Why doesn't the 'E' create first-time heel power-houses anymore?

[It's Damn Real!]

My thread title might be slightly off here considering what I'm asking, but I couldn't really think of a better vernacular term for what I'm asking.

That said, what I'm curious about here is why the WWE doesn't use "new names" (in a sense) to really stir the proverbial pot regarding their product any longer?

Take for example (most recently) someone like Kane. Granted he's a "giant", but he came into the company as a total unknown and quite literally put – housed the competition. The guy debuted against (what turned out to be his "brother" in the story) the Undertaker, and dominated. He built a legitimate level of fear and intrigue from the story line perspective, as well as from the fans who really didn't know what to expect.

Looking back over the last few years of the WWE, I'm hard-pressed to remember anyone who debuted and really caused much of a ruckus? This isn't even exclusive to the "monster" types, either, like the Boogeyman, who some might consider one of those types I'm talking about.

Having guys cut their teeth in ECW before they make the big jump IMO isn't always the best approach to take. In fact, quite often it takes away from the dominance factor IMO, because you've already seen wrestler X dominate for weeks on another show. The natural progression doesn't actually do anything to establish a fear right off the bat, because everyone understands that once you've run through the entire ECW roster (the way guys like Swagger and Sheamus did), the next step is obviously one of the A/B shows in RAW or Smackdown.

I can't help but feel sorry for a guy like Kaval (Low-Ki) who I feel could probably strike a lot of fear into the hearts of the baby-faces in the company (in a kayfabe sense) were he simply allowed to be "unleashed" on either of the flagship programs. I understand there are feuds going on right now that would potentially be disrupted, but debuting someone like Kaval against John Cena would be equate an incredible push for his character, much like TNA did with Desmond Wolfe who debuted off the bat with Kurt Angle. Nothing against Christian Cage (who I am a mark for, mind you), but IMO that kind of debuting feud is just too predictable for my tastes.

Your thoughts?

 

[Skorpiunz]

IDK man the WWE has their heads up their asses. Kane would be great as champ. Altho he's kinda flabby now. Still big and impressive. I dont think i could take an all american american lisp that seriously as champ.THey pushed thwagger and once he got to the good show they fumbled.. oh noe wtf do we do now?

lowki would be interesting. Maybbe bring in that quick, realistic action that TNA has. then again he would make all wwe starrs look like absolute shit.
WWE is way to slow imo both in the ring and with stories and that doesn't allow for new faces to come and move up the ranks quickly.

 

[wrestler36]

They still do. I just don't think they've quite found the right person yet. Remember when Kozlov re-debuted on Smackdown last year, he went on quite the undefeated streak. He even pinned the Undertaker clean not too long before Mania! Khali was the same way too when he first arrived.

It depends how they are packaged, pushed and how the crowd reacts to them. I can see Ezekiel being dominant like Lashley, had he stuck around.

 

[rubxcubedude]

The problem is that after Monster Wrestler A has finished his run at the top of the company, he has nowhere to go. Look at Umaga as an example. Umaga came into the company and destroyed Cena. After Cena beat him he had to go over to SD! to feud with the big guns there. However, Umaga was never able to face Shelton or something like that bc his character was established where no one would believe Shelton getting a clean win.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

They still do. I just don't think they've quite found the right person yet. Remember when Kozlov re-debuted on Smackdown last year, he went on quite the undefeated streak. He even pinned the Undertaker clean not too long before Mania! Khali was the same way too when he first arrived.

It depends how they are packaged, pushed and how the crowd reacts to them. I can see Ezekiel being dominant like Lashley, had he stuck around.

You're right about Kozlov in a sense, but even his push only went so far. He ended up jobbing to HHH if I recall correctly, (which effectively castrated his character and broke his undefeated streak) and was banished to ECW like that. He didn't even get a normal shot at a title, because while they were booking him to, they did that ridiculous Cyber Sunday PPV where the fans vote in what they want to see, and what they ended up voting was a three-way match, which killed the heat with Kozlov and HHH. He was buried soon after.

