Random Wrasslin' thoughts.....

Itssoeasy

Mick Murdock wrote: »

Vince is a marketing and business genius. He has some of the best produced live television in the world. It seems to me that all of his success came with quality people around him, hiring most of the stars he's ever had. As they've start to twindle and fall off the quality of most of his shows is average at best.

He is so ashamed of being involved in wrestling he has created a fantasy world where two guys wrestling each other is now 'entertainment'.

An incredibly interesting, driven and charismatic man and a self made billionaire but a creative wrestling genius I don't think so. Deranged definitely.

Of course he is a wrestling genius. I mean look at how he took an regional wrestling company in the north eastern United States and made it a worldwide company. I mean I'm not that happy with the product at the moment and in particular the divas revolution which has huge potential with the women involved but to say that Vince McMahon isn't a wrestling genius is utter and complete bollocks.

briany

Riddle101 wrote: »

Is Vince really a business genius though? I mean as a wrestling promoter he is a genius, but any other business Vince venture he has been involved with hasn't gone the way it's planned. Namely his bodybuilding federation, XFL, WWF New York/The World, even his movie production company is terrible although it's still around it's not exactly something to be praised either.

Vince took the WWF/E from a regional wrestling territory to a world-conquering behemoth. He's arguably had one great success, and that is it, but this is also true of many successful business men. Many of them have a lot of abject failures before and after the one venture that puts them in the history books. True, Vince was lucky enough to have inherited the company from his dad, but he still took the company way beyond what it had been before.

I think his strengths have always laid in the fact that he was savvy enough to surround himself with knowledgeable people and that he has one of the most insane work ethics around. He only sleeps a maximum of four hours a night and has done full on workout sessions after shows when all the wrestlers were sleeping in their beds. His determination and force of personality have been a huge part of where he got to where he is, IMO.

leggo

jaykhunter wrote: »

A difficult point to argue considering the conversation is the RAW Divas Revolution and pushing Eva Marie, in spite of the dirth of women's talent available and being finely showcased in his company, outside his grasp on NXT. He's been practically coasting on Orton/Cena since 2004.

It's all perspective, though. You can point to Sir Alex Ferguson's record as Man Utd manager in the early 00's and say he was a lazy manager coasting on past work. If you reduce someone with such a wide breadth of work to several choice decisions, while failing to acknowledge the massive accomplishments they've achieved, sure you can make a convincing argument but it doesn't mean it's in any way fair, accurate or balanced.

The thing that gets me with sweeping 'Vince doesn't know what he's talking about' statements is that, lads, pretty soon from now we're going to be writing his obituary. Like it could be a few years from now or we can wake up tomorrow. And when it's time to hold what he's achieved on this earth in full perspective, it's going to look pretty amazing. Keep in mind this: WWE can easily stand alongside the likes of the Premier League, NFL or NBA as a global powerhouse and one of the most influential entertainment organisations on the planet. You wouldn't credit Richard Scudamore, Roger Goodell or Adam Silver (or his predecessor David Stern) solely with those organisations' dominance, they're just the figureheads. But with WWE, you HAVE to credit Vince. He's created it and turned it into the powerhouse it is for the company's entire existence and success today (as we know it; I know it was originally his father's company). So when everyone is writing his obit, you're going to be THAT guy if you're making these statements: the one who looks foolish like the people who used to rip Gerry Ryan on boards every day while he was alive, all the while failing to realise why he was so successful and missing the point completely.

People might say that that equals good marketing, business strategy or promotional skill rather than creativity, but lads...what do you think forms the basis of all of the above? Creativity! It's just as important to be creative in those aspects as it is with some television storylines. Saying it's not, and again I don't mean to sound condescending here but it's true, reeks of ignorance of what exactly would go into his day-to-day job and what makes him successful. Hell, it's even MORE important to be creative in those aspects! Look at how WWE has continued to grow and thrive into a multimedia powerhouse and not just a touring TV show in spite of an, at times, stale television product. Vince has re-imagined the entire model of pay-per view as we know it, and is being proven right with the WWE Network's continued growth in figures. Is that not WAY more important than his handling of Eva Marie?! And do you think for a second that doing the above doesn't take creativity?

