Goalie Posted December 7, 2015 Author Report Posted December 7, 2015 I remember the attitude Era. WWF at the time had a super bowl ad... the tag line at the end was "get it?" Some do. Some don't. People going on sbout The omega angle is an example of people who really don't "get it" The Unknown Poster 1
iso_55 Posted December 7, 2015 Report Posted December 7, 2015 If Omega had laid down right away for Hulk Hogan to get the 1, 2, 3 in a PPV like Jeff Jarrett did in 1995 at a WCW PPV would you still stand up for him because he is a friend? My point is wrestlers make bad choices all the time. All that match with the little girl did was convince millions of people that pro wrestling sucks. Why do you think Brock Lesnar gets so much heat? Because, he, the Undertaker & a few others look like they actually could brawl their way out of a bar fight vs 20 guys. Fighting invisible men & kids just makes people laugh, not at the match but at the business. Just look at the last year of WCW & the stupid gimmicky stuff they did. Wrestling in a swimming pool, Santa climbing into the ring to fight. I remember all that ****. In WWE Adam Rose wrestling a bunny, so where is his career now? Buried on the roster. Most fans I think would be insulted watching a 9 year old defeat a 40 year old ring veteran or fighting an invisible man. You're judging an entire industry based on your perception. The only reason we're discussing this is because of youtube. The Omega match was for the Japanese audience which is very different from the American audience. Should those promoters stop making money because it offends the senses of specific American wrestling fans? The Undertaker isnt over because he looks like he could win a bar brawl. In fact, I'd never put money on him winning any sort of real fight at this point. Brock Lesnar doesnt move ratings one iota anymore. The most cartoony guy WWE has is John Cena and he's the top merchandise seller. Daniel Bryan and CM Punk were the #2 merch sellers at various points and both are smaller-average looking guys. Wrestling is a work. Everything about it is a work. If you had 25 Brock Lesnar's, then Brock Lesnar wouldnt be special. And by the way, Jeff Jarrett laying down was a work. Ofcourse I'd still be Omega's friend if the booker booked him to do that finish. Jarrett would have looked awful had he refused and also opened WCW up to a lawsuit from Hogan (which was the end result anyway, but not due to anything Jarrett did). Well, being the dumb wrestling fan that I am, I remember what Jarrett did on that PPV. I didn't come here because of You Tube so to speak. Of course the Japanese are a different audience. I said the video was creepy which is my opinion. You go into this long defense of Kenny Omega & the 9 year old saying they did great work in the ring. Of course the audience is different. A match like that here would be criticized, laughed at & mocked. In Japan they love it. Over here, no.
Goalie Posted December 7, 2015 Author Report Posted December 7, 2015 I dunno. North American fans are smarter than you think. Depends which market you are in but it might go over here quite well too. Wrestling is supposed to be fun. Most people get that. Watch PWG or Chikara. They do similar stuff and it gets over huge iso_55 1
iso_55 Posted December 7, 2015 Report Posted December 7, 2015 I dunno. North American fans are smarter than you think. Depends which market you are in but it might go over here quite well too. Wrestling is supposed to be fun. Most people get that. Watch PWG or Chikara. They do similar stuff and it gets over huge I appreciate what you're saying. But the phrase you use saying NA fans are smarter than you think means they wouldn't accept the Omega-9 yr old girl as a legit match.
Brandon Posted December 7, 2015 Report Posted December 7, 2015 Japanese audiences like a good freak show.. This is why mma from Japan doesn't work well here. For the most part north american fans don't want to shell out money for super fighters destroying tomato cans wearing a mask that can't fight. In Japan they eat that up.
