The WWE is officially lame.

[It's...Baylariat!]

On the WZ main site, there's a snippet from Good ol' JR about how he's glad there's less blood as it leads to a more 'kid friendly' product, not to mention the health hazards of blood being present around kids and the fans. So the WWE has now be *****fied to the point where no one over 19 will like this product in 5 years. I mean, I understand marketing and advertising as much as anyone, but selling your soul simply for some extra cash is selling true fans short.

Howard Stern was controversial way before he was syndicated on Satellite radio. He still managed to pull solid advertisements. Yet, the WWE can't pull some good ads because of some blood to the forehead? Please. The WWE is becoming lamer and lamer by the day and as I've said before, at this rate, the WWE will be treading water financially in 10 years or less. Mark it down.

Thoughts? Comments are appreciated.

 

[SavageTaker]

Just because there’s isn’t going to be as much blood as there was in previous years it doesn’t mean the WWE is lame. It’s not like the WWE is going to completely eliminate blood. I’m sure we will still some blood, there just isn’t going to be as much of it as there once was. I honestly don’t have a problem with that. Constantly seeing wrestlers bleed makes me nervous for them because they can catch diseases very easily. I think the WWE would rather have their wrestlers disease free than having wrestlers with HIV and any other disease.

Also, the WWE is a business their main goal is to make as much money as they possibly can. Yes, they might care about their fans whether they are true fans or not. But ultimately their goal is to make money. By toning their product down slightly, it helps them make some more money than what they already make. So like I said, they are a business and they want to make as much money as possible, so if toning down their product slightly and having their product be rated pg will get them more money and advertisers then they sure as hell are going to do just that. Why? Because it’s a smart long term business decision.

Lastly, I completely disagree with that line about how no one over 19 is going to like this product in 5 years. If we are getting the same product now and people over 19 like it, then why are they going to suddenly going to stop liking it in 5 years? The product we get now is probably going to be the same we are going to get in 5 years just with new main eventers, feuds, and other things. If someone over 19 is entertained by the current product we get then they will probably be entertained by the product in 5 years. Or at least the majority will be entertained and if they aren't going to be entertained then they were probably not true fans to begin with.

 

[WWEIsLife]

I agree why do you need blood to make a Wrestling Show? Yeah it makes a Match more interesting but you don't need it day in and day out. I guess Lariat you didn't see the Eddie Guerrero/JBL Match from Judgment Day in 2004? Eddie lost nearly all the blood in his body when when was hit by the chair from JBL and passed out backstage then was taken to the Hospital later in the night in Los Angeles if I remember correctly. If you only watching Wrestling for blood then you either got a problem or don't apprieciate Wrestling at all.

 

[Nev]

On the WZ main site, there's a snippet from Good ol' JR about how he's glad there's less blood as it leads to a more 'kid friendly' product, not to mention the health hazards of blood being present around kids and the fans. So the WWE has now be *****fied to the point where no one over 19 will like this product in 5 years.

Good ol' JR said family friendly, not kid friendly.

Furthermore, maybe nobody over the age of 19 will like the product in 5 years, but won't the 14 year old kids; that are watching wrestling now, be 19 in 5 years?

This is where the new generation aspect of it comes to place. Instead of looking at this negatively, look at it more positively. It makes more sense then to be clouded by frustration, when you're still going to be watching the product anyway, regardless of the television rating.

WWE's appealing to a new generation of fans. Don't sweat it. If you are really all that mad, attack it where it really hurts;

Not on an internet forum, in Vince's pocket.

 

[The Holy One]

No blood?!!!!! Nah I don't believe it. Wrestlers know the risk they take when stepping into the ring (hell they even have that commercial about not trying it at home), and it's not like they can stop the accidental blood. I for one am content on the current product as it is. The promos and stories are still entertaining as are the matches. If there is less blood then that's good unless you're one of those die-hard ECW fans looking for a blood and gore-fest. You have to remember that wrestling is like a cycle that adapts to its fan base as time changes.