What I'm talking about here is a truely dominant force – the kind of guy who comes in and tears the house down, not just a dozen jobbers the way Kozlov and Sheamus were built. That's the predictability I'm not looking for here. THe Goldberg thing works, we know that, but it's not really something that's all that new, whereas the instant recognition of being that unknown, although tried time and again, does in fact work – and work well – when it's applied correctly. It's actually the fastest track to superstardom second only to winning the rumble, IMO.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Yes, always look forward to a thread that calls it "The E." Talk about a nickname that's run it's course. That ranks up there with "WWE Shareholders." Now, as for your topic. Why doesn't "the E" create first timer heel power houses anymore? This gets me somewhat confused, because you go on to reference Kane and The Boogeyman of all people. Do you really mean first time "freaks" instead? Because if you haven't noticed the WWE has created a first time heel power house and he just happens to be the WWE champion Sheamus!!! Go to ECW. Who's Christian wrestling at The Royal Rumble? WOW, a heel powerhouse by the name of Ezekial Jackson!! Man, that "E" really doesn't create heel powerhouses, you dip shit!! Must be a "TNA shareholder."

Wrong – try reading my post again before you go on another belligerent rant trying to insult someone for no reason other than to get your pathetic post read.

I specifically spoke about how said "monster" is created, and specifically noted that guys who "run through the competition (jobbers)" in the Goldberg sense like Sheamus and Kozlov are not the type of characters I'm talking about.

Ezekial Jackson is another one who doesn't fit the bill, because he came in with Brian Kendrick as a bodyguard, and stuck around for quite some time before he got his singles shot.

What I'm talking about are debuts. Guys who come in and immediately vault their way to the top of the chain, or somewhere near it, instead of having to build their character the hard way like Sheamus and Kozlov did.

And for the record, "shareholders" are people who actually own stock in a publicly traded company. TNA is not a publicly traded company, so the term "TNA Shareholder" is both illogical as well as impossible. Maybe do some homework before you take a run at someone again, eh?

 

[AMH]

First of all, it wasn't a beligerant tirade. I was simply asking in so many words that you clarify what you mean. And as for Sheamus not being like Kane or Goldberg. Since coming to Raw, how many times has Sheamus lost? What about big Zeke. He hasn't exactly been so-so in terms of wins and losses. Remember when him and Kozlov would have ass kicking contests against each other. Zeke would win, Kozlov would come out and hit his finisher. Kozlov would win, Zeke would come out and hit his finish. These look like big powerhouses to me. And, by the way, Kane didn't necessarily dominate The Undertaker. They had a lot of back and forth altercations, Kane coming out on top in many, but when they finally had their first official match I believe that it was The Undertaker who won at Wrestlemania 14. And as for The Boogeyman. Never use The Boogeyman as an example. Because he was more of a gimmick than powerhouse. And if you disagree, remember he used to get pops from the crowd by eating worms!!

I didn't mean to offend you, but sometimes you don't even have to read the post to know exactly what a thread is about. Calling the WWE "The E" shows right off how you feel about the company, thus putting me, a life long WWE fan in defense mode. Nothing personal.

And by the way the term "shareholder" in terms of online WWE bashing is far different from a company shareholder. Your shareholder is a degrading nickname for those who are devoted WWE fans, which I am. Just like you're obviously a fan of TNA. Which is why I called you a TNA shareholder. You have an emotional investment with the company. Such as I with the WWE.

And I do understand what you mean. I'm just saying that you don't have to dominate right off to be considered a powerhouse. And Zeke and Sheamus have dominated since becoming part of their respective brands, so I included them. Settle down, it's not a big deal.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

The problem is that after Monster Wrestler A has finished his run at the top of the company, he has nowhere to go. Look at Umaga as an example. Umaga came into the company and destroyed Cena. After Cena beat him he had to go over to SD! to feud with the big guns there. However, Umaga was never able to face Shelton or something like that bc his character was established where no one would believe Shelton getting a clean win.

I counter that with Yokozuna. Came in and dominated (though he did run through the competition a bit), and because of how well structured the heel/face ratio was at the time, he was able to feud with numerous faces in the company, including Luger, Hogan, Duggan and Hart.

