There’s too many wrestlers and they’re not booked with enough of a clear gap between them.And yeah, less wrestlers would be better. You could probably scrap everyone in the Andre Battle Royal every year. If each promotion cut their rosters in half and fired the bottom halves, then things would probably get a lot, lot better.
As a result of “pushing the brand”, nobody matters, and they’re given less creative freedom than ever.
I guess they flip, flop and fly because they lack any other means to stand out and be successful.
The rigid character structure and giant soup of a roster are the main cause of the drop in nuance IMO, and indeed it’s to the industry’s severe detriment.
There only used to be about 10 wrestlers involved in title programs across the entire company for a whole year, with maybe another 10 wrestlers involved or posing a threat. That felt special, and with less competition at their level, they all had the security and incentive to collaborate the nuances together. Face and heel carrying whole body forward.
Now, we’ve got the 80th best wrestler on the roster competing for one of the 100’s of titles and fans are questioning why the 95th best wrestler isn’t getting a shot.
Where does the show’s structure encourage nuance?
I think WWE’s overly corporate, brand-centered entertainment style is to blame.