why did WWE switch to PG?

[RH23]

i don't understand why they did. Why are they aiming their product towards kids now?

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

This is completely my opinion, of course, but they made the move to start investing and growing a brand new audience of kids. So that those kids will grow up with them.

Unfortunately, they did so at the expense and risk of alienating the current audience of adults (like us) that they did have up before they began transitioning over to the switch (which has been several years in the making, and I was not the least bit surprised when they actually made the switch). They just made a risky move by going out on a limb at the risk of pissing us of with their PG content, and are telling us adults that the kids essentially come first, for them.

Sadly, I have argued until I was red and blue in the face with posters on different forums, and I have to say that the posters on this forum generally seem more reasonable, but there is not a single reason why WWE couldn't have had both. Have both an edgy program on Monday nights, and a family program on Friday nights. This time, however, they would enforce the roster split, and treat the shows separately so that you didn't have Superstar A cursing on Mondays, while being toned down for Fridays.

With a good PR and marketing team, I see absolutely no reason why they couldn't have worked that out. If you think about it, that was exactly what wrestling was during its most popular time in history. WWE being the edgy programming targeting adults and older teens. WCW being the family program, with a wide-based audience. And ECW being the niche group targeting older teens and adults who liked a more specialized product.

And to anyone saying that wouldn't work, because the Brands would be competing with each other ... I don't accept that. ECW had their rosters raided by both WCW and WWE. That wouldn't be happening in this case, since it would all be under the World Wrestling Entertainment Umbrella. It would therefore, be controlled, with traffic actually being directed. Of course WWE stole Jericho, Benoit, Saturn, Guerrero, and Malenko ... and morale went downhill from there, with a plethora of other internal problems. That wouldn't happen with this scenario, either since again ... it would all be under one umbrella.

Raw would target that 18-34 year olds.

Smackdown would be a more general audience, like today ... offer something for everyone.

With ECW being a Cruiserweight show, targeting a more nice audience.

That way, everyone would have been happy. I can not tell you how many people I have argued with who oppose the suggestion, simply because they like today's programming, did not like the edginess of Raw during the Attitude Era (yet they loved Austin, so go figure) ... and they have this need to have all 3 shows to themselves.

But yeah, they went PG to grow a new audience AND because there is no competition for them. Therefore, their mentality is "why go out on a limb if we don't have to"?

Unfortunately for them, people don't like being told by WWE that adults are supposed to like the exact same thing a kid likes. And it must be a problem within WWE, because otherwise Ross wouldn't be commenting on it regularly. I am sure this is Vince McMahon talking through Ross, because he knows that the fans respect Ross' opinions. Unfortunately for them, that still does not change my mind. Ross (or Vince) says "it's time to move on from the Attitude Era" programming. Says who? I thought when you're in television and customer service, you are supposed to listen to what your customers want ... not tell them "what they are supposed to want"?

But Vince has always been arrogant like this. He actually gleefully announced on Raw one time a few years ago that "I will tell you what you want to see, and you will like it." I couldn't believe the man actually told his audience that, but that was definitely the real Vince McMahon coming through when he stated those words. Unbelievably arrogant. Vince is simply frustrated that he can't have his cake and eat it too, by telling adults and kids that they have to both like the exact same product.

If you are frustrated with the PG programming, the best thing I can possibly tell you to do in the short term is not to order Wrestlemania 25, his biggest PPV of the year. If you want to send a big "Fuck You" back to Vince and his arrogance in telling you "what you will see, and liking it" ... I can think of no better way to hurt the man, but in his wallet.

 

[TheGreenEagle]

I agree with Lord Sidious

It's easier to market it to the kids if its PG. There has been lesser and lesser Extreme Rules, The way wrestlers talk is even changing. Listen to them. They really don't bash each other like they used to and the words they use are geared towards kids. They even changed the name to Cena's finisher.

I disagree with going PG fully.
They need to have at least one show that targets young adults and up audience. My only hope is that TNA moves to Monday Nights so they'll have to up the ante and go back to being edger.

 

[Wavy Crockett]

Even With It Going PG Though The Content Is Still Rather Edgy In Parts. I Mean In The Last Few Weeks We've Seen Home Invasions, Men Beating Woman, Sledgehammer Attacks, Ric Flair Being Busted Open Etc. I Wouldnt Call That PG.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Even With It Going PG Though The Content Is Still Rather Edgy In Parts. I Mean In The Last Few Weeks We've Seen Home Invasions, Men Beating Woman, Sledgehammer Attacks, Ric Flair Being Busted Open Etc. I Wouldnt Call That PG.

That's the misconception a lot of people have, though. And that isn't a knock or anything, so please don't take it as one. There is just some confusion of what constitutes a PG Rating.

Everything you have seen on WWE TV since the rating change has been PG. Orton DDT'ing Stephanie is PG. Ric Flair being busted open was PG. Home Invasions are PG. Sledgehammer Attacks are PG.

You aren't going to see PG-13 programming on a PG rated television show. The company would be facing fines over this kind of thing.

Here is the definition of what constitutes a PG rated program:

Parental Guidance Suggested

This program contains material that parents may find unsuitable for younger children. Many parents may want to watch it with their younger children. The theme itself may call for parental guidance and/or the program may contain one or more of the following: some suggestive dialogue (D), infrequent coarse language (L), some sexual situations (S), or moderate violence (V).

http://www.tvguidelines.org/ratings.htm

 

[SAMBOLIEWWE]

As its been touched on before,

The reason they went PG is because the WWE is going in cycles. The Attitude Era wouldnt have meant shit without the Hulk Hogans, Bret " Hitman " Harts, Warriors, Doinks, and Adam Bombs.

