sek69 Posted July 4, 2019 Report Share Posted July 4, 2019 To be fair to Cena, WWE pretty much stopped trying to create breakout stars after him and changed their business model to be THE BRAND above everything else. What we've seen is the same thing that happened after the Hulkamania Era was over, except the current way WWE is set up makes it way harder to luck into a Rock or Austin like they did to break out of the doldrums before. Today's WWE would have given up on both of them after the Blue Chipper/Ringmaster gimmicks flopped, and Austin 3:16 would have been a thing that got Steve in trouble for getting more over than he was "supposed" to instead of being the fuse that lit a boom period. It's a vicious cycle, how is anyone going to be the next company-carrying superstar when everyone has to learn to work/speak/act the exact same way? Will someone like Otis get the chance to be a Dusty-like charismatic big guy, or will Vince just think "haha, fat guy is funny" and make him a comedy figure for life? There's folks there that have huge superstar potential written all over them, but it's been a near unanimous opinion of everyone involved with the company that the man who pulls the trigger just doesn't get it anymore. I'm not entirely confident that the new creative arrangement will help matters. Bruce is just there to tell Vince what he wants to hear, and while Eric is probably going to be a plus when it comes to rubbing elbows with the suits at Fox, his track record doesn't inspire me. He seems to have a lot of excuses as to why his ideas don't pan out as opposed to coming up with actual ideas. I suppose Paul has the best chance since he's been in tune with the business and can think outside the box, but I agree with Cornette when he said Paul's likely the first one to get fed up and tell Vince to fuck off because he actually has a passion for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMKK Posted July 4, 2019 Report Share Posted July 4, 2019 6 hours ago, NintendoLogic said: From the latest Observer: This got me thinking about John Cena's impact. He drew in a ton of mostly younger fans, but he drove away a lot of older fans in the process. It seems that the fans he drew in didn't end up sticking around while the ones he drove away never came back. He could very well end up with a legacy like the NWO: turning business around in the short term but hurting the company over the long run. It's not really John's fault that they had no way of keeping those fans around after he was starting to phase out. He held up his part of the bargain by getting them in in the first place. The follow up is on Vince, not him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDuke Posted July 6, 2019 Report Share Posted July 6, 2019 It was cool seeing Heavy Machinery in the main event of Smackdown and the audience cheering for their win. There have been so many NXT call ups in the last year I was sure they got lost in the shuffle, and they deserve a chance at least to try to get over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted July 6, 2019 Report Share Posted July 6, 2019 So is this a hologram match or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted July 6, 2019 Report Share Posted July 6, 2019 Is there a show in Parts Unknown tomorrow or something. Anyway, they sure know how to capture the imagination of the current audience by going back 20 years straight... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMJ Posted July 6, 2019 Report Share Posted July 6, 2019 I was actually just thinking about this in the bathroom (full disclosure: I keep my copy of Death of WCW in there and was reading the section about how promoters don't know when to put their new big star over their old one.) My thought was: WWE has had multiple opportunities to do a big "passing the torch"/"dream" matches to make the next big superstar (or in the case of Sting/Taker, just do it to do it). They did it at WrestleMania VI (and, arguably, WrestleMania III, though, I think that one is somewhat debatable as Hogan was already "The Man" in alot of ways). But really, for the most part, when those opportunities have come up in recent times and even in the 90s, Vince has been very, very gun shy. They couldn't figure out how to do Brock/Austin (when the easy answer was that Austin was willing to do it if it was promoted as a big match). They never capitalized on a Flair/Hogan dream match despite WCW doing their biggest PPV buyrates to that time when they had a chance in 94'. Speaking of 94', they didn't have Hart beat Flair or Hogan on TV or PPV (in fact, while Flair putting over Hennig on RAW was great, in hindsight, I think one could argue that Bret should've got that rub). Bringing that up to the current day, I think Reigns not holding a clean victory over Brock Lesnar is INSANITY. In fact, that WrestleMania 34 loss, to me, is almost Starrcade 97' level of booking ineptitude. They also never really did a full Cena/Reigns program and now all we can hope for is an "After The Fact" rivalry much like what Cena and The Rock did. The Rock didn't pass the torch - Cena was already at the top and The Rock hadn't been a WWE performer