Week 4: Thriller -versus- The D-Man

[Mr. TM]

Will kids who the PG era markets to current, be fans in 10 years?

The D-Man is the home debater, he gets to choose which side of the debate he is on first, but he has 24 hours.

Remember to read the rules. This thread is only for the debaters.

This round ends +2 hours after Friday 1:00 pm Pacific

 

[D-Man]

Thriller, I'm taking the side of yes, the new PG audience will still be fans 10 years from now. You can go first with your argument. Good luck to you!

 

[Thriller Ant]

Good luck to you also. Just for clarification, I consider "kids" to be anyone under the age of 13 . I don't know if it'll be a big deal, but I just wanted that out in the open.

If the WWE keeps it current product format, they will lose the younger people they are currently marketing to when the reach their teenage years. Before I get going, I am not someone who hates the PG rating. You don't need copious amounts of blood or swearing for wrestling to be entertaining to me.

With that said, however, the current, more kid and parent oriented product can only hold that audience for so long. Eventually, those kids will grow up, and go into their teenage years. As anyone who has a teenager, or has been a teenager can tell you, those are the years where young people start becoming more rebellious, and their TV, film, and music interests become edgier. The typical teenager won't be as entertained by Hornswoggle beating Chavo when Chavo is on his knees as they were when they were 8.

I understand and appreciate the current WWE model, but if they want to hold these fans, they must be prepared to move back into a post-Attitude Era type product in a few years.

 

[D-Man]

I would like to point out that the subject at hand in this debate is quite vague and can easily swing in the direction of either debater based on technicalities within the argument. However, I will try to explain my side of things in a broad, general manner that will be clear, concise and as close to my side of the argument as possible.

Kids who the PG era markets to currently WILL be fans in 10 years.

For starters, I first became a fan of professional wrestling in 1983. I grew up watching living and breathing cartoon characters and superheroes such as Hulk Hogan, The Ultimate Warrior, Paul Orndorf, Roddy Piper, King Kong Bundy, Randy Savage, Brutus Beefcake, and the likes. I used to get in trouble with my parents for staying up late at night just to turn on MTV and catch rerun clips of events and matches that occurred at Madison Square Garden. If it was Sunday afternoon at 11am and 12pm there was only one place you’d find me… glued to my television and watching All-American Wrestling on USA channel. There was just something about the sport that captivated me. I didn’t need to play with my toys, play catch with my friends or watch cartoons because all three of those areas were covered when professional wrestling came onto the television. I idolized these men that I believed were icons and the centers of my universe. And when I became old enough, I used to go to my friends houses, dress up like my favorite wrestlers, take out the video camera, and have matches with my friends in an empty grass-lot across the street from their house. We used to hold jukeboxes with cassette tapes up against the television during All-American Wrestling, Prime Time Wrestling, and WWF Superstars just to tape our wrestlers’ theme songs so we could use them in our entrances. So much time was put into what we were so passionate about.

It was a different era back then. Superstars like Hulk Hogan and Roddy Piper were household names, squeezed themselves into the mainstream, and were respected by movie stars, televisions actors and actresses, and other personalities of the big and little screen. This era was knows as the first real “boom” of professional wrestling. Vince McMahon had almost completed his monopoly of the vast territories and promotions across the United States and nabbed national television programming with syndication for his product. There was no swearing on television, hardly any blood, no violence towards women, no bad attitudes. It was a pure product that was respected by the majority of the masses. Ratings were high and the majority of the United States either watched the product or had heard of it and respected it. Parents allowed their children to watch the product, purchased the merchandise for their kids, and allowed their kids to idolize the competitors involved. The groundbreaking concept of “Wrestlemania” catapulted professional wrestling with its use of (at the time) 5-star main event matchups, high-value production, and mainstream star-power in the form of Cyndi Lauper, Muhammed Ali, Liberachi, and Mr. T. It was a pleasant, wonderful time to be a wrestling fan.

Fast forward to August 25th, 2009. The product of professional wrestling is a worldwide phenomenon. It’s not only broadcasted in the United States, but across many countries throughout the world. Its stars include John Cena, Randy Orton, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, the Undertaker, and CM Punk. More merchandise is being sold and purchased by the masses than any of us had ever dreamed. In the past 10 years, dozens of stars have broken through into the mainstream and have starred in movies, commercials, skit television, and other forms of worldwide media. Over the past 26 years, the WWE has survived through controversy, drug allegations, superstars’ deaths, murders, trademark lawsuits, company-name changes, and competition that almost put them out of business.

However, I am still a fan of professional wrestling.

The reason why I mentioned my personal life story (in the pertinence of professional wrestling) is because it is very difficult to speak on behalf of the audience of a brand new generation and breed of wrestling fans. We are in a new time, a new era, and a new way of life in all aspects of how we live from day to day. However, some things remain the same… the entertainment and sport of professional wrestling is still here and will continue to grab and build new audiences and lifelong fans such as myself and everyone reading this.

Thriller, you mentioned how this new era of professional wrestling is going to lose this new audience that the WWE has grabbed once these children mature and grow up. You also mentioned that the WWE needs to move into a post-Attitude type product. But what exactly is a “post-attitude product”? You mentioned that the current product “doesn’t need copious amounts of blood and swearing,” but what other elements are involved that make it “post-attitude”?

First of all, as we all know, the current era of professional wrestling is a parallel of the Hulkamania Era of the 1980’s. However, there are major differences in today’s market:

1. Today’s audience is much larger than it was in the 1980’s.
Yet, the 1980’s era produced some of the longest, most dedicated fans that professional wrestling has ever produced. Fans like me that were children during that time period and are still knowledgeable about its history and loyal to the product in our current day and age.

2. The WWE no longer produces wrestling… they produce television.
It’s not just a wrestling show anymore. It’s turned into an iconic television program that is remembered and respected just as much as programs such as the He-Man, Thundercats, G.I. Joe, Power Rangers, and Saved By the Bell. New episodes of these television programs such as these no longer exist or are being produced. However, if any of these television programs made a comeback, adults that watched these programs as children would turn them back on again and possibly get addicted all over again. The difference is that WWE television never went away, nor is it ever going to. Children who grow to be adults never get a chance to be torn away from these programs and they always find the time to watch and dedicate themselves to it, just as I did.

