I am the most underrated wrestling poster.

[SSJPhenom]

How you can praise the "stories" told in the ring by guys like Cena, and then call the Attitude Era shit, is beyond me. You guys always talk about all this storytelling in matches, well there wasn't a better era for storytelling than the Attitude Era. Feuds with guys like Rock, Austin, Foley, Undertaker, Triple H, Kane, that was one of the best periods in wrestling history. You go watch any Raw from 1999 and it's roughly about twenty times as entertaining as a current episode is.

I agree 100%.

People say that the Attitude Era hurt wrestling in the long run more than it helped. I don't think that it was the Attitude Era that done this. I think that it was the competition that done this. With the lack of major competition right now, WWE has no reason to be as good as it was back then. Until major competition returns, WWE will remain sub par when compared to the Attitude Era.

The Attitude Era was outstanding must see T.V. It was raw, no pun intended, and it was shocking almost each and every week. You can watch an episode of Raw now and call the whole damn show like you are the one booking it.

 

[X]

Well I think everyone who enjoyed the Attitude Era, the generally low quality of the matches, and the stunt booking that the era spawned is an idiot. X is no more correct than me and the people who share my view.

General low quality of matches? I'll take most if not every main event from the Attitude Era over the ones we're having today. The Rock vs. Austin is probably the greatest feud in WWE history.

Stunt booking was around beforehand either way, and WCW exploited it to a much worse effect than the WWF did.

And if we're considering 2000 part of the Attitude era, which I do, well then that just blows everything this year right out of the fucking water. When your undercard is made up of the likes of Benoit, Guerrero, Jericho, and Angle, you've got a GREAT fucking product.

 

[byrnside]

The Attitude Era is what I like to refer to as the novelty item of wrestling. Hear me out. When I say novelty item, I mean, something that sells because of the gimmick. I use this term more with music than anything else. Ie- The Dropkick Murphys, one of my favorite bands, but they're more or less a punk band like Bad Religion or Rise Against, but they have a "gimmick" as an irish, drinking, punk band, which is why I love them. Flogging Molly is of course similar, but I discovered Dropkick first, so naturally, I only have room in my itunes library for the Murphys. Wrestling is the same way, specifically the Attitude Era. The Attitude Era was spawned because of a dire need for ratings to compete with WCW. We all know this obviously. The Attitude Era worked because it accomplished what it and the WWE needed to accomplish at the time. Improve ratings. You can agree or disagree with me, when I say I liked it. But the fact is, it worked. I'm not saying it's my favorite era in wrestlings history, I just think it was much better than what we're getting today. Of course, wrestling as a whole is a novelty item, so I guess it doesn't really matter.

 

[SavageTaker]

Well I think everyone who enjoyed the Attitude Era, the generally low quality of the matches, and the stunt booking that the era spawned is an idiot. X is no more correct than me and the people who share my view.

I don't even think ST was watching wrestling in 1999.

I've been watching wrestling since late 1997. I wasn't able to watch wrestling for some of 2002 and 2003.

 

[Coco]

2000 as fine, but stuff like Taker vs. Austin, Kane vs. Austin, Taker vs. Rock, Rock vs. Foley, and so on did nothing for me. That stuff was brutal for the most part. Any combination of Rock/Austin/Triple H was pretty swell, but the rest of the main event scene's ring work is pretty damn underwhelming to go back and rewatch.

I don't care how long stunt booking's been around either. That doesn't mean any of that crap was good.

 

[X]

2000 as fine, but stuff like Taker vs. Austin, Kane vs. Austin, Taker vs. Rock, Rock vs. Foley, and so on did nothing for me. That stuff was brutal for the most part. Any combination of Rock/Austin/Triple H was pretty swell, but the rest of the main event scene's ring work is pretty damn underwhelming to go back and rewatch.

Did you really just dismiss Rock vs. Foley? Seriously? Come on Coco, you've got to be kidding me, those two went out there and told some of the best stories wrestling has ever seen. Rock could hit Foley over the head with a chair for ten minutes and still make it a damn near perfect match.

All of those combos were great, the main event scene back then was so much more entertaining than the current one. Are you really more excited by Cena vs. Orton than Rock vs. Austin?

