Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
350 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
First of all, let me notify that this is not another bring back AE thread. While undoubtedly recognizing that AE was the best era of wrestling, and also recognizing that there are a few things from AE that cannot be brought back, atleast not in 10 - 20 years, i will try to conclude on what wwe is doing wrong, and just how wrong most of the IWC are.

So first of all, lets strike out some of the good things from the AE that we wouldnt be seeing too often in the current, and even though it might help the business theres no point talking about it since its not going to happen. This include:-

1) Blood :- Like it, or be a goody two shoes and hate it, either way accept the fact that blood can make the most boring matches into a exciting nerve wrecking episode. Matches that lack in technique, always helps to add a little blood to them, but not too often though.

2)OMG Moments :- Without the tv14, we arent likely to see too many OMG moments in the future. OMG moments are one of the biggest reasons why the AE was what it was.

3)Good Crowd:- Crowds add excitement. Gone are the days when the crowd knew actually how to cheer, it used to pump up the feelings by a mile, now we have dead crowd and little kids and families who would be in a coma if they were any quiter.

4)Hardcore matches:- With Linda running for senate, and PG pumping in money dont expect to see too much hardcore content from the WWE. sure we will have 2 - 3 brutal matches a year but thats about it. The most brutal moment of last year? Orton falling of the stairs. That just about explains the decline of hardcore nature of the product.

So these are the things that will NOT comeback in atleast 10 - 20 years so lets move on and talk about the things that CAN be changed.

1) Midcard Feuds:- One of the reasons why AE was the AE. Current IWC mentality = Let all the indie midgets from NXT and ROH fight out pointless 30 min matches at the midcard because they can put on a good match even though they are bland and characterless. Axe guys like Tensai and Funkasaurus who actually have characters because they cant put up 5 star matches and are squashing their man fetish fantasies from NXT every week. AE midcard matches almost always had a good storyline going. Nowadays wwe just put two wrestlers in pointless midcard matches without any story or anything, all the story revolves around the main event. Why? Does anybody even remember that the IC title used to be held by guys like Taker, Shawn, Jericho, Stone Cold, Goldust etc? Does anybody remember the Goldust vs Taker rivalry for the IC title which was actually better than the main event itself?
Imo wwe needs to build storylines around their midcards, not just pointless matches. But first wwe needs to give some characters to their midcard wrestlers. Everybody is just so bland. Guys like Dolph and Barett can be top class wrestlers. But they dont have any gimmick. ANd no, dont try to tell me that showing off is a gimmick. Dolph could have easily been Mr perfect or something like him, Barett could have been more like HHH, but in all honestly without any character they arent going anywhere. Give them mic time, give them characters. Once the midcard becomes interesting again wwe will be better. And i think Big Show winning the IC title is a great move, it will bring some much needed prestige to the title which Cody couldnt bring.

2)Sorting out the Roster/ Different between midcarders and main eventers :-

Typical IWC theory. As soon as they think a guy has potential they scream "push them to the main event" and start fantasizing and having day dreams about them. Its gone from being laughable to pathetic. It happens with every newcome. Miz, Dolph, Barett, Cody etc etc all of these guys as soon as they started making an impact iwc starts demanding they be pushed to the main event.
Its about time these "smarks" understand that main evnet is for icons and icons only, pushing these nobodies to main event will not only kill the product but destroy these talents too. Look at what happened to miz, beating cena at wrestlemania to jobbing, ziggler, feuding with punk for wwe title to being part of non relevant tag team matches.
Main event is for maineventers and maineventers only. Rock, Brock, Punk, Cena, Sheamus, Orton, Big Show are the only true main eventers atm and should be kept as such. Everybody else can be thrown back to midcard and yes that includes D Bryan. As much as he impressed me, he isnt the type of guy yet who can keep on main eventing without getting stale.
The problem with pushing wrestlers to main event too early is that once they reach the top that early, they have no where to go but down, if they stay at the top they will be stale. My opinion is, build stars around the midcard. Main event is a breeding ground for indie midgets, so keep the potential new talents in the midcard, give them good feuds, good characters, good storylines, give them mic time. And they will blossom that way, if they really do have potential that is. Once they get big, after 3 -4 years, thats when u put them in the main event. Thats how u make stars, u dont create stars by simply throwing them in the main event simply because they have "potentially" let them become big in the midcard and only after that push them to main event and they will be huge. I will use Orton as the biggest example. Look at how bland the guy is currently, yet hes the second biggest draw after cena. Thats only because wwe took time to build him, they didnt rush him, put him in the midcard for years, gave him good gimmicks like the legend killer, gave him interesting feuds against guys like mick foley, rock, tripple h, batista, flair etc. WWE really did everything right with this guy and hes a icon now.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,125 Posts
Am I the only person on the entire forum that DOESN'T think the "Attitude Era" was the best era in wrestling? If anything, it crippled the business (obviously not at the time). Now everything is given away for free on TV and every match is expected to be superstar Vs. superstar & the fans expect to see every big name on every show. None of that is good business because you just blow through all of your money matches & no one feels special. Sure that era made a lot of money and the fans during that era had the ability to pick-and-choose, so to speak, what segment they wanted to watch at any given time. But look at the state of wrestling today. THIS is a hangover BECAUSE of that era. Now everyone wants to be the next Austin or the next Rock. People still clamor to see the old faces come back. No one is over. We still have to deal with bullshit Authority Figures because of how successful Mr. McMahon was. It's CRAP.
 

