Any other longterm fans starting to feel alienated by the current fanbase?

[Matt D]

Isn't the trick just not to talk about wrestling on twitter?

[Sean Liska]

Also count me in on wrestling being as irrelevant as ever.

100% with you on how frustrating it is to be considered a troll if you don't think Okada is having the greatest year in wrestling history, makes me value this place even more. It just doesn't work for me. I have no reason to dislike NJPW, company with great history that has given me plenty of entertainment and I love seeing the crowds they're drawing, and they give me tons of content for $10 a month. But after watching the NJPW PPV I had this strange appreciation for the Ambrose-Drifter match on Raw. The Drifter actually got heat and "you suck" chants, when he had Ambrose in a chinlock the crowd rallied behind Ambrose, they didn't do a ton of moves, it was simple, it didn't overstay its welcome. I don't know when I turned into this old man. I loved 90s puro, I consider Misawa's guys vs Jumbo's guys to be the best feud ever.

 

Would disagree on wrestling being more irrelevant than ever. The fact that Mania drew 90k last year and Mania 11 was in the Hartford Civic Center says it all to me, that was a rough time. Hogan-Flair in a career match couldn't sell out an arena back then while WWE sells out major arenas regularly now.

[Matt D]

 

Also count me in on wrestling being as irrelevant as ever.

100% with you on how frustrating it is to be considered a troll if you don't think Okada is having the greatest year in wrestling history, makes me value this place even more. It just doesn't work for me. I have no reason to dislike NJPW, company with great history that has given me plenty of entertainment and I love seeing the crowds they're drawing, and they give me tons of content for $10 a month. But after watching the NJPW PPV I had this strange appreciation for the Ambrose-Drifter match on Raw. The Drifter actually got heat and "you suck" chants, when he had Ambrose in a chinlock the crowd rallied behind Ambrose, they didn't do a ton of moves, it was simple, it didn't overstay its welcome. I don't know when I turned into this old man. I loved 90s puro, I consider Misawa's guys vs Jumbo's guys to be the best feud ever.

 

Would disagree on wrestling being more irrelevant than ever. The fact that Mania drew 90k last year and Mania 11 was in the Hartford Civic Center says it all to me, that was a rough time. Hogan-Flair in a career match couldn't sell out an arena back then while WWE sells out major arenas regularly now.

 

Oh man, let me just invalidate my previous statement.

 

I went to a NXT house show last year with No Way Jose vs the Drifter. He was just back from injury. This might have been his first tour back. Huge heat and a big portion of the middle of the match was him working a chinlock (really working it), Jose getting hope spots out, and a hairpull cutting them off to huge heat. The crowd was into it. Both guys were working it. These two guys were ideally suited for this sort of a layout because of Jose's charisma and how reviled Samson was. I was digging it and absolutely loving how the crowd (which was hot for everything all night) was 100% into it.

 

The guy behind me starts getting vocally frustrated at all the "rest holds."

 

I can't really even begin to state how thoroughly I appreciate you people.

[SomethingSavage]

 

Ehh. Think you're totally off with that statement, to be honest. I mean, don't get me wrong. This ain't the Attitude Era we're living in - but wrestling is pretty widely accepted as a fun getaway and a fairly common hobby for a lot of people.

 

The fact that it became mundane as opposed to shameful doesn't make it a Golden Age.

 

 

Well, yeah. Except that it wasn't me saying this WAS a golden age.

 

It wasn't ever my argument that this is a golden age. It was my argument that wrestling isn't "as irrelevant as ever" right now. It simply isn't. The early nineties and the mid 2000's were far, far worse. Those first few PG years seemed really, REALLY rough too.

 

I do agree, though, about it being more die-hard fans that are touting this as a new golden age. Although I can easily understand why. There's an abundance of footage IMMEDIATELY available at your fingertips - on demand, in such a plentiful way unlike EVER before.

 

So, if they're talking in terms of QUANTITY, then yeah. It's a golden age of instant, easily accessible footage. In terms of QUALITY, that's obviously going to get people debating and offering different preferences. Just the name of the game.

 

*I think* it's basically just hardcore fans saying that this is an awesome time to be a fan. And, I mean, they're not wrong. You can practically cherry pick whatever you want from wherever you want. It's a bit silly to shit on them for whatever "term" they use to label this period in time. Okay. So maybe it isn't a golden age. Silver, then? It's just them expressing appreciation for what's available nowadays.

 

Or maybe my interpretation of it is totally off the mark. Maybe you're right. Maybe they all believe these Omega/Okada matches are THE definitive pinnacle - the best wrestling has ever been, and they're everything all wrestling should aspire to be moving forward. But I don't think that's the case. At least, I hope not.

