The W
June 7, 2009 - birthdaybritney.jpg
Views: 178996248
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.3.24 0656
The W - Pro Wrestling - An interesting theory
This thread has 15 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(11103 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (9 total)
GodEatGod
Bockwurst








Since: 28.2.02

Since last post: 3014 days
Last activity: 2453 days
#1 Posted on
Being about as prolific a writer as a three-day old halibut fillet, I have no regular forum when I want to get something off my chest. Except for the good ol' Wienerboard. God Bless America.

I've been debating a theory with myself for a few days now, and I thought maybe if I shared it with my fellow Wieners, I could find out if I was totally off-base. That or you'd think I was super-cool and insightful for thinking of it. More likely the former.

We spend a lot of time on here talking about backstage attitudes: egos, politics, pushes, that sort of thing. One of the continual discussions is about "paying dues", working your way up the ladder of success from indy fed jobber to WWE intro talent to finally World Champion material. I've noticed something however. Some of the people who didn't pay their dues in the traditional way have the best attitudes in wrestling. Specifically, I'm talking about people who's experience comes almost exclusively from WWE and its developmental system.

The Rock, Kurt Angle, Edge, Brock Lesnar...you rarely here a bad word said about these men's backstage personas. Brock's early problems seemed to be a result of inexperience and bad influence, but since then nary a peep has been said of him. For all his fame, The Rock is consistently seen as professional, willing to put anyone over, and always ready to do everything to entertain the fans. All four of these men had relatively little exposure before coming to WWE (I think Edge, as Sexton Hardcastle, had the most, but he was still a fairly obscure dot even on the Indy horizon, I think). They are thought of somewhat as "Vince's creations".

The worst attitudes? Triple H, Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Stone Cold, Hogan...all of them came up in the business somewhere other than in the WWE system. Trips, Taker, and Austin all had WCW stints, while Shawn and Hogan cut their teeth in Gagne's AWA. Each of them seems to have acquired certain attitudes about position, power and experience resulting in a de facto push for life. These are the men who speak of paying dues, of "coming up the right way". Would a power-freak like Vince encourage such attitudes in his employees? No. These men, I believe, acquired them during their fledgling careers in other promotions.

My theory is that the differences comes in how different federations view wrestling. Vince espouses sports-entertainment, wrestling as escapism, carnival, a soap opera for men. In this mindset, winning and losing are meaningless. Only entertainment matters. The Rock and Kurt don't care about jobbing because jobbing is, to some degree, meaningless if they just went out and had a good match. More "old school" federations promote the idea of competition, of legimate sport, at least in kayfabe terms. That idea filters into the mind of the performers, and winning suddenly matters. If I lose, it shows me to be less than him. I must always win.

Obviously, this isn't always the case. Some men, such as Booker T and Chris Jericho, seem to have come through it just fine, without these sorts of inherent problems. So the whole theory may be a load of bushwah. In fact, since the theory is based upon rumored backstage politics, innuendo and 'net legend prescribing certain personality characteristics to certain wrestlers, there isn't much probability of its truth.

But it's an interesting theory, at least.



"All I ever asked for in life is an unfair advantage." Microchip, Punisher Annual #2
Promote this thread!
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 7192 days
Last activity: 6662 days
#2 Posted on

    Originally posted by GodEatGod
    Obviously, this isn't always the case. Some men, such as Booker T and Chris Jericho, seem to have come through it just fine, without these sorts of inherent problems. So the whole theory may be a load of bushwah. In fact, since the theory is based upon rumored backstage politics, innuendo and 'net legend prescribing certain personality characteristics to certain wrestlers, there isn't much probability of its truth.

    But it's an interesting theory, at least.



Interesting indeed.

To go along with the theory, Booker and Jericho may have gotten a lot of their attitude from their pre-WCW stints, in smaller indy feds and (in Jericho's case) overseas. This would also explain Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrerro's relative lack of bad backstage press.

However, the IWC in general seems to buy into the "nature" end of the nature vs. nurture debate, preferring to believe that, say, HHH is in fact pure evil and that Chris Benoit is a holy creature who was put on this earth to entertain workrate fans by a merciful God. (:



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
HMD
Andouille








Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 2541 days
Last activity: 2541 days
#3 Posted on
I have always taken issue with the notion that only a "mark" cares about winning and losing and it doesn't matter so long as you have a good match. If you are never booked to win anything that means the company has no faith in you as a top draw. A top hand needs to win. Yes, you can stay over without winning but getting over requires victory. Not everyone is the Rock, who can rely on mic skills far and above anything anyone else in the company can even begin to approach.

