Week 8: Tastycles -versus- IC 25
- Thread starter Mr. TM
- Start date
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
So much for a break after last week's marathon. I feel like I went straight from Rocky 2 to Rocky 4.
Anyway, I am going to go with the argument that the IWC is a negative for the WWE. Tastycles, have at it. I will post tomorrow afternoon regardless.
Anyway, I am going to go with the argument that the IWC is a negative for the WWE. Tastycles, have at it. I will post tomorrow afternoon regardless.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it has fallen upon me to tell you why the IWC, that's you guys, is a good thing for the WWE. I expect my opponent to put up a superb argument, but hopefully, for the sake of my fingers and employment, not as quickfire as the one he participated in last week, but we shall wait and see.
As ever, we begin a debate with a simple definititon of the matter at hand. In the question here we all know what every term means very definitely, except for "IWC". IWC has many loose definitions, and can mean anything from everyone who has ever been on the internet, through to a very small portion of select people that think that John Cena and Hulk Hogan were crap and that Ring of Honor is better than WWF circa 1999.
This vagueness could obviously lead to confusion here, so I am going to define the IWC as people who regularly, talk about, read about or watch wrestling on the internet. That's everyone from the 10 year old kid that writes Batista is da bomb on WWE Universe, right through the ROHbots or whatever it is people call them to Slyfox696 educating people about John Cena.
With our definition in mind, we go into the jucier parts of the argument.
WWE.com
WWE.com is the primary interface that the company has with fans on the internet. It is in the top 600 websites by site traffic in the world, not including its daughter sites wweshop.com, wweeuroshop.com and wweaffiliates.com. That is a staggering amount of unique visitors everyday, and what it means is that the WWE is open to a far bigger audience than just the people who are watching on TV.
This site, unlike many of my other points, has a much more obvious and direct positive impact on the company. Because of the sheer volume of the IWC that go to the site, it increases merchandise sales, but perhaps even more directly, it makes the WWE a hell of a lot of money in advertising. Not to mention the fact the polls and forums on the site mean that the WWE have instant and direct access to fan feedback, which brings me quite nicely onto my next point.
Feedback
The IWC is capable of giving Vince a glimpse of what the fans are thinking, who they like and dislike, and who they would like to see fired or hired. Now, I'm not going to suggest for a minute that Vince McMahon sits on Wrestlezone all day and turns Shelton Benjamin heel and gives him a mouthpiece manager and a run at the World title as a result. What I am saying is that it is a useful yardstick, and that if you look at the polls on WWE.com, a place where the most wrestling fans congrugate, you see that Cena haters are in the minority. Batista won the poll as wrestler of the year last year, so people alledgedly "unpopular" in the IWC obviously aren't.
My evidence for this is quite low, but I'll use an example. Matt Hardy attributes his rehiring by the WWE entirely to the sheer volume of support he got from the IWC. The company was able to see that the fans wanted Hardy and acted accordingly. Imagine now, if you will, the days before the IWC. The WWE would have missed out on rehiring that popular wrestler because people wouldn't have told them that they miss them.
It works the other way too. Vladimir Kozlov wasn't selected for Cyber Sunday as they expected and routinely was panned by the IWC and on wwe.com polls. He went to ECW, but that still wasn't enough, and he now finds himself on the ECW midcard after almost a year of a main event push. He'd still be there if it wasn't for the universal disdain for him given on the internet. Some people have gained popularity due to the internet though, and we shall look at that now.
Those that couldn't be pushed now can
Traditional wrestling wisdom holds that in order for a wrestler to be successful and a draw, they have to be physically large or highly technical wrestlers. A quick look at WWE Champions before the widespread success of the internet in 1996 confirms and corrobortes this. Since then, the smaller showmen, often called the darlings of the IWC forums, have broken through the glass ceiling. This is not a coincidence.
Shawn Michaels was the first, and he wasn't that big a draw or merchandise seller at the time. When he returned from injury a few years later, he was far more popular despite not being as good as he was. Why? The forum visiting IWC increased in number so the people bigging up Shawn were increased, and thus he became more popular.
Go to any WWE event and check out the number of Edge T-shirts in the audience. Look to see if any of those people are a traditional wrestling audience member, and you will see that 99 times out of 100 they aren't. The IWC forums build up guys like that and those forum members then buy the merchandise of guys that would never have been a big deal in the past. You never see a child in an Edge t-shirt.
Fanbase
This new, Edge-loving fanbase that the IWC has become is a very good thing for the company. Even though pretty much all the IWC on forums do is bitch about how crap Raw is, they have a vested interest in the product. Unlike the majority of the audience, they will tune in, no matter how "shit" it is, so they can have a good ol' fashioned bitch about how "bad" it was.
That may not seem like that much of a good thing, but it really is. Here, you have now a fanbase that is interested in everything about your company, because they want to talk about it. Be honest, how many of the posters reading this have watched a match or bought a DVD, even gone to an event at the reccommendation of another forum member? There can be few who haven't, and that obviously helps the company get exposure.
The IWC provide the WWE with a hardcore fanbase, but also with a forum for fans to come and discuss the product. If people can do that, they are more interested in the product, and whats more the camraderie built on places such as this, and their own desire to see how the company works means that they are far less fickle than your average wrestling fan. In short, the IWC has made a hardcore and integrated fanbase for the WWE.
The extra dimension
Because of this fanbase existing and them generally being a little less naive of the product, it gives an added dimension to storylines. It is no coincidence that the highly successful worked shoot angles of the late 90s came about at the same time as the mass prevalence of the internet. This would never have happened without the IWC, which means that much of the Attitude Era would never have happened.
Its still happening today. If it wasn't for the IWC, nobody would have known about Jeff Hardy's drug issues, as it has never been publically shown on any media outlet. This basically made Punk's feud with him recently. No IWC, no legitimacy for Punk, which means he'd have had another dud reign again.
Knowledge which is assumed like Jeff's drugs, MVP's time in jail and HHH's marriage all comes about because of th IWC. Without it, there is no way the WWE could expect you to know, so the loss of those otential storylines is made.
New Talent
The awareness of external factors is not exclusive to the storylines, but also to the actual wrestlers. Unless you lived in a very localised region before the days of the IWC, there is no way you would know who a young developmental wrestler was. Bryan Danielson will debut with a little, not a lot, but a little popularity because of the IWC fans. If he had just been in a small indy promotion on the east coast before the IWC days, absolutely nobody would know who he was and it would make it harder for him to garner popularity. After all, its much easier to build on a tiny bit of popularity than it is to start from scratch.
That is all for my initial arguments, I await the response of my opponent with much anticipation.
As ever, we begin a debate with a simple definititon of the matter at hand. In the question here we all know what every term means very definitely, except for "IWC". IWC has many loose definitions, and can mean anything from everyone who has ever been on the internet, through to a very small portion of select people that think that John Cena and Hulk Hogan were crap and that Ring of Honor is better than WWF circa 1999.
This vagueness could obviously lead to confusion here, so I am going to define the IWC as people who regularly, talk about, read about or watch wrestling on the internet. That's everyone from the 10 year old kid that writes Batista is da bomb on WWE Universe, right through the ROHbots or whatever it is people call them to Slyfox696 educating people about John Cena.
With our definition in mind, we go into the jucier parts of the argument.
WWE.com
WWE.com is the primary interface that the company has with fans on the internet. It is in the top 600 websites by site traffic in the world, not including its daughter sites wweshop.com, wweeuroshop.com and wweaffiliates.com. That is a staggering amount of unique visitors everyday, and what it means is that the WWE is open to a far bigger audience than just the people who are watching on TV.
This site, unlike many of my other points, has a much more obvious and direct positive impact on the company. Because of the sheer volume of the IWC that go to the site, it increases merchandise sales, but perhaps even more directly, it makes the WWE a hell of a lot of money in advertising. Not to mention the fact the polls and forums on the site mean that the WWE have instant and direct access to fan feedback, which brings me quite nicely onto my next point.
