Should Older Stars put younger stars Over?

[themizisawesomemikeali]

There are some instances when a veteran faces a younger guy and should win, but in certain situations/storylines the time comes for the young guy to go over. When he doesn't go over, or doesn't look strong, it causes more problems for WWE because it takes longer to get the guy over because of that. It can be a potential momentum killer in some cases.

Thoughts?

 

[HBsam31]

I agree with the cycle comment. The vet can go over sometimes, but I think in the end the younger guy should get the upper hand. A problem I see coming for WWE is not enough young main event stars are being built. Relying on the older stars, and constantly putting them over will only hurt the business in the future.

 

[bmg82683]

only if it makes sense should a vet put over the young guy. even then it isn't always necessary. i dont want someone jobbing just to job. like when austin walked out on the wwe because on free tv with no promotion they wanted him to job to lesnar. why? you are losing money that way and it dimishes the potential rub he could have gotten.

prime example is lesnar destroyed hogan. how many people really remember that or care? not many because they didnt build it and make it mean something. however everyone remembers lesnar beating rock or beating taker in hell in a cell because it was built up and promoted to allow the vet to put over the young talent.

 

[lowandmighty]

No I think the older guys should mostly squash the younger guys and the younger guys should mostly wrestle amongst themselves until they build up a reputation then they could go over against one of the older more established wrestlers.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Casual fans build strong attachments to their favs, even when they are older. Its no coincidence that even with all the effort WWE has put into bringing along younger talent that this year's WrestleMania was built around a two matches where 3 of the 4 combatants had been wrestling for 15 or more years. They knew that to draw big numbers they needed to maximize the use of veterans.

When you job out popular vets just to elevate "the new guy" fans dont buy it, it turns them off. The idea that its better to make vets put over young guys is a false premise.

For a new guy to get over they need the audience to invest and care in what they do. Turning off the audience by making them mad some new kid on the block just laid out their vet fav doesnt do that. However, a legit feud where a new guy is allowed to have significant strong moments, building to multiple matches where new guy is allowed to show off significant offense, making it look as if they "belong" in the ring with the vet, THIS is how you elevate a new guy.

Sting & Lex Luger became hugely popular stars due to the success of their feuds vs Ric Flair. However, niether ever won a major match against Flair during those initial runs. It took 2 years till Sting got a major win vs Flair, Luger never did (outside some tag matches and non title bouts). However, both had plenty of top moments in their feuds, topping Flair in interviews, in ring beatdowns, post match brawls, etc. They didnt get the title but they were presented as legit main event level talent who could win the title.

Randy Savage had great runs vs Hogan in 86 & Steamboat in 87 but didnt win many matches, lost the payoff matches, and ultimately did not triumph in either feud. He did enough to establish himself with the audience that by 88 he was World Champion.

Shawn Michaels break out moment was his loss on TV vs Flair in late 91 which set about his break from The Rockers & the switch from teen idol tag guy to HBK. After a good showing in mid card feuds vs Rick Martel & British Bulldog he challenged Brett Hart for the World Title, losing cleanly in the blowoff match at Survivor Series, then putting over Hart repeatedly on house show circuit. Yet somehow this performance established him with the fans as a legit top level contender. Hart probably never realized he was grooming his successor so soon in his run as top draw, much like Flair with Sting in 88.

Eventually, if the new guy works out he has the gravitas with fans that wins over main event level vets is acceptable and that is when the company has found its new Top Guy. If John Cena had beaten HHH or HBK in 2003 fans would not have bought it. By 07 however it wasnt so far fetched. Today we debate if he should be the one to end Undertaker's streak.

Force new guys down our throats and fans will be turned off. Build their cred through involvement with established vets, not beating them per se but portrayed as equals, and soon "The New Guy" ends up "The Main Guy"

 

[DJ Kyo]

It really depends on the situation.

Take for instance the early days of Randy Orton and his "Legend Killer" character. That was perfect. It made sense for the older stars to lose and sometimes even get the upper hand as well until he figured out how to beat them.

You need a good feud for the younger stars to beat the older ones. No one should be able to come in, call out Taker or HHH for example and BAM they win just because they are up and coming. They need "reason" to beat them. Some sort of beef that's either legitimized or created within a reasonable time frame to make the victory believable.

Otherwise you end up with meaningless matches that no one will remember and the effect of being "put over" just isn't there.

 

[midgensa]

As said by others ... it depends on the situation EVERY SINGLE TIME.

It has nothing to do with Youth vs. Vet. It is about "who can make the most money." If you start having Cena put over Mason Ryan just to try and push the youth then you destroy Cena's money making ability while banking on Mason Ryan's boring ass to carry the company.

