Why All The Generic Names For Wrestlers?

[Arsenal]

Why are there no more gimmicks and characters in the WWE? A guy like Curt Hennig got over HUGE back in the day because he was "Mr. Perfect". I could go on and on listing great characters from the past.

These days, everyone has a generic first name and last name. Barely anyone is a true character or even has a character name (e.g. "Nature Boy", "Macho Man", "Stone Cold") to go along with their name.

Why is the WWE going with generic first and last names for virtually all their wrestlers these days? To me, that's another reason why today's WWE can't compare to their glory days of the past. It's boring.

 

[SPR*VLN]

I have to agree. But when you look back this has been going on for a great while. Even the Attitude Era had a grip of first name or first name & last name guys, and everything was fine.

It's just the gimmicks altogether. It has little to do with the names. But I do agree that it's getting too generic. Dolph Ziggler is the o lt flamboyant name I can think of. They should get more gimmick names in my opinion. Makes better TV.

 

[CDR]

Simple answer. Can the casual fan, or somebody who doesn't necessarily watch and keep up with the product ever single week, relate to a Kane-like character or a Cody Rhodes-like character? I don't mean their actual characters, but their appearance, attitude, etc. The everyday person can most easily relate to the character most resembling and actual person, such like themselves. Nobody can relate to Kane - walking around setting things on fire, wearing a mask, losing their parents in an inferno, etc. (Granted, there is always the small percentage of people who can, but you get the point.)

In today's day and age of the wrestling product, and entertainment in general, the consumer likes most the celebrity they can identify with. It's just today's thing. Why is reality TV so popular? Because it's reality television. The reality is that a Cody Rhodes character is more common in the general public than a Kane character.

Especially now since the WWE seems to be on somewhat of a decline (PPV buys, ratings, and just overall amount of fans), the WWE needs to capture the casual fan and reel them in before they can introduce a large number of "characters" and not-everyday wrestlers. Bring them in with what they can relate to, introduce them to something new. Sounds good, right?

Atleast, that's what I think.

 

[TheGreatLegend]

Why are there no more gimmicks and characters in the WWE? A guy like Curt Hennig got over HUGE back in the day because he was "Mr. Perfect". I could go on and on listing great characters from the past.

These days, everyone has a generic first name and last name. Barely anyone is a true character or even has a character name (e.g. "Nature Boy", "Macho Man", "Stone Cold") to go along with their name.

Why is the WWE going with generic first and last names for virtually all their wrestlers these days? To me, that's another reason why today's WWE can't compare to their glory days of the past. It's boring.

Agreed. Its so boring and bland nowadays. What they are doing is they are turning their company into some type of an independent wrestling company like ROH. Pro-Wrestling is about being "Larger Than Life". Nowadays everybody has the same generic name,same things to say to get heel heat etc..Some cruiserweight guys who don't even belong in the main-event are champions.WWE has come to an all-time low at this point. The biggest mistake they are doing is that they are listening to the IWC which is filled with nerds who likes boring,bland indy guys with no character whatsoever. It makes the people who are not part of the IWC to not tune in. I mean come on who can take Daniel Bryan seriously as the World "Heavyweight" Champion ? If Daniel Bryan can be World Champion so can William Regal,Dean Malenko,Chavo Guerrero etc. What is the difference between ROH and WWE now ? WWE was an alternative to other wrestling companies as it provided Wrestling with "Larger Than Life" characters etc. Nowadays the main - event talent is what would have been mid-card talent in the Attitude Era or The Ruthless Aggression Era.

 

[SPR*VLN]

I can't agree that it's due to the fact people can relate. But if it is it's definately not working.

The Great Legend couldn't have said it any better. There used to be comic like characters that we loved. I liked Cody Rhodes when he was in his masked gimmick it was different and cool at the time. Majority of the greatest were gimmick wrestlers who have the weirdest names, it's not the 70's anymore we want gimmicks.

 

[Da Solo]

I agree. Looking back, most of WWE's biggest draws were some exaggerated, drawn out name (The Rock, Stone Cold, Triple H, Edge, Undertaker, etc.). They need to bring this back. If I recall, the only people in recent history who I've seen debut with special names would be Hunico and Epico.