in half a decade. Imagine Cena coming back in 2020 to put over Rollins or Reigns - I mean, it's not really "passing the torch" when you willfully put it down and retired 2 years earlier. Really, only Austin beating Michaels, Brock going over The Rock at SummerSlam, and Michaels beating Bret at WrestleMania 12 strike me as true "passing the torch" moments where the victory felt like it happened when the loser was still at their peak and the victor was a rising star who then became the focal point. I guess Batista beating HHH and Cena beating JBL in 05' (and then Cena beating HHH in 06') kinda counts, but do seem lesser in hindsight. Also in that "lesser" camp would Benoit, Guerrero, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, etc....all had huge victories and were very popular, but the WWE never really seemed to go "all the way" with promoting them as the new face of the company. Which, to bring me back to my first point, is why WWE Reimagined is kind of a silly concept. Its not that the WWE couldn't have run some of these dream matches (Taker/Sting, Flair/Hogan, Hart/Hogan, Cena/Taker, a true Cena/Reigns program), its that they didn't. And when they did, like the multiple Reigns/Lesnar matches and the first Rock/Cena Mania match, they somehow opted to go with The Last Big Thing beating The New Big Thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted July 7, 2019 Report Share Posted July 7, 2019 I'm assuming WWE Reimagined is just a tease for a WWE 2K20 video game announcement and new mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted July 7, 2019 Report Share Posted July 7, 2019 WWE keeps insisting wins and losses don't matter, also are confounded as to why Roman isn't seen as "the guy" despite being booked as constantly unable to win the big one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted July 7, 2019 Report Share Posted July 7, 2019 11 hours ago, sek69 said: WWE keeps insisting wins and losses don't matter, also are confounded as to why Roman isn't seen as "the guy" despite being booked as constantly unable to win the big one. Because that's honestly the least of the reasons as to why Roman isn't seen as "the guy." Sure, it doesn't help, but it's far from the only issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted July 7, 2019 Report Share Posted July 7, 2019 Well it's not the only issue, sure, but I would argue the main reason WWE can't create new stars is that everyone gets booked to 50/50 at best and a geek at worse. People want to cheer for folks who win all the time, and that rarely happens in WWE anymore. I can hear the argument someone's surely going to make, "what about everyone who got upset at Super Cena", and again there's a way to book a guy who wins all the time without the fans turning on it. It's a fine line at times, and one I don't think Vince especially knows how to manage anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted July 7, 2019 Report Share Posted July 7, 2019 28 minutes ago, sek69 said: there's a way to book a guy who wins all the time without the fans turning on it. It's a fine line at times, and one I don't think Vince especially knows how to manage anymore. Well, part of it, too, is that the world has changed. You could get '80s Hogan now, booked the same way against the same opponents, and the reaction would still be very different. It's probably not that Vince doesn't know how to manage that fine anymore. It's more likely that Vince doesn't know how to change the way he manages it and update it for the times we're living in now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 7, 2019 Report Share Posted July 7, 2019 42 minutes ago, sek69 said: I can hear the argument someone's surely going to make, "what about everyone who got upset at Super Cena", and again there's a way to book a guy who wins all the time without the fans turning on it. It's a fine line at times, and one I don't think Vince especially knows how to manage anymore. Wasn't Cena also the last draw, though? Even with half of the crowd turning on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomethingSavage Posted July 8, 2019 Report Share Posted July 8, 2019 5 hours ago, Coffey said: Wasn't Cena also the last draw, though? Even with half of the crowd turning on him. Yup. Perception is reality. Present someone as a big deal. Promote someone as a big deal. Consistently. Faithfully. And they will be perceived as a big fucking deal. It really is that simple. This 50/50 shit just creates a field of guys who are essentially all running in place. The first one to truly take off would automatically be in first place at this point. Anyone can beat anyone. That's not unpredictable or exciting if it's done all the time. Structure and hierarchies are crucial. A star should seem nigh undefeatable. 99% of the time, a star's biggest fans should be able to argue that "their guy" could kick "your guy's" ass. Austin. Hogan. Bruno. They all carried this kind of weight to their reputations. But the company has purposely perpetuated this idea that everyone on their roster is, in fact, very VERY defeatable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.