Wrestling Forum banner

41 - 57 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
Is it really, though? Based on those numbers, the champions represent the top 12% of the roster. Shouldn't the world titles be won only by a select group? 12% actually seems generous given the number of geeks and jobbers on the roster. Spread the world titles around too thinly and they loose whatever tiny itty bitty meaning they still have.
And among those 12% we have people like Bray Wyatt, Jinder Mahal and Kofi Kingston. One could argue that those names alone devalue the WWE title tremendously.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,833 Posts
And among those 12% we have people like Bray Wyatt, Jinder Mahal and Kofi Kingston. One could argue that those names alone devalue the WWE title tremendously.
Wyatt fits just fine amidst other WWE title winners, but on the other two, I agree. That said, this is nothing new - the brand split has generated so many godawful world title winners (Swagger, Del Rio, Khali, etc.) that Mahal and (to a lesser extent) Kingston are just an extension of a 15+ year trend.
 

·
Fearless University Graduate
Joined
·
15,269 Posts


Thirteen different people have held the WWE or Universal championship in the last three years, an incredibly high rate if you actually think about it.

Brock, Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, AJ, Cena, Bryan, the group of guys who are endlessly on top and get all the spotlight. Wyatt, KO, and Kofi, Balor are all one and done.

You seriously want to pretend WWE dont just keep the same handful of people on top endlessly?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,587 Posts
.... I can't imagine why...

It's actually a good thing. Hopefully people smarten up and stop signing with WWE which starts a domino effect leading to WWE getting their shit together. Quite a few dominoes have to fall before that has even a chance of happening, but it's gotta start somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,519 Posts
If the morale ever gets to critical levels where the roster stages a mass walk out(I mean a real one, not a work), then tell me about it. People being sad that things suck doesn't mean anything if nothing ever changes.
 

·
Ex Con With A Heart Of Gold
Joined
·
10,244 Posts
[
Thirteen different people have held the WWE or Universal championship in the last three years, an incredibly high rate if you actually think about it.
That only works if you factor in the Smackdown Crackerjack Box-Toy that everybody gets a turn with for a few months if "they deserve it."

UT was held by 2 different people in over 700 days.
 

·
@delecast
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Iv heard a few times on Bruce Prichard podcast that if a talent is unhappy Vince would let them go. Why a change of heart now?
Because there's a non-WWE place for talent to go. AEW hasn't put on a show yet, but the money mark has NFL/Premier League money.

Ironic how Vince wants to get into football and a football guy wants to get into wrestling.

Oh, there's some lowcard wrestlers who want to leave...:surprise:

But WWE has twice the amount of wrestlers they need. Vince and HHH mujst be crying in the floor uh?:laugh:
Remember that the low card guys are the main eventers 5 years from now. Imagine jettisoning The Rock after people shit on Rocky Maivia or Steve Austin after The Ringmaster.

WWE has to think a few moves ahead, especially if AEW catches on.

The worst I ever heard morale being was in the fall of 1995, and I have a hard time imagining that it is worse now than it was then.

Why?

Vince McMahon admitted in a meeting with the wrestlers that summer that while WWE had made over $80M in 1994, they had lost money. And the financial situation was deteriorating in 1995, leading to mass layoffs in July (Heavenly Bodies, Barbarian, Lou Albano, Doink, Jack Tunney, Lord Alfred Hayes, Well Dunn, King Kong Bundy, Nikolai Volkoff). Adam Bomb, Jeff Jarrett, and The Road Dog had quit. The Clique had tightened its influence. And payoffs...the entire point of the enterprise....had become so bad that wrestlers who had taken out advances on house shows to cover travel expenses were finding that their paychecks were sometimes in the negatives (Shane Douglas alleged that he made $1.6K after travel expenses were factored out during the four months that he wrestled). I remember Wade Keller making the cover of his PW Torch newsletter "Titanic Sports" in late October, detailing these issues.