·
Rolex Bomb Defuser
Joined
·
410 Posts
1) Blood:- Like it, or be a goody two shoes and hate it, either way accept the fact that blood can make the most boring matches into a exciting nerve wrecking episode. Matches that lack in technique, always helps to add a little blood to them, but not too often though.

2) OMG Moments:- Without the tv14, we arent likely to see too many OMG moments in the future. OMG moments are one of the biggest reasons why the AE was what it was.

3) Good Crowd:- Crowds add excitement. Gone are the days when the crowd knew actually how to cheer, it used to pump up the feelings by a mile, now we have dead crowd and little kids and families who would be in a coma if they were any quiter.

4) Hardcore matches:- With Linda running for senate, and PG pumping in money dont expect to see too much hardcore content from the WWE. sure we will have 2 - 3 brutal matches a year but thats about it. The most brutal moment of last year? Orton falling of the stairs. That just about explains the decline of hardcore nature of the product.
ECW?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,281 Posts
The most brutal moment of last year? Orton falling of the stairs. That just about explains the decline of hardcore nature of the product.
Nah.



OMGZ ATTATUDE EREH BAKKK!

Anyway I agree blood should come back, but only when it is needed and would enhance the match, like what's a hell in a cell or an Elimination Chamber without blood?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
350 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Am I the only person on the entire forum that DOESN'T think the "Attitude Era" was the best era in wrestling? If anything, it crippled the business (obviously not at the time). Now everything is given away for free on TV and every match is expected to be superstar Vs. superstar & the fans expect to see every big name on every show. None of that is good business because you just blow through all of your money matches & no one feels special. Sure that era made a lot of money and the fans during that era had the ability to pick-and-choose, so to speak, what segment they wanted to watch at any given time. But look at the state of wrestling today. THIS is a hangover BECAUSE of that era. Now everyone wants to be the next Austin or the next Rock. People still clamor to see the old faces come back. No one is over. We still have to deal with bullshit Authority Figures because of how successful Mr. McMahon was. It's CRAP.
Bullshit authoriaty figures? Johnny Ace has been excellent currently. Paul Heyman, Eric Bishoff have all been excellent authority figures. The only time it has been boring was when wwe decided to have special gm every week.
And if AE wasnt the best era is wrestling then what is? You areb laming the AE because the follwing Eras cant live up to the standards? Thats the most ridiculous thing i ever heard.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,125 Posts
The last TNA PPV had a ton of blood in the main event cage match between James Storm & Bobby Roode. Both men were bleeding. It certainly didn't make that match anymore special or stop people from shitting all over the finish.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
350 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Nah.



OMGZ ATTATUDE EREH BAKKK!

