Are we expecting too much from WWE talent?

Prufrock

Well are we. Has wrestling seen it's hey day? Can any of the talent compair to the great performers of the past? Looking at the talent now there aren't a lot I'd say would be any better than a mid-card talent a few years ago. Not just WWE TNA aswell. Can anybody carry the business of pro wrestling for the next ten, elevin years?

In this generation is there a Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Undertaker, Bret Hart, Rock, Austin, Funk,Angle, Scott Hall, Shawn Micheals, Jericho, Jimmy Snuka, Sgt. Slaughter, Roddy Piper, Iron Sheik, Lou Thesz , Bruno Sammartino, "Killer" Kowalski, Ted DiBiase, Dusty Rhodes, Triple H or are they all just of polished Barry Horowitz wannabes?(I am aware that some of these guys are still wrestling but they're past it now)Sorry if I forgot anybody but there you go.

I mean have a look for yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wrestling_Entertainment_roster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Nonstop_Action_Wrestling_roster

What does the world of boards think?

Vince135792003

There'll never ever be another Iron Sheik!

But seriously, I think the big advantage in the '70s and '80s was the territorial system. It gave guys lots of time and experience to not only be polished in the ring but also in terms of cutting promos etc...

Back then 19 times out of 20 people were pushed to the top when they were ready.

Today, you'll have a guy spend 6 months in OVW and be brought up like a Daniel Rodimer who is apparently the next big think but has little experience.

Today WWE bring people up, push them for a while, then suddenly realise they are no where near ready and then give up on them.

With WWE basically being the only major show in town it stifles the talent making process. Back in the day you had a dozen or so territories churning out stars.

Fozzy

In WWE, I don't think it's a talent problem for the most part. Every wrestler has their strengths and weaknesses, and good booking should accentuate the positives of the wrestler, while hiding their weak points. WWE don't seem to be capable of doing that very much. Their booking lacks in common sense a lot of the time too, and just generally doesn't give you many reasons to be interested in most wrestlers

My point is that many of these guys could have been main eventers a few years ago, if they were booked as well as some of the guys back then were. I don't think the talent pool has been drained in any way. It's mainly a booking problem

TNA does a better job at showcasing their wrestlers' talents, although a good portion of their best workers are smaller guys. I don't think those guys would have been near main event status years ago, just because most main eventers were big guys. But I think in the next 10 years the average wrestling fan will come to accept smaller wrestlers as serious challengers. The real world has shown that it's certainly not the size of the fighter that's most important

Vince135792003

Fozzy wrote:

In WWE, I don't think it's a talent problem for the most part. /QUOTE]

Compare the WWE roster to 5 Years ago. The talent pool has dropped quite a bit. And with 3 brands, you really see it.

Prufrock

Vince135792003 wrote:

There'll never ever be another Iron Sheik!

But seriously, I think the big advantage in the '70s and '80s was the territorial system. It gave guys lots of time and experience to not only be polished in the ring but also in terms of cutting promos etc...

Back then 19 times out of 20 people were pushed to the top when they were ready.

Today, you'll have a guy spend 6 months in OVW and be brought up like a Daniel Rodimer who is apparently the next big think but has little experience.

Today WWE bring people up, push them for a while, then suddenly realise they are no where near ready and then give up on them.

With WWE basically being the only major show in town it stifles the talent making process. Back in the day you had a dozen or so territories churning out stars.

Good point. But with all the emphasis on entertainment you'd think their show would be more... entertaining. I don't see anyone coming through that can change that. I've never been able to say that before. Ever.

Mr.Nice Guy

I believe it comes down to 3 factors...

1) Time

Nowadays the wrestling business is so fast-paced and the wrestling calendar so condensed that often we see wrestlers thrown in at the deep end when they haven't yet made a serious connection with the audience. Case in point - Bobby Lashley. Here's a guy who has been shoved in at the deep end and made a world champion when he is not even over with the audience in a very big way and when his mic skills are very green. This guy should have been nurtured along and allowed to become a real star. It's not like the fans craved for this guy to be a champion - yet he has been made one and the aim is to make the fans accept it.

2) Ability to elevate

I think there needs to be better ways to make a wrestler into a real star. Some of the names listed above include Bret Hart, Austin, Angle, Triple H. What have they all in common? They each won King of the Ring thus becoming elevated in the eyes of the fans. Sadly this tournament has been replaced in recent years and while it came back this year, it was only on one brand and in a different format. Also, guys like Shawn Michaels and Chris Jericho held many titles before being given the ultimate title in the company but there are hardly any titles around these days. These things make it more difficult to build stars and the only way it's been done in the modern era is through Wrestlemania.