Even people who are known for mic skills, such as Hogan and Austin, cannot go out there without anything but a vague outline of what to cover and produce entertaining television out of it. And then there are the people like Kurt Angle who we give more credit than we should when it comes to mic skills. So the fact the Rock stays over no matter what shouldn't be our prospective litmus test; he's the exception, not the rule.

It's beens said argued, purported, and refuted a million times over but take Jericho. There are just certain times you need to win, and Chris is another guy who never got key wins that would have been vital to his validation as a top level performer. His bargain basement victories over Rock and Austin and Triple H were not enough to elevate him but the company's lack of faith was obvious in that case.

So if I'm a wrestler and I keep getting asked to lose I have to accept that the company sees me as a supporting character, or enhancement talent, and I'm never going to be a top guy. Some people accept this and have no problem with it. Mick Foley was at peace with his position as a guy who others go over, and he got the belt (with help) and was never portrayed as anywhere near capable of defeating any of the top guys he was against (austin, rocky, hunter).

Some guys may not want to lose, but they're well within their rights. I won't fault anyone for wanting to be taken seriously in their profession.








"Whatever I just posted above is what your mother said in bed last night."
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 6706 days
Last activity: 6706 days
#4 Posted on
I believe WWE has taken great care in trying to stop their homegrown talent from developing the same bad attitudes and habits as the "old guard".

Wins do mean quite a bit but it's more how they're done. Some guys needs wins. Take Triple H for example (I know, I know) but he wasn't perceived as a top guy during his first reign. Then he started getting big win after big win until finally he was accepted as a Main Event star.

The Rock and Kurt Angle are rare cases where they're more over for their ability to entertain then anything else but does that work? Kurt's still struggling to be accepted as a top guy. The Rock hasn't been a ratings draw in years now. Maybe they should refuse to job a little more often and look out for themselves more?

However, the problem now is if people tried to play the games that the old guard did in their day, they'd be out on their ass or in the opening match because they have NO LEVERAGE. What're they gonna do? Leave and go to NWATNA and earn peanuts? Go to Japan? That doesn't hurt Vince so they can't even play those games.

Even when Hogan didn't want to do another job to Brock, Vince let him sit at home and practically beg for his job back all over the place for months.
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 1927 days
Last activity: 1496 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54


    Mick Foley was at peace with his position as a guy who others go over, and he got the belt (with help) and was never portrayed as anywhere near capable of defeating any of the top guys he was against (austin, rocky, hunter).


Huh? Foley had several wins over HHH and the Rock. He beat both Austin and HHH at Summerslam 1999. The key is, all three of those guys SOLD for Foley and made him look like a constant threat as the guy who would do anything to himself and others in order to win.




"I have no intention of uttering my last words on the stage. Room service and a couple of depraved young women will do me quite nicely for an exit."-- Peter O'Toole

"I'm gonna rip the eyes out of your head, and piss down your dead skull!"
-- Jack Nicholson, in A Few Good Men

A Fan
Liverwurst








Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 7001 days
Last activity: 7001 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.59
Interesting theory. I do prescribe to the WWE "Homegrown Theory" to any other theory out there. Vince has a terrible knack of letting guys who have always been with the company become major stars while new and proven talent have to struggle through the mid-card. Jericho had a great entrance to the WWF, but was thrown to Chyna after his promo with Rock. Same thing with the Radicals. They were a major threat, hell Benoit even pinned Rock, but they were taken none a notch sans Benoit when Wrestlemania came around the corner. Tazz could have been a monster, but he had that mini-fued with Kurt and that was it.

Vince has to let go of the idea that certain wrestlers from other Feds need to go through main eventers. RVD is one of the best prospects they have and he isn't even on the card at Wrestlemania, but Albert is? It makes no sense to me to push big men when the fans give standing Os to Benoit/Angle and boo HHH/Stiener out of the building. Vince has said he always listens to the fans, bullshit. He used to listen to the fans, now he listens to the voices that tell him he made wrestling thats why he and Hogan are getting over 20 minutes at Wrestlemania instead of having Kane/RVD on the card.

The problem with the WWE now is that they are pushing people like Brock,Angel and Cena is that there is nothing for them to accomplish. Brock will have won KOR, RR, the Title, Main Evented at Wresltemania all in his first year. then what? He'll probably job to Cena who will probably hold it for a few months or just drop the next night. Brock doesn't have the charisma that Kurt does to do all that Kurt did in his first year and then go on to do other things. Remember, Kurt has never won the Rumble and only this year is getting his shot at main eventing WM unless Vince decides his match is more important. I don't think Brock can do much after this year, there is no more major obstacles to be accomplished. He has a few money matches left in him which is good, but he needs to job. He is the only face other than Austin during the McMahon era that has not done the job on a frequent basis. I have never got the feeling that Brock was in any danger or needed any help. He is the Superman character who can fight back from anything. I hate the Superman character. The WWE really needs to stop pushing these kids to the moon and start to look over their shoulder and realize they have the best talent in the world and are not using them

A Fan- I'm tired, its late and Wrestlemania is only a day away.
Ubermonkeys
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02
From: Michigan

Since last post: 6962 days
Last activity: 6836 days
#7 Posted on
This is my favorite wrestling thread on here in a long time.