IMO, just because a guy debuts by breaking the glass ceiling, that doesn't necessarily condemn him to remain there or risk losing all credibility if he falls to the mid-card. The high mid-card is still a very credible place to be.

First of all, it wasn't a beligerant tirade. I was simply asking in so many words that you clarify what you mean. And as for Sheamus not being like Kane or Goldberg. Since coming to Raw, how many times has Sheamus lost? What about big Zeke. He hasn't exactly been so-so in terms of wins and losses. Remember when him and Kozlov would have ass kicking contests against each other. Zeke would win, Kozlov would come out and hit his finisher. Kozlov would win, Zeke would come out and hit his finish. These look like big powerhouses to me. And, by the way, Kane didn't necessarily dominate The Undertaker. They had a lot of back and forth altercations, Kane coming out on top in many, but when they finally had their first official match I believe that it was The Undertaker who won at Wrestlemania 14. And as for The Boogeyman. Never use The Boogeyman as an example. Because he was more of a gimmick than powerhouse. And if you disagree, remember he used to get pops from the crowd by eating worms!!

I didn't mean to offend you, but sometimes you don't even have to read the post to know exactly what a thread is about. Calling the WWE "The E" shows right off how you feel about the company, thus putting me, a life long WWE fan in defense mode. Nothing personal.

Once again, you aren't understanding what I am talking about. I don't know how I can make it any clearer. What I am referring to are characters that DEBUT against already established characters high in the card. If the character spent any amount of time on television prior to that major debut as a recognizable character (e.g. not Issac Yankeem v. Kane), then that's not the character I'm taking about, so how many times Sheamus has lost on RAW is irrelevant. Same goes for Ezekial Jackson.

If you didn't mean to offend me, I suggest that the next time you reply to someone's post or thread, you don't insult them off the bat. My calling the WWE "The E" should have no bearing on your ability to objectively discuss a topic I very calmly started a thread about.

 

[Rated_R_Superstar2010]

you all seem to be forgetting the wwe champion. Sheamus!!!! yes he started out on ecw but he was on raw for maybe a month and dominated a few people then won the title from cena. CENA!!!! and he has yet to be pinned on raw.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

And I do understand what you mean. I'm just saying that you don't have to dominate right off to be considered a powerhouse. And Zeke and Sheamus have dominated since becoming part of their respective brands, so I included them. Settle down, it's not a big deal.

You're still not getting it. I am talking about HOW the characters are created – specifically in that the DEBUT against top-talent. No time building in ECW. No time building on Smackdown. No time building on RAW. Come in and establish dominance from day one. Ezekiel Jackson and Sheamus do not fit that bill, thus neither can be considered for what I'm asking for. I am not just talking about developing a monster – I'm talking about debuting one with instant credit.

you all seem to be forgetting the wwe champion. Sheamus!!!! yes he started out on ecw but he was on raw for maybe a month and dominated a few people then won the title from cena. CENA!!!! and he has yet to be pinned on raw.

Did you even read my follow-up posts? Read the one above this.

 

[MizMark]

My thread title might be slightly off here considering what I'm asking, but I couldn't really think of a better vernacular term for what I'm asking.

That said, what I'm curious about here is why the WWE doesn't use "new names" (in a sense) to really stir the proverbial pot regarding their product any longer?

One word - Sheamus.

He entered WWE and was WWE champion just a few months later.

Jack Swagger - Entered WWE and not long later is ECW champion, granted he isn't be used too well at the minute, but he made a huge impact and was a good champion, his match with Cena on Raw a year or so ago was quality.

You gotta remember that people won't connect with characters straight away so maybe WWE is playing the percentage game and taking the easy option.

 

[Greenlight13]

Because truly skilled big men are few and far between. They've brought in plenty of guys who were initially dominant but then faded when it became clear either the fans didn't accept them or their skills were limited. Snitsky pretty much owned Kane in his first few months and I know Kane's weaker these days but still, he was an established name and a monster and Snitsky obliterated him. Khali was really dominant. Sheamus, though he debuted on ECW, is champion already. Kozlov got a massive push.

