Wrestling Entertainment - we know, you don't have to tell us!

[Mike E]

Cesaro won't get pushed as long as Vince is around, unfortunately. Vince has made it clear he doesn't view Cesaro as main event talent - mainly because he's Swiss, apparently.

There are rumours that Ambrose will turn heel and join the Authority in Seth's absence, leading to an Ambrose Vs Reigns match at WrestleMania. I can see merits in the idea, but think it's the wrong direction to go in. Ambrose is popular as it is, whilst Reigns is entering Cena territory of being both liked and disliked by certain sections of the audience. If they went with a heel Ambrose Vs a face Reigns at WM, I could easily see the crowd booing the supposed face and cheering the heel. Reigns would obviously be pencilled in to win that match, which would lead to a pretty weird ending to WM where the face has won the title but is getting booed.

The most obvious route to take would be Reigns turning heel and having Ambrose (or Brock) facing him as a face at WM. However, WWE have put a lot of effort into trying to get Reigns over as a face, and I can see them being as stubborn with Reigns as they were with Cena.

Precisely my view on both Reigns and Ambrose. Reigns should get a dirty win over Ambrose at S'S.

After both his 'brothers' turned on him, he flips completely and goes all 'American Psycho' on people. He has that 'badass, blue collar' feel that SCSA had just as he started rising. Ditto Daniel Bryan.

[Dreyski]

Bryan Danielson AKA Daniel Bryan retires 🙁

[Madon]

Has anyone played the WWE 2K16 game? Bought it last week and it's a major improvement on last years. Love it.

[Mike E]

Bryan Danielson AKA Daniel Bryan retires 🙁

NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! :'(

[DE.]

Never really got the whole YES movement, but sad for DB nonetheless. Haven't seen somebody as over as he was since the days of Austin and The Rock. Thought his WWE career was patchy with some crazy highs but also long periods of lows. Pre-WWE he was one of if not the best performer out there.

[Mike E]

Never really got the whole YES movement, but sad for DB nonetheless. Haven't seen somebody as over as he was since the days of Austin and The Rock. Thought his WWE career was patchy with some crazy highs but also long periods of lows. Pre-WWE he was one of if not the best performer out there.

He's the best 'small man' we've seen in WWE since Eddie imo. Absolutely brilliant to watch. I'm hoping Finn Balor and Sam Zayn will compete for that mantle next.

[DE.]

He's the best 'small man' we've seen in WWE since Eddie imo. Absolutely brilliant to watch. I'm hoping Finn Balor and Sam Zayn will compete for that mantle next.

There's a lot of fantastic talent coming through, some of whom will hopefully take Bryan's place.

I still can't get over seeing AJ Styles in WWE. I watched TNA for a long time during their better years, so it's a little off putting seeing AJ on Raw. I hope they give him the respect he deserves.

[VinjayV4]

Can't really say that sounded like a great ending to Raw. Maybe should have been at the start or in the middle they do have 3 hours to fill after all. Not really a fan of the current product preferred when Raw was all about mayhem, carnage and antisocial attitudes. Not to mention some real cliffhanger endings. Things do move on though and I guess the current overly corporate/PC WWE is more a reflection of the present times.

[DE.]

WWE has its moments, but by and large it's a pretty poor product these days. I rarely watch it unless something big happens.

NXT is the show to watch. Top talent and storylines that are much more grounded in the basics of what made pro wrestling worth watching. It's just a shame that when NXT talent get called up to the "big leagues" of Raw and Smackdown they inevitably get saddled with bad gimmicks or get jobbed out to the regulars.

[donnermeat]

Haven't watched wrestling in over 15 years (though watched a bit of TNA semi regularly during 2006), saw this article and found it interesting. Don't know how true it is but thought it might be worth a read for the wrestling fans, see if you agree with it.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-wwe-dying-and-how-to-fix-it/

Edited February 9, 2016 by donnermeat

[VinjayV4]

Yeah but the problem with NXT is wrestling isn't really a draw. Storylines and characters are and really none of the NXT characters interest me. All well and good being popular on the internet but its hardly "revolutionizing" wrestling. Raw is too long as well but obviously that's down to commercial/tv reasons more than quality product. Too many long matches as well they should be cut to a minimum of 12 minutes on Raw/Smackdown. If you look at WWE's most popular periods they haven't exactly been critically acclaimed online for the quality of matches.

