WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected - Page 11 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #101 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 02:41 AM
Little Poppa Pump
 
ShiftyLWO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
               
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

we want

ShiftyLWO is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #102 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 03:15 AM
Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
 
SinJackal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
                     
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

Why are there so many idiots on here who think that if they bring back a big name or two that it means they won't build anyone in the meantime? That's like saying you need to take your car in to get fixed but you think if the mechanic changes the oil that he won't work on the rest of the car.

If the ratings are bad there's going to be less people watchin the new guys. Ratings will just decline and decline. You need to build guys up around established names to get them over.

WWE's problem also hasn't been focusing too much on John Cena. Imo it's been that they've invested way too much into guys like Punk and Sheamus who haven't paid off as much as they needed them to. They're big now, but they've been big for months. Sheamus isn't getting any great competition so barely anyone cares to watch him, and Punk's been spinning his wheels in place in terms of rising in popularity for over half a year. He might even be sputtering downward at this point even with the heel turn to refresh his stale character.

I know people here bitched and moaned about keeping titles on people for extended periods of time. . .but look how fucking boring it's been. WWE has become extremely predictable over the last 6 months. That's why there's no reason to really pay attention anymore. We already know what's gonna happen and the fluff isn't making people stick around.

It seems like 80% filler/commericals and 20% show. If they're gonna go that route then the shit that isn't filler better damn well be amazing. . .and it's just not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dog View Post
They need to put some trust in the younger wrestlers, in all of them, not one or two at a time, they all need to be competitive and not be tossed into squashes so often, there's nothing exciting when you can easily guess who's going to win.
To be honest, that's the worst idea possible for a show with tanking ratings. Gamble on stuff that could be a huge failure? The reward for that is far lower than the risk.

Bringing back big names is a nearly guaranteed way to fix ratings, and has barely any risk. WWE can always build up guys during the shows they have brought people back in. Nowhere is it written that nobody can be pushed when a big name drops in for a promo or a match.
SinJackal is offline  
post #103 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 03:38 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
   
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

TNA have managed to make new stars of late in Aries and Roode so it is possible to build new people up which is what WWE badly needs - bringing back the legends is fine but they need to put over younger talent otherwise it is just a short term fix but to be honest I am getting a bit bored of the same legends turning up time and time again
Stadhart is offline  
post #104 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 04:23 AM
Searching for a new identity
 
sesshomaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
                     
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

Quote:
Originally Posted by SinJackal View Post

WWE's problem also hasn't been focusing too much on John Cena. Imo it's been that they've invested way too much into guys like Punk and Sheamus who haven't paid off as much as they needed them to. They're big now, but they've been big for months. Sheamus isn't getting any great competition so barely anyone cares to watch him, and Punk's been spinning his wheels in place in terms of rising in popularity for over half a year. He might even be sputtering downward at this point even with the heel turn to refresh his stale character.

I know people here bitched and moaned about keeping titles on people for extended periods of time. . .but look how fucking boring it's been.
WWE has become extremely predictable over the last 6 months. That's why there's no reason to really pay attention anymore. We already know what's gonna happen and the fluff isn't making people stick around.
First of all, the only reason that Punk's reign was boring was because WWE left him at no.2, which means that they used their Indian immigrants to book his feuds, and it shows. Same with Sheamus, really. Somebody decided to water down both their characters, and Punk's lucky that someone smart said "What the fuck are we doing"?

However, as John Cena faces, they both failed. Which should be obvious. Punk's a dick, skinny, and full of tattoos. Not no.1 babyface material, while Sheamus just isn't charismatic enough.

The "predictability" you're complaining about will actually result in a higher payoff when Punk does lose the title, rather then the hopscotch the title had beforehand (didn't fucking matter who was champion, since he'd lose it in a month anyway).