But none of these men are as good as Kane was or even still is. Undertaker and Kane are pretty much freaks when it comes to big man wrestling because typically their shelf life is only a few years but both guys drew and were over for decades. Nash only managed to linger because he had charisma and could talk well, skill-wise he never blew anyone away.

So yeah, I call luck to be honest.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

One word - Sheamus.

He entered WWE and was WWE champion just a few months later.

Jack Swagger - Entered WWE and not long later is ECW champion, granted he isn't be used too well at the minute, but he made a huge impact and was a good champion, his match with Cena on Raw a year or so ago was quality.

You gotta remember that people won't connect with characters straight away so maybe WWE is playing the percentage game and taking the easy option.

I don't know how many times I have to negate these examples. You guys either really aren't understanding what I'm asking for here, or you don't care, because I am not talking about developing a monster or a superior heel – I am talking about debuting them off the bat – likely at a PPV or a high profile episode of a flagship show.

Who's to say fans can't connect with a character straight away simply because they weren't developed? If anything, the characters that need to be developed are being developed because they're probably too difficult to get over without the continuous exposure.

 

[Hill16]

Last monster powerhouse that debuted strongly that I can remember is Brock. Came in the night after wrestlemania, destroyed everyone from the Hardys -best tagteam at the time, RVD at KOTR and then Rock at Summerslam. Actually made crowd believe he was unstoppable and had a fearsome edge about him. Cant think of anyone since Brock to do that.

I think they've tried and failed with others like - Snitzky (came in against Kane no?)
Khali - debuted against 'Taker
not 100% on this but what about Masters too? Came in and was pushed pretty quickly too, beat all the top faces with his masterlock.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Because truly skilled big men are few and far between. They've brought in plenty of guys who were initially dominant but then faded when it became clear either the fans didn't accept them or their skills were limited. Snitsky pretty much owned Kane in his first few months and I know Kane's weaker these days but still, he was an established name and a monster and Snitsky obliterated him. Khali was really dominant. Sheamus, though he debuted on ECW, is champion already. Kozlov got a massive push.

But none of these men are as good as Kane was or even still is. Undertaker and Kane are pretty much freaks when it comes to big man wrestling because typically their shelf life is only a few years but both guys drew and were over for decades. Nash only managed to linger because he had charisma and could talk well, skill-wise he never blew anyone away.

So yeah, I call luck to be honest.

The size isn't really my concern here, though. Guys like Kane debuted as monsters, but really all I'm looking for here is the WWE to debut a dominant force – regardless of whether he's 7'2 460lbs or 6'2 220lbs.

It's why I noted in the OP the potential in Kaval (Low-Ki) to be that type of guy, because IMO his intensity would be unmatched by most in the the WWE, which would really help establish an identity to the otherwise unknown attacker right off the bat.

 

[CJ The Pirate]

I'd have to agree with Brock Lesnar as the most recent example. I think using Brock as the example rather than Kane would let this make more sense to people.

The reason for me is that for this type of character to work, they need to be heel. The only person in recent years that had the opportunity to do what you want here was Bobby Lashley, but he was awful on the mic and probably wouldn't have been able to handle a heel role. In my opinion, Lesnar wouldn't have worked had they not added Heyman to the mix. Face it... everyone hate him. I've not seen a non wrestling character since then generate as much heat as Heyman did. We thought we were rid of him and then he showed up again. Had Lesnar just done repeated hit and runs with no talking, or a few wooden promo in the ring, his eventual rise to the top would have felt a bit rushed and undeserved. Lesnar was elevated by his manager's brilliance.

So what we now need is a big guy, who is good on the mic who can come out and cause immediate impact? Sheamus...? I think not. He's awful on the mic and that's not due to his accent. I have a problem with someone who tells us he is 'Here to make an impact' - in a word it sucked. It made me want him to do something amazing to back up such a claim. The F5 looked impressive back in the Lesnar debuting days. The Razor's Edge isn't so impressive. Neither is an axe kick. As for instant impact, there was no pop on either his ECW or Raw debuts. His first feud on Raw... Jamie Noble. I love Noble but he's never quite become the respected guy on Raw over recent years. Sheamus/ Noble was the bathroom break match. People seemed more into the Diva matches.

