What -really- killed the attitude era.

[Tenta]

Sigh.... I don't see why people still fail to grasp on to this simple fact.

Guys... The Attitude Era "died" the day that WWE took his company public. By taking it public, Vince now had certain guidelines and things that were accepted, rather expected, of a public corporation, and its employees. How many times do you watch members of any company across America doing half of the shit that WWE employees were doing on television? Simply put, the actions you'd find in The Attitude Era are behaviors not typically accepted of a publicly traded company. As soon as Vince rang that bell on Wallstreet, his company was going to have to answer to a lot of executives, and act more like a public company, unlike the private company Vince had always been acting upon since before even he was an owner. There are certain sanctions that a public company can fall under, if they're not careful, and don't meet the guidelines of what is to be expected of a publicly traded company.

That, folks, is why The Attitude Era "died"

 

[X]

wut started the attitude era= bret hart.

False statement number one. Bret started teh Attitude Era? No, he did not. Stone Cold did. Not sure how that's debatable.

remember bret made austin at WM13 w/ the double switch- this propelled austin to stardom.

Austin was already a star in the company before WM13, for God's sake he won the Royal Rumble 2 months prior to that and main evented the IYH the month before. It wasn't until WM 13 that the fans started to get behind Austin, but he was already a star in the company before the submission match.

dx for the most part rode on the coat tails of austin but dx shud be credited for pushing the boundaries

Huh? How did DX ride the coat tails of Austin? If you said they were an nWo ripoff, then maybe you'd have a point here.

... what killed the attitude era= hunter and hbk.

False statement number two.

hunter and hbk have been so selfish in that they help themselves at the expense of burying a lot of up and coming talent. when hunter and hbk bury a lot of the up and coming talent, they hog tv time w/ their lame antics.

What are you talking about here? Seriously? HBK was gone before the Attitude era even began to pick up steam, it wasn't until Austin's title victory at WM 14 that the WWE began to become the number one promotion and the Attitude era reached it's peak. How exactly did HBK kill the Attitude era when the length of his involvement in the WWE at the time was the occasional special ref match or "GM" role?

And Hunter? Hard to bury talent before you're married to the bosses daughter. Not sure what you consider the end of the Attitude era, but for most people it ended around 2000-01, which was well before Hunter ever gained serious backstage pull.

HHH and HBK had absolutely nothing to do with the end of the Attitude era. Absolutely nothing.

 

[rajkaregakhalsa]

xfearbefore, i RESPECTFULLY refute ur points as follows:

1) austin did not start attitude era... attitude era+ mr. mcmahon character born when bret pushed vince on his keester. hart vs austin at wm13 helped propel austin and attitude era as did the hart foundation/anti usa angle. this is as per vince.

2) austin was not a star prior to WM13. austin was up and coming. austin became a star at the infamous double switch at wm13. if bret hadn't perfectly executed this, austin wud not be a star- and austin has acknowledged this himself. even though bret won the match he put over austin.

3) DX were never top draws... although they generated a lot of merchandising, a lot of others generated merchandising $ as well. this was due to austin and the rock- they were the top draws. when they did well everyone did well cuz they were willing to work w/ everyone and make everyone better.

4) many feel the attitude era ended in '02 when wwe went public... i thought we're still in the attitude era cuz there still seems to be a lot of attitude in the programming- maybe i'm wrong and i shudn't call these times the attitude era- i don't know... all i'm trying to say is that yes hbk and hhh shud be credited for pushing the boundaries on tv. however, here is the fact. hbk has even acknowledged in his autobiography that he had a small part in pushing wwf into the attitude era which i agree with. the key is 'small' part. austin was the key to the attitude era... hhh and hbk r killing the business rite now cuz they continue to bury up and coming talent to protect their top spots... hhh and hbk have been doing this since day 1. hbk and hhh work only w/ the big names to benefit themselves and hold back others= wwe programming is very stale right now.

 

[Y4J]

Y4J wrote:
"Half of those numbers were from us wrestling fans, half were from MARKS"

What do you think a mark is? It is a wrestling fan!! we are all marks!!!

Until you actually get trained and work for an organization, you are considered a mark or a smark (smart mark) and if you are trained, you wouldn't even bother posting a line like you did as it is a tradition to keep things kayfabe when responding to marks.