The WWE will go back to an " Attitude " era agian. with a different name , and years from now. When Vince has died and WWE regains its feet with Steph and Shane at the reigns , they will look to shake things up and change. they will take a big hero,,, Cena (if still there ) for example, and do what WCW did with Hogan have him turn on the Kids.

and the Kids they are attracting now,,,,, will be teenagers, and they will be feeling rebellious , and the WWE will have this harsh brash guy step up, and be the " Austin " of that generation.


its smart business, they cant just force this stuff, and they know that. The WWE's best business was in the Attitude days, and they will do it again, they just need to wait for society to be ready again, and when they are, I cant wait to see it.

 

[The Brain]

I for one think the move to PG is a good one. I have been watching WWE for 23 years and in my opinion 1999, the height of the attitude era, was one of the worst years in my WWE history. The attitude era was cool at first in 1997 and remained so through 1998, but by 1999 it was already getting old. Everyone seems to look back at the 80's with great fondness, but the same people are complaining that WWE is going back to PG. Making RAW adult oriented and SmackDown PG would not work. What about ppv's? When the kids who watch SmackDown see Triple H, Shawn Micaels, and John Cena on ppv they're going to want to see them on RAW too. Don't tell me not to let the kids watch ppv. You know SmackDown is going to be hyping the ppv for four weeks and the kids are going to want to watch.

I started watching WWE in 1986 at age six. I grew up with WWE and am a fan for life. Had I been six years old in 1999 I would never have been allowed to watch WWE in the first place. It is a smart move to go PG. Vince wants to get kids hooked on WWE so they can grow up with his product and be a fan for life just like me. He already has anyone reading these posts. You may not think WWE is as good as it used to be, but you're not going anywhere. You're already hooked. Are you really not going to watch WrestleMania 25 because you're unhappy with the PG rating? I don't think so. Wrestling was a popular fad in the late 90's. Most people who became fans during that time are long gone unless they were at a young age then. By going PG more parents are going to allow their kids to watch creating more life long fans. Maybe when these kids reach 17 or 18 we will be ready for another three year attitude fad. In the meantime enjoy what we've got now. I actually haven't noticed much difference in the show since going PG anyway. Does the use of so much foul language really make the show better? It was unique with Austin in 1996 because he was the only one doing it. Within a year everyone was swearing so it really didn't mean anything anymore. Do you miss the bra and panties matches? Switch over to playboy. Personally I could do without HLA, Katie Vick, and Mae Young's breasts. Give me a classic feud the Shawn Michales vs. Chris Jericho any day.

My guess is most of the people complaing about the rating don't have kids. If you had kids wouldn't you like to introduce him to WWE and hope he gets as much enjoyment you did growing up? It could be a great bonding experience. I would feel very awkward watching WWE with my eight year old and something like a live sex celebration came on. Let's face it, by the time you're 15 or 16 it just isn't that cool to get into wrestling. Get them early and you've got them for life.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

My guess is most of the people complaing about the rating don't have kids. If you had kids wouldn't you like to introduce him to WWE and hope he gets as much enjoyment you did growing up? It could be a great bonding experience. I would feel very awkward watching WWE with my eight year old and something like a live sex celebration came on. Let's face it, by the time you're 15 or 16 it just isn't that cool to get into wrestling. Get them early and you've got them for life.

For the record, I do not have kids. But should kids be up watching TV from 9 PM to 11 PM on a Monday night, or should they be watching TV from 8 to 10 PM on a Friday night?

What you are advocating is that kids are more important than adults. And as I have seen many posters touch base on ... there is a way to do both. WCW, WWE, and ECW all did so at the same time. There is absolutely no reason why WWE can not do the same.

I view this as a very selfish position on the part of people who did not like Attitude Era programming. I see absolutely no reason why you need 3 television shows all to yourselves. None.

 

[BlitzSage]

Well, it's obvious why they are doing it, because in order to get to that major market of young kids with families, they need to take away the vulgarity of the product.

It is true that this is how WWE rose in the 80s to get to the mainstream, but this system also caused them to decline in the early 90s. Remember that one company that, instead of going the PG route in the 90s, went for the edgy look and storylines and characters, and they almost put the WWE out of business.

And the WWE only came back after it shedded the PG image. When you think of the greatest periods in the WWF/WWE, 98-01 was one of the best ever in storylines, they had legendary wrestlers such as Rock, Austin, and HHH, and most importantly they had more viewers than any other promotion in history.

Yes, the PG rating does great business, but wrestling is a violent sport that does not need limits, and should be marketed to the 18-up demographic that wants edgy programing.

 

[The Brain]

Just for the record, I don't have kids either. I am just seeing this from a business aspect. Kids equal money. They want the t shirts. They want the toys. I don't mean to offend anyone who shops at wweshop.com, but there comes a point when adults stop wearing wrestling t shirts and hanging up posters on the wall. Kids want all the merchandise Santa can bring them. When a kid goes to a show he want little brother and best friend to come with. This means mom or dad has to buy a ticket too. My dad had no interest in watching a WWF show in the 80's, but he bought himself many tickets so the kids could have a good time.

