Which Era do you find more enjoyable? The Post Attitude Era or The PG Era?

[M-Rey845]

i was wondering which era in the WWE is liked by more people, either "The Post-Attitude Era" from 2002(The first wwe draft) to 2005(Wrestlemania 21), or the Era we're in now, (Wrestlemania 21-present)

The Post Attitude Era of course was recognized for being the aftermath of the attitude era and was imo underrated. Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle, American Badass Undertaker, and Triple H were at the top for most of the period. Many superstars showed better wrestling skills, and possibly more passion then the era now. The midcard was full with many superstars who were willing to step up. Brock and Kurt usually fought for the title on smackdown, while raw had triple h dominating everyone. This era also gave some memorable moments as well, like Triple H forming Evolution, Eddie Guerrero winning the title, Benoit winning the title, a Batista vs. Cena tease at the royal rumble, Cena's debut, Hollywood Rock, etc.

The Era we're in now, started off pretty good, but then started to decline. It started with Cena and Batista with the titles, Edge moving to the main event, the rebirth of ECW, and the main event scene being seriously filled up imo. Then the WWE went PG. This brang with it the beginning of the booing of Cena, the appealing of more kids, a very very bad representation of ECW, the continued aging of the old superstars(Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Triple H), a true Entertainment genred show, and too many complaints about what happens.

To me i think the era we're in now was better when it started, but then again i am a little bit biast since i started watching inbetween The 2005 Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania 21. I never really got to feel the expierence of watching the post-attitude era matches, so my opinion doesnt really count.

 

[iamcountrymusic]

Post Attitude has been my favorite for awhile. When it was Bischoff vs Stephanie/Paul Heyman.

Evolution is my favorite stable. And even though people hated storylines like Katie Vick, those most trashy (Stephanie having to do HLA) i found to be most entertaining. The elimination chamber. A bunch of the old WCW guys were pretty entertaining.

This PG era isn't anything compared to how things were. Sure we have Orton and a bunch of superstars like Kofi getting their push. But it's just gotten so boring and stale, there's nothing on Raw that keeps my attention anymore. i'd go to Smackdown but we don't get it in Utah. And ECW is a joke.
Actually, Cena getting booed has been pretty great.

 

[FreezeIzGAWD]

I have been a fan of WRESTLING 4 About 25 years and I can honestly say th@ THIS IS THE WORST PERIOD IN WRESTLING! Seriously! I HONESTLY hope TNA becomes LEGIT becuz right now it still is a DISTANT SECOND and honestly th@ is HORRIBLE 4 FANS! Since most TOP WRESTLERS DON'T REALLY HAVE A TOP TIER ALTERNATIVE THE WWE IS JUST GIVING US THE SAME STORYLINES AND MATCHES EVERY WEEK! I actually LOVE the SHEAMUS feud just becuz IT IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT! This era is slow boring and too CUTE! I couldn't believe th@ we witnessed 2 HELL IN THE CELL MATCHES on one card & THERE WASN'T ANY BLOOD! Th@ SUX! PPL KNOW WRESTLING IS FAKE NOW! Yeah I get it BUT DAYUM! That was one of the things that made wrestling seem REAL was the occasional BLOOD SHED! It brought out the ANIMAL in fans! I REMEMBER HOW PPL WERE SCREAMING IN ENJOYMENT WHEN HOGAN BUSTED BUNDY UP @ WRESTLEMANIA 2! U wanted 2 see the BAD GUY GET HURT! Now we have cute matches and DIVAS WHO WANT 2 BE STARS AND BORING FEUDS! SOMEBODY KILL ME!!!

 

[Toroc102]

Well, I just think of the "Post"-Attitude era as an extention of the attitude era, just watered down with the brand extention, so yeah I liked that era a LOT more than the current one. You still had a bunch of badasses, a little more meaning to most of the titles, a lot of my favorites were still wrestling for the company. I used to think the Brand Extention was a good idea, but recently I realized that you could blame most of the problems I complain about such as title derision, over exposure of ppvs, destruction of the Mid-Card, destruction of the Tag Titles and more on the Brand Split so that is one big negative, but then again its still going in the PG era.

