TUP Wrestling Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Wrestling > General World Wrestling Entertainment
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is It Time For The PG Era To Come To An End?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Is It Time For The PG Era To Come To An End?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
Message
soraroxasdude2 View Drop Down
Raw/Smackdown
Raw/Smackdown
Avatar

Joined: 12/October/2012
Location: Alexandria, MN
Status: Offline
Points: 652
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote soraroxasdude2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is It Time For The PG Era To Come To An End?
    Posted: 13/February/2013 at 04:48
Now I know that this has been widely discussed on this forum, but I have not seen a thread on it. While it has produced better matches, a safer work environment, and let's be honest, it's made WWE more money.

A lot more money.

But older fans don't want to hear that argument. They want it the way it was when they grew up: edgy, counterculture, in-your-face, take-no prisoners. Before this era, the Attitude Era was the most profitable and most cutthroat in wrestling history. And while a new generation of fans are enjoying the WWE of today, many fans who caught on to the product during its heyday have moved on.

For those people, and the select few that have stuck around, today's WWE is simply not working. This post is for you.

Here are ten reasons why the PG era is not working for WWE.

The storyline possibilities are limited. During the first half of the Attitude Era (generally regarded as 1998-2001), nearly every storyline in the WWF, no matter how simple or complex branched from the one tree that was Austin vs. McMahon. Some storylines were way over the top, but it still kept the fan interested in what happened next. Even storylines involving lower-card wrestlers were compelling at times. Today, with the PG format, if there's a chance you could see that storyline on a primetime drama on FX or HBO, it will not be on WWE programming.
Bad and confusing storylines are more glaring. In each of the past three summers (this one included), there has been the "big summer storyline". In 2010, it was Nexus. In 2011, it was the Summer of Punk. This year, it's Punk demanding respect. The Nexus storyline essentially died at SummerSlam, but was still kept on life support for eight months. Last year's Summer of Punk story got confusing in the fall with the questionable payoff of Kevin Nash texting himself. This year's attempted heel turn of CM Punk is not working. What he's done the last year has basically made him unbooable, much in the way "Stone Cold" Steve Austin was when he was on the fringe of turning face, Rob Van Dam when he was with the Alliance, the late Eddie Guerrero, or more recently, even Chris Jericho. In the age of the Internet, people are paying more attention to plot holes in stories. And even if a storyline is good, it's hard to get behind a stale character. Speaking of which...
There is very little development in the characters. If you've paid close attention to WWE programming in the last few years, you notice that there are very few compelling characters top to bottom. In the Attitude Era, and even the three or four years following, many characters, both heel and face, exhibited some shades of gray. The most prominent examples were Austin and The Rock. Austin drank beer, swore, and flipped people off. At any other time in history, he would be a heel. But fans got behind the character and made him face while still keeping his characteristics. Rocky Maivia was at first a smiling third-generation guy happy to be there. Fans booed him, and subsequently became The Rock, a pretty-boy jock who would often refer to himself in the third person. Thanks to his natural charisma and plethora of catchphrases, fans got behind The Rock, both as a heel and as a face. Two of the better characters they stumbled on in recent years: John Cena and CM Punk. Cena was a white boy rapper from "the mean streets of West Newbury, Massachusetts", who would commit lyrical homicide on his opponents before his matches. CM Punk was the straight edged prophet who eventually became WWE's "voice of the voiceless," speaking up for those who were disenchanted with the product. When they both became popular, they both got neutered. Cena rapped once in the last four years (a Raw prior to his WrestleMania match with The Rock), while Punk's promos are no longer the scathing pipebombs from last summer and fall. And it's not just the big names. I asked my older brother last week if there was a difference gimmick-wise between Dolph Ziggler and The Miz. I told him the only difference between the two: Miz has a catchphrase. The same can be said of just about any two guys you compare. In the end, they all look the same: faces are these uber-good guys with a shred of edge to them (no pun intended), while heels are cowardly and are afraid to get in there and scrap for what's theirs. There are very few dynamic promos in WWE; people that would make you stop whatever you're doing to listen to what they have to say. Don't get me started on the magazine models -- er, Divas. Yes they're smart, yes they're beautiful, yes they're powerful. But no, they're not compelling. Anytime most fans see a Diva on TV other than AJ Lee or Lilian Garcia, it's an excuse to change the channel. Speaking of development...