What exactly are you missing from the program since going PG? As I said above I haven't noticed much difference. If you're talking about "the glory days of the attitude era," those have been gone for eight years. The main difference is the divas. No more bra and panties matches, playboy pillow fights, or pudding matches. Were these really that important to the show?

Last year I attended SummerSlam. There was a little girl, maybe five years old, sitting behind me. She was on the edge of her seat all night and had the time of her life. I view it as a selfish move to want to take this away from her for the sake of unnecessary vulgarity. By the way everyone, fans of all ages, seemed to enjoy SummerSlam.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

For the record, I do not have kids. But should kids be up watching TV from 9 PM to 11 PM on a Monday night, or should they be watching TV from 8 to 10 PM on a Friday night?

What you are advocating is that kids are more important than adults. And as I have seen many posters touch base on ... there is a way to do both. WCW, WWE, and ECW all did so at the same time. There is absolutely no reason why WWE can not do the same.

I view this as a very selfish position on the part of people who did not like Attitude Era programming. I see absolutely no reason why you need 3 television shows all to yourselves. None.

Just for the record, I don't have kids either. I am just seeing this from a business aspect. Kids equal money. They want the t shirts. They want the toys. I don't mean to offend anyone who shops at wweshop.com, but there comes a point when adults stop wearing wrestling t shirts and hanging up posters on the wall. Kids want all the merchandise Santa can bring them. When a kid goes to a show he want little brother and best friend to come with. This means mom or dad has to buy a ticket too. My dad had no interest in watching a WWF show in the 80's, but he bought himself many tickets so the kids could have a good time.

What exactly are you missing from the program since going PG? As I said above I haven't noticed much difference. If you're talking about "the glory days of the attitude era," those have been gone for eight years. The main difference is the divas. No more bra and panties matches, playboy pillow fights, or pudding matches. Were these really that important to the show?

Last year I attended SummerSlam. There was a little girl, maybe five years old, sitting behind me. She was on the edge of her seat all night and had the time of her life. I view it as a selfish move to want to take this away from her for the sake of unnecessary vulgarity. By the way everyone, fans of all ages, seemed to enjoy SummerSlam.

Who says you necessarily have to take away that moment at PPV's? Is there a reason why we couldn't go back to Single Branded PPV's and combine the rosters for the Big 4? And on those Big 4 shows, we could produce a PG quality product and watch the language. But on the Raw PPV's, it would be directly reflective of Monday Night programming.

So you are telling adults who do want to see the risque type of programming "I don't give a damn about what you want". That is exactly what you are doing.

Merchandise is part of the business, but merchandise is not the be-all, end-all to the business. If I recall correctly, merchandise sold quite well in the Attitude Era, as well.

So, yes, I do conclude that you are being selfish, because you aren't listening to the amount of customers that do want to see that programming. And anyone who turns their nose up to that type of programming, you have absolutely no reason to do so. From every account: attendance, ratings, buyrates ... all of them were higher even with Rock and Austin gone and when they were still doing Shock TV, then today. So people who claim that nobody wants to see that stuff, or try to argue against it ... I'm sorry, but you don't have a leg to stand on in this argument.

What are we missing? Controversial Angles. Swearing and Middle Fingers. Swimsuits and Bikinis. Cutting Edge programming that gives the impression that any thing can happen at any time. Gimmicks geared more for adults like original Goldust (although he was Pre-Attitude Era in that character, but for all intents and purposes, that was a character born for the Attitude Era), the Godfather, Val Venis, and dare I say Beaver Cleavage (which I absolutely loved, and have no problem admitting it), complex storylines, the unpredictability, etc. A lot of stuff is missing that I want back. That type of programming definitely appeals more to me than what we have today.

And I have not purchased a single WWE PPV for 2 years. I still watch their TV, however if I DVR it, I usually fast forward through a lot of it. I also don't go to the shows anymore, when I used to go quite frequently, because I absolutely loved the programming. So in other words, I am a statistic. And I know there are a lot of people like me who have moved on since. Some stick around. Some don't order the PPV's anymore. Etc. And they lost me as a customer because of the programming.

So if you don't want to listen to what I want out of the product, you aren't getting my money. I don't know what else to say. I'm willing to spend money, if you put out a product that interests me, though.

And I have heard no compelling reason why you can't satisfy both the adults and the kids.

 

[The Brain]

What are we missing? Controversial Angles. Swearing and Middle Fingers. Swimsuits and Bikinis. Cutting Edge programming that gives the impression that any thing can happen at any time. Gimmicks geared more for adults like original Goldust (although he was Pre-Attitude Era in that character, but for all intents and purposes, that was a character born for the Attitude Era), the Godfather, Val Venis, and dare I say Beaver Cleavage (which I absolutely loved, and have no problem admitting it), complex storylines, the unpredictability, etc. A lot of stuff is missing that I want back. That type of programming definitely appeals more to me than what we have today.

And I have not purchased a single WWE PPV for 2 years. I still watch their TV, however if I DVR it, I usually fast forward through a lot of it. I also don't go to the shows anymore, when I used to go quite frequently, because I absolutely loved the programming. So in other words, I am a statistic. And I know there are a lot of people like me who have moved on since. Some stick around. Some don't order the PPV's anymore. Etc. And they lost me as a customer because of the programming.