I don't care how long stunt booking's been around either. That doesn't mean any of that crap was good.

And having a gimmick match PPV every month isn't stunt booking?

 

[SSJPhenom]

2000 as fine, but stuff like Taker vs. Austin, Kane vs. Austin, Taker vs. Rock, Rock vs. Foley, and so on did nothing for me. That stuff was brutal for the most part. Any combination of Rock/Austin/Triple H was pretty swell, but the rest of the main event scene's ring work is pretty damn underwhelming to go back and rewatch.

I don't care how long stunt booking's been around either. That doesn't mean any of that crap was good.

FTW, 'Taker vs Austin Summer Slam 1998 was a damn good main event and it had a damn good build up. Rock and 'Taker never did work well together, so I will give you that. However, Austin vs Kane on Raw after their first blood match was a damn good match. I don't see how you couldn't like those.

 

[X]

I've been watching wrestling since late 1997. I wasn't able to watch wrestling for some of 2002 and 2003.

You've been watching wrestling since you were 2?

...

 

[X]

Someone explain to me how the Attitude Era gets all this flack for "stunt booking" and "Crash TV", yet it's cool to have a leprechaun ride Chavo Guerrero around the ring in a cow suit. That's so much worse than Beaver Cleavage.

 

[Coco]

The Attitude Era is what I like to refer to as the novelty item of wrestling. Hear me out. When I say novelty item, I mean, something that sells because of the gimmick. I use this term more with music than anything else. Ie- The Dropkick Murphys, one of my favorite bands, but they're more or less a punk band like Bad Religion or Rise Against, but they have a "gimmick" as an irish, drinking, punk band, which is why I love them. Flogging Molly is of course similar, but I discovered Dropkick first, so naturally, I only have room in my itunes library for the Murphys. Wrestling is the same way, specifically the Attitude Era. The Attitude Era was spawned because of a dire need for ratings to compete with WCW. We all know this obviously. The Attitude Era worked because it accomplished what it and the WWE needed to accomplish at the time. Improve ratings. You can agree or disagree with me, when I say I liked it. But the fact is, it worked. I'm not saying it's my favorite era in wrestlings history, I just think it was much better than what we're getting today. Of course, wrestling as a whole is a novelty item, so I guess it doesn't really matter.

There's only so many beverage trucks you can hose down your rivals with. That kind of success isn't sustainable because there's only so much you can do before people get burned out and once you go back to a more grounded wrestling product the people don't care because they've been spoiled by attitude. Resensitizing people has been a huge effort, but the era you loved so much is why we have the kind of reception to today's product that we do.

Sure, attitude booking was necessary to win the war. But it's not a great long term plan. It creates a bubble.

 

[SavageTaker]

You've been watching wrestling since you were 2?

...

I wasn't two. For fuck's sakes, why do people assume I was 2 when I was watching wrestling?

 

[Coco]

Someone explain to me how the Attitude Era gets all this flack for "stunt booking" and "Crash TV", yet it's cool to have a leprechaun ride Chavo Guerrero around the ring in a cow suit. That's so much worse than Beaver Cleavage.

Yeah, Chavo and Hornswoggle's five minute segments really represent the whole of today's WWE product. Completely logical.

 

[X]

Are we talking about the same product that recently featured two of their top performers riding a tank to the ring? The same product where a man literally tried to murder another man with explosives?

The shit right now is stunt booking at it's worst, they're more focused on what celebrity to have on Raw every week than their actual booking.

 

[X]

I wasn't two. For fuck's sakes, why do people assume I was 2 when I was watching wrestling?

Because you're like 15? So twelve years ago you'd be 3 years old?

Yeah, Chavo and Hornswoggle's five minute segments really represent the whole of today's WWE product. Completely logical.

About as fair as criticizing the Attitude Era for it's "stunt booking".

 

[gd]

Well I think everyone who enjoyed the Attitude Era, the generally low quality of the matches, and the stunt booking that the era spawned is an idiot. X is no more correct than me and the people who share my view.

I don't even think ST was watching wrestling in 1999.

He wasn't even alive

 

[Dave]

You silly people...

