Wrestling Forum banner

People who've been in the IWC for a long time - ever noticed any recurring patterns?

2299 58
I've been around these forums for over a decade, and counting the time I've been on similar forums, I've been around the IWC for nearly 20 years. Though I've taken a ton of breaks from wrestling and wrestling forums during that period, I always find myself coming back for some stretches.

Anyways: from my long tenure, I have been able to pick up on two general patterns by the IWC. Has anyone picked up on anything similar?

1). From the time I've joined this site to now, there has always been a fascination with heels. If Wrestler A is a babyface, the general criticism on this site will always be that "Wrestler A should turn heel." Likewise - if Wrestler A is a face who recently turned heel, the argument is always "Wrestler A is so dull now. he was so much better as a heel." No one on this site ever, ever, ever says that "Wrestler A should turn face" or "Wrestler A should stay face" .... I have often joked that most people on this site feel that an ideal wrestling roster would be filled with nothing but heels. My supposition is that the fascination with heels comes from the desire to feel edgy and rebellious, the thinking that "we're not going to cheer for who Vince / Dixie / HHH / Tony Khan wants us to cheer for; we're going to cheer for the bad guys!!!"

2). This site has always supported the underdogs, the ones who they feel are getting held back (e.g. Daniel Bryan, CM Punk, Edge 2006-2010; Chris Jericho 2001-2010); and accordingly, this site has always hated the successful wrestlers at the very top (e.g. Triple H, John Cena, Roman Reigns). When I first joined this site, the most popular wrestler on here for several years was Chris Jericho. People felt that he was a main-event talent who got held back from the #1 spot by Triple H and the WWE machine. Now, Chris Jericho is "the man" in AEW, so he's no longer the underdog getting held back by the machine. As a result, the same people who loved him on this site have turned on him, simply because he's now the #1 guy in a wrestling promotion instead of the underdog. I feel this IWC tendency comes from the desire to feel smarter than the booker: the goal is to make the booker feel they've pushed the wrong guy (e.g. Cena) over the alternatives (e.g. CM Punk, Edge, Daniel Bryan etc)
41 - 59 of 59 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
3,198 Posts
I joined in 2001 and this is what some of YOU were saying around 01/02

  • Undertaker a pos and needs to retire
  • The brand extension is coming next week guys it's coming and it's good for the biz !
  • HGH GUH HGH IS THE BEST AND MUST GO OVER EVERYONE "beautiful dayyyyyyyyyyyy do doo doo"
  • EVERYONE ORDER TNA PPV's...SUPPORT THIS COMPANY
  • influx of Trish Stratus using a hose on herself Gifs
  • XWF going to be huge
 

· Baby It's Violence
Joined
·
12,452 Posts
Wrestling isn't a sport it's entertainment. You wouldn't want to watch a superhero movie that's nothing but a long drawn out fight scene. You need a story and a character.
Sure, but I also don't want my action movie to be nothing but character development and little to no action.

I'm referencing the idea of a wrestling show with very little attention to none at all given to the wrestling itself, which I have seen a bunch of times as something some people on here would want.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
I remember from the iwc hive mind:

-people thinking that ROH was the best company in the world (I'm not just talking very good in its heyday around 2005 to 2007, they thought ROH om HD, Kevin Steen as World Champ Davey Richard's as Champ, Tyler Black with that Age of the Fall crap up until cornette got too much power was all good ::facepalm::

- That Steve Austin was overrated, purposely holding back the Rock and couldn't compare to the great grapplers that can go 60 minutes like Buddy Rodgers, Brunno , and Lou Thesez, and he also was also purposely holding back the great charisma vaccum of HHH

- that Charisma vacuum HHH was the best worker in the world, bigger than Rock or Austin, more talented 🤣

- that Jeff Jarrett as WCW Champ would turn wcw around

- that Lance Storm should've been pushed more, and Team Canada was a great stable

- CM Punk was going to be as big as Rock or Austin (were talking back in his ROH days)