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/signaturepics/sigpic155408_3.gif
sesshomaru is offline  
post #105 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 05:48 AM
Asking SCOTT STEINER for Wrestling Advice
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

Bring back AE stars is a total crap. first of all, WWE can't count on them, since they have their own life now, they have been (allmost) out of in-ring action for years, and I don't feel they are interested in returning to bussiness.
WWE must (!) look at the present and that's it! your hopes for a one night show in 4 years with the Rock/ Taker/ Austin to make the difference is so ridicolous! focus on your current shinning stars and keep on devloping them. superstars like Ryback, Daniel Bryan, and even Shamous can be the next Taker/ Cena/ HBK/ Rock etc. no doubt! just use them correctlly and then you won't need any of the original AE top stars! please, try not to fuck things up.
and how one of the AE stars use to say: have a nice day.
roni10_levi is offline  
post #106 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 06:00 AM
Asking SCOTT STEINER for Wrestling Advice
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

By the way, I think ther is a one good reason to bring AE superstars back, and that's for jobbing to the current top and rising superstars. for example, make the Rock/ Mck Foley jobbing (cleanly) to Shamous would be awesome for his title run. or you can make a one time match between Austin/ Taker and having them job to Ryback. such a victory would make him THE top face of WWE and would take his overness to the next level.
or you can have a Bryan vs HBK as a great technical match which will easilly reach 5 stars level, and having Bryan beat him. that's gonn'a easilly put him as the next Kurt Angle/ HBK/ Bret Hart
roni10_levi is offline  
post #107 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 07:34 AM
Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
 
SinJackal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
                     
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

Quote:
Originally Posted by sesshomaru View Post
First of all, the only reason that Punk's reign was boring was because WWE left him at no.2, which means that they used their Indian immigrants to book his feuds, and it shows. Same with Sheamus, really. Somebody decided to water down both their characters, and Punk's lucky that someone smart said "What the fuck are we doing"?

However, as John Cena faces, they both failed. Which should be obvious. Punk's a dick, skinny, and full of tattoos. Not no.1 babyface material, while Sheamus just isn't charismatic enough.

The "predictability" you're complaining about will actually result in a higher payoff when Punk does lose the title, rather then the hopscotch the title had beforehand (didn't fucking matter who was champion, since he'd lose it in a month anyway).
I do not believe Punk was being billed as #2 except in pretty much 3 PPVs where Cena teamed with The Rock, fought The Rock, and fought Brock Lesnar. He was #1 in every other case unless you're arguing that when he faced Cena they were billing him as #2. . .which I would disagree with as he was still the champion.

Punk's been allowed to call himself the best wrestler in the world and even put it on his t shirt. He's been put over Cena twice in the last year and a half and Cena over him 0 times.

I also disagree that his reign was boring "because he was left at #2", and with the premise that he was intentionally billed as #2 as opposed to just naturally not going over Cena despite being put over Cena almost the whole time.

His push has absolutely been enough to get him over Cena if he was capable of doing so. A 300+ day reign, beating put against all of the best workers in the company and going over them (Jericho, Bryan, Ziggler, Cena, Del Rio), getting TONS of mic time, losing less than 5% of his promos, etc. He's been handed everything you could ask for besides be allowed to break kayfabe or break the PG rating on a weekly basis. Which is stuff nobody else gets to do either.

He's also been given tons of stipulation matches to spice up his fueds, and been allowed to fued against "the company" with Laurinitis, and now with Lawler, JR, and Vince. The guy gets everything he can possibly get within reason. He's been getting enough push and mic time for like 3 wrestlers.

As for the predictability comment, WWE in general is predictable. Have you participated in the Forum Championship game at all? I've been doing that for a year on here, and almost everybody has been getting nearly perfect scores on their predictions over the last 4 PPVs. That's never happened even once before that. Yet it's happened 4 straight times. Everyone's predicting the outcomes of the matches perfectly or almost perfectly.

Also, the "payoff" won't be big if he's just dropping the title to a predictable source like The Rock at the Rumble. Where's the excitement besides just to see The Rock? It'd have fuck all to do with CM Punk. Rock doesn't need extra situations to get buys and big cheers. So the length of Punk's reign is rendered a footnote. Meaning there was no point in even letting him have one for that long.

And "hopscotch"ing the title: The title never changed hands less than 5 times a year during the attitude era. That was the most interesting time in WWE. I looked up the numbers before too, and the title has not changed hands 0 times in a year since the 80's. Back when Hogan defeated the Iron Shiek for the title before Wrestlemania I even aired! 28 years ago. So in no way is this a proven thing to work. The only thing that's proven is that it's been boring.

^ A lot of that, of course, is just my opinion. Not trying to claim it as the best one. Oh, all it's opinion besides the facts I posted obviously.
SinJackal is offline  
post #108 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 08:58 AM
Moron
 
HalfNights70's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
     
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

Quote:
Originally Posted by SinJackal View Post
I do not believe Punk was being billed as #2 except in pretty much 3 PPVs where Cena teamed with The Rock, fought The Rock, and fought Brock Lesnar. He was #1 in every other case unless you're arguing that when he faced Cena they were billing him as #2. . .which I would disagree with as he was still the champion.