The Unknown Poster Posted December 8, 2015 Report Posted December 8, 2015 I dunno. North American fans are smarter than you think. Depends which market you are in but it might go over here quite well too. Wrestling is supposed to be fun. Most people get that. Watch PWG or Chikara. They do similar stuff and it gets over hugeI appreciate what you're saying. But the phrase you use saying NA fans are smarter than you think means they wouldn't accept the Omega-9 yr old girl as a legit match. Many American wrestling fans love Japanese wrestling. It's not the mainstream. But there is an audience for it here. As noted look at some very popular Indy promotions here like PWG and Chikara. Anyway....Raw last night did 3.04 million viewers, the second lowest modern number, beating only the 2.95 million of the 11/23 show. The number was down from last week partially due to the show falling off the tracks late, but also the Dallas Cowboys vs. Washington Redskins game did 14.15 million viewers, a number very close to the game on 11/23, while last week's game did 10.12 million viewers. The three hours were: 8 p.m. 3.27 million viewers 9 p.m. 3.04 million viewers 10 p.m. 2.85 million viewers
The Unknown Poster Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 Actual RAW rating is 2.15, lowest since February 1997 which I believe was the time when Vince lost his mind, demanded "results or resignations" and brought in Vince Russo to book WWE. Also, here's a depressing summation. When TNA launched their "Monday Night War" against WWE in 2010, they drew 2.2 million people average with a peak of over 3m. WWE drew 5.6m. So you had 7.8m watching wrestling on Monday night. Over 60% of that audience is now gone in just a few years. WWE seemingly has no idea why as they continue to do polls and surveys asking for fan feedback. Problem is, its feedback from fans still watching.
Brandon Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 It's because adults don't watch wrestling... The attitude era people watched the program for the mature over the top storylines. As a mid 30 year old why would I want to watch lame kiddy storylines?
Goalie Posted December 9, 2015 Author Report Posted December 9, 2015 People need to forget about the attitude era, It's not coming back... It doesn't even need too, There are lots of really good shows on TV that are PG, they just have better writers than WWE does, It's really that simple. They can say OK guys, we give in, ATTITUDE era is coming back but unless the storylines are good and there is good booking, efforts to get people over instead of shoving 1 guy the people have rejected down the fans throats every week, It won't matter. It's all about the backstage stuff, I like wrestling, I'll watch a good wrestling match and normally RAW has 1 or 2 good wrestling matches a week, ON A 3 HOUR SHOW... it's crazy... 5 minute match here, 4 minutes there, 20 minutes of solid action, 5 minutes here, 4 minutes there, recap, recap.. talk talk talk, talk again... It's the same format. Raw always starts the same, promo, followed by a match followed by a recap followed by a match, recap, match, recap,recap, pimp WWE network, recap, match, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk.... I guess, when was the last time something interesting happened on RAW? I'll say this tho, the first 2 hours... the viewership wasn't so bad... that last hour tho? YIKES... tells me nobody gives 2 craps about Roman and Sheamus yet... WWE still gonna shove Reigns down peoples throats... Just awful. It's so bad, it's not even worth talking about even.
The Unknown Poster Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 It's because adults don't watch wrestling... The attitude era people watched the program for the mature over the top storylines. As a mid 30 year old why would I want to watch lame kiddy storylines? You're wrong though. Demo's are trending up in age. Its the young audience they've lost.
Goalie Posted December 9, 2015 Author Report Posted December 9, 2015 Yup the 18-34 year old age group has went away.
Atomic Posted December 9, 2015 Report Posted December 9, 2015 They need to do more to make people actually curious about what is going to happen on RAW. Something impactful where if you miss it and watch the next week you say "Woah! When did that happen?!". I can miss RAW every week between PPVs and not be confused at all when I watch the next PPV. That tells me that nothing of consequence happens so why would I bother watching? Goalie and The Unknown Poster 2
Brandon Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 It's because adults don't watch wrestling... The attitude era people watched the program for the mature over the top storylines. As a mid 30 year old why would I want to watch lame kiddy storylines? You're wrong though. Demo's are trending up in age. Its the young audience they've lost. None of my friends who loved wrestling during high school follow it at all these days. The local wrestling's shows I went to were mostly family and carnie like folks... I don't see any 18-40 year olds at all talking about wrestling these days. I think your numbers are dead wrong...
The Unknown Poster Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 Well I would hate to call into question the scientific method of determining viewership by what your buddies watch but WWE's best demo is 50+. Second best demo is under 18. The other demos are around the same. And they are losing 18-34 faster than tje others. TNA trends even older. House shows are primarily younger I will grant you that. But people watching the show and the "PPV" events is trending older. WWE's issue isn't just that their angles are lame. Older fans keep watching almost no matter what. They've lost the cool factor.