All of that is taking into consideration your point that he's not a good booker, which is another fallacy. He's known as one of the greatest minds for finishes in the industry! Listen to Stone Cold talk about how baffled he was when Vince told him the finish to WM13, and then look at what it did for his career. Vince is the guy who tells the legends that we all revere what to do, and sometimes they doubt him, but more often that not they later admit that he saw something they didn't. If you think Vince isn't creative, then you also think that SCSA isn't creative either, because Vince taught him a lesson that day and that was that he knows better than him. You can say "Well that was then...", but how did the most recent WrestleMania finish? With a classic sleight of hand moment, that nobody saw coming at the time (don't lie and say that you did anybody - the only person I saw predict it was Lance Storm), to crown a creatively captivating night!

Look I'm no Vince apologist, I'll be the first to hold WWE to account if they do something piss-poor, but you have to consider the scale what you're saying or your criticism goes from credible to ridiculous in seconds. Is Eva Marie's push a bit forced and silly? Sure. But is THAT the marker we'll eventually judge Vince McMahon on when it comes to creativity?! Of course not! We'll say, "He got it wrong sometimes, but when he had a vision he stuck to it and it worked more often than it didn't, often with spectacular results that nobody could've envisioned." We'll also say that he had the balls to realise when he got it wrong mid-way through and correct himself to suit the fans.

Look at how almost every televised wrestling product today builds their TV show around the evil (or sometimes good) authority figure. Look at how many cheap imitations of Royal Rumbles, King of the Rings, Money In The Banks, Ladder/TLC matches etc there are within every organisation. Look at how almost every indie wrestling company now needs to go by three initials because they think that that's the only way a wrestling company can be named because they got so used to WWF as a kid and wanted a company just like that. Look at how every promotion needs to build towards a big, WrestleMania-style event on its calendar (Ultima Lucha, Wrestle Kingdom, Bound For Glory etc). Look at how many 'alternative' companies have used 'We're SO unlike WWE', even indirectly, in their marketing. If you think Vince isn't creative, you can't really think that people who rip him off or need to use his name to get over are either. So who exactly is alive and creative in wrestling then if they haven't ripped off something Vince McMahon started?

Vince McMahon isn't creative? He's the creativity sun that the rest of the wrestling world orbits around! And sure, the sun can be a bitch sometimes and burn you, but without it nothing else we've ever known or liked would exist at the same time.

Itssoeasy

Also just to touch on a point about him not doing anything without very charismatic people like hogan but verge gagne and Vince snr both had hogan working for them and they didn't have the success that Vince had with him. The constant was hulk the variable is Vince and look what both created.

connemara man

Leggo I agree with so much of what you are saying Vince has done so much well. It has taken creativity drive and all that jazz.

But if I take everything I read about the Current WWE at face value there in lies the issue, you could say he's tarnishing his own good reputation. The one or two things a year he gets right at the moment cant outweigh the rest of the bad. The Alex Ferguson analogy is perfect but Alex knew when to leave. The inability of the WWE to create the next Cena or Orton has to come down to him. The next generation of fans need a new superstar and I currently can't see where it will come from as I am willing to put money on it the second Rollins loses the WWE title he'll be used as mid card talent. and he is the nearest thing thats there at the moment

The current product feels bloated to me too many people wresting (sorry I'm not allowed to say that word) for no reason, there is very little entertainment in WWE anymore apart from the rare glimpse of what can be done, and the buzz created from a nostalgia pop

Stereomaniac

Laurel_Patente wrote: »

Until we get Eva Marie as NXT Women's Champion. Jesus wept...

Eva Marie will someday have to lose the title if she does indeed get it, as has been forecast. Hopefully we'll see someone good replace her. Nia Jax might be good.

Palo Alto

Eva Marie holding the strap in front of Full Sail will be my Christmas.

Mick Murdock

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Of course he is a wrestling genius. I mean look at how he took an regional wrestling company in the north eastern United States and made it a worldwide company. I mean I'm not that happy with the product at the moment and in particular the divas revolution which has huge potential with the women involved but to say that Vince McMahon isn't a wrestling genius is utter and complete bollocks.

With a lot of help along the way. I still believe the vast majority of what he has controlled over the last 10+ years has been rubbish. The less wrestling people involved in writing the shows the worse its got yet Vince remains in charge. I will say in fairness that he normally does pretty well with the big names and Mania has more often than been a success but he is still the man behind the other 80-90% of rubbish that appears on most of his shows. As soon as anybody gets some momentum he inevitably buries them by turning them into jobbers.