I guess they nixed it because it seems kind of corny to non-fans or less-than-casual fans. I actually think it's one of the things Pro-Wrestling is shitted on for the most. But it's also one of their most glamorous attributes. It gives it that surreal feeling that differentiates it from other sports. But I don't see it making a big time come-back since WWE is pushing this "Reality Era"

 

[Tyler44]

Well think about this. Can you think of a good character to fill in for even lets say 15% of the new superstars along the lines of an Undertaker, Kane, Goldust (just something with a good gimmick)?

Now even if you can, it's a small number of ideas. Why waste these ideas at a time you don't need to? As boring as WWE truly is, they still are rolling in a giant profit and are very relevant and still booming. Why waste all good ideas/characters/stories now when there is no competition?

 

[TempestH]

Daniel Bryan is the exception to the rule. The whole appeal of his character is that he ISN'T larger than life, but "can still kick your ass."

 

[shameronstar]

I think Kharma is a good example to answer this question. Her character is much more different, unique, and dynamic compared to all the other divas. Also, because of the type of character she portrays it's also longer than life because you don't see big scary black woman like Kharma who mysteriously appears out of the abyss of evil to inflict pain upon skinny Barbie model looking woman, and although I personally don't relate to something like that the fact that I'm intrigued and interested in the sheer mystique of who and what Kharma is I love it.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Agreed. Its so boring and bland nowadays. What they are doing is they are turning their company into some type of an independent wrestling company like ROH. Pro-Wrestling is about being "Larger Than Life". Nowadays everybody has the same generic name,same things to say to get heel heat etc..Some cruiserweight guys who don't even belong in the main-event are champions.WWE has come to an all-time low at this point. The biggest mistake they are doing is that they are listening to the IWC which is filled with nerds who likes boring,bland indy guys with no character whatsoever. It makes the people who are not part of the IWC to not tune in. I mean come on who can take Daniel Bryan seriously as the World "Heavyweight" Champion ? If Daniel Bryan can be World Champion so can William Regal,Dean Malenko,Chavo Guerrero etc. What is the difference between ROH and WWE now ? WWE was an alternative to other wrestling companies as it provided Wrestling with "Larger Than Life" characters etc. Nowadays the main - event talent is what would have been mid-card talent in the Attitude Era or The Ruthless Aggression Era.

My sentiments exactly. WWE was this huge dominant force that took over the wrestling industry. It destroyed and/or eventually bought all other major wrestling companies. They did so because they knew what they were doing and had wrestling geniuses working behind the scenes. Now they try to tailor it to the IWC, kids and casual fans that will just leave them eventually. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the WWE creative team consisted of a nerd browsing wrestling forums and a room full of kids with a bunch of wrestling action figures, blank t shirt templates, anda box of crayolas being observed through a two way mirror by a former Disney marketing exec.

 

[Bookman]

I agree that generic names in wrestling is definitely a problem. The issue directly reflects the general lack of creativity in the wrestling business today. Too many guys debut as "the big guy" or "the high-flyer" and really have no unique selling point beyond what they convey through their in-ring ability and mic skills. I think WWE (and all companies) should be more conscious of debuting their talent with more developed gimmicks. WWE has the production to use vignettes and the like to help with this. Some of the greatest wrestlers of all time got their start in vignettes. When WWE debuts a guy like Tyler Black under the name "Seth Rollins" presumably they're going to market him on his tremendous in-ring ability. But if they debuted him as "The Something" Seth Rollins (where "Something" is a gimmick) I think they immediately have given the talent more to work with. They need to give guys outside of the main event mic time and the opportunity to present themselves also before the problem of generic talent is solved.

 

[entertainer101]

It's quite simple: WWE writers and creative are lazy. And why not? When you can keep putting out a bland product filled with no characters (oddly enough on USA where "Characters are welcome") with any background story and people will still watch regardless because it's just what they've always done, why should you try? I wouldn't if it was my job and I knew people would still watch regardless, especially when Cena, Punk, and Ryder are still making money on merchandise.

Sadly this is a big factor in why the product sucks. To those who have argued otherwise simply to defend the product, allow me to provide an example:

Those who have peeked a little interest in recent times:
CM Punk: He's a character. A character who will say anything he wants to anyone he wants and his background is that he's a man out to fix the WWE.

Wad Barrett's NEXUS: They were characters. Granted, WWE blew it big time and no one in Nexus apart from Barrett (and Bryan) have formed any name for themselves (nor should they because they're all bland and suck in the ring). However, when they first arrived they were a huge hit. Why? Because they were characters with a background story as people who sought to destroy the WWE.

