Whats Wrong With Wrestling Fans #3: Imperfection

[D-Man]

Welcome to the third installment of my WWWWF series. (You can find the first two in the General Wrestling Discussion section HERE.)

Know what we need? We really need smarks to stop breaking the show down on a weekly basis in timeline fashion, plotline by plotline, detail by detail, analyzing every single minor and miniscule aspect of the show, throwing their opinions around when the shows fall short of absolute perfection each week.

We can all dream, can't we?

Here is a response I made after I was recently involved in a conversation with a few posters that I'll keep anonymous, for the time being. We were discussing Raw this past Monday night and going over the aspects of the show that were interesting and the ones that weren't. Naturally, this was a 100% matter of opinion by all parties involved, but I digress.

As the conversation went on, I was surprised at the direction it took. None of the parties were agreeing on which moments of the show were exciting, not exciting, intricate storyline pieces, non-important storyline pieces, buildups and declinations as it pertains to the product. They were so passionate to try and "prove" that their opinions were valid that they actually did something similar to this:

Raw was boring last night. The entire show had no action. All they did was promos, backstage segments, and very little in-ring action.

In my opinion, Raw is on the decline.

Well, I enjoyed Raw. They're going with less is more for Kane vs. Cena.

Ryder is out selling his injuries...finally.

Taker vs. HHH continues.

HBK announced for next week.

John Lauranitis story continues.

Six Pack challenge with Jericho pissing everyone off was fantastic.

Punk vs. Jericho is officially on at this point.

Royal Rumble winner continues momentum, all the while David Otunga is actually becoming pretty enjoyable.

DVR skipped by the Divas which is always a plus.

What else did we really need out of this Raw? It continued everything laid out the week before, while not shoving everything down our throats.

It wasn't a bad show last night. It was just very storyline driven instead of action driven.

If I wanted storyline driven, I'd read a book or watch a slow movie.

Now, before I go any further, I'd appreciate if the posters who wrote these things would keep themselves anonymous. I'm not trying to finger-point or single any of you out; it just so happens that these particular examples fit perfectly into my subject matter. By no means do I wish to offend or piss off anyone.

Anyway, after reading all of that, I instantly became nauseous. This is a prime example of conversations that take place within MANY of our threads and primarily in the Aftermath threads of each section. We take the broadcast, break down every little itsy-bitsy segment, and make ridiculous and broad judgment calls about the direction that said show is going in. Is this what we've all become, as fans?

When you all watch modern, popular television shows from Alcatraz and CSI to American Idol and Jersey Shore, do you all break the shows down, segment by segment, commercial to commercial? Or when the show is finished, do you say "Yeah, that was a good show. I could've done without Snooki pissing on the grass or the fist fight at the bar but it was mostly good." Or do you say "Well, first the cops discovered that they had to catch the criminal who escaped from Alcatraz. (Thumbs Up) Next, they sat in the office and discussed a gameplan. (Thumbs Down... too boring.) "Then, blah blah blah... since there were four good segments and five boring ones, this show is going into the toilet." Is it just me or is this not the most ridiculous thing you've ever seen before? Well guess what, that's what wrestling fans do all the time.

We watch shows like Raw and Smackdown every week. Most of us have been watching for years. You would think that we would base our judgments by the television programs as a whole. Instead, we break it down like we have a degree in analytics or like there's some formula that designates whether a television show is bad or good, depending on it's positive segments, minus the negative segments, divided by the square root of the third power. As far as all of you are concerned, unless the WWE delivers a perfect show every single week, you can't be bothered with it and it's time to whip out the red pen and start pointing out all of the flaws. Come on, guys... just enjoy the show or don't enjoy the show. But I don't need a math lesson on what YOU think it should be, piece by piece. Save that for your next Dungeons and Dragons get-together.

In closing, I just want to say that this perfect broadcast that you're looking for, most likely, will never exist. So PLEASE... stop holding your breath for it.

See you guys next time. Thanks for reading and I welcome any feedback.

 

[TheOneTheyCallOn]

I agree with everything you just said.

To expand on this:

This series you are doing is very interesting to me, simply because I feel like I am drifting away from 'fan' and into 'smark' territory and frankly it sucks, I am a fan first and foremost, I am willing to 'suspend disbelief' every chance I get and I too sometimes get too over analytical.