Cena is the only mainstream star since Rock and when the AE guys have all retired he will have nobody short of Cena and possibly Punk to get any kind of numbers for tv or the network or whatever.

The two most critically acclaimed wrestling shows at the moment have nothing to do with him.

Angron

Well being condescending won't get people on your side.

Stereomaniac

Let's not get into a row here lads. I'm sure no one feels so strongly they need that to happen!

Mick Murdock

Angron wrote: »

Well being condescending won't get people on your side.

That wasn't my intention, honestly. I just meant that it's a pretty commonly held opinion.

I removed the last sentence. Text is easily misinterpreted.

Angron

Mick Murdock wrote: »

That wasn't my intention, honestly. I just meant that it's a pretty commonly held opinion.

I removed the last sentence. Text is easily misinterpreted.

Ah, true enough. Sorry for taking it up wrong. Honestly I'd agree somewhat with you, and I'd kinda wish Vince would retire. For some of the flashes of insight he's shown (like apparently calling the audible on the mania main event) there has been a lot of muck, and then booking that's seemed to happen to spite certain wrestlers, though maybe all of that can't be laid solely at Vince's feet.

Stereomaniac

I think any wrestling fan that says they're fed up of the product and wants a change, but then says they still hold hope that it can come good again knows deep down that Vince McMahon is a creative genius. For all of the crap, he still keeps most of us watching weekly.

Mick Murdock

I love keeping up on what's going on. I watch all of the notable things on Raw and sometimes a bit of Smackdown. I like reading here and listening to shows that analyse the wrestling industry.

I've just finished watching the finale of Lucha Underground and as much as I enjoyed it, I don't think anything matches the larger than life and bombastic presentation of WWE when it's good.

I'm one of those people that probably wouldn't watch anymore if I didn't follow what was going on and the news and speculation on sites like this. Let's face it, the backstage going ons are often just as fascinating as anything that goes on in the shows themselves.

There seems to me to be a mini wrestling boom at the moment and I think a new direction could really take advantage of it.

Stereomaniac

I think that wrestling is exactly where it needs to be at the moment. I can't imagine what else Vince McMahon would feel he needs to achieve before the end of his life except for just continuing to run events in bigger and bigger stadiums and growing the Network subscriptions. I enjoy knowing what is going on backstage as well. But I often prefer to not know these things until after angles have been completed on screen. At my core, I still want to be a mark when I'm watching the shows. I try my hardest to detach from reality and tell myself that this is a legitimate contest I am watching. It's great.

leggo

connemara man wrote: »

Leggo I agree with so much of what you are saying Vince has done so much well. It has taken creativity drive and all that jazz.

But if I take everything I read about the Current WWE at face value there in lies the issue, you could say he's tarnishing his own good reputation. The one or two things a year he gets right at the moment cant outweigh the rest of the bad. The Alex Ferguson analogy is perfect but Alex knew when to leave. The inability of the WWE to create the next Cena or Orton has to come down to him. The next generation of fans need a new superstar and I currently can't see where it will come from as I am willing to put money on it the second Rollins loses the WWE title he'll be used as mid card talent. and he is the nearest thing thats there at the moment

The current product feels bloated to me too many people wresting (sorry I'm not allowed to say that word) for no reason, there is very little entertainment in WWE anymore apart from the rare glimpse of what can be done, and the buzz created from a nostalgia pop

Don't get me wrong, there are still a million decisions you can legitimately criticise him on, and I do so myself routinely. I'm not saying the man is above criticism by any means. There may even be scope to say he's out of touch altogether and his sensibilities aren't what they used to be. It's only when people veer into the sweeping statements about him not being creative or that he doesn't know anything that I take issue really, because they're blatantly untrue.

