Yes, us. And what are we filled with? Nothing but whiney motherfuckers. That's a fact, man. There is not one IWC member who doesn't have nothing negative to say. One way or another, they're trashing TNA or WWE, and doing it way more often than their praise of the other company. That's pretty much every "journalist" and forum poster.
I agree that people on forums like this one are rather negative. They piss and moan about every little thing, myself included. But, I don't see how that really hurts either TNA or WWE. For every fan that complains about the PG-era, another fan comes in and defends it.
When it comes to trashing a wrestling promotion, fans are often divided. You're acting as if people are being led around this place like blind sheep. This place acts as a venue for constant debate. People argue over everything. How often do you really see someone around here change their mind because another poster told them they should? People have their beliefs, and usually stick to them. "Guests" who stop by and read different kinds of threads see debates, not just one persons opinion blindly followed by everyone else. They don't see 20 or 30 people agreeing on one thing. So while all of us may piss and moan, we're always being jabbed right back by those who do not agree with us.
Dude, we contribute nothing but negativity to the business, as I pointed out in our first post. We don't convert new fans; we turn certain fans off, in fact.
First off, I would like to point out that it isn't our job to create new fans. We are paying audience members, just like everyone else. Do we not buy PPV's? Do we not watch Raw, Smackdown and/or Impact? Do we not buy t-shirts, DVD's, all of the other shit they sell? We are the most loyal fans professional wrestling has, even if we post negative reactions to what we're seeing.
And I'm really not buying into your theory of the IWC turning fans away from watching wrestling. As I said earlier, we act as a place where you can discuss and/or debate the current wrestling product. Look at the Live Discussions during Raw and/or Impact. What are people doing while discussing said event? They're watching it on television!
What about it? Dude, everyone could see that coming from a mile away. All you have to do is read the LD from that night to see people calling it left and right. That was as predictable as it comes.
Yes, people were "calling it" that night. That night and every other night since The Miz won the Money In The Bank briefcase
Okay, one surprise. Name some more from the past few years? You'd be hard-pressed, and it's because of the internet why you can't.
-Jack Swagger winning Money in the Bank at Wrestlemania 26. The guy had been down-on-his-luck for months, and I don't think anyone gave him a chance to pull off the win.
-Daniel Bryan returning at Summerslam 2010 to join Team Raw. Here's a link to the live discussion right here on Wrestlezone:
http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=127315&highlight=summerslam&page=106
A few people may have
suspected he would be there, but I think the reaction shows it wouldn't have matter if everyone knew for certain. However, it wasn't confirmed (prior to the show) that it would in fact be Danielson, so it was most definitely a surprise.
-Kane winning the Money In The Bank match at the PPV of the same name (07/18/2010), and then cashing in his prize that same night to become World Heavyweight Champion.
-Matt Hardy turning on Jeff Hardy at Royal Rumble 2009. I was at that show, and just about everyone in that place who had some sort of inside knowledge of WWE, probably via the internet, thought Christian was going to show up and screw Jeff out of the title. But, he didn't. Matt was the traitor, and it was a shocker.
-John Cena entering, and winning the 2008 Royal Rumble match. In this live discussion thread (
http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=16429&highlight=Cena&page=38), you can clearly see no one saw this coming. It was a total shocker, and everyone said as much.
I think these live discussion threads show something more than just people being able to be surprised. These threads show that "insider" fans, the "smarks" we are talking about, can also be surprised.
No, we mean nothing in a positive sense. We don't do anything good for the business. We contribute nothing. All we do is take away from the business, while giving nothing back. How in the World is that not detrimental?
I guess I could buy what you are selling here, if we didn't give these promotions our television ratings, PPV buys, merchandise sales, and ticket sales to live shows. We mean nothing in the sense that all of our bitching means zero to the people in charge. We can bitch and bitch all day long, but these promotions are going to book the way they want to book. From a business angle is where we mean something, and we definitely play a positive role.
It began in mid-to-late 2002, I just rounded it off to 2003. Either way, it's a six month difference... my point still stands.
Monday Night Raw Ratings
March 27, 2000- 6.6
April 3, 2000- 6.4
March 26, 2001- 4.7
April 2, 2001- 5.7
Not a
huge drop, but the ball started rolling before 2002.