3. The bar has been raised.
The concept of professional wrestling has changed. Matches are completely different. Drama between characters in the sport is just as important as the matches that culminate as a result of it. The Attitude Era of wrestling took simple matches and introduced new concepts such as hardcore wrestling, death-defying high spots, scantily clad women and interference, and blood and violence of the highest level… All of which aren’t appealing to children and will not gain parents’ approval. It was a quick fix and was needed during a desperate time of survival for two rivaling wrestling companies. But it also lost approval from adults who tore their children away from its programming. All that was left in the audience was pre-adolescents who were quickly moving on with their lives, as you mentioned. However, the fans of the 1980s era of wrestling stayed true to their dedication of the sport, just as I have.

As years go by, children will grow up. It is difficult to determine what they will be watching 10 years from now. The only thing that’s for sure is that these new members of the PG era will stay true to the product just as fans of the 80’s stayed true to this day. Time and time again, an attitude/post-attitude product has proven to be the killer of pro-wrestling. It served its purpose when it was needed, acting as nothing more than a Band-Aid on a broken leg. However, it was never a product that motivated young children to grow up watching it and stay dedicated to it into their pre-adolescent and adult years. Today’s PG era of wrestling is doing just that, just as it did in the 1980’s. Children love to watch the programs and grow with it, parents love to turn it on for them and support it, and they all benefit from its new positive messages that shape young children’s lives forever, just as it did with mine. With all of this being said, how can all of them NOT be fans in 10 years?

Good luck to you, Thriller.

 

[Thriller Ant]

Thriller, you mentioned how this new era of professional wrestling is going to lose this new audience that the WWE has grabbed once these children mature and grow up. You also mentioned that the WWE needs to move into a post-Attitude type product. But what exactly is a “post-attitude product”? You mentioned that the current product “doesn’t need copious amounts of blood and swearing,” but what other elements are involved that make it “post-attitude”?

The eras besides the Attitude Era are pretty undefined, but I consider the post Attitude Era the slightly toned down period we saw earlier in this decade. Think Edge's live sex celebration and Cena's heel raps.

First of all, as we all know, the current era of professional wrestling is a parallel of the Hulkamania Era of the 1980’s. However, there are major differences in today’s market:

1. Today’s audience is much larger than it was in the 1980’s.
Yet, the 1980’s era produced some of the longest, most dedicated fans that professional wrestling has ever produced. Fans like me that were children during that time period and are still knowledgeable about its history and loyal to the product in our current day and age.

The problem with a larger audience is that there are that many more different things that they want from the product. So, while they currently have more viewers, they will have that much more difficulty holding on to those young people in 10 years.

2. The WWE no longer produces wrestling… they produce television.
It’s not just a wrestling show anymore. It’s turned into an iconic television program that is remembered and respected just as much as programs such as the He-Man, Thundercats, G.I. Joe, Power Rangers, and Saved By the Bell. New episodes of these television programs such as these no longer exist or are being produced. However, if any of these television programs made a comeback, adults that watched these programs as children would turn them back on again and possibly get addicted all over again. The difference is that WWE television never went away, nor is it ever going to. Children who grow to be adults never get a chance to be torn away from these programs and they always find the time to watch and dedicate themselves to it, just as I did.

My previous reply works for this too. Not everyone will want the same things from the WWE, and that will alienate sections of the audience. In addition, the fact that there are 8 hours of programming in a non-pay-per-view week means that kids will get "burned out" quicker from an over-saturation of the product.

3. The bar has been raised.
The concept of professional wrestling has changed. Matches are completely different. Drama between characters in the sport is just as important as the matches that culminate as a result of it. The Attitude Era of wrestling took simple matches and introduced new concepts such as hardcore wrestling, death-defying high spots, scantily clad women and interference, and blood and violence of the highest level… All of which aren’t appealing to children and will not gain parents’ approval. It was a quick fix and was needed during a desperate time of survival for two rivaling wrestling companies. But it also lost approval from adults who tore their children away from its programming. All that was left in the audience was pre-adolescents who were quickly moving on with their lives, as you mentioned. However, the fans of the 1980s era of wrestling stayed true to their dedication of the sport, just as I have.

The emergence of mixed martial arts makes this another battling point for the WWE. The kids that enjoy the storylines will continue to watch, but the kids who enjoy the fighting and violence will move to UFC and could potentially join the anti-pro wrestling fanatics that make up a decent sized portion of the MMA audience.

As years go by, children will grow up. It is difficult to determine what they will be watching 10 years from now. The only thing that’s for sure is that these new members of the PG era will stay true to the product just as fans of the 80’s stayed true to this day.

But you can't be sure of that. Kids have so many different shows and games pulling their attention so many different ways that there is no way to be sure that anything can hold their attention. They only thing we can be sure of is that we can't be sure of what they will do.

Time and time again, an attitude/post-attitude product has proven to be the killer of pro-wrestling. It served its purpose when it was needed, acting as nothing more than a Band-Aid on a broken leg. However, it was never a product that motivated young children to grow up watching it and stay dedicated to it into their pre-adolescent and adult years.

I completely agree with you. I watched WCW during the wars because there was no way my parents would let me watch WWF. I really think that Vince caused a lot of fans and those fans' kids to never watch the programming again.

Today’s PG era of wrestling is doing just that, just as it did in the 1980’s. Children love to watch the programs and grow with it, parents love to turn it on for them and support it, and they all benefit from its new positive messages that shape young children’s lives forever, just as it did with mine. With all of this being said, how can all of them NOT be fans in 10 years?

Because in 10 years, a lot of these kids will be teenagers, that are notorious for rebelling against their parents and what they did as kids. I'm sure quite a few of the kids will still watch and I would be very happy if they do, but in all likelihood, a majority won't. It's not my hope, but it is more than likely the reality.

Good luck to you, Thriller.

Thanks, D-Man, you too. You're really pushing me, and I think this will be a good debate.

