Who should take precedence: Veterans or Newbies

[boywithbluehanger]

For a while on the boards we've all probably seen our share of noble fans claiming that the older talent that has been around for a while should make way for the next generation. Now while I agree that this should always occur at some point, I do believe that there's an exception in some cases.

When I've spent over a decade watching a guy wrestle who can still run good-to-decent or even very worthy matches and that guy has only won 1 or 2 titles, I can't help but think that he deserves a bit more. He knows all of the tricks of the trade, the crowd is behind him, and he's mastered his character. This guy is an expert now. Why make him a jobber when his time isn't really up? For example, Kane is a convincing monster who has only had less than a handful of title reigns yet he's outlasted most of the legends who started around the time he was there. He's not a 28 year old in the ring but his conditioning allows him to still put on quality matches. The same could be said for a guy like Christian.

Some say its because they've lost interest in those "vets" but I'd venture to ask you, "Outside of the writing for some of their feuds, just how interesting is Dolph Ziggler, Zack Ryder, Santino, The Miz, Kofi Kingston etc?" I'm not making mention of them to bash them but just because the decision was made to push these (once) newer guys at some point, doesn't mean that they were really all that special on their own. In most cases, people responded to them because they were pushed. Christian in his last reign wasn't given a meaningful feud fueled with necessary promos, video packages, story, buildup or anything of that matter. And Kane came back after an injury yet was only more of a threat in the terms of his matches being longer. He didn't win anything meaningful or even come out on top in the meaningless feuds he was in!

This is not to say that I always want the vets to take priority over the newer guys but I would love to see guys who are overlooked pros in every sense of the word and can still go in the ring without getting wiped out, win championships (plural) before they retire. They're less green in the ring, on the mic, and with their characters. I really don't enjoy seeing them forever bowing down in hopes that the new guy will be on his path to get rocketed to the top. However I do think there's a time for that to happen but I don't think it's when the veterans are still good. It should be when they can only handle those lame 3 minute matches. That, I believe, is the 2 year period where they should job and then retire.

What do you think? Should the newer talent still take precedence over the veterans even if the older boys can still put on good matches and be booked with good storylines?

 

[theBec2101]

It all depends on the people. If you have HBK, HHH, Rock, Austin, Undertaker people of that nature then they can and should do whatever at will. They have earned it and are able to come in and still perform. Now if you have the likes of Hardy's, Vader, Rakishi then I don’t think so. They were not as impact full I believe. So again it all depends on the people.

 

[justin71]

Perfect example look at Miz/Christian and the I-C title booking Miz to win the title was a great on the money choice Miz is nearly 10 years younger and his star is still on the up-rise. Christian at best might have a transitional WHC or WWE title in him, but his career is nothing to sneeze at, but Miz is younger and had a bigger upside to his career for the future when Vince is not blaming him for poor buy rates. When it comes to guys in their first 5-6 years the building up process is detrimental, but the HBK, HHH, Y2J, Rock, Austin, & UT's all of their best days are long behind them and deserve their huge pay day's whenever there is something big out there for them to show up at the big 4 ppv's when they can make the time, but they can comeback anytime and not hurt the younger talent by either putting them over or at least be generous without taking too much time away from up and comers. If Taker decided he wants Sheamus at WM29 he could set-up that match with a simple stare down and showcase Sheamus as the future for example and even with UT winning the match Sheamus still gets over by looking strong. If your talking something like Rock/Austin 4 nobody wins(except Vince) in that type of situations because it would be a time killer for anyone wanting to get noticed that works 300+ days and it's a slap to all the talent that is paying their dues.

 

[byrnside]

I think the most important thing is not who takes precedence over whom, but that there's an equal level for all. I think the biggest point is that Christian and Kane, as much as many of us love them, and as great of in-ring talents as they are, just don't sell like others do. It is important to keep them involved in major story lines if for no other reason than to elevate the newer guys. Working with a guy like Christian can only benefit a new guy's in-ring skills, and if the new guy is talented enough, it can only provide some damn good matches.