Tbh, though, I think we're getting the all-around best year of WWE we've had for quite some time. They're hitting a lot more than they miss in 2015. Their only problem, for me, right now is that there's SO much content that it's so tough to even get one complete home run, 3-hour Raw right without at least one segment completely bombing or producing something cringeworthy. So there's perhaps as much bad stuff on our screens as ever, while also being as much good stuff as we've ever enjoyed, because there's double the amount of stuff that there ever was. Does that make sense to anyone but me or is it gibberish? :pac:

jaykhunter

I don't think anyone's doubting Vince acumen in the boom of the Hulkamania or Attitude Era, which practically all of leggo's points are based. We're talking 2005-present Vince. I wouldn't tout the WWE Network as it'll only be out of debt (never mind recuperating lost profit from it) in 2020, but it is an impressive creative gamble. Vince's creative has lead to the largest collection of mid-carders in history, and the over-reliance on part-time older stars. These last few years have seen more fan-revolt/hijacking than ever before. What he's known for now is Million Dollar Mania, hornswoggle's father, being petty with CM Punk, killing the Nexus, Cesaro, dismissing Bryan, pushing Reigns, the RAW Divas Revolution etc. Being a huge juggernaut, it's not nearly as hard to stay afloat now as becoming #1 in the 80s, and reclaiming #1 in the 90s.

connemara man

leggo wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, there are still a million decisions you can legitimately criticise him on, and I do so myself routinely. I'm not saying the man is above criticism by any means. There may even be scope to say he's out of touch altogether and his sensibilities aren't what they used to be. It's only when people veer into the sweeping statements about him not being creative or that he doesn't know anything that I take issue really, because they're blatantly untrue.

Tbh, though, I think we're getting the all-around best year of WWE we've had for quite some time. They're hitting a lot more than they miss in 2015. Their only problem, for me, right now is that there's SO much content that it's so tough to even get one complete home run, 3-hour Raw right without at least one segment completely bombing or producing something cringeworthy. So there's perhaps as much bad stuff on our screens as ever, while also being as much good stuff as we've ever enjoyed, because there's double the amount of stuff that there ever was. Does that make sense to anyone but me or is it gibberish? :pac:

I get ya WWE is bloated for want of a better word
the more stuff there is the more likely there will be good and bad. It really is a shame there is no real competition for them that would really help

Ageyev

leggo wrote: »

The thing that gets me with sweeping 'Vince doesn't know what he's talking about' statements is that, lads, pretty soon from now we're going to be writing his obituary. Like it could be a few years from now or we can wake up tomorrow. And when it's time to hold what he's achieved on this earth in full perspective, it's going to look pretty amazing

Now that Jimmy Snuka has been charged with murder, Vince has got questions to answer about his involvement in the case. So there's that bit that needs to be included in any obit piece?

Vince has re-imagined the entire model of pay-per view as we know it, and is being proven right with the WWE Network's continued growth in figures

Their PPV numbers had been sliding for years and by placing all of their big shows on a streaming service the have forgone millions in cannibalised revenue - Chris Harrington has an interesting piece here on what if WM32 was on PPV and not the $10 Network. The MayweatherPacquiao fight did huge business on PPV and UFC still does extremely well.

There are still technical issues with the functionality of the Network - just look in the thread on this forum with people complaining of buffering. It's far too early to say that they've revolutionised or re imagined anything just yet, at least not in a positive sense. Does anyone really get excited about these new programmes they've done like Corey Graves talking about tattoos? I don't. The non-wrestling stuff sucks and is a waste of time and money.

All of that is taking into consideration your point that he's not a good booker, which is another fallacy. He's known as one of the greatest minds for finishes in the industry! Listen to Stone Cold talk about how baffled he was when Vince told him the finish to WM13, and then look at what it did for his career. Vince is the guy who tells the legends that we all revere what to do, and sometimes they doubt him, but more often that not they later admit that he saw something they didn't. If you think Vince isn't creative, then you also think that SCSA isn't creative either, because Vince taught him a lesson that day and that was that he knows better than him. You can say "Well that was then...", but how did the most recent WrestleMania finish? With a classic sleight of hand moment, that nobody saw coming at the time (don't lie and say that you did anybody - the only person I saw predict it was Lance Storm), to crown a creatively captivating night!

If Vince McMahon is a creative genius then why was Steve Austin given a carny gimmick and a mouthpiece when he debuted in WWF? After they dumped Dib8ase and Austin won KotR they did nothing with him until Bret picked Austin for his return match on PPV later in the year. It was only after the crowds took to Austin that they bothered to do something with him. You're being very selective here praising the Submission match finish because that wrestlmania 13 card was abysmal and had one of the worst Mania main events ever.

