Inquiry: The Dilemma Behind Modern Day Superstar Elevations

[lenguy]

I've been browsing the wrestling forums lately and I've been reading a lot of peoples thoughts and opinions regarding WWE and how they are elevating/not elevating superstars. A couple of random generic comments immediately rush to mind.

1. This superstar is not ready to main event.

2. The push this superstar is receiving is all wrong.

3. This superstar is not main event material.

Comments like these are plentiful on any wrestling form. A common case of the IWC just being as unsatisfied as ever. You can't please them all. However,this is not what this thread is about. People have been complaining for years now that the WWE is struggling when it comes to making new mega stars. People have come and gone,some having success while others completely flat-line.

People clamor for new faces in the main event scene. Yet when somebody finally does make it, it seems like an abundance amount of people remain discontent. For reasons I've stated above. This superstar is not ready,its too soon,this superstar is boring and has no style and or personality. This isn't the type of thing exclusive to the IWC. In virtually almost every arena,experimental superstars fail to get a reaction. Often of which they come in,debut and are soon to disappear months later...back to the drawing board as they would say. Will the same not be said for say Brodus Clay when he re-debuts? How can WWE guarantee that Clay gets over and stays over? Will he be destined to have one major push and then be forgotten once Wrestlemania season hits full stride? I digress...How do you get somebody to become relevant? Then once they do become relevant, how do you make it remain that way?

I read a thread about a week or so ago about keeping Cody Rhodes and Ziggler in the mid-card picture, to bring prestige back to the I.C title and U.S title instead of being lunged right into the main event. I mean why not? Back in the day, a lot of superstars carried their division for quite sometime before given an opportunity for a main event spot. Why can't they float around in the upper-mid card for awhile? Besides..aren't they already in the main event anyway? I mean they may not be headlining PPV's but you do seem them in the main event of ether Raw or Smackdown a bit frequently as of late. We can all agree they both have bright futures but does it need to happen so soon? Do we need to rush it? Or should we just give in to another 3 to 5 years of Cena and Orton and maybe a few others playing hot potato with the world titles? People don't seem to have any patience. Yet when they are elevated,it doesn't take very long for people to become weary and sick of these superstars, for whatever reason.

I think the key here is longevity. If you push a younger superstar to main event statues too soon then you run the risk of superstar fatigue. Sure,everybody is all high on them now but whats not to say in 5 years when that superstar has been main eventing 5 years straight and is still in their early 30's that people won't be already tired of seeing their faces and once again in a rage about not seeing newer and fresher faces. I mean I hate to get on Orton's case but the guys barely passed 30 and is already,what a 9 time world champion? I remember when people use to talk.."Orton,yeah guys,hes the future,hes going to do great things,amazing things, you just wait hes going to be a future world champion". 7 odd years later now that Orton IS the future all I hear is "GOD..a 9 time world champion already? WTF...I wish he'd go away"...I could also say similar things about one John Cena..

See this is where that dilemma comes in that I've been leading to. People are tired of the main event scene,yearning for new faces,fresh match ups and new feuds. Yet people seem to hate it when a superstar is elevated to quickly(a lot of people have seemed to turn on Del Rio for this exact reason). Then we are also faced with the problem that WWE doesn't seem to know how to get people over, so why not let the superstars get themselves over? It work wonders for Punk. Why not give it a try?

Then again,I guess we are in sort of a transition period. We do happen to see a few new faces with some world titles. Even so, this could be just another WWE experiment. Will Daniel Bryan get another title shot again if he doesn't impress,will he be plunged back down into the upper-mid card level bound to drift endlessly before getting another shot? Is WWE starting to lose a bit of faith in Punk? Will we see yet another unneeded Cena title reign? These are only things we can discuss,and discuss we shall. So!

In this modern day, what is the best and most effective way of getting a superstar over? Then,how does one stay over?

When handling debuts, again,how do you get one over? Is WWE handling debuts fine? If not, how would you recommend WWE should handle future debuts, be it a new heel or new face.

