Storylines

[Father:_Polley]

I was reading another thread discussing Sting and why he refused to join WWE because of their storylines and it got me thinking...

Are the only storylines that really keep us interestedand draw us in nowadays the steamy seduction type (eg Edge/Vickie, Edge/Lita, Steph/HHH), the controversial moments (Raven/Sandman crucifixion) or vicous matches (HIAC, Bullrope Match).

In previous eras, fans seemed to be drawn in by the acting and realism of angles, such as Hogan/Savage over Elizabeth, and it seemed a minor slight against a respected opponent was enough to hook in the audience, without the need for chairshots, run-ins, cheap shots or distractions.

As wrestling fans, I think we have developed a shorter attention span, and the idea of long, slow feuds based on mere irritations have become a thing of the fast, instead needing to engage us with witty barbs, titilation and violence and don't think storylines of a gentle nature work in today's audience

 

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

Which is sad. I would prefer to see a 2-4 month storyline.. Just like Michaels-Jericho. It's perfect. It started slow and has erupted into what we have now.. I am so tired of seeing feuds start like Cena and Batista. A 3 week feud. Oh Joy. It has no build what-so-ever. That annoys me.

 

[Father:_Polley]

Exactly... Jericho vs Michaels has worked so well simply because of the fact that there has been a gradual build into the viciousness and brutality we saw at GAB. I mean, it started with a minor incident over Y2J accusing HBK of faking a knee injury to win a match, as opposed to Opponent X sneaks an attack on Champion Y after a title match against a random opponent and claims he deserves a shot as a result.

That approach is effective at times, when there is some reasoning behind it. A long standing history or a cost match, that works, but not from nowhere. WWE seems too keen to rush the storylines simply because they're too lazy to have worked out anything interesting to make the match seem important

 

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

Edge and Taker is the only other storyline I can think of that had that awesome build and feud.. It's been great.. Will be a shame when that and Jeri-Shawn ends at SS. It annoys the heck out of me the way JBL every month is like, I deserve a title shot.. I hate it more when he gets it. I want feuds with build and substance.. If Edge had stayed out of the ME scene at GAB, then HHH could have built a feud with Show or Umaga, instead we are being fed this Khali crap. It has no build.. No meaning.. Just, blah.

 

[Father:_Polley]

Khali's not to blame for that though. He makes more sense than throwing Jeff Hardy in at the deep end with no storyline. At least he has the ability to make himself look a little intimidating in the process. Khali is little more than a means for HHH to come out looking strong, same way as Cena used him last year.

That being said, I think sometimes a short feud works ok. At least it gives a chance to get something set up so that a good one can come about as a result of it.

And lets be honest, even long storylines can go pear-shaped. Long story of the year was Hornswoggle and that was a disaster of a half-assed storyline with poor turns and a sloppy end in JBL vs Finlay.

My favourite storyline every though is the Ministry of Darkness. It had a slow build up and a massive turn at the end, that led to a revamp and (in my teenage mind) was compelling at the time.

 

[Haner388994]

Which is sad. I would prefer to see a 2-4 month storyline.. Just like Michaels-Jericho. It's perfect. It started slow and has erupted into what we have now.. I am so tired of seeing feuds start like Cena and Batista. A 3 week feud. Oh Joy. It has no build what-so-ever. That annoys me.

The Cena vs Batista match isn't really supposed to be a feud. It is a match made by tne new GM Adamle as a shocking match to make as new GM. So, I wouldn't consider this a feud more of a "clash of the best" as of now.

 

[Murfish]

I have noticed it this as well. It is evident in almost every storyline and every wrestling show. If you notice, there are barely any number one contender matches, and when they happen they are never at a ppv. There is no build up to a contender. It is usually just people asking and receiving. Or they have two top stars in a match on tv. Thats just wasting money matches. A great case would be Cena vs Batista. It is pointless. Not only has it not even been named a number one contenders match, but it is Wrestlmania quality in star power. The Kofi/Burchill feud was caused by a very random attack. The Kennedy/Burchill feud was worse because it was handled so poorly, when it could have helped both stars. T.N.A. is the king of quick contradictory storylines. From the Terrordome and Kaz's title matches, to Rhino, Christian, and AJ becoming pals after being bitter rivals.

I believe that it shows how much we have devolved as fans.

 

[Ptd]

I honestly think that we as wrestling fans have a short attention span. We want to see new stuff. We want to see new feuds, fresh matches, and past face excitement. While I will agree with most that the Michaels-Y2J feud is great right now, most wrestling fans just can not tolerate that all the time with different wrestlers. I also think that we just always have the need for new things to be added into the mix. We like to see new challengers, and new matches. It is sad though that we never really get a good feud anymore, the last that I can remember that meant anything at all is HHH/Batista, and maybe I can consider Edge/Taker.