I hate the PGWWE, an I think everyone can guess why.

 

[Pimpin]

The post Attitude Era was badass and I enjoyed it A LOT more than the PG Era. The post Attitude Era still had a lot of the badass characters from the attitude era with some old WCW, ECW and guys like Brock Lesnar mixed in there. The titles still meant something back then and of course back then there were still a lot of characters that stood out (unlike the PG Era where there are basically no gimmicks).

The PG Era however is just god awful. Sure we have Orton, Edge, Jericho, the older stars like HBK and Taker along with newer stars like Kofi, Morrison and others working their way to the top, but the quality of the product has decreased dramatically as today's product produces lame skits with Hornswoggle and an extremely stale DX, lame guest host's and just lots of unentertaining things going on in the PG Era.

So yeah I enjoyed the Post Attitude Era WAY MORE than the PG Era. In fact I hate the PG Era so yeah.

 

[Stuntz]

IMO the PG era is killing the WWE. NO blood in 3 HIAC matches in one night WTF. How can you have a HIAC without blood that is the biggest joke in wreestling IMO. The last couple of PPV's, Cena and Christian both get opened up the hard way and OMG Vince flips out and has to make sure the blood is cleaned up. They got away with it in Cena's match, but for god's sake they all but stopped the ladder matchat TLC. That has just about killed it for me. I have been watching the E for close to 30 years and this is the worst i have ever seen it in my life. I am so close to hangin up the boots on Raw im not even kidding. The only thing thats changed in recent memory is Sheamus winning the title then they devote a whole 90 seconds the next night with him on TV. Total Bullshit . Hey Vince I Know you have eyes in here somewhere.....Get your head out of your ass and grow your fucking cajone's back. Will the real Vince McMahon please stand up, or get the fuck out. We want blood, and real entertainment. Fuck I think Im done ranting for now.....

 

[CenaFan]

I enjoy them all but I realize that every era has it’s faults. I enjoyed The Attitude Era more though. People can say what they want about the Attitude Era but the Attitude Era has it’s faults as well. I mean I see people complaining about the PG Era but fail to recognize the problems and issues with in the Attitude Era. It wasn’t all full of roses. We had the montreal screw job, we had the Canada vs. U.S and most of all there was a major Drug issue with the company during that time. I’m just not the type of person that will say that Attitude Era was the best thing that happened because that’s not true. I just enjoyed it more because to me it was more entertaining.

 

[BladeRunner]

Post-attitude era had a lot of awesome stuff going for it. All of the good WCW guys were there. It still had attitude, unlike now, which means a lot to me. In fact, I'd say WWE had the most good wrestlers of any period within that time frame. And there were so many good moments.

To me, there's just no comparison. PG era has some great wrestlers, but storylines have sucked ass. The last really good storyline I can remember is Michaels versus Jericho, where Jericho put Michaels through a tv. And come to think of it, it was right before the PG era started!

 

[Ytoojae]

Post-Attitude era.

For the following reasons in no particular order --Chris Jericho; Chris Benoit; Kurt Angle;
Eddie Guerrero

Though having said that I really believe that right now is an exciting time for the future of the WWE and wrestling in general. There are so many young (32 and under) wrestlers out there who are taking the world by storm. They're getting opportunities that they probably would never have had in eras gone by and a large number of them are taking the bull by the horns.

I'm excited for wrestling in 3 to 5 years. I think we're on our way to a huge new era.

 

[trkoeller]

Well, both era's in my opinion brought something new to the table.

Post Attitude is definitely better because of all the wrestlers that were brought in, and there were some pretty decent matches too. Storylines were great, and there was that violent atmosphere that every wrestling fan likes.

The PG era is decent. Storylines are so-so. And the violence has gone downhill. Me being a wrestler in training has to have a little respect for the PG era because of the new fans it brings in. The children are able to watch more, which is able to rake in more money. If the WWE wasn't going towards the kids, it wouldn't be able to rake in as much merchandise money.