If the contemporary shows are off limits for criticism then look at all the other poor decisions over the years:

The last two Rumble winners were booed out of the building. As I wrote in my previous post, they actually though that Batista Orton in the Mania 30 main event was a good idea, likewise Triple H beating Punk and having Bryan in a match with Sheamus on the undercard. Terrible ideas.

They wasted three Brock Lesnar matches with having him wrestle Triple H. Terrible.

John Cena has been booed for the last ten years on TV to the point that it's a gimmick part of the show and they have failed to make a new star to take over the reigns.

The ending of Undertakers streak was done very badly. The build to that was awful.

Go back further and look at how much of a clusterf**k the Invasion angle was. They refused at the time to bring in the WCW stars and book a proper invasion - despite them later signing Flair, Goldberg, NWO, Mysterio et al. That Invasion PPV did over 700k buys but the whole six month angle sucked. If Vince is so good at creative you'd think he'd have had the foresight to invest the money that that angle needed.

Go back to the mid 90s period when he tried to remake Hogan with Lex Luger and it flopped. Diesel was the lowest drawing champion for a year and that failed.

Look at The Rock's debut year where he sucked big time because they booked him as a cheery babyface.

The narrative that Vince has the midas touch and used his genius to put WCW out of business is a fairytale and one that they keep telling.Jamie Kellner put WCW out of business not Vince McMahon.

Look at how almost every televised wrestling product today builds their TV show around the evil (or sometimes good) authority figure.

Do you seriously like the WWE heel authority figure? I've never met or heard of anyone who does. Bischoff went heel before Vince - although Vince did do the heel gimmick in USWA in about 1994.

Dario Cueto was quite good but that's because he's a legit actor.

Look at how many cheap imitations of Royal Rumbles, King of the Rings, Money In The Banks, Ladder/TLC matches etc there are within every organisation. Look at how almost every indie wrestling company now needs to go by three initials because they think that that's the only way a wrestling company can be named because they got so used to WWF as a kid and wanted a company just like that. Look at how every promotion needs to build towards a big, WrestleMania-style event on its calendar (Ultima Lucha, Wrestle Kingdom, Bound For Glory etc). Look at how many 'alternative' companies have used 'We're SO unlike WWE', even indirectly, in their marketing. If you think Vince isn't creative, you can't really think that people who rip him off or need to use his name to get over are either. So who exactly is alive and creative in wrestling then if they haven't ripped off something Vince McMahon started?

The Royal Rumble was Pat Patterson's idea. Afaik Roy Shire used that gimmick years before Vince Jr. even owened WWF and besides, battle royals were nothing new. Neither were tournaments. Ladder matches and other such gimmicks were not exclusive to WWE. WWE might have been good with taking ideas and concepts from other people but that doesn't mean Vince McMahon is the creative genius some make him out to be.

Look at how almost every indie wrestling company now needs to go by three initials because they think that that's the only way a wrestling company can be named because they got so used to WWF as a kid and wanted a company just like that.

NWA and AWA were around before the WWF name change. And you don't "need" to have three letters.

Also on this topic, Vince lost his WWF initials because of his stubbornness in how he dealt with the Wildlife Fund.

Look at how every promotion needs to build towards a big, WrestleMania-style event on its calendar

Supercards were not created by Vince McMahon. Starrcade predates Mania as does World Class' Star Wars shows.

Vince McMahon isn't creative? He's the creativity sun that the rest of the wrestling world orbits around

He took other people's ideas and put them on a bigger stage because he had the TV business deals. Some wrestling promotions or wrestlers might look to WWE for ideas, inspiration or whatever else but more often than not its the other way around. Even silly little things like doing moves on the ring apron a la ROH or having The Usos do a lot of superkicks a la Young Bucks.

Omackeral

jaykhunter wrote: »

I don't think anyone's doubting Vince acumen in the boom of the Hulkamania or Attitude Era, which practically all of leggo's points are based. We're talking 2005-present Vince. I wouldn't tout the WWE Network as it'll only be out of debt (never mind recuperating lost profit from it) in 2020, but it is an impressive creative gamble. Vince's creative has lead to the largest collection of mid-carders in history, and the over-reliance on part-time older stars. These last few years have seen more fan-revolt/hijacking than ever before. What he's known for now is Million Dollar Mania, hornswoggle's father, being petty with CM Punk, killing the Nexus, Cesaro, dismissing Bryan, pushing Reigns, the RAW Divas Revolution etc. Being a huge juggernaut, it's not nearly as hard to stay afloat now as becoming #1 in the 80s, and reclaiming #1 in the 90s.

