Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,206 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
....do they really suck enough to the point of being unable to have an interesting character or is the generalization of these type of guys backlash against the other part of the IWC than obssesses over the in-ring product? I agree with the idea of them needing some actual interesting and endearing characters to be worth something, but what I don't understand is how you guys seem to lump in almost all of them together on frivolous bases.

You guys may mention mic skills. Indeed many people call out Styles on this, but y'all will conviently ignore the terrible mic skill of RVD and Hardy in addition to established greats like Taker, Goldberg, Lesnar, and Mysterio on the mic skill thing. You guys seem to beleive it is impossible to get over without mic skill when talking about the "vanilla midgets", but more often than not forget about the above mentioned examples' lack of mic skill and how they managed to get over.

You guys will regard charisma as a response (when you respond at ALL), but y'all seem to have a poor understanding of it to begin with. For starters, their only seems to be two levels, Main Event level and none. I never understood why just because Hogan, Rock, Austin got away with being regarded as icons despite their crappy ring work that you could use that to justify holding more mic oriented guys like Pope, Roode, and Morgan infinitely above the highflyers just because of being given more of a focus by management for character development despite honestly being FAR less charismatic than the superstars in question to the point of being closer to the vanilla midgets in charisma than Hogan, Rock, or Austin. I never understood how casuals are said to not be interested in wrestling in the slightest, but a guy like Evan Bourne can get a huge pop on RAW with a favorable audience despite him never speaking and being regarded as having no charisma on here; one of the two viewpoints has to be wrong. How a guy John Morrison can get MUCH bigger pops than losers like Ricky Ortiz, Braden Walker, and Tyler Reks but can somehow have no charisma which not only doesn't even make logical sense without the existance of negative charisma, but also doesn't explain how he was infinitely more succesful than the three guys who got their asses canned.

Then their is the argument on lack of character. I would agree with someone having a lack of personality to be a huge turnoff; I think most of us would. The problem comes when the idea of developing a personality comes into play. Having mediocre mic skills seem to automatically disqualify you from having a personality, but then I reference the stars mentioned in the first paragraph. Lack of charisma can definitely prevent you from being around long enough to develop a personality, but the "system" we use to measure charisma is FAR too vague to determine is someone doesn't have enough charisma to be an entertaining midcarder. You guys apparently don't acknowledge how the writing team has A LOT on how somebody's character develops (personality admittiedly, is on the performer, but the character given to him needs to reflect a guy's personality enough to it to be noticable in the first place).

Ask me this, WHAT exactly about them should discourage TNA bookers from not trying to give them fleshed out and interesting characters, if they aren't outright devoid of mic skill or charisma (and I can't take the words of most posters who hark on these guys for utter lack of charisma as people throw around this argument too liberally)? Explain how smaller size automatically makes you have less character potential than bigger, more masculine guys; how does Rob Terry has more potential for an interesting character than AJ Styles despite AJ being a better all-around entertainer? Why do some TNA fans go around wanting an adult oriented wrestling program, but scowl at the idea of an guy being able to have a character with well developed motivations and endearing characteristics other than "SPOTZ" because of looking indy and a stigma against them created by mainstream companies for a huge emphasis on bigger guys while calling out the WWE for its over-emphasis in its factory made wrestlers?


I maintain that TNA booking is just outright incompetent in regards to building talented young guys into stars and deserve to be criticised on their unhealthy over-reliance on established guys (in terms of company identity) as opposed to the young guys for supposedly sucking like some people here do. I honestly like a lot of the X-Division styled wresters so I would appreciate a sensible reason as to why TNA couldn't allocate some time towards character development for the "highflying, spotmonkey, vanilla midget, indy wrestlers" and would be better off phasing part of what gives TNA something of an identity as opposed to improving it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
823 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Sorry, but I stopped reading when you said Taker had terrible mic skills.
 

·
Comin' at you like a double-fisted kangaroo
Joined
·
21,054 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Well besides Shelley, Sabin, & Lethal who else from the X-Division has a personality? The other guys get pops because of their moves, just like Evan Bourne. But just like Bourne, they're going to be at a certain slot until they can speak, pure and simple.
 