Feel free to contribute anything else to the conversation but please do it in a gracious and respectful manner, no need to hate here. We all have strong opinions but mindless bashing and name calling is rude and utterly ill-mannered. So please people,be civil, then again, I can only ask this of you.

With that said, sound off below!

 

[JohnJohnson]

I think the best way to get a superstar over is to give them actual quality storylines. Not just "I want your belt" or "heel randomly attacks face, face seeks revenge", but actual in depth stories that have been thought out months ahead, with twists and turns. Not only that but, similar to what you said about getting themselves over, let the superstars have more creative control over their character. Why have so many dull first and last names. I believe the success of Rhodes and Ziggler has been due to the fact that they have developed character personalities. If a superstar has creative control over their character, they can incorporate more of their real selves into the character and bring about a more natural feel. I also agree that they should slow down the pushes and the amount of title reigns. The same couple people shouldn't be trading the belts back and forth. If there is no one to legitimately take the belt from someone, then just give them a long title reign so as not to discredit the title or the reigns of past champions. There is no reason to push someone too quickly. These young superstars will have PLENTY of time to develop and come into their own before becoming a champion. If they don't then they don't need the belt anyways. Like in the case of Batista; the guy got some title reigns and then left the WWE soon after. Slow it down and weed out the loyal workers from the guys worried about their 15 minutes of fame. Besides, not every superstar that is good or even great should receive the belt. The WWE shouldn't feel obligated to share the belt with everyone. This only further diminishes its value. The title reigns shouldn't define the superstar. Their abilities should define them. If a superstar needs a belt just to get over or seem credible, then they aren't good enough to be a world champion. The championships need good wrestlers; good wrestlers don't need championships. Similarly not everyone who gets the US or IC title and carries it for a few months should be automatically made the next world champ. The US and IC belts should carry a lot of value and should be a highly sought after prize, rather than the last stepping stone to a world title reign. Additionally, get rid of MITB. The matches are great but are usually full of mid carders. Winning the match is the equivalent of winning the championship and therefore the match results in a mid carder becoming world champ. Hell maybe change it up a little and have a MITB winner go after a mid card title. I think it would have given a lot more credibility to Daniel Bryan if he would have cashed in on Cody or Ziggler then proclaim that, to him, it means more to fight for a belt that has more competition(since there are, or should be, more mid carders than main eventers). It would also make him seem like the hard worker he is supposed to be by wanting to earn a real world title shot and beat everyone else on the mid card before jumping to the top.

 

[go_patriots11]

Nice post man, as I try to answer this I found myself struggling to look for a solid correct answer. I believe this is because there are so many things that have to go right for a wrestler to debut and stay over. Off the top- luck of catching the fans attention has to be a main point. Lets face it, if you fail to do even that, be it a new generic type of wrestler (Alex Riley) or an over the top type (The Boogeyman), If you cannot make a fan say "Hey I like this guy, I wanna see what he has to offer next week" then you are doomed from the start.
A second thing that I would add to a Superstar staying relevant after a debut is keeping the freshness of your character and allowing the ability to change things up. I think that the PG era may have taken away from this a bit as you can only go so far into heel territory. Attitude gave the guys the freedom to push the envelope therefore satisfying the tastes of the demographic at the time. It is apparent that kids are now the demographic so if it's Rey/Cara coming out or Cena coming out every night and kids are going "Look Mommy/Daddy theres John Cena he's my favorite wrestler of all time and he's the best" Than WWE has done their job in doing so.
Lastly I would have to add what keeps a debuting superstar in the spotlight is chemistry. You could be the best wrestler, or have the best gimmick but if the talent is not there to give you a run and put on a great show with then again what really is the point? I think you are going to see CM Punk soon fall into this category. This is why I am so adamant to see Jericho return and run a program with Punk. Both Wrestlers are great mic workers with the same kind of natural sarcastic humor that really gives a degree of realism while delivering a promo, not to mention their wrestling styles are also pretty similar. It is Clear Punk is the direction that the WWE wants to go in, but how many times does anyone wanna see CM Punk vs Mark Henry, or CM Punk vs Doplh Ziggler? although great wrestlers, what is the connection there? How do you build something out of it?
Anyways again great post, It's something I can totally relate to with you on. I have had thoughts on this subject for awhile

