The Death of the "Mega-Feud".

[The Crock]

In the past there have been many great "mega-feuds"; Rock vs Austin, Hogan vs Andre The Giant, etc. In the current product, there doesn't seem to be any of these "mega-feuds" left. The industry seems to have shifted towards transitional feuds more than anything, the occasional long, well-developed feud here or there, but for the most part they don't seem to have that epic feeling about them anymore. Why do you think that is? A lack of talent? A different target audience? Or, is this not an issue at all?

In my eyes, it's a combination of a couple of things. Like I said previously, a lack of talent able to pull of such a feud is evident. John Cena vs Nexus and Shawn Michaels vs Undertaker are the closest we've gotten, and although their very major feuds I don't believe they live up to the mega-feuds of yesteryear. 'Taker vs HBK was definitely a big deal, but that was due to things like it being at Wrestlemania, the streak, and HBK's impending retirement. It was superficially built as a large feud, it wasn't properly built or anything. It's not an issue that it ended at 'Mania, but on any other stage it wouldn't be the main event, whereas the previously stated mega-feuds would be. Star power and the ability to draw fans are key, and guys like Rock, Austin, Hogan, and Andre don't just appear overnight. The other issue surrounding this is the target audience. Kids only care about being entertained, a major feud doesn't mean anything to them. If they're not interested in it, then why put the effort into it at all?

What do you guys think about this?

 

[Big Sexy]

One main reason is that there are so many live shows and ppv's nowadays. When you have 12 ppv's a year and a RAW/Smackdown every week it's hard to keep a big feud fresh. back in the 80's and early 90's there were only 4 or 5 ppv's and just the occasional live show on TV. It was much easier to keep these feuds fresh and keep them going for longer periods of time.

Another reason these feuds don't happen very often anymore is because of the fans. I always hear people complaining when guys have multiple title matches against each other over a series of ppv's. Everyone always bitched when Orton and Triple H would keep main eventing ppv's. People also got sick of Cena and Edge after a while, and while these were still great feuds, they would always lose steam at the end. Like I said earlier there are just too many shows now and these feuds tend to get stale faster then before because fans are impatient.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I think it is just the fact that with a PPV every month, and now someones even more than one every four weeks means there is less time to build up a feud. There is not enough time to make people interested in seeing people get face-to-face, scrap and then eventually settle their differences in a match.

In the past fans would be dying to see two feuding wrestlers lock up after an long slow-building feud, but now its literally just a couple of weeks later they fight. It completely kills all anticipation and makes the match an anti-climax. Remember Kane v Undertaker when Kane debuted? It was months before those 2 actually fought, as Taker was refusing to fight his own brother. That length of build up just doesnt happen anymore.

Also, these BIG feuds were often settled in a rare gimmick match, one that wasnt used very often, such as Hell In A Cell...but now, every year coming up to the HIAC PPV, you already know what type of match will be happening, so once again the anticipation and excitement is gone

Finally, I just think that the wrestlers carrying the feud are not as entertaining as they were when it was Rock and Austin on top. With their promos being scripted, no blood and restrictions on what can be done, the superstars are prevented from being as creative as before which lessens my interest in these sorts of feuds. How many great feuds have given us bloody wars, most of Flairs, Triple H's etc...it adds intensity to a bitter rivalry, but now sadly this cant be done

So its a combination of several factors, and I really cant see where the next mega-feud is coming from

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

There are no mega feuds these days simply because there are no megastars of the calibre of Rock, Austin, Hogan or Andre. They were the driving force behind the feuds that they had.

The mega feud of this generation was supposed to be Cena vs Orton but the audience has just not connected to it the way the connected to Rock vs Austin. It is due to the fact that niether Cena nor Orton is as charismatic as Cena or Austin.

The huge number of PPV's do hurt but I am sure none of us would have complained had we been subject to see Rock vs Austin for three consecutive PPV's. However when the same thing happens in the case of Cena and Orton, we resent it. That is simply because they have not connected with us as well as Rock or Austin had.

 

[Pole Smoker]

I think a problem is that when they start a new fued they drag it out and have a this ends here match to end it making them unable to compete again for a couple of years. Look at Cena vs Orton last year. They had a fued for months then had a "final match" at Bragging Rights. If instead of having them dragged out and making them boring they ended it with a few problems with each other they could pick it up easier. Cena and Orton have wrestled since their apparent last match on Raw this year in a tables match and some are speculating a WWE Championship match between the two at Wrestlemania 27. Could WWE not have thought of this before they planned this. (sorry for quite off topic rant about Cena vs Orton)

Another aspect is of course already mentioned too many PPV's.

 

[Tastycles]

You need two people to pull it off that work well with each other. Cena and Orton aren't as big as the duos you said, but they're bigger than Hart and Michaels were, and the only thing stopping them is that their promo styles and ring chemistry didn't quite mesh. The only pairing that has had the real ability to do it is Batista and Cena, but Batista's impending departure meant that the feud never really had the unpredictability it could have. The possibility is there, they just need to find the right chemistry. The best option is possibly Triple H and Cena with what the WWE have now, and TNA don't have anything close to approaching the right balance. Wrestling superstars rarely come along, and two who go well together come along even more rarely. The mega feud isn't dead, it's just not that common throughout wrestling history.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

You need two people to pull it off that work well with each other. Cena and Orton aren't as big as the duos you said, but they're bigger than Hart and Michaels were,

To tell you the truth I never considered Hart vs Michaels, as a feud, to be in the same league as say Rock vs Austin or Hogan vs Andre. People consider it to be a great feud only due to their backstage alteractions and ego hassles. Also the Montreal Screwjob plays a huge part in making this feud seem legendary in hindsight. There was not much of a story behind this feud except for the fact that they hated each other. And even that hate could not be understood unless one was a smark. The great rivalries are the ones which are equally appealing to a mark as well as a smark. That isn't the case when you consider the Hart vs HBK rivalry.

I mean if you look at it they only had three matches with each other. One at Survivor Series 1992 when the outcome was never in doubt, then at Wrestlemania 12 which was a boring match for most part with a great last 20 minutes and lastly you have the Montreal Screwjob match which is remembered more for the controversy than for the actual match.