The Attitude era ended at the end of the "McMahon-Helmsley era" and then the new era began when Taker became a biker dude. You can also use the music Anthology as a reference point, that is, if you even remember that 3 CD set

Um no.. You hear of the term "Mark out?"

Of course we are all marks, but if you look deeper into something. You even seperated it yourself. There are smarks and marks. Most MARKS are not very well knowledgable. Which MEANS, when I said that, that's what I meant. The casual fan. So your attempt to "Prove me wrong" failed.

And Undertaker turning badass did NOTHING to kill the attitude era.. Please.. If anything his character embodied it.

 

[TM Punk]

xfearbefore, i RESPECTFULLY refute ur points as follows:

1) austin did not start attitude era... attitude era+ mr. mcmahon character born when bret pushed vince on his keester. hart vs austin at wm13 helped propel austin and attitude era as did the hart foundation/anti usa angle. this is as per vince.

If you want to get technical.

"The first thing I want done, is to get that piece of crap out of my ring. Don't just get him out of the ring, get him out of the WWF, because I proved son, without a shadow of a doubt, you ain't got what it takes anymore. You sit there, and you thump your bible, and you say your prayers, and it didn't get you anywhere. Talk about your psalms, talk about John 3:16. Austin 3:16 say's I just whooped your ass."

- Stone Cold Steve Austin, King of the Ring speech. June 23rd, 1996.

That speech, and the ATTITUDE and character of Stone Cold Steve Austin, is what made WWF decide to go in a more edgy direction. Not NWO as some people may think. If anything, Eric Bischoff being smart made the NWO in response to this because he knew something was going to happen. And behold, a month later, Hulk Hogan turns heel, and the NWO is formed. Thus, turning people's heads away from what Austin was starting to do, and delaying the inevitable. And becoming the top company for two years.

As far as the beginning of the Attitude era. Austin's character in 1996 is what started it.

And as many say when you start something, you end it too. The entire Attitude era revolved around Austin being the anti-hero. Standing up and doing what the everyday american male wished he could do. Beat the shit out of his boss, drink on the job, and raise hell all while being the top guy.

Once Austin became a corporate champion at WM 17. An era truly ended.

 

[HBK-aholic]

I think what people don't realise is that the Attitude Era was never meant to be a permanent move for the WWE, it was always going to 'die' eventually. The WWE needed something new to keep viewers with WCW giving them tough competition on a Monday Night thus the Attitude Era was born. However, that's not what pro-wrestling is about, really. McMahon knew this, and once he'd won the Monday Night Wars he tried to take wrestling back to what it was before. That's really what we've been seeing since.

 

[TM Punk]

I also think that what we're seeing in this thread is that people are either looking at it in a storyline, and non-storyline matter. What kayfabe event occured that killed the attitude era is what I think the thread maker had in mind. We all know that Vince used it to beat WCW. The poster is simply trying to ask what occurence do you think killed Attitude.

Other than a kayfabe reason for it. We all should know by now why it ended.

 

[rockmysock01]

Everyone is forgetting how big a role Vince Russo played in the Attitute Era. HE was the man behind it all..his brilliant ideas and storylines.
So, naturally, when he left WWF at the end of '99..it was all downhill from there. You could tell too. I watched every show back in those days..and it just didnt have the same feel to it once Russo left. That X-factor was gone.

It was still good, of course, and im gonna agree with everyone else and say March 2001, when McMahon brought WCW, was the true end of the Attitude Era.
But for me the Attitude Era lasted from mid 1996, when Austin did his 3:16 speech and the NWO formed, until the end of '99..when Austin took that year off because of injuries, WCW had turned 2 crap, and Vince Russo left to try and save the sinking ship.
But even Russo(or superman 4 that matter) couldnt have saved WCW. it was already too late by the time he got there

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I think what people don't realise is that the Attitude Era was never meant to be a permanent move for the WWE, it was always going to 'die' eventually.

Uhm, no?