Anyway I agree blood should come back, but only when it is needed and would enhance the match, like what's a hell in a cell or an Elimination Chamber without blood?
yes, blood was overly used in the Ruthless agression era, even a technical match had bloody superstars in the end. Blood should be used but in extreme matches only. And which match is the screenshot from? I must have missed it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,125 Posts
Bullshit authoriaty figures? Johnny Ace has been excellent currently. Paul Heyman, Eric Bishoff have all been excellent authority figures. The only time it has been boring was when wwe decided to have special gm every week.
And if AE wasnt the best era is wrestling then what is? You areb laming the AE because the follwing Eras cant live up to the standards? Thats the most ridiculous thing i ever heard.
As in Authority Figures have to exist at all times at all is my point. Just like now there's always a ton of cameras backstage and showing wrestlers coming out of Gorilla position and shit. That's all layover from the Attitude Era.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,125 Posts
I think overall people tend to look back at the Attitude Era with rose-colored glasses. You go back and watch those shows now and they're dreadful. The big difference is there were a couple of guys on the roster that you cared about, like Austin, The Rock or Foley. But the show featured very little wrestling, a TON of painfully unfunny (or downright offensive) segments, shitty character galore (think ALL of DOA or Los Bariquas) and a slew of other problems that were just desperate attempts at ratings grabs. There was an episode where Kane & The Undertaker literally interfered in every single match. If that happened today, the internet would shit all over it because there wouldn't be any wrestling or clean finishes, but back then, the live crowd was going nuts. It was Vince Russo 101 and it sucked then just like it sucks now. The difference is all the people saying that it was OMG SO COOL~! back then aren't fucking 16 anymore.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,037 Posts
Am I the only person on the entire forum that DOESN'T think the "Attitude Era" was the best era in wrestling? If anything, it crippled the business (obviously not at the time). Now everything is given away for free on TV and every match is expected to be superstar Vs. superstar & the fans expect to see every big name on every show. None of that is good business because you just blow through all of your money matches & no one feels special. Sure that era made a lot of money and the fans during that era had the ability to pick-and-choose, so to speak, what segment they wanted to watch at any given time. But look at the state of wrestling today. THIS is a hangover BECAUSE of that era. Now everyone wants to be the next Austin or the next Rock. People still clamor to see the old faces come back. No one is over. We still have to deal with bullshit Authority Figures because of how successful Mr. McMahon was. It's CRAP.
I don't think it was either and that was the point I been trying to make in the other thread.

The fact that this guy made this thread discussing the same exact thing from the other thread shows me that people want to live in the past.

I wonder how many more AE based threads will pop up today?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
621 Posts
I would like to see the european championship back and give it to drew mcintyre to keep him on tv since they can't find any stories for him.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
350 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I think overall people tend to look back at the Attitude Era with rose-colored glasses. You go back and watch those shows now and they're dreadful. The big difference is there were a couple of guys on the roster that you cared about, like Austin, The Rock or Foley. But the show featured very little wrestling, a TON of painfully unfunny (or downright offensive) segments, shitty character galore (think ALL of DOA or Los Bariquas) and a slew of other problems that were just desperate attempts at ratings grabs. There was an episode where Kane & The Undertaker literally interfered in every single match. If that happened today, the internet would shit all over it because there wouldn't be any wrestling or clean finishes, but back then, the live crowd was going nuts. It was Vince Russo 101 and it sucked then just like it sucks now. The difference is all the people saying that it was OMG SO COOL~! back then aren't fucking 16 anymore.
LMAO @ "You go back and watch those shows and now they are dreadful". The fact that you are trying to say that the AE was unfunny and offensive prooves you are another 14 year old who has been growing up with the PG shit. I have nothing else to say except that all your points are ridiculous and ur whole argument can be rendered invalid.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,037 Posts
LMAO @ "You go back and watch those shows and now they are dreadful". The fact that you are trying to say that the AE was unfunny and offensive prooves you are another 14 year old who has been growing up with the PG shit. I have nothing else to say except that all your points are ridiculous and ur whole argument can be rendered invalid.
You have to be mentally challenged if you don't think the AE was offensive in the least bit.

You must like the stereotypical characters, the sexual assault of dead corpses, Beaver Cleavage, the birth of a hand, Mark Henry making out with a transsexual, HHH inebriating Stephanie to marry her, the many childish antics of DX, the firing of Sable for refusing to appear topless on RAW IS WAR, the exploitation of Melanie Pillman, man on woman violence and kidnapping or hostage angles.

Mainstream media as actually offended by this when it happened, so if America is even more sensitive and politically correct now, what makes you think they won't be still?

I know you not from this country but we might find things disrespectful over here that you might find funny or entertaining in your country.

The only thing ridiculous is your thought process that you don't judge those who dislike the AE, yet thats all you have done in this thread. I also find your spelling to be atrocious and I find it pointless that you would make another thread to discuss the exact same thing that is discussed in another thread, a thread you have commented in by the way.