Feedback
The IWC is capable of giving Vince a glimpse of what the fans are thinking, who they like and dislike, and who they would like to see fired or hired. Now, I'm not going to suggest for a minute that Vince McMahon sits on Wrestlezone all day and turns Shelton Benjamin heel and gives him a mouthpiece manager and a run at the World title as a result. What I am saying is that it is a useful yardstick, and that if you look at the polls on WWE.com, a place where the most wrestling fans congrugate, you see that Cena haters are in the minority. Batista won the poll as wrestler of the year last year, so people alledgedly "unpopular" in the IWC obviously aren't.
My evidence for this is quite low, but I'll use an example. Matt Hardy attributes his rehiring by the WWE entirely to the sheer volume of support he got from the IWC. The company was able to see that the fans wanted Hardy and acted accordingly. Imagine now, if you will, the days before the IWC. The WWE would have missed out on rehiring that popular wrestler because people wouldn't have told them that they miss them.
It works the other way too. Vladimir Kozlov wasn't selected for Cyber Sunday as they expected and routinely was panned by the IWC and on wwe.com polls. He went to ECW, but that still wasn't enough, and he now finds himself on the ECW midcard after almost a year of a main event push. He'd still be there if it wasn't for the universal disdain for him given on the internet. Some people have gained popularity due to the internet though, and we shall look at that now.
Those that couldn't be pushed now can
Traditional wrestling wisdom holds that in order for a wrestler to be successful and a draw, they have to be physically large or highly technical wrestlers. A quick look at WWE Champions before the widespread success of the internet in 1996 confirms and corrobortes this. Since then, the smaller showmen, often called the darlings of the IWC forums, have broken through the glass ceiling. This is not a coincidence.
Shawn Michaels was the first, and he wasn't that big a draw or merchandise seller at the time. When he returned from injury a few years later, he was far more popular despite not being as good as he was. Why? The forum visiting IWC increased in number so the people bigging up Shawn were increased, and thus he became more popular.
Go to any WWE event and check out the number of Edge T-shirts in the audience. Look to see if any of those people are a traditional wrestling audience member, and you will see that 99 times out of 100 they aren't. The IWC forums build up guys like that and those forum members then buy the merchandise of guys that would never have been a big deal in the past. You never see a child in an Edge t-shirt.
Fanbase
This new, Edge-loving fanbase that the IWC has become is a very good thing for the company. Even though pretty much all the IWC on forums do is bitch about how crap Raw is, they have a vested interest in the product. Unlike the majority of the audience, they will tune in, no matter how "shit" it is, so they can have a good ol' fashioned bitch about how "bad" it was.
That may not seem like that much of a good thing, but it really is. Here, you have now a fanbase that is interested in everything about your company, because they want to talk about it. Be honest, how many of the posters reading this have watched a match or bought a DVD, even gone to an event at the reccommendation of another forum member? There can be few who haven't, and that obviously helps the company get exposure.
The IWC provide the WWE with a hardcore fanbase, but also with a forum for fans to come and discuss the product. If people can do that, they are more interested in the product, and whats more the camraderie built on places such as this, and their own desire to see how the company works means that they are far less fickle than your average wrestling fan. In short, the IWC has made a hardcore and integrated fanbase for the WWE.
The extra dimension
Because of this fanbase existing and them generally being a little less naive of the product, it gives an added dimension to storylines. It is no coincidence that the highly successful worked shoot angles of the late 90s came about at the same time as the mass prevalence of the internet. This would never have happened without the IWC, which means that much of the Attitude Era would never have happened.
Its still happening today. If it wasn't for the IWC, nobody would have known about Jeff Hardy's drug issues, as it has never been publically shown on any media outlet. This basically made Punk's feud with him recently. No IWC, no legitimacy for Punk, which means he'd have had another dud reign again.
Knowledge which is assumed like Jeff's drugs, MVP's time in jail and HHH's marriage all comes about because of th IWC. Without it, there is no way the WWE could expect you to know, so the loss of those otential storylines is made.
New Talent
The awareness of external factors is not exclusive to the storylines, but also to the actual wrestlers. Unless you lived in a very localised region before the days of the IWC, there is no way you would know who a young developmental wrestler was. Bryan Danielson will debut with a little, not a lot, but a little popularity because of the IWC fans. If he had just been in a small indy promotion on the east coast before the IWC days, absolutely nobody would know who he was and it would make it harder for him to garner popularity. After all, its much easier to build on a tiny bit of popularity than it is to start from scratch.
That is all for my initial arguments, I await the response of my opponent with much anticipation.
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
One word I can use to describe the debate I am about to engage in - "unenviable." I have the unenviable task of basically stating as fact that all of us - you, me, all of us on Wrestlezone and other IWC websites, are, in fact a detriment to the WWE. Furthermore, the WWE - the largest professional wrestling organization in the world - would be better off if the IWC did not exist.
Reason #1 - The Spoiler Effect
You can't deny the fact that the presence of the IWC has increased significantly the presence of storyline and match spoilers. Here at Wrestlezone, moderators such as myself have deleted, banned, and infracted spoilers to try to respectfully reserve the element of surprise for those fans wishing not to know everything.
Self control is one thing, but the mere presence of the information can be so tempting. It also ruins the romance of the storyline - just knowing that the results of the book you are reading is right at your fingertips really takes the lustre off of the read. Same with pro wrestling. Why was Harry Potter 7 the best selling book of all time? Because everybody wanted to know the ending, but nobody did.
When was the last time that happened? How often are you actually shocked by something? And in the rare instance you are shocked, how often are you let down when things return to normal? If the IWC goes away, so does that stigma.
Reason #2 - No longer a fan of Wrestling...
You're now so clued in to the inner workings of the matches that the reasons you were originally attracted to pro wrestling - the spectacle, shock, and sport - have been replaced by cynicism and a need to critique every little thing.
In the terrific build up to Wrestlemania 7, Sgt. Slaughter burned an American flag in the ring. At that time, at that age, I was appalled. I was offended. I thought he was such a bastard.
Take that event and place it in today's product with the IWC in tow. How, it's "wow, what a great heel move. He's very believable in this role."
From Wrestlemania 4 through Wrestlemania 6, there were a grand total of 2 WWF Champions. Savage and Hogan, each of them with a year-long reign. There was no doubt that they were the two best at that time, and their year long reign affirmed that. "Champions for a year? Wow, they are awesome!"
God forbid John Cena's reign approaches 9 months. People will cry foul without question. "They are shoving him down our throats. It's so stale." Why? Because we know too much. THAT is why. The IWC is why.
Reason #3 - Overanalysis breeds contempt
The IWC has not been a bastion of celebration "for the sport we love." It's become a place to bitch and complain. A place to point out the flaws in the product we follow. We're like film critics. We spend so much time breaking down storylines, creating conjecture, and convincing ourselves that we know more than everybody else - even those who get paid to do this stuff - that instead of enjoying it, we have contempt for it.
We're angry that John Cena is a champion again. We're pissed Triple H married Stephanie. We don't understand why The Miz can't get a decent push. Why? Because we know to much. UFC doesn't have that issue, because it's a sport. Pro wrestling isn't, and the IWC makes sure it mever will be again.
Reason #4 - Who Needs to Watch?
I am typing this monolouge while Monday Night Raw is on. Why? Because I know that nothing major is going to happen. I know the storylines and how they will go from this site. And if I do miss something, I'll read about it on here, get everybody's opinions on it, and see it on Youtube within a day. It will be on wikipedia in 10 minutes. I don't need to watch.
I also don't need to pay for the PPV's. Why not? I have Wrestlezone's LD's, updates from the main page, and <gasp> free internet streams. All made possible by the IWC. Now, the excitement of watching a PPV and seeing feuds end is gone because nothing major is going to happen, and if it does, people will find a way to say it sucks anyway.
I will be glad to respond to my opponents posts tomorrow, but for tonight, I had to make these four major points perfectly clear. Rest assured I will have more.
Reason #1 - The Spoiler Effect
You can't deny the fact that the presence of the IWC has increased significantly the presence of storyline and match spoilers. Here at Wrestlezone, moderators such as myself have deleted, banned, and infracted spoilers to try to respectfully reserve the element of surprise for those fans wishing not to know everything.