So, in my opinion the post-attitude had better wrestling, but PG is better 4 the actual wrestlers

 

[Red_Venom]

Definately post-attitude era. Lesnar/Angle, Jericho champion and the random appearences of Austin and Rock are some of the factors that made this better.

 

[Y-2-Jay]

Just thought i will lt you know the PG era didnt offically start untill July 2008. The Wrestlemania 21-July 2008 was known as the Cena/Batista Era.


Anyway back to the question it has to be post attitude. Why? because it entertained me a hell of a lot more than this era were in now which lacks a edge that the WWE is so badly missing. That era had good storylines this era has????? Hornswoggle. Even though the post era tried to be a rip off of the attitude era with the pointless swearing, HLA and other stuff. That era also had better matches the pg era has good maches every once in a while. Even though post era had its disadvantages (e.g HHH boring world title regin) But all together post attitude era gets the nod.

 

[Hype]

I'd definitely go with the Post-Attitude Era. I started off watching WWF as kid. It was all about Hogan, Steamboat, Savage for me. It was very family oriented. Somewhere in the early 90's i stopped watching and didn't get back into it until early/mid 97, and was immediately hooked at how WCW had come up. Now I agree with everyone else that the Post era had a lot of great talent let over from the monday night wars, and the storylines were a hell of a lot better than they are now. Now, I understand that they're gearing towards kids more for revenue. I understand that Linda is running for Senate. But lets think about this. WWE had no competition therefore they feel as though they can do whatever they want and not really fear losing viewers. We're pretty much coming full circle. Maybe as TNA gets bigger, WWE will start to change its format to compete thus giving us some other era. (sorry for rambling)

 

[will5979]

Post Attitude for me...I remember when WCW folded and Flair showed up on MNR thinking WOW this could be interesting. Then Vince brings back the nWo and creates the epic showdown at SkyDome between the Rock and Hogan (so much for the Hogan being washed up and won't put anyone over jazz at that time!). The best part of that match, Hogan was heel, Rock was babyface and NO ONE cared! It was all about RESPECT for the men that revolutionized this business.

Then there was the Hogan HHH matches...classic. You're taking the man that made your industry against the man that keeps it going and they have 2 classic matches. You also finally (after we were robbed at WMVIII) get a WWE championship match between Hogan-Flair.

 

[Dr. Stinger A. Zoidberg]

So, in my opinion the post-attitude had better wrestling, but PG is better 4 the actual wrestlers

Better? How better? Money-wise: Not much, In the post attitude era, You had wrestlers skyrocketing in popularity. There was Lesnar, DDP, Taker, The Rock, Booker T, Angle, RVD, Benoit, Guerrero, and hell even John Cena.

Due to the rising popularity, more fans came out to see the shows. Whether it be a live event, or a TV Taping, more fans came. Especially, those who were WCW fans and needed to watch SOME wrestling, so they watched the WWF/E.

In the post-attitude era, There were some great rivalries. You had Cena/Angle, Lesnar/Taker, Rock/Hogan, and Rock/Angle/Taker. This also caused more money intake for Vince, as fans would buy the PPV.

Also, with superstars popularity going up, so did merchandise sales. I going to an even back in 2002, and I couldnt even walk 5 feet without seeing a Lesnar shirt, or a Mysterio mask, or a Taker shirt, or an Angle shirt, etc. SO obviously, there was alot of money being made by Vince on that.

Where does all this money go? THE SUPERSTARS! So no, the PG Era is in no way better for the superstars. The Post-attitude era was by far, more marketable for them.

 

[Sean Valjean]

Personally, I'd extend the Post-Attitude era to at least 2006 or 2007. The PG era didn't really start until 08.