Lesnar is great even with the PG constraints and the Undertaker is always a welcome sight. The Rock will be at Wrestlemania of course but he's more "Dwayne Johnson" than "The Rock" these days. Other than that I can't say I have much interest at the moment. I still watched long after the late 90's having to endure the likes of Rey Mysterio. Its not just the "family entertainment" it was better than this in the mid 90's though I watched from autumn 1997 onwards. Its just far too corporate and looks more like Disney on Ice than a wrestling show. Did see a bit of the Royal Rumble match though wasn't even interested in seeing that through to the end. I don't really care that much about Bryan either it really does not mean more to me than some random hockey player, golfer, etc retiring. His apparent popularity as well hasn't shown in arena attendance or increased Tv ratings. He's not even comparable to Austin/Rock even in past few years Cena has been a bigger draw than Bryan has. I've never exactly disliked Bryan he just hasn't generated much interest from me.

Unfortunately if they keep making good profits not much is likely to change. As people have said fans seem to follow the "brand" now more than the wrestlers. I certainly think Vince is a brilliant businessman but he will only change things if the fans finally get tired of how stale it is. WWE's difficulties in the early-mid 90's (albeit partly due to non Tv events as well) it took big financial losses and beatings from WCW for changes to be made. I certainly don't want the company to ever go out of business but things might need to get a lot worse to get a lot better.

Edited February 9, 2016 by VinjayV4

[DE.]

Haven't watched wrestling in over 15 years (though watched a bit of TNA semi regularly during 2006), saw this article and found it interesting. Don't know how true it is but thought it might be worth a read for the wrestling fans, see if you agree with it.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-wwe-dying-and-how-to-fix-it/

It's a fair summation of some of the problems that exist. The biggest issue is the lack of competition. As soon as WCW folded, that was the beginning of the end. TNA put up a little bit of a fight (they even went head to head with Raw on Mondays for a few months in 2010) but ultimately WWE is simply too big to compete against. To most fans WWE is wrestling, and nothing else matters.

Yeah but the problem with NXT is wrestling isn't really a draw. Storylines and characters are and really none of the NXT characters interest me. All well and good being popular on the internet but its hardly "revolutionizing" wrestling. Raw is too long as well but obviously that's down to commercial/tv reasons more than quality product. Too many long matches as well they should be cut to a minimum of 12 minutes on Raw/Smackdown. If you look at WWE's most popular periods they haven't exactly been critically acclaimed online for the quality of matches

The internet is where WWE is focusing now, so of course NXT being popular there is relevant. The Network is where WWE is placing a massive part of their future hopes, and there's no doubt NXT is a big draw to that. I read an article about six months ago which said NXT was either the most popular or second most popular feature on the WWE Network.

It sounds like you haven't really given NXT a chance chief. Or perhaps you're more into the Attitude Era than pro wrestling itself? You wouldn't be alone, the 3-4 million missing viewers in the US alone from that time period were certainly more Attitude Era fans than wrestling fans.

[VinjayV4]

It's a fair summation of some of the problems that exist. The biggest issue is the lack of competition. As soon as WCW folded, that was the beginning of the end. TNA put up a little bit of a fight (they even went head to head with Raw on Mondays for a few months in 2010) but ultimately WWE is simply too big to compete against. To most fans WWE is wrestling, and nothing else matters.

The internet is where WWE is focusing now, so of course NXT being popular there is relevant. The Network is where WWE is placing a massive part of their future hopes, and there's no doubt NXT is a big draw to that. I read an article about six months ago which said NXT was either the most popular or second most popular feature on the WWE Network.

