Of course the rating matters. It is like ratings in films. The rating of the product indicates the subject matter contained within, and whom it is marketed for.
You wouldnt see a group of men going watching a U rated kids film containing teddy bears, nor would you market a film containing murder and rape to children.
Same with wrestling. The PG rating indicates that the content is more acceptable for a younger audience, which is what the WWE wants right now. The biggest star in the company, John Cena, is very family friendly and the storylines have generally been less adult and more suited to the younger audience. This has been difficult to swallow for the older fans, who have grown up with the Attitude era and its sex/swearing/blood and more adult themed storylines. At the time of the AE, they were the target audience, and the product was aimed towards them, while now they are not the audience members the WWE are trying to attract.
The PG does not neccesarily mean that the product is of a lower standard, as within the restrictions placed on talent now, the superstars can still put on great matches and great storylines, but it can limit it in some ways, as their are topics which cannot be covered in storylines and things which cannot be said in promos, which in my opinion lessen the realism of the product, as it is only natural to use offensive language when in a heated argument with someone. Sometimes, some of the promos in WWE make me cringe as the insults thrown about are just childish. This indicates to me that it is a problem with the writers and not the rating, as a good writer should be able to adapt to the circumstances they are placed in and use their creativity to get around certain restrictions that are in place. At the present time, and for the last few years, the WWE has lacked the quality in its writing, which I believe has led to a poorer product, which does not appeal to me as much.
Also, the big thing that people disagree on is the blood. Personally I preferred the more bloody, attitude era product as it was more realistic and "manly" even if you understand what I mean. It didnt look as fake, and I just found it more exciting and it kept me on the edge of my seat. Some of the Triple H v Mick Foley wars were unbelivably exciting to me at the time, and still are today. While I agree that perhaps the AE overdid certain aspects, such as too much blood and was perhaps too sleazy at times, I do not think wrestling is something that should not soley have children as its target audience, and should not be PG. Great WRESTLING matches are great to see, but would you rather see Daniel Bryan putting on a great match WWE style, or see him in his ROH days putting on 30 minute bloody epics...for me it is the latter. The blood and violence, when done right, can add so much to the story of a match, and by taking this away, WWE have limited themselves.
Wrestling moves can injure people if done incorrectly, and we all know how kids like to copy what they see on TV. I remember as a young boy being a big fan of Power Rangers, and karate kicking everything. However, several people in my school were severely injured playing Power Rangers, and as WWE is marketed to more kids than ever, the potential for them to copy the moves is greater than ever. In my opinion, this is dangerous and is why the WWE should have continued to focus its product on a more mature audience, and the kids can watch it when they are a bit older and can appreciate that you dont copy what you see on the TV.
All in all, the rating of the show can make a huge difference, both to the content it has to contain and to the type/age of person watching the show. For me, the end of the PG era cannot come quickly enough. I want to get back to more edgy, violent programming. But thats just my preffered option, I still enjoy the occasional excellent match thrown out by the WWE in the current PG era
