Why PG isn't the problem....

[SilverBullet1929]

I'm quite uncomfortable with so many fans claiming that the problem with the WWE these days is the PG rating. I'm here to explain why I think that's just not the case. Let me start by noting that I've been a fan of wrestling, almost all wrestling, for over twenty years. I'm not 31 years old and I'm an elementary school teacher. My experience with kids comes into play with how I view the WWE product because while most of us just can't stand how the WWE markets to kids, I at least have actual kids to feed off of and "debate" some of these topics. This comes in handy quite a bit for me. Moving on...

The term PG stands for Parental Guidance and implies that said TV product has even the slightest edge to it. That it has some topics that are a bit higher than a regular kid can understand and it would take some Parental Guidance to help a kid comprehend it.

Why isn't PG the problem with WWE? Because the WWE was 100% PG from day one in 1963 up until 1998, mayyybe 1997. Actually, ALL wrestling was PG before that time wasn't it? Maybe some riskier ECW material wasn't but generally speaking everything was PG.

The problem folks isn't the PG rating, its the abundance of mind numbingly stupid storylines with enormous flaws in logic that insult the viewer's intelligence! Perfect example, I became a die hard fan in the early '90s... you wanna know which storyline stood out to me the most back then? Bret Hart vs Owen Hart was 200% PG! There wasn't even a drop of bloodshed in that entire storyline! But it was deep enthralling emotional television fueled by a family torn apart storyline.

You can have PG without fart jokes, midgets, and other corny garbage. Basically sometimes the WWE is G rated, and thats total garbage there.

Also, being a teacher... if the WWE wants kids to watch, I have nothing against them cleaning up the TV product. I can easily see my students watching WWE from the late eighties and early 90s. Yet its still good TV.

Do you all think the WWE can still make compelling TV under the PG rating? Do you, even though you may wish for an edgier product, think that the PG rating is ok if theyre gonna be pushing toward the kids demographic?

 

[Last Man Standing]

Could not agree more with anything you said.

Look at many feuds throughout the years of PG. Flair vs Rhodes was a PG rating. Savage & Steamboat was a PG rating. Hogan & Piper was also PG. PG isn't the problem at all. So as a father of a 9 year old I have no issues with WWE toning it down a bit. I don't need WWE to be raunchy to enjoy it.

I viewed the last two years as WWE's transition years. We have had them before and they are never easy to sit through. But I also believe WWE is picking up some steam. And I fully expect this next year to be one of WWE's best ever. Not to mention how great WWE's future is looking with all the young up & coming talent they've been signing.

 

[scomvp316]

PG isn't the problem because looking back with JCP they were PG and competed very well with WWF then
One of the problems is WWE is so sponsor driven that they can only do so much because VKM has backed himself into a corner to preserve his company that if just a few mid level sponsors pull out WWE would have to make drastic changes to make a minimal profit
The other issue is WWE has 95% of the wrestling market so you don't have to try as hard cause you are guaranteed a minimal rating for your flagship show at 2.7
I do think VKM's end game is to have revenue reach 1 billion under PG so then he can really compete with Disney which has been his vision since 1983

 

[Merkin353]

For every point you make there is another who can show you why PG is the problem. Is no one smart enough to know each era has its ups & downs.

The number one reason PG is "A" problem & not "the" problem is promoting violence to kids. My mother was a saint & yet couldn't get me to stop wrestling in my room.

One more reason for the other side of the argument is yes Flair Vs Rhodes was a PG rating but times have changed & PG isn't that entertaining when everything is as fast as it can be. The internet has ruined many a things & this (in my opinion) is one of them. In closing I'd like to believe if the WWE had the likes of a Jeff Hardy, Shane McMahon & or a Mick Foley style bumb at PPV's then PG wouldn't be a problem. The product, the bumbs, the storylines, mat based wrestling, & high flying spots have all gone down hill. & some people believe that is the PG eras fault. Maybe it was the attitude eras fault for not inspiring the right guys... Who knows but who cares?

 

[SilverBullet1929]

For every point you make there is another who can show you why PG is the problem. Is no one smart enough to know each era has its ups & downs.

The number one reason PG is "A" problem & not "the" problem is promoting violence to kids. My mother was a saint & yet couldn't get me to stop wrestling in my room.

One more reason for the other side of the argument is yes Flair Vs Rhodes was a PG rating but times have changed & PG isn't that entertaining when everything is as fast as it can be. The internet has ruined many a things & this (in my opinion) is one of them. In closing I'd like to believe if the WWE had the likes of a Jeff Hardy, Shane McMahon & or a Mick Foley style bumb at PPV's then PG wouldn't be a problem. The product, the bumbs, the storylines, mat based wrestling, & high flying spots have all gone down hill. & some people believe that is the PG eras fault. Maybe it was the attitude eras fault for not inspiring the right guys... Who knows but who cares?