Self control is one thing, but the mere presence of the information can be so tempting. It also ruins the romance of the storyline - just knowing that the results of the book you are reading is right at your fingertips really takes the lustre off of the read. Same with pro wrestling. Why was Harry Potter 7 the best selling book of all time? Because everybody wanted to know the ending, but nobody did.
When was the last time that happened? How often are you actually shocked by something? And in the rare instance you are shocked, how often are you let down when things return to normal? If the IWC goes away, so does that stigma.
Reason #2 - No longer a fan of Wrestling...
You're now so clued in to the inner workings of the matches that the reasons you were originally attracted to pro wrestling - the spectacle, shock, and sport - have been replaced by cynicism and a need to critique every little thing.
In the terrific build up to Wrestlemania 7, Sgt. Slaughter burned an American flag in the ring. At that time, at that age, I was appalled. I was offended. I thought he was such a bastard.
Take that event and place it in today's product with the IWC in tow. How, it's "wow, what a great heel move. He's very believable in this role."
From Wrestlemania 4 through Wrestlemania 6, there were a grand total of 2 WWF Champions. Savage and Hogan, each of them with a year-long reign. There was no doubt that they were the two best at that time, and their year long reign affirmed that. "Champions for a year? Wow, they are awesome!"
God forbid John Cena's reign approaches 9 months. People will cry foul without question. "They are shoving him down our throats. It's so stale." Why? Because we know too much. THAT is why. The IWC is why.
Reason #3 - Overanalysis breeds contempt
The IWC has not been a bastion of celebration "for the sport we love." It's become a place to bitch and complain. A place to point out the flaws in the product we follow. We're like film critics. We spend so much time breaking down storylines, creating conjecture, and convincing ourselves that we know more than everybody else - even those who get paid to do this stuff - that instead of enjoying it, we have contempt for it.
We're angry that John Cena is a champion again. We're pissed Triple H married Stephanie. We don't understand why The Miz can't get a decent push. Why? Because we know to much. UFC doesn't have that issue, because it's a sport. Pro wrestling isn't, and the IWC makes sure it mever will be again.
Reason #4 - Who Needs to Watch?
I am typing this monolouge while Monday Night Raw is on. Why? Because I know that nothing major is going to happen. I know the storylines and how they will go from this site. And if I do miss something, I'll read about it on here, get everybody's opinions on it, and see it on Youtube within a day. It will be on wikipedia in 10 minutes. I don't need to watch.
I also don't need to pay for the PPV's. Why not? I have Wrestlezone's LD's, updates from the main page, and <gasp> free internet streams. All made possible by the IWC. Now, the excitement of watching a PPV and seeing feuds end is gone because nothing major is going to happen, and if it does, people will find a way to say it sucks anyway.
I will be glad to respond to my opponents posts tomorrow, but for tonight, I had to make these four major points perfectly clear. Rest assured I will have more.
As with previous debates, I shall begin by first adding more points to my own argument, and I will then go on to address the arguments that have been made by my opponent.
Deliberate leaks
It sounds strange doesn't it, but it is a legitimate tool in just about all walks of media. To leak a small piece of information in order to leave people needing to quench a thirst for more is a legitimate tool that has been used by the WWE too.
Perhaps the best example is of the mystery wrestler backstage. How often do we see this news on websites such as this RVD is backstage at the Royal Rumble, and sure enough he made an appearence. When they want to keep it secret, as with Big Show's return, most people thought it was coming back after No Way Out, he then shows up, completely unnanounced on that PPV. The IWC didn't report that Masters was backstage the other week either. Its funny how something which may garner a few extra PPV buys is mysteriously available to the IWC, but something where suprise is the element is kept under wraps.
The internet as a storyline tool
We have seen how deliberate leaks can be used to garner interest in a particular event, but the internet can have a far more active role in progressing a storyline. Perhaps the best example of this is last year's Survivor Series. The story about Jeff Hardy being found in a stairwell was perhaps in bad taste, but you can't deny how hotly passed around it was, on wwe.com and beyond.
This news was not seen anywhere else, but managed to sollicit more interest in that PPV and there's no denying that. It was then treated as common knowledge when the PPV began, proving that the WWE expects its audience to be on the internet, and proving that it was the key tool in getting that storyline across. If it wasnt for the IWC, that storyline could never have developed at a realistic pace, and would have been limited to badly placed angles on TV ("Hardy attacked on way to arena", "Hardy attacked backstage", "Hardy attacked in ring") which would have been uninspiring.
The fact that storyline developed at random times with the car crash made it all the more engaging to the audience than if it just happened on Fridays. Without the IWC, it would have just been JR telling the audience what had happened that week, which would have had the same affect as it just happening. The existence of the IWC allowed the story to be realistic.
Greater accessibility
As well as being a tool for storylines, the internet has provided a tool for helping a wrestler get over with the fans. Thanks to the IWC, the demand is there for wrestlers to be online, both on official WWE Universe websites and on their own Twitters etc. The IWC's hunger for information means that they go on these websites and give the wrestlers a core audience, which can then be built on by non internet fans in arenas and thus, the company is given a boost.
The IWC can help a wrestler get over, and that is helped if they have an interaction with them. It all comes back to advertising again. If there wasn't an IWC these wrestlers blogs and things wouldn't be visited and the WWE would lose out on the revenue as well as the more direct benefit of having an over superstar.
Healthy competition
My final point is on a bit of a tangent to the others, but it is something to take to heart. It is thanks to the IWC that TNA has grown as rapidly as it has. Without it, there wouldn't have been the audience for those early weekly PPVs or when it got taken off FSN. As it happened, TNA was able to exist and grow.
But wait! TNA isn't part of WWE, so that's a bad thing, right? Wrong. Wrestling was stale as a monopoly. If you don't believe me, look at how quickly the ratings for Raw dropped off after WCW went bust. Now that TNA has become more popular than it ever was before, WWE has upped its game a little, and the average rating is up .5 on last year, and .1 on the year before that, for the first ratings increase since 2005.
The IWC has allowed competition to be at a competitive level inside 7 years. Compare that to the position ECW found itself in after 7 years, bankrupt with less than 10% of the wrestling audience, and you can see how much of an effect the IWC has had. Competition is what makes businesses thrive, and it is what took Raw from 2.4 ratings in 1995 to 6.1 in 1999, without the IWC we would have been quite a few years from seeing a rival promotion with widespread popularity.
The spoiler effect
Having looked at a few of my own new arguments, I shall address those of my opponent now.
Actually, you can deny it. 13 years ago, when wwe.com looked like this, and websites like this were just pipe dreams, Tony Schiavone was giving out the Raw spoilers on a regular basis, so the IWC isn't the only culprit at all. Indeed, even when Wrestlezone did launch in 1998, it had very little traffic compared to, say, Nitro.
But the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the audiece don't read spoilers, and that the programming that the WWE invests the most time and money in, Raw and PPVs are both live 95% of the time except for foreign tours. You can't spoil live television, even if you "know" what is going to happen. Remember when everyone "knew" Christian was going to appear on one of the PPVs in late 2008, or when they "knew" Chris Jericho would be at Survivor Series 2007?
The WWE shock the IWC and everyone else all of the time. Absolutely nobody saw Cena returning at the Royal Rumble last year. Absolutely nobody saw any of the MITB cash ins, nobody saw DX losing to Legacy. The latter isn't in the same league as the others, but you get my drift, there are things that the IWC don't see coming that happen on a regular basis. Perhaps you would like to tell me what shocked you so much in 1995, the last time when the internet was completely irrelevant.
No longer a fan of Wrestling...
That's perhaps true, but its detrimental to the IWC, not to WWE. If the IWC want to pay money to watch WWE events, and then criticise it, power to them, but it isn't losing the company anything. You're still watching.
I'm not sure this is true anyway, actually. People do criticise, but they still get lost in the product. Watch how slowly a LD progresses on these forums when a match like Mysterio vs Jericho is on. People still let themselves be entertained.