It sounds like you haven't really given NXT a chance chief. Or perhaps you're more into the Attitude Era than pro wrestling itself? You wouldn't be alone, the 3-4 million missing viewers in the US alone from that time period were certainly more Attitude Era fans than wrestling fans.

I don't know if it will be that good again but it certainly could be better than it is now. People like the Undertaker are great whatever era it is and Paul Bearer (he was hilarious) was always a total cartoon. Just don't want constant corporate stuff shoved down my throat. When I started watching was under the impression (more from seeing slightly dated video games) that it was still a cartoonish product. If it had been probably would have liked it at that age. Its true that I've never been a fan of lengthy matches though I don't mind them on PPV/Network. Raw and Smackdown should be about storylines and characters that's what interests me far more. That's just how it was then matches on Raw (and later Smackdown) were nowhere near as long. I don't think there was ever a match on Raw in 98 that went beyond 20 minutes. The longest matches were usually around 12 minutes at most and that would have been for main events. Far more kids watched then as well though clearly there were more adults in the arenas.

I'm referring to a certain section of fans on the internet. Those who visit the Observer/Torch websites not so much the ones on twitter. NXT is only so popular on there because its new. Marketing the product to them just makes wrestling more of a "niche" product. The 1998/1999 stuff does not get a lot of viewers on there but that's only because its over 10 years old. As far as mainstream Raw is far more popular than NXT. I started becoming more "smart" to the "business" from 2001 onwards (thanks to the internet though maybe that should be no thanks) and know lengthy matches just don't draw. NXT is more like "independent wrestling" and a lot of great moves don't make a great match. I'm a fan of ringwork from people like Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels. Brawling is my preferred type but some technical stuff isn't bad. I'm not interested in flippy floppy independent style wrestling.

Most people on the "smart" internet sites wouldn't agree. They would probably just call me a Vince Russo fan. Which I am.

Edited February 9, 2016 by VinjayV4

[DE.]

I don't know if it will be that good again but it certainly could be better than it is now. People like the Undertaker are great whatever era it is and Paul Bearer (he was hilarious) was always a total cartoon. Just don't want constant corporate stuff shoved down my throat. When I started watching was under the impression (more from seeing slightly dated video games) that it was still a cartoonish product. If it had been probably would have liked it at that age. Its true that I've never been a fan of lengthy matches though I don't mind them on PPV/Network. Raw and Smackdown should be about storylines and characters that's what interests me far more. That's just how it was then matches on Raw (and later Smackdown) were nowhere near as long. I don't think there was ever a match on Raw in 98 that went beyond 20 minutes. The longest matches were usually around 12 minutes at most and that would have been for main events. Far more kids watched then as well though clearly there were more adults in the arenas.

I'm referring to a certain section of fans on the internet. Those who visit the Observer/Torch websites not so much the ones on twitter. NXT is only so popular on there because its new. Marketing the product to them just makes wrestling more of a "niche" product. The 1998/1999 stuff does not get a lot of viewers on there but that's only because its over 10 years old. As far as mainstream Raw is far more popular than NXT. I started becoming more "smart" to the "business" from 2001 onwards (thanks to the internet though maybe that should be no thanks) and know lengthy matches just don't draw. NXT is more like "independent wrestling" and a lot of great moves don't make a great match. I'm a fan of ringwork from people like Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels. Brawling is my preferred type but some technical stuff isn't bad. I'm not interested in flippy floppy independent style wrestling.

Most people on the "smart" internet sites wouldn't agree. They would probably just call me a Vince Russo fan. Which I am.

I agree that the corporate stuff gets tiresome. WWE seems kind of soulless these days, which is a shame because there is legitimate talent across the brand. The likes of Dean Ambrose, Roman Reigns, Seth Rollins, Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Bray Wyatt, Kevin Owens, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan could easily have fit into the Attitude Era and become every bit as successful as the guys Phil listed in the post above mine. It sucks in some ways that these guys are wrestling in such a stale era, but worth noting WWE and wrestling in general is probably as good as it's ever been when it comes to overall safety and workers' health. In that regard these guys have got it a lot better than those that came before them.