- that TNA with the 6 sided ring and Jeff Jarett as champ would overcome WWE as top company in America

- That PWG with it no selling, charisma vacuum, rent a Rockers was the best company in the world (hey with AEW , history repeating itself)

-Supercena was going to put WWE out of business (hont, hint no one talent or bad bookers are killing wwe, not even bad ratings, the shareholders pulling the plus would have to do that)

-Chris Benoit was framed, it was a work (wait some of that still goes on with the crazylier icw types)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
11,907 Posts
A big pattern is looking back on past days and thinking EVERYTHING was better in the past; coupled with just shitting on every single thing that happens. From the hate-watching crowd that can't pull themselves away as the only identity they may have in their live is that of the angry fake fighting fan.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
20,961 Posts
The same could happen in those sports too, in all fairness. Weight classes are sensible, but heavyweights aren't the guaranteed winner.

On average, a professionally trained heavyweight vs a professional trained featherweight is going to resort in a massive beatdown for the little guy. I mean, it's nice to have a feel good story when you see a trained small guy beat an untrained big guy but it's not gonna happen often in reality.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,717 Posts
A big pattern is looking back on past days and thinking EVERYTHING was better in the past
This is definitely true, even the things people were shitting on at the time are "better than what we have now", we've gotten to the point I've seen people looking back on early 2010s RAW fondly... not a huge amount of people saying that but I've definitely seen that.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
20,961 Posts
This is definitely true, even the things people were shitting on at the time are "better than what we have now", we've gotten to the point I've seen people looking back on early 2010s RAW fondly... not a huge amount of people saying that but I've definitely seen that.

Early 2010s RAW was better though. Wrestling in general lacks the star power that still existed when the like of Undertaker/HHH/HBK/Cena/Batista/etc were still around. Who is around that can replace them? You might be able to name one or two.
 

· Registered
RIP NapperX
Joined
·
7,000 Posts
On average, a professionally trained heavyweight vs a professional trained featherweight is going to resort in a massive beatdown for the little guy. I mean, it's nice to have a feel good story when you see a trained small guy beat an untrained big guy but it's not gonna happen often in reality.
8/10 times, yes. But put a very good smaller guy against a mediocre big guy and that can reverse the odds.

Boxing especially relies on agility and pace, which smaller guys are typically better at. If a heavyweight hits a haymaker, then they're out. If the smaller guy avoids these and hits a well-timed upper cut, the heavyweight will be on their arse. I did a bit of boxing myself and have seen it a lot of a non-professional level and it's quite funny.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,198 Posts
This is definitely true, even the things people were shitting on at the time are "better than what we have now", we've gotten to the point I've seen people looking back on early 2010s RAW fondly... not a huge amount of people saying that but I've definitely seen that.
even in 99/2000 and 2001 people were longing for New Generation era, YES this was a theme in the WWF.com chat rooms.
It didn't help that WWF propaganda made the Iron man match at 12 the best match ever.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,767 Posts
I've been around these forums for over a decade, and counting the time I've been on similar forums, I've been around the IWC for nearly 20 years. Though I've taken a ton of breaks from wrestling and wrestling forums during that period, I always find myself coming back for some stretches.

Anyways: from my long tenure, I have been able to pick up on two general patterns by the IWC. Has anyone picked up on anything similar?

1). From the time I've joined this site to now, there has always been a fascination with heels. If Wrestler A is a babyface, the general criticism on this site will always be that "Wrestler A should turn heel." Likewise - if Wrestler A is a face who recently turned heel, the argument is always "Wrestler A is so dull now. he was so much better as a heel." No one on this site ever, ever, ever says that "Wrestler A should turn face" or "Wrestler A should stay face" .... I have often joked that most people on this site feel that an ideal wrestling roster would be filled with nothing but heels. My supposition is that the fascination with heels comes from the desire to feel edgy and rebellious, the thinking that "we're not going to cheer for who Vince / Dixie / HHH / Tony Khan wants us to cheer for; we're going to cheer for the bad guys!!!"
That's why the creation of Austin and Rock was smart and successful cause when they switched to babyface, they didn't turn into bland babyfaces, the stayed edgy. And so the rebellious element was still there.