I'm honestly not sure if you're for PG, against it, or a little of both.

But PG is only "A" problem for fans who only want blood, excessive violence, cursing, and raunchy storylines... and nothing more. I myself can enjoy a wrestling product without those things... not that I can't enjoy those things to an extent when its presented the right way.

 

[Headman]

The OP is correct. PG is not the issue. Story telling is. But truth be told good story telling would be wasted on the morons who frequently repeat the same old "PG iz da sux!" argument because they are incapable of individual thought. They just pick up on what they hear in the echo chamber and run with it no matter how factually incorrect their claims are proven to be. Besides, it's hard to pay attention to the story line when the only reason you came to the show is to chant ******ed slogans and steal the attention away from the actual performers.

As far as improving the storylines, that remains a tough one. They have to come up with fresh material every week. Impatient fans and internet spoilers make it nearly impossible to draw out stories like they used to do. Plus they've just got way too much "talent" on the roster to write for. Going to three hours didn't help much either. Sadly this seems like an issue that can't be fixed under the current circumstances.

 

[Loveless]

PG isn't the problem. The problem is micro-management, destruction of the creative process in favour of sales, an unwillingness to trust the talent, an unwillingness to take risks, politiking, over-reliance on old stars, unwillingness to let new talent step up, oh and John fucking Cena.

There are only 2 logical arguments against PG.

1. One of the biggest boom periods in the industry came off the back of AE.
2. It's grown men resolving their problems through violence. How the fuck is that a product for kids? No matter how you dress it up.

 

[SilverBullet1929]

The OP is correct. PG is not the issue. Story telling is. But truth be told good story telling would be wasted on the morons who frequently repeat the same old "PG iz da sux!" argument because they are incapable of individual thought. They just pick up on what they hear in the echo chamber and run with it no matter how factually incorrect their claims are proven to be. Besides, it's hard to pay attention to the story line when the only reason you came to the show is to chant ******ed slogans and steal the attention away from the actual performers.

This is a huge problem you're so right. I can't stand it. Anyone ever notice Sign Guy, the WWE superfan in the blue shirt with the red cap always holding signs in the front row? You know that guy is a diehard fan and must know as much about wrestling as we do. But he always is in the front row acting like a simple fan and all he does is cheer the faces and boo the heels even if he probably likes that heel for his workrate or charisma or whatever it may be. I often think more of us should be like him. Enjoy the damn show!

 

[dolphinzigglah]

I think WWE is just as successful now, and I don't really see why it's a big deal with looking @ the past.

Wrestling was a fad back then, so it was very popular. Now, it's more popular across the world, they sell more merchandise with the internet, social media helps their brand, more tv time..etc etc.

 

[Dyscord]

I'm quite uncomfortable with so many fans claiming that the problem with the WWE these days is the PG rating. I'm here to explain why I think that's just not the case. Let me start by noting that I've been a fan of wrestling, almost all wrestling, for over twenty years. I'm not 31 years old and I'm an elementary school teacher. My experience with kids comes into play with how I view the WWE product because while most of us just can't stand how the WWE markets to kids, I at least have actual kids to feed off of and "debate" some of these topics. This comes in handy quite a bit for me. Moving on...

The term PG stands for Parental Guidance and implies that said TV product has even the slightest edge to it. That it has some topics that are a bit higher than a regular kid can understand and it would take some Parental Guidance to help a kid comprehend it.

Why isn't PG the problem with WWE? Because the WWE was 100% PG from day one in 1963 up until 1998, mayyybe 1997. Actually, ALL wrestling was PG before that time wasn't it? Maybe some riskier ECW material wasn't but generally speaking everything was PG.

The problem folks isn't the PG rating, its the abundance of mind numbingly stupid storylines with enormous flaws in logic that insult the viewer's intelligence! Perfect example, I became a die hard fan in the early '90s... you wanna know which storyline stood out to me the most back then? Bret Hart vs Owen Hart was 200% PG! There wasn't even a drop of bloodshed in that entire storyline! But it was deep enthralling emotional television fueled by a family torn apart storyline.

You can have PG without fart jokes, midgets, and other corny garbage. Basically sometimes the WWE is G rated, and thats total garbage there.

Also, being a teacher... if the WWE wants kids to watch, I have nothing against them cleaning up the TV product. I can easily see my students watching WWE from the late eighties and early 90s. Yet its still good TV.

Do you all think the WWE can still make compelling TV under the PG rating? Do you, even though you may wish for an edgier product, think that the PG rating is ok if theyre gonna be pushing toward the kids demographic?