It's very very rare you find someone who can handle this... generally speaking, the mic skills necessary are not there so a worthy manager is needed. Paul Bearer for Kane. Paul Heyman for Lesnar. Umaga with Armando Estrada, Vicky Guerrero for Eric Escobar... well, they tried!

So in that equation we're now looking for a big guy with the skill to handle that kind of role, the skill to capture or attention immediately AND a voice who commands our attention with charisma and attitude. Now that's a rare thing to stumble across. I think the only guy with the mic skills enough to handle this right now would be Chris Jericho... perhaps as an option for his later years. That said, I'd love Chris to still be going for as long as Flair!

 

[boombox77]

This is an interesting thing you posted on, enough so i opened up and account. I think that its a great idea, they could come out with a story of like an enemy of any type. Be it from childhood, on the streets, or whatever. Like your example with Kane they talked about it for a while and when he made the debut he was already over. It is a very simple art form that seems to have been lost over the years, no jobbers, just come so hyped up by word of mouth its and automatic main event.

 

[CJ The Pirate]

This is an interesting thing you posted on, enough so i opened up and account. I think that its a great idea, they could come out with a story of like an enemy of any type. Be it from childhood, on the streets, or whatever. Like your example with Kane they talked about it for a while and when he made the debut he was already over. It is a very simple art form that seems to have been lost over the years, no jobbers, just come so hyped up by word of mouth its and automatic main event.

I'd thought of that very idea as a way to elevate MVP as in an old acquaintance from his prison days. They always mention it in the same way and he cuts the same old boring speech about it. I let it better myself. I repent it but I don't regret it. Well, how about we get someone in to tell the true story of MVP's past. How he was a gay shower raper who'd do practically anything for money. or Something? It'd be nice to see that story develop!

 

[matt_hud]

Well said, made AMH look like he had no cluse what he was saying, and btw great post... I have always been a life long E fan as well, I am however also a TNA fan, I dont feel like it makes you a "shareholder" to enjoy 1 brand or the other more... It makes you a true fan, I have my likes and dislikes with boths companies and I am sure it will always be the case...

Now on the the thread topic... I actually completly agree with how the "monster" heel is created these days, you can have someone come in and do the "Goldberg" and destroy everyone ala Lesner, Shamus, Jackson, Kozlov, Khali, ect ect or you can have someone come in and do the "Kane" someone we have heard about and never seen whose mere appearence is so intimidating his opponents pretty much are defeated at the mere sight of him...

I infact enjoy the "monster" of either angle, however as for the "Goldberg" monster I am sick of seeing a guy debut who could legitimatly be a monster for years to come only to have a 6 month or 1 year dominate streak and then lose to HHH, Cena, Batista, or HBK and then pretty much live out a career in jobberland... It happened with Kozlov, Snitsky, Umaga, Khali and it will eventually happen to Jackson, Archer, & even Shamus...

This is why I feel The Undertaker is so Special, these monsters can come in and dominate eventually facing the Deadman and even though he usually goes over they still look bigger & stronger in most cases like Kane, Lesner, Cena, & even Orton

 

[bigjd691]

i dont know why the wwe doesnt do this anymore the last person i remember debuting snd taking out a established guy was kahli and it wasnt that great but the reason i think wwe does the build up thing with the new monster heels is to see how the crowd reacts to them like does anyone remember modicai? thought not but he was a person of light and wanted to rid the wwe of darkness personally i liked the gimmick and wanted to see more and they was gonna hae him feud with undertaker in a light vs dark type thing but it never happened because the crowd never really reacted to him so i think that this is one of many reasons why the wwe dont do this no more they want to see how the crowd reacts with certain guys

 

[Greenlight13]

If we're not so fussed about their size then I'd say the real issue is it's a hell of a risk to take on a talent to put them over a major name their very first time on camera. If the talent becomes a bust then you've made your major talent job for no reason which isn't going to make them not a major name anymore or anything, but it just seems good business sense to not have your big guys job for no reason.

