What's Wrong With Wrestling Fans #2: The Word "Stale"

[D-Man]

I swear, if there was a dictionary of misused buzz-words that the IWC throws around to make themselves sound even remotely intelligent, this word would be at (or very near) the top of the list. Being that I've been a mod/G-mod on WZF for over two years now, you can probably imagine how many threads I've seen on a weekly basis titled, "Is <wrestler A> becoming stale?" Actually, I take that back... none of you could possibly imagine.

Yeah, I get it. Wrestlers are thrust into the spotlight for temporary periods of time and get bumped down the ladder when their time is up. When they get knocked down a few pegs and no longer seem "interesting", the audience gets bored with them. So you all seize your moment and say, "This guy is getting stale. Turn him/her heel/face. That'll fix them." No, it won't. And if you honestly think this works for everyone then you're a moron.

First of all, you should all understand what happens when a wrestler steps aside and seems to be knocked down the totem pole for a while.

It is rare for wrestlers to constantly keep the same exact momentum on a weekly basis for years at a time. After a while, they all need to move out of the way since there are only so many hours of pro-wrestling television programming per week. Promotions want all of their guys to become marketable and successful so all of the wrestlers take turns with their moment in the sun. Wrestlers are just props to their larger corporations and are used to draw money. Once they've served their purpose and drawn enough money, they move aside and the next person in line steps up to the plate. Each of these superstars are given opportunities to leave their mark and attain success to that of guys like Austin, Rock, Undertaker, HHH, etc. If they've served their purpose for the time being and can no longer go any further to be a consistent draw, the WWE can't keep them at the top of the totem pole. They need to step aside temporarily (or for some, permanently) and make room for the next batch. More so, even if they're consistently being successful, a wrestler can't stay at the top forever. Otherwise, the audience will get sick and tired of them (i.e. John Cena). So restructuring needs to be made.

The problem with most wrestling fans is they can't seem to make the determination between guys that are temporarily pushed aside and the ones that are permanently pushed aside. Recently, someone made a thread talking about how the MIZ is becoming stale. Are you serious? He headlined Wrestlemania last year and has played an integral part in Raw's present generation of heels. The guy can't be chasing or holding the WWE title 24/7; he's got to step aside after a while. So right now, he's in a position where he can elevate other guys in order to give them the fair shot that was given to him last year. Does that make him "stale"? He's just as charismatic, technically-sound (to an extent), and marketable as he was last year. The only difference is he's in a different position now. But fans will jump to the opportunity to call him "stale" just because he hasn't been featured on TV for the past few weeks. It's such a joke.

Guys, if you're going to take the time to act like your intelligent and post on this forum, take as much time to learn about the business that you wish to discuss. Stop throwing buzz words around like "stale" when you really don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. And, most importantly, have a little bit of something that I'll discuss in the third installment of my "What's wrong with wrestling fans" series: a little bit of patience.

Thanks for reading. Feel free to discuss.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I think part of the mindset for fans calling a certain wrestler's situation stale is the fact that sometimes this said wrestler goes from a very hyped, talked about feud to something rather small.

I can bring up the Miz here from last year's Mania, the man was on top even though it was realistically all about Cena/Rock, Miz did exceed expectations with his segments because, quite frankly, nothing was expected of him. He then went on to the Riley feud. And in a lotta fans' eyes it was a huge stepdown.


I disagreed because I liked Riley and I also firmly believe that some top guys have great feuds with fresh faces or when the title isn't invovlved. HBK is agreat example of someone who could've fresh feuds, like with Hunter on return, and for me it was on par with any championship feud. True the championship was involved in that rivalry soon after but it was still the personal animosity and potrayal by these two that kept me hooked. I loved the Edge/Benoit match and feud from Backlash 2005 much more than Benoit's title run and Hunter feud. So it isn't always about championships for me that bring excitement. Sometimes a championship is rather irrelevant. Like in the Batista/Cena feud from Mania 26.


As I complete this post I actually have to ask my myself what I do consider stale. I'm drawing a blank. I know there are times when I have felt a character or performer is not getting his due spotlight but I dunno what I would call stale. Someone could help me out.

 

[D-Man]

As I complete this post I actually have to ask my myself what I do consider stale. I'm drawing a blank. I know there are times when I have felt a character or performer is not getting his due spotlight but I dunno what I would call stale. Someone could help me out.