Brandon Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 So you are flip flopping... I said in the past that it's only younger kids and old timers watching wrestling and you claimed this was completely false.
The Unknown Poster Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 So you are flip flopping... I said in the past that it's only younger kids and old timers watching wrestling and you claimed this was completely false. You'll have to show me where I said that. I've always known the audience trends older. And wouldnt that be you who's flip flopping since you just said it was only kids watching? Im not the decider on the issue. Im only telling you facts. In the grand scheme of things the demo's dont have wild disparity because it's fairly low numbers but because it's low numbers, small changes have a significant impact. It does sort of fly in the face of logic because people like you and me see WWE having gone from "cool" to "lame" and we both know people in our demo who feel the same. I think what happened is, the older crowd are the diehard fans that always watched. They aren't the "smart mark" fan that follows the ins and outs. They just like their rasslin. They will always watch no matter how good or bad it is. This explains why TNA eroded their audience down to an even older demo. The smark audience likes ROH. They like NXT. Their the type of fan to watch for the "art" of a Daniel Bryan match. UFC did hurt their audience because it siphoned off some of the 18-34 males. The irony being it was a Vince McMahon decision that helped "save" UFC and delivered to UFC their own best demo. If you look at WWE numbers since the attitude era, it's very depressing. If you look at it year over year, I believe its a 16% decline. Which is not insignificant ofcourse. Some of the other negative trends is that they arent seeing the rise in interests for things like the post PPV RAW, a hot shot angle (League of Nations), a title change, a special guest. It used to be even when fans were tuning out, they still "followed" and would tune in for what was expected to be good RAW's...they arent so much anymore which means they arent just not watching, they arent following and those are fans they will be hard-pressed to win back. Their latest surveys seemed to be geared towards RAW vs NXT and Network viewing habits. They see NXT as "cool" and want to know what fans like about NXT versus what they dont like about RAW. And supposedly "changes" are coming. They will be changes to Smackdown to as it flips to USA Network in January.
Atomic Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 The problem is the fans don't know what they want. And I mean that in terms of fans in general, not just wrestling fans. Fans may be very vocal about what they want but it doesn't always make sense, and if you give it to them, they may find that it's not as great an idea as they thought. Fan polls.... Not a good way to fix the biz. Catering to the whims of the smarks will kill WWE, not save it.
The Unknown Poster Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 I agree that surveys arent going to help much because they are surveying people that still watch. They need to reach the people that stopped watching. Either way, they have a lot of information available to them, from demographics of their ratings to very detailed viewership information concerning the Network. I think they are just in denial and going through the motions of a company trying to figure out whats happening. The fact they generate a significant revenue and are in no threat to go under puts less pressure on them to be reactionary where they were in the past when they had competition and felt a sense of pride to compete and be very reactionary. I would disagree about the smarks to a degree. If you can entertain your toughest to please fans, your easiest to please fans will be just as entertained. Im not saying inside references or things like that, which WWE did all the time in the Attitude era, but the audience that is smarter to the business wants better wrestling, better story telling and more engagement. I think WWE's biggest problem is that they stopped pretending wrestling was real. Its more of a parody/variety show now. Its closer to SNL than UFC. WWE pretty much winks at their viewers that everything that is happening is fake. When I go to see The Avengers, I know it's not real, but I dont want Stan Lee to appear on screen and remind me of that fact. They need to present RAW as if its a legitimate sport. part of that is to stop over-producing their shows which is very hard for them to do. Vince and their Exec Producer Kevin Dun are control freaks. They need to stop scripting promos. They need to stop being so "polished" and they really need to go with the flow more. They cut off their nose to spite their face way too often.
bigg jay Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 I think WWE's biggest problem is that they stopped pretending wrestling was real. Its more of a parody/variety show now. Its closer to SNL than UFC. WWE pretty much winks at their viewers that everything that is happening is fake. When I go to see The Avengers, I know it's not real, but I dont want Stan Lee to appear on screen and remind me of that fact. They need to present RAW as if its a legitimate sport. part of that is to stop over-producing their shows which is very hard for them to do. Vince and their Exec Producer Kevin Dun are control freaks. They need to stop scripting promos. They need to stop being so "polished" and they really need to go with the flow more. They cut off their nose to spite their face way too often. The problem with trying to go more "real" (at least in terms of in ring action) is that people know what real looks like, thanks to the UFC. When they try incorporating moves from mma, it looks terrible (Undertaker's gogoplata is a perfect example) and brings it back to the realm of being a parody.
