The W
Views: 101478207
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.12.14 1340
The W - Pro Wrestling - A couple things that are bothering me about WWE..
This thread has 18 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(8737 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (11 total)
dropmailnotbombs
Pinkelwurst








Since: 10.7.03
From: Decatur, Illinois

Since last post: 3116 days
Last activity: 2152 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on
First...the name. I'm sorry if this has been discussed recently. But, I really believe my love for wrestling began to wane in the days after The World Wrestling Federation changed it's name to WWE. It's a lame name. Right?

Why in the world doesn't Vince McMahon change the company name back to World Wide Wrestling Federation...that's more tolerable then WWE. Atleast then, you could still, in theory, call the champion World Wrestling Federation champ.

And the split. It's gotta end. Smackdown brand champions? Raw brand champions. What title is considered "The Title" The World Title or the WWE Title?

And while I'm venting..NWATNA...GET A DARN tv show that I don't have to pay 40 bucks a month to see.....

Atleast I've got the Sunshine Network now...MLW seems cool at first glance...reminds me of ECW...is it cuz of Styles?

Anyways...that's my beef. For now.
Promote this thread!
XPacArmy
Frankfurter








Since: 13.5.03
From: Woodbridge, VA

Since last post: 410 days
Last activity: 407 days
#2 Posted on

    Originally posted by dropmailnotbombs
    First...the name. I'm sorry if this has been discussed recently. But, I really believe my love for wrestling began to wane in the days after The World Wrestling Federation changed it's name to WWE. It's a lame name. Right?

    Why in the world doesn't Vince McMahon change the company name back to World Wide Wrestling Federation...that's more tolerable then WWE. Atleast then, you could still, in theory, call the champion World Wrestling Federation champ.

    And the split. It's gotta end. Smackdown brand champions? Raw brand champions. What title is considered "The Title" The World Title or the WWE Title?

    And while I'm venting..NWATNA...GET A DARN tv show that I don't have to pay 40 bucks a month to see.....

    Atleast I've got the Sunshine Network now...MLW seems cool at first glance...reminds me of ECW...is it cuz of Styles?

    Anyways...that's my beef. For now.



Although WWE has been kinda...sucky somewhat...Iam starting to like the WWE name. Its either they call themselves WWE or I have to listen to them say WWWF all the time. Maybe its me but I don't think I can listen to everyone go WWWF all the time in the company, it just sounds too long.

The only problem I have with the split is, they have a limited roster, to a degree. Maybe to me it seems like that because it seems they only use the same people all the time.

And just to note, NWA-TNA does have a tv show, syndicated that is. Its NWA-TNA XPlosion.



Homer: Well, I've always been a firm believer in the three R's. Reading TV Guide, um... Writing to TV Guide, um... and Renewing TV Guide.
TalusMZ
Tocino








Since: 21.11.02
From: Los Angeles, CA

Since last post: 1474 days
Last activity: 804 days
#3 Posted on
(Not all of these are going to be counterarguments, but rather just a different opinion, so sorry if I don't actually help answer anything, but...)

I don't think the name really affects too much. It's an annoyance to have to say "E" after being used to "F", but other than that, it doesn't seem too big an issue.

Also, (I think) the split is meant to:

A) create a sense of competition in the seperate shows, or at least market 2 different shows that are independent of each other in quality and such...(So just because the storylines on RAW may be of a certain quality, it has no effect on the storylines on Smackdown)

and
B)Allow for shows not to be fully dominated by all these topcarders. Since the buyout and the hiring and rehiring of several wrestlers, if you allowed one full roster, you'd have a LOT of topcarders, and each 2 hour show would not be enough time to showcase all the stars, causing them to be filled with only topcarders and not enough time for midcarders, or make a lot of topcarders missing from the shows to make room for the rest, which is pretty bad too. With the split, you theoretically have less total big stars on each show, so you have time for the rest of the people and all the big names, more or less. How useful this has been in getting all the good wrestlers, regardless of popularity and status on the card is disputable, but I think that's the idea.