 

[Dagger Dias]

The WWE is in it to make a profit, much like any other business. How does one make money? Make the target market WANT to purchase your item. They have to give fans a reason to buy the PPV events. In order to do this, it comes down to a simple marketing concept. The fans will not care about your product (wrestling matches on PPV) if you do not give them a reason to. WWE can generate this interest by elevating wrestlers correctly. That's the simple solution. Now then, how does one go about this elevation process? The thread's original post asks about how to get someone over and how to debut them, both of which are part of the elevation process. Let's start with the debut. No pun intended.

The debut is extremely important because it is the first time that the wrestler is onscreen at a WWE show. First impressions matter. John Cena stood up to Kurt Angle when (kayfabe) no one else dared to that night. RUTHLESS AGGRESSION! Ziggler debuted as a golfer. Then he went into a cheerleader stable. Yet people wonder why he took so long for people to take him seriously? Promo videos should air to hype someone's debut. Look at Kizarny. Sure he flopped BIG TIME, but people were so interested in what he would be like, due to the videos. Undertaker's videos last year, Jericho's viral coding images, things like that help hype a return which is the same process that should be done for a debut. It creates a lasting impression. Follow it up with a good promo and a good match, the guy is all set for his first couple of angles.

After that he needs to prove that he has the skills both in the ring and in promos. Filler feuds within the midcard help at first. Next come the midcard titles. Have them chase the titles for a bit. Ryder's big win was a big moment as a result of his chase. Once he is champion, he needs a strong reign with the midcard title full of successful defenses. Then he can break into the main event by feuding with upper midcard guys or main eventers in higher profile feuds. Once the fan reaction is good enough, move the guy up to the main event. If he's able to generate interest in matches, it's time for the world title push. Should he still be generating interest as a World Heavyweight or WWE Champion, that determines if he stays a main eventer or not. Legend status awaits him in the future if he is among the lucky few to make it far enough to hold multiple world titles.

THAT is how you elevate a wrestler properly. The whole process from debut/return up through main event run. While it's a simple formula on paper, the wrestler has to be able to get the fans behind him (or against if he is a heel) as well as earn the support of the creative team who will be booking the angles. Everything has to fall into place correctly, but this is how it's done and how it SHOULD be done. Not "this guy is Vince's favorite so the fans will have to like him or watch another show".

 

[TheTemp]

August 9th, 1999 and August 1st, 2006. Two WWF/E debut dates that turned out two of the greatest Wrestlers in our generation.

The first being the day the Millennium Countdown ran out. The Rock was in the ring, commanding the microphone like only he can. The lights went out. In an age where the internet wasn't all that involved in Wrestling. The Titan Tron read the word "Jericho" and with that, the crowd leaped out of their seats and they exploded with cheers. "Y2J", "The Ayatollah of Rock & Rolla", whatever you wish to call him, Chris Jericho made his debut in the World Wrestling Federation. The crowd was surprised, the crowd was excited, the crowd was on the edge of their seats for the great back and forth verbal exchange that was about to occur. This is one prime example of how to debut someone with great Charisma, that already had a following. Something WWE doesn't seem to want to ever acknowledge nowadays.

