Am I the only one who is sick and tired of all the commissioners/general managers/guest hosts, etc. over the past seveal years? When is the last time WWE had an impartial authority figure? I think it goes all the way back to Jack Tunney or maybe, maybe Gorilla Monsoon. I think the days of the heel authority making life miserable for the top face are way beyond stale. It has never really made much sense anyway.
As I type this Batista just announced he had unlimited power on RAW. He could fire all three members of legacy if he wants to. Why doesn't he? What does he have to loose? I guess it wouldn't matter. Next week the new guest host would just hire them back. So if there is a new host every week the new one can just overturn the last's decisions? I don't see the point.
Austin trying to overcome Vince was different. It was unique. It was wildly popular. It even made some sense. Vince didn't want to fire Austin because he sold tickets, sold merchandise, and brought in high ratings. However, he had such personal hatred toward Austin that he didn't want Austin to be his champion. This was a good angle throughout 1998 and got better with the Rock as the corporate champion. This angle should have ended at WrestleMania XV. Here we are ten years later and the same thing is going on. Bischoff trying to screw Cena. Heyman trying to screw Lesnar. Vince trying to screw Shawn. Vicki trying to screw Taker. And on and on and on. You could even argue that Teddy Long was out to screw JBL and MVP.
I know as wrestling fans we have to use what I call "wrestling logic." This is the kind of logic that doesn't punish someone with a fine or suspension for kicking the chairman in the head. Instead he has to settle it in the ring, which is his job anyway. Despite my knowledge of "wrestling logic" I am tired of trying to make sense of the heel authority figure. I'm not one of the people who is going to say "I'm done watching WWE. The product today is horrible." I'm not done and it's not horrible. I just wish this played out storyline would be done.
I miss Jack Tunney. You would see him once a year, if that, when something very controversial was going on. You could argue he didn't always make the right decision, but he didn't play favorites and wasn't out to screw anybody. Besides the heel authority figure just comes off as lazy booking. Same story with a revolving door as to who's involved. Time to come up with some new original ideas for the main event feuds.
As I type this Batista just announced he had unlimited power on RAW. He could fire all three members of legacy if he wants to. Why doesn't he? What does he have to loose? I guess it wouldn't matter. Next week the new guest host would just hire them back. So if there is a new host every week the new one can just overturn the last's decisions? I don't see the point.
Austin trying to overcome Vince was different. It was unique. It was wildly popular. It even made some sense. Vince didn't want to fire Austin because he sold tickets, sold merchandise, and brought in high ratings. However, he had such personal hatred toward Austin that he didn't want Austin to be his champion. This was a good angle throughout 1998 and got better with the Rock as the corporate champion. This angle should have ended at WrestleMania XV. Here we are ten years later and the same thing is going on. Bischoff trying to screw Cena. Heyman trying to screw Lesnar. Vince trying to screw Shawn. Vicki trying to screw Taker. And on and on and on. You could even argue that Teddy Long was out to screw JBL and MVP.
I know as wrestling fans we have to use what I call "wrestling logic." This is the kind of logic that doesn't punish someone with a fine or suspension for kicking the chairman in the head. Instead he has to settle it in the ring, which is his job anyway. Despite my knowledge of "wrestling logic" I am tired of trying to make sense of the heel authority figure. I'm not one of the people who is going to say "I'm done watching WWE. The product today is horrible." I'm not done and it's not horrible. I just wish this played out storyline would be done.
I miss Jack Tunney. You would see him once a year, if that, when something very controversial was going on. You could argue he didn't always make the right decision, but he didn't play favorites and wasn't out to screw anybody. Besides the heel authority figure just comes off as lazy booking. Same story with a revolving door as to who's involved. Time to come up with some new original ideas for the main event feuds.