On the title issue, before, we had a WCW and a WWF title, along with ECW, and how-ever-many else organizations, which one could really be the true world title? It's something that's always been there, and while the names are misleading, it just boils down to "the best of your group", which is now Smackdown and Raw as opposed to the WWE in total.

As for NWATNA getting a show...well, I guess they're just not too good about that, and there's not much we can do about it. I'm still annoyed I can't see RAW or any of the B-shows (among other things) due to my lack of cable, but that's my problem.

I hope that provided an explanation...or at least different view on the issues. Some understandable concerns and questions you brought up.

-TMZ
XPacArmy
Frankfurter








Since: 13.5.03
From: Woodbridge, VA

Since last post: 410 days
Last activity: 407 days
#4 Posted on
One thing I hate is that WWE doesn't use HeAT and Velocity as much as they could. I probably said this before but what the hey:

Since the way before the brand split was, RAW was the number one show and Smackdown was the number two show in WWE's eyes. So I logically thought, silly me, that WWE might use the brand split and capitalize on this.

On the RAW Brand side, they should make RAW the #1 show and make HeAT its #2 show (like Smackdown use to be).

Same goes for SD Brand, make Smackdown the #1 show and make Velocity the #2 show.

But they just don't seem to care that much about the weekend shows. They could continue storylines and what not, but they donít. I know itís hard to continue a storyline when they tape the weekend show before the main shows. But I don't know maybe its just me.

And, I know I have said this, if they ever get the name "WWF" back, they shouldn't just drop the "WWE" name. Instead of RAW and Smackdown brands, since that just sounds weird, the can call RAW, WWF, and call SD, WWE.

(edited by XPacArmy on 12.7.03 0500)


Homer: Well, I've always been a firm believer in the three R's. Reading TV Guide, um... Writing to TV Guide, um... and Renewing TV Guide.
ShotGunShep
Frankfurter








Since: 20.2.03

Since last post: 2595 days
Last activity: 2482 days
#5 Posted on
You get used to the name after a while, but I don't think any of us actually prefer it.

I didn't like the split when I first started getting back into wrestling 6 months ago, but I have accepted it now. It's nice that on I don't have to see the same stuff on Mon. and Thurs. But now with the split PPV's the first few weeks of programming seem rather dull.

And, NWA:TNA is only 10 bucks a week (plus fees and taxes) and if it's 40 where you are, well shit, that sucks.
Gugs
Bierwurst








Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 576 days
Last activity: 26 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on
40 bucks a month is what he said, I believe. That's unless you get an odd fifth Wednesday in a month. I still think WWE is kind of stupid, but it was probably the best decision that could be made. Either that or make sure to say World Wrestling Federation all the time. While on the subject of calling Raw one name and SmackDown! the other, why not try WCW? I know it sounds like a bad idea, but it's been 2 years since the InVasion started, and maybe it's time to give it a shot. It could work, if Vince swallows his pride and just keeps it going as usual.



Sometimes I ask myself why I watch WWE after all the crap it's given me. HLA, necro, HHH, and so on. And then it hits me. That one simple phrase that can be modified and used for anything that gets you down, yet makes you keep coming back.

Every episode has the potential to be the best one ever, and I'll be damned if I'm going to miss it after sitting through this shit.
RKMtwin
Boudin rouge








Since: 1.3.02
From: Denver, Colorado

Since last post: 2241 days
Last activity: 1685 days
#7 Posted on
One thing that I don't like about WWE on both sides is the very generic, formulaic feel most matches besides the main event have. The beat down to the corner, stomp stomp stomp stomp to the mat in the corner... I hope you all know where I'm getting at. Even with the cruiserweights, they all have changed their repertoires in some way to adapt to this "WWE style." (Is that just because of the larger ring WWE uses as opposed to other organizations, BTW?)