Ha, remember Tout? They tried to make it a thing for a while didn't they?! Literally just recalled that there.

Andersonisgod

jaykhunter wrote: »

I don't think anyone's doubting Vince acumen in the boom of the Hulkamania or Attitude Era, which practically all of leggo's points are based. We're talking 2005-present Vince. I wouldn't tout the WWE Network as it'll only be out of debt (never mind recuperating lost profit from it) in 2020, but it is an impressive creative gamble. Vince's creative has lead to the largest collection of mid-carders in history, and the over-reliance on part-time older stars. These last few years have seen more fan-revolt/hijacking than ever before. What he's known for now is Million Dollar Mania, hornswoggle's father, being petty with CM Punk, killing the Nexus, Cesaro, dismissing Bryan, pushing Reigns, the RAW Divas Revolution etc. Being a huge juggernaut, it's not nearly as hard to stay afloat now as becoming #1 in the 80s, and reclaiming #1 in the 90s.

Sure those are crimes but those shouldn't be the biggest mark against him. It should be the massive over-reliance on part timers to be the big draw when Wrestlemania season rolls around. That WWE have failed to create a true money-drawing superstar since Cena is something for fans of the company to be concerned about. That WWE must keep going back to the well of past stars and outsiders to draw on their biggest show of the year must also be a concern.

jaykhunter

Never sat right with me that fans turned on Punk when he left. He was miserable in his job and wanted to leave. Everyone has that right. It's like the majority of fans just took WWE's PoV on it and that was that.

ERG89

jaykhunter wrote: »

Never sat right with me that fans turned on Punk when he left. He was miserable in his job and wanted to leave. Everyone has that right. It's like the majority of fans just took WWE's PoV on it and that was that.

Not really most the fans were chanting his name for ages after he left.
They missed him but the Bryan push helped at the time

leggo

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and tastes, but the reality is is that history doesn't tend to favour those who ignore the weight of evidence staring them in the face and go for the contrary opinion on majorly successful figures. Walk into any pub or taxi in Ireland and try and make a case that Alex Ferguson was overrated as a manager and just knew how to hire knowledgable people around him. Try tell people that Gerry Ryan was a pompous, smug lad who wasn't worth a penny of his bloated state wages. See how long it takes before you're laughed out of the room. And yet these are all opinions that were repeated en masse - and gained steam - right here on boards and places like it while these figures were in their prime. Because, you know what, sometimes it's fun to poke holes in conventional wisdom, even if it's not really rooted in any kind of reality. How else do you think Eamonn Dunphy still has a job sure? He'd no doubt call Vince a clown if he ever turned his eye to the wrestling industry.

Every week you had someone saying that Fergie had lost the plot and he walked away a Premier League title-winning manager. That's the facts. Vince re-mortgaged his home to fund the first WrestleMania and will die one of the richest and most successful franchise owners on the planet. That's the facts. Ignore this gaping evidence staring you in the face at your own peril by all means. Success isn't subjective. And Vince McMahon is a success in the entertainment industry, in which creativity is crucial to survive for as long as he has.

You can cherry pick singular failures just as easily as I can point to individual matches were Alex Ferguson got his tactics wrong; the argument you're opposing isn't saying that he's been right 100% of the time, in fact I'm agreeing with you there, just that his empire has continued to grow and remain relevant which kinda proves that he's been right more often than not.

We can get into a whole debate on whether creativity is based around original thought, and then I'd probably get all philosophical with you and ask if original thought is possible...but let's not do that for the sake of all of our sanities. Can you agree with me that it takes at least a small dose of creativity to build a giant brand around the vision of one man and ideas of those who surround him who he's picked himself?

You can make ridiculous claims like how Bound For Glory isn't TNA's attempt at a WrestleMania-style event and is instead a tribute to, of course, Starrcade if you like, but that's REALLY stretching it. Note how Starrcade quickly followed WrestleMania to pay-per view and not the other way around.