Cody Rhodes: Undoubtedly became popular because he was a character. He wore a mask and put bags on people's heads. His background was that he believed he is much better looking than everyone else.

Mark Henry: Undoubtedly someone who's received lots of credit for having a great title run. Why? He was a character. His background story was that he was a beast who wanted to destroy anyone in his path in as gruesome a way possible.

Zack Ryder: He's a character with a background story. Why do the fans love him? Because he's a great technical wrestler? Because he posted youtube videos? No. Because he's a character that's entertaining because of the fact that he's just that, a character.

These are pretty much the only names that have peeked any interest from me in WWE along with Barrett (excluding people who have been around for a while like Cena or Orton who...also have character!) Everyone else has been left to die because they do nothing to make themselves memorable. Why should I care about any of them if they're just another bland name saying the same bland thing? I shouldn't. But again, that won't change because WWE knows the product sucks... they just don't care because people are still giving them money like never before.

 

[Azane]

We're heading into the reality era.
Social media, the men behind the ring, and kayfabe being bent are just major staples of what's to come.

Twitter may be the biggest pain in the ass to the more hardcore fans, but semi-casual fans are using this, A lot, and it's opening up a whole new dimension to wrestling. Tweeting to a superstar named John Cena seems so much more personal and interactive than tweeting to The Undertaker would.

Over the top gimmicks are something I love, and one of the main things that got me into wrestling in the first place, unfortunately every character they've tried to make into the next Mankind has shockmastered.

I think we'll see some gimmicks sprinkled in, gimmicks are just core to professional wrestling's life.

But for the time being, WWE is pushing their product in a direction that fits formal names, and it's a wait and see on if it ends up well, because the transitional youth movement we're in now is just that.


To the post above, Everyone in WWE is a character. There is not a single WWE wrestler who is not acting when they're on screen.

 

[Suibon]

There still are gimmicks in the WWE. They're more subdued than in previous eras - John Cena playing the goody-two-shoes, CM Punk playing the anti-corporate, Mark Henry playing a strongman, Daniel Bryan and Alberto del Rio playing anachronistic gimmicks, etc. - but it's there.

It's just that you people want - oh fuck it, you people don't know what you want.
​

 

[The Hardcore Kid]

Because WWE can trademark the names and make money off of them. It's that simple.

???

Did you read the post? You think they don't trademark "Stone Cold" or "The Undertaker"? What's the difference between trademarking that or made up "real-sounding" names?

 

[Mustang Sally]

An interesting point has been made. Until the OP called it to our attention, I don't think I even realized that most of the nicknames (or "action" names) had been done away with. In the past, Paul Levesque took the name "Triple H" which is a title rather a real name.....but in addition to that, he had action names such as "The Cerebral Assassin" and "The Blueblood from Greenwich." (Incidentally, did anyone ever catch the irony that he was advertised for years as hailing from Greenwich, Connecticut......and that he wound up actually living there?)

But the present-day leader of the band has the most generic name of all: John Cena. His real first name is the most common male name in existence. Plus, we don't call him anything else; he isn't "The West Newbury Whirlwind" or "The Nor'Easter from the Northeast." In fact, with stupid nicknames like that, I'd rather just call him by his real name.

I think it all started when Johnny B. Badd came to WWE from WCW and wound up using his real name: Marc Mero. Before that, WWE always changed the name of guys who came from other wrestling organizations, but that was the first time I can remember them changing an action name to a generic one. It might have started the trend we're talking about in this topic.

Of course, Mero's wife called herself "Sable," so who's to say whether or not the whole thing was coincidence?

 

[Jaystrong322]

What is the difference between ROH and WWE now ?

The difference between ROH and the WWE is ROH has a better product right now. Sorry buddy but no one wants to watch cartoon characters in wrestling anymore. ROH is doing the right thing by presenting a more athletic competition feel to pro wrestling with guys that can actually entertain you in the ring that have amateur wrestling and mixed martial arts backgrounds. But thats just me, I like pro wrestling and WWE is barely a pro wrestling promotion anymore.