Year to year, as the internet got bigger and bigger. Coincidence? I think not. More on this in a minute...
You're refusing to acknowledge the drop-off in competition after the WWF purchased WCW. If I were in your shoes, I might do the same
Don't you think though that it's odd the bigger the IWC got, the lesser the overall wrestling audience got? I mean, dude, you cannot deny this. It's not coincidence.
What's not a coincidence is how ratings actually began dropping after WCW was sold to the WWF. A steady decline in viewership followed, and I believe most of that had to do with a lack of viewing options. Also around this time, Austin turned heel, and I think a lot of people didn't like that (hence him finding it difficult to draw heat).
This was followed by the WCW/ECW invasion debacle. The storyline was piss-poor, mainly because WCW didn't have their main stars invading Raw. The Alliance didn't have Sting, Goldberg, Lex Luger, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Scott Steiner, Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, etc. Who did it have? Booker T, DDP, and a bunch of no-name guys. This angle is the kind of shitty booking that turns fans away. Success in the wrestling industry is all about quality programming, and many people obviously didn't like what they were seeing.
No, blaming competition is a cop-out.
Please tell me you're kidding...please.
I rarely ever agree with anything that comes out on Vince McMahon's mouth, but one time he said that WWE today is competition to the entire entertainment industry. ANY show that runs against his is quality competition. WWE competes against that these days, whereas in the nineties all they worried about was Nitro.
WWF didn't have to worry about Monday Night Football in the 90's? When Monday Night Football was on ABC? I find that hard to believe. Actually, it's impossible to believe, but whatever.
Today, however, they have to compete against Monday Night Football, and successful primetime sitcoms and dramas.
Of course Vince is going to say his company is competing with everyone.
1. If he were to say he is only competing with rival wrestling promotions, he couldn't be taken seriously. Why? Because there is no major wrestling promotion putting on a Monday or even Friday night show.
2. Vince, for many years now, has wanted to be a bigger part of "mainstream" entertainment, hence the current PG-rating. Saying he is only competing with rival wrestling promotions wouldn't really work, now would it?
Television today has as many popular shows on at once more than ever... that's WWE's competition. Just because they aren't wrestling shows, doesn't mean they're not competition. At the end of the day, pro wrestling is an entertainment industry in the United States.
I understand this, and you're right. Other shows, outside of wrestling, are competition. But if people who really love wrestling are seeing something they want to see, they're going to watch regardless of what else is on in that timeslot. It's boils down to quality. If people aren't happy with the current state of professional wrestling, they are not going to watch. And with no real alternative to the WWE right now, those same disgruntled fans are turning away more and more each year.
You go to pretty much any wrestling forum, you'll see people asking for streams during a live pay-per-view. You'll see the next day people asking for downloads. That's big money out of WWE's pockets... because most of these people, I guarantee, would have ordered the show had they not have access to streams and downloads. However, the IWC provides them with that, and it is a burden.
If I'm not mistaken, Wrestlezone doesn't allow people to post streams, right? So that cuts down on stream feeds right there.
Also, you're completely ignoring the PPV buys from those who are in the live discussions. A lot of those people
paid for the PPV, money that goes right into the pockets of WWE and/or TNA. Live discussions are able to exist because a lot of the people taking part have purchased said PPV.
High fours and low fives are still great numbers, though.
Yes, they are. They are really, really good numbers. But you cannot deny that it was a drop from 5's and 6's.
That's why I started at around 2002/2003, because when I see 3 somethings on a regular basis, to me that's a failure for Raw.
But is it really a failure? Or are these numbers the norm, and the Attitude Era was a peak?