. This site has always supported the underdogs, the ones who they feel are getting held back (e.g. Daniel Bryan, CM Punk, Edge 2006-2010; Chris Jericho 2001-2010); and accordingly, this site has always hated the successful wrestlers at the very top (e.g. Triple H, John Cena, Roman Reigns). When I first joined this site, the most popular wrestler on here for several years was Chris Jericho. People felt that he was a main-event talent who got held back from the #1 spot by Triple H and the WWE machine. Now, Chris Jericho is "the man" in AEW, so he's no longer the underdog getting held back by the machine. As a result, the same people who loved him on this site have turned on him, simply because he's now the #1 guy in a wrestling promotion instead of the underdog. I feel this IWC tendency comes from the desire to feel smarter than the booker: the goal is to make the booker feel they've pushed the wrong guy (e.g. Cena) over the alternatives (e.g. CM Punk, Edge, Daniel Bryan etc)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,767 Posts
Have been around the IWC off and on since around 2003 [Took a hiatus for 2 years around 2004 until I joined this forum]. Here's just a few:


1. Every solution to a failed babyface talent usually involves a heel turn [But rarely ever the opposite].

2. Any young good looking guy should be an "arrogant cocky heel."

3. Any guy who can't cut promos or exhibit sufficient charisma should be given a manager instead of actually improving. Case in point, Andrade.

4. Any criticism of a promotion outside of WWE in the U.S. [IE: ROH/TNA/AEW] means you are cheering for a WWE monopoly.

5. IWC cares way more about workrate than the average casual fan does.

6. The countless people we were told that would have become stars if WWE hadn't held them down who end up going to other promotions and continue to not become relevant stars. It doesn't mean they necessarily sucked but people like Chris Masters, Damien Sandow, Rene Dupree, ECIII, Ken Kennedy [Who had short-term success in TNA], etc didn't exactly blow the roof off the wrestling industry after their WWE runs. Not to mention the multitude of releases that went to AEW and got lost in the mix. Remember when Ruby Soho was supposed to finally show us how big of a star she can be without that evil Vincent MacMah0n holding her down? Lulz.
Good post but EC3 did explode when he left WWE and joined TNA. Sandow was great in the NWA but that company was damaged by the pandemic. Kennedy was pretty good in TNA. But it was during the Hogan regime and there was so many stars he was sort of drowned in all of it. But he had a good career in TNA overall.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
20,961 Posts
Good post but EC3 did explode when he left WWE and joined TNA. Sandow was great in the NWA but that company was damaged by the pandemic. Kennedy was pretty good in TNA. But it was during the Hogan regime and there was so many stars he was sort of drowned in all of it. But he had a good career in TNA overall.
I don’t consider “Derrick Bateman” to be a real WWE run. He was a nobody when he left. He had a decent TNA run but the company was already starting to hit the skids by then. His second WWE run was his chance to be a big long term wrestling star but, well, we know how that turned out.

Kennedy did have a great TNA run but it abruptly ended, as usual, by his own stupidity and bad luck.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
20,961 Posts
I have no idea at what level Jericho is today, but in the 90s and 2000s, he was one of the best workers in the industry.
From when I see him, he’s decent this year. About two years ago, when he got really fat, he was horrendous though. Getting back into shape helped a lot (And people here were blaming his age for getting fat as usual).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
468 Posts
The face of the company sucks. Always.

You cannot have a nuanced opinion about the face of the company. You can't say "well, I think they are decent on the mic but their character sucks" or "they have a good look and charisma but in-ring leaves a lot to be desired" or "good in ring worker but lacks crowd connection".

They suck. Everything about them is wrong. Worst ever. Vince has a boner whenever he sees them. They are worthless.

This is IWC, always.
 
41 - 59 of 59 Posts
Top