 

[D-Man]

First of all, I'm loving this debate. It can go in so many directions and Thriller is a very fair debater that isn't allowing his emotions to get the best of him, while remaining a gentlemen and staying distinguished in his posts. My hat's off to you. Professionalism is dying on this site...

NOW, onto the debate...

The eras besides the Attitude Era are pretty undefined, but I consider the post Attitude Era the slightly toned down period we saw earlier in this decade. Think Edge's live sex celebration and Cena's heel raps.

Understood. I wasn't sure exactly what time period you were referring to, but I had a hunch this was it. Thank you for clarifying.

First of all, as we all know, the current era of professional wrestling is a parallel of the Hulkamania Era of the 1980’s. However, there are major differences in today’s market:

Once again, I agree. That's the basis of my argument. The era of the 1980's produced some of professional wrestling's most loyal fans EVER. These fans will pass down their passion of the sport to their children. They'll take their kids to live shows, turn on Raw with them, and buy the merchandise and PPV's. At least I know that I will...

The problem with a larger audience is that there are that many more different things that they want from the product.

But what things are you referring to? Please don't take offense to this, but this is an extremely vague statement. That's like me saying that children are going to continue to watch the product 10 years from now, and when you ask why, I'll say "Lots of reasons." And that'll be it

So, while they currently have more viewers, they will have that much more difficulty holding on to those young people in 10 years.

I'll have to disagree here. First off, you are lacking any reasoning behind your statements, so they fall into the category of being nothing more than just personal opinion. For me, it's quite simple, actually. I believe in the law of large numbers... if more people are watching the product now, there are more chances of the WWE holding onto a good portion of those viewers in 10 years. In addition, with new marketing strategies, a wider audience base, and stars of the WWE cracking into the mainstream, they stay relevant in the eyes of ALL viewers, both younger and older collectively. The WWE has learned from their past mistakes and created marketing strategies to draw in new fans, especially targeting these kids (under 13 years old ) that we mention in this debate.

My previous reply works for this too. Not everyone will want the same things from the WWE, and that will alienate sections of the audience.

I hear ya, but I still need to understand what the "different things" are that the WWE isn't producing, in your eyes. As far as I'm concerned, they're giving children EXACTLY what they want... merchandise, heroes, action, quality television, storylines to relate to, and lifetime memories that will make it difficult to tear away from the product in the future (let's say for about 10 years ).

In addition, the fact that there are 8 hours of programming in a non-pay-per-view week means that kids will get "burned out" quicker from an over-saturation of the product.

This is another speculation that I don't believe can be proven. If we're addressing this issue, then we need to go by the current product's track record. Now, the WWE's current goal is to stray away from entertaining audiences that were fans during the Attitude Era. They want to strip down their product and take away everything that made their television shows racy, violent, and not appealing to fans consisting of parents and young children. The current product is very clean, motivating, educational, and addictive. The numbers speak for themselves... PPV buys are up, rating are growing again, stars of the mainstream are taking part in the weekly shows, the format of Raw, Smackdown, Superstars, and ECW is changing and adapting to our youth and fans of the PG product. There is no sign of anything slowing down or anyone "burning out" from an "over-saturation" of the product.

The emergence of mixed martial arts makes this another battling point for the WWE. The kids that enjoy the storylines will continue to watch, but the kids who enjoy the fighting and violence will move to UFC and could potentially join the anti-pro wrestling fanatics that make up a decent sized portion of the MMA audience.

Vince McMahon has said on multiple occasions that he is not catering to fans of MMA, nor does he think organizations such as the UFC are competition for him. I believe him. I mean, let's break it down...

** WWE and UFC are apples and oranges. The UFC is a legitimate, competitive sport, just like boxing, baseball, football, hockey, and basketball. The WWE has admitted over and over again that they are not a real or legitimate sport. And last I checked, baseball, football, hockey, and basketball fans watch the WWE. Hell, even stars of those sports come out to WWE events, or guest-host them (i.e. Shaquille O'Neill, Floyd Mayweather). So, what's to say that UFC fans won't continue to watch professional wrestling when they grow up?

** The WWE is just a television program, just like Scrubs. They have plots, storylines, twists, turns, and happy and sad endings. They've preached to us time and time again that they are nothing more than "entertainment." The UFC is a real sport. Granted, sports are another form of television, but it's a completely different product than what the WWE produces.

** Onto this "anti-pro wrestling fanatic" audience that you speak of... I think things are moving in the opposite direction of what you speak about. They are slowly shoving their feet in their mouths thanks to a gentleman by the name of Brock Lesnar. At first, no one looked at him like a legitimate fighter. First of all, he never trained in MMA until 13 months before his first fight with Min Soo Kim in the K1 promotion. After Brock's dominating victory over Kim, during his attendance at UFC 77, Dana White announced that Brock was joining the organization. The majority of UFC fighters are seasoned, trained, experienced fighters of the octagon cage. Brock was brand new, and Dana implored him that the UFC isn't a place where men should "learn how to fight." However, despite White's advice, the fans' hatred towards him due to his lack of experience in MMA, and his professional wrestling background, Brock earned their respect after losing his initial, hard-fought fight with Frank Mir and after his destruction of Heath Herring. Furthermore, he changed the minds of the UFC's fans after defeating the legend, Randy Couture, for the UFC Heavyweight Championship at UFC 91. And, after his one-sided victory over Frank Mir at Brock's first title defense during UFC 100, even though he celebrated his victory in a disgraceful manner, fans began to view this former professional wrestler as being a legitimate athlete. As a result, newer fans became curious about the WWE's talent and began turning on their programming (including mainstream stars) and Vince took advantage. So, this is just the opposite of what you had mentioned earlier.

But you can't be sure of that. Kids have so many different shows and games pulling their attention so many different ways that there is no way to be sure that anything can hold their attention. They only thing we can be sure of is that we can't be sure of what they will do.