So if you don't want to listen to what I want out of the product, you aren't getting my money. I don't know what else to say. I'm willing to spend money, if you put out a product that interests me, though.

And I have heard no compelling reason why you can't satisfy both the adults and the kids.

I think the prodcut we have now is good for adults and kids. The topic was about WWE going PG which just happened last year. All your points are from ten years ago. I just don't think middle fingers and swearing add anything to the show. Maybe in 1997, but that stuff is not cutting edge anymore. I mentioned earlier that 1999 was my least favorite year in wrestling. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. We just have different opinions. I enjoyed 1998. I just think the whole attitude thing ran it's course after about two years.

I find it hard to believe you haven't seen a ppv in two years. I don't actually purchase them either. I go to the bar to watch them. It has nothing to do with the quality of the product. I just don't see why I should spend $40 per month if I don't have to. I have a feeling you do the same. Of course I don't know you so I could be wrong. I just wonder why you use your time to go on a website about something you don't care for.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I think the prodcut we have now is good for adults and kids. The topic was about WWE going PG which just happened last year. All your points are from ten years ago. I just don't think middle fingers and swearing add anything to the show. Maybe in 1997, but that stuff is not cutting edge anymore. I mentioned earlier that 1999 was my least favorite year in wrestling. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. We just have different opinions. I enjoyed 1998. I just think the whole attitude thing ran it's course after about two years.

I find it hard to believe you haven't seen a ppv in two years. I don't actually purchase them either. I go to the bar to watch them. It has nothing to do with the quality of the product. I just don't see why I should spend $40 per month if I don't have to. I have a feeling you do the same. Of course I don't know you so I could be wrong. I just wonder why you use your time to go on a website about something you don't care for.

Because I will always be a fan of wrestling. I am just not a big fan of this Era. And I have stated that I haven't purchased a WWE PPV in 2 years. And that is true. I have got tapes/DVD's of a fraction of them from friends, but I am not going out of my way to pay for them like I used to, for something I don't feel deserves my money, at the moment. It is true that I dare say 60% of the PPV's of the past two years (mostly the lesser ones), I have not seen at all. But like I said, I will still watch the programming in the background.

Now, you mention ...

I think the prodcut we have now is good for adults and kids. The topic was about WWE going PG which just happened last year. All your points are from ten years ago. I just don't think middle fingers and swearing add anything to the show. Maybe in 1997, but that stuff is not cutting edge anymore.

Who are you exactly to tell me what I should find and what I should not find entertaining? You say you don't feel that any of that stuff adds to the broadcast, that they aren't cutting edge anymore, etc. Says who, exactly? You? When did you become qualified to tell others what they should and what they should not be seeing? Also, if this "be everything to everyone" philosophy is so ingenious, why is it that all programs on television aren't Rated PG? What is the purpose for there being programs that are Rated PG-13, Rated R, etc. when we can just write all television shows for all audiences?

We can take it a step further shortly, but let's eliminate talking about it from a business point of view for just a moment. Do you feel fans that prefer that type of programming should have one show for them, and for you to have one show for you? Do you feel that is fair?

 

[mrstlouis]

Because I will always be a fan of wrestling. I am just not a big fan of this Era. And I have stated that I haven't purchased a WWE PPV in 2 years. And that is true. I have got tapes/DVD's of a fraction of them from friends, but I am not going out of my way to pay for them like I used to, for something I don't feel deserves my money, at the moment. It is true that I dare say 60% of the PPV's of the past two years (mostly the lesser ones), I have not seen at all. But like I said, I will still watch the programming in the background.

Now, you mention ...

Who are you exactly to tell me what I should find and what I should not find entertaining? You say you don't feel that any of that stuff adds to the broadcast, that they aren't cutting edge anymore, etc. Says who, exactly? You?

When did you become qualified to tell others what they should and what they should not be seeing? Also, if this "be everything to everyone" philosophy is so ingenious, why is it that all programs on television aren't Rated PG? What is the purpose for there being programs that are Rated PG-13, Rated R, etc. when we can just write all television shows for all audiences?

We can take it a step further shortly, but let's eliminate talking about it from a business point of view for just a moment. Do you feel fans that prefer that type of programming should have one show for them, and for you to have one show for you? Do you feel that is fair?

Lord Sidious you are wrong about everything . you forget WWF started out P.g . WWE went back to WWF 80's roots & that was best years of wrestling not that lame ass attitude era that had alot of lame wrestling matches on raw. the reason we have short matches is because of the stupid attitude era that hurt what old school pro-wrestling ment. Wrestling is not about middle fingers & never was . all that attitude crap is for people who have no grown up
. also raw is shown from 8p.m. to 10p.m here in midwest . kids don't have to go to bed till 9pm. or after .the reason vince went p.g is because you & your attitude fans betrayed WWE & left us . you guys can't be counted on nomre . too many of the attitude fan base left WWE high & dry .so vince went back to his roots & that is kids . i was kid when WWF started & it was all about hulk hogan & the kids . so save your selfish bullcrap . yes, you are selfish .kids come first in everything in life. grow up & stop being selfish. wrestling has always been about the kids & that is fact. what makes you know cutting edge ? nothing does!

 

[d_henderson1810]

This is completely my opinion, of course, but they made the move to start investing and growing a brand new audience of kids. So that those kids will grow up with them.