There is very little development in the roster. Though the roster is as deep as it's ever been since the early days of the brand split (it's not an extension, it's a split, damnit!), when you sit and watch Raw or Smackdown, you get the feeling of not knowing why most of these people are here. Two words: John Laurainitis. He was the man overseeing talent development when he took over for Jim Ross in 2004. The number of major stars created during Laurainitis' run as Executive Vice President of Talent Relations you could probably count on one hand. During Laurinaitis' final days at the post, he nearly let CM Punk walk, and only last minute negotiations kept one of the five biggest names in the company from walking away. And perhaps, in a bit of irony, Johnny Ace himself became an on-screen talent. And in the way of Michael Cole and Vickie Guerrero, he created "get off my TV" heat. Speaking of big names, who's the next big one? Eventually John Cena, CM Punk, Randy Orton, and Sheamus will all be gone and if I were a betting man, probably at least two will be retired by their 40th birthday. It never hurts to groom the next guy now when you still have time. I'm not convinced that WWE has done that. In essence, the PG Era has created very few stars the casual fan cares about.
The PG era has relied heavily on the past to prop it up. Regardless of how you feel about the Attitude Era, why is it that those stars continue to appear on WWE programming regularly? When the Attitude Era was around, WWE didn't put a call to the stars of the New Generation and Hulkamania efforts as much (granted most of them were in WCW at the time, but still...). Case in point: the main event of WrestleMania XXVIII was won by a guy that wrestled once since WrestleMania XX. And you needed that guy to prop up Wrestlemania XXVII too.
The ratings aren't as high as they used to be. Honestly, outside of the NFL, is there any show on television that had increased ratings year-to-year recently? Probably not. Even in the PG era, RAW and Smackdown rank among the most watched programs in all of cable. As much as we want ratings to be what it was during the height of the Attitude Era (where 6's and 7's were commonplace), they're not coming back to that level. It's difficult to catch lightning in a bottle twice, no matter how big the bottle.
Matches and storylines have become mostly predictable. I'm not talking Hulkamania era-predictable. But if you pay a bit of attention to WWE programming for a while, you have a sixth sense in what happens next, and more often than not, you're right. Especially if it involves a John Cena match. Yeah, the Internet is partly to blame for it, but the guys and gals writing the show have to share the responsibility too.
There is no competition out there to challenge WWE. Sorry TNA and Ring of Honor (ROH) fans, but until their promotions step up financially to the level of WWE on a consistent basis, WWE will sit comfortably on top of its perch as the premiere sports entertainment company on the planet. And notice to TNA: that doesn't just include paying former WWE talent top dollar. For starters, get out of the Impact Zone once in a while. You got the coin to do it.
With no competition, WWE got complacent. Let's face it: WWE doesn't fear TNA, nor should they. No organization can compete with WWE financially, in the TV ratings, or message boards, or anywhere on the Internet for that matter. Seriously, you'll probably find many more search results on WWE-related topics than TNA or ROH. Why take a chance when you don't have to? That seems to be the feeling in Stamford. It's that way in many walks of life. When you're not being pushed or nudged, you get comfortable in your spot. And WWE is sitting pretty at #1.
Older fans are being driven away. While the young demographic is buying and getting a good portion of WWE merchandise these days, the Nielsen demo coveted more than any other is adults 18-49. They have the buying power. They are the decision makers. And many of those people that watched WWE in the past are watching something else these days.
Here's one more to consider: an era where blood is a no-no and chair shots to the head are frowned upon, please answer this for me: why are gimmick matches such as the Elimination Chamber, Hell in a Cell, and Extreme Rules still around?

They were three of the most barbaric match types in WWE. With the company leaning towards a much safer work environment, they don't seem necessary in the PG Era. Especially Hell in a Cell since there hasn't been a good one since SummerSlam 2008 and they've had two a year ever since. The Elimination Chamber is not as barbaric and demonic as it was once perceived. And there's hardly anything extreme about an Extreme Rules match these days (though John Cena vs. Brock Lesnar from earlier this year is a notable exception).