The Unknown Poster Posted December 10, 2015 Report Posted December 10, 2015 By real I mean the production aspects. They could show the most Dastardly thing imaginable and then cut to the announcers for some barely relevant exchange that includes joking and quickly moving on to something else. No urgency. No seriousness. Overly slick. Too many cliches. The in ring action has never been better. And you don't need to be like UFC in the ring. No one expects that and in fact no one wants that because UFC is boring more often than not. WWE's huge advantage over MMA is that they control the match and they control the outcome. They just suck at the emotion and promotion. When Batman fights Joker I know it's not real but I'm still entertained. I can suspend my disbelief for two hours. One issue with the advent of CGI is when scenes don't look real and takes the viewer out. Wrestling is very good at the work part of matches. As an audience we want to suspend our disbelief for three hours. WWE just doesn'tet us.
Atomic Posted December 11, 2015 Report Posted December 11, 2015 I would agree with your comments that they don't present it as real. What I meant by not appealing to smarks is that smarks tend to care more about the in ring work than anything else. Cesaro is a perfect example. Great in the ring but can you imagine that guy as the face of WWE? Absolutely no mass appeal like the rock or stone cold or John cena. He's just a lame old bald guy who is lame on the mic. Spectacular in the ring and the smarks would put the belt on him but I wouldn't and Vince won't either because he has no mass appeal potential.
Brandon Posted December 11, 2015 Report Posted December 11, 2015 I want to see funny and edgy stuff mixed in with great wrestling. The Unknown Poster 1
The Unknown Poster Posted December 11, 2015 Report Posted December 11, 2015 I would agree with your comments that they don't present it as real. What I meant by not appealing to smarks is that smarks tend to care more about the in ring work than anything else. Cesaro is a perfect example. Great in the ring but can you imagine that guy as the face of WWE? Absolutely no mass appeal like the rock or stone cold or John cena. He's just a lame old bald guy who is lame on the mic. Spectacular in the ring and the smarks would put the belt on him but I wouldn't and Vince won't either because he has no mass appeal potential. Cesaro is a great example though, of a guy that can be a lot more than he is. You could certainly argue that he doesnt have the "it" factor. And one aspect of his work that is lacking is "babyface fire". But he speaks a million languages (which is a pretty obvious thing to market) and is a great worker. I'd turn him heel and be perfectly okay with fans still cheering for him, with the idea he'd be a great face down the road. Not everyone has to be The Rock. Some people can be Mr Perfect. Some people can be Owen Hart. Some people can be Earthquake. They've forgotten how to sprinkle guys throughout the roster. Its like if they dont have a main event idea for them, then they just end up as nobodies. WWE has maybe three top guys and everyone else are low-mid card. Backstage guys call it the 500 Club. Fans call it the 50-50 club. Its the same thing. Everyone is middling.
Taynted_Fayth Posted December 13, 2015 Report Posted December 13, 2015 I think there's a general lack of superficial characters and too many randy ortons n dolph zigglers. Its kinda nice seeing something like the stardust gimmick but im not a fan golddust or cody rhodes, but at least someone other then kane/undertaker are trying to be something more then joe tights who likes to fight
The Unknown Poster Posted December 13, 2015 Report Posted December 13, 2015 Stardust is probably true most embarrassing gimmick of all time. If you're watching raw and a non fan walks into the room the last thing you want on your screen and have to explain is stardust. Dustin Rhodes is great. Cody Rhodes is pretty good. But it's another tbing wrong with WWE is that they had essentially three generations of Rhodes' and never told a real story. Dusty was over and then he dared raise his hand to shush Steph during a promo and was never used again Just ego and pettiness.
Recommended Posts