Unfortunately, they did so at the expense and risk of alienating the current audience of adults (like us) that they did have up before they began transitioning over to the switch (which has been several years in the making, and I was not the least bit surprised when they actually made the switch). They just made a risky move by going out on a limb at the risk of pissing us of with their PG content, and are telling us adults that the kids essentially come first, for them.

Sadly, I have argued until I was red and blue in the face with posters on different forums, and I have to say that the posters on this forum generally seem more reasonable, but there is not a single reason why WWE couldn't have had both. Have both an edgy program on Monday nights, and a family program on Friday nights. This time, however, they would enforce the roster split, and treat the shows separately so that you didn't have Superstar A cursing on Mondays, while being toned down for Fridays.

With a good PR and marketing team, I see absolutely no reason why they couldn't have worked that out. If you think about it, that was exactly what wrestling was during its most popular time in history. WWE being the edgy programming targeting adults and older teens. WCW being the family program, with a wide-based audience. And ECW being the niche group targeting older teens and adults who liked a more specialized product.

And to anyone saying that wouldn't work, because the Brands would be competing with each other ... I don't accept that. ECW had their rosters raided by both WCW and WWE. That wouldn't be happening in this case, since it would all be under the World Wrestling Entertainment Umbrella. It would therefore, be controlled, with traffic actually being directed. Of course WWE stole Jericho, Benoit, Saturn, Guerrero, and Malenko ... and morale went downhill from there, with a plethora of other internal problems. That wouldn't happen with this scenario, either since again ... it would all be under one umbrella.

Raw would target that 18-34 year olds.

Smackdown would be a more general audience, like today ... offer something for everyone.

With ECW being a Cruiserweight show, targeting a more nice audience.

That way, everyone would have been happy. I can not tell you how many people I have argued with who oppose the suggestion, simply because they like today's programming, did not like the edginess of Raw during the Attitude Era (yet they loved Austin, so go figure) ... and they have this need to have all 3 shows to themselves.

But yeah, they went PG to grow a new audience AND because there is no competition for them. Therefore, their mentality is "why go out on a limb if we don't have to"?

Unfortunately for them, people don't like being told by WWE that adults are supposed to like the exact same thing a kid likes. And it must be a problem within WWE, because otherwise Ross wouldn't be commenting on it

-regularly. I am sure this is Vince McMahon talking through Ross, because he knows that the fans respect Ross' opinions. Unfortunately for them, that still does not change my mind. Ross (or Vince) says "it's time to move on from the Attitude Era" programming. Says who? I thought when you're in television and customer service, you are supposed to listen to what your customers want ... not tell them "what they are supposed to want"?

But Vince has always been arrogant like this. He actually gleefully announced on Raw one time a few years ago that "I will tell you what you want to see, and you will like it." I couldn't believe the man actually told his audience that, but that was definitely the real Vince McMahon coming through when he stated those words. Unbelievably arrogant. Vince is simply frustrated that he can't have his cake and eat it too, by telling adults and kids that they have to both like the exact same product.

If you are frustrated with the PG programming, the best thing I can possibly tell you to do in the short term is not to order Wrestlemania 25, his biggest PPV of the year. If you want to send a big "Fuck You" back to Vince and his arrogance in telling you "what you will see, and liking it" ... I can think of no better way to hurt the man, but in his wallet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like your idea of defining each brand. I just hope then that under your idea, you would have to draft certain superstars to certain brands. For example, kid-friendly Rey Mysterio would be on the "friendly" Smackdown, whereas a dark character, like the Undertaker, would be on Raw (as he is less-PG friendly). This would require them to strictly enforce the brand extensions, and not have just anyone on any show like they have recently, where the same people show up on Raw and Smackdown.

Also, you can't totally blame Vince for this. Society has changed, and there seems to be a strong drive towards "keeping children away from any sort of violence whatsoever". I remember when I was a kid, I used to watch some darker material, and violent cartoons, and I used to love using playground equipment. These days, kids can't play video games because it "leads" to obesity, and someone may get influenced and start shooting people, they can't go outside as they could get abducted, they can't play on playgrounds, as the poor darlings may fall off and hurt themselves. They are even trying to tone down contact sport, since kids may get hurt. Society has turned into a moddle-coddling nanny, and even WWE has been touched.

Maybe sponsors are telling Vince to tone down his show, as consumers are threatening boycotts to products advertised on Raw. Vince is a businessman, and he doesn't want these sponsors pulling out, so he "toned down" the product so that mummies will let their little angels watch a saintly version of WWE. Don't necessarily blame Vince, blame society for what it has become.

Next WWE will be forced to be enviromentally friendly if this keeps up.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Lord Sidious you are wrong about everything . you forget WWF started out P.g . WWE went back to WWF 80's roots & that was best years of wrestling not that lame ass attitude era that had alot of lame wrestling matches on raw. the reason we have short matches is because of the stupid attitude era that hurt what old school pro-wrestling ment. Wrestling is not about middle fingers & never was . all that attitude crap is for people who have no grown up
. also raw is shown from 8p.m. to 10p.m here in midwest . kids don't have to go to bed till 9pm. or after .the reason vince went p.g is because you & your attitude fans betrayed WWE & left us . you guys can't be counted on nomre . too many of the attitude fan base left WWE high & dry .so vince went back to his roots & that is kids . i was kid when WWF started & it was all about hulk hogan & the kids . so save your selfish bullcrap . yes, you are selfish .kids come first in everything in life. grow up & stop being selfish. wrestling has always been about the kids & that is fact. what makes you know cutting edge ? nothing does!