Of course something to point out about Kane's debut was that he had been wrestling in the WWF already and they put a mask on him later so he was in many ways a proven talent in that he was very used to the WWF style, they trusted and knew him, he came highly touted from Puerto Rico etc so one can argue that even he didn't come straight in and destroy, but rather the Kane character did. We don't have many masked wrestlers anymore so it's difficult to repeat it (I'd guess Vince feels we need to see a face to connect with a character or something).

Brock did dominate but at first it was against the likes of Rikishi and others of around his talent level, nobody who was in a major program until he picked on the Hardyz, and that feud lasted for two months and he would have lost a handicap match if not for Heyman pulling the ref out. Heyman is another reason for Brock's success as someone pointed out and Vince apparently doesn't believe in managers anymore. Kane also had a manger... interesting link there.

In all honesty I think Khali is about the only heel I remember dominating a main event face in their very first match in the WWE. I don't remember him going to FCW or doing dark matches or anything, so I'm going to say it was his first time in the WWE. Nobody else - regardless of size - occurs to me off the top of my head.

 

[Mr_billy]

They should bring out the kind of wrestler you are talking about as a Hired gun. I get what you are saying, like the Zeus's, Kanes, Yokozuna's, el Gigante's. They need to do this with a Buzzsaw kind of guy, and they tried to do it with Carlito. It would be fun to see a Heel wrestler come out and beat everyone not because he is the biggest or strongest, but the best, Like Bryan Danielson.

 

[LCShazardous]

yeah you got a point there but look at the last dominant wrestler to start out on the flagship brand smackdown. anyone remember vladmer kozlov? on smackdown he walked out with now music or anything for 6 months or so and contained a pretty dominant win loss streak. maybe they don't do that anymore because guys like koslov ussually sink after there 1st pinfall loss

 

[4-Real]

I dont think you guys are getting it. "Well your forgetting SHEAMUS!! THE WWE CHAMPION!!!" Sheamus, for one thing, didnt have an epic debut at all. He, like 90% of every new WWE superstar came as a part of the New Superstar Initiative on ECW, where he almost lost to Goldust. All of a sudden, he appears dominant on Raw. KANE had an epic debut, breaking into Undertaker's HIAC match, the first one ever I might add, and feuding with him immediately. The Boogeyman was a character based off of a movie, and by utilizing his slovenly behavior against guys like Booker and JBL, he was able to get over pretty good. Remember his debut? How could we forget Survivor Series 05, when he randomly attacked Eric Bischoff? Other examples of this include Nailz, Giant Gonzales, Yokozuna, Judas Mesias (fail), Great Khali, and most recently, and probably the best example, Desmond Wolfe and his attack on Kurt Angle.

I think Hulk Hogan put it best at Genesis, referring to McMahon no longer looking at 'wrestling' as 'wrestling.' I'd compare him to Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis in the sense that he is stubborn and doesnt listen to the fans. And until they retire, their team/company will never improve as both have dropped the ball on several occasions. Anyway, I'm rambling.

Point is that because wrestling is now Sports Entertainment to Vince McMahon, WWE just doesnt do stuff like this anymore. This was a very old school way of getting a monster over quickly, and Taker was used as the springboard in most of these cases. Once again, NO, Sheamus does not count as this big time debuting heel, and he should, in no way shape or form be compared to Goldberg. I do think another problem though is who would play the part? The talent in pro wrestling has taken a big dip in the past 10 years, as most of the WWE dev wrestlers in FCW are unknowns (except for indy and second/third gen stars). It used to be everybody who'd go into the WWF had to have some kind of credentials in the profession. (See Flair, Guerrero, Hart, Steamboat, Windham, etc etc etc.) But thats another argument for another day.

But yeah, definately. This is an idea that WWE should find a way to take advantage of down the road if they're to compete with... duh duh duh... TNA.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

yeah you got a point there but look at the last dominant wrestler to start out on the flagship brand smackdown. anyone remember vladmer kozlov? on smackdown he walked out with now music or anything for 6 months or so and contained a pretty dominant win loss streak. maybe they don't do that anymore because guys like koslov ussually sink after there 1st pinfall loss

Kozlov's run around that period was great and probably had the best entrace at the time. Dim lights no music and just him walking to the ring. I loved it. Too bad they didn't do much with him afterwards he is actually pretty good in the ring.