I understand your going thru your AE era stage because you didn't watch when it was actual relevant but get with the times. It's over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
2)Sorting out the Roster/ Different between midcarders and main eventers :-

Typical IWC theory. As soon as they think a guy has potential they scream "push them to the main event" and start fantasizing and having day dreams about them. Its gone from being laughable to pathetic. It happens with every newcome. Miz, Dolph, Barett, Cody etc etc all of these guys as soon as they started making an impact iwc starts demanding they be pushed to the main event.
Its about time these "smarks" understand that main evnet is for icons and icons only, pushing these nobodies to main event will not only kill the product but destroy these talents too. Look at what happened to miz, beating cena at wrestlemania to jobbing, ziggler, feuding with punk for wwe title to being part of non relevant tag team matches.
Main event is for maineventers and maineventers only. Rock, Brock, Punk, Cena, Sheamus, Orton, Big Show are the only true main eventers atm and should be kept as such. Everybody else can be thrown back to midcard and yes that includes D Bryan. As much as he impressed me, he isnt the type of guy yet who can keep on main eventing without getting stale.
The problem with pushing wrestlers to main event too early is that once they reach the top that early, they have no where to go but down, if they stay at the top they will be stale. My opinion is, build stars around the midcard. Main event is a breeding ground for indie midgets, so keep the potential new talents in the midcard, give them good feuds, good characters, good storylines, give them mic time. And they will blossom that way, if they really do have potential that is. Once they get big, after 3 -4 years, thats when u put them in the main event. Thats how u make stars, u dont create stars by simply throwing them in the main event simply because they have "potentially" let them become big in the midcard and only after that push them to main event and they will be huge. I will use Orton as the biggest example. Look at how bland the guy is currently, yet hes the second biggest draw after cena. Thats only because wwe took time to build him, they didnt rush him, put him in the midcard for years, gave him good gimmicks like the legend killer, gave him interesting feuds against guys like mick foley, rock, tripple h, batista, flair etc. WWE really did everything right with this guy and hes a icon now.
I completely agree with this. The constant need to bring back already made stars who have left sums this up completely. They try and make every newcomer heel a new Brock Lesnar like an unstoppable force, funnily enough you cannot have lots of unstoppable forces in one company: IT DOESN'T WORK. A build up of mid cards is needed. ->MID CARDS ARE FADING ALTOGETHER.<- we need (obviously when they can) Bourne, Barrett etc to come back. All midcards are being put either straight up to main eventing or put into WWE Superstars. hahah recently... R-Truth vs. Jack Swagger. Swagger is an ex-WH champion for goodness sakes! USE THEM AS MIDCARDS IN THE MAIN SHOWS.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
350 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
You have to be mentally challenged if you don't think the AE was offensive in the least bit.

You must like the stereotypical characters, the sexual assault of dead corpses, Beaver Cleavage, the birth of a hand, Mark Henry making out with a transsexual, HHH inebriating Stephanie to marry her, the many childish antics of DX, the firing of Sable for refusing to appear topless on RAW IS WAR, the exploitation of Melanie Pillman, man on woman violence and kidnapping or hostage angles.
Yes i do. That adds uniqueness to the product something that the current product is missing. Bland guys like miz and ziggler would be jobbing to scotty 2 hotty in the AE. Lets get this straight, this is WWE. WORLD WRESTLING ENTERTAINMENT. So dont come here with your holier than though attitude trying to make wwe look like a preaching ground of integrity.

Mainstream media as actually offended by this when it happened, so if America is even more sensitive and politically correct now, what makes you think they won't be still?

I know you not from this country but we might find things disrespectful over here that you might find funny or entertaining in your country.

The only thing ridiculous is your thought process that you don't judge those who dislike the AE, yet thats all you have done in this thread. I also find your spelling to be atrocious and I find it pointless that you would make another thread to discuss the exact same thing that is discussed in another thread, a thread you have commented in by the way.

I understand your going thru your AE era stage because you didn't watch when it was actual relevant but get with the times. It's over.
"We"? Speak for urself. Dont put words in other people's mouth. Even in ur own country, around 90% of the wwe fanbase, excluding anyone whose under 14, agrees that AE is the best era in the history of wrestling.
 