Oh, I haven't forgotten about the Hogan Era. I enjoyed that Era a lot. You want to know why? Because I was a kid. That was a different time, though. The real question you have to ask though, is would the adults have found the product more appealing if it pushed the envelope a little more back then? Maybe .... maybe not. It was a different day and age, though. I should know. I grew up in the 80's.

However, you say I am being selfish ... no I am not being selfish. You are. I am advocating something to please everyone. You are essentially telling EVERYONE that they have to like one Universal product. And like I'm telling you, that is why you are seeing so much resistance in this day and age. Nobody likes to be told what they have to like. You are telling adults in this day and age, that they have to like something suitable for kids.

Again, I ask ... if appealing to everyone is such a brilliant strategy, then why aren't all programs Rated PG on television today, so that everyone can be targeted?

And I also want you to explain how I am being selfish by advocating one program for older teens and adults, and one program for older teens, adults, and children without the swearing. I need you to explain to me how that is being selfish, when I am offering you exactly what you want. The difference is that I am willing to share the ball on the playground. You aren't. I thought we got over that kind of mentality in Elementary School, by learning to share the ball. Evidently, one show is not good enough for you. You need 3 all to yourself.

But if you wish to respond, please answer all of those points. Thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like your idea of defining each brand. I just hope then that under your idea, you would have to draft certain superstars to certain brands. For example, kid-friendly Rey Mysterio would be on the "friendly" Smackdown, whereas a dark character, like the Undertaker, would be on Raw (as he is less-PG friendly). This would require them to strictly enforce the brand extensions, and not have just anyone on any show like they have recently, where the same people show up on Raw and Smackdown.

Also, you can't totally blame Vince for this. Society has changed, and there seems to be a strong drive towards "keeping children away from any sort of violence whatsoever". I remember when I was a kid, I used to watch some darker material, and violent cartoons, and I used to love using playground equipment. These days, kids can't play video games because it "leads" to obesity, and someone may get influenced and start shooting people, they can't go outside as they could get abducted, they can't play on playgrounds, as the poor darlings may fall off and hurt themselves. They are even trying to tone down contact sport, since kids may get hurt. Society has turned into a moddle-coddling nanny, and even WWE has been touched.

Maybe sponsors are telling Vince to tone down his show, as consumers are threatening boycotts to products advertised on Raw. Vince is a businessman, and he doesn't want these sponsors pulling out, so he "toned down" the product so that mummies will let their little angels watch a saintly version of WWE. Don't necessarily blame Vince, blame society for what it has become.

Next WWE will be forced to be enviromentally friendly if this keeps up.

I think John Cena would actually do more good and be a Hell of a lot more over today, if he was still doing his Rap character.

So Raw would feature- Faces: John Cena (rap gimmick), Undertaker
Heels: Randy Orton (in psychotic gimmick) and Edge (w/ gimmick makeover)

That is conditional IF and ONLY IF Shawn Michaels could be pitched to go to Smackdown with the firm understanding of what we are doing ... and that Smackdown would no longer be considered a B Show by any definition (so he doesn't interpret it as a demotion). Rather, he is needed because of his name value, and to help with the show's new concept. Being that Michaels doesn't like controversial angles any more, this show would be more suited for him anyway.

So Smackdown would feature- Faces: Shawn Michaels and Chris Jericho (turn)
Heels: Triple H (turn), Big Show

Rey Mysterio would also be sent to Smackdown because of his appeal to children.



If Michaels still refused to go to Smackdown because of Church or just personally not wanting to do it ... then i would go with:

Raw- Faces: Triple H, Shawn Michaels
Heels: Randy Orton, Edge

Smackdown- Faces: John Cena, Undertaker
Heels: Chris Jericho, Big Show

With Rey Mysterio still going to Smackdown.

And you are absolutely correct in that the Brand Splits would be STRICTLY enforced because of programming content. We couldn't have Superstar A cursing, or doing whatever on Raw, but come to Smackdown with a completely toned down character. So the Brand Splits would again be strictly enforced.

As far as the sponsors, I think the problem WWE had before, was that they were accused of marketing one universal risque product to children. WWE denied it, but it was the truth. Here, our PR team would have us covered because we could argue that Smackdown is our Children's show (or Family Show) ... where as Raw is targeted to older teens and adults. Our PR and Marketing teams would make that very clear.

And I would expect most adults to still watch both shows. Sure, some kids are going to still find a way to watch Raw, but at least we are covered from a PR perspective by having a product suitable for children, unlike the Attitude Era.

Again, if this concept worked back in wrestling's glory days with WWE, WCW, and ECW ... I see no reason why it would work today under the WWE umbrella. The big difference this time is that the companies would not be competing with each other, since Vince would control the talent flow. In other words, each Brand is under one umbrella, so it's not like they are competing for each other's talent or raiding their rosters.

 

[Arrynboot]

I could be wrong but I think its more kid friendly now because only kids are stupid enough to buy those ugly as shit John Cena beach towels and they have to move that stock somehow

 

[Crimson Mask]

Lord Sidious you are wrong about everything . you forget WWF started out P.g . WWE went back to WWF 80's roots & that was best years of wrestling not that lame ass attitude era that had alot of lame wrestling matches on raw.

