The W
Views: 134068611
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.6.18 1602
The W - Pro Wrestling - Can We Be Shocked Anymore?
This thread has 4 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(11106 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Post (15 total)

Since: 22.8.02
From: Between thought and Reality, TZ

Since last post: 3995 days
Last activity: 3989 days
#1 Posted on
>>Hello follow Wieners. I'm Davros from Denver, and I wanted to try to earn a contributor tag so I can share columns IMO why, what and how kayfabe impacted our sport. Often times, I will do a unique take on certain situations, and even present the columns in kayfabe. But before all of this can happen, I wanted to share some of my opinions and give a background on where my point of view is. I am open to all types of feedback, positive and negative. Pan me, Yah me, or Slam me, it's all good. So read on and hopefully, enjoy.<<

In an age where we as pro wrestling/sports entertainment fans are becoming more and more discontent with the product the one major force is giving us, has one of us ever asked why we have such a hard time being shocked?

I will NOT say that the advent of the IWC is what is hurting our beloved sport. In fact, it may be the very last thing to save it. Also, I'll highlight a few of the things that I think prevent us from ever being truly schocked by any big angles or money matches that the WWE can produce.

For the exception of tragic events in wrestling, what other heart stopping moments can we see without the outcomes or very reasons of the matches being marred by politics? Goldberg wants a lot of money, and not a lot of dates. Sting has morality issues with Vince and company. Rock will only be around for a few more months (hopefully a lot more), Austin's return is untested, and what about the bookers of WWE? When the IWC however, reports some of the political interplay, these reports and speculations made by posters at boards, or even the big time writers from various sites help us stay excited.

Let's face facts here... we cannot simply say we should stop going on the net because that's the reason we don't mark out. Bull. The WWE relies on the internet to keep the bottom line. We are the "trucking industry" of wrestling. In other words, this is how all regional and world news gets to fans all over the globe. How else would someone like myself in Denver, Colorado know about All Japan, ROH and hell, even XPW? IWC. When wrestling is no longer "cool" anymore, who will be a representation of fans that will always continue to watch, despite the product or even the promotion? IWC.

So why is it hard for us to be shocked? Here's my list.
1) Hogan turns heel. Not a lot of explanation here. But Hogan turning heel destroyed any remnants of innocence and security we had as kids who grew up during Rock and Wrestling. There would be no more line on who could turn bad. All faces became immune. While necessary to a degree, the end result is very costly.
2) Goldberg's streak. How in the world can he have 100 plus wins in that short amount of time? I remember some time ago I did the calculations, and perhaps I will attemt to do the notations again, but Bill literally would have to wrestle everyday of the week, when we knew at best, WCW was running three to four shows a week. Plus, most of the streak exposed him immediately, as most of the "Streak" consisted of jobbers. Now, why do you think it's so hard for us to except an astronomical push of new talent? Hmmm...
3) The failure of the InVasion. Let's face it. This SHOULD have been THE ANGLE. PERIOD. Booker T was WCW World AND U.S. Champion simultaneously!!! C'mon Vince! Elix Skipper and Kid Romeo weren't retained, they were the Cruiserweight Tag Champs, and to that point had put on some of the BEST matches in WCW during the faltering days. C'mon Vince! And, to this day, WCW's history is all but ignored, unless it concerns a worker that may be getting a push. And not even that is done right. How many times have they mentioned Chris Benoit- former WCW World Champ? Will they mention the fact that Booker T is the eqivalent of a WWE Grand Slam Champion? World/US/Tag/TV Champ? All on numerous occasions. I could go on...

So, is there a solution? Sure. It's what some folks have been saying all along. Just enjoy it, as hard as it may seem. We can't fool ourselves when the product is bad, but focus on the positive. On RAW, the Women holding it down. RVD, Booker, Goldy, the Dudleys and yes, HHH, Chief Morley, 3MW and Steiner giving all of us moments to mark out for in one way, shape or form over the past year. Smackdown? Well, we could do a whole column on that.

Also too, before wrestling got cool, how many of your buds did you try to convince to watch the game? To the best of my knowledge, NOBODY knew about ECW here in Denver until some of us were fortunate enough to turn to Prime Sports Network, and see Hack Meyers and the Young Dragons get that ass WHOOPED by the Pit Bulls and Jason the Terrible. How much could it hurt to try to spread the word again?

When all of that is hard, remind yourselves of why you watch. And think about what it would be like if there was NO wrestling. Yeah, that's right. NO wrestling.