You know what, you're right. I can't be sure that (quoting myself from an earlier post: ) "new members of the PG era will stay true to the product just as fans of the 80’s stayed true to this day." And yes, the only thing we can be sure of is that we can't be sure of what they'll do. However, we can speculate, and that is why I mentioned in my first post that this debate is extremely vague. We don't know if the creator of this debate is asking about the majority of fans, minority of fans, or even just ONE fan. So, at first glance, you and I are mostly at a stalemate. However, you admitted that the current era is professional wrestling is a parallel of the era of the 1980's. Therefore, we can use similar comparisons to the dedicated fans that came out of the 1980's and stayed true to the product, at least until the Attitude Era ruined wrestling, or even until our present day (such as myself and many people that I know). I feel that I've been doing that throughout this debate.

I completely agree with you. I watched WCW during the wars because there was no way my parents would let me watch WWF. I really think that Vince caused a lot of fans and those fans' kids to never watch the programming again.

Exactly. Therefore, the WWE's current product will do just the opposite. Since it has become educational, clean, and entertaining to fans of all ages, parents will turn it ON for their children instead of turning OFF, like your parents did. And, in doing so, this will create more lifelong fans.

Because in 10 years, a lot of these kids will be teenagers, that are notorious for rebelling against their parents and what they did as kids. I'm sure quite a few of the kids will still watch and I would be very happy if they do,

Then due to the technicalities and flaws in the initial debate argument that I pointed out earlier, you proved my side of the debate to be correct .

but in all likelihood, a majority won't. It's not my hope, but it is more than likely the reality.

Crap, that means you're right, too . I guess all we can go with is provable track records, backed up by facts. I've done that, but I feel that your argument is more opinionated. However, I'm not the judge here.

Thanks, D-Man, you too. You're really pushing me, and I think this will be a good debate.

What can I say, I love to debate. And thanks to you, too.

I'm glad that I didn't leave this tournament. I think it's making me a better wrestling fan by continuing to particicipate. I thoroughly enjoy carrying on as a lifelong fan of the product. That is why I'm so passionate about this particular debate. I truly feel that the PG era, as much as recent fans are against it, is the answer to all of the WWE's problems and I love it. The WWE is re-creating the magic of the 1980's product and nabbing lifelong fans such as myself, all over again.

 

[Thriller Ant]

First of all, I'm loving this debate. It can go in so many directions and Thriller is a very fair debater that isn't allowing his emotions to get the best of him, while remaining a gentlemen and staying distinguished in his posts. My hat's off to you. Professionalism is dying on this site...

NOW, onto the debate...

Thank you sir . I've seen you around and like your stuff, so I was looking forward to this.

Understood. I wasn't sure exactly what time period you were referring to, but I had a hunch this was it. Thank you for clarifying.

No problem.

Once again, I agree. That's the basis of my argument. The era of the 1980's produced some of professional wrestling's most loyal fans EVER. These fans will pass down their passion of the sport to their children. They'll take their kids to live shows, turn on Raw with them, and buy the merchandise and PPV's. At least I know that I will...

I was looking at what you quoted from me here, and I think it was from your first reply to me, and I forgot to put it in quotes. Sorry.

But what things are you referring to? Please don't take offense to this, but this is an extremely vague statement. That's like me saying that children are going to continue to watch the product 10 years from now, and when you ask why, I'll say "Lots of reasons." And that'll be it

I understand your problem with it. Kids today have so many products vying for their attention and their parents money, that it is tough to hold on to a sizable audience. Between WWE, other pro sports, Disney, Nickelodeon, MTV, cartoons, movies, etc. it is tough say what will hold a child's attention in the long run.

I'll have to disagree here. First off, you are lacking any reasoning behind your statements, so they fall into the category of being nothing more than just personal opinion. For me, it's quite simple, actually. I believe in the law of large numbers... if more people are watching the product now, there are more chances of the WWE holding onto a good portion of those viewers in 10 years. In addition, with new marketing strategies, a wider audience base, and stars of the WWE cracking into the mainstream, they stay relevant in the eyes of ALL viewers, both younger and older collectively. The WWE has learned from their past mistakes and created marketing strategies to draw in new fans, especially targeting these kids (under 13 years old ) that we mention in this debate.

I am inclined to agree with you, but you still can't predict what kids will do. I was a huge WCW fan when I was younger, but I just randomly lost interest one day and quit watching. My 11 year old brother was the same way a year or two ago with WWE. I understand that my statements are vague, but the group we are talking about is so broad, that it is very hard to make specific, definitive statements about it.

I hear ya, but I still need to understand what the "different things" are that the WWE isn't producing, in your eyes. As far as I'm concerned, they're giving children EXACTLY what they want... merchandise, heroes, action, quality television, storylines to relate to, and lifetime memories that will make it difficult to tear away from the product in the future (let's say for about 10 years ).

Maybe they'll want to watch shows with people their age starring, maybe they'll want to watch (I hate saying this, but it fits) legitimate sports, maybe they'll want sing-a-longs or cartoons. There are plenty of things that kids could want from a program that they can't get from WWE. Some of my best memories are watching WCW or wrestling with my neighbors on the trampoline, but that didn't stop me from ditching it quicker than an ugly date.

This is another speculation that I don't believe can be proven. If we're addressing this issue, then we need to go by the current product's track record. Now, the WWE's current goal is to stray away from entertaining audiences that were fans during the Attitude Era. They want to strip down their product and take away everything that made their television shows racy, violent, and not appealing to fans consisting of parents and young children. The current product is very clean, motivating, educational, and addictive. The numbers speak for themselves... PPV buys are up, rating are growing again, stars of the mainstream are taking part in the weekly shows, the format of Raw, Smackdown, Superstars, and ECW is changing and adapting to our youth and fans of the PG product. There is no sign of anything slowing down or anyone "burning out" from an "over-saturation" of the product.

Kids are notorious for having short attention spans. In that regard, having this much programming is a good thing. But, if said programming gets stale, like the Raw main event had before the return of D-X, the kids feel like they are watching the same episode of a show week after week and will get bored with it.

Vince McMahon has said on multiple occasions that he is not catering to fans of MMA, nor does he think organizations such as the UFC are competition for him. I believe him. I mean, let's break it down...

I don't think he should cater to them, but the fact is that they are competition and can cause a loss of potential viewers.