WWF was more family friendly, but the matches were far from great, since the promotion was focused on guys like Hogan, 'Taker and Warrior; larger than life characters that could hold the kids interest, but not that good in the ring. Can't you think of anything else to say on the Attitude era other than calling it lame?

the reason we have short matches is because of the stupid attitude era that hurt what old school pro-wrestling ment. Wrestling is not about middle fingers & never was . all that attitude crap is for people who have no grown up

Wrong, the focus of WWF/E has always been entertainment over straight wrestling, so was never an emphasis on putting on half-half plus pure mat wrestling exhibitions, that was more associated with the old NWA. Vince's focus was on larger-than-life cartoon style gimmicks and staying with that formula as long as long he did hurt the company, as the fans started to get bored with it. In order to stay afloat and in competiton with a expanding WCW, Vince had to attract an older audience, hence the attitude eara.

. also raw is shown from 8p.m. to 10p.m here in midwest . kids don't have to go to bed till 9pm. or after .the reason vince went p.g is because you & your attitude fans betrayed WWE & left us.

Nobody "betrayed" WWE, they screwed up in the aftermath of their buyout of WCW and instead of adding to their audience by bringing in new fans, they managed to alienate the former WCW audience and started losing their own attitude era fans because they continued to focus on the same small group of top guys.

you guys can't be counted on nomre . too many of the attitude fan base left WWE high & dry .so vince went back to his roots & that is kids . i was kid when WWF started & it was all about hulk hogan & the kids . so save your selfish bullcrap . yes, you are selfish .kids come first in everything in life. grow up & stop being selfish. wrestling has always been about the kids & that is fact. what makes you know cutting edge ? nothing does!

The whole point of the brand split was to be able to target different audiences, but WWE weren't able to put it into practise properly, hence the current mess. The reason Vince is going back to a young audience again is because they're a large demographic who it's easy to market to and because much of the older audience has lost interest through increasingly bad writing, mishandling of talent and the stuff that's come out about the companies drug-testing policies in the wake of a number of drug-related wrestler deaths. It's got nothing to do with bring older fans being "selfish", through you clearly have no other argument other than that, else you wouldn't have to keep repeating yourself.

 

[Savage1]

So far what everyone is saying about the reasons for the switch are all on point, but you are forgetting one thing. While they are trying to rope in a new younger audience that will become lifelong fans and eventually transition into a more edgier product that will possibly have a huge fan base like the attitude era had, they are also doing this because its smart from a financial standpoint. With the pg rating and more family friendly programming they are also getting more and more sponsorship and backing from major marketing companies. These shows make a good portion of thier revenue from commercials and if you have a show that is more accepted and mainstream, you have bigger and more sponsors who buy commercial spots during the show thus bringing them more money. I personally have been a fan since 1984 and I have fond memories of the 80's. I loved the characters back then, from Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, and Jake The Snake, to Rick Rude, Earthquake, and the Undertaker. These over the top heros and villains are aimed at a younger audience and they are the guys who made me the fan I am today. I think back nostalgically and have great great memories, and still watch an old Summerslam or Survivor Series now and then. And while I am 29 now and still like to get my old school fix, I would love to be in the heart of the attitude era all over again. That was my favorite time in wrestling but only because I was older and had a different view on life and that style of show was more relatable. That is what I would love to be watching now each Monday night...but I also understand why they are pushing this pg thing. I hope the younger generation gets a chance to watch and fall in love with wrestling like I did. Because this is the greatest sport or form of entertainment in the world and I would hate to think that my parents would have never let me watch if it was as brash as it was during the mid to late 90's. So I will prob be disappointed from time to time for at least a few years during this transition but I will still watch and I hope these young kids get to watch and fall in love with the same thing I did.

 

[enigmaticdude]

WWE before the PG switch was aimed at the 18 to 35 demographic. There was their core viewership. But I guess the company wasn't happy with that. They were aiming to kids before anyways, They had action figures and toy rings and toy title belts. Obviously the WWE wasn't attracting kids so they decided to go PG. But I don't really see the switch. There is the storyline between Vickie Guerrero and Edge, Big show and Cena that is still an "adult" storyline and the McMahon-Hemsley-Orton feud is still not aimed at kids either. The Divas are still referred to as "the sexiest women on television".
The only PG change they made is slowing down the pace of their matches. That is the only real change I see. I think that the WWE should just go back to the way it was before. The PG switch was ridiculous.

 

[aljnxh]

My only hope is that TNA moves to Monday Nights so they'll have to up the ante and go back to being edger.

Actually not the smartest idea for TNA. Its obvious WWE kills TNA in ratings, and some WWE fans may not even know what TNA is, so the best thing that can happen is getting some popularity out of it. Besides that, TNA could easily go down the drain if they move to Monday nights. I'd say advertise more before even thinking about doing that.

Anyway, getting back to the subject, yes Lord Sidious is right. It's a short cycle of business. You go from a PG rated show slowly into a TV-14 rated show. Its the Golden Age into the Attitude Era. WWE is referring to this era as "Now," which I am pretty sure it said on one of those three discs for WWE music iTunes. (Not 100% sure.) Its like this is the second Golden Age, and the Attitude Era will come back, maybe.in 5 years or so. The objective is to get kids to grow up still liking to watch wrestling. The adult audience will be affected, like us who grew up watching the Attitude Era. If John Cena was in the Attitude Era instead of The Rock, we'd probably be wanting Cena to come back and saying The Rock sucks and no one likes him except little kids. Why? If you think about, Cena has almost as good mic skills as The Rock, but Cena's not allowed to say half the stuff he could say.