"Don't hate the Playa, hate the Game!"
Promote this thread!

Since: 19.1.02
From: Minnesota

Since last post: 808 days
Last activity: 675 days
#2 Posted on
Few things of note:

1) You aren't saying anything new. Most of what you are saying is "right" to a certain degree, but most people on the Internet have debated the importance/lack there of of the IWC until we all had carpal tunnel. For future write-ups, if you decide to do them, pick something REALLY obscure and go off on it. It doesn't have to be controversial or anything, just fresh. Knowing your audience is really important, and writing to the IWC about how jaded the IWC has become is like writing to the manager of McDonalds about how greasy the food is. They already know. Go off in a completely different direction than most people, but don't go too far off where reading it becomes a pain. (And, yeah, I realize that MY column isn't exactly an original concept, which counts doubly against me as I'm trying to be creative in my concepts. It's easier to take the "originality" road)

2) You could probably format a little better. It helps to write down what you want to say (Point A because Point B which also caused Point C). Make sure that it's not only easy to follow, but that the point of each paragraph jumps right out and grabs you.

3) You never really fully addressed the real reason that kayfabe and angles will never shock us: We already know the people, angles, backstage gossip/news, and sometimes results before they "happen". Why was I not surprised when the nWo debuted? Because I'd already read several days earlier that they were about to.

4) Try not to do "kayfabe" columns. True, I haven't read one by you yet, but they almost always come across really forced (especially given that your readership will come in knowing that you have some level of smark knowledge), or it comes off as humorous. If you're trying to be humorous, more power to you, but stick with one or the other.

5) Once again, and I can't stress this enough, know your audience. Be sure that every time you do a column it's not just something you want to write, but something that we'll want to read as well. Writing for writing's sake is great, but if you're going to make a column out of it, you're going to have to find something that people where you put your work will WANT to read.

(edited by Excalibur05 on 27.2.03 1637)

Satire 2/24 (I promise to learn the new coding by next week)
Buffy 7.15 gets a 8 The Kennedy tweener turn happened out of nowhere, but whatever. Mostly good stuff though.

Since: 25.11.02
From: Jersey

Since last post: 3310 days
Last activity: 2011 days
#3 Posted on
"Now, why do you think it's so hard for us to except an astronomical push of new talent? Hmmm..."

checking grammar is also a good start to writing a column that people will take seriously.

also, i think the main reason people aren't shocked by anything is a societal thing. people aren't shocked by ANYTHING any more when there's blood, gore, and sex on tv and kids are shooting up our public schools.

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 744 days
Last activity: 131 days
#4 Posted on

    Originally posted by sentonBOMB
    "Now, why do you think it's so hard for us to except an astronomical push of new talent? Hmmm..."

    checking grammar is also a good start to writing a column that people will take seriously.

    also, i think the main reason people aren't shocked by anything is a societal thing. people aren't shocked by ANYTHING any more when there's blood, gore, and sex on tv and kids are shooting up our public schools.

I'd disagree to an extent. I think people are potentially easier to shock exactly because so many believe that they CAN'T be shocked.

The way to do it however is not with outrageous in your face gore or sex. Like you say people are already pretty desensitised to this sort of shit.

Trying to shock people on a more psychological level which leaves something to the imagination however could still be very effective.

"You dont appreciate a lot of stuff in school until you get older. Little things like being spanked every day by a middle aged woman: stuff you'd pay good money for these days."

One time undisputed Wiener of the day 2.11.02

Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
#5 Posted on
Just enjoy it? Sorry, but that's a terrible message.

What that says, is that Vince McMahon can do whatever he wants and we're supposed to make him rich. Even back in the day (before everyone got so savvy), if they booked WM5 to be DiBiase vs Hogan and DiBiase went over, that would have killed business, because nobody paid to see Hogan lose back then. When people's favorite characters get shat on, people tend not to like the shows. That's the way it is in any form of entertainment.

So, Vince can push Albert to the moon, give HHH another unbeatable streak, fire Kurt Angle and we're all supposed to sit there and like it. Even without knowing the backstage politics, the fact of the matter is that Albert just doesn't appeal to people. It's like Mantaur getting a megapush back in the day. Even without following the sheets, no one would have liked it.

There's a more than just three reasons why wrestling isn't unpredictable, and Goldberg's streak isn't even in the top 20. The author only hit on one: the Hogan turn. There's also the Vince turn, the numerous title changes we see week after week, heels going over at WM, and hundreds of other reasons why. All of the rules have been broken to the point where breaking the rules has become the rule.

Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 4598 days
Last activity: 4598 days
#6 Posted on
The "Just Enjoy It" argument. The same one that popped up during WCW's dying days when Russo was destroying the foundation of the company.

Since: 29.10.02
From: New York

Since last post: 4316 days
Last activity: 3003 days
#7 Posted on
I really don't see the need for you to jump all over this guy just because this argument was bought up before. It's his point of view, and maybe he didn't chime in when the rest were yapping. Everybody has a right to say what they feel on this board. His post is relevant, and saying something like "make sure we'll want to read it" is simply assuming that nobody wants to hear what he has to say. It's just your opinion that nobody wants to read his post.

But back to WRESTLING, yes, I know you're sick of hearing this, but people seem very confused about this "Just Enjoy It" argument.

It DOESN'T mean accept everything they do and don't complain.

It DOES mean to look for the good parts of things in bad times. (You know, instead of BITCHING over EVERYTHING).

Big difference, but a very simple concept.

And the usual comeback is "Well if I don't like it, I'll keep bitching". Once again, we come full circle. Cause just like it seems a lot of people don't want to hear this guy voice his opinion because it's "played", a lot of people just don't want to hear the bitching either. It goes both ways.



Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 962 days
Last activity: 381 days
#8 Posted on
Furry, the problem with your argument becomes one of focus. Take an episode of Raw from a couple of months ago. There may have been 1-2 enjoyable segments on the show lasting 3-10 minutes, and the rest was from not enjoyable to downright painful. By your way of thinking, those 3-10 minutes of good should outweigh the 110 minutes of bad. Or at least that's what it seems like you are saying.

As for not wanting to hear bitching, or the inverse not wanting to hear positive things, I think you are oversimplifying to a great degree here. Certainly when a show is awful the tendency will be to get into a negative mood about it and overlook the positive. However it seems that there is a contingent on the net that takes great umbrage when their favorite company is criticized, be it the old ECW mutants defending the Justin Credible title reign, the folks in Jan. 2001 talking about how WCW was just about ready to turn everything around, or the people who get into a massive snit if everyone doesn't give a thumbs up to Raw each week. When a bad product is put out, and I'm really having trouble seeing how anyone can not agree that Raw in late 2002 was on average a bad product, people are going to come down hard on that product. And because places like the board are populated with people who LIKE wrestling, they really get unhappy when they are given crappy product. When the product is even halfway decent, like this week's Raw, most people are more than happy to say so. Yes I know there's always a couple ultra-smarks who will rip everything just to seem cool, but then they are as annoying as the people who will completely refuse to admit even the slightest possibility that HHH has any sway whatsoever in decision making.

As for the column, what he's saying has some interesting points but I find myself in agreement with previous posters that he needs to work on his flow and making his points. Also, the use of "C'mon" in an article is highly grating and makes me not want to read anymore. I agree with his points, but he needs to say them better if he wants to be taken seriously. Read some of Jeb's previous columns would be recommendation.

The Most Bitter Place On The Net.

The current artist tickling my fancy: Brenda Weiler


Since: 25.11.02
From: Jersey

Since last post: 3310 days
Last activity: 2011 days
#9 Posted on
i'm thinking maybe it was the pompousness of "here is my bid to be the next contributor so i can post in the 'columns' section" thing that made people jump all over him. it definitely wasn't a nonsensical or irrelevant post, but not 'contributor' quality either. which isn't necessarily a diss; i don't feel like the stuff i write is on that level of being thought-out and researched and really insightful, either.
Parts Unknown
Lap cheong

Since: 2.1.02
From: Darkenwood

Since last post: 266 days
Last activity: 266 days
#10 Posted on
My advice to any aspiring Wienerboard columnist: NO CHEESY TOP TEN LISTS! C'mon!!!

(edited by Parts Unknown on 27.2.03 1331)

"Also, don't incur the wrath of P.U. It can only lead to trouble." - Torchslasher
Cherries > Peaches

Since: 1.8.02
From: Phoenix-ish

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 15 hours
#11 Posted on
Did I miss the "jumping all over" part? Davros' preamble paragraph specifically requested "all types of feedback" appropriate to a prospective columnist, & Excalibur gave him several editorial notes. I suspect that without the preamble, Excalibur's reply would have been somewhat different. In this context, I don't see the "jumping".
Wolfram J. Paulovich

Since: 11.11.02
From: Fat City, Baby

Since last post: 4292 days
Last activity: 3663 days
#12 Posted on
The only things I would say about being a columnist are the things you heard from your English teacher:

1. PROOFREAD. Proofread again. Then put the column away for a day or two, to forget how you wrote things, then proofread again.