That was worse than people getting paid $500K - $1M and not being used properly.
Not disagreeing with most of what you're saying. The Heavenly Bodies, however, were brought in as a favor to Jim Cornette as a way to get him to do business with the WWF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,608 Posts
Not everyone will be happy, but not everyone is unhappy. This will happen to AEW as well as times goes on. The narratives the dirt sheets are trying to sell is very similar to what it was when WCW & WWF were head on. This time WWE is the bad guy.
This is spot on! The WWE is the big bad WCW.

The problem AEW has is the lack of a legacy and connection with an audience that may want to see them usurp WWE though.

When WCW was the big bad wolf the WWF was the underdog favorite who fans wanted to see come back in a fight due to the narrative being WWF stars who they supported became sell outs to Ted Turner.

Then in WCW, they had their own twist as the new WCW was selling out the old NWA/WCW lineage for the the WWF old school and WWF new generation in Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, Razor Ramone, and Diesel.

There were so many layers during the 1990's for fans to sink their teeth into.

BTW. OP ANOTHER 2019 comparison to 1995. WWE morale and ratings going hand in hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
769 Posts
The problem with the product is it is over exposed and has too many wrestlers on the books with zero charisma who maybe very talented but can't cut it on the mic and it's an entertainment business and if you don't entertain it becomes stale which it has.
 

·
TONI POR TODO!
Joined
·
4,544 Posts
Remember that the low card guys are the main eventers 5 years from now. Imagine jettisoning The Rock after people shit on Rocky Maivia or Steve Austin after The Ringmaster.

WWE has to think a few moves ahead, especially if AEW catches on.
That would have been great... 1998 to 2001 focused on Mankind, Owen, Bulldog, Hardcore Holly or even Jarrett against HHH and later Jericho and Benoit would've been great.(Y)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,172 Posts
The backstage has always had turmoil, at least there was something you could do about it in the past. Wrestler's court existed for a reason.

Nowadays there's nothing, not until AEW that is which throws a spanner in the works in the way WWE treats it's staff & its audience.

Wrestlers make the promotion it's just WWE has such a monopoly that they can say otherwise. AEW succeeding in everyone's best interest but Vince's, 90% of the active roster have a point to prove with a chip on their shoulders that they were sold a dream that isn't anymore, because of 1 man.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,833 Posts
Brock, Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, AJ, Cena, Bryan, the group of guys who are endlessly on top and get all the spotlight. Wyatt, KO, and Kofi, Balor are all one and done.

You seriously want to pretend WWE dont just keep the same handful of people on top endlessly?
UT was held by 2 different people in over 700 days.
First off, the dispersal of world titles in recent times is broadly in line with historical trends. Throughout the Attitude Era, nine different people won the WWE Championship, which is only a bit more brisk a pace than the period since the advent of the Universal championship. Moreover, of those nine champions, four of them (Kurt Angle, Big Show, Kane, and Vince McMahon) had relatively short single reigns, three of which were 50 days or less. The title was basically ricocheted between Austin, Undertaker, Rock, Foley, and Triple H.

Eva, you're not wrong that the collection you listed (Brock, Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, AJ, Cena, Bryan, though Cena less so) have dominated the world titles over the last 3+ years, but isn't that how it should probably be? We complain about WWE making stars, but wouldn't it further hamper the star-making system if 20 different people hot-potato the world titles? WWE anointed their collection of stars and stuck with them during arguably their greatest period; doesn't it make sense to try to replicate that model?

One further note: I'm not arguing that THOSE PEOPLE are the ones that should be at the pinnacle; that's a separate conversation. The question is the number of people that should reside at the top.
 

·
a Stupid Idea from Bad Creative
Joined
·
24,745 Posts
I mean, yes, technically we do not know if this is true or not, but when a guy like Dean Ambrose leaves even with what they all offered him I tend to believe reports of low morale
 
41 - 57 of 57 Posts
Top