Good stars get THEMSELVES OVER ... it is that simple. Vince didn't want to put Punk or Bryan over. They are not his kind of guys ... he put them over because they put themselves over when given the opportunity.

Sometimes a young guy gets the push (like Jack Swagger) and it is a total disaster and it stunts that younger guy for a long long time (remember how good Swagger looked right up until winning that title and then falling to mediocrity?)

It is about pushing at the right time, not just putting over young talent left and right.

 

[The Hillside]

I have always thought and talked about this but it only works when a veteran or an firmly established main eventer agrees to lose to one of those younger or midcarder stars at a PPV and it doesn't happen too often, anyways let's talk about failed and successful attempt and potential attempts as well.

Failed attempts:

HHH helped Benjamin
HBK helped Benjamin
HBK helped Kennedy
Taker helped Heidenreich

Let's talk about successful attempts:

Taker helped Punk
Taker helped Lesnar
HHH helped Jeff Hardy
Foley helped Orton
HHH helped Batista
Cena helped Sheamus
Orton helped The Miz

Potential Attempts:

Jericho helps Daniel Bryan
Orton helps Daniel Bryan
Orton helps Cody Rhodes
Orton helps Del Rio
Jericho helps Del Rio
HHH helps Del Rio

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

Casual fans build strong attachments to their favs, even when they are older. Its no coincidence that even with all the effort WWE has put into bringing along younger talent that this year's WrestleMania was built around a two matches where 3 of the 4 combatants had been wrestling for 15 or more years. They knew that to draw big numbers they needed to maximize the use of veterans.

When you job out popular vets just to elevate "the new guy" fans dont buy it, it turns them off. The idea that its better to make vets put over young guys is a false premise.

For a new guy to get over they need the audience to invest and care in what they do. Turning off the audience by making them mad some new kid on the block just laid out their vet fav doesnt do that. However, a legit feud where a new guy is allowed to have significant strong moments, building to multiple matches where new guy is allowed to show off significant offense, making it look as if they "belong" in the ring with the vet, THIS is how you elevate a new guy.

Sting & Lex Luger became hugely popular stars due to the success of their feuds vs Ric Flair. However, niether ever won a major match against Flair during those initial runs. It took 2 years till Sting got a major win vs Flair, Luger never did (outside some tag matches and non title bouts). However, both had plenty of top moments in their feuds, topping Flair in interviews, in ring beatdowns, post match brawls, etc. They didnt get the title but they were presented as legit main event level talent who could win the title.

Randy Savage had great runs vs Hogan in 86 & Steamboat in 87 but didnt win many matches, lost the payoff matches, and ultimately did not triumph in either feud. He did enough to establish himself with the audience that by 88 he was World Champion.

Shawn Michaels break out moment was his loss on TV vs Flair in late 91 which set about his break from The Rockers & the switch from teen idol tag guy to HBK. After a good showing in mid card feuds vs Rick Martel & British Bulldog he challenged Brett Hart for the World Title, losing cleanly in the blowoff match at Survivor Series, then putting over Hart repeatedly on house show circuit. Yet somehow this performance established him with the fans as a legit top level contender. Hart probably never realized he was grooming his successor so soon in his run as top draw, much like Flair with Sting in 88.

Eventually, if the new guy works out he has the gravitas with fans that wins over main event level vets is acceptable and that is when the company has found its new Top Guy. If John Cena had beaten HHH or HBK in 2003 fans would not have bought it. By 07 however it wasnt so far fetched. Today we debate if he should be the one to end Undertaker's streak.

Force new guys down our throats and fans will be turned off. Build their cred through involvement with established vets, not beating them per se but portrayed as equals, and soon "The New Guy" ends up "The Main Guy"

THIS

This is exactly right. There is no benefit in forcing a new up-and-coming wrestler down the throat of the fans just as a way to get them over. It has to be done correctly, and when the time is right. Eventually, the older top stars will be retiring and there needs to be a next generation ready to carry the baton for the company. If pushes are done correctly, the outgoing veteran passes the torch to the younger guy, who is accepted as a main-event level player and worthy of the spot.

Occasionally, for example in the case of Brock Lesnar, the rookie gets a monster push to the top, beating everyone in his path such as Hulk Hogan and The Rock. But this is a very special case due to the immense talent and potential Lesnar has. However, in many cases, pushing a talent too soon ends up turning the audience off, and that is something you do not want to do. See Ahmed Johnson and Bobby Lashley as versions of this.