[Ricky Jackson]

I think this is an awesome time to be a fan because it feels like there is a lot of interesting stuff going on in a variety of different ways and settings. Japan, indie, UK, women. Crowds are hot if obnoxious at times. Old school footage is plentiful and being discussed more and more. WWE at least has NXT going for it, which has kept me going week to week. I think this is definitely the high point for wrestling in this century. Yes, wrestling isn't terribly relevant on a mainstream level, but this is the age we live in, where you can indulge in your niche hobby 24/7 and there are tons of different niche hobbies out there. Who really wants mainstream acceptance anyway? The last time that happened the quality of wrestling nose dived and it took years to recover. I'm fine with the way things are

[funkdoc]

decline in cultural relevance is far from just a wrestling thing, which makes me think it doesn't have much to do with quality or lack thereof. entertainment in general is so splintered these days that almost nothing can gain the sort of hold that, say, Saturday Night Live did in the 70s.

 

one of the most oft-reported stories in football this past year has been the significant drop in TV ratings, for both NFL and college football. this past NFL season also had the least buzz around it that i can remember - pundits mostly talked about how bad and unwatchable it is, and so many people i know have completely stopped caring about it. hell, i get waaaayyyy more response when i talk about wrestling on Twitter or my Twitch stream than i do when i try to talk football!

 

even with the NFL, this has been ongoing throughout the 2000s. remember Dennis Miller on commentary for Monday Night Football? that was a desperate attempt to make that show a Cultural Event like it used to be, and they eventually realized that was impossible. too much else had changed even by then, much less now.

 

i harp on this particular example so much because the NFL was long seen as the Teflon sport and the most consistent presence in American pop culture...and yet its story isn't turning out so differently.

 

i think economics play an important role in this as well, and that's not talked about nearly enough. is it merely an accident that wrestling's all-time business peak roughly coincides with the all-time peak period for album sales, or is that a function of the 90s economy yielding more disposable income for the middle and upper-middle class? this also ties into the heavy reliance on 90s nostalgia acts, which isn't just a wrestling thing either; U2 & Metallica & the Chili Peppers are still some of the biggest live draws in rock music, in no small part because their fans have a hell of a lot more money to spend than younger folks do.

 

my point in all this? i don't think it's worthwhile to define a "Golden Age" by anything other than appeal to hardcores anymore, since appeal to hardcores is all anything has these days.

[sek69]

Nothing makes me feel more "get off my lawn"-ish than seeing people absolutely lose their shit that someone rated a match they liked 1/4th less of a star than they did. It's like there's no allowance for differing personal tastes, and if someone doesn't share the same opinion you do then that person is either a shill for another company and/or mentally deficient in some way. There's little room for debate or nuance, but I guess that's just par for the course in the social media world we live in now.

 

In all the fuss about Dave giving the Dome match six stars, one point that gets lost is now people see anything less than five stars as a sign of low quality instead of the near-classic a four plus rating was intended to be. I don't know if this is just a wrestling equivalent to a culture that is based on rating apps where anything less than the maximum is seen as garbage or what, but it's been fascinating to see people @'ing Dave asking what was wrong with a match he "only" gave ****1/4 to.

[Loss]

A *** match is good and worth seeing and Beyoncé proves superstars that are household names, make headlines, and have crossover appeal can still exist.

[Loss]

WWE would be less handcuffed if they returned to the business of creating megastars instead of making the brand the draw. Mediums are niche, yes, but stars are still stars and cults are still driven by personality.

[sek69]

WWE would be less handcuffed if they returned to the business of creating megastars instead of making the brand the draw. Mediums are niche, yes, but stars are still stars and cults are still driven by personality.

 

 

This is true, but Vince seems more happy knowing none of his creations will ever be popular enough to be able to make money without him. He'd rather make a little bit of money for a long time than make huge amount of money for a shorter time and risk having his stars leave for bigger fame.

[Loss]

I agree that's a more stable model. But I also think wrestling was only cyclical in the old days because promoters never knew when to stop going with a pat hand. It's Vince's loss -- if he's content making less money to preserve greater power over his labor, so be it.

[sek69]

You would think the ridiculous amounts of money he made with megastars like Hogan and Austin would make him think otherwise, but Vince seems like the kind of guy still pissed that Stacy Kiebler never came back from Dancing With The Stars.

[Sean Liska]

I think he wants Roman to be a mega star. The guy is going to beat HHH, Taker, and Brock in consecutive Mania main events. They broke Taker's streak and had Brock squash Cena with the idea of him getting the rub off it eventually. Just hasn't worked, whether you want to blame Roman or booking or both. But I think the intent is there.