Here is the main problem, Paperghost. NO ONE seems to understand the term "stale." Obviously, it's an opinionated word and is often used subjectively. But it's also overused and abused. Fans don't feel like taking two minutes to sit down and actually think about what they're saying before they say it.

Prime examples of this are ANY wrestler that is featured for an extended period of time and then taken out of that spotlight for a few weeks. Just because they're not doing exactly what they were involved in a few weeks prior, posters within the IWC say that said wrestler is getting "stale." If they would use common sense, they'd know that the focus cannot be on the same person, ALL the time. If a wrestler is backed out of the spotlight, they might be underutilized. But if they're not even being featured on television like they were before, how does that make them "stale"?

I challenge anyone to provide me with a fitting example of a current, "stale" superstar besides the staples of WWE's organization (i.e. Cena, Orton, HHH, Taker, Big Show, Punk, etc.)

 

[TheOneTheyCallOn]

I challenge anyone to provide me with a fitting example of a current, "stale" superstar besides the staples of WWE's organization (i.e. Cena, Orton, HHH, Taker, Big Show, Punk, etc.)

As I read this and, try as I might, I cannot honestly do it. I am just like alot of people who think that people such as Cena, Miz, etc are getting pretty stale but I cannot think of anyone on the under card I would consider stale. As for definition I would consider stale with regards to a wrestling character as anyone who has been doing the same gimmick for so long that it's simply time for a change. Now am I not able to find anyone besides the 'staples' that are considered stale because

a) I don't pay enough attention to them?
b) The main eventers are the ones who are always in front of the camera thus making it seem like they are stale since you see them so often?
c) Is the who idea of a wrestler becoming stale all in my head? Thus making me completely wrong for thinking it?

Look at someone like Hulk Hogan for example, He has pretty much kept the same gimmick (besides a few years as the heel Hollywood) since the mid 1970's and while it may seem a little old and dated to some, hulkamania still draws a crowd reaction no matter what. I think what it comes down to is simply a matter of opinion, if a character, gimmick, stable, faction, etc etc doesn't work for you it really doesn't matter in the long run. It continues because it is effective in some manner and thus not stale.

 

[GrandSword]

I think that many people don't even understand how pro-werstling or more specifically how the WWE works. And since all 90% of people really talk about is the WWE, allow me to enlighten them, which leads into the term "stale"...

The WWE will build a wrestler with a character. At first it will be quite generic and almost stereotypical. then they will build upon it week, after week, after week after week. This is so to stick in the minds of the fans why they must hate or love this guy, and in the end either buy their shirts and buy tickets to see them win, or buy the shirts of those who they are wrestling and buy tickets to see them lose.

Let's take... hmmm CM Punk. On Smackdown, he would come out week after week, for a year talking about Straight edge. He would do segments which was basically him bashing the fans on drinking smoking or taking prescription drugs. According to the IWC Did it get "stale"? Did it get "tiresome' and "boring"? Did Truth dumping a trash can full of stuff on Punk get a pop from the fans? Did Show shaving Punk's head geta big reaction?

It is all about building up a character 5-10 minutes at a time each week, so that in 6 -12 months you know who this guy is and why you must hate or love him.

What about something not so obvious. Rey Mysterio. The underdog that just keeps pulling out these fluke wins. He is built as the younger audience's hero. Every week, a new coloured mak, a kid gets a mask, he head butts all the kids, he gets the win, every week. then they can make video vigenettes on him, on Punk on everyone. then they cans ell T-shirts, and headbands. I can go on and on.. Zack Ryder John Cena, Randy Orton, Sheamus... It's all about building up someone as a character and making money off them when they come to your town.

Now please watch Daniel Bryan. He is using the vegan thing to be booed just like Punk used Straight edge. He will mention it in every promo he will have for the next 6 months to create this hated character so guys like Big Show can make steak jokes and amuse the fans, because they know what to expect from these guys when they come to the shows.

The crowds come to sing along with the catch phrases, see them perform their favourite moves and either win or lose... It's all a show to make money.

Ziggler isn't being buried, he is performing to the fans, having people buy his shirts or buy a ticket to see him lose!

There is your lesson, now I hope you all get it. Miz isn't stale, he's the obnoxious loud mouth that everyone wants to see get punched in the face. And until no one wants to see that anymore, than Vince will keep him doing exactly what he has been doing....