3) WWE Creative

Bottom line is these guys are the ones most to blame. They have had opportunities in the past to pull the trigger on hot commodities but failed to do so. Case in point - Christian, who was huge in mid-2005 and yet they shoved him into midcard on Smackdown after promising a main event push. Then you have the recent example of Carlito who was on the cusp of main event status with a Randy Orton feud before being de-pushed. Then recently we had ECW's most over guy CM Punk being jobbed out first in his first main event appearance after a super reaction at Survivor Series where he was more over than D-X. It's hard to build real stars when you're only willing to push guys that you - not the fans - have created.

Prufrock

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I believe it comes down to 3 factors...

1) Time

2) Ability to elevate

3) WWE Creative

Bottom line is these guys are the ones most to blame. They have had opportunities in the past to pull the trigger on hot commodities but failed to do so. Case in point - Christian, who was huge in mid-2005 and yet they shoved him into midcard on Smackdown after promising a main event push. Then you have the recent example of Carlito who was on the cusp of main event status with a Randy Orton feud before being de-pushed. Then recently we had ECW's most over guy CM Punk being jobbed out first in his first main event appearance after a super reaction at Survivor Series where he was more over than D-X. It's hard to build real stars when you're only willing to push guys that you - not the fans - have created.

Would you place most of the blame on the creative team? I mean in terms of talent I don't see a lot to work with. Granted the creative team have a major role to play but do they have anything to work with? As far as I remember the creative team was never all that to start with and yet the talent of the better wrestlers shone through in the end.

I agree with the titles argument and the time factor. Bobby Lashley ECW champion? Doesn't have the right feel to it. It won't last long.

Mr.Nice Guy

Prufrock wrote:

Would you place most of the blame on the creative team? I mean in terms of talent I don't see a lot to work with. Granted the creative team have a major role to play but do they have anything to work with? As far as I remember the creative team was never all that to start with and yet the talent of the better wrestlers shone through in the end.

I think they have plenty of talent to work with. If you look at ECW under Heyman (the original ECW that is), Heyman managed to make wrestlers with very limited movesets such as Dreamer, Sandman, Balls Mahoney etc. connect with the audience in a strong way. The guys that are there in WWE now have way more ability in the ring than those listed yet many can't connect with the crowd. In my view if the writing is good enough then you can create stars.

I think a large problem is the fact that nowadays wrestlers have to stick exactly to the script. I think Steve Austin said something about this before. In Austin's time there was more freedom and I think the Austin 3:16 phrase was coined by him. Nowadays though they don't trust guys to talk on the mic by themselves. The only ones who seem to be allowed freedom are Triple H, Mick Foley etc. I think that's a problem.

Prufrock

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I think they have plenty of talent to work with. If you look at ECW under Heyman (the original ECW that is), Heyman managed to make wrestlers with very limited movesets such as Dreamer, Sandman, Balls Mahoney etc. connect with the audience in a strong way.

Good point. But those guys also put their bodies through a hell of a lot to get reaction from the crowd. I don't see anyone on the roster in the present day doing that. Maybe I'm wrong but the desire to do it just isn't there.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The guys that are there in WWE now have way more ability in the ring than those listed yet many can't connect with the crowd. In my view if the writing is good enough then you can create stars.

Do they have more in ring ability? I've seen guys in ECW wrestle. One Night Stand had some great examples of mat wrestling. Also ECW was really inventive in the ring. Great to watch in its day.

Gizzle

Prufrock wrote:

Good point. But those guys also put their bodies through a hell of a lot to get reaction from the crowd. I don't see anyone on the roster in the present day doing that. Maybe I'm wrong but the desire to do it just isn't there.

I'd still say that it had a lot more to do with Heymans's uncanny ability to cover up talents shortcomings than the talent's ability to absorb punishment from chairs, tables, NES console etc (I presume that's what you mean when you say putting their bodies through a hell of a lot). I mean, he made RVD seem like a technical master in the RVD vs. Jerry Lynn series of matches.

On another point, I think the WWE needs a more slow burn approach to title changes. This way it helps elevate both the title holders and the chasers when they eventually do force a change of title.

Vince135792003

I think another factor in terms of connecting with the crowd or getting over was that back in the day, wrestlers worked and were allowed to work different styles again due to the territories perhaps. There was only 1 Dusty Rhodes. There was only 1 Honky Tonk Man. There was only 1 Rip Rogers. There was only 1 Greg Valentine etc..

