Do You Want Good Wrestling OR Good Entertainment?

[WWEvsJosh]

People wont say this but lets be honest did you really watch WWF(attitude era) for wrestling or did you watch it for the entertainment value of it? Thats just a question you can ask yourself but that's not what I want to focus on.
Some of us tell ourselves that we watch wrestling for its "wrestling" but would you really trade in some of WWE's greatest moments for a "wrestling match".

Example: Undertaker vs Mankind in the Hell in a Cell match.

Let's be honest that was not a good "wrestling" match, that was good entertainment. How much do you really think went into that match? I mean not everyone want to get thrown off a cell but its not like it took years of training to do that. But with that all being said it still is one of the matches that people praise to this day. Would you trade that match in for a 30 min "wrestling" match?

Goldberg's matches were always short but would you trade in his match with Hogan for a good "wrestling" match?

All of Stone Cold's segments with Vince are some of the most memorable things about the WWE. Would you trade those segments in for 10 min good "wrestling" matches?

The last example I want to use is Hogan vs The Rock. This was not one of the best matches ever as far as ring performance goes but as far as hype and excitement it could be argued as one of the best ever. Would you trade that in for a good "wrestling" match?

I want to see good wrestling matches but I just hated when people act like WWE has ever put wrestling before entertainment. WWE has always been best when it was a entertainment show not a wrestling show.

To be honest WWE right now is the better wrestling show than WWF of 1998-2001. Just my thoughts.

What do you want to see in the WWE?

 

[DJ Kyo]

A fine tunement of both.

You can have great "wrestlers" and have good "entertainers" at the same time.

Imo, people like Jericho, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit (gasp I said his name), Brett Hart, Shawn Michaels, etc.. are all great "wresters" (though they do the entertaining part too)

and then people like Stone Cold, The Rock, Triple H, Undertaker, E&C, Hardy's, etc. are great entertainers.

You can have great stories, great interactions and have great wrestling matches as well. You just have to make sure that you have both to sell the product.

The ratings would stink with nothing but wrestling matches. You need people who can jump off the top rope, be hit with a chair from time to time, etc... It's why Hell in a Cella, the E-Chamber, and TLC are all PPVs now. They know that it's a selling point for some people. Though I could do without those selling points in the PG era as it's very unrealistic to be in those matches and not get bloodied up.

People like Daniel Bryan bring something good into WWE in the sense that they give it that wrestling flare again. ADR kind of does this as well, but it needs to be done in a fashion to where you're "wrestling" but you're making it look good at the same time. No one wants to see a 20-minute grapple match, let's be honest here. They want hitting, punching, jumping, and yes the ground work as well.

Balance is the key and if WWE can do that, then they can get ratings to go back up, even without a full-fledged attitude era coming back into play.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

A little bit of both but mostly entertainment. I don't want a match that is so overly technical that it seems boring but at the same time I don't want to see Khali fighting Big Show.

I want to see a good overall story but I also want to see a fight that is at least somewhat believable.

I think the dorks that are watching WWE exclusively for the wrestling are the ones that complain the most about the product and guys that don't get a push. WWE is not soley about wrestling, it's about wrestling AND entertainment and making money. The majority of fans probably care more about the entertainment value and the show as a "production" rather than the actual moves and technical aspects of wrestling.

 

[Rampage Bentley]

I WANT BOTH

Why would you ever pick one or the other? They go hand in hand. What's the point of building up an epic story with fantastic writing if the match is going to be boring as hell?

And on the flipside, what's the point of watching an amazing wrestling match if you're not emotionally invested with what's happening?

Cena vs. Punk at MitB last year was a perfect example of what the WWE should be trying to do, an amazing five star match that had you holding your breath after every two count and either jumping for joy or being legitimately bummed (depending on who you were rooting for) at the end of it.

 

[H33LTurn]

I think if it were possible to have both everyone would make that choice but if I had to chose between the two I'd choose entertainment. A company like the WWE has to pay more attention to the entertainment side of things in order to succeed. I dont understand why people who are so anal of the wrestling and overcritical of the entertainment WWE presents dont just go and watch ROH. I dont watch WWE to see an athletic performance, there are other plenty of other sports than you can more accurately judge based on skill aka not pre determined, if thats what I wanted. I watch because the characters and the storylines interest me.

 

[gwarren]

Meh, I'd much rather see Rock vs Austin for entertainment that two no names who happen to be the best wrestlers in the world in a random wrestling match. Sure good wrestling matches are nice but if I wanted to see proper wrestling I'd watch it at the Olympics or watch MMA. Of course I don't want any boring matches but for me, entertainment is so much more important.