That being said, you are completely correct, many people tend to break down the show bit by bit almost as if they are looking for an excuse to hate and criticize it. I am not saying that in and of it self is a bad thing, we as fans have the right to say if we do not like something but not when it becomes nitpicking. This is just ridiculous and petty. OK lets say out of a 4 week period RAW entertains you 3 weeks and 1 week is boring. Does that mean it's going down hill? Of course not, perhaps it just didn't suit your tastes or perhaps they are building towards something.

The posts from the anonymous posters pretty much prove my point, either that or people get complacent about the product and thus think its all bad, which in my opinion there are a few times where I have been watching and actually changed the channel, but I can also understand why most of what has happened (or doesn't happen) is taking place.

 

[Shadowking]

I created an account because of this topic, lurked for a while.

On topic
This is an interesting subject. Raw and Smackdown are a very different entity, television wise, then that other shows you mention. While shows like CSI, Big Bang Theory, American Idol and others run weekly, most are not as dependent on long term payoffs as WWE is. "Standard" weekly tv shows tend to have a new episode each week that loosely connects to the previous/next one. Most have and overarching story, but are filled with filler episodes that completely stand alone. The WWE does not have this luxury. For them, and just about any wrestling promotion to be successful on TV they need to tell a long term story culminating in a PPV to earn the maximum money. Now that I finish saying what most of us already know, this style of broadcasting leads itself to breakdown style analysis very easily. A more accurate comparison would be a football game or basketball game with a story. So people tend to lean want to break down every move, every line, every video package down to the base level to determine if it was a good event or show. People need to see if its worth spending 50+ bucks on a PPV to get the pay off, and if the shows leading up to it were boring due to lack of story or good action odds are that it wont sell well.

Now with that all said, I agree that people are expecting to high, and the Tuesday morning refereeing (or color commentating) isnt that productive, and is strictly based off personal opinions, it has every much a right to exist ESPN commenting on the previous football game or people talking about lost around a water cooler or people reviewing music/movies/games. Its all based off personal opinion, and its up to each reader to determine if they should listen to the reviewer. Now I enjoyed this past raw, my only complaint was no Brodus Clay, i really want to see his in some actual matches and not squashes following the same formula.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Overanalysis isn't as rampant as you think. In fact, none of your examples really even amount to analysis. Live Discussions suck, huh?

Reading your post, you'd think people had been going "Yeah, the thirty minute match between Punk and Cena was an all-time classic, sure, but did Punk seriously wear his yellow trunks instead of his red ones? I damn near threw up." Admittedly, that's the sort of thing that goes through my mind, though I rarely commit it to words.

Wrestling fans break wrestling into segments because, well, wrestling easily breaks into segments. CSI, Big Bang Theory etc. have a handful of characters that share tonally consistent scenes across a half hour or so of television. Wrestling shows - or WWE and TNA at least - come at a minimum of two hours, and break down easily. There are different stories with different characters with little to no overlap. This segment was an interview, this segment's in the ring. This was the first hour, that's the second hour. This bit had CM Punk and Dolph Ziggler in it, that one had John Cena and Kane it. This one was a comedy sketch with Santino, that one was a thirty minute iron man match. Rather distinct, no? Nothing, say, like this:

"Well, first the cops discovered that they had to catch the criminal who escaped from Alcatraz. (Thumbs Up) Next, they sat in the office and discussed a gameplan. (Thumbs Down... too boring.) "Then, blah blah blah... since there were four good segments and five boring ones, this show is going into the toilet."

Wrestling shows break down pretty easily into their constituent parts - there are many different, distinct storylines going on one after the other. If it was a two hour show covering how John Cena got his groove back, maybe I could understand your frustration. You paint a picture of a basement dweller - likely well oiled and nude from the waist down - watching an episode of Raw with a microscope. I don't.

"The Kofi segment was good, the Hornswoggle segment was bad; there were more good segments than bad, therefore it was a good show."

You might diagnose that person with autism. I'd diagnose them with common sense.

 

[D-Man]

"The Kofi segment was good, the Hornswoggle segment was bad; there were more good segments than bad, therefore it was a good show."

You might diagnose that person with autism. I'd diagnose them with common sense.

As much as I love your feedback, Sam, this example you gave is hardly what the majority posts in the Aftermath sections.

Although pro-wrestling can be broken down into constituent parts easier than most television shows (as you clearly stated above), if the opinions of wrestling fans were as simple as what I just quoted, I wouldn't have a problem. It's never an "I like THIS" or "I dislike THAT." They tend to really dig into the nitty-gritty of it all, most of which is completely irrelevant to the "big picture" of the program. However, in an attempt for them to try and sound intelligent, they stick out their chests and point out as many negatives and they can, giving them an insignificant rhyme and reason as to why the show is "on the rise or the decline." That's my point.