I say Post-Attitude Era by far. While it wasn't perfect, it had so many awesome things. There were still alot of the guys from the attitude era (Angle, Jericho, Benoit, Edge, etc.), some cool new guys (ex. Brock Lesner), the title's meant a little more, and the WWE still had attitude. Some highlights from that era include:

Bischoff as Raw GM
Evolution
Rapper Cena
Crusierweight Division
Kane's awesome 2003 psycho heel run
HHH/HBK feud
Wrestlemania 19 (IMO, the last great WM)
Benoit/Eddie world title wins
The strongest Women's division ever (02-04)
The Rock's 2003 heel run

And of Course...

Booker T & Goldust (sorry, I'm a mark for this team)

 

[rko102]

I hate the PG era, absolutely HATE it, yet I still watch WWE and I don't always know why. I've been watching since late 2006, and until about mid 2008 I was really enjoying it, but it has sucked for so long now....I really don't know why I've kept up watching it. Maybe a part of me is hoping things will change and go back to how they used to be but I know that's impossible. Ever since all the roster cuts to save money with the economic crisis starting, as well as Vince deciding kids were the future of this business' success and changing the tv rating to PG, we've seen the same guys on all the shows every week, and the same rematches over and over again. Storylines are boring and stale, and appeal more to kids than actual adult fans who understand and appreciate the rich history this wrestling company was once so known for, and I'm not satisfied with anything right now. I was watching the Twisted and Disturbed Life of Kane DVD earlier today and just seeing these old matches, like Shane vs. Kane at Unforgiven 2003, makes me wonder how WWE went from being that to the shit it is today. I know I sound like a real hater, but I can't help but be honest. I don't know what happened to the WWE, but their product is nothing like it once was, and I think people who aren't kids who actually like this PG era are out of their minds.

The post-attitude era is something I only get to relive through wrestlers' DVDs as well as streams and youtube videos, but every time I see it I really wish I'd been watching back then. Storylines were good and developed most of the time in a slow but interesting pace, and we didn't have stupid shit like the guest host gimmick on RAW, which I've said time and time again has really run its course and should be dropped. WWE showed why they were number 1 back then. I don't feel they do that anymore, and I think it's only a matter of time before TNA starts having just as much, if not, more success. Because quite honestly I am more and more tempted to switch to that and give up on WWE because I'm so fed up with the crappy wrestling shows they air each week. End of story.

 

[DR.Dopenhagen]

iv been watching wrestling since i was 6 in 1999 yea thats right vince kids watched the attitude era too (as a 6 year old my fav match was always foley vs HHH at Rumble 2000 i must have watched that match a 100 times when i was a kid) and the post attitude era was much much better. we saw angle vs lesnar which was great Bischoff as GM on Raw which was fuking awesome and Randy Orton before he became stale boring and tattoed. i also personally think WM 21 was the start of the new era and eddie guerrero vs Rey Mysterio and HBK vs Kurt Angle at WM 21 were the last WWE matches i truly enjoyed.

 

[Rated R Stustar]

I personally liked the post attitude era, it was resonsible for creating so many big names like Brock Lesnar, Randy Orton, Eddie Guerrero, JBL, Cena, Batista etc the matches were by far better as we go to witness extreme matches, for an example Brock Lesnar and The Undertaker's Hell In A Cell Match, whereas in this era matches like Hell In A Cell are toned down eg, Orton Vs. Cena Hell In A Cell, also the in the post attitude era they were allowed to say more stuff but with all the younger fans watching these days the WWE needs to be careful with what messages they pass along.

 

[Southwind]

Post attitude era. You had Benoit and Guerrero (RIP) at their best and as world champions Randy Orton and John Cena were bright up and comers. You had Evolution JBL and his cabinet the return of "The Deadman" as well as much much more.

It's not even close.

 

[Mr. TM]

I have it in my mind set in two different periods that are alike in many ways. Each had storylines that involved "superman" like characters, something that I felt the attitude era moved away from. However, I liked the previous era before, not because of the Brock Lesnars, The Goldbergs, The Triple Hs, but because it was the growth of the smaller men, which we now see today. But that time period had an advantage, Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero. Both of those men would go on to win titles in an era when it looked like you had to be a sculpted God to win the title, and it was always special for me.