 

[Jdulemba1001]

You have to have veterans like Christian. However, for wrestling to evolve and continue to grow, new talent must come around. So a good mix is essential. Without the vets, fans dont have someone to get behind and draw them in. But it is their job to make sure that the new guys get noticed. Someday, it will then be their job to do the same to the next generation.

 

[xavyer]

Well, that depends on the veteran, i wouldn't mind Kane, Jericho or Christian getting over or winning a few more WWE or WHC titles, they can still go, they can still put on quality matches and they don't mind putting people over, but i do however have a problem with someone like the Rock, he didn't want to put over Cena, i mean, if someone has busted his butt for the company big time is Cena, and yet, they made the Rock win, that was the ultimate slap in the face for him, or now that he's back, he get's a title shot? what about the other guys? The ones that have been working hard all this time, when a veteran like The Rock shows up and take everything away from them, i'm sorry to say, but that is a masive slap in the face for guys like Kane, Ziggler, or up and rising stars that deserve it far more than the Rock, with guys like Triple H or The Undertaker is different, at least those guys are still with The WWE in some capacity, but i think The Undertaker should call it quits after Wrestlemania 29, i love the guy and he's my all time favorite, but his time is due now that he's injury prone, if you can only work one match per year that is not good, at least Triple H has enough gas in the tank to do it for a few more years, or also i would'n mind William Regal to have one more run, if they gave one to Mark Henry, they should give Regal one, even if he doesn't win any title, but one las great feud with an up and coming talent, like Barret, or Sandow, that would be like getting two birds with one shot, he can put them over big time and he goes out swinging, just a thought.......

 

[boywithbluehanger]

Well, that depends on the veteran, i wouldn't mind Kane, Jericho or Christian getting over or winning a few more WWE or WHC titles, they can still go, they can still put on quality matches and they don't mind putting people over, but i do however have a problem with someone like the Rock, he didn't want to put over Cena, i mean, if someone has busted his butt for the company big time is Cena, and yet, they made the Rock win, that was the ultimate slap in the face for him, or now that he's back, he get's a title shot? what about the other guys? The ones that have been working hard all this time, when a veteran like The Rock shows up and take everything away from them, i'm sorry to say, but that is a masive slap in the face for guys like Kane, Ziggler, or up and rising stars that deserve it far more than the Rock

I don't really have a problem with someone like The Rock coming back. Mainly because even though he can't handle long matches anymore he deserved to go out on top. Back in '03 Vince knew when The Rock was leaving and chose to let it be on a loss under the guise of putting over Evolution. Instead of just letting The Rock end his career on a high note after all he had done for the company with his talents in the ring, on the mic, and with expertly portraying his character (which got him noticed as someone who had the chops to become an actor), Vince chose for him to end in a loss. From '02 he had The Rock turn heel (which I was fine with..even the stupid Hogan stuff) and in '03 he jobbed to Goldberg and was even turned into a "chicken shit heel". Two things no Rocky fan really wanted to see but we swallowed that pill and rolled with it for over a year.

So this is a guy who paid his dues..he had portrayed a heel long before that obviously but the crowd loved the character so much that they embraced him anyway. So he deserved/deserves to end his storied career on a high note. I believe it wasn't fully out of spite but rather this was also in hopes that Dwayne Johnson would feel there was unfinished business to come back to the WWE. It was Vince being a manipulative businessman by dangling a carrot in front of him. So when you say that you have a problem with the most successful wrestler to come from the business returning simply to boost the company's exposure and to show his children (who were too young or not alive during much of the AE) how important he still is to many people, I think its very necessary for a less relevant WWE and excusable.

Now I would have a problem if he was nothing more than a veteran who can no longer put on entertaining matches and is getting victories over new talent when he should be using this time to put them over before retiring. But Cena is not a new talent and The Rock (like Cena) deserves to end his career as a face.