Let's look at Monday Night Raw ratings from October, starting in 1995, all the way through 2007 (By the way, I picked a totally random month. The link to this information will follow, if you feel like looking at the the whole thing):
October 2, 1995 2.5
October 9, 1995 2.6
October 16, 1995 2.6
October 23, 1995 2.2
October 30, 1995 2.1
October 7, 1996 2.1
October 14, 1996 1.8
October 21, 1996 2.6
October 28, 1996 2.0
October 6, 1997 3.0
October 13, 1997 2.3
October 20, 1997 2.9
October 27, 1997 2.3
October 5, 1998 4.55
October 12, 1998 4.8
October 19, 1998 5.0
October 26, 1998 4.5
October 4, 1999 5.9
October 11, 1999 6.1
October 18, 1999 5.4
October 25, 1999 5.6
October 2, 2000 5.4
October 9, 2000 5.4
October 16, 2000 4.8
October 23, 2000 5.5
October 30, 2000 4.9
October 1, 2001 4.4
October 8, 2001 4.5
October 15, 2001 4.1
October 22, 2001 3.9
October 29, 2001 4.1
October 7, 2002 3.8
October 14, 2002 3.8
October 21, 2002 3.7
October 28, 2002 3.4
October 6, 2003 3.4
October 13, 2003 3.6
October 20, 2003 3.7
October 27, 2003 3.4
October 4, 2004 3.4
October 11, 2004 3.4
October 18, 2004 3.0
October 25, 2004 3.7
October 3, 2005 4.4
October 10, 2005 4.0
October 17, 2005 3.6
October 24, 2005 3.9
October 31, 2005 3.4
October 2, 2006 3.6
October 9, 2006 3.8
October 16, 2006 3.7
October 23, 2006 3.6
October 30, 2006 3.5
October 1, 2007 3.2
October 8, 2007 2.8
October 15, 2007 3.3
October 22, 2007 3.3
October 29, 2007 3.5
(source:
http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wwf/wwfraw.htm)
WWE fucked up the Invasion angle, and it hurt them, no doubt about it; however, competition is not the reason why they haven't been able to rebound since. The NFL has no competition... but does that keep it from being hugely successful? No.
You're not seriously comparing the NFL and Pro Wrestling, are you? Professional football is about as mainstream as it gets. Pro wrestling is not. Why is this? Who knows. Football is an actual competition, with no script behind it? Possibly, but I really can't say. I just know that pro football has been much more successful, over the last 50-75 years, at carving out a place in mainstream entertainment. The comparison just doesn't work.
Would it help a show like Glee to have "competition" like another Choir based show on NBC? Absolutely not. So, why oh why is competition so important when it comes to professional wrestling? The WWF didn't have any real competition in the mid-to-late eighties, yet they still did great business... why was that, if competition is so important?
I think it had a lot to do with what wrestling turned into. It became a spectacle. It was big, colorful, excessive, over-the-top, and flat-out entertaining. It was no longer just two sweaty guys rolling around on a mat, pretending to beat the shit out of one another. It became Sports Entertainment.
We were given things like Wrestlemania, which included celebrities like Muhammad Ali and Mr. T. We saw the rise of a man named Hulk Hogan. I could go on and on, but this really has nothing to do with how the IWC has hurt pro wrestling.
No, we've seen "Boss vs. Wrestler" before Austin vs. McMahon... that's yet another myth that people buy into. Multiple territories did storylines like that (including big ones like WCCW), and even ECW did it for a while during their early stages with Paul Heyman.
The Austin/McMahon storyline may not have been completely original, but it was new to almost all wrestling fans. Those smaller promotions didn't have the capability of showing millions and millions of people, on a weekly basis, this kind of storyline.
Nah, I think the internet would have ruined too many things.
This is pure speculation.
For example, there's no way they could have kept the "Higher Power" storyline under wraps if the internet was as big back then as it is today.
We have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not this storyline would have been spoiled or not.
Just look at the Vince's son angle... everyone knew it was going to be Kennedy, and when he got hurt, we got fucking dumped with Hornswoggle. That kind of dumb shit would have never happened in a non-IWC World.
Actually, we didn't
know anything. Internet speculation drove that story, so at the time we had no way of actually knowing who it was supposed to be. I agree it was most likely Kennedy, but once again, internet speculation doesn't always turn out to be true.
One example... not impressed.
Well, I guess it's a good thing I'm not overly concerned with impressing you
First of all, HBK's retirement was not a secrete. Everyone saw it coming.
I disagree. I clearly remember most people being shocked to find out Taker and Shawn were going to have another Wrestlemania match.