[soup23]

I find it fascinating that those who feel disconnected hyperfocus on Dave Meltzer and his star ratings. As someone that loves modern wrestling, and feels bad for those that can't realize we're in a golden age, I can say that Meltzer's stars mean nothing to a large quantity of people I interact with. What is Meltzer's influence? There are so many outlets and so many voices, why is Dave the one that people look at?

 

I think you are underselling Dave's influence to a degree. One, there is a thread on VOW offering up Okada as GOAT that essentially says Dave is the only barometer to judge because he's been doing it the longest. Two, there are plenty of takes on twitter once the Observer or Observer radio hits shouting at the rooftops that "Dave thinks Omega vs Okada II is better than 1!".

[Matt D]

We're in a world where Rotten Tomatoes scores drive movie advertising and can kill domestic box office. Critics matter and given the decentralized and ultimately amateur (which isn't necessarily an insult, just a fact) nature of wrestling criticism, he's a monolithic force.

[El-P]

I'm telling you. He's on his way to become Robert Parker, as you get big matches in both NJ & WWE catering to his current tastes, for various reasons. Globalization of pro-wrestling is a terrible thing (like globalization in general).

[Sean Liska]

I'm telling you. He's on his way to become Robert Parker, as you get big matches in both NJ & WWE catering to his current tastes, for various reasons. Globalization of pro-wrestling is a terrible thing (like globalization in general).

It sucks because I love Dave, I've been reading the Observer for 20 years. But I'm growing to resent him as he plays this role in turning more and more wrestling into something I don't like.

[Jmare007]

Meh, let's wait a couple of years first and see how things unfold. It's pretty common for people that are starting to "open their eyes" to wrestling outside of WWE to take Dave's word and opinion like a big deal. Then those fans get older and that influence wains down. Shit, I've read people that started to get into the New Japan wave in 2012-2013 getting less and less enamored by it.

 

I agree with Matt that if all these opinions bother you, the best solution is staying off twitter when it comes to wrestling.

[stro]

On the topic of irrelevancy, I think judging wrestling's relevancy by TV ratings in America in 2017 is dumb and doesn't give the picture at all. Rolling Stone is regularly covering and doing interviews with WWE, ROH, and NJPW talent. Wrestlemania has been able to sell 70-100K stadiums for the past decade of WM. The indies are more profitable than ever. WWE continues to expand into new areas, they're able to run 3 separate world wide tours at once. NJPW is selling out a venue of 3K in their first officially promoted shows in the US. Judging it just on what the TV ratings are seems misguided.

[Sean Liska]

On the topic of irrelevancy, I think judging wrestling's relevancy by TV ratings in America in 2017 is dumb and doesn't give the picture at all. Rolling Stone is regularly covering and doing interviews with WWE, ROH, and NJPW talent. Wrestlemania has been able to sell 70-100K stadiums for the past decade of WM. The indies are more profitable than ever. WWE continues to expand into new areas, they're able to run 3 separate world wide tours at once. NJPW is selling out a venue of 3K in their first officially promoted shows in the US. Judging it just on what the TV ratings are seems misguided.

So many people struggle to understand the modern media landscape. And I think it's because they take their lead from Meltzer and I've never seen Dave this far behind the curve, he's basically arguing that TV is the same as 1998 and everything else is excuses. Raw is doing half the viewership it did in 2010. Every other aspect of their business is basically flat with 2010. Hmm. That's weird.

[iamthedoctor]

Im struggling to enjoy WWE on a weekly basis. Ill only really watch a segment if Ive read about it in the news as I never watch Raw or Smackdown alough ill surf the results and if I see something like Goldberg squashing Lesnar or say Hardyz winning matches on Raw I will youtube WWE's channel and watch that segment but the only thing I will watch in full is Wrestlemania PPV or the 30 man Rumble match.

 

Im not really enjoying the current stars alough I do like Ambrose but the only thing that really keeps me interested is the nostalgia part when a part timer will come back but again im only watching that segment.

[JKWebb]