Right, and how old were you in 1991? About 10? Do you think a ten year old watching now would question whether or not Randy Orton is coming across well when he is booting an old man in the head, or do you think that a 10 year old is thinking "wow, that Orton is a bad man"?
The intelligent people in their 20s like yourself now at WrestleMania VII, would have been just as analytical as you are now. That's if there were such fans then. The IWC has given people like you and me a place to talk about wrestling. If it didn't exist, I'm not so sure that everyone here would still be watching, because one might feel that it was below ones intelligence to watch a product like pro wrestling if you can't analyse it.
The IWC isn't why at all. It's weekly TV, saturation of markets and general demands of society that have taken us out of the era of wrestlers holding titles for several years. This can be easily proved. In the 4 years between 1 January 1991 and 1 January 1995, long before the days of the IWC but within the days of widespread exposure, instant demand and for the most part weekly television, there were 15 WWE Champions.
In the 4 years between 1 January 2005 and 1 January 2009, literally the same period of time, there have been 15 champions, exactly the same number. The IWC has had absolutely no effect on the length of reigns or the amount of title changes, it is other external factors that do this.
Overanalysis breeds contempt
Firstly, there are plenty of people within the IWC that don't bitch and moan. This includes people on wwe.com right through to some of the most highly regarded posters on this site. For example, when was the last time that you heard, obviously I actually mean read, Slyfox696 bitch and moan about the WWE product?
But again, I ask you why it is detrimental to the WWE for a bunch of people to moan about the product that they are still paying to watch? The Raw LD is the same 2 hour bitchfest every week, but the same people are there week after week, criticising the product, and it doesn't matter. Overanalysis may be detrimental to your own enjoyment, but it doesn't remotely affect the fortunes of World Wrestling Entertainment.
UFC absolutely has this problem. People bitch that they didn't offer Fedor a big sack of cash, and that Brock Lesnar was given a title match too soon. People bitch about the cards. Are you telling me that the average football fan doesn't moan about the tactics of his team, or a baseball fan that doesn't moan about the umpires. People moan about what they love. You used the analogy of a film critic, and let me put that back on to you, film critics still go to the cinema. Everyone criticises every piece of media they watch. The IWC hasn't invented that, if anything it has given people a place to vent rather than them just switching off.
Who Needs to Watch?
This is ridiculous. I can find out the football score from the BBC and watch the goals on Sky Sports News, doesn'tmean I'm going to though, because it is the match I want to see. Any sport results can be found out about later, and wrestling is not unique. Its the same from the entertainment aspect. I can read the blurb of a film off Wikipedia and then watch the best bits on Youtube, or I can actually watch the film. That choice exists to everyone and it always has. You can keep up with other sports without watching them, purely by watching the news, but the fans don't because they enjoy them, the same is true of wrestling.
If this were true, that the IWC was killing PPV buy rates, then surely they would have been higher in the past, no? Lets see...
WrestleMania IV, before the IWC existed drew 550,000 buys.
WrestleMania XIV, when the IWC was in its infancy drew 750,000 buys.
WrestleMania XXIV, when the IWC was in full force drew 1,058,000 buys.
Your claim is simply untrue.
So there we have it, I have answered all of my opponents arguments as well as making a few more of my own. Thank you very much for reading, and again I await my opponents response with great interest.
Deliberate leaks
It sounds strange doesn't it, but it is a legitimate tool in just about all walks of media. To leak a small piece of information in order to leave people needing to quench a thirst for more is a legitimate tool that has been used by the WWE too.
Perhaps the best example is of the mystery wrestler backstage. How often do we see this news on websites such as this RVD is backstage at the Royal Rumble, and sure enough he made an appearence. When they want to keep it secret, as with Big Show's return, most people thought it was coming back after No Way Out, he then shows up, completely unnanounced on that PPV. The IWC didn't report that Masters was backstage the other week either. Its funny how something which may garner a few extra PPV buys is mysteriously available to the IWC, but something where suprise is the element is kept under wraps.
The internet as a storyline tool
We have seen how deliberate leaks can be used to garner interest in a particular event, but the internet can have a far more active role in progressing a storyline. Perhaps the best example of this is last year's Survivor Series. The story about Jeff Hardy being found in a stairwell was perhaps in bad taste, but you can't deny how hotly passed around it was, on wwe.com and beyond.
This news was not seen anywhere else, but managed to sollicit more interest in that PPV and there's no denying that. It was then treated as common knowledge when the PPV began, proving that the WWE expects its audience to be on the internet, and proving that it was the key tool in getting that storyline across. If it wasnt for the IWC, that storyline could never have developed at a realistic pace, and would have been limited to badly placed angles on TV ("Hardy attacked on way to arena", "Hardy attacked backstage", "Hardy attacked in ring") which would have been uninspiring.
The fact that storyline developed at random times with the car crash made it all the more engaging to the audience than if it just happened on Fridays. Without the IWC, it would have just been JR telling the audience what had happened that week, which would have had the same affect as it just happening. The existence of the IWC allowed the story to be realistic.
Greater accessibility
As well as being a tool for storylines, the internet has provided a tool for helping a wrestler get over with the fans. Thanks to the IWC, the demand is there for wrestlers to be online, both on official WWE Universe websites and on their own Twitters etc. The IWC's hunger for information means that they go on these websites and give the wrestlers a core audience, which can then be built on by non internet fans in arenas and thus, the company is given a boost.
The IWC can help a wrestler get over, and that is helped if they have an interaction with them. It all comes back to advertising again. If there wasn't an IWC these wrestlers blogs and things wouldn't be visited and the WWE would lose out on the revenue as well as the more direct benefit of having an over superstar.
Healthy competition
My final point is on a bit of a tangent to the others, but it is something to take to heart. It is thanks to the IWC that TNA has grown as rapidly as it has. Without it, there wouldn't have been the audience for those early weekly PPVs or when it got taken off FSN. As it happened, TNA was able to exist and grow.
But wait! TNA isn't part of WWE, so that's a bad thing, right? Wrong. Wrestling was stale as a monopoly. If you don't believe me, look at how quickly the ratings for Raw dropped off after WCW went bust. Now that TNA has become more popular than it ever was before, WWE has upped its game a little, and the average rating is up .5 on last year, and .1 on the year before that, for the first ratings increase since 2005.
The IWC has allowed competition to be at a competitive level inside 7 years. Compare that to the position ECW found itself in after 7 years, bankrupt with less than 10% of the wrestling audience, and you can see how much of an effect the IWC has had. Competition is what makes businesses thrive, and it is what took Raw from 2.4 ratings in 1995 to 6.1 in 1999, without the IWC we would have been quite a few years from seeing a rival promotion with widespread popularity.
The spoiler effect
Having looked at a few of my own new arguments, I shall address those of my opponent now.
Actually, you can deny it. 13 years ago, when wwe.com looked like this, and websites like this were just pipe dreams, Tony Schiavone was giving out the Raw spoilers on a regular basis, so the IWC isn't the only culprit at all. Indeed, even when Wrestlezone did launch in 1998, it had very little traffic compared to, say, Nitro.
But the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the audiece don't read spoilers, and that the programming that the WWE invests the most time and money in, Raw and PPVs are both live 95% of the time except for foreign tours. You can't spoil live television, even if you "know" what is going to happen. Remember when everyone "knew" Christian was going to appear on one of the PPVs in late 2008, or when they "knew" Chris Jericho would be at Survivor Series 2007?
The WWE shock the IWC and everyone else all of the time. Absolutely nobody saw Cena returning at the Royal Rumble last year. Absolutely nobody saw any of the MITB cash ins, nobody saw DX losing to Legacy. The latter isn't in the same league as the others, but you get my drift, there are things that the IWC don't see coming that happen on a regular basis. Perhaps you would like to tell me what shocked you so much in 1995, the last time when the internet was completely irrelevant.
No longer a fan of Wrestling...
That's perhaps true, but its detrimental to the IWC, not to WWE. If the IWC want to pay money to watch WWE events, and then criticise it, power to them, but it isn't losing the company anything. You're still watching.
I'm not sure this is true anyway, actually. People do criticise, but they still get lost in the product. Watch how slowly a LD progresses on these forums when a match like Mysterio vs Jericho is on. People still let themselves be entertained.