 

[ProWrestling'sBrain]

I agree with others. How exactly does blood shed equal to a good wrestling match? Blood is going to improve the athleticism & talent of the superstars? If you're restricted and are unable to use edgier things such as blood shed then you have to make up for it by pulling a better performance.

Like said, JR said family friendly, not kid friendly. What is even lamer is when people try to re-word things just to turn others against what the other person dislikes so people would get on his or her side. Stuff that are kids friendly would be stuff like Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers. Shows that are family friendly would be Roseanne, Threes Company, Sanford & Son and King of the Hill.... shows that were family friendly but didn't need to cross the line in order to deliver something that was enjoyed among people of all ages and that are remembered as some of the greatest shows in TV history. What about the Rock N' Wrestling era? As I recall that time period was wrestling at it's best and many older wrestling fans and former fans can agree with me on that. The WWE didn't have to go South Park on us in the 80's to deliver something family friendly and to date adults (older and younger adults) still speak of when Hogan slammed Andre, remembering past superstars, watching wrestling in the bars back in the old days, etc. I'm sorry but it kind of upsets me when someone purposely misinforms us just to get others on their side.

 

[RKOhead84]

I dont think the wwe's product is lame at all. Blood or no blood really doesnt bother me. I'm just hoping that jericho's mystery partner is none other than SAVAGE TAKER!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Decarow]

I, for one, think that blood should only happen on occasions. Remember back in the day whenever people bled, it was HUGE? Now it's just like "oh look, they're bleeding..." If they stick to less bleeding, it'll look more dramatic when it does happen. The WWE is definitely not lame. By the time the children they are appealing to grow up, they will switch back to a more TV-14 rating. It's the cycle of the business.

 

[Blue Chipper]

I realistically doubt that the WWE will be doing poorly financially in upcoming years. The ratings have been consistent to the ratings before PG, if not slightly better. It's allowing new adolescent fans to watch and get hooked on the product because their parents are secure with their children watching a cordial show, void of extreme voilence, language, and sexual references. And, these kids that do connect with the product will generally remain connected and therefore continue watching as they grow.

The lack of blood doesn't bother the show in no significant way. No viewers will watch and suddenly say "hey, there hasn't been blood in months, this isn't wrestling!" and quit watching. Any way, I assume they're not completely done with blood and just didn't need them in any matches or feuds yet.

Anyway, there has been talk of the WWE going back to the PG-14 rating, but we'll have to see how this pans out, as it's only a mere rumor.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I guess I need to clear some things up, because many of the posts in here are hypocritical and pissing me off.

For starters, not having bloodshed is ONE of the reasons the WWE is becoming lame. I'm not saying blood has to be in every match, but in order to sell an ass kicking in this blood thirsty day and age, you simply need a blade job every now and again. It adds to the shock value.

And for those who say the WWE will be fine in five years...most of you are the same ones who are saying the 'main event scene is stale'. Hypocritical things like that are what make me wonder about some of the so called 'fans' on this forum. I still watch wrestling and always will. That doesn't mean I'm satisfied with the current product. And family friendly my ass. It's KID friendly. Like it was back in the days of the Hulkster during his heyday. That worked out fine at the moment, but you notice between 1994 and 1996, the WWE was treading water to the point of nearly being bankrupt. Why? Vince was out of touch and using cartoon characters in an age where people were tired of seeing it. What makes you think the wrestling fan in 2009 isn't tired of seeing stale characters and cookie cutter bullshit?

Back in the golden days, it was the realism that sold tickets. In the Attitude era, it was entertaining personalities...not characters. Now, we have...well, we have stupid kid comedy and celebrities that do not belong within 100 yards of a wrestling ring.

