The General Wrestling Thread

[SuperKevin]

I wonder what Hurricane Sandy references RAW will give us tonight

[Warner2BruceTD]

Outside of Hogan, he's really really bad at giving a guy the ball...perhaps The Rock, but Rock was a Jim Ross guy. Otherwise, all of his top guys are his reluctant choices otherwise.

And lets face it, Hogan was already arguably the biggest star in the business before Vince raided him away. And The Rock was pegged for superstardom before his first match in Memphis. Vince actually botched him at first with the white bread babyface gimmick that flopped.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

And lets face it, Hogan was already arguably the biggest star in the business before Vince raided him away. And The Rock was pegged for superstardom before his first match in Memphis. Vince actually botched him at first with the white bread babyface gimmick that flopped.

Hogan was probably second to Andre, but I totally agree...Hogan was almost pre-made before he went to Vince.

The Rock was a Jim Ross guy, Jim Ross was the catalyst behind a lot of the early attitude era talent...the WCW guys like Austin and Mick as well as the young talent like Rocky.

[JimLeavy59]

Gonna watch the final night of King of Trios, If the WWE wants to do goofy childish shit why don't they just sign some of the Chikara talent?

[Warner2BruceTD]

Gonna watch the final night of King of Trios, If the WWE wants to do goofy childish shit why don't they just sign some of the Chikara talent?

Those characters wouldn't work in WWE, because they would find away to destroy the charm.

CHIKARA is part live action comic book, part tongue in cheek fun. There is a certain charm about CHIKARA that can't be explained. Some of the shit they do is absurd, but it works in their universe. It's just...fun.

The problem with the WWE, is there is no subtlety to anything they do. AJ has to tilt her head every three seconds, because that's what she does. Daniel Bryan has done a good job being a crazy guy, so they make him over the top bat shit insane. Santino showed great comic timing, so they essentially turned him into a fucking court jester. There is no charm. Everything they do is so over the top and in your face that it becomes annoying and abrasive.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

I've come to the conclusion that the idea of "drawing" and being a "draw" is absolutely irrelevant, not only in this era of wrestling, but has been a dead term since at the very latest, early 90's.

Once wrestling went national, the idea of drawing power died. The industry has essentially become one that rides with its own ebb and flow and it has mattered not who is at the top of the national wrestling scene, the national wrestling scene has its peaks and valleys and thats pretty much that.

[Warner2BruceTD]

There are still people who can move the needle, and show to show there are guys or angles that can make a 10% difference or whatever, but yes, from a wider lens it is the WWE brand that draws now, not an individual. It's more about the story & the build these days. A good story can still uptick business and a big star like Lesnar or The Rock can bring in more business.

Remember when the national companies would stress over title changes, because they would be scared shitless of picking the wrong guy who might not draw on the road? Shit, not even just the world champ, things like the tag team titles mattered too, because those guys would headline the B or C tour.

Now title changes are done on a whim and who is champion matters zero.

[EmpireWF]

Edge was finally seen as a star by management only because ratings improved during his first, short stint the gold.

[BigBiss]

I've come to the conclusion that the idea of "drawing" and being a "draw" is absolutely irrelevant, not only in this era of wrestling, but has been a dead term since at the very latest, early 90's.

Once wrestling went national, the idea of drawing power died. The industry has essentially become one that rides with its own ebb and flow and it has mattered not who is at the top of the national wrestling scene, the national wrestling scene has its peaks and valleys and thats pretty much that.

I can tell you at its base form you can fell a difference between having a draw on top and not, some guys draw some guys dont, some booking draws some dont. WWE has just built up enough die hards its not going to effect there raw rating or ppv buy rates too much either way.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

There are still people who can move the needle, and show to show there are guys or angles that can make a 10% difference or whatever, but yes, from a wider lens it is the WWE brand that draws now, not an individual. It's more about the story & the build these days. A good story can still uptick business and a big star like Lesnar or The Rock can bring in more business.

Remember when the national companies would stress over title changes, because they would be scared shitless of picking the wrong guy who might not draw on the road? Shit, not even just the world champ, things like the tag team titles mattered too, because those guys would headline the B or C tour.

Now title changes are done on a whim and who is champion matters zero.

Moving a needle isn't really "drawing" though...getting a one or two week pop in ratings that doesn't even venture outside of your standard deviation isn't really drawing, IMO. It isn't even a "draw" if they pop a buy rate that isn't outside of their standard deviation (Rock, nor Lesnar popped a rate that was outside of a normal standard deviation...before Rock-Cena...Cena-Michaels popped the highest buyrate at WrestleMania. Plus, the way they promote their business at this point isn't an individual effort, its a group effort...there was essentially three main events at the last WrestleMania. They can give credit to Rocky for popping the buyrate all they want, but we're civilized folks and that conclusion doesn't really hold up, IMO.

The WWE specifically, has made itself into the NFL but with a much smaller audience. It doesn't matter if Tom Brady or Peyton Manning are playing...

Even looking back to say, the Monday Night Wars era...everyone says Austin was the biggest draw and star...and to a point, I don't doubt that, but...how is it possible to quantify his drawing power when that era had a record setting number of guys at the top? The WWE had Austin, Rock, HHH, Mick Foley...on the WCW it was Hogan, Nash, Piper, DDP, Goldberg...was a monster period of buyrates and ratings that held up over the long term...but, Austin gets the credit for being the biggest draw...something doesn't compute.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

I can tell you at its base form you can fell a difference between having a draw on top and not, some guys draw some guys dont, some booking draws some dont. WWE has just built up enough die hards its not going to effect there raw rating or ppv buy rates too much either way.