 

[VinnieSunshine]

I think its all about realism. In the golden age you had guys that HAD nicknames, but still went by realistic names too: "Macho Man" Randy Savage, Bret "The Hitman" Hart, etc., same for the attitude era. I like it better though. Its not like TNA where almost all of their talent, well at one point, had nicknames.

As for Triple H, it became a way of shortening his name from Hunter Hurst Helmsley. He had gone by Hunter after he dropped his rich snob gimmick. Aside for rare occasions of him using it, Triple H never went by "The Cerebral Assassin" Triple H, it was the announcers that referenced it.

Im kind of glad there aren't more nicknames for guys today, I like the realism it brings. Besides...most of the roster aren't even going by their REAL names anyway.

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

???

Did you read the post? You think they don't trademark "Stone Cold" or "The Undertaker"? What's the difference between trademarking that or made up "real-sounding" names?

Where did I say they DON'T trademark that? They certainly do trademark nicknames and gimmick names. But since not everyone has a crazy gimmick like Undertaker or Kane, they have the simple fake generic names.

 

[Ry.the_Stunner]

umm...

"The Apex Predator" "The Viper" "The Rated-R Superstar" "The Phenom" "The Big Red Machine" "American Dragon Daniel Bryan" "The All American-American"

Shall I go on?

I have NEVER heard of Daniel Bryan referred to as "American Dragon" during his tenure in WWE. Maybe it's just me, but I know for a fact it's not used regularly.

As for the others, those are just side nicknames.

 

[H33LTurn]

It all depends on whether it fits the chracter or not. Kane is a monster so a simplistic name only highlights the fact that hes not a normal person. Same with the Undertaker. The Miz is a celebrity so the name is more of an artistic one. Truth is people dont want to sound stupid talking about wrestling and having to say cartoony names. The names dont get the superstars over, theyre actions do.

 

[Tyler44]

umm...

"The Apex Predator" "The Viper" "The Rated-R Superstar" "The Phenom" "The Big Red Machine" "American Dragon Daniel Bryan" "The All American-American"

Shall I go on?

You just named Randy Orton, Edge, The Undertaker, Kane, Daniel Bryan, and Jack Swagger.

First off, The Undertaker and Kane are from the 90's when these gimmicks were around. This is the examples of what we want again (the point of this thread). So no they do not count. Edge isn't wrestling in WWE anymore, and he also came from the 90's. Along with Triple-H

Now, Randy Orton, Jack Swagger, and Daniel Brian may have all these nicknames, but look at their wrestling name. Basic names, not gimmick/character names.

That is the thread is all about.

So to answer your final question, yes go on and name some more PEOPLE and not characters in WWE and try to play it off.

 

[Henhouse]

Because wrestling (WWE specifically) is becoming a soap, and the characters are made more realistic through normal names, playa.

 

[jskatt21]

This might be a generational thing too. Baseball, Football, Basketball, and Hockey players all used to have nicknames too. It was a way to define the player or differentiate their style, much like wrestling did. Ed "Too Tall" Jones, "Hammering" Hank Aaron, Andre "The Hawk" Dawson, "Prime Time" Deion Sanders, "Pistol" Pete Maravich, "The Great One" Wayne Gretzky, Domonique Wilkens "The Human Highlight Reel", Ted Williams "The Splendid Splinter", "Broadway" Joe Namath, Earvin "Magic" Johnson.

You have to live up to it, it has to defy you, set you apart.

I thought when Drew McIntyre was dubbed "The Chosen One" it would work, especially since Vince himself on TV dubbed him as such, but he hasnt lived up to it. He hasnt embraced or been allowed to embrace it. They need to actually announce him as "The Chosen One" Drew McIntyre.

Generic names are fine, just add something to it, to distinguish them over the other. Explain the difference of John Cena vs John Doe to a non wrestlign fan. Then explain Bret "The Hitman" Hart vs. "Stone Cold" Steve Austin. A lot easier.

 

[DirtyD79]

I agree too many times the names they come up with for guys are just bland and generic. I mean Seth Rollins, Dolph Ziggler, Daniel Bryan, Scotty Goldman? They just sound too much like the Johnny boots and tights jobbers from the 80s and early 90s. If you're going to give them a new name then at least give them something that doesn't sound like you just pointed to any name in a phonebook. Like I dunno Seth "The Thunder" Rollins or something like that. Something that makes him sound like a star and not just some shmoe out of the cheap seats. You need something that stands out, A character.