Which brings me to the second date. This is the date current WWE Champion, CM Punk, made his long-awaited debut for World Wrestling Entertainment under the ECW on Sci-Fi brand. This is one of my favorite debuts in at least the last 10 years. This is a prime example of how to debut someone with a cult following, not nearly as large as the Jericho following from WCW when he debuted, but I digress. In an age where the internet is now running wild, people knew CM Punk was going to debut. People who followed Punk on the independent circuit from LWF to ROH, his developmental stint in OVW where he won nearly every title they had to offer, under the creative power of Paul Heyman and went through a great feud with Brent Albright. People who've heard of Punk through their friends and people who've never heard of the man other then in the promos he had the weeks prior to this. Granted ECW was never the most watched show for WWE on Sci-Fi, however the thing that made this night special? WWE could not have picked a better place to debut "the Straight-Edge Superstar". The Hammerstein Ballroom. New York City. A building Punk competed in several times for Ring of Honor, as soon as he walked out through the curtain, the ENTIRE building was chanting his name. Now for people who had never seen Punk until that moment, there was a little over 1 Million people watching on Television, not counting the people who watched it online or on later showings. The first impression they get from hearing such a crowd chant for a man on his FIRST televised appearance for the company, is "hey, this guy's getting a great reaction, I should pay attention to this." This is how you debut someone with a Cult Following. Something they didn't try to use with current World Heavyweight Champion, Daniel Bryan. One will hope they use a similar tactic for current developmental stars former FCW Tag Team and FCW 15 Champion Seth Rollins (Former ROH World Champion Tyler Black), Dean Ambrose (Former CZW Heavyweight Champion, DGUSA member Jon Moxley) and Antonio Cesaro (Former PWG World Champion, ROH World Tag Team Champion Claudio Castagnoli). All of who have followings from the independent circuit. People in the "internet wrestling community" can say what they like about those "followings not making a difference" and maybe it won't in the long run, but it does matter when it comes to how fast a certain competitor makes their main roster debut.

Those are just two examples. Another that was mentioned, are people who've gotten more popular on their own, like Zack Ryder. Once a Major Brother, an Edgehead, now in his own gimmick where he went from stealing the show in a match against Christian on ECW on Sci-Fi and impressing Agents and Creative, all the way to finally winning a singles championship at TLC 2011 against Dolph Ziggler. He started his own youtube show and his popularity has skyrocketed to the point he's in the top 5 Merchandise sellers in WWE. Along with guys like CM Punk, John Cena and The Rock, that's saying something about the people WWE tries to elevate who just end up being shoved down the fans' throats.

Then there comes the issue of being able to stay over after you've made that first appearance, whether it be terrible (The Shock Master) or great (The Undertaker). That's when the Creative Team, the Agents/Producers and the Wrestler need to come together to find something that will entice the crowd to react. It's up to the creative team to come up with an idea. It's up to the Agents/Producers to make sure the talent knows what to do and how to do it. Then it's up to the Wrestler to go and wrap all of it into one pretty little show for the audience.

It's been said time and again, the wrestlers don't make the wrestlers, the FANS make the wrestlers.

 

[Aberle4Life]

I think what's happening is we're witnessing the first generation of wrestlers to come up in this weekly format of BIG wrestling shows. Before the Attitude Era, wrestlers didn't face other big wrestlers on a regular basis. They took on jobbers or low mid-card guys that they were able to snack on to build them up until they were ready for bigger matches. Or, they wrestled for years in smaller territories, honed their craft, and were ready to truly entertain by the time they got to the WWE(F). Now, guys like Jack Swagger and Alberto Del Rio are immediately being thrust into big matches and championships. WWE is no longer putting time in these guys, which is really hurting them because they're not having time to perfect their craft...and the fans aren't getting the time to care about them. Also, Swagger facing guys like John Cena right away just makes him look bad. If they could wait on feeding Swagger to Cena longer, he might be more on Cena's level as far as audience reaction goes.

The WWE wants the immediate pay-off now, but they're not putting the work in to develop their wrestlers properly. Bret Hart perfected his craft for years in smaller organizations, and then was in WWF for seven years before he won a world championship. He had a LONG career before he reached the pinnacle. The same applies to Austin and Michaels. By the time they reached that level, the fans were familiar with them and were ready to give them a big reaction and CARE about them. Alberto Del Rio winning the belt before the casual fan even knows his name (not everybody already knows it) is not good business because fans won't take it seriously or care about it.

