[steelsteps]

I was just wondering what people's views on WWE house shows were. I think that they are beneficial in the sense that wrestlers can top up their salaries by doing them, as well as perfect and improve in-ring skills. But I do think that the WWE is exploiting wrestlers by putting on such a large amount of shows per year. Surely, for the wrestlers health status, it is better to have a maximum of four shows per week, with a tv taping included in that total. Does the WWE fill the arenas during house shows? It seems to me that the company has retained some of the old-school wrestling traditions with respect to touring and putting on as many shows as physically ppossible, whilst neglecting the health of the talent it employs. Surely with the multiple revenue streams the WWE has combined with its monopolisation of the wrestling business, the company should be able to reduce the workload of its employees.
Anyways what are your opinions of them?
Too many? Just the right amount? etc.

 

[Thumbinthebum]

Ask guys like Ric Flair, Terry Funk and Harley Race if WWE have too many house shows. In their day it wasn't unusual to wrestle 7 days a week, sometimes twice in 1 day and the matches were a hell of a lot longer, 1 hour draws were common place. Granted, matches were wrestled at a slower pace which meant they were less taxing individually but the sheer amount took one hell of a toll on the body.

 

[SpearAndJackhammer]

Well:

A. Wrestlers are healthy and probably eat a shit ton of protein ect. Really a 10 minute match is only like doing some cardio on the treadmill with some banging ect.

B. House Shows are good because they draw in crowd who want to avoid cameras, give wrestlers a chance to try some mock stuff and practice but also the wrestlers can do more as it is off camera (I know Bret Hart appeared at a few house shows on the world tour late last year or earlier this year). TNA (which isn't PG) also is apparently insane in house shows, swearing and working the crowd a hell of alot more.

 

[VRsick]

I think it would be impossible to get rid of them due to the income they provide. I highly doubt some wrestlers enjoy them. Kurt angle sure didnt and thats part of the reason why he left. Expecting people to wrestle 4 nights a week is to intense on the body due to travel schedules. Im surprised the top talent dont try to negotiate only doing their tv show so they can go home and have somewhat of a normal life.

 

[Paladine]

It's definately a risk for them. Cena was hurt a while back at a house show and it affected the Nexus storyline on Raw. It would be better if they just used their midcard talent primarily at house shows. Guys like Chris Masters, Primo, and random other jobbers rarely get on tv anyway.

 

[mcc4374]

I was watching a shoot interview with Kurt Angle where he was talking about something similar to this and his right, it's their decision to sign the dotted line or not. All the things that will be demanded of them will be made to their knowledge before their on the road.

Soldiers go to war knowing they could die, Professional wrestlers do what they do knowing what will happen to their bodies in the future.

 

[vincent k. mcmahon]

house shows are better because the wrestlers can do so much more because they're not on tv

 

[dxbender]

Superstars should only work for like 3 of the days a week.

It sucks though how in things like house shows we see superstars pulling off great moves, but on tv it's not even half of the moves they do on house shows.

Sucks even more how we see some guys wrestle house shows so much, but don't wrestle on tv(not talking about the guys we see on superstars, I'm talking about how we might see cena,orton,punk all wrestle at one house show, then on raw none of them wrestle)

 

[MOBELS]

house shows are better because the wrestlers can do so much more because they're not on tv

This. The matches are normally better at house shows than TV