WWE really needs to allow more room for certain wrestlers to wrestle in a way that's more suited for them when it's warranted. For instance, if Bradshaw wants to brawl strong-style (Puroresu-like stiffness), I'm sure guys like A-Train could be for it. Also, when it comes to the cruisers, let guys like Misterio, Kidman, Dragon and Guerrero go with a quicker pace. At any rate, I just don't like the predictability factor in WWE matches.




David Crockett sez it best, folks: "Look at 'im, Tony! Look at 'im!"

OMEGA
Lap cheong








Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky

Since last post: 1999 days
Last activity: 1967 days
#8 Posted on
I hate people blasting the WWE name-change. First, they changed the name because they legally HAD to, not because they thought it'd be fun. And was there really a better choice than WWE? WWWF just seems too long. Three letters is good, and WWE is close enough to WWF that it really isn't a big deal. If your love of wrestling is dieing because they replaced the letter 'F', then your love must not have been that strong to begin with.

Although I personally liked the brand split at first, they handled it totally wrong, and it has meant nothing positive for business. so I agree that they should end it. Maybe WrestleMania XX can be a culmination and feature several RAW v. SmackDown matches. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Oh, and I agree with the title thing too. It may have been an okay idea in theory, but all it accomplished was making Brock Lesnar's Title win look like that much less of an achievement.

If NWA TNA could get a good cable slot, the would. It's not there fault that they don't. WCW was the highest rated show on Turner's stations for YEARS, and no cable company wanted it. Pro=wrestling is not that easy to sell to cable-company big-wigs, so you might as well just take what you can get right now.

And yes, I too LOVE MLW. In a time where RAW has a tendency to suck, my excitement for Monday nights is still here because "At least I get to watch MLW!"



The answer to WWE's financial problems...
AJ_Levy
Mettwurst








Since: 31.3.02

Since last post: 3928 days
Last activity: 3925 days
#9 Posted on

    Originally posted by dropmailnotbombs
    First...the name. I'm sorry if this has been discussed recently. But, I really believe my love for wrestling began to wane in the days after The World Wrestling Federation changed it's name to WWE. It's a lame name. Right?

    Why in the world doesn't Vince McMahon change the company name back to World Wide Wrestling Federation...that's more tolerable then WWE. Atleast then, you could still, in theory, call the champion World Wrestling Federation champ.

    And the split. It's gotta end. Smackdown brand champions? Raw brand champions. What title is considered "The Title" The World Title or the WWE Title?

    And while I'm venting..NWATNA...GET A DARN tv show that I don't have to pay 40 bucks a month to see.....

    Atleast I've got the Sunshine Network now...MLW seems cool at first glance...reminds me of ECW...is it cuz of Styles?

    Anyways...that's my beef. For now.



Yeah, its well established that WWE is a sucky name. If the Invasion had've gone to plan, they could have had WWF Smackdown vs. WCW Raw, and then have the nWo "take over" Smackdown I guess. Or they could have decided to put more emphasis on the individual brands as separate federations, and have Raw Wrestling Federation (RWF) vs SmackDown Wrestling (SDW) or something, but they'd still need a name for the company that promotes both. But I'll agree there's better ways they could have branded themselves.

But losing the WWF name was not their fault, or their decision. Yeah, they should have probably chosen a different name 20 years ago. Perhaps they should have dealt with the charity better. However, legally they have to change their name, the decision was out of their hands. And they fought the decision all the way to the House of Lords (the British equivelent of Congress) and lost.

Yeah, nothing is as grand sounding or established as "World Wrestling Federation". But what other name could they have used that comes close, to describe both Raw and Smackdown? WCW hasn't the same reconition outside wrestling fans, and is linked to wrestlecrap in the minds of most fans. So while WWE is a sucky name, really they were forced out of the WWF name and it was - as an abreviation of their previous business name (WWFE) what they decided was the best option.

And the split? Personally, while there's no doubt (like most things WWE has done lately) it could have been handled better. I gave an example earlier. However, it's still being established (given that they've just started the brand specific PPV's) and has given a chance to guys like Booker T, Jericho, RVD, et al. they wouldn't have had otherwise.