 

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

You know, Lariat, I think you're a very good poster. But you are dead wrong here. The changes that are being made to the WWE are doing nothing to harm the company. They still fill up the arena every week, pull near 4.0 ratings (which are higher than they have been consistently since 2004 or so), and still have all of us watching. Them creating new fans is essential to the WWE, because without a new generation of viewers, there would be no one to watch. I understand that you prefer "shock" and all of that, and there is a product being put out for you. It's called TNA. Their storylines are also completely illogical, and if you could take a step back and asses things without a bias, you'd see that the attitude era is not what it's made out to be. It was shocking, yes, but it was also filled with garbage and nonsense. Today's product is simple and sensible, and entertaining. If you are this bothered about the lack of blood, cursing, or sexual themes, then why do you bother to watch? Those days aren't coming back. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, or if this post rambled a bit. I don't often take the time to collect my thoughts before starting to write.

 

[ProWrestling'sBrain]

For starters, not having bloodshed is ONE of the reasons the WWE is becoming lame. I'm not saying blood has to be in every match, but in order to sell an ass kicking in this blood thirsty day and age, you simply need a blade job every now and again. It adds to the shock value.

But wasn't this entire thread just about the blood shed seeing that was all you even bothered to mention?

And family friendly my ass. It's KID friendly. Like it was back in the days of the Hulkster during his heyday. That worked out fine at the moment, but you notice between 1994 and 1996, the WWE was treading water to the point of nearly being bankrupt. Why? Vince was out of touch and using cartoon characters in an age where people were tired of seeing it. What makes you think the wrestling fan in 2009 isn't tired of seeing stale characters and cookie cutter bullshit?

Well if that's what you consider kids friendly then other shows like Cheers are pretty softcore in my opinion because if anything they're more kiddie friendly than a typical episode of Raw. Your ideal of what is oriented to kids is way off. I mean did we not just have a Divas swim suit contest? Didn't they revolve a storyline around Randy Orton taking everyone out with the intentions of putting everyone out with permanent injuries to the head? Fuck, didn't they have a small angle where Orton attempted & succeed to rip Batista's arm off? Although it was a staged angle, it still looked kind of sick. And hell they're having an angle between Punk & Hardy where CM Punk, the one who is straight edge, is the villain as if the WWE is training it's fans to hate on someone who stands strong when it comes to keeping clean. If it's all kid friendly like you're claiming, wouldn't they send the OPPOSITE message out? Out of all this, you consider the WWE to be kiddie friendly? Since when did you EVER see what I stated on a specific television show that was made specifically for children? I don't understand your logic at unless we live in two completely different planets.

we have stupid kid comedy and celebrities that do not belong within 100 yards of a wrestling ring.

The comedy stuff is only your opinion so speak for yourself.

Let's be realistic. I'm sure there are some people that likes the idea of celebrities appearing weekly so if I were you I'd speak for myself. There are a lot of casual fans that sees wrestling as what it is....entertainment and they don't mind seeing other entertainers stepping in making special appearances. Once again it's only your opinion so please don't speak for people such as myself or claim your opinion as fact.

Here is a very logical response with many valid points:

You know, Lariat, I think you're a very good poster. But you are dead wrong here. The changes that are being made to the WWE are doing nothing to harm the company. They still fill up the arena every week, pull near 4.0 ratings (which are higher than they have been consistently since 2004 or so), and still have all of us watching. Them creating new fans is essential to the WWE, because without a new generation of viewers, there would be no one to watch. I understand that you prefer "shock" and all of that, and there is a product being put out for you. It's called TNA. Their storylines are also completely illogical, and if you could take a step back and asses things without a bias, you'd see that the attitude era is not what it's made out to be. It was shocking, yes, but it was also filled with garbage and nonsense. Today's product is simple and sensible, and entertaining. If you are this bothered about the lack of blood, cursing, or sexual themes, then why do you bother to watch? Those days aren't coming back. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, or if this post rambled a bit. I don't often take the time to collect my thoughts before starting to write.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

You know, Lariat, I think you're a very good poster. But you are dead wrong here. The changes that are being made to the WWE are doing nothing to harm the company.