There's much to complain about the state of wrestling these days. One thing is for certain: the PG Era is not going anywhere any time soon. As much as we complain about the WWE, it is resilient.

It survived worse in my lifetime: a steroid trial with the principal owner as its chief defendant, a rival organization with deeper pockets trying to drive them out of business, and numerous in-ring and out-of-the-ring scandals and tragedies. Surviving the PG Era would probably be a piece of cake.

I'm of the opinion that the PG era as currently constituted, while it has its good points, is not working. There is a lot of room for improvement. It's just a matter of whether WWE wants to do it on its own, or do what they did back in the 90s: wait for a nudge from someone else.

What do you think? Is the PG Era working?

                                                                                                                                                                                                               

Edited by soraroxasdude2 - 13/February/2013 at 04:48
Back to Top
ihatethatmonkee View Drop Down
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Avatar

Joined: 01/October/2009
Location: Birmingham, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 9087
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ihatethatmonkee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13/February/2013 at 04:49
do better searches
Back to Top
#Heel View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (VII, VIII, & XIII)

Joined: 03/January/2012
Location: Newcastle, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11519
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote #Heel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13/February/2013 at 07:30
That looks alot like a bleacher report
Back to Top
ihatethatmonkee View Drop Down
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Avatar

Joined: 01/October/2009
Location: Birmingham, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 9087
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ihatethatmonkee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13/February/2013 at 20:07
Originally posted by #Heel #Heel wrote:

That looks alot like a bleacher report
 
i didn't read it, just saw the title, along with a previous thread he created, and knew he hadn't searched for anything.
Back to Top
Rico Len View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (X, XII, XIII)

Joined: 23/October/2012
Location: Yosemite Lakes
Status: Offline
Points: 11307
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rico Len Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16/February/2013 at 00:56
Well, I'll be honest, I didn't read most of that, because the PG-Era is already over. It's been over for about 2 years now. You could say the new era started when The Rock came back and started his feud with Cena, or when Punk took the title at MitB, or when he became champion the second time at Survivor Series, but in any case the PG-Era died in 2011.

Most people (I think, maybe I'm wrong) are calling this the Reality Era. It's already far more edgy than it's been in the last several years since they first went PG, and they still have room to go a long ways further.

WWF in the late 80's and early 90's was PG, and it was spectacular. Granted back then they could get away with more, like having a cobra bite Randy Savage, sending kids crying into their mom's laps, and then of course the cobra later died. This would send parents & PETA into shit fits these days. But really, anything Jake Roberts did back then would be walking the wire of PG these days and would be as edgy as you could ever need to be.

So this whole PG-Era sucks because it's PG is a completely debunked argument. There's a million reasons why the era sucked, but the PG rating was not among them.
Back to Top
Collywog3:16 View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Ticket Wars Trading Shark

Joined: 13/December/2012
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3783
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Collywog3:16 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16/February/2013 at 01:59
Originally posted by Rico Len Rico Len wrote:

Well, I'll be honest, I didn't read most of that, because the PG-Era is already over. It's been over for about 2 years now. You could say the new era started when The Rock came back and started his feud with Cena, or when Punk took the title at MitB, or when he became champion the second time at Survivor Series, but in any case the PG-Era died in 2011.

Most people (I think, maybe I'm wrong) are calling this the Reality Era. It's already far more edgy than it's been in the last several years since they first went PG, and they still have room to go a long ways further.

WWF in the late 80's and early 90's was PG, and it was spectacular. Granted back then they could get away with more, like having a cobra bite Randy Savage, sending kids crying into their mom's laps, and then of course the cobra later died. This would send parents & PETA into shit fits these days. But really, anything Jake Roberts did back then would be walking the wire of PG these days and would be as edgy as you could ever need to be.

So this whole PG-Era sucks because it's PG is a completely debunked argument. There's a million reasons why the era sucked, but the PG rating was not among them.

There is another thread on this forum which I have already posted my opinion on why PG back in the Rock N' Wrestling/New Generation Early to Mid 90's Era was successful then but not in today's current system. Since I'd just be repeating myself, here is what I wrote at the time, keep in mind I wrote this last December...

