What do people call the era of the WWE between 2003-2008, PG is era isn't that bad?

[Nev]

I'm just trying to make a point that, sadly, the PG era is inevitable in the buisness of Vince McMahon.

Let's look at the good 'ol Attitude Era and how the general media took it:
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/1999/02/24/1999-02-24_wwf_too_raw_for_kids__study.html

Hehe, here's some interesting facts they pulled:

Grabbed or pointed to their crotch 1,658 times


Chanted a certain obscene phrase 434 times


Flipped their fans the bird 157 times


Simulated sexual activity 128 times


Simulated satanic activity 47 times


Simulated drug use 42 times


During the late 90s and early 00s, the country as a whole were interested in seeing things over the edge

South Park & Jerry Springer were both were record breaking programs that experienced huge popularity during these years as the Attitude Era.

But over the years, the WWE has committed itself to "attitude-like" storylines and programs but never has really peaked in popularity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rspvlqlsB9E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhsRJDaKVNs

There's good examples.

Here are some articles that explain some issues the WWF/E after 2002:

If anyone remembers 2003, how everyone said "the WWE needs Goldberg!" or "The Rock must come back to fight Austin", here's a general view from a random blogger back in 2003 about the fall of the WWE back then:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_124912.html

Here's a good article a wrestling fan wrote in july 2002, a time where people still called the WWF the "attitude era", it still had its negatives:
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/7-18-2002-22703.asp

She talks about how the WWE made Austin heel, embarrassingly put Kane and Undertaker as the top faces of the WWE after the Rock left to film The Scorpion King, the failed executed WCW/ECW storyline, Austin's anger at the current product, how the wwe would try to push stars like Benoit or Jericho but put them back in the mid-card because they were scared they didn't get crowd reactions at times, and ultimately, the writing went nowhere.

All the events occurred in 2001, pretty much sums it up

- WWE does not listen to their fans
- Disappointing and pushing the wrong characters
- Fans don't connect to the top faces or heels
- Storylines don't execute well
- WWE pushes stars, doesn't take much chances, then buries them back into the mid-card
- Letting good wrestlers with a ton of potential go simply because Vince can't fathom them


These were the main problems for the WWE over the past 5 years. Also around 2002, the WWE officially lost its "anything can happen on RAW" feeling which is pretty obvious now. Time and time, the WWE would host some great programs or episode specials but only peaked during that one week then returns back to normal.

Also during 2002-3, slowly, kids and adults started taking over the scene selling out arena's, you don't hear much older teenagers/young adults at WWE events anymore. During this time, the WWE still had attitude-like storylines, but didn't grow any popular, only grew worse.

In 2006-7, the WWE still had a young adult fan base that would boo Cena while the girls/kids would cheer for him during some events. But by 2008, most cities around the country has been pro-Cena.

Only in New York and Chicago you would see male adults and real wrestling fans.

If anyone should complain about PG, they should have complained over the past 5 years about how the WWE has been slowly growing soft in storylines and character. I know people have been complaining for years that "Cena and Batista sucks" and that "babyfaces" are boring, but it never really went anywhere since the less-loyal fans from the attitude era are pretty much gone and the female teens and kids have already taken over the WWE appeal by cheering Batista when he rebelled against Evolution and making Cena a very profitable value.


Now it's too late for anything. It's too late to complain about the PG-rating. The Attitude era is over and no traces of TV-14 storylines will bring WWE into its peak of popularity. Sure, you and I love to see a decent wrestling show with violence and sex even if it posts a 3.5 rating for RAW every week, but what Vince McMahon wants is the WWE's popularity to peak like it did during '99-'00 and we can't do anything about it. In my opinion, the fans that are left from the attitude era that are complaining about the PG-rating are loyal wrestling fans that won't quit watching. All the others are gone. And if anyone says that the WWE would be so successful if it still had sex, vulgar, and violence, explain why South Park and the other programs I mentioned aren't nearly as popular as they were in the late 90's.

It's over, it's too late to complain. It's better to grow used to it and watch TNA as an alternative and hope for it to compete with the WWE, or quit watching wrestling.

To be honest with you I think I lost the point I was trying to make somewhere in here, but I hope people understand the point I'm trying to make.

 

[mareek]

All the events occurred in 2001, pretty much sums up how the WWE is today:

- WWE does not listen to their fans

Their fans are kids now. The kids want rey mysterio they get mysterio, they want cena they get cena, they want hhh, batista, taker and they get all these guys.