 

[klunderbunker]

I think part of the problem with this is the amount of tv exposure there is now, as well as the match length. Back in the late 80s, you'd have one full show a week: Superstars. Then every once in awhile, an SNME. Superstars you'd have big names win squashes, an occsaional big match, and the rest were interviews and segments. A feud could simmer for a year at times. Also, these feuds would only culminate at payperviews, which was the huge key to it all. Back in 1986, there was one single WWF ppv, and that was WM2. In 1987, there were 2. WM3, and the first Survivor Series where there were four matches. This is how the Hogan Andre feud started before WM3 and went on through WM4. You'd see them a few times a month, they'd talk and talk, and by the time they got in the ring, you HAD to see them go at it. Now, a "feud" is a match is made, there's 2 weeks of run ins and beatdowns, then a big brawl and a staredown, then the match. That's not a feud. The other hting that I think is missing now is a reason for a match. How long has it been since there was a main event match because two guys just wanted to beat each other up, rather than one guy qualified for a title match by winning a contender's match, or a competition? The stories today don't work because we see too much of the same thing, and too much in general. At least I do.

 

[Dark Blaze]

Like Eric Bischoff once said, Controversy Creates Cash, and this has been proven that more people will tune in for the more edgier, mysterious and controversial storylines than the "norm" so to say. Which caused the WWF (at the time) to usher in the Attitude Era, which was we all know brought them their highest ratings, however, that Era has spoilt the audience so to say and fans now require such storylines to capture and maintain their interest (and even those are kinda becoming repetitive), a fact which has placed the WWE into a rut so to say. While trying to cater to more kids, they're at risk of losing their hardcore fan base with a more kid friendly show.

I like some have stated however, am one of those who prefer a long gradual build compared to the two-three weeks build of a normal feud nowadays, I love the HBK/Y2J storyline, and detest the fact that WWE has a huge money maker right now in the 'Tista- Cena feud but is willing to blow if off without a proper build...and what'll happen because of the short build? The match will be repeated...and repeated...until the fans get absolutely tired of the storyline, and that is what I think is the WWE's problem.

I'm all for building the storyline, without there needing an actual match between the two, I mean look, the HBK/ Y2J storyline didn't require them facing off at each and every PPV, and they've had twist and turns to maintain interest (at least in me).

Though in favor of long feuds/ reigns, however like Polley mentioned, there are times that it is not favorable to have them or where they are lengthened much longer than they should be for instance, the Rhodes/Holly tag titles reign was quite tiresome when the belts were barely ever being defended. Another instance is the Orton- HHH feud which technically has been going on for years, I think the only match those two HAVEN'T had is a HIAC, which they probably will when Orton comes back (which will cause the HIAC to be overused and boring)...hell even their GIMMICK matches are being repeated.

What I would love is for WWE to properly differentiate between when feuds/storylines need to be extended and the ways to extend them without losing interest (You can only do so many, "I accidentally hit you in a match, now we hate each other" feuds) and when feuds or reigns need to be just cut short.

Another factor(s) that should be taken into consideration is the fact that some talent IMO can get pushed depending on their willingness to take part in some storylines over others, for example MCMG being punished because they didn't want to blade or Kristal being fired for not wanting to be Edge's mistress. I understand that sometimes eagerness shows a passion for a business but is it really worth losing talent or holding them back (not saying Kristal was much of one, just giving an example), when a storyline can simply be altered? What I'm interested in however is seeing how this new PG oriented WWE will affect the (if any) edgy and controversial storylines.

 

[Davi323]

This thread kinda ties in with the WWE going PG thread, I think. To that, I think going to PG will help with the storyline situation. As a 33 year old, who has been watching wrestling since 1984, I have seen the 80s style, went through the Attitude era, and understand today's product. Personally, I would love to see the WWE go back to drawing out storylines, going back to having believable feuds, rather than these over the top ones going on now...To me, JBL has no business trying to commit vehicular homicide on John Cena. That kind of crap simply is unneeded. What HBK and Jericho are doing, drawing it out slowly, keeping us occupied with brilliant promo work, is MUCH better entertainment for me. I love having storylines that are long term, rather than "3 weeks to the next PPV, so we gotta do this in a hurry" kind of storylines.

 

[jpfizzle]

It's not as wrestling fans we have a short attention spans its just how the world is today. Adaptation and development are the two things ANY tv programme needs to stay in control. Just look at how television programming has changed, in the 80s stuff like Murder she wrote and the A-team where popular...storyline programing... today its more big brother and survivor, reality TV. Everyone looks for a quick fix and thats why storylines never last that long, I mean most people are bored of CM Punks Title reign already and when Cena had his year long run the wrestling world was up in arms. With Wrestling now fans are crying out for almost a new storyline every week, even with the Undertaker/ Edge feud which I think has been amazing many people are saying "oh, we've seen enough of these two now." It's just how we watch TV these days, instant hit storylines are the in thing where as long drawn out storylines are usually seen as a drag.