And pointing to wrestlers whose gimmicks failed initially is completely missing the point of how wrestlers succeed and showing a fundamental misunderstanding for how the business you're commenting on works: 'The Ringmaster' wasn't a gimmick that was designed to main event, it was a platform to allow SCSA to work and grow and evolve into the star he was to become. Vince McMahon doesn't make wrestlers succeed, nor does he hinder them, he merely markets those who do stand out and books them accordingly when they're ready. That's a booker's job. A booker's job isn't to make your favourite wrestler the champion; that's the job of your favourite wrestler himself. The booker looks out for the best interests of the company, not the talent. In fact the latter kind of thinking is how the fly-by-night bookers of the business operate and flop quicker than it takes for any of us to ever hear of them.

And I LOL'd at the notion that more often than not WWE are looking to the indies for inspiration than the reverse. Hang out with 99% of people who train to be wrestlers and see if they're coming up with ideas to innovate and out-manoeuvre WWE or if they're just trying to be the next Daniel Bryan or John Cena. Fact is, 99% of wrestlers and promoters and difference-makers in the business today grew up watching WWE and it's at least partly because of them they got into the business. Hell listen to any wrestling podcast ever with a wrestler who's career doesn't pre-date the first WrestleMania and you'll know that. You already do though, truth be told.

Yeah WWE are the commercial centrepieces of the industry and - as in cinema, pop music etc - will follow trends and ideas made popular on the independent circuit...but is that a strike against them or do you actually enjoy watching NXT? I'm not sure what the problem here is exactly. One minute they're flawed for making Kevin Nash the champion, the next they're flawed for hiring Finn Balor and Kevin Owens, what is it exactly you want from them aside from a rant?

Your logic is circular. They literally cannot win. If they do what you want, they're ripping somebody off. If they don't then they're creatively stifled. Is it possible that they're just the easiest target in the game because of length of tenure and volume of content, and that you're projecting some frustration onto them despite the gaping amount of evidence presented above that they're actually doing an alright job after all?

leggo

jaykhunter wrote: »

Never sat right with me that fans turned on Punk when he left. He was miserable in his job and wanted to leave. Everyone has that right. It's like the majority of fans just took WWE's PoV on it and that was that.

To be fair, he was a moany and bitter c u next tuesday about it all. The guy struck me as a negative whinger way back in the days when he posted LiveJournals. His draining personality makes for great copy but does him no favours in the PR game. After his departure you heard the likes of Austin, Heyman, Edge, Jericho etc all talk about their own similar experiences of burnout. Yet none of them tried to attack the company on the way out as Punk did, they just sat at home and got on with life.

He's the type of person who blames the world on his own personal problems and expects to be handed opportunities or everyone else is stupid for not giving them to him, an unappreciative, slightly-sociopathic douche. I was delighted that a lot of people saw through his populist anti-WWE narrative and saw him for what he truly was. He said all of the things people wanted to hear yet still couldn't pull the wool over everyone's eyes.

Ageyev

leggo wrote: »

... [text]... I'm not sure what the problem here is exactly.
.... [text]...

WWE booking more often than not sucks and Vince McMahon has had more misses than hits. Thats the discussion point. I've already agreed that WWE are a billion dollar company with a corporate structure managing multiple revenue streams.

leggo

Ageyev wrote: »

WWE booking more often than not sucks and Vince McMahon has had more misses than hits. Thats the discussion point. I've already agreed that WWE are a billion dollar company with a corporate structure managing multiple revenue streams.

We're in danger of going around in circles if we're just going to repeat our points. To labour on an example that hasn't been challenged yet, that's like saying "Alex Ferguson is a bad manager who gets it wrong more than right, however I agree that he's won multiple titles in a variety of different competitions." Doesn't the latter point kinda disprove the former?

Now if you were to say, "WWE booking...not for me" on the other hand...

Ageyev

leggo wrote: »

We're in danger of going around in circles if we're just going to repeat our points. To labour on an example that hasn't been challenged yet, that's like saying "Alex Ferguson is a bad manager who gets it wrong more than right, however I agree that he's won multiple titles in a variety of different competitions." Doesn't the latter point kinda disprove the former?

Now if you were to say, "WWE booking...not for me" on the other hand...

I don't follow football and haven't watched an Alex Ferguson match since the 1990s so i don't get the reference.

Critical creative taste in Wrestling is indeed subjective but I am not the only person to question the 'Vince as creative genius' narrative.

billion dollar baby

Never heard a more accurate description of CM Punk to be fair

Omackeral

Just to weigh in on the Vince being the almighty genius...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmhw43ratxA