Technically they might be better today but in terms of standing out and having they're own unique style, few have it.

Today the WWE wants everybody to work the same style match (more or less) which means that less people stand out. Also they pretty much want everyone to look the same too which again means that less people get noticed.

Brow

I think WWE protect the talent these days. Thats one problem I havnt seen mentioned.

With house shows, numerous overseas tours, multiple ppvs etc I think a lot of talent is restricted in what they do and therefore cant really advertise themselves as the 'next stone cold' or whatever.

Take Cena for example. he gets a lot of flack for his 'five moves of death' but you all know how much money he generates. The merchandise, films (*cough*), music (*COUGH*) etc he needs to be in the public eye and be top of the cards, kept in the public eye. If he were to injure himself and be on the shelf for a few months i think it would hurt profits.

It goes for a lot of other people too. I'm sure there's people on the roster capable of much more. One I know for sure is Mike Knox, some of his DSW stuff is really, really good, youd be suprised.

Bounty Hunter

When wrestlers these days read Mick Foleys book they cant believe he slept in his car so he could wrestle, the same car that unlike most of the others he drove himself to most of his matches with, they think its unbelievable!

He lived to wrestle and to be the best he could be. He did this despite not having the normal image that would be pushed too. Why? Cos he gave everything he had to make the Fans remember his time. He like Chris benoit at WM got given the titles because they deserved them, they earnt them. How many of todays champs does that apply to?

I also believe that well we were originally Fans of WWF and WWE isnt ever really going to be like that just like the new ECW isnt quite the same as the old.

oneofakind32

Since WCW folded in 2001 the numbers of US viewers watching wrestling on a monday night has fallen from 10 to 4 million. In the 2 or 3 years proceeding that time WWE was at its most profitable. The wrestlers of the time were oozing with charisma (the rock, austin, foley) and willing to be more daring in the ring. WWE programing was unpradictable and fast paced.
Since the NWO reformed in 2002 a larg amount of the angles on the WWE are just a rehash. You cant watch Raw on a monday night now without seeing some "WWE Legend" being wheeled out to do 3 or 4 signiture moves in a tag match. All WWE programing now starts with a quick show reel of memroble moments from the past. They are trying to get people to watch wrestling by saying "remember how great it was when you were a kid" and its working just barly enough for them to think its the way forward.
There also parading around a new playboy playmate every week because studys show that the veiwing figures spike when Divas segements air and viewers is all VMK is after theese days.
The problem in WWE is not the lake of talent, it is the complete lack of direction. The in-ring tallent WWE has today (Paul London, Shelton Benjamin, RVD, CM Punk) far outweighs the talent of 2001 (Foley, Austin and rock all had limited move sets) but the charecters lack the charisma that made WWE unmissable TV in the late 90's.
They are wrestlers with a pasion for what they do and this pasion isnt being harnesed into good promos instead they handed a script and expected to be actors

Fozzy

oneofakind32 wrote:

The problem in WWE is not the lake of talent, it is the complete lack of direction. The in-ring tallent WWE has today (Paul London, Shelton Benjamin, RVD, CM Punk) far outweighs the talent of 2001 (Foley, Austin and rock all had limited move sets) but the charecters lack the charisma that made WWE unmissable TV in the late 90's.
They are wrestlers with a pasion for what they do and this pasion isnt being harnesed into good promos instead they handed a script and expected to be actors

I agree with the lack of direction and the scripted promos being bad. I don't think Punk's had much of a chance on the mic yet in ECW, but I can't see him living up to the sort of work he did on the mic in ROH, purely because he won't be allowed to say his own things. I really hope I'm wrong there though, because that would make for a lot of entertaining tv. The problem again as I see it is creative, not talent

Vince135792003

oneofakind32 wrote:

There also parading around a new playboy playmate every week because studys show that the veiwing figures spike when Divas segements air /QUOTE]

The funny thing is though, divas don't spike ratings at all now. They haven't for a while if you look at the quarters. Another example would be the extreme strip poker which did nothing after it was promoted for 2/3 straight weeks.

Gizzle

Vince135792003 wrote:

oneofakind32 wrote:

There also parading around a new playboy playmate every week because studys show that the veiwing figures spike when Divas segements air /QUOTE]

The funny thing is though, divas don't spike ratings at all now. They haven't for a while if you look at the quarters. Another example would be the extreme strip poker which did nothing after it was promoted for 2/3 straight weeks.

They don't spike ratings, they spike pants!