That's actually debatable. WWE is very, very profitable at the moment, which is a miracle. However, it is a sure sign that Vince is correct to an extent in that wrestling fans will purchase his product no matter what. He has what one would call "blind loyalty" from people who aren't even necessarily thrilled with his product, yet refuse to give it up. It's like smoking. Old habits die hard.

Even though his base has been chipped away the past couple years, he has proven that he can simply make up for it by raising prices ... and people will still pay. Hats off to him.

However, at the same time, the fanbase isn't increasing. His whole goal was to start building a new fanbase, and that really hasn't transpired to any real degree. And there certainly is no sign of it happening either, with staying the course. If the fanbase was going to take off, because what they were doing was such a hit, you would have seen a much stronger signal by now. When the WWE changed direction with the Attitude Era, that concept basically took off to the moon. WWE took Raw from a 2.6 rating in 2007 to a 4.4 rating in 2008.

If they want to keep the current strategy to try to grow the fanbase with more kids, then they are going to have to do more than what they are currently doing.

They still fill up the arena every week

That's because of a couple things.

1) They are running smaller buildings than they used to ...


2) Attendance is heavily papered in this day and age with comps.


3) If you look closely, many times the upper half of many of the buildings are completely tarped off, giving the illusion that the building is filled to capacity.

pull near 4.0 ratings (which are higher than they have been consistently since 2004 or so),

Pull near 4.0 ratings?

WWE has pulled above a 4.0 on Raw three times this year so far. They did a 4.5 for Trump and did two 4.1's near Mania time. And notice that on each of those times, they were actually investing in the show with major angles (Trump, and Orton attacking Stephanie). That just goes to show that the wrestling isn't the draw. Rather, it's what they do with the show AND what they do with the talent in terms of storylines (which don't really happen anymore) and angles the talent is involved with that IS the draw.

After Mania though, it's usually all downhill ... especially with Football getting ready to start.

Their yearly average rating thus far is a 3.6. That is lower than all of the yearly Post Attitude Era ratings.


2002- 4.03
2003- 3.78
2004- 3.69
2005- 3.82
2006- 3.90



As stated, given that Football is around the corner, we can expect the 3.6 to go down from there. Looking at the prior years, the ratings for the second half of the year drop by about .4 points. Therefore, if trends hold true, Raw will probably finish around a 3.4 or so for the 2009 year. As you can see, that is still lower than any of the Post Attitude Era years.

and still have all of us watching.

Do you measure the IWC daily, out of curiosity, on whether the fanbase goes up or down? The IWC may watch, but the IWC is still insignificant in the Big Picture as compared to the mainstream fanbase.

Them creating new fans is essential to the WWE, because without a new generation of viewers, there would be no one to watch.

I've seen no indication they have done this to any real degree. What's the point in pissing off the majority of your fanbase, which is adults 18-44, to coddle to kids? Not that I think the WWE is necessarily coddling to kids, however the problem is that it isn't really coddling to anyone in particular and isn't aggressively targeting people enough.

If WWE does not wish to broaden its horizons with tailoring different shows to different age brackets, with all of the shows comprising the total fanbase ... then they should be making a choice. Either go after the kids or go after the adults. If they want kids, then they should market to kids. Honestly, I'd be fine with another Hogan-like Era or New Generation Era again. Hell, I enjoyed both of those Eras and would take either of those two Eras any day over what's on the TV screen today. At least both of those periods were interesting and had great feuds.

Or, if they want adults, then they should target adults. Don't just set the plate out in the trough for any of the farm animals that want it.

I understand that you prefer "shock" and all of that, and there is a product being put out for you. It's called TNA. Their storylines are also completely illogical, and if you could take a step back and assess things without a bias, you'd see that the attitude era is not what it's made out to be. It was shocking, yes, but it was also filled with garbage and nonsense.

TNA certainly isn't the best, but I will agree that those who enjoyed the Attitude Era will find TNA more comparable to Attitude-Era programming than WWE at the moment, which is actually more comparable to Ring of Honor or WCW at its worst.

