. I would be ok with the WWE if they would sacrifice 2013 trying to build new talents, and then 2014 to be an awesome year. I can understand them, then

ZigglersHandshake · 01-01-2013, 07:04 AM

I think last year was worse. At least they're finally creating new stars. Cesaro, Ambrose, Ryback, Sandow, Ziggler among others plus the talent in NXT makes it pretty easy to be optimistic for the future.

Current storylines are horrendous but hopefully they can tie them up quickly and get on with the road to Wrestlemania.

uknoww · 01-01-2013, 07:21 AM

yep it is
how can the show be good when you have a 400+ days champion who draw's worst than diesel in 1995

Tony Tornado · 01-01-2013, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by uknoww

yep it is
how can the show be good when you have a 400+ days champion who draw's worst than diesel in 1995

How can someone take your opinion seriously when you write "draw's" instead of "draws"?

Do you really think quality has anything to do with popularity and "drawing power"? The general public's opinion is certainly not a measure of quality, especially in a medium that's known for their uneducated audience. That's why the Twilight movies and Justin Bieber are popular and Bela Tarr and Wayne Shorter are not.

It's unbelievable how many times I've read that imbecile argument on this forum.

roadkill_ · 01-01-2013, 07:57 AM

WWE has been shit for 7 years, with each year being worse than the last. That's an awfully long 'transitional period'.