Right, and how old were you in 1991? About 10? Do you think a ten year old watching now would question whether or not Randy Orton is coming across well when he is booting an old man in the head, or do you think that a 10 year old is thinking "wow, that Orton is a bad man"?
The intelligent people in their 20s like yourself now at WrestleMania VII, would have been just as analytical as you are now. That's if there were such fans then. The IWC has given people like you and me a place to talk about wrestling. If it didn't exist, I'm not so sure that everyone here would still be watching, because one might feel that it was below ones intelligence to watch a product like pro wrestling if you can't analyse it.
The IWC isn't why at all. It's weekly TV, saturation of markets and general demands of society that have taken us out of the era of wrestlers holding titles for several years. This can be easily proved. In the 4 years between 1 January 1991 and 1 January 1995, long before the days of the IWC but within the days of widespread exposure, instant demand and for the most part weekly television, there were 15 WWE Champions.
In the 4 years between 1 January 2005 and 1 January 2009, literally the same period of time, there have been 15 champions, exactly the same number. The IWC has had absolutely no effect on the length of reigns or the amount of title changes, it is other external factors that do this.
Overanalysis breeds contempt
Firstly, there are plenty of people within the IWC that don't bitch and moan. This includes people on wwe.com right through to some of the most highly regarded posters on this site. For example, when was the last time that you heard, obviously I actually mean read, Slyfox696 bitch and moan about the WWE product?
But again, I ask you why it is detrimental to the WWE for a bunch of people to moan about the product that they are still paying to watch? The Raw LD is the same 2 hour bitchfest every week, but the same people are there week after week, criticising the product, and it doesn't matter. Overanalysis may be detrimental to your own enjoyment, but it doesn't remotely affect the fortunes of World Wrestling Entertainment.
UFC absolutely has this problem. People bitch that they didn't offer Fedor a big sack of cash, and that Brock Lesnar was given a title match too soon. People bitch about the cards. Are you telling me that the average football fan doesn't moan about the tactics of his team, or a baseball fan that doesn't moan about the umpires. People moan about what they love. You used the analogy of a film critic, and let me put that back on to you, film critics still go to the cinema. Everyone criticises every piece of media they watch. The IWC hasn't invented that, if anything it has given people a place to vent rather than them just switching off.
Who Needs to Watch?
This is ridiculous. I can find out the football score from the BBC and watch the goals on Sky Sports News, doesn'tmean I'm going to though, because it is the match I want to see. Any sport results can be found out about later, and wrestling is not unique. Its the same from the entertainment aspect. I can read the blurb of a film off Wikipedia and then watch the best bits on Youtube, or I can actually watch the film. That choice exists to everyone and it always has. You can keep up with other sports without watching them, purely by watching the news, but the fans don't because they enjoy them, the same is true of wrestling.
If this were true, that the IWC was killing PPV buy rates, then surely they would have been higher in the past, no? Lets see...
WrestleMania IV, before the IWC existed drew 550,000 buys.
WrestleMania XIV, when the IWC was in its infancy drew 750,000 buys.
WrestleMania XXIV, when the IWC was in full force drew 1,058,000 buys.
Your claim is simply untrue.
So there we have it, I have answered all of my opponents arguments as well as making a few more of my own. Thank you very much for reading, and again I await my opponents response with great interest.
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
I do not consider WWE.com to be a function of the Internet Wrestling Community. Why not? Plain and simple, it is a corporate website, a medium of company propaganda. The rules and restrictions placed on content, amount of news, chat, etc. is pretty significant.
WWE.com is an much a neutral member of the IWC as the Federalist Papers were a neutral cononist manifesto.
The website is not designed to give fans a forum, it's designed to sell advertising, push WWE products and merchandise, and promote their specific shows and storylines.
If the IWC had any effect whatsoever on WWE booking, I venture to guess that John Cena would not be a 6-time and current World Champion. Batista would not be back already, looking at an almost instant main event push. Vince McMahon uses crowd reaction, merchandise sales, gates, PPV buys, and ratings to determine pushes and the like - not the IWC. Sure, he may have a couple people on his team "monitor" the IWC, but that's more likely to see if spoilers are leaking and what people EXPECT to see happen.
Matt Hardy's job was saved by a huge internet campaign, but also by chants of "We Want Matt" in the crowd. That was an exception to the rule, because fans were so outraged by the situation with Edge and Lita. It made Matt a sympathetic figure. But how far did it really get him? He got his job back, and has received little to no sustained push since then. IWC notwithstanding.
And the Internet has nothing to do with Kozlov. He has gotten ZERO reaction from fans, partially because he is a black hole from which no charisma can escape. The first match he ever lost in the WWE was to Shawn Michaels on RAW, and everybody knew the outcome because the internet had been hyping Shawn vs Undertaker for months. In that regard, the internet KILLED Kozlov's steam, sure, but due to "The Spoiler Effect." He is an ECW mid-carder because he gets absolutely no reaction from a live crowd. Do you know where the reaction takes place when Kozlov wrestles? The urinals.
I disagree to an extent. I don't think the discussion of the IWC allows newer wrestlers to receive pushes. At least not in the WWE. It seems to me from what I read that the real IWC darlings are the indy wrestlers, TNA wrestlers, and ROH guys. That doesn't really help the WWE, because it promotes their competition. Remember, we're not debating whether the IWC harms professional wrestling, we are debating whether it harms the WWE.
As for your assertion that smaller, more technical wrestlers have broken through the "glass ceiling" to become champions more due to the IWC, I also think that's inaccurate. Randy Savage did it before the IWC exists. Same with Ricky Steamboat.
And since Shawn Michaels in the mid-90's was the worst drawing WWF Champion in the last 20 or so years, it's safe to say that IF WWE did go by the IWC in making that decision that the IWC was dead wrong, and in essence, harmed the WWE.
Wait, so the IWC-fueled, Edge-loving fan base is a good thing? Because, if nobody's told you yet - for the past 4 or 5 years Edge has been a heel. He's not supposed to have a fan base. And that's yet another reason why the IWC has harmed professional wrestling. Solid heels become popular good guys (Orton, Edge, Jericho) and popular babyfaces become hated figures (Cena, Batista.) The basis of professional wrestling is to be an athletic morality play of the struggles of good vs evil and art imitating life. When fans became too smart about the business and everyone became an expert, that willing suspension of disbelief ceased to be.
This is an interesting point you make. But I don't think you can look at a few storylines - vis-a-vis the Hardy / Punk angle, and say that alone makes the IWC relevant. I also don't think you can compare the storylines that the IWC helped to make favorably to the number of storylines the IWC has ruined through leaked spoilers and such, ex: Ric Flair's retirement angle vs Shawn Michaels, etc.
Furthermore, the IWC wasn't the reason for Hardy's drug suspensions being made public. That was a result of the wellness program guidelines that WWE instituted as a result of growing scrutiny from mainstream media and government about drugs and steroids in sports. WWE.com just happened to be the media outlet for it. The Hardy vs Punk feud and the direction they took with it is far more traceable to the Wellness Program than it is to the IWC.
Again, I am not saying that the IWC is all bad. I am saying that the negatives (spoilers, lack of fanship) vastly outweight the positives (information, forum for fans).
Your best argument by far. I absolutely think that the IWC's reaction, support, and campaigning for men like Bryan Danielson and Nigel McGuinness led to their being courted and signed by the WWE recently.
But think of the risk. Some past internet darlings have included men like Shelton Benjamin, and the result has been wasted pushes, increased fan criticism of the WWE on the internet including the assertion by internet fans that WWE was racist, and eventually the burying of a talent.
Let's assume that the WWE did read the IWC's reaction to guys like Shelton Benjamin and said "well, the IWC thinks this guy is a superstar, so let's push him. He's got a following." So they did, and Shelton was pushed before he was ready. He fell flat on his face, and the backlash was unfortunate. If Danielson and McGuinnes don't draw or succeed for the WWE, and the IWC is the reason they went after them, then are we really doing them any favors?