** WWE and UFC are apples and oranges. The UFC is a legitimate, competitive sport, just like boxing, baseball, football, hockey, and basketball. The WWE has admitted over and over again that they are not a real or legitimate sport. And last I checked, baseball, football, hockey, and basketball fans watch the WWE. Hell, even stars of those sports come out to WWE events, or guest-host them (i.e. Shaquille O'Neill, Floyd Mayweather). So, what's to say that UFC fans won't continue to watch professional wrestling when they grow up?

** The WWE is just a television program, just like Scrubs. They have plots, storylines, twists, turns, and happy and sad endings. They've preached to us time and time again that they are nothing more than "entertainment." The UFC is a real sport. Granted, sports are another form of television, but it's a completely different product than what the WWE produces.

** Onto this "anti-pro wrestling fanatic" audience that you speak of... I think things are moving in the opposite direction of what you speak about. They are slowly shoving their feet in their mouths thanks to a gentleman by the name of Brock Lesnar. At first, no one looked at him like a legitimate fighter. First of all, he never trained in MMA until 13 months before his first fight with Min Soo Kim in the K1 promotion. After Brock's dominating victory over Kim, during his attendance at UFC 77, Dana White announced that Brock was joining the organization. The majority of UFC fighters are seasoned, trained, experienced fighters of the octagon cage. Brock was brand new, and Dana implored him that the UFC isn't a place where men should "learn how to fight." However, despite White's advice, the fans' hatred towards him due to his lack of experience in MMA, and his professional wrestling background, Brock earned their respect after losing his initial, hard-fought fight with Frank Mir and after his destruction of Heath Herring. Furthermore, he changed the minds of the UFC's fans after defeating the legend, Randy Couture, for the UFC Heavyweight Championship at UFC 91. And, after his one-sided victory over Frank Mir at Brock's first title defense during UFC 100, even though he celebrated his victory in a disgraceful manner, fans began to view this former professional wrestler as being a legitimate athlete. As a result, newer fans became curious about the WWE's talent and began turning on their programming (including mainstream stars) and Vince took advantage. So, this is just the opposite of what you had mentioned earlier.

You are completely right with your points here. But does the fact that football and wrestling aren't alike stop people from turning off Raw and turning on Monday Night Football? Did Brock Lesnar stop all MMA diehards from insulting pro wrestling? Your points are right, but those facts alone don't mean all the people you defined there do watch WWE over the other option.

You know what, you're right. I can't be sure that (quoting myself from an earlier post: ) "new members of the PG era will stay true to the product just as fans of the 80’s stayed true to this day." And yes, the only thing we can be sure of is that we can't be sure of what they'll do. However, we can speculate, and that is why I mentioned in my first post that this debate is extremely vague. We don't know if the creator of this debate is asking about the majority of fans, minority of fans, or even just ONE fan.

You are right once again. While cold, hard numbers are good, I like to use percentages. Let's say WWE has 1 million fans under 13 right now (just for easy percentages' sake) and they hold on to 1% in 10 years. While that is still
10,000 people, it would be disappointing to keep that few of the original number.

Exactly. Therefore, the WWE's current product will do just the opposite. Since it has become educational, clean, and entertaining to fans of all ages, parents will turn it ON for their children instead of turning OFF, like your parents did. And, in doing so, this will create more lifelong fans.

Until those fans hit their teenage years and want the blood and sex. If the WWE doesn't change the product to bring some of that back, those fans will leave.

Crap, that means you're right, too . I guess all we can go with is provable track records, backed up by facts. I've done that, but I feel that your argument is more opinionated. However, I'm not the judge here.

I understand what you are saying about the opinions, but it is hard to define such a large group of people. I will do what I can to be more defined, but like you said, this is vague..

What can I say, I love to debate. And thanks to you, too.

I'm glad that I didn't leave this tournament. I think it's making me a better wrestling fan by continuing to particicipate. I thoroughly enjoy carrying on as a lifelong fan of the product. That is why I'm so passionate about this particular debate. I truly feel that the PG era, as much as recent fans are against it, is the answer to all of the WWE's problems and I love it. The WWE is re-creating the magic of the 1980's product and nabbing lifelong fans such as myself, all over again.

I am learning so much from this, and I love it, also. And while I do see parallels to the 80's, you have to remember that over 20 years have passed since then, and we live in a different world with different kids now.

 

[D-Man]

Thank you sir . I've seen you around and like your stuff, so I was looking forward to this.

Ditto brother. Ditto.

I understand your problem with it. Kids today have so many products vying for their attention and their parents money, that it is tough to hold on to a sizable audience. Between WWE, other pro sports, Disney, Nickelodeon, MTV, cartoons, movies, etc. it is tough say what will hold a child's attention in the long run.

But somehow, judging by the merchandise sales, demographic of current ratings reports, and the attendees at the live audiences each week on television, it seems that the WWE is doing fine with getting the attention of younger viewers. Even though we have no way of determining how much of this audience will stick around in 10 years, this debate plainly asked "Will kids who the PG era markets to current, be fans in 10 years?" I say yes, and I think you have to agree with it

I am inclined to agree with you, but you still can't predict what kids will do.

Not all of them, but you have to believe that many of them will. And according to the original thread title, that's enough for my side of the debate.

I was a huge WCW fan when I was younger, but I just randomly lost interest one day and quit watching. My 11 year old brother was the same way a year or two ago with WWE. I understand that my statements are vague, but the group we are talking about is so broad, that it is very hard to make specific, definitive statements about it.

I agree. It's too broad of an audience. However, the current product and television is moving in too much of a positive direction for us to see any sign of declination over the course of the next 10 years. More arguments favor longevity, not regression.

Maybe they'll want to watch shows with people their age starring, maybe they'll want to watch (I hate saying this, but it fits) legitimate sports, maybe they'll want sing-a-longs or cartoons.

