Did WWE stop any chance of a competitor by accident with bad booking?

[Jesse Ewiak]

Now, there's a multitude of other reasons, but listen to me for a second.

 

Along with good booking, another part of the reason why WCW finally gained some steam is frankly, people in college or in their early 20's flipped channels or stumbled upon wrestling with all their favorites from childhood on TV - Hogan! Savage! Gene Okerlund! Jim Duggan! A guy who kinda looks like Andre!

 

Meanwhile, on the other channel, there were the two people who were in tag teams when they were kids and a bunch of dudes they don't know.

 

Now, assume you're some billionaire with money to burn and a network with some coverage. Who are you going to hire that has name value and is available? I mean, John Morrison has been great on Lucha Underground and all, but he's not Randy Savage in 1995. I mean, maybe you drop a dump truck full of money in front of Batista & Punk, with a slightly smaller dump truck for Rey Jr., but I doubt any of them would move the needle that much.

 

So, I guess my argument is, even if somebody wanted to create a WCW, are there the available draws to do so? And if not, isn't it a net positive for WWE to continue 50/50 booking even if it hurts their ceiling?

[khawk20]

At this point a competitor with any real "oomph" is so far out of sight that it makes no sense for them to book everything to be "meh", if that was a line of reasoning that they would actually be using.

 

I think WWE is doing everything they can to maximize their ceiling, they just aren't very good at it.

[Al]

In a world where something like Storage Wars became a huge hit, I don't know if you actually need that much "name" talent to make a promotion work.

[Petey]

I was actually thinking about this early this morning and the answer is, I don't think the talent is there to create a legitimate "alternative" or #2 (1995 WCW as an example).

 

If we use 1994-1995 WCW's blueprint of hiring older wrestlers from the previous US wrestling boom and putting them in a new environment, that's impossible to duplicate since the last time US wrestling was mainstream was like fifteen years ago.

 

So if there aren't wrestlers of a previous era that can come in and work for the other company, then what? I used to think that it was creating an "alternative" based around workrate, essentially like mid-00's ROH but built better for a bigger audience. Problem is that with WWE's new focus on in-ring performance and signing all the super indy guys for NXT, that type of company would basically just be a lesser copy of WWE/NXT.

[goc]

I don't think the way to go to be an alternative to WWE these days is to try to be a "workrate alternative" at all because that's not their weak point. Their weak point is having interesting characters and engaging storylines. If anything WWE has too much wrestling and not enough character development.

[SteveJRogers]

Didn't TNA try that route for years with just about every former WWE star that became available through the years?

[bradhindsight]

This is a good talking point on the latest Where the Big Boys Play. Chad cites TNA, in fact, bringing in Jeff Hardy in 2010 and it not moving the needle. He surmised that Cena was probably the only name. Worth a listen.

[pol]

TNA has been a bigger obstruction to a viable #2 than anything WWE has done.

[Luchaundead]

The bad booking making it feel like no one is a star is only half of it because, the bad booking also soured casual fans to the point they are less inclined to watch any wrestling at all. This is why even when TNA signs Hardy, Angle, and Hogan it doesn't move the needle. People in general are completely turned off by the idea of watching wrestling as entertainment period no matter who the wrestlers are.

[MikeF]

I don't think the way to go to be an alternative to WWE these days is to try to be a "workrate alternative" at all because that's not their weak point. Their weak point is having interesting characters and engaging storylines. If anything WWE has too much wrestling and not enough character development.

This would be the way to go, IMO. Run it like a modern day version of an old territory. Similar to SMW. It wouldn't be a "mainstream" success, but wrestling fans would eat it up.

[Jimmy Redman]

Problem is, WWE are already doing that themselves with NXT.

[Ricky Jackson]

Exactly. The best alternative to WWE TV is a different kind of WWE TV

[Gutenberger]

At the moment, I can't see any promotion coming even close to beeing competition. I think the best they can do is just carve out their own niche and try to be as successful as they can.

It's like Petey said, they can't even go the "Dreammatch Indy Darling" route, because NXT and WWE are doing that themselves...