I will say that one man's garbage is another man's treasure. I simply find it hysterical that the Attitude Era was responsible for making half of the IWC fans of the business to begin with, and everyone enjoyed the Hell out of it. Today, not so much. I'm willing to bet if Steve Austin came back as his old self and began flipping off McMahon and giving Triple H the middle finger, everyone would be ranting and raving about how awesome it is. Or if the old D-Generation X came back with the adult humor, not the juvenile humor we've seen out of Triple H and Shawn Michaels after the Attitude Era, everyone would love it.

I am convinced that what we have out here are simply a bunch of Vince marks. Vince could put shit on a spoon and spoon-feed half of you, and you would learn to like it. It all goes back to the concept of Blind Loyalty. You make Vince happy. He can still tell you what you want to see, which in turn, allows him to stroke his ego.

Today's product is simple

I agree with that, which is a major part of the problem. It is all wrestling and ONLY wrestling. That defies a formula that WWE has had in place since the 80's. And that was a formula that made people actually care about the talent who was wrestling. Just look at how dead today's crowds are, and compare that to any of the other Era's of the WWE. It's pathetic.

and sensible,

That one is really debatable.

and entertaining.

There is nothing remotely entertaining about today's WWE. But I am glad to hear that McMahon's sophomoric humor with Santino Marella shaking his ass in a bikini is the kind of entertainment that is right up your alley, though.

ZZ Top did a wonderful job last week, didn't they? They had the fans in stitches. (*sarcasm)

If you are this bothered about the lack of blood, cursing, or sexual themes, then why do you bother to watch? Those days aren't coming back.

I, for one, am not bothered by the lack of blood. I have never been a big fan of blading and do agree with Ross in that the concept of it is rather unsafe, and to be frank, disgusting. I'd much rather them use a blood capsule for blood, and keep that info from the IWC. But if they want to do blood once in a while, that would be my preference. Quite frankly, I don't think the blood is that big a deal.

The cursing and sexual themes ... that is a different story. And if people don't understand why some wrestling fans like that with their wrestling, than that is unfortunate. Not every fan simply finds watching scripted matches amusing. Therefore, something else is needed to add drama to the product, to get people into the matches. Those kind of elements, along with the in-ring action, provided the perfect blend for Attitude Era fans, and that is why these fans want to see that product return.

On the same token, here you are telling WWE fans who once had this, and who want to see that product return, to go away or go watch TNA .... but the same could be said for fans like you. Why don't you instead go watch and support Ring of Honor, since that is essentially the type of product you enjoy. Nothing but match after match after match, with no storyline. If you get a thrill over analyzing the art of the wrestling match ... then seriously, why don't you go support Ring of Honor?

By the way, can I see that crystal ball you are using that says that the WWE will never see another Attitude Era? I find that a bit premature for you to claim to see into the future and predict such a thing. I'm simply curious how you formulated your opinion on that, as quite frankly, I am sick and tired of the ROH bots making this rather bold claim, with not a single shred of logical evidence to back it up. Kind of presumptuous to claim that there won't ever be another Era like that in 5, 10, or even 15 years ... unless you have a crystal ball which can predict trends in the business years into the future.

 

[SavageTaker]

For starters, not having bloodshed is ONE of the reasons the WWE is becoming lame.

I really don’t know why people think that there’s not going to be any more bloodshed. There’s still going to be bloodshed, just less of it than from what we have seen previously.

I'm not saying blood has to be in every match, but in order to sell an ass kicking in this blood thirsty day and age, you simply need a blade job every now and again. It adds to the shock value.

We’re still going to see bloodshed, but only when it’s necessary. We’re definitely not going to see the same amount of bloodshed like we saw in the original ECW, but we’re still going to see it like I said, when it’s absolutely necessary.

And for those who say the WWE will be fine in five years...most of you are the same ones who are saying the 'main event scene is stale'. Hypocritical things like that are what make me wonder about some of the so called 'fans' on this forum.

