Pro Wrestling Vs Sports Entertainment

gimmick

Ive been thinking about this one for a while now, and am still unsure which is more important to the survival of the other ie could pro wrestling survive without the sports entertainment side and vice versa? Now, i do realsie that PW isnt the only type of Sports Ent as Dodgeball and Roolerball battles in the US also fall into that category.

If the attitude era never happened, and factions like NWO/DX/Corporate Ministry had never happened, would we even have a product like what WWE is today? Or would real wrestling, the likes of ROH, IWC, PWG rule the roost?

So that leads me to what I have been trying to get to the bottom of - are most Wrestling fans, fans of Sports Entertainment ie DX and their cóck jokes, or Pro Wrestling ie Angle Vs Benoit clinics?

I can only speak for myself, but lately I have been trying to take a broader view of what Pro Wrestling is, outside the WWE landscape, and I must say, watching the likes of Raw is getting harder and harder. It has, essentially become a a soap opera over the years, but now it is having to resort to base humour and sexual innuendo on a weekly basis to stay entertaining. Where before a storyline would develop the pay off match, the match now is used almost as an afterthought to the storyline. Point in case the DX Vs McMahon fued which has been stuffed down our gobs for too long now. In short, WWEs Sports Entertainment would be alot more entertaining if there was actually wrestling happening.

Im not sure does that even make any sense.

Minto

It actually makes loads of sense.

Its true that WWE is about 60% enterteinment and 40% wrestling (just percentages off the top of my head), but what more can we expect from a bunch of soap opera writers and not people who know the business.

Vince135792003

I think whats happened is that the objective of wrestling in WWE has got lost amid all the sports entertainment rubbish.

Basically WWE have for the most part forgotten how to promote wrestling.

You take 2 guys, push them as superstars, make the people believe that they are superstars and then have them face off to see who is the bigger star. Thats how all big money matches work. Hogan and Andre, Hogan and Warrior, Savage and Hogan, Funk and Flair, Rock and Austin, Angle and HBK etc..


Look at the UFC. Dave Meltzer descibes it as old school wrestling promotion for they're ppvs and its the formula I just decsrcibed above. And they are getting gigantic ppv numbers virtually every month. The WWE do not. Thats the story of 2006 in wrestling right there.

Now granted you can't do that for every single match on the card. It would get a little stale. But the point is, you have to try to make every feud believable, interesting and somthing that people can relate too that will make them want to pay to see it. The whole Austin v Vince, employee versus boss is a good example of productive sports entertainment that had a purpose to it, that was entertaining and that people could relate too.

I guess my point is that wrestling should not be overcomplciated with sport enterainment angles. But if your gonna do them, make sure they have a point. The problem with WWE is that so much of it does n't.

Mr.Nice Guy

The problem is that Vince doesn't want to be known as simply a wrestling promoter. That's why he has dabbled in other stuff like movies, the XFL etc.

I'd like to see TNA focus more on wrestling and provide competition to Vince as I imagine this would create a greater emphasis on the wrestling aspect of WWE.

That's why I think ECW is the best show on TV right now as it's left behind all the 'entertainment' bits and is primarily focused on the wrestling itself. The backstage bits on ECW nowadays actually make sense to the overall show as opposed to the juvenile segments on Raw designed to get a cheap laugh. For example DX, Eugene etc.

Gillie

For me it's tough. I love the Soap Opera element of WWE but I am trying to get into the real PW shows.
I have always been a WWF/WWE fan though and I probably always will be.

Cactus Col

The UFC isn't the same as WWE, they may have copied a lot of sports entertainment's pomp and circumstance and promotion techniques, but, when it all comes down to it, ufc is an actual sport without pre-determined winners and losers.

The soap opera bits in wwe (when done properly) add a lot more entertainment, and drama to these fake fights. Right now they may be handling them badly, but when they do it right, I would take it over anything ufc have to offer.

Vince135792003

Cactus Col wrote:

The UFC isn't the same as WWE, they may have copied a lot of sports entertainment's pomp and circumstance and promotion techniques, but, when it all comes down to it, ufc is an actual sport without pre-determined winners and losers.
.

I know this off the topic but your missing the point.

The UFC are n't fundamentally mimicking WWE 2006 at all. There using old school wrestling booking. They are copying simple 1980's territorial booking.

The real sport (which can't control the outcome of matches) is promoting their show infinitely better than the WWE (who has total control over the direction they go in). Every month I care and am inteterested about who wins the UFC main event. I could n't care less who wins the fatal four way on Sunday. The reason? UFC promotes in a way that makes me want to see the fight and care. The WWE in 2006 does not.