 

[NatureBoy3:14]

Oh wow! Someone is officially on there high horse. This is a forum. I would define but I am very sure you know what the basis for a forum is. Members of this forum and many others will complai, moan and grown, or what ever they want to in the confines of this place BECAUSE this is the place to do it. That is why this place is set up.
Its

 

[Uncle Sam]

That is why this place is set up.
Its

I can only imagine D-Man rugby tackled you out of your chair before you could finish your post. You'll wake up shackled to the wall in the pitch dark. D-Man will wake up with a few extra scratch marks on his face and a new use for his power tools.

[D-Man's post - the one he wrote before he went to Wal-Mart's hardware section]

I'm struggling to pin down your point.

If it's that people make generalisations based only on segments of a show, yes, that's foolish.

If it's that people are overly critical, pointing out, say, the few bad points of an otherwise good show, yes, that's foolish. Unfounded negativity makes my skin crawl, as if my parents have told me that uncle's coming over for dinner.

If it's that NatureBoy3:14 didn't really need his kneecaps to start with, sure, I'm board.

If it's that wrestling isn't a patchwork quilt which, more than any other show on television, can be said to be pretty much the sum of its parts, then no, get out of my room.

 

[NatureBoy3:14]

Here is the definition of the word forum: A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.
I am not trying to be an ass but the "I like THIS" or "I dislike THAT" that is why we have a forum. These forums are set up for those to exspress one's ideas and views. It is why we come here. I understand your frustration with those who nit-pick the product but that is life.
You asking or even expecting fans not to nit-pick really doesn't make any sense because this is the place for it. We are here to nit-pick. We are here to exchange ideas. Its like people who complain about the IWC on these boards. They get on thier high horses and make comments not knowing the whole time they are part of the IWC. What does IWC stand for. That is my point. Fans are going to complain because these forums are set up for those to complain. If you like say that you did and why. If not then you are free to explain why you are unhappy.
My friend what you are asking goes against everythign a forum is.

That's food for thought. You do the dishes.

 

[brighamosity]

I think this is an interesting post. And I agree with it somewhat, but I think it needs to be pointed out that most shows don't have the internet following that professional wrestling does. I watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report nightly. But after I watch them, I don't go on internet forums and talk about them. Because I don't really care whether or not other people enjoyed the show, and I don't care enough to discuss what they talked about. Same goes for every other show I watch. At most, I might google and read a review someone posted. But there are no other shows that get me talking like professional wrestling does. In fact, forums make me enjoy the shows more. And like others have said, the segments are really broken down so it's acceptable that you might like some things but not like others. Sort of like Saturday Night Live, if I were to like that to the point of going online to discuss it.

And on a lesser note, I would not just say "I liked tonight's show" because I wouldn't want to get infractions for spamming. And I wouldn't care to read other people just saying that either. I'm not saying every match has to be broken down, but I would be annoyed if someone were to just say "That promo sucks", rather than explaning what it was they didn't like about it.

But yeah, that's what makes the IWC different than regular wrestling fans. When I try to talk to people who watch Raw, but aren't part of the IWC, the conversations are completely different. They don't ever say that they liked it or didn't like it. If they like it, they watch it. If they don't like it, they change the channel.

 

[King of the Words]

What's wrong with analizing something that you are passionate about? If I really liked the Family Guy, which I do, I would be talking about every part of the show. But I know what you mean. If I didn't like it I would just change the channel on FG. I guess with WWE, it has been around so long and has so many fans of all ages and most just want to see it be as great as it can possibly be. But we all have are own oppinions, some the same and some different. We will never be all happy about the product, but it be nice to see WWE give more of what the older fans want, maybe with a separate r rated show with it's own superstars? I know(WWE) ECW failed but I don't think enough was put into it for it to be successful. IMO.

