Mr. Artistic guy
Better Off This Way
Before I start I'd just like to clarify that I don't like the brand extension. I haven't since the day of it's inception and I don't think I ever will for the reason that I feel it limits the amount of potential feuds that can be had. I think it actually makes it harder for a younger guy to succeed because when they make it to the top, they've only risen to the top in one brand. Back in a single brand company an up-and-comer challenging a top guy made a far bigger impact because the top guys couldn't just be the top of one brand, they needed to be the best in the company at that time. So as you can see, I'm not a fan. And with that said.....
The brand extension isn't going anywhere. When the stock of WWE has fallen as low as it has, having two major shows brings in too much revenue for there to be the consideration of unity once again. And I can come to accept this. But only if there being two brands is then used to the fullest of it's capability. For the potential that I think the bi-branded system ought to have, it is not fulfilling that in my estimation.
What is a gimmick? It is a characteristic of a wrestler that sets them apart from the rest of the guys. But when applied to a company as a whole? It is something that no other wrestling company is known for, something unique and something therefore that ought to be capitalised upon. I'll give you another example, the six sided-ring that was indicative of TNA. It was a feature of the company TNA was that you saw nowhere else and it allowed for themed matches, different spots, different kinds of matches, all things had to be considered because it was something about TNA that gave you a unique experience at least as far as matches were concerned. Someone posed the question recently as to whther TNA may have been successful by now had it not gone through the "6-sided ring" stage of it's development. I'm here to tell you that I think it's sad that it's gone. Conformity is a disease. The complaint I hear so often about how all promos sound the same, and so many guys look the same proves my theory. People want people who can interject some of themselves into their characters and not be told what they can do by some corporate stooge with tally charts of week-by-week ratings, wrestlers want the oppertunity to go out and do what they know they are capable of which is use their personality and their experiences to bring life to the guy their playing. Not sayin they should go out and cut a scott steiner promo but it's very tiresome hearing the same old "GET HERE BOY AND I'M GONNA KICK YOUR ASS" or "IN THREE DAYS YOUR ASS IS MINE". I guarantee none of the very biggest superstars broke through being exactly who they were told to be, improvisation is a life skill.
TNA losing it's hexagonly-squared circle was just another way for people to forget something else about the company, the first big mistake of the Hogan/Bischoff regime. I'm sure many people have asked themselves this question but what was the genesis of attitude, what started the shifting of momentum from WCW to WWF in 1998. Was it indeed as everybody says that WCW shot themselevs in the foot when they made the fingerpoke of doom moment. I don't think so and never have, I think that forced the whole thing along and made it easier for people to switch channels but it wasn't the original reason. Because I think we can all agree whatever that secret was it should be bottled up and be worth it's weight in platinum.
I have a theory. I believe attitude began in the most ironic and innapropriate of circumstances. I believe attitude began with a man who hated the idea of real life stories and shoots and the like being used in wrestling. I believe attitude started....with Bret "The Hitman" Hart!
March 17th, 1997, Monday Night Raw - A segment where Vince McMahon interviews is next up. Vince proceeds to ask Bret a question and all of a sudden eh SNAPS, he pushes Vince over, grabs the mic and begins swearing all over the live show calling out stone cold, calling names and talking about injustice. That day Bret broke character, he went from a hero to a real life villain and set the seeds for the wrestlemania match between himself and stone cold where stone cold would turn face and the would be history. But it took a moment of Bret being Bret and making everything real for just five minutes to change the programme from a wrestling show to a wrestling drama. And god knows drama draws because some drama shows on TV don't get viewers because of the sensational writing...<COUGH> Eatenders, and if you don't know what that is don't worry.
But Bret breaking character was the man not conforming. When most guys in his position would been professional and played into their character (remember this was before wrestling shoot promos came into prominence), because he didn't what he wasn't supposed to he started off a chain reaction that wasn't supposed to happen but was bigger and better than what Vince could otherwise have dreamt up. Ever since, examples where wrestlers break character in a fit of passion have proven to be great drawing moments for wrestling companies. Matt Hardy's verbal attack on Edge and Lita, Stone Cold walking out, whatever the occasion it's more or less proven now. But whatever the case, I believe something was born in the mind of Vince McMahon that day, something he may never have otherwise realised by him. Vince McMahon, a guy who had until that time tried very hard to make sure the average Joe didn't know he was running the company did one of the most important things in the history of the business. For months Vince had this idea in his mind, drama and real life = ratings, it festered and spread until it became something he considered often, but he didn't act upon it because it was such a radical idea that he dared not to unless it turned out to be a gigantic failure.