 

[ChrisKessaris]

Here are my thoughts on WWE switching formats.


The wrestling business is in a constant state of change, which is why I feel that regression is not the best tactic they need to be taking to ensure that the quality of a product they are putting out stays fresh. Instead of reverting back to the days that Vince McMahon 11 years ago stated were "outdated" and "stale" in the eyes of wrestling fans, they should look to freshen up their product.

On an episode of WWF Raw back in October of 1997, Vince McMahon stated that the idea of a goodguy vs a badguy was outdated and that his characters would be more shades of gray. This would increase public interest in the characters as they would be able to do things that your typical good guys would not be able to. It's called being an anti-hero. Look at Rorschach from Watchmen, he's a prime example of this. And he was created over 20 years ago. Yet the character remains in the fans' eyes as being a great character because he was not bound by the stereotype of being a good guy.

This is where I feel WWE has gone astray, and they did so even during the Austin era. Austin started off as a trail blazing redneck who took crap from no one and towards the middle of 1999 became a typical good guy that you knew was going to save the day. Christ he had Vince McMahon crying saying thank you for saving his daughter on an episode of RAW and that was his arch nemesis at that point.

So what I'm trying to say here is that instead of taking an idea that was pronounced dead 11 years ago and trying to recreate it to be fresh again, why not do something a little different?

Instead of having an Iraqi wrestler come in and be a huge heel, have him come in and announce that he agrees with America's stance on the war because Iraq is a desolate place full of religious prosecution and crime and he just wants to be free like everyone else. Instead of having black guys run around stealing stuff, turn them into uncle toms like the father from Class Act when white people are around, and then have them get really pissed off when they walk away. WWE's characters are usually way too dry and predictable.

Create THOUGHT PROVOKING storylines with characters that people don't neccessarily need to get behind, but think are interesting. Not just having mindless drivel between squash matches. Ratings are in decline because the FORMULA itself of promo squash promo squash is way too overdone. On WWE RAW this past week, 70% of the time allotted to the show was done to promote. It was basically a 2 hour commercial for Wrestlemania. Wrestling fans want to see SOME wrestling on a competitive level. We got Jericho vs Lawler and Mysterio vs JBL as our competitive matches this week. Jerry Lawler is 20 years past his prime and a color commentator while Chris Jericho is just off a run as World Champion...gee I wonder who is going to win this one. Then we had JBL vs Mysterio in a wrestlemania pre-match match. Which Mysterio won. So now, unless he cheats, it's a foregone conclusion in the minds of the fans that Mysterio should win at Wrestlemania and if he doesn't he was cheated. We know whats going to happen before it does and that is what makes wrestling stale.

Back in 1999/2000 WCW conducted a survey with people who still watch and people who have started to tune out to see what they had to say. It should come as no suprise that people wanted more wrestling and less entertaining. They also wanted to see things that they don't expect to see. WWE right now is concentrating on entertaining so much that wrestlers aren't learning the ropes, literally. We get tag matches where guys in the match don't even get tagged in. We get 3 minute matches to make 1 guy look great while the guy who loses is "future endeavored". Nobody is learning how to be a great mat technician anymore because they are not getting the ringtime they need.

In closing, I feel that WWE needs to create storylines that are intelligent and consistent. Instead of doing a who's Vince's son angle or a who killed Vince angle...which are just hotshotting angles done to increase the current viewing audience, if they did storylines that an outsider said "wow, I know wrestling is fake and all, but the writing on this show is actually pretty good" then they would increase their overall viewership and interest. They don't neccessarily need to switch to TV PG to accomplish this. If they can pull it off by switching thats great, but I really just want to be entertained by them again instead of seeing a variety show with a few squash matches and 305 diva tag match. ;cause nobody is interest in that WWE, in case you haven't checked out the ratings lately.

 

[johnnygoround360]

I personally think PG was a good move. Some people are so caught up with wanting to see "puppies" and too much bloodshed on tv that they're forgetting kids love wrestling too, as much as the adults do. Also, while the Attitude era was WWE at its peak, you have to remember that part of the reason they went PG is because of the whole Steroid-related deaths that made the product look somewhat bad in the public, so the parents of these children would not want to have their children watch WWE anymore.

Now, since they went with the PG to make it more family friendly, a lot more kids get to see their favorite wrestlers on tv, with almost no limit. Sure, the ratings aren't as good as it was, but then those TNA-marks make so much of a big deal with their favorite show (iMPACT!) tallying at 1.3, 1.4, whichever... which isn't as impressive compared to the ones WWE conquer. But anyways,... just because the ratings aren't as good as it was, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's failing. I found WWE boring during 2002 and 2004 (2003 was a great year) but it got my interest back at 2005 and onwards...

It all depends who what kind of person watches the product. I personally love it, even if there's less blood and violence. In fact, I can make my little brother watch it without worrying that they'd end up being violent or wrestle an 8 year old girl to death. Remember that news over a decade ago, which happened to be the Attitude era? I sure as hell remember hearing that news.