- Disappointing and pushing the wrong characters

Everyone thats's suppose to get pushed is getting pushed right now.

- Fans don't connect to the top faces or heels

Taker,hbk,hhh,and cena are all top faces and the fans love these guys same goes for the top heels.

- Storylines don't execute well

What storyline has not executed well so far. I can't think of one storyline that makes me say "somethings wrong here". Some storylines are boring and stale but they all make sense.

- WWE pushes stars, doesn't take much chances, then buries them back into the mid-card

There's no one in the wwe that's getting buried right now after having a mega push. No one. As far as chances go they're putting their top draw against a guy with just good mic skills to please smarks (idk why). And this friday on Smackdown ther world heavyweight champin loss to a rising star. How's that for taking chances. [/quote]

- Letting good wrestlers with a ton of potential go simply because Vince can't fathom them

What wrestler who's been released has this happened to in this we era. No one.

Everything your saying is either wrong or makes no sense.

 

[unique.enigma.666]

mareek makes some great points dude. Look at how Morrison has been used recently; in the right way, fair point hes lost some, most recent being against Edge, but they had an epic match. This week however Morrison pinned Punk, both around about the same age, both have years ahead of them in WWE. Attitude Era was full of over-the edge stuff, but times move on. People want The Rock and Steve Austin well they arent going to get them, simply because The Rock went onto do movies, and Steve's neck problems caused him to step down. I've been a fan since I was 13, I'm now 19, and I'm not going to bitch about how WWE doesnt show as much violence as they used to or sexual references or swear words, fuck man we have the internet, want some porn on the internet, watch a horror film if you want violence, if you want swearing buy an Eminem album if you want that stuff. despite it being at a PG rating, I still enjoy WWE. At the end you say 'It's over, it's too late to complain. It's better to grow used to it and watch TNA as an alternative and hope for it to compete with the WWE, or quit watching wrestling.' how in the hell is watching TNA going to resolve things? By watching WWE rejects wrestle each other? For one Angle is a hypocrite, he said he doesnt need 14 title reigns in a recent interview, to my knowledge he's held 12 top tier championships overall in his entire wrestling career. the main event is practically filled with guys who shouldnt be wrestling as much as they do. TNA is nothing but a WCW replacement, it barely competes with WWE's C show and WWE's newest show Superstar's isnt far off from beating TNA in the ratings. I counted with a friend of mine just how many former WWE stars are now with TNA, and this includes knockouts, at 34 wrestlers, whove been under contract with WWE, and theres Tazz who looks to be debuting soon making it 35.
Back onto WWE though, there might be stale and boring storylines but nevertheless they are realistic. Yeah we may dislike Cena, but learn to accept that hes going to continue wrestling til he retires, I have so why cant others? I personally dont like him but I have enjoyed this feud he and Miz have had, great way to propel Miz into the upper mid-carders. Reason why we havent seen Cena, Batista and Rey heel is because they are way over with the younger fans, they sell merch, Vince knows they'll get a great crowd response as for the rest, they're generally for everybody

 

[Nev]

@mareek:

Those events I mentioned are what occurred during '03-'08 that made the WWE slowly go down in popularity and made the young adult fans that watched back in the attitude era, stop watching; not only because the WWE's sex and violence slowly decreased. those points are a duplicate of the article that I linked from july '02. By the way Mr.K was released that has huge potential lol.

you didn't read the whole thing since I basically said

These were the main problems for the WWE over the past 5 years.

right after I made those bullets (rolls eyes).

Anyway it's my fault for not being clear since I said "the wwe is today" before i wrote it, sorry, i should have proof read this.

EDIT: @enigma: Yeah, the current product is in the right direction. Some people have a problem with the PG-rating. Like I agree you, I wouldn't mind a solid wrestling show with solid characters without sex & violence. Though some people look at the PG era as the end of the WWE and its company will be challenged by TNA. I do believe TNA will be a challenge, but no because of the PG rating.

 

[unique.enigma.666]

I personally dont see it as the end of WWE. Vince might lose some fans given how its PG, but there are still a lot of die hard fans who enjoy watching the likes of Edge, Jericho, Matt and Jeff, Christian, 'Taker, Kane, HBK, HHH and so on. The past 4 names I mentioned may not be in the shape they were in the attitude era, but the fact that they're still wrestling shows the passion they have, if they didnt have the passion they wouldnt be wrestling, like if I didnt have the passion for art I wouldnt be at college doing art. I dont see TNA being a worthy challenge for WWE if they continue to bring in former WWE stars. by all means bring in younger guys like Lashley, they'll get crap for it cos he was a former WWE star but hes young but thats besides the point. they've got some impressive young talent there and its a huge shame we see former WWE/WCW talent hog the spotlight still.