·
Perry Karavello
Joined
·
602 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Sorry, but I stopped reading when you said Taker had terrible mic skills.
Yeah, that's some silly shit right there, bud.

I'd say over-all he's been one of the best.

Everything else your saying is just arguing against what professional wrestling is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,206 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Well besides Shelley, Sabin, & Lethal who else from the X-Division has a personality? The other guys get pops because of their moves, just like Evan Bourne. But just like Bourne, they're going to be at a certain slot until they can speak, pure and simple.
For starters, I acknowledged they needed a personality in my first paragraph. My argument was against the idea that they couldn't develop a personality with a bit of focus because of this overemphasis on certain faults of theirs, particularly when other more often praised guys (RVD, Terry to a lesser extent) carry similar lack of mic skills/character.

And we've seen many guys on these forums that have been saying causals couldn't give less of a crap about an actual match. In that case, Bourne either has the charisma (his character is borderline nonexistant, but character and charisma are very distinct attributes of a wrestler) to make his matches interesting enough for audiences to get involved or actual wresting has a role in getting a guy over, independent of charisma or mic skill.

And I NEVER understood how Shelley and Sabin could be considered to have a personality. They can speak on the mic yes, but its borderline worthless when they haven't used it to developed interesting characters. Their below 2009 Christopher Daniels as far as personality is concerned imo.

Yeah, that's some silly shit right there, bud.

I'd say over-all he's been one of the best.


Everything else your saying is just arguing against what professional wrestling is.
Undertaker is average at best. The only thing going for his is an actual character to structure his promos around, but the ability to have an interesting character in the first place isn't really reliant on how much mic skill a guy has as opposed to their charisma (which unfortunately people here as a whole are too vague on what charisma actually is to really be debated on).

Professional wrestling as a whole is really poor in regards to characters. Its been watered down WWE kiddy crap for most of the 21st century, and although the Attitude Era was character driven, it was a cesspit of crash TV and extremely raunchy programming, only held up by the guys with REALLY great characters that make Anderson, Miz, Pope, and pretty much EVERYONE in today's generation come off as cheap, underwhelming replacements.

If Pro Wrestling is to evolve, it will very likely evolve through the storytelling medium, but writers in all companies will need to move beyond the typical conventions of booking for the last 15 years if it is to come off as even remotely adult. The facade of kayfabe has long been unveiled and pro wrestlers, no matter their size or shape, aren't considered anything resembling a tough guy amongst our demographic. We need to improve the storytelling if we are to consider wrestling for adults and a huge way to do that is to have much greater diversity of characters, dispositions, and people able to be considered credible in general in order to foster a braoder variety of potential conflicts. The guys have to be interesting and have charisma of course, but it seems the generalization of young indy guys at least seems to go FAR beyond pragmatism and straight into blind hate. Thats my issue at the end of the day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,813 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Evan bourne is fine so is morrison. I like them both and good matches and moves have a big place in wrestling obviously. The issue comes in when people on here moan and complain about 'push teh yung gunzz11!!1!' when in reality, they are getting a lot of tv time. not to mention most of them are not young and have been at it for years. It is the thought that they all deserve to be main eventers and every ppv main event should be AJ/Joe/Nigel ultimate x wrestlefest, and the show would be better off built around that, that turns people off.

Say what you want about RVD and hardy's mic skills, and they do suck, but he has somehow projected a character out there to where people identify him as the cocky, showman, stoner who lives for the adoration of his fans. That is his character, everybody knows it, people identify with it. Hardy, same thing 'the charismatic enigma' doesnt give a shit, unpredictable, artistic and his looks and actions match his ring style. people identify with it. Pre-flair, what could you say about aj? good wrestler....nice guy? Joe...makes a good angry face? Kaz? these guys are all very good, but until they develop some kind of a hook, they wont get over the top in a lot of people eyes. Even a guy like Robert Roode, he is ripped, but storm is the key to that team and defines the personality and makes it stand out. At the same time, nobody is saying they are bums, I like all of them (well maybe not Kaz so much).