I also think it's misleading for you to suggest that the IWC is the reason WWE promotes young talent. They are doing it because established talent is getting older and is preparing to retire. That's simple sustainability.
Do you think that the number of deliberate leaks outnumbers the quantity of spoilers? How often do we read that Vince McMahon is furious with internet leaks ruining storylines?
And as for your RVD at the Royal Rumble example, let me ask you this - do you honestly think that fans paid the $50 to order the PPV just because RVD was rumored to be backstage?
In terms of the WWE, I don't think the superstars are as much involved in the IWC as you think. Yes, they are involved on WWE.com, but once again, that is a function of marketing and propaganda, less so of the Internet Wrestling Community as I define it. People who log on to WWE.com to see pictures of Kelly Kelly and read Santino Marella's WWE approved blog don't constitute the IWC. It's the folks of sites like Wrestlezone who read spoilers and then state "I can't believe they are going to give so and so another match they are wasting guys like so and so I am not even gonna watch lulz." A casual fan who occassionally logs on to a company website doesn't equate to a part of the IWC.
TNA is not yet direct competition to WWE in most ways. For starters, TNA's ratings increase has more to do with finally getting a cable TV slot than anything else. But the difference with WCW in the 90's was that they went into DIRECT competition with the WWE by placing a show opposite Raw during the Raw timeslot. That forced WWE to get better. A Thursday night show and some PPV's hasn't done anything to make WWE panic or turn on the gas.
All competition has been indirect thus far - WWE and TNA are both competing for consumer dollars. The DVD's compete. The video games compete. The merchandise competes.
For the "healthy competition" argument to work, competition would actually have to exist. As far as TNA goes, that's just not yet the case.
Again, I shall make a few new points in my favour before addressing those of my opponent.
Bigger interest
Everyone likes to talk about what they enjoy, be it sports, music or films, its a basic aspect of human social interaction. Unfortunately for us wrestling fans, that isn't always possible, because wrestling isn't very cool, you can't always do that. The IWC has given fans a place to talk about that.
The reason that's good for the WWE is that the camraderie of wrestling fans on places like WZ lead them to watch just so they can discuss it with their e-friends. I'm not saying people in the IWC watch because they are in the IWC, I'm just saying that if it is a close decision for them to watch or not, then they may be swayed into doing so because they can talk about it later.
Deeper understanding of the product
This goes without saying. Columns from guys like Glenn Gilberti and Mark Madden increase our understanding of the product. If your name is Bret Hart, that's a bad thing, but it really really isn't. For too long, wrestling fans were treated like idiots, and when people started treating them as if they were aware it was fake, the ratings grew. The reason they started treating them like that is because the IWC made it impossible to believe otherwise.
Vince Russo, regardless of what he did in WCW, was a success in WWE. If he wasn't, then Vince wouldn't have rehired him. Anyway, Russo's booking was heavily internet centric, and was very successful when in WWE. The moral of the story is that an increased awareness of the product brought about by the IWC improved it. It may not make a difference now, but it certainly did ten years ago.
Egging on your peers
Since being on this site, my interest in the product has increased, which has made my desire to find out more get bigger. I have bought DVDs based on the recommendations of people on this site, you have been to a WWE event with somebody that you met on this site. The existence of the IWC serves not only to act as a forum for fan discussion, but it also allows people to recommend other aspects of the product.
If both you and I have done it, that should show that this is prevalent. Because of the IWC, we are putting more money in the WWE coffers, and that can only be a good thing for the company.
wwe.com
We return now to the comments made by my opponent.
Except it isn't a corporate website, the seperate corportate.wwe.com is. The main wwe.com page is a kayfabe wrestling news site, that allows people to respond and interact about the product. Its a website, so its on the internet. Its owned and run by the wwe and is exclusviely about wrestling, and you can join up and tell them your opinions and discuss them with fellow wrestling fans, which, by definition, makes it part of the wrestling fan community. See what I did there? Very good.
Websites that objectively portrays wrestling are as common as four leaf clovers. Seriously, can you think of one? I can't. Everyone has got an agenda, from wwe.com to the lowly blogger.
wweshop.com is designed to sell merchandise. All websites that want to last longer than 8 seconds are designed to sell advertising. As for the fans having a forum, the most used and visited part of the website is WWE Universe, which is a fan forum.
I've literally opened one thread there, and it was a Cena bashing one. One guy's sig was this
That wouldn't be on there if it wwe.com was a corporate propaganda machine.
feedback
I'm not saying that Vince reads a book this thread then copies it, nor takes every single moron opinion on board, but he uses the IWC for feedback. Gauging what fans think is going to happen is getting feedback from the IWC, that's an excellent example, thanks. There wasn't a medium for this to be done before the IWC came into full effect.
Right, so here's the facts. Without the IWC, nobody would have known the circumstances of Hardy's release, they were not initially made public. Secondly, it was the campaign that led to the chants. Thirdly, it doesn't matter whats happened since, the IWC wanted Matt back, and Vince took it on board. As for the push, it's irrelevant, but I'm sure if you asked Hardy if he'd rather be in a major angle on WrestleMania or headlining a show in a scout hut in Rhyl, he'd go with WrestleMania.
I'm willing to accept that the internet reaction didn't cause his drop, if you are willing to use your own criteria and accept that Kozlov was dropped cause he was shit and not because of some spoilers. On an aside, anyone who can't maintain steam after losing a match isn't really very good.
Those that couldn't be pushed now can
It absolutely does happen in the WWE. Look at the main eventers in 1989, look at the size of them, and look at them in 2009. The kids still like the big guys, it is the smarky people in the crowd that pay to see Edge, buy CM Punk merchandise and ladder match DVDs. This is a categorical fact, you could try and explain this without recourse to the IWC, but you can't say it hasn't happened. I'm saying the IWC has made it ok to like these guys and has made the fanbase grow, show me what has.
When did Ricky Steamboat win the WWF Title? We're talking about WWF remember, not professional wrestling. As for Savage, he weighed over 240lbs and looked like this
I don't really think he is small.
People don't like change, and there was a much smaller IWC in which the fanbase could build then. Since his inital, horrible run, how much do you think Michaels has made in merchandise, what about Edge?, RVD?, Rey Mysterio?, Jeff Hardy? None of those guys would ever have been main eventers if it hadn't been made ok to like smaller guys by the IWC.
fanbase
If people are paying to see Orton, Jericho and Edge and are buying their merchandise, then it is a good thing for the company. The number of people at the events booing them far outnumber those cheering them, but the few that do cheer make heels more saleable. Compare how many people were wearing King Kong Bundy T-shrits in 1986 to those wearing RKO ones in 2009, and you'll see my point entirely. By breaking down the heel-face solidity, the IWC has doubled the number of saleable superstars in the company. A good thing, surely.
The extra dimension
Not being funny, but I wasn't in the IWC back then, and if you didn't see Michaels - Flair coming, then you have poor foresight.
Right, because loads of people who aren't in the IWC go to the industry news section of wwe.com. I tell you what, google "jeff hardy wellness violation" and tell me how many of the sites in the first 5 pages are not wrestling news ones? The answer is one, on page three. That is a tabloid newspapers wrestling news section. There is no way that Hardy's violations would be well known without the internet wrestling community.
I'm not saying its all good, but its more good than bad.
new talent
Well your negative and positive points kind of proove a point. The WWE needs new talent, and thanks to the IWC, they can get guys who already have some measure of popularity.
Sure, a few may fall flat on their face, but others, e.g. CM Punk grow into megastars. It was the same before and after the IWC, but the difference now is that they can know if someone is going to have a minor backing as soon as they debut, as was the case with Punk, and as will be with Danielson and McGuinness.
deliberate leaks
How doyou know if those leaks aren't deliberate too? It's a messy business to get into, but its hard to tell. Some spoilers are obviously hacks making shit up, to be honest. Why would Vince be bothered about people knowing that Chris Masters may return in the next month or two? All of the Christian "spoilers" helped the Hardy swerve get over. Probably the only thing I've seen on here in a year that would have ired Vince is the leaked JBL vs CM Punk script.