I wouldn't call NXT like the independents. It's very much story based, with the big matches being saved for the PPV's. WWE use NXT to prepare their talent for Raw and Smackdown, so it would make no sense for the show to mirror the Independent scene and for matches to be spotfests. If that is what you think NXT is then I have to assume you haven't watched it much if at all. The women's division in NXT alone is absolutely phenomenal. They bring in a lot of independent workers to see if they're able to adapt to the WWE style. It is probably best likened to the popular times before the Attitude Era - simpler stories which still managed to get people interested, with big blowoff matches at the PPV events.

[VinjayV4]

I agree that the corporate stuff gets tiresome. WWE seems kind of soulless these days, which is a shame because there is legitimate talent across the brand. The likes of Dean Ambrose, Roman Reigns, Seth Rollins, Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Bray Wyatt, Kevin Owens, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan could easily have fit into the Attitude Era and become every bit as successful as the guys Phil listed in the post above mine. It sucks in some ways that these guys are wrestling in such a stale era, but worth noting WWE and wrestling in general is probably as good as it's ever been when it comes to overall safety and workers' health. In that regard these guys have got it a lot better than those that came before them.

I wouldn't call NXT like the independents. It's very much story based, with the big matches being saved for the PPV's. WWE use NXT to prepare their talent for Raw and Smackdown, so it would make no sense for the show to mirror the Independent scene and for matches to be spotfests. If that is what you think NXT is then I have to assume you haven't watched it much if at all. The women's division in NXT alone is absolutely phenomenal. They bring in a lot of independent workers to see if they're able to adapt to the WWE style. It is probably best likened to the popular times before the Attitude Era - simpler stories which still managed to get people interested, with big blowoff matches at the PPV events.

Can't agree with that at all and Kevin Owens in particular does not look like a star. Vince should remember what he wanted to do with Christian (never a big draw either) and put a blue dot over his face.

As for NXT its correct I haven't watched it much. Maybe "too much flippy floppy" stuff is wrong to describe the whole NXT roster. There's far too much emphasis on high impact moves (not meaning just top rope) at high speed for no real reason though. With the likes of Austin in particular at least the matches looked more like an actual fight in the 90's/early 2000's. There wasn't as much technical stuff after Bret Hart left but he was much better as well. OK the Undertaker v Mankind cell match (as an example) was mostly 2 big moves but it was absolutely unbelievable (JR's commentary at its best too) and won't ever be forgotten for the drama and violence. To say Undertaker gave Mankind the beating of his life would probably be an understatement!

Speaking of JR how about this for a spotfest!

Edited February 10, 2016 by VinjayV4

[DE.]

Can't agree with that at all and Kevin Owens in particular does not look like a star. Vince should remember what he wanted to do with Christian (never a big draw either) and put a blue dot over his face.

It's all about how they're packaged chief. Mick Foley was an overweight, ugly dude whose claim to fame was having half his ear ripped off. The Hardy Boyz were just two scrawny kids with southern drawls. The Dudleyz were/are just a black guy and a fat dude from New York. Hell, even Stone Cold was just a bald guy in black trunks. I bet there weren't many people pegging him as a star when he was "the Ringmaster". It's all about marketing and having the right gimmick. I have no doubt that the majority of the roster could be much more entertaining if they were let off the leash, but they never will be. WWE doesn't need to do that any more.

As for NXT its correct I haven't watched it much. Maybe "too much flippy floppy" stuff is wrong to describe the whole NXT roster. There's far too much emphasis on high impact moves (not meaning just top rope) at high speed for no real reason though. With the likes of Austin in particular at least the matches looked more like an actual fight in the 90's/early 2000's. There wasn't as much technical stuff after Bret Hart left but he was much better as well. OK the Undertaker v Mankind cell match (as an example) was mostly 2 big moves but it was absolutely unbelievable (JR's commentary at its best too) and won't ever be forgotten for the drama and violence. To say Undertaker gave Mankind the beating of his life would probably be an understatement!

Speaking of JR how about this for a spotfest!