This rushing-the-young-guy thing had been masked the last several years because there were still some old-timers around to rely on: HBK, Jericho, Undertaker, Flair to name a few. Now, none of those guys are around anymore (except part-time for a couple, hopefully) and it's really showing that this generation of superstars lack the fundamental training the previous generation had.

I wish WWE would do a couple things to help these guys grow as superstars:
First, switch the matches up on Raw! Bring back the occasional "jobber" match for these young guys to build them awhile. Put some patience into your talent, WWE. It will pay off in the long run. Also, keep some guys off TV some weeks--yes, even some of the bigger names. If Cena is going to be on EVERY week, why will the fans sick of him tune in every week? Some won't. And on the flipside of that, not having someone like Ziggler on Raw at all one week will make fans want to see him more the next week and start to care about him a little more.

Second, cut down on the PPV's and slow storylines DOWN. WWE is too dependent on the writers and not dependent enough on the wrestling. They have a formula they strictly follow nowadays that says this feud lasts until this PPV and then the next one starts because we need a new PPV match! If you're rushing through building someone so they can cash in their Money In The Bank briefcase (which they shouldn't have in the first place because they're not ready to become a world champion), the fans have not vested enough emotion or interest in the wrestler and the fans will be bored by the title change and thus bored by the character. Also, who says every storyline has to be on television every single week? If Ziggler is feuding with Ryder, for instance, don't directly interact them with each other every week. Have them face different opponents to draw the feud out longer, and let that be it some weeks. It could last a few more months that way, all the while building both characters to look stronger with wins over lower guys.

Sorry if my post rambled a bit or was tough to read; at times, it's tough to express exactly what I want to say but I like the topic and wanted to comment. Mainly, it's about slowing the entire machine down that is WWE. For years now, they have followed the exact same formula in order to pump out PPV's and big matches. They have to slow down and remember what built them in the first place: WRESTLING with GOOD and LONG storylines. Remember the Jake Roberts/Ted DiBiase feud back in 1990, older fans? I think it lasted over a year if I remember that correctly--and remained interesting the whole time.

WWE can't quite go back to that all the way, but they have to find a middle ground because the current product is not cutting it--and they have the talent to make it work if they can figure it out. Start to incorporate it with the younger talent. Yes, many of them seem to have the ability to be main eventers--but they have to earn their stripes and reach their potential first. If you push them too fast, fans won't see them at their best and they won't care about them...and that will kill their momentum. Jack Swagger is a prime example of it, and right now that guy is dangerously close to being nothing more than a jobber.

I'll stop now and hope some of you can make sense of this

 

[Arsenal]

I think what's happening is we're witnessing the first generation of wrestlers to come up in this weekly format of BIG wrestling shows. Before the Attitude Era, wrestlers didn't face other big wrestlers on a regular basis. They took on jobbers or low mid-card guys that they were able to snack on to build them up until they were ready for bigger matches. Or, they wrestled for years in smaller territories, honed their craft, and were ready to truly entertain by the time they got to the WWE(F). Now, guys like Jack Swagger and Alberto Del Rio are immediately being thrust into big matches and championships. WWE is no longer putting time in these guys, which is really hurting them because they're not having time to perfect their craft...and the fans aren't getting the time to care about them. Also, Swagger facing guys like John Cena right away just makes him look bad. If they could wait on feeding Swagger to Cena longer, he might be more on Cena's level as far as audience reaction goes.

The WWE wants the immediate pay-off now, but they're not putting the work in to develop their wrestlers properly. Bret Hart perfected his craft for years in smaller organizations, and then was in WWF for seven years before he won a world championship. He had a LONG career before he reached the pinnacle. The same applies to Austin and Michaels. By the time they reached that level, the fans were familiar with them and were ready to give them a big reaction and CARE about them. Alberto Del Rio winning the belt before the casual fan even knows his name (not everybody already knows it) is not good business because fans won't take it seriously or care about it.