[goc]

Problem is, WWE are already doing that themselves with NXT.

I don't know, NXT TV to me is really lacking in good promos. I am sure people will bring the pitchforks out for that but I think if you were to put together a compilation of the best promos from NXT it wouldn't be very long.

[WingedEagle]

Not that its impacting other organizations, but I don't think NXT TV has been anything special in quite some time. The Takeover shows are always a hit and the odd Bayley / Joe / Gable & Jordan non-squash with time its usually good, but there's been far too much skippable C show material of late.

[fakeplastictrees]

The 50/50 booking definitely helps prevent people from becoming bigger than the company and thus being able to carry other companies. This also makes wrestlers pulling a Punk/Rock/Lesnar a few less likely experience. Its about the brand and not the wrestlers in the brand. TNA has proven that the wrestlers, for the most part, aren't draws anymore. Bound For Glory 2010 had Sting, Kevin Nash, RVD, Ric Flair, ECW guys (Sabu, Rhino, Dreamer, Raven), Mick Foley, Jeff Hardy, and Kurt Angle all on the card and it only managed to get 3500 people in the building that day. This is all intenational, get people over, but not TOO over.

[Jingus]

And most of the really-super-over megastars from the Monday Night Wars/Ruthless Aggression era are either still aligned with WWE or otherwise unavailable. Austin, Goldberg, Foley, Bret, Shawn, Flair, DDP, Sid, Booker, Luger, Hall, Bradshaw, Ron Simmons, Edge, Christian, Trish, Lita, Sable, and now Sting are all retired and likely to stay retired. Undertaker, Triple H, Cena, Big Show, Jericho, Kane, Orton, and Brock are all WWE 4 Life. Rock and Batista are probably retired, and if they return it'll almost certainly be for the WWE. Savage, Warrior, Piper, Eddy, Benoit, and Chyna are all dead. Hogan is damaged goods. Nash and Jarrett are useless. No new stars from the early days of TNA besides Styles and Joe have come to mean anything special.

 

Pretty much the only free agents that 1.still wrestle, and 2.ever made any difference are Rey Mysterio, Kurt Angle, Scott Steiner, RVD, Vader, and the Hardys. And as mentioned, TNA proved that even those types of guys are still worthless if they're put in a promotion which doesn't know how to use them correctly. Am I missing anyone important? (Unless you want to start counting old ECW stars, but really, let's not even bother.) If someone managed to book ALL of those guys into the same promotion along with a healthy young roster of indy stars and foreign talent, it might theoretically be possible to craft it into something interesting; but once again, TNA has been trying and failing to do exactly that for pretty much their entire existence.

[Parties]

It's certainly a good point that the WWE idea of "it's about the brand, not any individual stars". Bad booking perpetuates it. You also have a situation in which every other person who could potentially run a #2 brand seems deeply flawed in their approach. Gabe, Sinclair/Delirious, Konnan, Bauer, Dixie and the weird Corgan team at TNA, DeJoseph and the Lucha Underground bookers. Guys like Cornette, Jerry Jarrett and Ross are probably too old and have one foot out the door. Heyman seems resigned to who he now is, and had his own issues that kept him from being a true threat.

 

If the increased ESPN-ification of WWE continues, it's possible that someone in the next 5-10 years could come out of WWE - a Ryan Ward type - who is the right mix of a smart wrestling mind, corporate professionalism, and a personality that contrasts all of Vince's difficult craven weirdness (thus making for a better, more approachable partner for media, production deals, sponsorship). But even if you are that person - or think you're that person in the case of someone like Court Bauer - there are questions as to whether a Grantland-style vision of wrestling would be as profitable as a lot of us think, where you find years of necessary capital, and all the other usual questions. TNA had more money than God, but stupid beats money every time. And to the subject question of this thread: even with a Vince-caliber booker/promoter at the helm, you need the talent, but the current indie scene is a lot richer than it probably should be given the current state of wrestling. Unless something changes in those 5-10 years, it seems like there will always be enough talent. But being a talent and being a star are different things.