Now someone like Mark Henry would be in my example. He can still pretty much do all of the things he's been doing for the past 8 years with the company and yet he's only had one reign with the WHC. Even if he's only going to be used as a transitional champ, he sure as hell would be a far better one than most. All a guy like him needs is a leaner, talented, opponent to face. Monster VS. Monster matches aren't the most fun to watch so his feud with the Big Show was doomed from the start. But nevertheless Henry is a prime example of someone who can still go in the ring who in this point of his career deserves to be busting through inexperienced kids on their way up, raking in title runs before he's out of here. He's paid his dues, he expertly portrays his character, and he can still put on the same type of matches (with talented wrestlers) that he could 8 years ago. I'd even venture to say that he became better at in-ring psychology after his first 5 years from 96-2001. So yes, I'd put someone like him in the category with Kane, and Christian as experienced veterans who should be raking in title holds for newbies to win from them.

 

[Mustang Sally]

As always, it's a proper product mix that stirs the broth. Sometimes the newbies will shine over the veterans, and sometimes it's the other way around.

When analyzing this type of notion, the first thing to do is toss legends like The Rock and Steve Austin out of the equation: if they work any type of program, they're going to be the guys who are catered to by whomever they're facing.....when Rock met Cena at WM, I thought Cena would win. Looking back, that seems foolish. He'll come back at another PPV and lose to Cena someday, but that the event was held in Miami should have clued me in at WM28.

But the thrust of this thread isn't legends, it's veterans.....and to that I still say a good mix is what gets the job done. Newbies would never get anywhere if veterans didn't job to them. Yes, the company could get newbies to build up other newbies.....and they sometimes do..... but the newbie who loses that contest often has his momentum stalled or ruined; better to get a veteran who's already had his share of success to sacrifice for the benefit of the newbie. Conversely, when a veteran whose career has been running in place for awhile needs a boost, he usually gets a few wins over other veterans, but he'll sometimes stall the progress of a newbie by taking the win, sometimes in unexpected fashion.

Take Dolph Ziggler. At this juncture, it's hard to see him as a newbie. Still, in WWE's effort to build the stars of tomorrow, this guy has been force-fed to us like no one else; he's everywhere.....and, as part of the product mix I speak of, he's had his share of winning and losing. After boosting him to world title level, the company surprisingly put him on a losing streak that sent him plummeting back down to the mid-card. I thought management had decided Dolph was never going to be main event material.....yet, look at him now.....he's the MITB winner and holds the world on a string.

While veterans are at different levels, depending on who they are and at what cycle in their careers they occupy, newbies come in all shapes and sizes, too. Not all newbies are destined for big careers and how they fare in matches against veterans depends on what Creative has in mind for them.

Take Ryback and Antonio Cesaro. They're both newbies, right? Yet, no one sees them as equals, do they? With Cesaro, I can't imagine what anyone sees in him; to me, he's as boring as dishwater. True to that, he's already lost a match or two, and no veterans have sacrificed anything to him at this point. Ryback's character is built on a completely different foundation.....and there are going to be plenty of veterans having their standing obliterated by this guy. In another thread, it's being speculated how (and to whom) Ryback will finally lose. It's a damn good question, too.

Who takes precedence.....veteran or newbie? Depends on numerous factors....and the fact it's an ever-changing set of circumstances that determines who wins and loses is a good thing. Otherwise, we'd know in advance the result of every match and confrontation before the show even went on the air.

 

[Marv95]

I understand we can't rely on the old guys forever. I also understand for there to be a future you have to have a new crop of talent to secure the future. But until these "newbies" show me they can be taken seriously, until they show be they got the it factor in and out of the ring, who am I going to root for? Who am I going to take seriously? I'll go with Rock, Austin, Taker, Jericho, Christian, Henry and Lesnar over guys like Dolph, Cody, Santino, Sandow, Miz, Sheamus, etc. Like it or not there's a reason why they had to resort to Rock, Brock, HHH and Big Show to headline PPVs. These new guys aren't good enough to headline on their own, and it's not just because of the way they're booked. So for right now the guys who can appeal to me, the ones who can entertain me can take precedence, and those are the vets(for the most part).

A storyline between the vets vs the new guys(Millionaires Club/New Blood, Main Event Mafia/Frontline, whatever) isn't such a bad idea. A good way to put over new talent yet find out who gets exposed the least.