 

[rayisawesomeness]

as much as ill miss some of the crazy shit the wwe used to do, i honestly have no problem with the pg rating, think about it, no more:

- condemning people to hell (i think everyone knows what im talking about)
- no more bra and panties matches
- no more stupid dick jokes

i mean, i could go on and on but ya get the point...

 

[Nev]

Yeah. I guess there aren't too many people who see the PG era as the inevitable death of the WWE as I've been reading all over youtube.

Like I said in this thread, the attitude era already ended in 2003-08, there will be no Chyna or Austin ever again even if the WWE goes TV-14. Better to just enjoy it or stop watching wrestling.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Professional wrestling in the second half of the 90s and early 2000s was a fad. For the first time in history, the cookie cutter and cartoonish aspects of good and evil were erased from pro wrestling. The age of the anti-establishment, young, aggressive, angry and rebellious wrestler became what drew new fans to wrestling.

During that time, the WWE made mainstream media headlines on a regular basis because the stuff was edgier and people, at the time, liked it. The WWE was drawing 6's and 7's but it wasn't going to last forever. Eventually, the casual fan and tv viewer found something else to focus their attention on and the hardcore fans, basically the 3's and 4's in the Nielsen ratings, were the ones left and are still the ones left.

While the PG thing isn't that bad, I do prefer the days of the Attitude Era. Simply put, wrestling was more colorful in those days. WWE is now, more or less, the way it was prior to the Attitude Era in terms of how they market themselves. The WWE's use of outside celebrity is another good indication of that. During the Attitude Era, they didn't try to court celebrities because they were celebrities. They were mainstream. Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Undertaker, Hulk Hogan, and Bill Goldberg were featured on the cover of TV Guide. It's hard to be more mainstream than that.

 

[Black Snow]

While I agree that the WWE of the last few years hasn't been quite as good at the "Attitude Era" I believe that the wrong points are being addressed. The attitude isn't what made the "Attitude Era" so great. What made is so great was the competition. With WCW constantly breathing down Vince's neck he was more willing to experiment. In the "Attitude Era" a guy like John Cena wouldn't be holding the WWE title for close to a year on two seperate title reigns. Vince would see that Cena only gets a 50/50 reaction and either turn him heel or play up the tweener role. He wouldn't dream of continuing to shove him down the fans' throats as the top face no matter what. He'd know that the second he dictates to the fans is the second that the fans switch over to Nitro.

Vince has gotten relaxed. He has no competition. Yes, TNA and ROH exist but come on. At this point they're still no real threat. So he can take a guy that the fans sort of like and work on him as long and as much as he wants. As a result, things get stale. It doesn't even have to be Cena. I'm just using him as an example since he's the easiest guy to pick.

Casual fans tune into RAW when a big status quo change happens. When things are turned on their ear, they care. The problem is it doesn't happen as much nowadays. When Edge first won the WWE title fans tuned to RAW because Edge had finally ended close to a year's worth of the same guy wrestling the same match against the same opponents for the title.

In the "Attitude Era" Vince dared himself to be different. Steve Austin was hot. Great. But what else could he do? He made himself a big on air figure. He made Mick Foley a legit main event threat. Undertaker's character was reinvented. The Rock got huge so he was immediately pushed.

Today? Austin would probably clutch that title from one 'Mania to the next until fans got sick of him and Rock would spend an extra year at IC title level. No competition breeds stagnation.

Look at the WWE and World title history for the five years in question. I'm all for long title reigns making belts seem important but the title history does tell an obvious tale. 280 days seems to be about the magic number for Cena, Hunter, Batista and JBL. And look at recent 'Mania main events. They always seem to involve Cena and Hunter. Show isn't exactly fresh and even Edge now is getting overexposed.

While I don't want to totally discount the edginess of the late 90s drawing in fans I do believe that it's not nearly as important as the simple matter of the product needing a fly by the seat of your pants mentality. This is why day in and day out I hope for TNA to one day be capable of building itself up as a genuinely threatening number two company.

---

Also, I want to comment on two little points made in the original post that started this thread. First of all, most cities in America are NOT pro Cena. Most cities are still very much split 50/50. That's not a bad thing and it's not just me taking a shot at the guy. It's just a fact. You're still just as likely to find fans who hate him as you are fans who love him in 2009 as you were in 2005.