Or maybe they'll run to school one day after a great PPV (such as the recent Summerslam) and say to ALL of their friends, "John Cena got screwed on live television!! You know, the guy that starred in the Marine?!? Yeah, he was on Jay Leno a bunch of times, the Kid's Choice Awards on Nickelodeon, and Saturday Night Live. Yeah, he was also in the Gillette commercials, too! He's my favorite wrestler ever and my idol! You should all watch the show this Monday!" And they may all go home and turn it on and begin to worship him, as well. Hey, you never know... just "maybe" it could happen .

There are plenty of things that kids could want from a program that they can't get from WWE. Some of my best memories are watching WCW or wrestling with my neighbors on the trampoline, but that didn't stop me from ditching it quicker than an ugly date.

But when your date was over, you watched the Friday Night Smackdown episode that you recorded on your TiVo, didn't you?? Come on, admit it! Either way, you went out with that ugly date (and hopefully hit it for ugly's sake) and here you are, some time later writing on a wrestling website about extremely knowledgable wrestling information that you've learned over the years because you never stopped watching the program. This is the point that I'm proving. Through thick and thin, professional wrestling fans are some of the most dedicated, loyal, and vocal fans out of any other form of entertainment in the world. They always find a way to come back and watch the product. They might have patches in their lives where they briefly stop watching, but once things come back in order they turn on Monday Night Raw. It's always going to be there and they all know it.

Kids are notorious for having short attention spans. In that regard, having this much programming is a good thing. But, if said programming gets stale, like the Raw main event had before the return of D-X, the kids feel like they are watching the same episode of a show week after week and will get bored with it.

I believe this is a one-sided opinion. I have enjoyed every single week of programming for the past 2 years. Some of the most recent shows are my favorites, actually. I love the feuds that you call stale, and so do kids. They don't care about storylines... they don't break things down like the smarks of the IWC... they just want to be entertained. They want to watch a program and waive their hands in front of their faces at the same time as John Cena when he says, "You can't see me!" They want to scream out "BALLIN!!!" after MVP bounces off the ropes. And they want to mark out when Triple H hits the pedigree. They could care less about "stale storylines."

As much as we are involved in this website, the IWC is only a small fraction of the WWE's fanbase. "Stale storylines" don't mean anything to young people that have never been to websites such as Wrestlezone. Let's face it.. every episode of our favorite television shows can't be the best and newest thing that we've ever seen on TV. There are bad seasons for sitcoms and TV shows... some are few and far between while others are on a downward spiral. The ones that are spiraling into oblivion become canceled, eventually. The WWE will NEVER get canceled. It will always stay fresh, relevant, exciting, and entertaining enough where it will constantly gain newer viewers and keep existing ones.

I don't think he should cater to them, but the fact is that they are competition and can cause a loss of potential viewers.

So is Intervention on A&E. I mean, it's also on television on Monday Nights at 9pm on the East Coast of the United States. So are tons of other programs. They're all competing for our ratings. But that's where the inventions of DVR's and TiVo come in... it allows the audience to be in two places at once. Granted, they're all competition, but they're not enough competition where the WWE should be worried about losing their audience as a result of their existance.

You are completely right with your points here. But does the fact that football and wrestling aren't alike stop people from turning off Raw and turning on Monday Night Football?

According to the Fun Facts that are displayed on Monday Night Raw after commercials, then I have to answer yes. Monday Night Raw has been destroying Monday Night Football in ratings on random nights unless it is a special occasion such as the first MNF game of the season or a heated rivalry comes on. But the WWE could fight fire with fire and bring in a guest host such as Shaquille O'Neill again to steal the ratings back. It's all just a television war. But none of this will cause viewers to stop watching professional wrestling, completely.

Did Brock Lesnar stop all MMA diehards from insulting pro wrestling?

Not all of them, but I doubt that will ever happen. However, it definitely shut a good portion of them up.

Your points are right, but those facts alone don't mean all the people you defined there do watch WWE over the other option.

First off, thanks

And actually, you're right... they now watch both WWE and MMA. It's very exciting to think about. A fake sport has drawn the interest of real sport fans. I have a feeling that someday MMA and professional wrestling will merge in some way, shape or form...

oh, wait...

TNA's begun that transition already. And the UFC has already paid for and borrowed video of Brock Lesnar's old WWE footage to be played on UFC television shows. What a concept...

You are right once again. While cold, hard numbers are good, I like to use percentages. Let's say WWE has 1 million fans under 13 right now (just for easy percentages' sake) and they hold on to 1% in 10 years. While that is still 10,000 people, it would be disappointing to keep that few of the original number.

I've been right a lot during this debate

Back to your point... I understand what you're saying, but those are still fictitious numbers with no validity, whatsoever. I can argue just as strongly that they'll keep 99% of those 1 million fans, or 990,000 fans.

Until those fans hit their teenage years and want the blood and sex. If the WWE doesn't change the product to bring some of that back, those fans will leave.

Once again, what is your source behind this? Personally, I was never into the blood and sex. Granted, the match concepts were more exciting as they were introduced (such as TLC, Hell in a Cell, Elimination Chamber), but these concepts haven't gone anywhere. Besides blood and sex, what else has really changed about the product?

I understand what you are saying about the opinions, but it is hard to define such a large group of people. I will do what I can to be more defined, but like you said, this is vague..

I'm with you here. I'm a little disappointed that this question wasn't thought through a bit more with more details added to the question. However, this could have been their point the whole time... to make us chase our tails and give us more to debate about. If that's the case, then my hat's off to the judges... it worked!

I am learning so much from this, and I love it, also. And while I do see parallels to the 80's, you have to remember that over 20 years have passed since then, and we live in a different world with different kids now.

I'm learning a ton from this debate, this website, and from debating against you!! You're one tough cookie.

As for times changing over the years, you're right. But so has every aspect of the WWE's format to blend with the times. They've seen the changes, shifted their format, and answered our call. And now they're grabbing the young audiences and breeding the next generation of die-hard fans. I love seeing it all unfold.