Originally posted by Collywog3:16 Collywog3:16 wrote:

There is a simple explanation as to why the PG Rating on WWE Programming is problem.

I believe Paul Heyman sum it up a pretty decent way on a resent episode of Monday Night Raw during CM Punk's Celebration of reaching a full year as WWE Champion.

His words were something along the lines of "We show you just a taste of Attitude, and turns out that you don't like it though do you?!" and also "You have the nerve to chant 'E-C-W' at me, but when you get shown just a hint of the Extreme, you don't like it very much?!" I honestly agree somewhat with that statement.

The reason behind alot of people were booing during that promo, is because they were consisted of nieve children who quite frankly do not know any better and 'we' can't do anything about.

This generation of wrestling fans are growing up with their heroes being 'Super-Hero' type characters with the likes of John Cena, Rey Mysterio and others at its vocal point, much similar to a group of kids growing up with the same message of saying there prays and eating their vitiams by Hulk Hogan and back then, wrestling was as toned down as the era were currently living in today.

The only logical reasoning I can see why Superstars like (just to name a few) Ultimate Warrior, Junk Yard Dog, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, 'The Mighty' Hercules, Honky Tonk Man and even Jake 'The Snake' Roberts (if you have any others, people suggest them to me) and other guys on The Rock N' Wrestling WWF Roster who were ranging from horrible to below average and fairly Ok in-ring work and more of a cartoonish type gimmicks but at the same had a tone of popularity in there prime (maybe Hercules, as he was over but not that popular) and you compare that cast to the group of the current WWE 'PG' (If you will) Roster today, we see the same rebalance to a cartoonish type like 'The Funkasaurus' and Santino Marella with his pet 'Cobra'. 

Not alot of difference in my opinion between the two eras (maybe besides the entertainment factor, which is a big gap I believe, but the reason they entertained better then today is that they were used in a much greater capacity.) But the question remains, why were they more popular?

Anyway, its simple really, I mean when you think about...

There was a gap in the middle between the two called 'The Attitude Era'.

The way the business transitioned form a family-friendly promotion like what it was in the 80's and early 90's, into a bizarre world filled with beer swilling, finger gesturing, telling people they had had two words for them, and other numerous sexual gestures, is because the loyal fans that had grown up with the Rock N' Wrestling Connection with stars like Rowdy Piper and 'Macho Man' Randy Savage, were know simply doing just that, 'GROWING UP'.

They felt they wanted a more mature product to follow as the world around them was changing, with their sense of humour being effected by shows such as South Park and culture of what was cool back then, like MTV (if you understand were I'm coming from).

And also, the tow major wrestling companies, the WWF and WCW, quickly realised this as well because fans were beginning to follow the cult of a new breed of wrestling style that ECW had been producing.

So, as the change in the way wrestling did programming, the ratings of the shows sky rocked and the popularity of the business exploded!

The Rock, Stone Cold, Mick Foley, Triple H, The Big Show, Kane, The Undertaker, Chris Jericho and Kurt Angle all shinned as mega-stars in the WWF! Below or upper mid carders the likes of Val Venis, Gangrel, Al Snow, D'Lo Brown, X-Pac, Hardcore Holly, Big Boss Man, Test and Rikishi even had purpose and had their own legion out there! And hell, even some so called jobbers were somewhat cheered for!

Everything just came together at the right place at the right time!

But, as Monday Night Wars were drawing to a close and the popularity of the industry was winding down over the years, it seemed the WWE had no over opinion but re-event themselves in some way, shape or form...thats were around '02-'03, Mr. McMahon told his talent to shake things up and he wanted to see some 'Ruthless Aggression'! 

Now, it didn't exactly all solve their problems, but it worked to a degree... unfortunately though, seemly out of no where, 'Linda' decided to run for a senate job and all of sudden the image of her husbands company was to violent and crude, and reverted back to a targeted for kids television much like it was back in the days of Rock N' Wrestling Era.

But that brings me back to just how much of difference that the 'gap' between the to eras (Modern day PG and Rock N' Wrestling Era/Early '90's 'New Generation' slogan) really made a significant impact on the outlook of the entire wrestling business.

Fans were given a taste of a edgy product but then it changed again to what it was before hand, and thats what I believe makes a huge difference in the overall success of 'THIS' Era today.