Punk's been allowed to call himself the best wrestler in the world and even put it on his t shirt. He's been put over Cena twice in the last year and a half and Cena over him 0 times.

I also disagree that his reign was boring "because he was left at #2", and with the premise that he was intentionally billed as #2 as opposed to just naturally not going over Cena despite being put over Cena almost the whole time.

His push has absolutely been enough to get him over Cena if he was capable of doing so. A 300+ day reign, beating put against all of the best workers in the company and going over them (Jericho, Bryan, Ziggler, Cena, Del Rio), getting TONS of mic time, losing less than 5% of his promos, etc. He's been handed everything you could ask for besides be allowed to break kayfabe or break the PG rating on a weekly basis. Which is stuff nobody else gets to do either.

He's also been given tons of stipulation matches to spice up his fueds, and been allowed to fued against "the company" with Laurinitis, and now with Lawler, JR, and Vince. The guy gets everything he can possibly get within reason. He's been getting enough push and mic time for like 3 wrestlers.

As for the predictability comment, WWE in general is predictable. Have you participated in the Forum Championship game at all? I've been doing that for a year on here, and almost everybody has been getting nearly perfect scores on their predictions over the last 4 PPVs. That's never happened even once before that. Yet it's happened 4 straight times. Everyone's predicting the outcomes of the matches perfectly or almost perfectly.

Also, the "payoff" won't be big if he's just dropping the title to a predictable source like The Rock at the Rumble. Where's the excitement besides just to see The Rock? It'd have fuck all to do with CM Punk. Rock doesn't need extra situations to get buys and big cheers. So the length of Punk's reign is rendered a footnote. Meaning there was no point in even letting him have one for that long.

And "hopscotch"ing the title: The title never changed hands less than 5 times a year during the attitude era. That was the most interesting time in WWE. I looked up the numbers before too, and the title has not changed hands 0 times in a year since the 80's. Back when Hogan defeated the Iron Shiek for the title before Wrestlemania I even aired! 28 years ago. So in no way is this a proven thing to work. The only thing that's proven is that it's been boring.

^ A lot of that, of course, is just my opinion. Not trying to claim it as the best one. Oh, all it's opinion besides the facts I posted obviously.
I don't think his title reign is boring. The guys you listed are just midcarders, many in the current roster defeated them without the need of a feud. Punk defeated Cena none of it was clean, so casual fans make that excuse because it's true. You can't be taking seriously if you can't beat Cena fair and squere. You think if Punk had guys like Michaels, Trips, Batista, Orton, etc to feud with, his title reign will be boring, others had that in their reign and Punk didn't get that yet. Yeah, Punk is the man who brought Johnny into the WWE and Cena is the guy to kick him out of the WWE, what an awesome push. Punk starts things and they have Cena to end it, instead for the guy who started it.
HalfNights70 is offline  
post #109 of 110 (permalink) Old 10-12-2012, 09:09 AM
Humbled
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,704
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: WWE Expected To Bring Back Attitude Era Stars Earlier Than Expected

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShiftyLWO View Post
we want

This
You can fill a 3 hour show only with somebody who has 1000 ideas and Russo is that guy. Everybody would have a own storylina, from Tyson Kidd to John Cena.
Many fans say that the current WWE is terrible but they watch it only because of Team Hell No and Punk/Heyman, just like many fans watched it some months ago only because AJ before she became GM to see what she can do next, with Russo almost everyone on the roster would be the reason to watch
If WWE hires Russo the fans would love to see the Attitude Era stars only because of nostalgia and not because the shows are so boring and they need excitement because Russo would make the current WWE stars interesting.
During his WWE run there weas not even one wrestlers who was really boring, ok maybe the Patriot or Brakkus but everyone else, even guys like Tiger Ali Singh, Gerald Brisco, Dan Severn or Jesus Castillo were interesting, so imagine what he could do with some guys from the curren roster.
He would probably make his ideas more family friendly or change some things in his storyline because of the PG rating but he would still be able to make WWE exciting like during his first run.
With Russo the fans would want the returns of Stone Cold, The Rock, Brock Lesnar or The Undertaker only to make WWE even more exciting and not because they need to save the WWE of boredom
DualShock is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

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