Eventually he generated the second necessary action that laid the ground-work and it's one that lives in wrestling infamy. When Bret hart was set to leave the company to go to WCW, himself and Vince had disagreements about him losing to michaels in his home town on his last night, he agreed to relinquish the belt but not the match. Vince did something that, had Bret not snapped months earlier and created this idea, he almost certainly would not have done. The old McMahon would have spoken backstage and told Bret that he wanted him to lose and that was final, after all they had a close relationship and ince could have said things to him confidentially, they weren't that far adrift. But Vince still had this idea racing through his mind... DRAMA = RATINGS, DRAMA = RATINGS. Instead of merely telling Bret that he didn't like what he was planning to do, he made everything real, he flooded the arena with drama, he decided to make and example of the guy who said he was almost like a father figure to him. In one swift pre-planned action he came out as the company owner into plain view, openly accepting any heat he got as a result, and created more drama than he could otherwise have imagined. That night nobody was watching WCW because something far too realy and important was going down in WWF. And the rest, as they say, is something everyone should all know...1998.... birth of attitude, birth of stone cold as the global icon, birth of the road to WWF eventually buying out their competition, it all started there.
Now you would have a very good point if you wanted to interject right now and ask me what in the blue hell any of this has got to do with the brand extension in the WWE. One word. CONFORMITY. Right there and then it was proven that if you want people to watch you have to capitilise on your assets, find what you posess that nobody else offers and quite frankly exploit the hell out of it. That's what I don't believe WWE is doing right now. No I already admitted that I don't like the brand extnesion but seen as it's there and it aint going anywhere use it to the fulled of potantial and don't do what TNA did with all their originality and throw it out the window.
So right now there is a show once a year dedictaed to moving guys from brand to brand, and braggin rights a PPV dedicated to one match where two opposing teams face each other for the right of saying they won. I haven't really got the suggestions but I'm interested to hear from you.
If the brand extension is the future then should WWE be doing more to encompass it and harness it's unique drawing power and if so what could they do?
The brand extension isn't going anywhere. When the stock of WWE has fallen as low as it has, having two major shows brings in too much revenue for there to be the consideration of unity once again. And I can come to accept this. But only if there being two brands is then used to the fullest of it's capability. For the potential that I think the bi-branded system ought to have, it is not fulfilling that in my estimation.
What is a gimmick? It is a characteristic of a wrestler that sets them apart from the rest of the guys. But when applied to a company as a whole? It is something that no other wrestling company is known for, something unique and something therefore that ought to be capitalised upon. I'll give you another example, the six sided-ring that was indicative of TNA. It was a feature of the company TNA was that you saw nowhere else and it allowed for themed matches, different spots, different kinds of matches, all things had to be considered because it was something about TNA that gave you a unique experience at least as far as matches were concerned. Someone posed the question recently as to whther TNA may have been successful by now had it not gone through the "6-sided ring" stage of it's development. I'm here to tell you that I think it's sad that it's gone. Conformity is a disease. The complaint I hear so often about how all promos sound the same, and so many guys look the same proves my theory. People want people who can interject some of themselves into their characters and not be told what they can do by some corporate stooge with tally charts of week-by-week ratings, wrestlers want the oppertunity to go out and do what they know they are capable of which is use their personality and their experiences to bring life to the guy their playing. Not sayin they should go out and cut a scott steiner promo but it's very tiresome hearing the same old "GET HERE BOY AND I'M GONNA KICK YOUR ASS" or "IN THREE DAYS YOUR ASS IS MINE". I guarantee none of the very biggest superstars broke through being exactly who they were told to be, improvisation is a life skill.