·
a Stupid Idea from Bad Creative
Joined
·
24,745 Posts
Am I the only person on the entire forum that DOESN'T think the "Attitude Era" was the best era in wrestling? If anything, it crippled the business (obviously not at the time). Now everything is given away for free on TV and every match is expected to be superstar Vs. superstar & the fans expect to see every big name on every show. None of that is good business because you just blow through all of your money matches & no one feels special. Sure that era made a lot of money and the fans during that era had the ability to pick-and-choose, so to speak, what segment they wanted to watch at any given time. But look at the state of wrestling today. THIS is a hangover BECAUSE of that era. Now everyone wants to be the next Austin or the next Rock. People still clamor to see the old faces come back. No one is over. We still have to deal with bullshit Authority Figures because of how successful Mr. McMahon was. It's CRAP.
Major applause sir. Now don't get me wrong I LOVED the Attitude Era, loved it to death (mot likely b/c I was in middle/high school during it) but a few things....

1. Its over

2. Its not coming back and

3. The more I look back on it the more and more I agree with this quoted post. Not to the extent that Walk In beleives it but agree with him more and more the more posts/threads I see complaining about the current product vs AE. Its like some people can;t or refuse to just enjoy (or at least try to)today's product b/c it isn;t the Attitude era.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
350 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I completely agree with this. The constant need to bring back already made stars who have left sums this up completely. They try and make every newcomer heel a new Brock Lesnar like an unstoppable force, funnily enough you cannot have lots of unstoppable forces in one company: IT DOESN'T WORK. A build up of mid cards is needed. ->MID CARDS ARE FADING ALTOGETHER.<- we need (obviously when they can) Bourne, Barrett etc to come back. All midcards are being put either straight up to main eventing or put into WWE Superstars. hahah recently... R-Truth vs. Jack Swagger. Swagger is an ex-WH champion for goodness sakes! USE THEM AS MIDCARDS IN THE MAIN SHOWS.
yep and give them good storylines. I cant stress the importance of how a stroyline can make a star. Look at Cody for example, hes hardly a better wrestler than ziggler, however his storylines have been great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
give the euro title to wade barrett
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,037 Posts
"We"? Speak for urself. Dont put words in other people's mouth. Even in ur own country, around 90% of the wwe fanbase, excluding anyone whose under 14, agrees that AE is the best era in the history of wrestling.
You tell me to speak for myself than you speak for other people in a country you don't even live in?

You come off as one of those people who say things without realizing what you said.

In another post titled "stupid smarks", you said:


Edge was entertaining in the ring. But in wwe theres more to a wrestler than just being entertaining in the ring. Goldberg had a more entertaining gimmick.
Basically, that Goldberg was more entertaining than Edge. But in your very next post you said:

in everything else? You are very wrong.
The ONLY thing edge was better than goldberg was at being entertaining. Lets compare the two.

1) Edge was a midcarder throughout his career, except the last few years.
Goldberg was always a maineventer, rarely dropped down to upper midcard.

2) Goldberg was always a big draw, mainly through his wcw run, even when he returned to wwe he instantly drew lots, and got a huge pop.
Edge never was a big draw, his reign was liked mostly by the self proclaimed smarks, not saying his reign wasnt good, but he never was a draw, facts.

3)Both have the same finisher, with Goldberg excelling at making it look more dominant.

4)Goldberg is the bigger guy, looks more intimidating.

5)Technically Edge beats goldberg by far.

6)Edge was faster around the ring.

7)Goldberg was stronger, or atleast made to look stronger, and he potrayed that strong kratos gimmick better than anyone else in the business.

8)Goldberg is a much bigger icon than edge.

So there you go, anyone putting edge above goldberg are typical teenage ROH fans.
Basically, in one post you said Goldberg was more entertaining with Edge but in your next post, you said Edge was more entertaining than Goldberg once an argument was presented towards you.

If your only argument is that people who dislike or find the AE offensive are 14, I wonder how old you are? Because the way you come off, it's like you were just born when the AE was started. You don't know how to debate, you don't respect other peoples opinions and you wanted to feel important so you made another thread about the same subject you posted on in another thread.

Don't get your panties in a bunch, the AE is dead and gone. It ran it's course and was only good for that point in time. And for the record, I said we "might". If you don't know, the word might means possible but not certain or likely. Which mean I'm not speaking factually for anybody. But if I did, don't tell me not to when you finish the same post by attempting to speak for 90% of people you don't know from a country you don't even live in.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top