 

[Thriller Ant]

But somehow, judging by the merchandise sales, demographic of current ratings reports, and the attendees at the live audiences each week on television, it seems that the WWE is doing fine with getting the attention of younger viewers. Even though we have no way of determining how much of this audience will stick around in 10 years, this debate plainly asked "Will kids who the PG era markets to current, be fans in 10 years?" I say yes, and I think you have to agree with it

But just like the other things I said are vying for the kids' attention, kids will lose interest. Will the hold on to fans? Yes, that is inevitable. But I truly believe a majority of the kids will lost interest in the product and move on to other things. I can't give you physical data to prove this, but I would be willing to bet that is how it will play out.

I agree. It's too broad of an audience. However, the current product and television is moving in too much of a positive direction for us to see any sign of declination over the course of the next 10 years. More arguments favor longevity, not regression.

It favors people in that we consider kids to stay in the next 10 years. Once again, the product is focusing on the kids, not on the teenagers and young adults they will inevitably become. Their interests will change, and they will leave. Other kids may replace them, but they won't keep those people.

Or maybe they'll run to school one day after a great PPV (such as the recent Summerslam) and say to ALL of their friends, "John Cena got screwed on live television!! You know, the guy that starred in the Marine?!? Yeah, he was on Jay Leno a bunch of times, the Kid's Choice Awards on Nickelodeon, and Saturday Night Live. Yeah, he was also in the Gillette commercials, too! He's my favorite wrestler ever and my idol! You should all watch the show this Monday!" And they may all go home and turn it on and begin to worship him, as well. Hey, you never know... just "maybe" it could happen .

Or they could run into their friends, who say "Did you see what happened on *insert any random MTV show here* last night?" And when they realize their friends are watching MTV, not Raw, they will go watch what their friends are watching.

But when your date was over, you watched the Friday Night Smackdown episode that you recorded on your TiVo, didn't you?? Come on, admit it! Either way, you went out with that ugly date (and hopefully hit it for ugly's sake) and here you are, some time later writing on a wrestling website about extremely knowledgable wrestling information that you've learned over the years because you never stopped watching the program. This is the point that I'm proving. Through thick and thin, professional wrestling fans are some of the most dedicated, loyal, and vocal fans out of any other form of entertainment in the world. They always find a way to come back and watch the product. They might have patches in their lives where they briefly stop watching, but once things come back in order they turn on Monday Night Raw. It's always going to be there and they all know it.

I don't doubt that they could come back, but I believe it will be after their teenage years, so in more than 10 years. I watched when I was a kid, ditched it for around 10 years, and then came back. I kind of regret missing that time, but a majority of teenagers don't watch pro wrestling.

I believe this is a one-sided opinion. I have enjoyed every single week of programming for the past 2 years. Some of the most recent shows are my favorites, actually. I love the feuds that you call stale, and so do kids. They don't care about storylines... they don't break things down like the smarks of the IWC... they just want to be entertained. They want to watch a program and waive their hands in front of their faces at the same time as John Cena when he says, "You can't see me!" They want to scream out "BALLIN!!!" after MVP bounces off the ropes. And they want to mark out when Triple H hits the pedigree. They could care less about "stale storylines."

As much as we are involved in this website, the IWC is only a small fraction of the WWE's fanbase. "Stale storylines" don't mean anything to young people that have never been to websites such as Wrestlezone. Let's face it.. every episode of our favorite television shows can't be the best and newest thing that we've ever seen on TV. There are bad seasons for sitcoms and TV shows... some are few and far between while others are on a downward spiral. The ones that are spiraling into oblivion become canceled, eventually. The WWE will NEVER get canceled. It will always stay fresh, relevant, exciting, and entertaining enough where it will constantly gain newer viewers and keep existing ones.

Trust me, I'm not a Raw basher like a lot of guys on this site. But, even I had to admit that Orton vs Triple H/Batista was getting boring. And even now I'm the guy who does the "You can't see me." I went to Raw when Vince got punted in January. It was my first live event ever and I was acting just like the 10 year old kids there (except I cheered for Orton, lol). I try to not think of it in storylines when I watch, but it gets hard when it gets boring like that.

So is Intervention on A&E. I mean, it's also on television on Monday Nights at 9pm on the East Coast of the United States. So are tons of other programs. They're all competing for our ratings. But that's where the inventions of DVR's and TiVo come in... it allows the audience to be in two places at once. Granted, they're all competition, but they're not enough competition where the WWE should be worried about losing their audience as a result of their existance.

For ratings and ad revenue, however, they need those viewers to watch live. Every time someone tapes Raw or watches it on Youtube, the WWE loses. They may still get the viewers, but they lose the opportunity to cash in on it.

According to the Fun Facts that are displayed on Monday Night Raw after commercials, then I have to answer yes. Monday Night Raw has been destroying Monday Night Football in ratings on random nights unless it is a special occasion such as the first MNF game of the season or a heated rivalry comes on. But the WWE could fight fire with fire and bring in a guest host such as Shaquille O'Neill again to steal the ratings back. It's all just a television war. But none of this will cause viewers to stop watching professional wrestling, completely.

We both know it is currently preseason, so that has to be taken with a grain of salt. Once the regular season starts, MNF will steal plenty of viewers from Raw, even with the popular guest hosts. WWE is popular, but in the States, the NFL is more popular.

Not all of them, but I doubt that will ever happen. However, it definitely shut a good portion of them up.

Still didn't shut up his next opponent

First off, thanks

And actually, you're right... they now watch both WWE and MMA. It's very exciting to think about. A fake sport has drawn the interest of real sport fans. I have a feeling that someday MMA and professional wrestling will merge in some way, shape or form...

oh, wait...

TNA's begun that transition already. And the UFC has already paid for and borrowed video of Brock Lesnar's old WWE footage to be played on UFC television shows. What a concept...

But like you said in an earlier post, there is no way in hell (pun intended) that Vince would let that happen in the WWE. TNA can do it all they want, but as far as the pro wrestling market goes, they are a regional chain store compared to the Wal-Mart that is the WWE.

Back to your point... I understand what you're saying, but those are still fictitious numbers with no validity, whatsoever. I can argue just as strongly that they'll keep 99% of those 1 million fans, or 990,000 fans.

Which is when we get back to how vague the question is. A majority of this debate is going to be based on opinion and personal accounts.