I'll put it differently. You know how Trips is dominating Raw now? Just imagine if he dominated the whole fed, and the big ongoing storyling was Trips Vs Steph?

NWA TNA has a business model that has seen them last longer than most of the upstarts. Over one year in business and still seemingly going strong. Given the short lives of other feds that have come and gone - WWA, XWF, XPW, WOW, and a heap of other acronyms contraining 'W' that I've long since forgotten - that's nothing to be sneezed at. Yeah, they could get a cable show, and assuming the network promoted it right and they had a new investor willing to pump millions more into the product it might not fall into the same trap ECW did. And also keep in mind that WCW - usually #2 and with Turner's networks (TBS, TNT, Turner South) and money behind it, lost between $10m and $80m every year it existed aside from about 3 (when it was beating the WWF, which was at that time losing money).

Especially given their biggest selling point - the X Division - would probably have to be cut back for TV, and (as mentioned earlier) they do have a syndicated show, really I'd disagree that getting a cable deal would necessarily be good for them.
IfYouWill
Linguica








Since: 4.6.03
From: Erie, PA

Since last post: 4125 days
Last activity: 4123 days
AIM:  
#10 Posted on
    Originally posted by OMEGA
    I hate people blasting the WWE name-change. First, they changed the name because they legally HAD to, not because they thought it'd be fun. And was there really a better choice than WWE?"



Absolutely. WWT (World Wrestling Tour), IWF (International Wrestling Federation), or maybe something like W3F (World Wide Wrestling Federation). WWE was a very poor choice, the head honchos could have renamed the company better.



    Originally posted by RKMtwin
    One thing that I don't like about WWE on both sides is the very generic, formulaic feel most matches besides the main event have. The beat down to the corner, stomp stomp stomp stomp to the mat in the corner... I hope you all know where I'm getting at. Even with the cruiserweights, they all have changed their repertoires in some way to adapt to this "WWE style." (Is that just because of the larger ring WWE uses as opposed to other organizations, BTW?)

    WWE really needs to allow more room for certain wrestlers to wrestle in a way that's more suited for them when it's warranted. For instance, if Bradshaw wants to brawl strong-style (Puroresu-like stiffness), I'm sure guys like A-Train could be for it. Also, when it comes to the cruisers, let guys like Misterio, Kidman, Dragon and Guerrero go with a quicker pace. At any rate, I just don't like the predictability factor in WWE matches.



You're right, RKMtwin. The product that the WWE offers is too 'packaged' and condensed. A WWE match is typical and predictable. That's why, with most of the WCW cruiserweight talent on Smackdown, the WWE Crusierweight division is ailing. These wrestlers are victim to the WWE style. The typical WWE crusierweight match is limited to about 5 minutes of cruiserweight punches and cruiserweight kicks and a few high spots, with no psychology and and the main point of the match is to put an angle over, rather than the battle of the match.

WCW crusierweights during '96-'99 were given about 7 to 8 minutes and were to hold raise hell. Non-stop action. I was always a mark for the WCW cruiserweight division.

I hate WWE! :)

(edited by IfYouWill on 13.7.03 1000)

"I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
I am a real American, fight for what's right, fight for your life!"
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3320 days
Last activity: 3320 days
#11 Posted on
It's just a name. Changing the name or the set or anything cosmetic isn't going to change a thing. It's the same braintrust and same creative team which made such a mess of the split to begin with.

Vince still buries WCW every chance he can get, there's no way he's ever going to use that name. It'd be admitting something he didn't create, actually worked (for awhile).

Pages: 1Thread ahead: The wrestling gods have come to save us!
Next thread: And they think Lance Storm will get OVER?!?!
Previous thread: Jericho article in Penthouse
(8737 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
A couple weeks ago I searched through the match listings for the WWE Match Jukebox on WWE.com, and the list was easily impressive enough to get me to agree to a one-year, $40 subscription.
The W - Pro Wrestling - A couple things that are bothering me about WWE..Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.413 seconds.