               


Back to Top
Rico Len View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (X, XII, XIII)

Joined: 23/October/2012
Location: Yosemite Lakes
Status: Offline
Points: 11307
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rico Len Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16/February/2013 at 03:18
There's a few problems I have with that argument.

1. I was one such guy that grew up with the WWF Rock and Wrestling and the New Generation was when I really got into it around 1989-ish. I was just graduating high school during the attitude era. I, to this day, have more fun watching those guys I watched as a kid than any of the crap that was on the WWF in 1995 - 1999 (not so with WCW from 1995-1999). I was growing up, but that didn't mean I wanted to see some nobody dumbfuck come out of no where and treat a legend like Jake The Snake like he was trash. That whole Austin 3:16 thing pissed me off, and as it happened about the same time Hulk Hogan turned heel, I was prompted to say screw you to the WWF and all it's nobodies and up and coming kids who were essentially WCW rejects at that point in time, and watch WCW where the big boys played. All the WWF guys I knew and cared about where in WCW and taking everyone out under the flag of the nWo. To hell with the attitude era. By the time I saw Vince doing those commercials my reaction was "Dude WCW has been that way for ages now you has-been!" I felt like he was about 1 year too late with that, and at this point he was just being cheesy and trying to be like the WCW/nWo.

2. The undercard you mention; Val Venis, Gangrel, Al Snow, D'Lo Brown, X-Pac, Hardcore Holly, Big Boss Man, Test and Rikishi... of those guys the only ones I'd ever want to see again are Boss Man & Rikishi. I'll gladly take Papa Shango over Godfather, Earthquake over Golga, and the Boss Man of 1991 over his AE incarnation. For that matter, mid-card guys like Mr. Perfect, Rude, Roberts & Razor Ramon I'll take over most anyone of ANY era mid-card or main event.

PG doesn't even BEGIN to factor in to that. WCW was always rated PG. It was always writing & booking that made the WWF eventually better than the WCW, not going 'attitude' and upping the PG-rating to 14.

Now, that's not to say that I didn't eventually come around to what the WWF was selling, and even in some cases change my mind and overturn my initial reaction. Austin 3:16, I can look back on now as see it for what it was. Part of the reason I didn't like it back at that time was because I was still a naive mark. Realizing now that Roberts was putting Austin over and that we were essentially seeing a passing of the torch from one snake to another makes that whole thing pretty awesome, and I can sure as hell appreciate it's legacy.

Last year I went back and re-watched every single episode of MNR from April 1996- Dec 1999, and I have to say that the attitude era sucked fat ass in the 90's. It had it's moments to be sure, but 1996 was so abysmally bad, I felt like I was getting lobotomized watching it. 1997 was only slightly better and that's only because it was evolving, not because it did much of anything right. Austin was just getting good, and yes in Austin's case, the pushing of the ratings envelope worked, but the Pillman's got a gun incident hurt the WWF's ratings, and did nothing to help them.

Quote
I believe Paul Heyman sum it up a pretty decent way on a resent episode of Monday Night Raw during CM Punk's Celebration of reaching a full year as WWE Champion.

His words were something along the lines of "We show you just a taste of Attitude, and turns out that you don't like it though do you?!" and also "You have the nerve to chant 'E-C-W' at me, but when you get shown just a hint of the Extreme, you don't like it very much?!" I honestly agree somewhat with that statement.


Now that I agree with whole-heartedly. The culture has just changed. My kids know better, I've shown them stuff from all different eras, and they like it all, but just like the little kids from the attitude era didn't like Hogan, Savage, Flair, Sting, and everyone else who was before their time and embraced Austin, Rock, DX, Taker, Foley, and the rest, kids these days just like Cena, Punk, Sheamus, Ryback, Miz, Team Hell No, etc, because they're CURRENT. No kid wants to live in the past, they want the stuff that's new NOW.