What you've described doesn't sound like NXT to me pal, sorry. It sounds like ROH or TNA.

It's funny you mention JR, one of the biggest problems WWE has is their announce team. Annoying, fake, boring and extremely uncool. JBL has his moments, but Saxton is bland and Cole is Cole. These guys really struggle to make anything seem important, and it's hard to take any of them particularly seriously.

[VinjayV4]

Eric Bischoff thought Austin was just a "bald guy in black trunks". There were a lot of people who thought Austin had star potential before he joined WWE. When he did it was with the reputation that he couldn't talk but Vince soon realised he could. As for Mick Foley he wasn't hired for years because Vince felt "he didn't look like a star" but he certainly looked different. Its like Vince Russo has said who would turn heads more in public? Someone who looks like Owens or Foley who looks nothing like most people.

I always thought Reigns would be Vince's guy and he does have a great look. Maybe his mic skills will improve and I read about his match with Sheamus on Raw recently. I think Ambrose has higher potential too if he was more edgy. Would be better than throwing ketchup over Kane or whatever it was he did. Its Dean Ambrose not Doink Ambrose. It will be difficult with too many writers scripting everything and the "watered down" nature of the shows. As for Rollins it seems like he just did the same promo week after week. AJ Styles and Samoa Joe have been around too long so its unlikely they will be major stars. Joe has wasted a lot of his potential and it wasn't just TNA's fault. The Hardy Boyz had appeal with their look and with people like the Dudleys did some great stuff in the tag team division. They did however become big names in the WWE when the shows were already drawing huge ratings. People praised their matches in 99-2001 but they were not the draw for most people. CM Punk wasn't as big as some people think but he could have been bigger. Bray Wyatt has a great entrance and some interesting mic work but he's in a watered down environment. Daniel Bryan as I've already said did not draw Tv ratings and apparently house shows featuring Cena on top outdrew those with Bryan. I'm not a big Cena fan (though I don't hate him like some do) but he's certainly been the biggest draw. I don't particularly dislike any of those guys but they just haven't interested me enough.

The best they have is The Undertaker and Lesnar but they aren't there often enough. Lesnar is so good that even in a PG, watered down product he looks like an absolute killer. Always liked HHH and Kane though they are shadows of their former selves really especially Kane.

I don't mind Cole though he was actually better earlier in his career. Doubt anyone other than Lawler has been on WWE Tv as much as him in the past 20 years. Saxton offers nothing and JBL should be a total heel. People have been praising the new announcer Ranallo on Smackdown (though a lot are the "smart" types) and I've heard King is acting like a heel again which he is FAR FAR better at. King has come across as bored and unenthusiastic in the past few years and I can't really blame him. In the 90's and early 2000's he was brilliant. As for JR its been a no win situation for Cole in some ways following him. JR is over 60 though and would have had to be replaced at some point though I wish he was still there.

[VinjayV4]

It's funny you mention JR, one of the biggest problems WWE has is their announce team. Annoying, fake, boring and extremely uncool. JBL has his moments, but Saxton is bland and Cole is Cole. These guys really struggle to make anything seem important, and it's hard to take any of them particularly seriously.

Speaking of Michael Cole I remember Rovers had a youth player with that name a few years back. What did Rovers do trade him to Smackdown?

[Iceman]

The WWF/WWE Attitude Era will never be surpassed. It was simply a good backbone storyline tied in with fantastically played and distinctive characters.

• The Rock
• Stone Cold
• Triple H
• Kurt Angle
• Chris Jericho
• The Undertaker
• Kane
• Rikishi
• Booker T
• The Dudley Boyz
• Mick Foley as GM

To name but a few... I still occasionally go back and watch clips of it on YouTube, but my age not withstanding, WWE does seem to be empty these days.

Ive also lost interest. I agree with one of the posts above, the day WCW folded was the day it became boring. Seeing Bill Goldberg, Rick and Scott Steiner, Nash, Sting etc challenge those of the WWE to battes were great. Eric Bischoff was also a great windup, and it made its battle with Mr Mcmahon something pretty special.