 

[Paralyzer Z]

In pro wrestling good wrestling = good entertainment.

When it comes to watching professional wrestling you can only have one without the other on WWE programming when it comes to segments and promos. When guys put on good wrestling I am as an output entertained by it. When interesting and emotional promos are but I am entertained as well. For WWE it's like the 2 sides of a coin, one cannot exist without the other. In simpler words I want both and the combination of them is the basic building block of WWE.

If I wanted pure Wrestling I would go watch some college wrestling or some other type of obscure unscripted versions of the sport. If I wanted pure entertainment I would go watch a movie, when I watch WWE I get the offspring of the 2. The storylines, segments, promos, or any other ring shenanigans get us interested in the matches to come. The matches themselves are the pay off and if both story and wrestling done right we could have ourselves a memorable feud. If I didn't get one, I am pretty sure when watching WWE I wouldn't have a dose of the other. The correlation is to large to separate. Hardcore matches like you said are mostly entertainment but last time I checked it happens in a wrestling ring. The classic matches are a result of classic entertainment (whether it be in promo or other forms).

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Oh my lord, not another one of these!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll honestly NEVER!!!!!! understand why someone has to imply that you just can't have one of these things while sacrificing the other. I watch pro wrestling BECAUSE I find it entertaining. What's the purpose of devoting your time and attention to watching a program on television if you don't want to be entertained or hope to be entertained???

In this day and age, most people aren't entertained by a show that just features one wrestling match after another. Despite what a few internet fans and dirtsheet writers claim, it's just not enough to sustain interest. It's 2012, not 1952 after all. You need compelling storylines that you enjoy watching as they progress, you need personalities and characters to allow you to become emotionally invested in the people behind the personalities and you need the wrestling matches to watch how things play out. It's all part of the entertainment factor.

Another frustrating aspect of this thread is that someone again tries to define what makes a "good wrestling match" based on nitpicking this or that. To me, a good wrestling match isn't only about the action, it's about the story that's being told within the ring. It's about the storyline, it's about the wrestlers themselves. It all works in together.

As for Taker vs. Mankind in HIAC not being a "good wrestling match", based on what? Because there weren't enough flying headscissors? Not enough reverse chinlocks going on? As I aluded to earlier, pro wrestling has had to change and to evolve. Very little of what you see in pro wrestling is "actual wrestling". It's mock combat. It's combat entertainment. The formula has changed because watching two, one dimensional men roll around on a canvas eventually got very boring.

Some weeks in WWE, wrestling matches will be stronger than others. Some weeks, promo segments & storyline progression will be the primary feature. Every so often, you get a good mix of both.

 

[IA-SteveB]

I also think good wrestling is good entertainment. I can do without the backstage antics, especially in Friday Night Smackdown. Even though I have only been watching that for a few months, I just can't stand Long. How many times can he say "playa" each night? Also, the flirting with the women is just corny. I like the John Laurinaitis storyline on RAW, though. Seeing Punk, HHH and JL interact is great.

That said, I like a good wrestling match and that is physical, entertaining and something that forces you to suspend your disbelief. Good wrestling needs good athletes that can still perform the moves and have the stamina to make the match worth watching. Remember the old WCW days where they kept bringing back past stars that could barely move? Ugh.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

I pick both.

The point of this thread seems to be to prove that while almost everyone cares more about the entertainment side of things (myself included) there seems to be a ton of people who go out of their way to rag on a guy for not being a good wrestler and rush to use "technical ability" as a major reason to support another guy. You never hear the crowd go apeshit over a submission hold or someone escaping a submission if its not a finisher of some sort. That's because mat wrestling is not what the majority of us fans care dearly about, we care about "low-blow" promo speeches, enthusiastic punches/kicks, high-octane spots, big slams, and shocking revelations.

We love entertainment but the E has definitely diminished ever since we got the F out.

 

[DirtyD79]

I watch wrestling for entertainment. By entertainment I mean I want good entertainment. There is nothing more painful to watch than something trying too hard to be funny and failing. Another thing about trying to go the funny route is that something that may have been funny for one episode is not necessarly going to be funny when you're still seeing it months from now and the gag has long since worn out it's welcome.

Some characters are just not meant to be funny, especially if you're trying to build them up to be a legitimate threat to the babyface. Even some babyfaces aren't really meant to be funny either. Undertaker for example is impressive just for his sheer size and his dark and spooky appearance. That's what makes him great. The last thing he'd need to do is stand in the middle of the ring and drop dozens on Triple H's mama.