I don’t think the main event is as stale as some people make it out to be but I still think that the WWE will be perfectly fine in the next 5 years. They have some wrestlers in the main roster they are currently building up to be in the main event so that people don’t think it’s the same old wrestlers main eventing and they have a plethora of talent in developmental and they will get more talent in FCW once the talent they currently have there is called up to the main roster. I think it’s safe to say that the WWE is going to be fine in 5 years unless some terrible tragedy where to happen.

I still watch wrestling and always will.

Then you’re probably a true fan of wrestling.

That doesn't mean I'm satisfied with the current product. And family friendly my ass. It's KID friendly. Like it was back in the days of the Hulkster during his heyday. That worked out fine at the moment, but you notice between 1994 and 1996, the WWE was treading water to the point of nearly being bankrupt. Why? Vince was out of touch and using cartoon characters in an age where people were tired of seeing it. What makes you think the wrestling fan in 2009 isn't tired of seeing stale characters and cookie cutter bullshit?

So what if the current product is kid friendly? That’s who the WWE is currently targeting as their target audience and who they will continue to target in the coming years. Meaning that they need to put out the product that will please that target audience.

Back in the golden days, it was the realism that sold tickets. In the Attitude era, it was entertaining personalities...not characters. Now, we have...well, we have stupid kid comedy and celebrities that do not belong within 100 yards of a wrestling ring.

For some very odd reason (and I mean very odd reason) the kids watching enjoy those comedy skits and if they are enjoying them then Vince will continue running those segments because it please their target audience. As far as the celebrities hosting Raw, that’s Vince’s way of trying to spike ratings. The summer is a time when ratings drop slightly, so this is Vince’s annual attempt at keeping them up. And maybe we will see some entertaining episodes of Raw with some of the celebrities. Who knows?

 

[rayisawesomeness]

With blood comes the risk of HIVS and other ridiculous diseases. Like someone said earlier, Eddie passed out because of loss of blood, it's very dangerous. So before you slam the WWE for this, go home, pull out a blade, scratch your forehead, and then post another thread.

 

[unique.enigma.666]

Blood doesn't mean jack, if you want blood watch a horror film. 'Taker vs. Edge had no blood, this years 2 elimination chambers had no blood, the SD chamber and said Taker/Edge situation was immense, they didnt need blood. I don't see anything at all wrong with the WWE right now, the superstars they're molding to be the next generation of main eventers given 'Taker and HBK don't have much left and HHH will soon begin to downplay his matches by next year, CM Punk, John Morrison, Legacy, The Hart Dynasty, Yoshi Tatsu, Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, Jack Swagger, Kofi and more are being used the right way so they're making sure they have fresh faces for fresh feuds and fresh title runs and such. I'm 19 and I still enjoy it, one of my closest friends whose 20 and has liked it longer than me enjoys it, so not everyone agrees with everything said. and as for J.R., we all know hes one of the most respected men in wrestling and a sound man, its his say on the matter, so of course he would say that.

 

[Viola Moonlight]

I was actually going to save this topic for creating a new thread, but seeing the comments being built up here... I am going to unleash the demon within... or this analytical post, whatever you reckon. The Lariat says the WWE is officially lame, FalKon says the WWE is officially rebuilding. Same shit, different smell. Bare with me here, dont go by exact dates but by a roughly estimated chronological plot...

The Hogan-era seems to be very comparable in many eyes as the current PG ratings era. However, for the sake of this post alongside the argument I am going to present, I will refer to the PG-ratings era as the Cena-era. The reason why the two are comparable are mainly because the WWE are currently targeting a new audience... the under 16's area per say. They are attempting to create a new fanbase in order to be afloat for the next few years. The business is also taking this opportunity to rebuild itself & its product under the ever so watchful & observant eyes of children. Don't know about any of you, but this seems to be the perfect time to do so what with the ratings slowly descending, why not try something new. If it works, good work... otherwis put it through the incinerator. Now that the WWE is "vunerable," other alternative viewing in the form of ROH & TNA are accessible for those who are interested.