The kids of today like the top faces of today just like the attitude era kids liked the faces of that era, and it all has to do with booking and writing. Cena is booked as a face, not a heel, so the kids like him. Simple as that. When CM Punk was face, and still essentially the same character the kids loved him. Commentary and how kids see the live crowd react mean everything for getting a kid like or not like someone. They're sheep that need to be herded.
Back to Top
thundarr2000 View Drop Down
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
Avatar

Joined: 13/June/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 15338
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote thundarr2000 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16/February/2013 at 05:35
Back to Top
Collywog3:16 View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Ticket Wars Trading Shark

Joined: 13/December/2012
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3783
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Collywog3:16 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16/February/2013 at 06:24
Originally posted by Rico Len Rico Len wrote:

There's a few problems I have with that argument.

1. I was one such guy that grew up with the WWF Rock and Wrestling and the New Generation was when I really got into it around 1989-ish. I was just graduating high school during the attitude era. I, to this day, have more fun watching those guys I watched as a kid than any of the crap that was on the WWF in 1995 - 1999 (not so with WCW from 1995-1999). I was growing up, but that didn't mean I wanted to see some nobody dumbfuck come out of no where and treat a legend like Jake The Snake like he was trash. That whole Austin 3:16 thing pissed me off, and as it happened about the same time Hulk Hogan turned heel, I was prompted to say screw you to the WWF and all it's nobodies and up and coming kids who were essentially WCW rejects at that point in time, and watch WCW where the big boys played. All the WWF guys I knew and cared about where in WCW and taking everyone out under the flag of the nWo. To hell with the attitude era. By the time I saw Vince doing those commercials my reaction was "Dude WCW has been that way for ages now you has-been!" I felt like he was about 1 year too late with that, and at this point he was just being cheesy and trying to be like the WCW/nWo.

2. The undercard you mention; Val Venis, Gangrel, Al Snow, D'Lo Brown, X-Pac, Hardcore Holly, Big Boss Man, Test and Rikishi... of those guys the only ones I'd ever want to see again are Boss Man & Rikishi. I'll gladly take Papa Shango over Godfather, Earthquake over Golga, and the Boss Man of 1991 over his AE incarnation. For that matter, mid-card guys like Mr. Perfect, Rude, Roberts & Razor Ramon I'll take over most anyone of ANY era mid-card or main event.

PG doesn't even BEGIN to factor in to that. WCW was always rated PG. It was always writing & booking that made the WWF eventually better than the WCW, not going 'attitude' and upping the PG-rating to 14.

Now, that's not to say that I didn't eventually come around to what the WWF was selling, and even in some cases change my mind and overturn my initial reaction. Austin 3:16, I can look back on now as see it for what it was. Part of the reason I didn't like it back at that time was because I was still a naive mark. Realizing now that Roberts was putting Austin over and that we were essentially seeing a passing of the torch from one snake to another makes that whole thing pretty awesome, and I can sure as hell appreciate it's legacy.

Last year I went back and re-watched every single episode of MNR from April 1996- Dec 1999, and I have to say that the attitude era sucked fat ass in the 90's. It had it's moments to be sure, but 1996 was so abysmally bad, I felt like I was getting lobotomized watching it. 1997 was only slightly better and that's only because it was evolving, not because it did much of anything right. Austin was just getting good, and yes in Austin's case, the pushing of the ratings envelope worked, but the Pillman's got a gun incident hurt the WWF's ratings, and did nothing to help them.

Quote
I believe Paul Heyman sum it up a pretty decent way on a resent episode of Monday Night Raw during CM Punk's Celebration of reaching a full year as WWE Champion.

His words were something along the lines of "We show you just a taste of Attitude, and turns out that you don't like it though do you?!" and also "You have the nerve to chant 'E-C-W' at me, but when you get shown just a hint of the Extreme, you don't like it very much?!" I honestly agree somewhat with that statement.


Now that I agree with whole-heartedly. The culture has just changed. My kids know better, I've shown them stuff from all different eras, and they like it all, but just like the little kids from the attitude era didn't like Hogan, Savage, Flair, Sting, and everyone else who was before their time and embraced Austin, Rock, DX, Taker, Foley, and the rest, kids these days just like Cena, Punk, Sheamus, Ryback, Miz, Team Hell No, etc, because they're CURRENT. No kid wants to live in the past, they want the stuff that's new NOW.