2. Spell and punctuate everything properly.

3. Avoid over-use of passive voice, compound sentences and endless parenthetical phrases.

4. Avoid red herrings, deliberately inflammatory comments, supposed "givens" that go unjustified, and assumptions that, at every point, you assume are correct.

The "IWC" (whatever that's supposed to mean) already has hundreds of quasi-literate flame junkies spewing rants of dubious relevance aimed at the basest and grossest elements of the reading public. If you want to set yourself apart from the crowd, write a column the way you would write a school essay: with respect, concern and thoughtfulness not only for the subject but for those who have to read about it.

The Obtuse Angle Archive.

Burns: Smither's this beer isn't working! I don't feel any younger, or funkier....
Smithers: I'll switch to the tablespoon, sir.
Tribal Prophet

Since: 9.1.02
From: Winnipeg, MB, Canada

Since last post: 828 days
Last activity: 88 days
#13 Posted on
Hey, feel free to post whatever type topics you want (wrestling related, that is) as far as I'm concerned, as I'd much rather read something that someone thought-through rather than a top list of why David Flair sucks (Apologies to anyone who DID spend a deal of time of his 'David Flair Sucks' top ten list). One thing that might turn people away from your posts is when you have something like "I'm just posting to get special treatment" at the beginning.

My advice in all of this is not to be concerned about getting that "Contributor" tag on the site. When people are reading a post here, I don't know if anyone even cares what the rank of the person who posted was. The fact that people don't just post as a race to get the highest ranking is one of the nice things that seperates this board from most on the net.

I mean, it's nice to be acknowledged for being here a while, but having a special tag doesn't mean you're smarter than someone else or that your opinion matters more than a newer person, it just means that you probably have consistant trouble sleeping.

Basically, your ranking is going to be ignored unless your tag is something along the lines of 'moderator' (in which case you rule this land like a GOD), so just enjoy spreading your viewpoint and seeing what other people have to say.

Tribal Prophet

Wrestling exists in the eternal present. What is, has always been, and when it no longer is, it never was. It has no past and no future, and sometimes even today is in question. - Madame Manga

Since: 17.11.02

Since last post: 353 days
Last activity: 74 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.74

I was 'THIS CLOSE'( --><-- ) to posting my 'Top 10 Reasons David Flair Should Not Be In The Business' list, but NOW if I do it, It'll look like I just STOLE your idea.


Well, at least no one's beaten me to the punch with my 'TOP 100 OF THE IWC' list, THAT pooch is comming as soon as I finish typing it out... I wrote it free hand while watching Smackdown earlier tonight.

Cerebus: Barbarian, Prime Minister, Pope, Perfect House Guest.

"Graft is as necessary as throwing up when you drink too much."

Since: 22.8.02
From: Between thought and Reality, TZ

Since last post: 3995 days
Last activity: 3989 days
#15 Posted on
First I'd like to say thank you very much for all who responded. I'm going to take all of the constructive criticism and try to do a better column. Just one thing I want to point out. I don't care about my ranking. It's just that I don't know if doing a giant thread in the wrestling section is appropriate.
I emailed Guru Zim about the whole thing. So no, I don't want to be "cool" or "special," I just want to make sure that wherever I post is going to be the right place. I think I've been pretty close to being in hot water with some folks here from time to time. I want to be able to post ideas and views that I think are pertinent to wrestling and try not to offend anyone in the process.
So again, thanks everybody, and it's back to the drawing board. :)

"Don't hate the Playa, hate the Game!"
Pages: 1Thread ahead: Where's O'Haire?
Next thread: Fun at Shopzone!
Previous thread: Watts, Lawler, and Flair!! Uh...not THAT Watts, Lawler, and Flair
(11106 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
That's a nice punk card you just dropped, Senton. Let me tell you something, brother, number one doesn't come to number two. I've got 206 points on you that says you can't lace my boots. But I'll tell you what:
- John Orquiola, WWE Fantasy Final Standings (2005)
The W - Pro Wrestling - Can We Be Shocked Anymore? Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

©2001-2018 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.512 seconds.