The promotion and business model is virtually identical for both whether its fake or real.

Push 2 stars, get them over with the people and then have them fight to see whoose the bigger star. UFC do it every month. If your lucky, WWE might be able to it for one pay per view a year.

UFC gets roughly 30-40% of its total audience to buy their ppvs right now. TNA and WWE in contrast get 4 % on average of their audience to purchase monthly. People in wrestling need to look at how the UFC promote.

Reganio 2

I don't think I would watch wrestling without some of the jokes I think DX lighten things up and that's why I like them. It really has to be a mix of entertainment and wrestling. To much wrestling you get bored. To much entertainment you may as well watch Corrie.

Fozzy

Reganio 2 wrote:

To much wrestling you get bored. To much entertainment you may as well watch Corrie.

I think a lot of people, myself included, wouldn't have any problem with too much wrestling, as long as it's good. I wouldn't have a problem with WWE at the moment if it was just that they have too much "entertainment" (I'm referring to all the non-wrestling stuff, a lot of which isn't actually very entertaining), as long as the wrestling was good. But it hasn't been, it's been as boring as the rest of it. Which is why I stopped watching WWE

I think WWE's stance on this can be summed up by what Jim Cornette said in an interview after he left WWE this year (think I might have said this here before). He said that during a creative meeting the question of what they should call their performers came up. Cornette said "wrestlers", but everyone looked at him, and Shane McMahon told him that they're not a wrestling company

To answer the original question, I think that both could survive without the other. Sports entertainment (taken to its extreme) appeals to a lot of people, generally not too knowledgable about the product, I've found. Basically, the majority of John Cena's screaming fans are the sort of people who could live without wrestling. Pro wrestling has existed for far longer, and I think that it would easily survive on its own. It's the desire for something closer to this that has caused a lot of people to turn their backs on WWE and get interested with ROH, Japan, etc, so the market would still be there

I was just thinking, a lot of people who haven't strayed from WWE seem to think that the likes of ROH are just completely 100% straight-up pro wrestling, when that isn't the full story. There's storylines and there's comedy, so it's not that different to WWE. Except that it usually makes sense, and is funny!

Reganio 2

I agree with you Fozzy that the entertainment is getting a bit out of hand they do need to put more wrestling in. I have never watched any other show except for wwe and ecw so I probably would like them better.

I've got a good one for you. I was talking to this guy on the internet from Australia and he stated talking about wrestling, he asked who my favourite wrestlers were and I said Jeff Hardy, Carlito and Randy Orton. I then asked him his fave's and he said ... wait for it... Cena, Batista and Hulk Hogan (when he wrestles):eek: . I then asked him what he tought of RVD on ecw and he said I don't watch it all they do is fight with no story:eek: . No Messing. Needless to say the conversation ended there. He fell for the goodies hook, line and sinker:rolleyes: .

Vince135792003

I think Cena (in 2006) is a consistently better worker than Carlito and Jeff Hardy (although he's done really well since he's been back)! He'd give Orton a run too.

I can't really defend him on the other 2.

Reganio 2

Vince135792003 wrote:

I think Cena (in 2006) is a consistently better worker than Carlito and Jeff Hardy (although he's done really well since he's been back)! He'd give Orton a run too.

I can't really defend him on the other 2.

Don't get me wrong it's his choice if he likes Cena and the rest ok its just he picked the 2 (champions at the time) and the hulk I kind of felt like saying make up your own mind dont just go for the champions whch is pretty much the vibe I got when I talked to him. I like Jeff, Carlito and Orton because I like there style and there is something about them I like. Not because they are amazing wrestlers who win every week.

Mr.Nice Guy

Vince135792003 wrote:

I think Cena (in 2006) is a consistently better worker than Carlito and Jeff Hardy (although he's done really well since he's been back)! He'd give Orton a run too.

I can't really defend him on the other 2.

Cena has upped his game but so has Carlito. I think he's worked a lot harder of late and pulled out some impressive high-risk offence. If they book him correctly I think Carlito could be the top babyface this time next year.

Vince135792003

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Cena has upped his game but so has Carlito. I think he's worked a lot harder of late and pulled out some impressive high-risk offence. If they book him correctly I think Carlito could be the top babyface this time next year.

I disgree to an extent .
He's had decent matches but he's been in a lot of bad ones too. I think his offence looks contrived and weak at times.

I do like Carlito's charisma though. He's got the "it" factor.