TNA losing it's hexagonly-squared circle was just another way for people to forget something else about the company, the first big mistake of the Hogan/Bischoff regime. I'm sure many people have asked themselves this question but what was the genesis of attitude, what started the shifting of momentum from WCW to WWF in 1998. Was it indeed as everybody says that WCW shot themselevs in the foot when they made the fingerpoke of doom moment. I don't think so and never have, I think that forced the whole thing along and made it easier for people to switch channels but it wasn't the original reason. Because I think we can all agree whatever that secret was it should be bottled up and be worth it's weight in platinum.
I have a theory. I believe attitude began in the most ironic and innapropriate of circumstances. I believe attitude began with a man who hated the idea of real life stories and shoots and the like being used in wrestling. I believe attitude started....with Bret "The Hitman" Hart!
March 17th, 1997, Monday Night Raw - A segment where Vince McMahon interviews is next up. Vince proceeds to ask Bret a question and all of a sudden eh SNAPS, he pushes Vince over, grabs the mic and begins swearing all over the live show calling out stone cold, calling names and talking about injustice. That day Bret broke character, he went from a hero to a real life villain and set the seeds for the wrestlemania match between himself and stone cold where stone cold would turn face and the would be history. But it took a moment of Bret being Bret and making everything real for just five minutes to change the programme from a wrestling show to a wrestling drama. And god knows drama draws because some drama shows on TV don't get viewers because of the sensational writing...<COUGH> Eatenders, and if you don't know what that is don't worry.
But Bret breaking character was the man not conforming. When most guys in his position would been professional and played into their character (remember this was before wrestling shoot promos came into prominence), because he didn't what he wasn't supposed to he started off a chain reaction that wasn't supposed to happen but was bigger and better than what Vince could otherwise have dreamt up. Ever since, examples where wrestlers break character in a fit of passion have proven to be great drawing moments for wrestling companies. Matt Hardy's verbal attack on Edge and Lita, Stone Cold walking out, whatever the occasion it's more or less proven now. But whatever the case, I believe something was born in the mind of Vince McMahon that day, something he may never have otherwise realised by him. Vince McMahon, a guy who had until that time tried very hard to make sure the average Joe didn't know he was running the company did one of the most important things in the history of the business. For months Vince had this idea in his mind, drama and real life = ratings, it festered and spread until it became something he considered often, but he didn't act upon it because it was such a radical idea that he dared not to unless it turned out to be a gigantic failure.
Eventually he generated the second necessary action that laid the ground-work and it's one that lives in wrestling infamy. When Bret hart was set to leave the company to go to WCW, himself and Vince had disagreements about him losing to michaels in his home town on his last night, he agreed to relinquish the belt but not the match. Vince did something that, had Bret not snapped months earlier and created this idea, he almost certainly would not have done. The old McMahon would have spoken backstage and told Bret that he wanted him to lose and that was final, after all they had a close relationship and ince could have said things to him confidentially, they weren't that far adrift. But Vince still had this idea racing through his mind... DRAMA = RATINGS, DRAMA = RATINGS. Instead of merely telling Bret that he didn't like what he was planning to do, he made everything real, he flooded the arena with drama, he decided to make and example of the guy who said he was almost like a father figure to him. In one swift pre-planned action he came out as the company owner into plain view, openly accepting any heat he got as a result, and created more drama than he could otherwise have imagined. That night nobody was watching WCW because something far too realy and important was going down in WWF. And the rest, as they say, is something everyone should all know...1998.... birth of attitude, birth of stone cold as the global icon, birth of the road to WWF eventually buying out their competition, it all started there.
Now you would have a very good point if you wanted to interject right now and ask me what in the blue hell any of this has got to do with the brand extension in the WWE. One word. CONFORMITY. Right there and then it was proven that if you want people to watch you have to capitilise on your assets, find what you posess that nobody else offers and quite frankly exploit the hell out of it. That's what I don't believe WWE is doing right now. No I already admitted that I don't like the brand extnesion but seen as it's there and it aint going anywhere use it to the fulled of potantial and don't do what TNA did with all their originality and throw it out the window.
So right now there is a show once a year dedictaed to moving guys from brand to brand, and braggin rights a PPV dedicated to one match where two opposing teams face each other for the right of saying they won. I haven't really got the suggestions but I'm interested to hear from you.
If the brand extension is the future then should WWE be doing more to encompass it and harness it's unique drawing power and if so what could they do?