The WWE will, if history repeats itself [which it most likely will as it goes through the business/product life cycle], go through a trial-&-error stage to find something that works, eliminating the old methods they have adopted for so many years. Don't believe me, let's take a look:

Throughout history, there has always been the idea between some wrestling fans that the whole business is a fake, worked plot of entertainment similar to The Bold & The Beautiful... even though business' & people inside have always denied this, taking the professional wrestling secrets to the graves even. During the Hogan-era, these small talks being abolished with simple "Nays" have somehow spread into wide world phenomena between the wrestling fan community & society. As these allegations were on the borderlines of giving up, the WWF at that time was in the stage of rebuilding itself into a new company, refreshing the brand if you will. What happened?

During the time of putting whatever rebuilding plans the WWE had into affect, the WWE seemed to have given an open mind about how to address the rumors of pro wrestling is fake. Eventually, pro wrestling had been revealed that it was indeed a work but not entirely fake as some of these moves still hurt & actually can cause serious physical side effects. These reprecussions can be still felt today, like when Steve Austin was a guest on a talk show & "wrestled the host" in a match [can't remember the show though]. Inside the business, there are now comedy skits & segments during the match depicting & shitting on the point wrestling is fake with humour.

So, by following this trend... I think the WWE's "lame" or "rebuilding" state is doing something. What happened on the ZZ Top host of RAW when Randy Orton "asked" or "demanded" when he wanted to be included into the Legacy vs. HHH/Cena tag match? John Cena explained, with the aids of HHH & his body language, to Orton & the audience of the usual kayfabe storyline plot. Cena kinda gives away the following kayfabe storyline:

- Two guys want a piece of one guy.
- They are put into a difficult situation together to fight the other guy & whatever he stipulated.
- These two guys build heat with each other whilst the other guy gets the fall.
- All hell breaks loose when these guys lose to the other guy, when the other guy comes into the situation to gain an advantage & momentum into an important [usually PPV] match.

As a side, I have also noticed that VKM has gotten rid of the old-skewl colour commentator type from ringside. It is a lot less often do you here that Jerry "the King" Lawler supports Orton & his devious ways. However, he says that despite he may not agree with what he does as a human, he admires his wrestling ability in the ring & can get the job done.

There are other less noticeable examples that i could create for this thread, but lets stick with these two. What do these two have in common? They are not the norm from what happened in the past & seem to be changing. Why? Because the WWE is changing itself entirely. What's my point? Low levels of bloodshed is just one of the various changes the WWE is going to make to form the new product which will last until the WWE is faced with threats of getting taken over by other companies like TNA/ROH or when the cycle repeats itself.

So, while the WWE is in a stage of rebuilding... it is very, very ignorant to say the WWE is lame in my opinion. Until we see the finished product or if they scrap the rebuilding process entirely, then I wil accept your opinion as a valid point. Until then, let the WWE & VKM do what it does best & be patient. For a thread to come from a guy that I respect on these WZ Forums, this is probably a low point for you Lariat in my eyes. Keep these types of forums to those who actually deserve to get the red rep or the non-WWE marks.

 

[bioshock]

I like blood in wrestling as much as anyone, just makes matches mean something, I mean watch Bret vs Piper WM8 match it makes it a little more epic with blood then without, same goes for the Flair matches.

But where WWE needs the blood is in cage matches, HIAC matches. if they fail with blood in those matches, then they will lose the 19 year olds and up. Even 10 year olds that watch Rated R movies as it is knows there should be blood in a cage match, if not the match fails to look real. Yeah Edge vs Taker as good as that was in a HIAC it still needed a little blood shed.

As for JR hes full of shit, him and his blog crap he does is always WWE homer shit, he always sticks up with anything Vince does, hes like a sheep that follows orders, and he does the same on his stupid blog. So don't read much into it. Someone who has made a living off bloody catch phrases like "crimson mask" and so on, sure says enough good stuff about no more blood.

 

[Dave]

I completely agree with you Latriat.