Given it is the Royal Rumble, people would know that meant he'd be appearing. If one person, a die hard RVD fan, bought the PPV, then it the leak was worthwhile, right?
I've already shown why this isn't the case. Basically, if fans on WWE Universe, an internet foru, can interact with Santino's approved blog, it means they relate to and support him better.
healthy competition
Except it doesn't quite work likr that. They may not be on at the same time, but you can guarantee that not everyone wants to donate every weeknight to wrestling. That is how they are competing, indirectly. Just this week I've seen somebody post that they can only afford one PPV a month, be it TNA or WWE. That is competition, and is actually quite direct.
Right, which is competition, you are proving my point
I have shown that TNA is competing with the WWE, even if it isn't in a Monday Night War situation. The IWC hasn't built TNA completely, but without it, it wouldn't have been nearly popular enough to get a TV deal.
That is the end of my arguments, and my analysis of those of my opponent, I await his next post with the greatest of interests, thank you for reading.
Bigger interest
Everyone likes to talk about what they enjoy, be it sports, music or films, its a basic aspect of human social interaction. Unfortunately for us wrestling fans, that isn't always possible, because wrestling isn't very cool, you can't always do that. The IWC has given fans a place to talk about that.
The reason that's good for the WWE is that the camraderie of wrestling fans on places like WZ lead them to watch just so they can discuss it with their e-friends. I'm not saying people in the IWC watch because they are in the IWC, I'm just saying that if it is a close decision for them to watch or not, then they may be swayed into doing so because they can talk about it later.
Deeper understanding of the product
This goes without saying. Columns from guys like Glenn Gilberti and Mark Madden increase our understanding of the product. If your name is Bret Hart, that's a bad thing, but it really really isn't. For too long, wrestling fans were treated like idiots, and when people started treating them as if they were aware it was fake, the ratings grew. The reason they started treating them like that is because the IWC made it impossible to believe otherwise.
Vince Russo, regardless of what he did in WCW, was a success in WWE. If he wasn't, then Vince wouldn't have rehired him. Anyway, Russo's booking was heavily internet centric, and was very successful when in WWE. The moral of the story is that an increased awareness of the product brought about by the IWC improved it. It may not make a difference now, but it certainly did ten years ago.
Egging on your peers
Since being on this site, my interest in the product has increased, which has made my desire to find out more get bigger. I have bought DVDs based on the recommendations of people on this site, you have been to a WWE event with somebody that you met on this site. The existence of the IWC serves not only to act as a forum for fan discussion, but it also allows people to recommend other aspects of the product.
If both you and I have done it, that should show that this is prevalent. Because of the IWC, we are putting more money in the WWE coffers, and that can only be a good thing for the company.
wwe.com
We return now to the comments made by my opponent.
Except it isn't a corporate website, the seperate corportate.wwe.com is. The main wwe.com page is a kayfabe wrestling news site, that allows people to respond and interact about the product. Its a website, so its on the internet. Its owned and run by the wwe and is exclusviely about wrestling, and you can join up and tell them your opinions and discuss them with fellow wrestling fans, which, by definition, makes it part of the wrestling fan community. See what I did there? Very good.
Websites that objectively portrays wrestling are as common as four leaf clovers. Seriously, can you think of one? I can't. Everyone has got an agenda, from wwe.com to the lowly blogger.
wweshop.com is designed to sell merchandise. All websites that want to last longer than 8 seconds are designed to sell advertising. As for the fans having a forum, the most used and visited part of the website is WWE Universe, which is a fan forum.
I've literally opened one thread there, and it was a Cena bashing one. One guy's sig was this
10. He buries talent with his "invincible" persona. He is put over superstars who often dominate the entire match impressively until the last 30 seconds which result in another win.
9. His programs consist of him getting beat up every single week until he wins in predictable fashion at the PPV.
8. His gimmick, or lack there of, is boring and stale. He's like the generic babyface, and it's rare he has a meaningful fued.
7. His mic skills are sub-par: I noticed it most when he was fueding with Jericho, who just whipped him on the mic and made Cena look really bad.
6. His title reigns are boring beyond belief. WWE is at it's worst when he's got the belt, which is far too often. He can't have meaningful promos and he can't do anything meaningful in the ring to help his rivalries.
5. He can't take a break from the main-event: he's got to be everywhere at everytime. Be it winning the Royal Rumble, winning the title in his return match, etc. he always is the centre of attention unless he's injured.
4. When he does return he ruins the great programs that often occur in his absense (i.e. Jericho title reign).
3. This may be a one-off, but when he does a movie it's like everything suddenly resolves around it. There's vignettes for it 5 times a show plus the commercials in between. I mean, jesus christ I get it's a WWE movie with John Cena but come on!
2. His wrestling skills are mediocore at best. His 5-move John Cena routine is ridiculous. His entire offensive repitoire can be executed in 60 seconds and he has to be carried the rest of the match.
1. He is shoved down our throats to a degree commonly reserved for elected members of parliament. They're trying to bill him as the next Austin/Rock/Hogan but he's not nearly as entertaining or watchable. He is boring in and outside the ring and some compare to Hogan-I believe he's much worse.
9. His programs consist of him getting beat up every single week until he wins in predictable fashion at the PPV.
8. His gimmick, or lack there of, is boring and stale. He's like the generic babyface, and it's rare he has a meaningful fued.
7. His mic skills are sub-par: I noticed it most when he was fueding with Jericho, who just whipped him on the mic and made Cena look really bad.
6. His title reigns are boring beyond belief. WWE is at it's worst when he's got the belt, which is far too often. He can't have meaningful promos and he can't do anything meaningful in the ring to help his rivalries.
5. He can't take a break from the main-event: he's got to be everywhere at everytime. Be it winning the Royal Rumble, winning the title in his return match, etc. he always is the centre of attention unless he's injured.
4. When he does return he ruins the great programs that often occur in his absense (i.e. Jericho title reign).
3. This may be a one-off, but when he does a movie it's like everything suddenly resolves around it. There's vignettes for it 5 times a show plus the commercials in between. I mean, jesus christ I get it's a WWE movie with John Cena but come on!
2. His wrestling skills are mediocore at best. His 5-move John Cena routine is ridiculous. His entire offensive repitoire can be executed in 60 seconds and he has to be carried the rest of the match.
1. He is shoved down our throats to a degree commonly reserved for elected members of parliament. They're trying to bill him as the next Austin/Rock/Hogan but he's not nearly as entertaining or watchable. He is boring in and outside the ring and some compare to Hogan-I believe he's much worse.
That wouldn't be on there if it wwe.com was a corporate propaganda machine.
feedback
I'm not saying that Vince reads a book this thread then copies it, nor takes every single moron opinion on board, but he uses the IWC for feedback. Gauging what fans think is going to happen is getting feedback from the IWC, that's an excellent example, thanks. There wasn't a medium for this to be done before the IWC came into full effect.
Right, so here's the facts. Without the IWC, nobody would have known the circumstances of Hardy's release, they were not initially made public. Secondly, it was the campaign that led to the chants. Thirdly, it doesn't matter whats happened since, the IWC wanted Matt back, and Vince took it on board. As for the push, it's irrelevant, but I'm sure if you asked Hardy if he'd rather be in a major angle on WrestleMania or headlining a show in a scout hut in Rhyl, he'd go with WrestleMania.
I'm willing to accept that the internet reaction didn't cause his drop, if you are willing to use your own criteria and accept that Kozlov was dropped cause he was shit and not because of some spoilers. On an aside, anyone who can't maintain steam after losing a match isn't really very good.
Those that couldn't be pushed now can
It absolutely does happen in the WWE. Look at the main eventers in 1989, look at the size of them, and look at them in 2009. The kids still like the big guys, it is the smarky people in the crowd that pay to see Edge, buy CM Punk merchandise and ladder match DVDs. This is a categorical fact, you could try and explain this without recourse to the IWC, but you can't say it hasn't happened. I'm saying the IWC has made it ok to like these guys and has made the fanbase grow, show me what has.
When did Ricky Steamboat win the WWF Title? We're talking about WWF remember, not professional wrestling. As for Savage, he weighed over 240lbs and looked like this
I don't really think he is small.