How do you know the Attitude Era had a life-span? How do you know it wasn't meant to be a permanent fixture within the Company, when even to this day they still use several aspects that made the W.W.E regain control of the ratings from the Attitude Era? (DX, namely)

The fact of the matter is, the Attitude Era was never McMahon's idea and as such he didn't want to keep it, or rather couldn't keep it, once he bought out his competition, because he was more or less stealing ideas to make his Company flourish - while lesser Companies died out. (ECW, namely)

I'm not saying ECW was ever going to be a bigger Company, and anyone would be stupid minded to believe it could've been. But I am saying, McMahon knew he was going to lose in the ratings war if he didn't change his ways and adapt. So he did so, against his will because he hates doing things he doesn't think of, or have thought up within his own Company.. and once he won out - he switched back.

The WWE needed something new to keep viewers with WCW giving them tough competition on a Monday Night thus the Attitude Era was born. However, that's not what pro-wrestling is about, really. McMahon knew this, and once he'd won the Monday Night Wars he tried to take wrestling back to what it was before. That's really what we've been seeing since.

Kinda yes, but you have it slightly wrong. McMahon understood once he won the Monday Night Wars and bought out his competition, he had no one to feud with and could control the world of Professional Wrestling to however he saw fit.

Thus, he scrapped what was working (the Attitude Era) in favor of going back to what he was originally trying for in the time that wasn't from like 92-95. Which is what we're seeing more of, today.

Stupid, mind-numbing storylines that don't have depth, except for a very select few. No depth in divisions. No ladder to climb for the younger guys anymore, because they don't have to worry about most of them leaving for "greener pastures" elsewhere.

All in all, I believe McMahon felt that once he bought out his competition - he could try once more to force his own brand of Wrestling down everyone's throat, without a true secondary option for people to tune into.

And while I'm assuming some will mention TNA, the fact is they aren't (yet) big enough, let alone rich enough, to compete head-to-head with the WWE.

 

[HBK-aholic]

Hon what have I told you about replying to me?

Uhm, no?

How do you know the Attitude Era had a life-span?

How do you know it didn't? It did end, which supports my argument more than it does yours.

How do you know it wasn't meant to be a permanent fixture within the Company, when even to this day they still use several aspects that made the W.W.E regain control of the ratings from the Attitude Era? (DX, namely)

Are you really trying to tell me you think the WWE...in it's PG rating glory...is using aspects from the Attitude Era? DX, so far away from what they were originally made out to be, aren't about the attitude era in anything other than name value.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Hon what have I told you about replying to me?

I know, but you're the only person who entertains me in this thread, so look at that as a good thing. I think. lol

How do you know it didn't? It did end, which supports my argument more than it does yours.

Not exactly. Just because the Era changed, doesn't mean it ended because it meant to, so much as because it had to. Again, you have to look at the situation that McMahon didn't know how to run the attitude era, that was mainly all Vince Russo & Ed Ferrera (sp?).

Once they left, which also lead to the downfall of WCW, (ironically) McMahon was free to go back to what he always stubborn-mindedly felt should've worked in the first place. Stale, boring, Family programming.

Its Professional Wrestling, not Family Feud. Its meant to be raunchy, racey and PG-17/R rated. Its meant to have attitude.

So, you say it died because it was never meant to go on forever. I say it was murdered, because McMahon couldn't stand it being what it became - over something he felt should've worked better.

Are you really trying to tell me you think the WWE...in it's PG rating glory...is using aspects from the Attitude Era? DX, so far away from what they were originally made out to be, aren't about the attitude era in anything other than name value.

Look at all the current underlinings within the Company, and tell me you don't see similarities from the Attitude Era.

You have a ton of attitude sitting right there, but its numbed to a degree. Hell, the Orton/McMahon rivalry is somewhat 'R' rated. I mean, he did attack a female (Steph) afterall. And that lead to Triple H breaking into Orton's home and attacking him, with his Wife there.

And that storyline has similarities to the McMahon/Austin rivalry, and the Austin/Pillman house scene. Only, not as "violent" or aggressive.

 

[Slam Master]

I wouldn't call it the pinnacle of wrestling because during this era the show was based largely on stuff that wasn't wrestling. It was a time when the mainstream accepted shock TV and sports entertainment. The pinnacle of actual wrestling was when Bret, Shawn, Owen, Davey, etc. took over the top spots and really wrestled, told stories in the ring aka the New Generation.