I also really do enjoy the shades of grey and want to see more of it. Real conflicts are seldom black and white, good guys versus bad guys. Real "good guys" are not always perfect infalliable saints just as real "villains" are not always evil simply for the sake of being evil. Wrestling does not have to be Shakespeare but in the same token it doesn't always need to be Jackass either.

 

[JaylisJayP]

Entertainment, and I'm not at all ashamed to say it. In fact, I fast-forward through even the main events on RAW to get to the finish to find out what happened and how it furthered the story. Sure, I like seeing huge spots and bumps, etc..., but to me 95% of the actual wrestling is boring as hell.

Good characters and entertaining stories will forever be what sells this product, period.

 

[billm75]

I don't think they have to be mutually exclusive. Crowds are easy to win over with a two-minute series of high impact, or high flying maneuvers. The rest is just staying consistent and building to a finish.

Too often, in my opinion, they force finishes and rush matches just to get them on the card that it takes away from what could be extremely entertaining wrestling. It doesn't have to be technically sound, just make a little sense.

Lately, they've relied on the "surprise" roll up finish, even when the guy has had his ass handed to him for the entire match. A tiny bit of logic wouldn't hurt.

 

[scottyshowman82]

I think people are too quick to jump on the I hate entertainment bandwagon.
If pro wrestling was just moves in the ring it would be boring as ---- well you know where I'm going with that. Hulk Hogan vs the Ultimate Warrior was my favourite match of all time. It was the showmanship, the drama, and Ultimate Warrior, Jim Hellwig, Warrior, he says somethings that make my head spin but the said in an interview when asked if being a technical wrestler or charisma, he said charisma. Warrior in that particular interview came out as a guy who didn't love wrestling but a guy who paid to do a job and did his job very very well, because he was a hard worker. The facepaint, the tassels, the boots, the crazy promos, the running to the ring, the shaking of the ropes, the reaching to the sky. That was all showmanship and he did it so well, he put butts in the seats.

Mr. Perfect's music, the spitting of gum and slapping it that's entertainment. Million Dollar Man coming to the ring with diamond belt and laughing at how wealthy he compared to everyone eles that's entertainment. The video packages, the elaborate and breath taking Wrestlemania set ups that's entertainment. My second favourite match of all time is Austin vs Bret Wrestlemania 13 Submission match and I abosolutely love a tussle between AJ Styles, Christopher Daniels and Samoa Joe but brother if you don't have entertainment and a bit of showmanship you might as just go watch baseball.

Not that there's anything wrong with baseball but WWE it is not.

 

[GameOver]

you can have both, all era's since the 80's have proved that if the wrestling is hard fought and OMG, a great buildup or long running fueds ='s entertainment, and there's still time for the soap and comedy.

Problem with all entertainment you take away what people have loved about wrestling, the implied physicality, the atheleticism, the awe inspiring moments of imagination. If we wanted to watch just soap opera, porn, reality crap you could watch any of 1000's of shows on any given day or goto the movies.

 

[WrestlingFan97]

Well, WWE has certainly diminished (which by the way is an understatement) in the entertainment department but apparently are doing great with the wrestling side. If WWE was even somewhat close to being as entertaining as it was in the late 90's and even 80's I wouldn't have problems with the shows.

 

[TheAwesomeF'nTruth]

If entertainment is what keeps people watching I dont understand why people always complain about how "so and so" only has five moves. If you think about it hardly anybody in the WWE pulls off real wrestling moves if you really want to watch people wrestle you're better off watching college wrestling or olympics.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

"good wrestling" is incredibly subjective. 10% of people will think a match that goes like this:
Start out with an amateur style feeling out process, move onto chain wrestling, still exchange ending with a no sell of a headdrop suplex, sick leg submission, guy who was in the submission gets up and kicks the other guy, fighting spirit spot, finishing stretch of 4 finishers and kickouts, finish with a roll up

is a good match. The other 90% will think it's contrived as fuck and shitty. It's why you don't see what I described (a typical indytastic smartard fuckfest) in the WWE.

Basically good wrestling is simply wrestling that entertains people. If Daniel Bryan and Tyson Kidd trade wristlocks in front of the WWE audience for 45 minutes and get "BOORING" chants, it's NOT good wrestling. If they do it in front of the ROH audience and get "THIS IS AWESOME" chants, it IS good wrestling. That's why the best ones, Punk, Cena, Hero, etc all change their style for the audience.