I'm not saying that after the match was announced I believed Shawn had a chance. He didn't. I doubt anyone will ever beat Taker at Mania. But, I remember a lot people talking about Shawn wanting HHH to retire him, maybe even the next year at Wrestlemania 27. The internet is full of speculation and opposing reports. Wrestling websites are not trustworthy enough for people to just stop watching the show.
Plus, where is the entertainment value in only reading online reports? We read these reports because, as you said earlier, it's human nature to speculate about what's going to happen. But, it doesn't mean people aren't going to watch the actual show because we think we
may know what's going to happen next.
On the rare occasion WWE does surprise us, it seems like a THAT day decision. Dude, in today's wrestling world... there is no build. The show gets written the very single day the program is shot.
First of all, not to get too far off track here, but we have absolutely no clue when the show is written. Unless you can show me something proving otherwise, I'm not buying it.
However, I do agree internet reports may be something for Vince and company to think about. But then again, for all we know, Vince has these storylines planned out months and months ahead of time. It's quite possible he just doesn't share these ideas with those outside of his inner-circle until he feels it's time to do so.
Storylines have been leaked before, no doubt. But if Vince were so worried about it, he would probably change the angle right then and there, no? That leads me to believe the IWC isn't nearly as heavy of a burden to these companies as you seem to believe.
Now, nickb, I politely ask you... why is it like that today? Why are there no long term plans?
I'll go ahead and provide the answer, which is because WWE knows that they can't keep a secrete for too long. And that's all thanks to the IWC. If there was no IWC, then WWE could carefully plan out the future and have long, compelling, drawn-out storylines, such as McMahon vs. Austin, instead of this one/two month bullshit we so often get today.
I think many factors weigh in on how storylines are dealt with today. Lazy booking (both WWE and TNA), piss-poor and even unoriginal ideas (both TNA and WWE), the PG-era (WWE) and nostalgia (Hogan/Bischoff/TNA).
But you just proved one of my points... competition means NOTHING. WWE got their biggest buyrates when there was NO competition... so how is it the lack of competition why WWE's ratings and pay-per-view buys are so shit today?
The first three Wrestlemania's, as I said earlier, were something new. They were a spectacle, something for the whole family. The WWF was attempting to enter the mainstream, and had to spend big money to do so. Also, Hulk Hogan was a mega-star, not just in the wrestling world, but everywhere.
But let's look at those buyrate numbers. Wrestlemania buyrates were in constant decline from 1987 through 1997. Buyrates began to rise up again, starting in 1998 (drawing a 2.3, up from the last years 0.77), and did so through Wrestlemania 2000. When did buyrates begin to decline once again? In the year 2001, not long after WCW was sold to the WWF.
I would also say more people enjoyed what they were watching in 1998 as opposed to 1997. And all of this took place before the internet took a really strong hold on people.
Also, look at the years of 2002 through 2008.
2002 1.60
2003 1.40
2004 1.63
2005 2.46
2006 2.33
2007 2.97
2008 2.645
PPV buyrates actually increased starting in 2005, and stayed in the 2's up until at least Wrestlemania 24 (the list didn't have 2009 or 2010). If your theory is true, how do PPV buyrates increase during a time where even more people have the internet? If the internet wrestling community is as damaging to the pro wrestling industry as you say it is, I just don't see how PPV buyrates increase during the time period you're talking about.
Also, WWE might be partnered with a site like Youtube, but it's for strictly advertisement, not posting whole shows.
Sorry, but you are completely wrong about this.
http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2010/WWECorporate-6.23.2010.jsp
This article states...
"World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. and YouTube announced today a multi-year partnership that will make full episodes of WWE Friday Night SmackDown®, WWE NXT, WWE Superstars and ECW®, available at WWEs official YouTubeÔ channel (www.YouTube.com/WWE)."
Please, feel free to read the article if my word isn't enough.
Yeah, but it's the Internet Wrestling Community who is uploading all the illegal content when it comes to pro wrestling videos, is it not?
Is it? I have no clue who uploads those videos, and quite frankly neither do you. To just pin all of that on the IWC isn't right.
The ones who are praising though, later on look for something to complain about, right? 95% of John Cena fans here hate TNA, and they have no problem expressing their disgust for that company every chance they get. And 95% TNA fans here hate Cena, and they have no problem expressing their disgust for him. It's nothing but mindless, bias bitching. And the majority of the time, they don't even know why they hate something... they only hate it because they like the other side. I wouldn't call that debate; it's ******ation.