The kids of today like the top faces of today just like the attitude era kids liked the faces of that era, and it all has to do with booking and writing. Cena is booked as a face, not a heel, so the kids like him. Simple as that. When CM Punk was face, and still essentially the same character the kids loved him. Commentary and how kids see the live crowd react mean everything for getting a kid like or not like someone. They're sheep that need to be herded.

I totally agree about the under/mid card part you mentioned, yes I'd much rather watch the likes of Mr. Perfect, 'Ravishing' Rick Rude, Jake 'The Snake' Roberts & Razor Ramon etc. then the ones from the Attitude Era. However, my beef wasn't necessarily directed towards them though. My point was more focused on comparing the so called 'mid-carders' of today to thoughs of the Attitude Era, and in my humble personal opinion, AE guys wins that argument by a country mile! They far better more entertainers then thoughs of current WWE. Now, they weren't exactly as athletically gifted as some of today's roster, but still in this business, entertainment is the key! I'd much rather see the names of under/mid card roster of the Attitude Era, then sit down and watch the today's product. SIDE NOTE: I'm surprised about the Papa Shango reference, but your entitled to your reasons.  

Anyway, I'm not going to completely rip on them though, as I do enjoy alot of the that comes out of Superstars today which comes from guys like Antonio Cesaro, Dolph Ziggler, Kofi Kingston, Wade Barrett, Cody Rhodes, Damien Sandow among a few others which have certainly done more to impress me and fans a like that make you believe most of thoughs are the future of the company. Although, I think the biggest issue is that most of the AE roster was basically booked almost perfectly with most of the guys having gimmicks that suited them to a 'T' and storylines which captivated audiences! Today, it is rare to find that in WWE.

To sum it all up though, all in all, times change and I guess wrestling is a perfect example of just how different of the generation gap is!

   
Back to Top
Rico Len View Drop Down
PB Members
PB Members
Avatar
Three Time TW Winner (X, XII, XIII)

Joined: 23/October/2012
Location: Yosemite Lakes
Status: Offline
Points: 11307
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rico Len Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16/February/2013 at 06:50
Originally posted by Collywog3:16 Collywog3:16 wrote:



I totally agree about the under/mid card part you mentioned, yes I'd much rather watch the likes of <span style="line-height: 1.4;">Mr. Perfect, 'Ravishing' Rick Rude, Jake 'The Snake' Roberts & Razor Ramon etc. then the ones from the Attitude Era. However, my beef wasn't </span>necessarily directed towards them though. My point was more focused on comparing the so called 'mid-carders' of today to thoughs of the Attitude Era, and in my humble personal opinion, AE guys wins that argument by a country mile! They far better more entertainers then thoughs of current WWE. Now, they weren't exactly as athletically gifted as some of today's roster, but still in this business, entertainment is the key! I'd much rather see the names of under/mid card roster of the Attitude Era, then sit down and watch the today's product. SIDE NOTE: I'm surprised about the Papa Shango reference, but your entitled to your reasons.  

Anyway, I'm not going to completely rip on them though, as I do enjoy alot of the that comes out of Superstars today which comes from guys like Antonio Cesaro, Dolph Ziggler, Kofi Kingston, Wade Barrett, Cody Rhodes, Damien Sandow among a few others which have certainly done more to impress me and fans a like that make you believe most of thoughs are the future of the company. Although, I think the biggest issue is that most of the AE roster was basically booked almost perfectly with most of the guys having gimmicks that suited them to a 'T' and storylines which captivated audiences! Today, it is rare to find that in WWE.

To sum it all up though, all in all, times change and I guess wrestling is a perfect example of just how different of the generation gap is!

   


Yeah fair enough. My point though is that the era that was pg prior to the ae was incredible even though it did have it's terrible segments as well. IMO the talent in the AE was the worst of the three big eras people tend to talk about these days, the rock n wrestling, the ae and this PG era, but the booking and writing during the ae was so damned effective it hid most all of the crap talent that era had.

The main event performers from the attitude era were pretty much all bonafied stars as were the midcard stars that eventually got to the main event, but those true midcard performers imo were terrible, except for the fact that they were given time enough to make a connection and that's something that people these days don't get.

Until someone gets to the main event it's really hard to give a crap about them, and that's all on writing and booking, not it's pg rating.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.