 

[D-Man]

Oh wow! Someone is officially on there high horse. This is a forum. I would define but I am very sure you know what the basis for a forum is. Members of this forum and many others will complai, moan and grown, or what ever they want to in the confines of this place BECAUSE this is the place to do it. That is why this place is set up.
Its

Here is the definition of the word forum: A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.
I am not trying to be an ass but the "I like THIS" or "I dislike THAT" that is why we have a forum. These forums are set up for those to exspress one's ideas and views. It is why we come here. I understand your frustration with those who nit-pick the product but that is life.
You asking or even expecting fans not to nit-pick really doesn't make any sense because this is the place for it. We are here to nit-pick. We are here to exchange ideas. Its like people who complain about the IWC on these boards. They get on thier high horses and make comments not knowing the whole time they are part of the IWC. What does IWC stand for. That is my point. Fans are going to complain because these forums are set up for those to complain. If you like say that you did and why. If not then you are free to explain why you are unhappy.
My friend what you are asking goes against everythign a forum is.

That's food for thought. You do the dishes.

Ignorance is another thing that I despise but I digress. I obviously know the purpose of a forum otherwise I would not be a global moderator of one of it's largest.

Anyone can take the low-road by answering ANY topic on the internet by saying, "ITZ AN INTERNETZ FORUMZ. WERE ALLOWD TO HAVE OPINIONZ." But instead of dancing around the real answers or real discussion, maybe you should try hitting it head-on.

Fact of the matter is that the internet is extremely over-critical on most occasions. It's a place where people can put on a mask and offer up opinions and pass them off as facts while disguising themselves as experts on a topic that, most likely, they know nothing about. But it's one thing to just like or dislike something and it's something completely different when they bullet-point their jagged opinions like ESPN analysts about a product that they're not qualified to analyze.

This is my main point here. Taking a television program, stripping it down to its bare bones, and over-critiquing it is ruining it for all of you. The purpose of programs like Raw & Smackdown is to entertain us while we suspend our disbelief. If we continue to peel away each of its layers, eventually we're going to come to the core of the onion and pull the curtain back so far that too much is revealed and the product is permanently ruined.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Wrestling fans break wrestling into segments because, well, wrestling easily breaks into segments.

That's the point. We over-analyze because it's so easy to do so. Shows like "American Idol" and "Jersey Shore" were mentioned in this thread. In discussion forums for those shows, folks probably analyze the hell out of them, too. In baseball forums, we've seen people dissect a single at-bat for a hitter or an isolated play for a fielder and tear the poor guy to shreds over one play in a season of accomplishments and failures.

To echo a sentiment expressed frequently (very frequently) on this forum, we were spoiled by the Attitude Era. It was a crack in time in which immense TV ratings were generated, spurred less by people's appreciation of professional wrestling than of folks flocking to a fad.....and a fleeting one, as fads always seem to be. Because of it, many are waiting for those days to come back and are constantly accusing WWE of "failing" because they can't get to those heights again. In the non-spam section right now, there's a topic that bemoans how little time WWE has left. Oy vey.

A large part of what WWE has to measure up to is it's own legacy. "American Idol" and "Jersey Shore" haven't been on the air nearly as long as WWE, nor are they apt to last as long as WWE already has. Plus, WWE has about 100 new shows a year to produce, while "Jersey Shore" probably makes the standard 22 new episodes a season and goes into reruns the rest of the year. There's a lot more WWE for us to enjoy (or not); therefore, there's that much more "imperfection" for us to gnaw at.

We're the audience, we're hungry to be entertained. That's fine, but I prefer to sit down and watch the show, not looking to analyze every minute of what's happening and flexing my trigger finger in anticipation of all the negative stuff I'm going to write on the wrestling forum next day (Ohmigod, did you see Zack Ryder's freakin' wedgie last night? Yeah, right where it said... 'Are you serious, bro!'... I shit you not!). It's fine to discuss; that's what we're here for.....but get over the notion that WWE is failing despite it's imperfections, because it isn't. People get tired of other shows, which is the reason they all have limited shelf lives, but WWE remains the top shows of USA and SyFy year after year, scoring ratings that remain consistently higher than everything else those networks air. Plus, the company is making money, which is the lifeblood of any business enterprise.

But if you insist on no imperfections, you'll need to tune in to............well, I don't know exactly where you'd need to go to find perfection. Lotsa luck.

 

[The Crock]

Fact of the matter is that the internet is extremely over-critical on most occasions. It's a place where people can put on a mask and offer up opinions and pass them off as facts while disguising themselves as experts on a topic that, most likely, they know nothing about. But it's one thing to just like or dislike something and it's something completely different when they bullet-point their jagged opinions like ESPN analysts about a product that they're not qualified to analyze.