I share your opinion, for the most part, on this particular matter. But, this really does nothing to prove the IWC is a burden on the wrestling industry. If the worst we (IWC) can do is flock to an internet site, and argue with others about everything concerning pro wrestling, I don't think we're that heavy of a burden to carry.
Mark Madden gets his little followers to buy into whatever bullshit he's spewing. You're talking about a man whose objective isn't to cause debate, but to bad mouth the business. That's it. Those who agree with him, simply repeat the nonsense he said, and those who don't, bitch about his article. Either way, it's not good for anyone. It just causes more bitching and even sometimes controversy, since that fat fuck was actually apart of the business at one point.
You just said it yourself. An article written by a guy like Mark Madden creates debate, which increases interest in the product you're arguing about. If you're taking the time to come to a wrestling site and post a response to something written by someone you don't even know, you're obviously watching what's going on. I don't care what Mark Madden
tries to do. I only care about the result, even if that result is unintended.
My numbers on the households who have internet access beg to differ.
I hate to break it to you, but having internet access doesn't mean you automatically come to a wrestling website and talk about what you do and do not like in regards to the current product.
I know people who actually decide to join a wrestling forum and post are a very small portion of the audience, but best believe that wrestling sites get an unbelievable amount of hits every single day from MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of fans. That's a fact.
Fine. Great. Millions of hits, I agree. But does that really make each one of those people a member of the IWC? Are each of those people not buying PPV's, and only readig online discussions instead of tuning into Raw/Impact? And how many of those hits are from the same person, checking the site over and over again? I fail to see how this is an indictment of the IWC.
Let me ask you something, man, and I want you to be completely honest, if you'd please:
Do you think we'll ever see another boom period?
I don't want to hear anything about competition... I just want to know if you think we'll ever see another boom period in pro wrestling?
Sorry to disappoint, but competition is a valid argument, whether you're going to admit it or not.
If TNA can get their shit together, I don't see why wrestling couldn't have another massive increase in popularity. You can downplay competition all you like, but competition among companies was at an all-time high during wrestlings' most successful period. That fact cannot be ignored.
In my opinion, I am certain we will not.
The first boom period happened in 1985 and lasted to about 1991. That's seven years. Then, the 2nd started in late 1997, about 6/7 years after the first ended, and lasted until about Invasion, so that's 5 years.
Dude, do you realize how we're about to reach ten fucking years since the last time WWE came anywhere near to having numbers that they had during the boom periods? TEN YEARS.
It's been quite some time, I agree with you.
And now, I'm not saying that the IWC is the sole reason why that is; however, it is a part of the reason. Whether you think it's a big reason or a small reason, there's absolutely no denying that the IWC plays a part in why WWE and pro wrestling as a whole hasn't been able reach another boom period, which overall does indeed make IWC detrimental to the business.
The wrestling business is facing many obstacles right now.
WWE is still staggering from the Benoit double-murder, and suicide. Also, it can't help that former wrestlers seem to die every other month at very young ages from drug abuse, concussions, etc.
Also, WWE has really started aiming it's programming at families. It's mostly a show aimed at children and their parents (who control the money), and I know a lot of Attitude Era-fans are upset by this.
TNA is just shit. Terrible writing, lazy booking, and piss-poor management. It also doesn't help that they are stuck in the Impact Zone each week, with only two hours of television time.
The wrestling business has had it's highs and lows. The industry is experiencing another downturn right now, no doubt about it. But I really don't think the IWC is to blame.
In my own personal opinion, another major promotion is needed right now. The last time WWE faced a major competitor, it took it's game to another level. It wrote some of the most compelling, interesting stories we've ever seen from a wrestling promotion. WCW did the same (for awhile, at least).
The IWC whines and complains, no doubt. But we whine and complain about everything because we're still interested in wrestling, and we still watch the shows. However big of a burden the IWC is on pro wrestling, it's just as much of a supporter. As I said earlier, we watch their programming, buy PPV's, buy tickets to the show, buy t-shirts, buy DVD's, etc. We help the business for more than we hurt it, I guarantee that much.