This rushing-the-young-guy thing had been masked the last several years because there were still some old-timers around to rely on: HBK, Jericho, Undertaker, Flair to name a few. Now, none of those guys are around anymore (except part-time for a couple, hopefully) and it's really showing that this generation of superstars lack the fundamental training the previous generation had.

I wish WWE would do a couple things to help these guys grow as superstars:
First, switch the matches up on Raw! Bring back the occasional "jobber" match for these young guys to build them awhile. Put some patience into your talent, WWE. It will pay off in the long run. Also, keep some guys off TV some weeks--yes, even some of the bigger names. If Cena is going to be on EVERY week, why will the fans sick of him tune in every week? Some won't. And on the flipside of that, not having someone like Ziggler on Raw at all one week will make fans want to see him more the next week and start to care about him a little more.

Second, cut down on the PPV's and slow storylines DOWN. WWE is too dependent on the writers and not dependent enough on the wrestling. They have a formula they strictly follow nowadays that says this feud lasts until this PPV and then the next one starts because we need a new PPV match! If you're rushing through building someone so they can cash in their Money In The Bank briefcase (which they shouldn't have in the first place because they're not ready to become a world champion), the fans have not vested enough emotion or interest in the wrestler and the fans will be bored by the title change and thus bored by the character. Also, who says every storyline has to be on television every single week? If Ziggler is feuding with Ryder, for instance, don't directly interact them with each other every week. Have them face different opponents to draw the feud out longer, and let that be it some weeks. It could last a few more months that way, all the while building both characters to look stronger with wins over lower guys.

Sorry if my post rambled a bit or was tough to read; at times, it's tough to express exactly what I want to say but I like the topic and wanted to comment. Mainly, it's about slowing the entire machine down that is WWE. For years now, they have followed the exact same formula in order to pump out PPV's and big matches. They have to slow down and remember what built them in the first place: WRESTLING with GOOD and LONG storylines. Remember the Jake Roberts/Ted DiBiase feud back in 1990, older fans? I think it lasted over a year if I remember that correctly--and remained interesting the whole time.

WWE can't quite go back to that all the way, but they have to find a middle ground because the current product is not cutting it--and they have the talent to make it work if they can figure it out. Start to incorporate it with the younger talent. Yes, many of them seem to have the ability to be main eventers--but they have to earn their stripes and reach their potential first. If you push them too fast, fans won't see them at their best and they won't care about them...and that will kill their momentum. Jack Swagger is a prime example of it, and right now that guy is dangerously close to being nothing more than a jobber.

I'll stop now and hope some of you can make sense of this

Great post and it's no surprise that we're about the same age. We both remember when wrestling was awesome, and a big reason why was because they took the time to properly build up superstars and storylines both. Today everything is rushed, and many of their superstars are not ready for the limelight and therefore the fans don't care about them, probably because of the pressure of needing good matches on RAW / Smackdown every single week, and on a PPV every single month.

After seeing wrestling when it was great, I won't pay for a PPV unless there is a strong build, which is why I've purchased exactly 1 PPV in over the last several years. If they properly built their PPVs, say with only 4 PPVs per year, I'd probably buy all 4. Of course, they need to stop giving away PPV matches on RAW and Smackdown, otherwise why should I pay $50 to watch the same match I can watch for free the next day? What makes it special and therefore worth $50???

The same goes with their wrestlers. They need to properly build them over longer periods of time. When guys like Randy Savage, Ultimate Warrior, Shawn Michaels, and Steve Austin won the WWE Title it meant so much more because we watched these guys build themselves up and perfect their craft for YEARS beforehand, either in the WWE or elsewhere. Now midcarders who've earned nothing (e.g. Jack Swagger, Daniel Bryan) can cash in a briefcase at any time to become champion. I don't care about and won't pay for guys like that who get the belt before they've EARNED it.