Once again, what is your source behind this? Personally, I was never into the blood and sex. Granted, the match concepts were more exciting as they were introduced (such as TLC, Hell in a Cell, Elimination Chamber), but these concepts haven't gone anywhere. Besides blood and sex, what else has really changed about the product?

The average teenage guy wants sex and it entertained by gore. There are of course exceptions, and it takes more than those things to keep them completely engaged, but it is a good start. As for the changes due to the PG rating, the WWE Sux thread and PG rating thread would argue that everything has changed,

I'm with you here. I'm a little disappointed that this question wasn't thought through a bit more with more details added to the question. However, this could have been their point the whole time... to make us chase our tails and give us more to debate about. If that's the case, then my hat's off to the judges... it worked!

This has definitely been the toughest one yet! I am having fun though.

I'm learning a ton from this debate, this website, and from debating against you!! You're one tough cookie.

Thanks again. It probably doesn't mean much, but you have definitely earned a ton of respect from me. You're working your ass off and challenging me, and you clearly know what you are talking about.

As for times changing over the years, you're right. But so has every aspect of the WWE's format to blend with the times. They've seen the changes, shifted their format, and answered our call. And now they're grabbing the young audiences and breeding the next generation of die-hard fans. I love seeing it all unfold.

I enjoy watching it unfold, too, but what matters in this debate is whether or not the kids will. And judging by the short attention spans of most of the kids I know, I wouldn't count on it.

 

[Mr. TM]

Clarity of Argument - Fine argument here boys, but I have to give this to The D-Man for his hard work in keeping this debate straight as an arrow.


Punctuality: Sorry Thriller, you were behind with your last debate post.


Informative: Thriller would throw out points, and D-Man would destroy them with some hard facts backed with opinions. Great job there D-Man


Emotionality: There was a little too much hugging going on here guys, this isn't a 1920s parlor. Bring that emotion. Thiller was able to get off of it in a positive way in his posts, still D-Man could have easily gotten this point especially since Thriller seemed to bow down a little in respecting Dman. Though Thriller was able to withstand D-Man's smartbuttedness (yes that is a word that the PG Era has allowed me to create).


Persuasion: Dman and I have been watching wrestling for a long time, Him longer, due to his senior status, But we both have the privileged of seeing the times change. However, call me a pessimist, which most do not, but I predict a future decline for Vince's product. Still, D-Man persuaded me a lot more than Thriller did here. He gets this point.


TM rates this 4 points DMan, 1 points Thriller.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

Clarity - Thanks for outlining things as usual, D-Man. Good job on presenting a clear argument. You did pretty good yourself, Thriller, and this bodes well for you, as you will see in a little bit.

Point: D-Man

Punctuality - D-Man gets the point.

Point: D-Man

Informative - Thriller, you kept things straight and to the point. You gave a simple and short argument and decided to shine in your rebuttals. D-Man, always remember to bring in sources for anything that can't readily be found on this site or Wikipedia. You mentioned in your opening arguments that WWE currently has more fans than the WWF had in the 1980s. I have never seen this mentioned before. I only know three things: WWE has a lot more programming than the WWF had in the 1980s and an overwhelming majority of Americans now have basic cable/satellite service. How does this translate into WWE having a bigger fanbase?

Point: Thriller

Emotionality - Go ahead and have as much of a love-fest as you desire. Thriller, you kept at it, and never backed down. This wasn't the case in your earlier debates, so I'm giving you the point here, as you've upped your persistence and conviction.

Point: Thriller

Persuasion - Great strategy here, Thriller. I was very persuaded by what you had to offer. You gave a common sense opening argument, and overcame almost all of D-Man's objections. Also, you did a pretty good job in refuting the points he made.

Point: Thriller

tdigle's Score

Thriller - 3
D-Man - 2

 

[Blade]

Clarity: Both made great posts here, but I think D-Man thought his posts and arguments out better. D-Man gets the point.

Punctuality: See TM's post.

Informative: D-Man just threw so much great tidbits ( I hate that word, but it seems to fit) out there and they fit well.

Emotionality: You both sicken me. I judge debates for blood!! Remember, in debates there are no friends or enemies, just opponents. No point given here, let that be a lesson to you.

Persuasion: D-Man takes this point too. Simply put, his story about his interest in wrestling from an early age and how it hasn't wavered is hard to argue against. It's hard to argue that wrestling is not, for want of a better word, addictive!

Thriller 0 D-Man 4

 

[CH David]

Clarity: D-Man always outlines his posts and make them look fantastic.

Point: The D-Man

Punctuality: Thriller a smidge late.

Point: The D-Man

Informative: This is a tough one. Both brought some great information. This is purely a speculation debate. I'm going to have to give this to Thriller, as he brought about ideas for other shows for kids to watch, such as real sports, sitcoms, cartoons, etc.

Point: Thriller

Emotionality: Love fest this, love fest that. I don't care. D-Man seemed really into his points, having grown up with the product himself. D-Man even said it himself, Thriller was acting like a gentleman. Take it as you will.

Point: The D-Man

Persuasion: I think I have to with Thriller on this one, for the sole reason that no matter what, he was going to lose in some facet. The question is, will kids still be fans in 10 years. There is no way to say that all of the current fans won't be fans anymore. It just isn't logical for it to happen. Thriller persuaded me on the point that more kids will stop watching than those that will continue, which is the only point he had to stand on, and he put up a good fight.

Point: Thriller

CH David scores this D-Man 3, Thriller 2.

 

[Miko]

Clarity: Gotta go with D-Man, same reasons as everybody else, although I do really like Thrillers short approach

Point: The D-Man

Punctuality: Thriller was late, others have said mmm

Point: The D-Man

Informative: Thriller, same reasons as CH David up there

Point: Thriller

Emotionality: I was wondering when you both were gonna stop debating and just hug each other to death, luckily that didnt happen, although judging would've been easier. Split points

Point: Split

Persuasion: Thriller had me nodding in agreement more often, had D-Man said "I watched Ultimate Warrior and he was fucking awesome" then I'd have given the point straight to him. As it stands, Thriller gets the point.

Point: Thriller

Miko scores this
D-Man - 2.5
Thriller - 2.5