I dont know, a guy like anderson or pope weren't big stars, came in, and in a couple months and surpassed all of these guys because they had something more to offer entertainment-wise. TNA's creative dept blows, so the guys like them will continue to be on top, because they were able to take matters into their own hands creatively. Actually hardy and rvd did the same thing in wwe, they did it themselves. Sometimes, if nobody has any good ideas for you, you have to do it yourself. And I dont buy that they havent had the time to do it, because most of them have, people just forgot about it, because their characters didn't make an impact, which is the core of the problem
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
823 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

I disagree that Taker was only average on the mic. I always thought that his promos went perfectly with the Undertaker character, and some of the promos he cut on HBK are epic (especially back in '97/'98). Plus I thought he showed to be very good on the mic during his Bad Ass phase as well, totally changing his style up.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,631 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Shelley has great mic skill and I think he could carry a feud if given the chance. Daniels as a heel was an awesome character. AJ and Kaz are awful though and are incapable of having interesting characters. Lethal is just as bad. The only time anyone ever cares about him is when he impersonates people that actually do have a personality.
 

·
DAVID OTUNGA's Personal Assistant
Joined
·
9,748 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

i actually stopped reading after the thread title.

but then i saw you said The Undertaker had no mic skills, and so i was impressed with my ability to detect fail.
TNA just doesn't do much to make me care abut their indy highfliers besides SPOTZ. and well, i don't care about SPOTZ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

Shelley has great mic skill and I think he could carry a feud if given the chance. Daniels as a heel was an awesome character. AJ and Kaz are awful though and are incapable of having interesting characters. Lethal is just as bad. The only time anyone ever cares about him is when he impersonates people that actually do have a personality.

Oh come on, AJ hasn't been awful on the mic in a while. When was the last time he cut a promo that you could honestly call bad? These days I'd go so far even as to say he's above average.

OT, I agree that a lot of people on these forums value mic skills far, far too highly. It's as if some of you honestly think that casual fans just watch wrestling for the bad comedy skits and shitty soap opera, and don't care about the actual matches at all.

I personally started watching wrestling for the cool shit that happens in the ring, and my friends who don't watch wrestling at all are always more impressed when I show them a good x-division match than when I show them any backstage promo.

It's a pretty narrow-minded, elitist attitude that the only people who can actually appreciate a wrestling match are us more dedicated fans in the IWC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,541 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

With regards to why the live audience may cheer someone like Bourne (or Amazing Red), i'd compare it to say....watching fireworks. Its something a live crowd might enjoy in person but for people watching on tv its a different story. Hell in person i'd probably love to watch a Red match, but sitting at home i want him nowhere near an Impact broadcast because of his lack of personality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,206 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

i actually stopped reading after the thread title.

but then i saw you said The Undertaker had no mic skills, and so i was impressed with my ability to detect fail.
TNA just doesn't do much to make me care abut their indy highfliers besides SPOTZ. and well, i don't care about SPOTZ.
:rolleyes: Are the people on here THAT incapable of understanding the point of my thread? The main point was that whether or not the indy highfliers could develop an interesting or at least deep enough character or personality for fans to invest in despite their disadvantages in mic work to the point that they could be given decent storylines while maintaining their highflying in-ring antics.

As far as Undertaker is concerned, the main thing was that he developed a character and wasn't overly reliant on mic skills in order to do it. Regardless if they were either average or great, he portrays his character primarily through great booking and charisma and his mic skills were merely a back up tool that didn't define how well he was able to develop a character for himself.

Shelley has great mic skill and I think he could carry a feud if given the chance. Daniels as a heel was an awesome character. AJ and Kaz are awful though and are incapable of having interesting characters. Lethal is just as bad. The only time anyone ever cares about him is when he impersonates people that actually do have a personality.
I said that already! My thing was that Shelley didn't have much in the way of character. He can speak on the mic and has charisma, but those attributes haven't translated into a charcter a casual viewer can emotionally invest in.