Sometimes I feel as though I have been slightly cheated by what the WWE have to offer at the minute. I mean I pay for all of the PPV's, I buy some merchandise and I watch the show almost every week if I can. However, I cannot get past the fact that I am becoming more and more disillusioned by the product every week. I'm not saying that the lack of blood is the main reason, in fact it is far from it, but it is just another thing that pisses me off.

Taking blood out the equation is just another thing that the WWE have employed to make sure that kids will like the show. The bottom line being: If you are over the age of 8 years old, the WWE doesn't give a shit about you any more. There was a time around 8 or 9 years ago that the WWE cared about the product is was sending out, especially if you are the age that I am now. They cared about how you viewed the product and made it edgy and more importantly entertaining. Now, there is no competition for it and they could not give a shit.

 

[ccotreau1]

It seems like the more blood aspect became big during the Attitude Era...Prior to that, wrestling was similar to the product today in regards to the blood, and people seemed to be into it more then, partly because of the characters and the storylines were better then IMO.

 

[The Brain]

Blood has been used way too much over the past ten years. There came a point when blood was used so often that it didn't mean anything. It should only be used once in a while, in a big match to add to the drama. Anything that is overdone loses it's luster. Just think, next time someone does bleed in a big match you will mark out for it because you haven't seen it in so long. If people continued to bleed every week no one would care.

And family friendly my ass. It's KID friendly. Like it was back in the days of the Hulkster during his heyday. That worked out fine at the moment,

.

You say that worked fine at the moment because you were a kid back then. If there were internet forums back then a lot of adults would have probably been on there complaining. You wouldn't have cared because you were a kid enjoying what you were seeing. One pet peeve of mine is when people say it was ok to market towards kids back when they were kids, but not now. Just because you're not a kid anymore? What about today's kids? Why not let them enjoy WWE now like you did when you were a kid?

 

[Midnight]

I will say that the current WWE product isn't as good as it could be, but the blood has absolutely nothing to do with it. I don't mind seeing it rarely, when it truly happens and is not forced.

Now, about the product becoming lame. I will say that some of the stuff they do on Raw should go. Hornswoggle needs to disappear, their women's and tag division need to improve, and they need to freshen up their ME picture. That's pretty much it though. The product certainly needs to be revised, but it's not bad enough to say for certain that in ten years they will be done.

 

[ProWrestling'sBrain]

You say that worked fine at the moment because you were a kid back then. If there were internet forums back then a lot of adults would have probably been on there complaining. You wouldn't have cared because you were a kid enjoying what you were seeing. One pet peeve of mine is when people say it was ok to market towards kids back when they were kids, but not now. Just because you're not a kid anymore? What about today's kids? Why not let them enjoy WWE now like you did when you were a kid?

This is 100% true. Majority of the times this is something a lot of the people here are very unwilling to admit, but it's true. I would always hear how people are ranting about the WWE trying to reach out to younger fans yet if we were born and skipped right to being an adult I'm sure very little of us would be on this forum discussing this very topic right now. These same fans will eventually grow up to become the older followers in a couple decades from now, much like us. If the WWE never appealed to kids to begin with then I'm sure the WWE would be no bigger than TNA is right now. Pretty much all adults starts watching in a young age so why ruin the fun for others? You were a kid too, right?

 

[andrew_vasquez8693]

i am a fan of blood but only on rare occasions. in this world, you can never judge anything. sure wwe could get rid of some things but i wouldnt say it is lame. i grew up watching wwe just like the rest of us. it has lasted over 50 years and im pretty sure it will last over 10 years. we pass it on to our kids and then they will do the same. all we can do is wait and see where it will be in 10 years. but we can not say it was lame, otherwise it wouldnt be the most dominant wrestling company in the world right now.

 

[HBK-aholic]

It's really not something that bothers me at all. In fact, until reading this thread I hadn't even thought of blood being used less frequently. It's something which, if added, can have a nice effect at time, but is absolutely not essential. Matches are great without it.