It is actually I, who is the most under-rated wrestling poster.

 

[X]

You silly people...

It is actually I, who is the most under-rated wrestling poster.

I refuse to recognize that statement until you admit William Regal is fucking boss.

 

[Dave]

I refuse to recognize that statement until you admit William Regal is fucking boss.

Now, I never said that William Regal was not an excellent wrestler and athlete in his day. That would be ignorant and I am looking forward to seeing him knock all of the other teams out of the park when he gets in to the UK team for the Wrestlezolympics. However, the point I was trying to make in that thread was that William Regal has passed his peak and now occupies a role similar to Finlay. That, again, is not saying that Finlay is a bad wrestler because he isn't. What I am saying is that they are passed their peak.

 

[Coco]

Are we talking about the same product that recently featured two of their top performers riding a tank to the ring? The same product where a man literally tried to murder another man with explosives?

One's a prop for an entrace. Big fucking deal.

So one real example vs.... Taker's Black Wedding, the Triple H-Step-Test crap, the blood-mobile, Austin running down Rock's car with a monster truck, frequent arrests, attempted vehicular homicide on multiple occasions... all in main event feuds. On a regular basis. And I know I've barely scratched the surface.

The level of dumb-fuckery in the Attitude Era out-does the current era in staggering fashion.

The shit right now is stunt booking at it's worst, they're more focused on what celebrity to have on Raw every week than their actual booking.

The whole product isn't like that.

Christian is being built as a good champion and a future main eventer, ECW has several prospects hanging with reputable vets, SmackDown has plenty of main eventers and a great personal issue in the upper midcard as well as some decent up and comers.

Nothing wrong with 2/3rds of the WWE product.

 

[X]

One's a prop for an entrace. Big fucking deal.

Okay...so aren't half of the things you're complaining about the Attitude Era for. How is that different from Austin driving a truck to the ring?

So one real example vs.... Taker's Black Wedding, the Triple H-Step-Test crap, the blood-mobile, Austin running down Rock's car with a monster truck, frequent arrests, attempted vehicular homicide on multiple occasions... all in main event feuds. On a regular basis. And I know I've barely scratched the surface.

It was not nearly as frequent as you claim. In fact pretty much everything you just mentioned happened in late 1999. Completely unfair to dismiss years of wrestling for a few gimmicky angles like that in a few months span. Especially considering all of the ridiculous shit the WWE still does this year, in fact there's a whole thread about them in the WWE section comparing the current attempt at comedy by the WWE to midgets and clowns. Shit, atleast the crude humor of the Attitude Era was actually amusing to most of the audience, compared to the three year olds that might giggle when Hornswoggle comes out.

The whole product isn't like that.

And the whole Attitude Era wasn't Triple H date raping Stephanie McMahon.

Christian is being built as a good champion and a future main eventer, ECW has several prospects hanging with reputable vets, SmackDown has plenty of main eventers and a great personal issue in the upper midcard as well as some decent up and comers.

Nothing wrong with 2/3rds of the WWE product.

Smackdown has been very bland the past few weeks, Christian should have been moved up long ago, but the WWE's "A-Show" of Raw is for the most part awful week in and week out. This has been one of the worst years in Raw's entire history.

 

[Coco]

Okay...so aren't half of the things you're complaining about the Attitude Era for. How is that different from Austin driving a truck to the ring?

One is an elaborate entrance, the other is someone driving a truck into a major arena with no warning and hosing his boss down in brew.

One of those things is clearly more absurd than the other.

It was not nearly as frequent as you claim. In fact pretty much everything you just mentioned happened in late 1999.

The zamboni incident wasn't. McMahon winning the Rumble wasn't. Nor was the McMahon in every corner Mania main event and several other odd inter-family feuds the McMahons were involved in. Can I include the Invasion in this? Man, was that ever handled wrong.

There was a lot wrong with that era. More than in this era.

Completely unfair to dismiss years of wrestling for a few gimmicky angles like that in a few months span.

Those were main event angles. There's more.

Not to mention the generally poor wrestling quality.