People don't like change, and there was a much smaller IWC in which the fanbase could build then. Since his inital, horrible run, how much do you think Michaels has made in merchandise, what about Edge?, RVD?, Rey Mysterio?, Jeff Hardy? None of those guys would ever have been main eventers if it hadn't been made ok to like smaller guys by the IWC.
fanbase
If people are paying to see Orton, Jericho and Edge and are buying their merchandise, then it is a good thing for the company. The number of people at the events booing them far outnumber those cheering them, but the few that do cheer make heels more saleable. Compare how many people were wearing King Kong Bundy T-shrits in 1986 to those wearing RKO ones in 2009, and you'll see my point entirely. By breaking down the heel-face solidity, the IWC has doubled the number of saleable superstars in the company. A good thing, surely.
The extra dimension
Not being funny, but I wasn't in the IWC back then, and if you didn't see Michaels - Flair coming, then you have poor foresight.
Right, because loads of people who aren't in the IWC go to the industry news section of wwe.com. I tell you what, google "jeff hardy wellness violation" and tell me how many of the sites in the first 5 pages are not wrestling news ones? The answer is one, on page three. That is a tabloid newspapers wrestling news section. There is no way that Hardy's violations would be well known without the internet wrestling community.
I'm not saying its all good, but its more good than bad.
new talent
Well your negative and positive points kind of proove a point. The WWE needs new talent, and thanks to the IWC, they can get guys who already have some measure of popularity.
Sure, a few may fall flat on their face, but others, e.g. CM Punk grow into megastars. It was the same before and after the IWC, but the difference now is that they can know if someone is going to have a minor backing as soon as they debut, as was the case with Punk, and as will be with Danielson and McGuinness.
deliberate leaks
How doyou know if those leaks aren't deliberate too? It's a messy business to get into, but its hard to tell. Some spoilers are obviously hacks making shit up, to be honest. Why would Vince be bothered about people knowing that Chris Masters may return in the next month or two? All of the Christian "spoilers" helped the Hardy swerve get over. Probably the only thing I've seen on here in a year that would have ired Vince is the leaked JBL vs CM Punk script.
Given it is the Royal Rumble, people would know that meant he'd be appearing. If one person, a die hard RVD fan, bought the PPV, then it the leak was worthwhile, right?
I've already shown why this isn't the case. Basically, if fans on WWE Universe, an internet foru, can interact with Santino's approved blog, it means they relate to and support him better.
healthy competition
Except it doesn't quite work likr that. They may not be on at the same time, but you can guarantee that not everyone wants to donate every weeknight to wrestling. That is how they are competing, indirectly. Just this week I've seen somebody post that they can only afford one PPV a month, be it TNA or WWE. That is competition, and is actually quite direct.
Right, which is competition, you are proving my point
I have shown that TNA is competing with the WWE, even if it isn't in a Monday Night War situation. The IWC hasn't built TNA completely, but without it, it wouldn't have been nearly popular enough to get a TV deal.
That is the end of my arguments, and my analysis of those of my opponent, I await his next post with the greatest of interests, thank you for reading.
Clarity Of Debate: IC was neater, Tastycles was better at flow. Hard to judge a winner in this, but I say Tastycles was the most clear.
Punctuality: Tasty was always on time, IC left unfortunately.
Informative: Lots of information on both ends, with new information being brought on on each end to combat the other. Except Tastycles kept coming with IC's depature. Tasty gets these points.
Emotionality: Cannot take away from IC in this category often, and again not here. point IC.
Persuasion: Library is closing, so I'll make this quick. Both new what you were debating, both know this inside and out. I find it funny that an administrator of a forum argued against his own job here, but he did it well. Point IC.
TM rates this 3 points Tasty, 2 points IC.
Punctuality: Tasty was always on time, IC left unfortunately.
Informative: Lots of information on both ends, with new information being brought on on each end to combat the other. Except Tastycles kept coming with IC's depature. Tasty gets these points.
Emotionality: Cannot take away from IC in this category often, and again not here. point IC.
Persuasion: Library is closing, so I'll make this quick. Both new what you were debating, both know this inside and out. I find it funny that an administrator of a forum argued against his own job here, but he did it well. Point IC.
TM rates this 3 points Tasty, 2 points IC.
Clarity: Both had some very clear points. I will give this a split, only because I felt that some of Tasty's later points may have been a little excessive.
Point: Split
Punctuality: What TM said.
Point: Tastycles
Informative: Both brought some great points, but I think Tasty used all of his better.
Point: Tastycles
Emotionality: This is tough. IC always brings a great attitude, as does Tasty. Neither disappointed me here.
Point: Split
Persuasion: IC had a very tough go trying to say why we are bad, and he is a damn admin in the IWC. Both seemed like possible easy routes to take. However, with IC being admin, and saying how we affect the WWE, that persuaded me. Tasty made some great points, but IC going against something he is in charge of is damn impressive.
Point: IC25
CH David scores this Tastycles 3, IC25 2.
Point: Split
Punctuality: What TM said.
Point: Tastycles
Informative: Both brought some great points, but I think Tasty used all of his better.
Point: Tastycles
Emotionality: This is tough. IC always brings a great attitude, as does Tasty. Neither disappointed me here.
Point: Split
Persuasion: IC had a very tough go trying to say why we are bad, and he is a damn admin in the IWC. Both seemed like possible easy routes to take. However, with IC being admin, and saying how we affect the WWE, that persuaded me. Tasty made some great points, but IC going against something he is in charge of is damn impressive.
Point: IC25
CH David scores this Tastycles 3, IC25 2.
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
I hope I get a playoff match with Tasytcles. He's a terrific debator, and he certainly didn't get my best work in this debate because of work and wedding time constraints. He certainly earned the win - he could have half-assed it and still beaten me this week, but he still gave 100% and showed - AGAIN - why he's an awesome poster.
Cena's Little Helper
Mid-Card Championship Winner
Clarity Of Debate: IrishCanadian25 gets the point here. I'm a huge proponent of making things as simple as possible. Ironically, your wedding seemed to have benefited you here, IrishCanadian25. You got down to the bare bones here, and it did wonders for you.
Point: IrishCanadian25
Punctuality: Read TM's post.
Point: Tastycles
Informative: Both guys brought in a lot of information. I'm going to split the point here.
Point: Split
Emotionality: Tastycles' aggression in this debate had a lot of substance behind it. Good job.
Point: Tastycles
Persuasion: IrishCanadian25 had the better opening argument, but Tastycles did better in the rebuttals. I'll split the point here, as both of you brought your A-game.
Point: Split
tdigle's Score
Tastycles - 3
IrishCanadian25 - 2
Point: IrishCanadian25
Punctuality: Read TM's post.
Point: Tastycles
Informative: Both guys brought in a lot of information. I'm going to split the point here.
Point: Split
Emotionality: Tastycles' aggression in this debate had a lot of substance behind it. Good job.
Point: Tastycles
Persuasion: IrishCanadian25 had the better opening argument, but Tastycles did better in the rebuttals. I'll split the point here, as both of you brought your A-game.
Point: Split
tdigle's Score
Tastycles - 3
IrishCanadian25 - 2
Clarity: Tasty's argument was easier to read through
Point: Tastycles
Punctuality: Tastycles
Point: Tastycles
Informative: Tasty bought up some great information and in a rare showing used it better than IC25 did
Point: Tastycles
Emotionality: IC he brought that whatsit that is emotional and stuff
Point: IC25
Persuasion: I know this subject matter better than most, given that I have a friend in the IWC. I could see where IC25 was coming from
Point: IC25
I score this one
IC25 - 2
Tastycles - 3
Point: Tastycles
Punctuality: Tastycles
Point: Tastycles
Informative: Tasty bought up some great information and in a rare showing used it better than IC25 did
Point: Tastycles
Emotionality: IC he brought that whatsit that is emotional and stuff
Point: IC25
Persuasion: I know this subject matter better than most, given that I have a friend in the IWC. I could see where IC25 was coming from
Point: IC25
I score this one
IC25 - 2
Tastycles - 3