But WWE can never compete with the days when it was known as the WWF, with Taker, the 4 Horsemen, Michaels, Brett Hart, Mankind etc.

[VinjayV4]

That's the main problem no major competition and good profits. Of course being profitable is good for the company but combined with lack of competition its not good for the fans. Not including 99-00 when WCW were being destroyed and WWF(E) were still putting on a great product.

Funny thing is I never watched WCW and miss it more now! Unless you count their dreadful Channel 5 show which (and I'm seriously not making this up) included Batman style KERPLOW, WHAM, censoring for weapons shots! I do think that was a C5 decision though at least Sky just cut to the crowd on the Sky 1 morning Smackdown broadcasts!

Edited February 14, 2016 by VinjayV4

[DE.]

Funny thing is I never watched WCW and miss it more now! Unless you count their dreadful Channel 5 show which (and I'm seriously not making this up) included Batman style KERPLOW, WHAM, censoring for weapons shots!

That was hilarious, though I remember being pretty angry at the time. We switched to Sky Digital in '99 and WCW wasn't on there, so the only way I could watch it was through Channel 5 and it @#/? sucked. The segments were weeks if not months old and often spliced together with no cohesion at all. If I remember correctly the show was called WCW Worldwide. By the time WCW came to Bravo (2000, 2001?) I'd already migrated to the WWF/E.

I did go through all of the WCW eps recently on the Network, from around mid-96 to the beginning of 1998. Really great stuff - WCW in its prime was a fantastic show. A shame that they had no ideas once the nWo idea became stale.

[Iceman]

That was hilarious, though I remember being pretty angry at the time. We switched to Sky Digital in '99 and WCW wasn't on there, so the only way I could watch it was through Channel 5 and it @#/? sucked. The segments were weeks if not months old and often spliced together with no cohesion at all. If I remember correctly the show was called WCW Worldwide. By the time WCW came to Bravo (2000, 2001?) I'd already migrated to the WWF/E.

I did go through all of the WCW eps recently on the Network, from around mid-96 to the beginning of 1998. Really great stuff - WCW in its prime was a fantastic show. A shame that they had no ideas once the nWo idea became stale.

But thats partly due to Russo and Bischof, as they were terrible at the way they matched things up.

[DE.]

But thats partly due to Russo and Bischof, as they were terrible at the way they matched things up.

WCW was a sinking ship long before Russo came in, WWF/E became so hot in 1999 that there probably wasn't much WCW could do. They hadn't built any new stars and people were tired of seeing Hogan, Nash, Sting, etc in the main event every week. WWF/E was giving the fans something fresh and exciting, whilst WCW was giving people practically the same thing they'd been offering in 1997, especially when the Wolfpac/B&W nWo joined forces again after the 'fingerpoke of doom'.

Russo didn't help, but by that time the horse had bolted anyway. WCW could never have competed with the likes of Austin and the Rock at that point.

The company itself died because of the mergers and Ted Turner's weakened position. Once the network had decided it didn't want WCW any more, it was game over regardless of anything they attempted.

[VinjayV4]

The company itself died because of the mergers and Ted Turner's weakened position. Once the network had decided it didn't want WCW any more, it was game over regardless of anything they attempted.

Absolutely. Even the "death of WCW" book apparently names the head of the network (Jamie Kellner) as the guy who "killed" WCW. Yet Kellner isn't even on the cover!

Edited February 14, 2016 by VinjayV4

[VinjayV4]

Don't really like the look of the shows either. Too many bright lights and glossy, simplified logos. Thought the look of the show was especially great in 98/99 but I guess you need all these pointless "extras" in Tv production these days. Of course WWE do a brilliant job of producing Tv and are up there with anyone in that respect though the shows look too similar. The videoscreen they have been using for about 8 years certainly wasn't cheap so they won't stop using that anytime soon. Or replace it with a plainer version like the old Titantron.

Still there's nothing Raw about Raw. Forget Raw is War more like Raw is Disney On Ice.

Edited February 15, 2016 by VinjayV4