Especially considering all of the ridiculous shit the WWE still does this year, in fact there's a whole thread about them in the WWE section comparing the current attempt at comedy by the WWE to midgets and clowns. Shit, atleast the crude humor of the Attitude Era was actually amusing to most of the audience, compared to the three year olds that might giggle when Hornswoggle comes out.

I'd rather watch that than this:

[YOUTUBE]W356F8uCYwI[/YOUTUBE]

And the whole Attitude Era wasn't Triple H date raping Stephanie McMahon.

Of course not. It was also about Taker getting a match with Triple H because Kane threatened to drop Stephanie McMahon from a height, and the love triangle between Angle, Steph, and Hunter, and Saturn and Moppy, and Young and Henry's hand baby, and Chris Jericho spilling coffee on Kane.

Smackdown has been very bland the past few weeks

No, you just don't like how mucn Batista is focused on.

Christian should have been moved up long ago,

No, you're just a raving mark.

 

[SavageTaker]

Because you're like 15? So twelve years ago you'd be 3 years old?

4 actually.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

Yeah, in my opinion, the Attitude Era completely shits over what is put out today. And, I'm sorry to break it to everyone here, but WWE isn't about wrestling so much as it is about entertainment (obviously, I thought the Attitude Era was much more entertaining that what is put out today).

Also, storytelling...people need to stop throwing that term around so much. Current WWE superstars have only a very basic understanding of storytelling, if they have an understanding of it at all.

 

[X]

One is an elaborate entrance, the other is someone driving a truck into a major arena with no warning and hosing his boss down in brew.

One of those things is clearly more absurd than the other.

So driving tanks into arenas and firing off cannons is cool, but don't you dare hose your boss down in beer? It's fucking wrestling Coco, no shit it's absurd, wrestling has always been a circus.

The zamboni incident wasn't. McMahon winning the Rumble wasn't. Nor was the McMahon in every corner Mania main event and several other odd inter-family feuds the McMahons were involved in. Can I include the Invasion in this? Man, was that ever handled wrong.

There was a lot wrong with that era. More than in this era.

Total bullshit. The roster that WWE had back then made the current one look like an indy fed, the year 2000 in particular was so much far and away better than the current product I can't believe I actually even have to argue it. Jericho, Angle, Benoit, Guerrero, Regal, Saturn, Edge and Christian, the Hardys, the Dudleys...this was the fucking undercard. Seriously you're going to sit here and say that the WWE is better now than it was in 2000?

Those were main event angles. There's more.

Not to mention the generally poor wrestling quality.

Explain that one to me. Explain how Orton vs. Cena is Godly when they brawl, but anyone who had a brawl in the Attitude era was just shit. What happened to everyone's favorite line about "storytelling in the ring"? Isn't that what it's all about?

I'd rather watch that than this:

[YOUTUBE]W356F8uCYwI[/YOUTUBE]

I can't help but laugh my ass off when you say it isn't fair for me to judge the current WWE on Hornswoggle and Chavo, yet you go ahead and judge the Attitude Era for Mae Young or The Big Show's dad, which took up even less time than Hornswoggle.

Of course not. It was also about Taker getting a match with Triple H because Kane threatened to drop Stephanie McMahon from a height, and the love triangle between Angle, Steph, and Hunter, and Saturn and Moppy, and Young and Henry's hand baby, and Chris Jericho spilling coffee on Kane.

Now you're just grasping wildly at straws, pulling out the same argument that you just dismissed me for using. Was Saturn/Moppy and Mae Young a major angle?

How is this different from the shit Orton was doing with McMahon earlier this year?

No, you just don't like how mucn Batista is focused on.

No actually I've enjoyed Batista as a heel so far. The show all around hasn't been as good in the past few weeks as the fantastic run it was on in the summer.

No, you're just a raving mark.

Because I want the WWE to use their over talent correctly? How foolish of me. There's no reason Christian couldn't be on Smackdown right now while Drew McIntyre could have debuted on ECW. If fucking Sheamus can get promoted to Raw within a few months, there's no reason Christian shouldn't.

 

[Hyorinmaru]

Attack my assertion here.

I should post more in wrestling, and have been making an effort. I don't get mentioned very often as a good wrestling poster, but I know I am.

I'm pretty underrated in the Wrestling sections