Wrestling Forum banner
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm not ashamed to admit that, as an adult, the kind of action I want to see weekly on WWE programming most certainly isn't what's being dished out as of now. I want to see feuds where the competitors can express their hatred, I want to see risky characters, divas wearing next to nothing, a bit of blood when it will enhance the match (Austin-Bret wrestlemania without Austin's 'crimson' mask would have been less iconic, imo), and less fodder that is aimed directly at kiddies.

Now, I know that the WWE has a large demographic of young viewers, but the kind of programming I have detailed above is the exact TV that made me fall in love with wrestling as a young kid myself. It was the exact kind of programming that, back in 1999, had a class of 10 year olds itching to watch Raw Is War. I simply do not buy the excuse that losing PG would result in a loss of young viewers, quite the contrary I'd say.

Now, I have absolutely no idea about WWE marketing deals, sponsors etc, but that can be the only real explanation for them persisting within the constraints of a rating that is inarguably detrimental to their television output.

Time to shape up and bring back some real excitement, I think. The current set up is beyond stale.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,566 Posts
Until either TNA provides some competition with their programming or the ratings start to decline for WWE will they go to TV-14. I could see them moving a little towards it in regards to interviews, matches, and blood. However, going to profanity all the time won't happen anytime soon.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,828 Posts
Even under the PG rating, if WWE saw fit, they could still push it to the limit. Remember up until mid 1998 the WWE was under a PG rating and WCW's hottest times were under a PG rating. Turning the product back to TV-14, wouldn't make the product magically better (see 2007). Personally, the PG rating doesn't really bother me. The only thing I miss is blood on occasion, but other than that there isn't much I miss. Plus, like I said in the past the PG rating is a great business move for advertisers and families.
 

· The Cornerstone Of The Corner Store
Joined
·
3,386 Posts
Their deal with toy manufactere Mattel which ends in 2014 or 2015 iirc prohibits them from using alot of violence and risky storylines. Another factor in the overly childish WWE was Linda McMahon running for senate. Fortunately that has ended as we could see when CM Punk got his nose broken by Orton, we got close ups and replays instead of wideshots and crowdshots.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
PG may suck from a TV and PPV standpoint, but its doing wonders for sponsorship deals and advertising.
But isn't that, along with live attendances, WWE's bread and butter when it comes to generating revenue?

I'm not surprised that the WWE is, in terms of profit at least, doing better today than they were 10 years ago. They are now operating in a host of markets, certainly more than they would have been back when the TV/PPV output was at its peak. Imagine the profit they'd be turning over if the expanded WWE of 2011 had TV that was on a par with their absolute best.
 

· Inappropriately tinkly music.
Joined
·
7,092 Posts
As soon as merch, licensing and advertising stops making the McMahons megabucks. So really, they'll probably never have to. Frankly, the PG rating isn't the problem, it's the self-imposed restrictions - the ref stoppages for the slightest drop of blood has nothing to do with being PG. Any of the really important changes can happen without going TV-14.

It's also worth noting that PPV is a far less lucrative avenue for WWE than any of the above concerns, with streams and what-have-you. You can't get Rey Mysterio masks for free with a quick Google search. (Actually, with that in mind, it's a wonder WWE don't have $10-15 webstreams for PPV. I'd take a moderately-priced, good-quality stream over a laggy stream that could get closed at any second.)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
What they're forgetting is that kids love coarse language and gratuitous violence more than adults because it feels like they're watching something they shouldn't. Maybe not little ones, but once they get to about 9 or 10, they want chairs and swears. Then when you take into account how long the PG era's been going, the viewers who were very young at the start will be growing up, and if they keep shit like the Khali kiss cam, they'll be dropping like flies.

But yea. The Attitude era was totally suitable for kids when you're not mentally constrained by petty-minded conservative ideas about what is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPCDRI

· Registered
Joined
·
5,034 Posts
Until TNA starts providing some competition for the WWE and makes them improve their product. I thought Hogan going on there would do it but no. I think they are trying to edge it up a little bit. I mean, they zoomed it CM Punk's bleeding nose, The Rock cussed at least 20 times in his return promo lol, Linda lost her race for senate, I think the writer who wanted PG the most left WWE late last year, so I'm hoping they could be trying to give a more PG 14 product.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
20,997 Posts
WWE has been PG for most of its existence and Smackdown was PG during the Attitude Era. Not really that big of a deal.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
WWE has been PG for most of its existence and Smackdown was PG during the Attitude Era. Not really that big of a deal.
Off the top of my head, Attitude Era' Smackdown had a heap of sexual innuendo, first blood matches, cuss words all over the shop and Kane being set on fire. Attitude Era' Smackdown was also adhering to the parameters set by a rating that has changed fundamentally within the past 10 years. WWE simply wouldn't get away with that kind of programming within the constraints of PG 2011.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 · (Edited)
I doubt Mattel has the clout to govern WWE's programming. In fact, didn't they flat out reject that notion in the aftermath of the Daniel Bryan firing? Mattel also deal with DC Comics, and that stuff is arguably even edgier than Attitude Era WWE.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the story about Mattel restricting the WWE comes from some hack magazine. I wouldn't pay it any mind. A more likely explanation is that WWE changed it's programming in an attempt to make Linda appear as a legitimate political candidate.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
I have no desire to see bleeding in the ring but seeing the word @ss censored makes the product look like its intended for 8 year olds. The divas prime selling point is sex appeal so PG obviously doesn't work for their appearances either.
 

· Inappropriately tinkly music.
Joined
·
7,092 Posts
I doubt Mattel has the clout to govern WWE's programming. In fact, didn't they flat out reject that notion in the aftermath of the Daniel Bryan firing? Mattel also deal with DC Comics, and that stuff is arguably even edgier than Attitude Era WWE.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the story about Mattel restricting the WWE comes from some hack magazine. I wouldn't pay it any mind. The more likely option is that WWE changed it's programming in an attempt for Linda to appear as a legitimate political candidate.
Well, you have to keep in mind who Mattel are aiming their WWE figures at. Kids that need their parents to buy them. Parents who disapprove of cusses and boobs in their kids' TV shows.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
11,216 Posts
Off the top of my head, Attitude Era' Smackdown had a heap of sexual innuendo, first blood matches, cuss words all over the shop and Kane being set on fire. Attitude Era' Smackdown was also adhering to the parameters set by a rating that has changed fundamentally within the past 10 years. WWE simply wouldn't get away with that kind of programming within the constraints of PG 2011.
Great post.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top