It's interesting. Typically, I'll be watching wrestling from the 80's on my TV, and I'll let RAW play in the background. If a moment happens that catches my eye, like the Joe/Lesnar moment, then I'll hit pause and switch to WWE on my tablet. I enjoy Smackdown more than Raw, so I'll typically pick up where it is after my kids go to bed and watch it through. But, I guess what I'm saying is... don't feel sorry for me if I don't see this as the Golden Age of wrestling, because it doesn't have to be the GA for me to enjoy it. I just prefer how stories were told in the past. That's not to say it won't change in the future, or that the current product doesn't offer any great stories. There are matches I absolutely love every year. I've never stopped watching. I subscribe to the network. I hit up NJ World and RevPro from time to time (and others when I want to). I still just prefer the way stories were told in the past. And, I do think it is particularly the matches with unrelenting highspots and multiple kickouts/false finishes that get me down. It just weakens the story for me personally. It's extremely hard for me to enjoy the Young Bucks, even though I think they sound like cool dudes. I don't think Kenny Omega is one of the greatest of all-time, but that's okay. I think of it like The Godfather vs. Transformers. Not everyone is going to like the Godfather (Flair vs. Steamboat Clash VI), in fact some will think it is boring, or maybe even too long. I love the script and the story and the acting and how it falls together perfectly. In my opinion it's one of the greatest movies of all-time. However, I totally dislike Transformers/Michael Bay productions (Young Bucks matches that get pimped or Owens/Cena from a few years back - just examples) - I think the scripts are bad and the acting isn't that great, and I don't see the art of explosions for explosions. But that's okay, because obviously a lot of people do. Those films make more money and seem to entertain way more people, and Michael Bay wouldn't care what a guy like me thinks. So, it's all good. I love wrestling. I love the current product and I love the old product. I find more things enjoyable from the old, so it's awesome that so much is at our fingertips. But, I'll keep watching the new. I hope the NJPW show in CA coming up is awesome, and I hope Lesnar and Joe kill it.

 

I wanted to come back and add that part of my enjoyment of the current product are the guys that I think keep that style or art of storytelling alive. For me, some of those guys include AJ Styles and the Revival. Of course there are others, and what's interesting is that a guy like Cena does both.

[JKWebb]

With the Meltzer talk, I thought this was pretty interesting. I just finished the episode of New Japan on AXS with Suzuki vs. Okada (which I really enjoyed), and they had a commercial that revolved around the Wrestling Observer. The commercial stated that the Wrestler Observer voted NJ Promotion of the Year, best weekly TV, and they had the top three matches of the year. I could have missed it, but that's the first time I've seen the Observer mentioned like say a Rolling Stone review would be mentioned for a TV series advertisement.

[Matt D]

With the Meltzer talk, I thought this was pretty interesting. I just finished the episode of New Japan on AXS with Suzuki vs. Okada (which I really enjoyed), and they had a commercial that revolved around the Wrestling Observer. The commercial stated that the Wrestler Observer voted NJ Promotion of the Year, best weekly TV, and they had the top three matches of the year. I could have missed it, but that's the first time I've seen the Observer mentioned like say a Rolling Stone review would be mentioned for a TV series advertisement.

 

We were watching something on a random channel (I think it was the terrible Wil Wheaton plays tabletop games with celebrity nerds show, because we couldn't believe this was a thing that actually exists and couldn't look away), and there was a NJPW commercial on AXS. My wife, who knows nothing of wrestling other than vague ideas of WWE and how much she despises it, and some vague sense that I watch it and talk about how much wrestlers draw as a flawed metric of something or other asked about how what the hell it was and why there was a WWE in Japan. I explained it that it was based off of the sumo traditional and the desire to assimilate to US Customs during the occupation, like how they love baseball, and that it's generally annoying because it picks up so many of the worst traits of fighting spirit like in anime. Then we moved on. That just made me think of that.

[sek69]

 

On the topic of irrelevancy, I think judging wrestling's relevancy by TV ratings in America in 2017 is dumb and doesn't give the picture at all. Rolling Stone is regularly covering and doing interviews with WWE, ROH, and NJPW talent. Wrestlemania has been able to sell 70-100K stadiums for the past decade of WM. The indies are more profitable than ever. WWE continues to expand into new areas, they're able to run 3 separate world wide tours at once. NJPW is selling out a venue of 3K in their first officially promoted shows in the US. Judging it just on what the TV ratings are seems misguided.

So many people struggle to understand the modern media landscape. And I think it's because they take their lead from Meltzer and I've never seen Dave this far behind the curve, he's basically arguing that TV is the same as 1998 and everything else is excuses. Raw is doing half the viewership it did in 2010. Every other aspect of their business is basically flat with 2010. Hmm. That's weird.

 

 

 

Considering I heard it mentioned on a video game podcast recently that traditional TV is quickly becoming to the 30 and under set what radio was to people in their 40s (ie: something the old folks enjoyed) made me realize how out to lunch Dave is on the media landscape. He is right when he says ratings are a percentage of people able to get the channel so that cord cutters automatically aren't counted, but he really doesn't get at all that there's an entire generation who only watch content via streaming devices. TV really only has a future in areas where bandwidth hasn't grown enough to accommodate streaming, and once it does those markets jump as well.

 

That doesn't even mention the looming bursting of the TV sports bubble, and how the trickle down will definitely affect UFC and probably WWE as well.