Too Many Firings ?

[SD619]

In the past few months in the WWE, we have seen many superstars and on-screen personalities "fired". This list includes:

Vince McMahon: He was fired by HHH as a result of the CM Punk situation getting out of control. Came back last week.

Miz and R-Truth: Both of these superstars were fired because of their assault of the referees among other actions during NoC. Reinstated last week on RAW.

Kevin Nash: Was fired by HHH because he lied to him during the whole "text" story. Made an appearance at NoC and might be a part of Survivor Series.

Jim Ross: Was fired by Laurinitis last week because he betrayed HHH. To make a comeback this week on RAW.


Am i the only one to feel that there are too many firings in the WWE. I understand that each of them is kayfbe fired and is still a part of WWE, but it is too watered-down and has lost the shock value. The "firing" angle was rarely used for many used and was generally used to promote a big feud, like the firing of Austin etc.

Do you feel that WWE is going overboard with the whole "firings"?

 

[martymcfly]

Yes and no....I think the "firings" would mean more and be more significant if they actually took the person off the air for at least a few months. Vince hasn't been gone long, and apparently he's back as chairman. Miz and R truth we all knew were not really fired, but it would have made more sense for them to be not seen for a while except maybe a brief cameo here and there. It makes no sense to fire JR, the only reason I can think for it was to make sure everyone knew we were not supposed to like Laurinitis, but I think that was pretty obvious already. As far as Kevin nash goes, I don't think it made sense to bring him into the story in the first place, but since he was there, then no, he should not have been fired.

So to answer the original question, I think the firings don't make sense because everything about this story is rushed. If they had slowed it down and developed it over months, then the firings would have been more impactful and made more sense.

 

[Ellye]

It's to reflect the climate of internal chaos that the current storyline needs. Title changing hands constantly, people being fired and rehired, unsafe working environment, etcetera.

I believe the storytellers know what they are doing here, and am willing to trust it.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

It's to reflect the climate of internal chaos that the current storyline needs. Title changing hands constantly, people being fired and rehired, unsafe working environment, etcetera.

I believe the storytellers know what they are doing here, and am willing to trust it.

True, all the firings does go hand in hand with the general feeling of "chaos" surrounding WWE. However, I do think that the "firings" have kind of run their course. The only problem with chaos and legit unpredictability is that, much of the time, it doesn't work out as smoothly as hoped. The walk out, for instance, was an interesting idea and may have sounded good on paper but the aftermath just fell flat. Although, to be fair, Vince changing his mind every 5 minutes and taking bits of different ideas and just sticking them together at the last minute probably contributed a fair share as well.

 

[CM11]

Yes and no....I think the "firings" would mean more and be more significant if they actually took the person off the air for at least a few months. Vince hasn't been gone long, and apparently he's back as chairman.

Vince was never fired as chairman, nor did he step down!!! He was relieved of his duties!!! The firings made sense as it showed Triple H panic firing and having no control of the superstars. I feel the current storyline is one of the best for years and is a good power struggle fight, between HHH and no1 really knows, we assume john however is Vince pulling his strings etc???? as it makes sense unlike the power struggle storylines TNA has been rubbishing out over last few years!!!

 

[Peoples_Champ]

I would say no, but JR's firing out of the blue made me pissed off with the whole firing angle. Sure it was cheap heat for Laurinitis, but it was pointless.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I have not been able to take a "firing" seriously in WWE in a very long time due to that they do them far too often. It is meant to be part of the chaos but I just roll my eyes at it these days. When someone gets "fired" on Raw they still show up anyhow so they have given us reasons to not take it seriously. They are definitely going overboard with the amount of firings because the more they do the less shocking it becomes.

 

[Jessie Lynn DivaGirl]

Sadly yes. Everytime someone gets fired on TV, they always come back. It's expected and now every time someone runs their mouth then they're sure to be fired and then return the next week. And if not the next week then the week after that. The only exception is Bret Hart whom we haven't seen since June 21st last year (my b-day and the day the Nexus was signed- booyeah).

Btw, CENA DOESN'T COUNT.

To answer your question, yes, WWE is overdoing the firings.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

I don't think the issue is really that there are too many firings, I think the real issue is that there are too many "firings". I'm sure if I were to really go back and look they've used this angle a lot in the past, but in the last year we've had SO many people get "fired" only to come back a week, two weeks, maybe a month later... Is it supposed to build up momentum for a big comeback? Nobody cared when Cena got "fired" last year. Nobody cared when he almost got "fired" this year. I was excited to see where Miz and Truth was going, but they could have stuck around and I would have cared just as much. The only "firing" that really made an impact recently was CM Punk, and that wasn't even him getting fired - he just didn't sign a new contract!

They used to use the firing angle as a way to get rid of talents that were actually leaving. And it used to be awesome... But when you know the ins and outs of the "dirt sheet" world of pro wrestling, you know when I guy is getting fired, and when he's getting "fired" for storyline reasons. It's not an issue with the plot device, it's an over-use of a BLAND plot device because they can't creatively come up with anything else.