Secondly... am I the only one that loved heel Austin circa 2001? He was absolutely gold in the role. I was finding his character very stale earlier that year and while I would have liked to see Rock beat Austin at 'Mania that year I was still very much excited to see a heel Austin with the WWE title. From the Two-Man Power Trip to him and Angle hugging Vince to a badass Angle beating up a cowardly Austin I loved every second of heel Austin. The InVasion angle tanked and Austin leading the WCW/ECW group was dumb but he was still a great heel.

 

[Phoenix]

Secondly... am I the only one that loved heel Austin circa 2001? He was absolutely gold in the role. I was finding his character very stale earlier that year and while I would have liked to see Rock beat Austin at 'Mania that year I was still very much excited to see a heel Austin with the WWE title. From the Two-Man Power Trip to him and Angle hugging Vince to a badass Angle beating up a cowardly Austin I loved every second of heel Austin. The InVasion angle tanked and Austin leading the WCW/ECW group was dumb but he was still a great heel.

I liked it too, purely because his gimmick of being a rebel beating up his boss who is a 50/60 year old man was getting tiresome ansd stale, it gave him a refreshed look at least put him forward through 2001. Unfortunately when the Alliance story ended, they just hit the reset button as if nothing happened to Austin and Angle (Rock and Jericho's feud was the only one that carried over from the Alliance angle). So you're not the only one there.

I did think that pushing Undertaker and Kane wasn't that big a problem, I thought the first half of 2001 was good for Kane at least, best performer at the Royal Rumble, Hardcore, Tag Team & IC title (beating Triple H), then he lost to Albert, that's where it went wrong. Only fitting for Taker partly because prior to Wrestlemania X-Seven, he had nothing to do, feuded with Trips, giving a reasonable set up to face the Power Trip, no harm there tbh.

 

[prestonluv]

The 'attitude' era was spawned out of intense competition from WCW's 'Nitro' and then 'Thunder' TV shows.

The majority of loyal wrestling fans have historically been kids and their parents. The 'attitude' era brought the 18-35 year old back into the mix. This helped spawn the 6+ ratings.

The only way wrestling will ever be must see TV again, will be because TNA or another organization steps up bigtime and puts their show in the same time slot as 'RAW'.

This will inevitably spur healthy competition which will increase the quality of product. Simple stuff imo.


edit: this summarizes 'Blacks' earlier post.

 

[Nev]

@Black Snow:

You make the perfect point that a large portion of the WWE's success was in fact the competition. That brings an interesting debate if the fans of the Attitude Era stopped watching immediately after there was no competition or sense of urgency for the WWE to produce flawless shows. I'm not sure on that one. Maybe very few fans thought an "Anti-heel raising hell and not taking crap" had grown tiresome into 2001.

Ah, and I can see we all have mixed views about 2001 after Wrestlemania X7. I still think pushing Kane and Undertaker as the top faces was a poor decision. Well, more of Kane actually. In order for the WWE to be successful, they needed an anti-heel to appeal to those young fans but instead had Taker/Kane attacked by Shane and his factions to inevitably want the audience for Taker/Kane to seek revenge against them. I don't think that worked very well, especially in the peak of the WWE's success. From there that's where the writing slowly became stale.

@Jack-Hammer: Good point as well. The Attitude Era was a fad in the wrestling world but as well as "attitude-like" programs like South Park or Jerry Springer for the viewers that tuned into that. All are still producing new episodes and programs, but not as immensely popular as it was during the L-90s/E-00s. Perhaps the country as a whole slowly moved on from over the edge programs. The Rock leaving for movies and stale writing are all but just of a coincidence maybe.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I got the perfect name!!!!
The era of WWE we are now in is....

The Attitude Adjusted Era

The generally accepted name for this Era is the "PG Era". If you Google the term "WWE PG Era", you will find multiple links with that particular title listed for this time period.

And looking back 20 years from now, the name fits perfectly. This Era should be recognized by name for the big experiment that was tried, and by referring to it as the "PG Era", we can pinpoint down the road, the actual years that WWE adjusted their rating from TV-14 down to PG television.

So the PG Era, as far as I'm concerned, works great ... and we just need to go with it.

Finally, I think we have names for all the Eras down ...

Hogan Era
New Generation Era
Attitude Era
Post-Attitude Era
PG Era