At the base level, namely, the Indy scene...I agree with you, you can see noticeable, tangible evidence...

IMO, at the national level...you can't really gauge it and give it a quantifiable variable. And it goes beyond the MNW era of wrestling where business was at its highest, but business also had tons of guys at the top. I mean, who gets the props for the boom period of the mid-80's NWA? Ric Flair? He was also there for the downturn in the early 90's, too. Hogan was the top guy for the WWE in the 80's...but was also there for a downturn in business in the early-mid 90's.

IMO, the ebb and flow of business changed and the idea of a real draw was nullified by going national.

[BigBiss]

At the base level, namely, the Indy scene...I agree with you, you can see noticeable, tangible evidence...

IMO, at the national level...you can't really gauge it and give it a quantifiable variable. And it goes beyond the MNW era of wrestling where business was at its highest, but business also had tons of guys at the top. I mean, who gets the props for the boom period of the mid-80's NWA? Ric Flair? He was also there for the downturn in the early 90's, too. Hogan was the top guy for the WWE in the 80's...but was also there for a downturn in business in the early-mid 90's.

IMO, the ebb and flow of business changed and the idea of a real draw was nullified by going national.

the peaks also gave power to the wrestlers, gave them options out side of wrestling. now vince is happy with the status quoe. only movie stars hes making are for WWE films, TNAs only chance is a Boom to create a rise in the demand for wrestling, Vince has a steady stream of money and wealth and really the only thing that can change that is success

[Warner2BruceTD]

Moving a needle isn't really "drawing" though...getting a one or two week pop in ratings that doesn't even venture outside of your standard deviation isn't really drawing, IMO. It isn't even a "draw" if they pop a buy rate that isn't outside of their standard deviation (Rock, nor Lesnar popped a rate that was outside of a normal standard deviation...before Rock-Cena...Cena-Michaels popped the highest buyrate at WrestleMania. Plus, the way they promote their business at this point isn't an individual effort, its a group effort...there was essentially three main events at the last WrestleMania. They can give credit to Rocky for popping the buyrate all they want, but we're civilized folks and that conclusion doesn't really hold up, IMO.

Donald Trump vs Vince McMahon is the match you are looking for with the bold.

Even looking back to say, the Monday Night Wars era...everyone says Austin was the biggest draw and star...and to a point, I don't doubt that, but...how is it possible to quantify his drawing power when that era had a record setting number of guys at the top? The WWE had Austin, Rock, HHH, Mick Foley...on the WCW it was Hogan, Nash, Piper, DDP, Goldberg...was a monster period of buyrates and ratings that held up over the long term...but, Austin gets the credit for being the biggest draw...something doesn't compute.

Probably because after that WrestleMania broke records thanks in part to the Tyson boost, business reached new heights with Austin on top. Then after the ill advised Austin heel turn, business steadily declined.

There is no question Austin was the biggest star and biggest draw of that era. Triple H, Foley, HBK, Undertaker, even The Rock, whoever you want to talk about, none of them drew anything like Austin, the numbers bear that out, even if some of them more than drew their share on their own (Rock). Why didn't the Rock ever touch the numbers he did with Austin, with Triple H or Undertaker or whoever else? Because they weren't Austin.

The NWO popped WCW, then Sting & Goldberg legit drew at times, and it all fell apart due to bad booking. It wasn't going to last forever, its always cyclical, but the booking didn't set up the next era of stars and it died as a result.

WWE is better off now, where the brand draws. It's easier this way. I don't know if it was by design, but it's a better model. Austin helped them reach that point that biss is talking about, where there are die hards now that are likely never going away. Hogan didn't achieve that. WWF nearly died at points in between Hogan & Austin. Without Austin, business isn't nearly as good in the Cena era, but it's healthy as fuck and in no danger of folding up shop.

Austin is the reason Vince is still in business, Austin is the reason he was able to go public, and Austin is the reason the brand is so strong. That's why I say Austin is the biggest star in the history of the business. He not only peaked higher than Hogan, and drew more money than Hogan, but he left the company in far better shape when he left.

[BigBiss]

Also I think good Booking has done more to draw then the top stars themselfs just makes booking ez when you have more top stars to work with

[Warner2BruceTD]

At the base level, namely, the Indy scene...I agree with you, you can see noticeable, tangible evidence...

IMO, at the national level...you can't really gauge it and give it a quantifiable variable. And it goes beyond the MNW era of wrestling where business was at its highest, but business also had tons of guys at the top. I mean, who gets the props for the boom period of the mid-80's NWA? Ric Flair? He was also there for the downturn in the early 90's, too. Hogan was the top guy for the WWE in the 80's...but was also there for a downturn in business in the early-mid 90's.

IMO, the ebb and flow of business changed and the idea of a real draw was nullified by going national.

Nobody can draw forever.

It's not a indictment on Hogan or anybody else because eventually they stop drawing.

Hogan left WWF, and immediately drew in New Japan. Then he went to WCW and immediately drew. It wasn't until the end of WCW that Hogan didn't matter any more. He popped TNA for like two weeks, and he drew just under 3,000 to an indie show in NY. Other than that, he means nothing today. That takes nothing away from what he already did.