This is my main point here. Taking a television program, stripping it down to its bare bones, and over-critiquing it is ruining it for all of you. The purpose of programs like Raw & Smackdown is to entertain us while we suspend our disbelief. If we continue to peel away each of its layers, eventually we're going to come to the core of the onion and pull the curtain back so far that too much is revealed and the product is permanently ruined.

I agree with some of what you said here, but the portion in bold is what I really DON'T agree with. Once I found the internet, the curtain was effectively blown away. I can try to suspend my belief, but it doesn't work that way anymore. While watching WWE programming, I don't dwell on the fact that it's fake, but I certainly don't watch it the same way I once did (as a child). I don't enjoy over-critical analysis of the product myself, but I don't necessarily blame people for coming on and analyzing what they see, as it's their way of enjoying the product.

On the internet, you can find a plethora of review sites, some by people who have no journalistic/wrestling experience, but their opinion is still valid. It may be frustrating, but if anything, it can add to your experience as a fan, I suppose. For example, I'm a huge football fan, often finding myself breaking down failed plays and whatnot. I'm no expert, but it adds to my enjoyment of it -- it allows me to flex my knowledge. I see what you mean though, as around these forums, for every intelligent and articulate person, you get an absolute moron trying to seem as if he has "backstage" knowledge of the product, when you can see that kind of stuff on any dirtsheet there is.

In today's era of wrestling, the analysis has just become a part of the fandom -- well, for internet fans -- and it's not something I would classify as being "wrong." There's no need to break down a segment and cover every word that was said, but pointing out mistakes with the product isn't necessarily a bad thing. Again, that's not to say I don't agree with you -- I defend today's product staunchly -- but sometimes you can't help breaking down what you see (like it or not), can you?

In essence, what I'm trying to say is this: there's a time and a place for breaking the product down, but it shouldn't be completely looked down upon, as it won't ruin the product. I hate it when people pollute LDs with the typical trash you get in there, i.e. "Teh product suckz so hard, bring back Attitudezzz." I appreciate when someone will say, "I don't like that match, here's why..." It shows that they care about what they're watching, not only that, it's fun to talk about it. It'll never ruin the product for me, nor do I think it'll ruin it for them. Their expectations may be high, for whatever reason, that certainly breeds criticism, but they'll keep coming back. Some fans are fickle, others just enjoy breaking things down, I see no reason for it to stop.

 

[ravssss]

i wont say the problem is with those getting disappointed and still watching it again n again ... WWE had way better product till few years back ... and its the same fans who jst get frustrated ...

when i was watching Wrestling in 99 i dint know it was gonna be bad later and they are gonna make it like some cartoon network entertainment for kids .. they took away the violence and dint produce newer stars ... who cater to this audience ... STONE COLD and The ROCK leaving the company was too much ...coz they werent jst popular like hulk ... but the qlty of their work/product was unmatchable ... they took wrestling to unmatchable heights .. making it too difficult for the newbies ..leaving them confused whether they are supposed to be themselves or to jst immitate them both ... CENA started off very well ... but its after he became this superman ... ppl started feeling enough is enough ..

 

[Alastor]

I don't really mind the constant nit picking by the IWC, it is another form of entertainment for me to read how a programme supposedly aimed at kids can generate so much anger in 'adults'. I think most of us are guilty of it as well, whether it is in this forums about wrestling or on some other forum about some other form of interests.

What really surprises me is how far some fans go to defend a product somebody else is critisizing. Most of these posters resort to personal attacks or the standard 'TNA done it worse or WWE is worse' to justify their defending of the product. I don't get how it makes it OK for me to enjoy a bad programme or not to criticize something I dislike if the competition is just as bad.

It is OK to point out flaws in something you like or appreciate why somebody like something you hate. Most posters here seem to only have the extreme mindset that whatever he/she likes it must be perfect and whoever dislike it is a moron. Whatever he/she dislike, it must be the absolute worst with almost no positive points.

 

[H33LTurn]

I agree I mean no one really does this with other shows, but since they have a medium to criticize and sound smart, wrestling forums, they give it a shot. First off, everything is based on opinion. At the end of the day no matter how over or not over someone is in the crowd theres going to be someone here who likes/dislikes them. And thats fine to mention but mindless nitpicking and bickering can only take a conversation so far. In the end, if I sat down to watch a show all the way through it had to be enjoyable. I really dont know anybody, besides movie critics, that sits down in front a screen to watch something they are probably going to dislike.

That being said, your post was a little too vague to pin down exactly what you're saying but people also have a right to point out whats wrong. If you dont want to hear it you can always avoid the discussion.