Thats part of my entire point, Shelley (as of right now anyway) has noticably less character and personality than even AJ Styles, let alone more developed young guys in the E like Daniel Bryan and Sheamus and yet gets a pass for it because he can speak on the mic despite having nothing resembling a developed character coming from his skills. This wouldn't really be an issue if the people I'm reffering to realized they are entertained mostly through mic work and didn't give two shits on how well developed or not somebody is character wise and didn't randomly rant on guys for lack of good character while ignoring flaws for others in regards to their character.

Oh come on, AJ hasn't been awful on the mic in a while. When was the last time he cut a promo that you could honestly call bad? These days I'd go so far even as to say he's above average.

OT, I agree that a lot of people on these forums value mic skills far, far too highly. It's as if some of you honestly think that casual fans just watch wrestling for the bad comedy skits and shitty soap opera, and don't care about the actual matches at all.

I personally started watching wrestling for the cool shit that happens in the ring, and my friends who don't watch wrestling at all are always more impressed when I show them a good x-division match than when I show them any backstage promo.

It's a pretty narrow-minded, elitist attitude that the only people who can actually appreciate a wrestling match are us more dedicated fans in the IWC.
I agree with you in that mic skill is rediculously overatted on here to the point that most people seem to think it and charisma are one in the same. But the X-Division needs guys with character to invest in if it is to ever become something worthwhile again. I just don't beleive in the arguments that lacking Pope level mic work or looking indy automatically makes you devoid of the charisma necessary to allow you to develop a decent character (at least for a midcarder anyway).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
990 Posts
Re: At the people on here who rant on the TNA's indy highfliers for lack of character

If Pro Wrestling is to evolve, it will very likely evolve through the storytelling medium, but writers in all companies will need to move beyond the typical conventions of booking for the last 15 years if it is to come off as even remotely adult. The facade of kayfabe has long been unveiled and pro wrestlers, no matter their size or shape, aren't considered anything resembling a tough guy amongst our demographic. We need to improve the storytelling if we are to consider wrestling for adults and a huge way to do that is to have much greater diversity of characters, dispositions, and people able to be considered credible in general in order to foster a braoder variety of potential conflicts. The guys have to be interesting and have charisma of course, but it seems the generalization of young indy guys at least seems to go FAR beyond pragmatism and straight into blind hate. Thats my issue at the end of the day.
You're spot on here and this is why the Attitude Era was such a success. Every single wrestler on the roster had a character you could associate with that guy. The storylines going on were far more interesting than your basic singles rivalries and this allowed casual fans to become emotionally invested. If wrestling is to succeed again, its going to need characters interesting enough for stories to be told well and based around.

I agree with you in that mic skill is rediculously overatted on here to the point that most people seem to think it and charisma are one in the same. But the X-Division needs guys with character to invest in if it is to ever become something worthwhile again. I just don't beleive in the arguments that lacking Pope level mic work or looking indy automatically makes you devoid of the charisma necessary to allow you to develop a decent character (at least for a midcarder anyway).
Whilst most wrestlers are capable of developing enough charcter to make them interesting (if they're booked in the right way), you've got to appreciate the fact that its much easier for Mr. Anderson to develop a personality fans are interested in than it is for someone like Jay Lethal who isn't as good on the mic. Being good on the mic opens up more avenues for character development and therefore it leads to more interesting characters.

But I definitely agree with you. The X Division can become interesting once again if it allows for sufficent character development. The most succesful wrestler in the X Division this year, DougLAS Williams has managed to develop a personality upon which all of the storylines of the X Division are based. He's not the best in the world on the mic but he's been given time to develop an intersting personality. Last year, Suicide didn't even talk on the mic and his mysterious personality again allowed for some interesting storylines. The whole mysterious gimmick doesn't have too long a lifespan though so the whole Suicide character is in need of an evolution.

If you had say 5 X Division wrestlers regardless of their size with characters as interesting as Williams the whole problem would be solved as you could have these guys square off against one another using their differing characters to ensure unique feuds and storylines. The thing is other than marketing your small highflier as the plucky underdog there aren't too many other believable personalities for them to develop. They can develop personalities but the numbers of possible chacaters available to them is far more limited.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top