Basically, if you were over elsewhere, don't count on it meaning shit in WWE.

Jericho, RVD, DDP...

But then again, there's Hogan, Nash, and Steiner. Hogan's obviously a special case and he was made in the WWF before leaving, same with Nash, and I guess this is speculative at best, but it seems like if Big Kev was healthy, he'd be scheduled for a really shitty match fairly high up on WM. Meltzer said in the Observer this week that he wants to come back as Diesel... because Diesel is a Vince creation. It really bugs me about how much time and planning goes into Nash's (reported) politics and then he just goes out and takes a shit in the ring.

I'd venture to say Steiner would have had a run with the title by now if he didn't turn out to be terrible and have fans turning on him.

I wonder if Goldberg will end up becoming the special case that Hogan is... but can he job like Hogan has and still keep his credibility with the fans, or will he just die off slowly like he did after Nash ended his streak?


(edited by Ubermonkeys on 29.3.03 0707)

The Hurricane's Advanced Dungeons & Dragons character is a level 12 thief skilled in the art of hamburglary

GodEatGod
Bockwurst








Since: 28.2.02

Since last post: 3014 days
Last activity: 2453 days
#8 Posted on
I'm not saying that winning shouldn't matter. I'm saying that winning is important in the context of the storyline. Some storylines work better if a particular character loses, some if a particular character wins. I feel that those who come up under Vince's system seem less likely to buck the storyline in order to keep their character looking good. To me, the story is the key. I don't care if wrestler X wins or loses so long as it makes a good story (and a good match, but I'm relatively happy as long as I get one or the other). In truth, I don't even mind if some people don't job often. HHH and Brock, for example, both have characters built essentially on being bad-ass MFers (no, the OTHER MFers). The difference between the two is that Brock is booked that way with relatively little say in the matter, while Triple H presumably has influence over his character. With the Evolution and his attempts to channel Flair, Trips is becoming increasingly the coward, cunning heel rather than the monster heel he was. He can't shift his character in that fashion and continue to be booked in the exact same fashion he was before. Stone Cold had some of the same problem during his 2001 heel turn, as they continued to book him, at least for a while, as indestructible Stone Cold in spite of his shift in character. I don't think they really started to get it right until the Kurt Angle feud.

As for Goldberg, I think he will probably be a dominant monster when he comes in. He just seems like someone Vince has been drooling to have forever. However, I also think he probably has a lot less rope to work with than the others. If Goldberg bombs, he, too, may be spending time laughing at jokes in the background...



"All I ever asked for in life is an unfair advantage." Microchip, Punisher Annual #2
Rush4Life
Kolbasz








Since: 2.1.02
From: Tacoma, WA

Since last post: 1762 days
Last activity: 1429 days
#9 Posted on
This is all very very interesting but I believe it comes down to one thing. Do what is right for the business. Every major company thrives on making some critical choices at one time or another. In 1984, WWE pushed Hogan, it worked and things were good. Then 1997 came and they pushed Austin. They have pushed HHH for 3 years now and it is stale. Vince is afraid to send someone new to the plate because he wants to go with what works. The problem is, it isnt working now. He isn't doing what is right for the business. I am personally a little burned out on seeing the same person win every week and the same people lose every week. I would love to see Hurricane get a victory over HHH. I would love to see a few of these guys actually go out and beat some of the bigger names. It kind of worked with Flair's opponents in the 80's. That was fun TV to watch.



Rush4Life

"I believed what I was told, I thought it was a good life, I thought I was happy. Then I found something that changed it all...." -Anonymous, 2112
Pages: 1Thread ahead: you wanna bet?
Next thread: Wait a Tick?! RVD OUT for Wrestlemania?!
Previous thread: Something NOONE has considered
(11103 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
After last week's loaded show, we sure could use a breather. Too bad. It's all business this week, too. GM Regal welcomes us with the announcement of the next Takeover event on Feb. 11.
- Tenken347, NXT #260 1/21/15 (2015)
The W - Pro Wrestling - An interesting theoryRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2024 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.375 seconds.