Agreed. Honestly the best part of the AE and even the 80s were the storylines. There were some compelling storylines in those days. Hell, even the jobbers had storylines. Were they all winners? No, of course not. But at least every one had a purpose. A stark contrast to today, where if you're not in the main event or upper midcard, then you don't really matter.

 

[SilverBullet1929]

I think WWE is just as successful now, and I don't really see why it's a big deal with looking @ the past.

Wrestling was a fad back then, so it was very popular. Now, it's more popular across the world, they sell more merchandise with the internet, social media helps their brand, more tv time..etc etc.

Yeah wrestling is popular now but imagine how popular it would be if it had competent storylines and wasn't marketed towards kids and diehards all the time.

 

[scomvp316]

What economic data are you looking at
So you are telling me that a product is more popular and selling more merch with nearly 70% less fans compared to when they were vastly popular
If Social media works then why hasn't Tout come close to topping Instagram
Take the sponsor money away and this company barely gets to 400 mill
WWE is more sponsored driven now then they were when they were making over a billion per year under Attitude

I think WWE is just as successful now, and I don't really see why it's a big deal with looking @ the past.

Wrestling was a fad back then, so it was very popular. Now, it's more popular across the world, they sell more merchandise with the internet, social media helps their brand, more tv time..etc etc.

 

[sdelfin]

As has already been said, PG isn't really the problem. There are plenty of examples of PG working fine, even being edgy while still staying PG. The thing with the Attitude Era is that there was a vibe of creative freedom that went along with it. The PG era has has seemed stifled in that way. There has been a lot of forced attempts at comedy, which haven't worked so well. Besides the comedy, they were forcing a lot of concepts like guest hosts(some worked and some bombed), contrived story lines, too many gimmick matches. And they also focused almost exclusively on the main event scene and not at all on anything else. There were times Cena would appear before the crowd two or three times a show, which is the best way to kill a pop.

Lately, the product seems like it has improved. I think that's because the story lines are more logical and focused(Daniel Bryan in the main event because he's been exciting and mostly victorious), and there are multiple good story lines going such as Cena/Bryan, Orton with the case, Sandow/Rhodes, the Shield, Mark Henry. The comedy seems more toned down now, and I even like the Sheamus 1-800-FELLA ads, as they remind me of Buddy Rose's old "Blow-Away Diet" skit.

It always comes back to storytelling. You can make PG interesting, and you can make mature content boring all through storytelling. I've seen plenty of hardcore-style wrestling which I've found uninteresting because it has no point on its own.

 

[faltemer]

What economic data are you looking at
So you are telling me that a product is more popular and selling more merch with nearly 70% less fans compared to when they were vastly popular
If Social media works then why hasn't Tout come close to topping Instagram
Take the sponsor money away and this company barely gets to 400 mill
WWE is more sponsored driven now then they were when they were making over a billion per year under Attitude

The amount of problems with these statements is bordering on annoying. First off, you have no economic data. Without hard facts on viewership across the globe from every year, month, show, this at best conjecture on that regard. Without knowing exact merchandise sales, or how social media affects them it again is useless to post on that. And once again you pull random number's out of nowhere and use them. Most of what you said has nothing to do with your main point, and the rest of your points are simply assertions.

 

[zephyrs]

I agree with the OP. It's not PG's fault that the writing is terrible. I think the problem is that WWE doesn't really build long term storyline. They just try to set a feud up that will last until the next pay per view. If they took their time with things and created more robust, fleshed out storyline, it'd be much more entertaining. That has nothing to do with PG, only bad writing.

 

[scomvp316]

The amount of problems with these statements is bordering on annoying. First off, you have no economic data. Without hard facts on viewership across the globe from every year, month, show, this at best conjecture on that regard. Without knowing exact merchandise sales, or how social media affects them it again is useless to post on that. And once again you pull random number's out of nowhere and use them. Most of what you said has nothing to do with your main point, and the rest of your points are simply assertions.

I haven't pulled random numbers out of anywhere
It doesn't make sense when someone says when you have 5 mill viewers for a show it as profitable when you had 15 mill viewers
With social media WWE has majority ownership in Tout and if they are as influential in social media then Tout at the very least would compete with Instagram and hasn't panned out to what WWE wanted
Back during Attitude when you have four stars over 3.5 mill merch sales per year according to insiders and now you have the top two barely getting to 2 mill according to some inside reports
My main point was at no other time before in the history of this company have they got more sponsor money
Just with Mattel they get 200 mill each year and with WWE sales with Mattel you can take 100 mill away from the actual WWE bottom line to see actual revenue compared to operation revenue
There is a big difference between the two
Actual Revenue-what you do of merch you sell
Operational Revenue-Sales that comes from contractual obligations of sponsors

 

[Skyeborne]

The biggest thing I say to counter-argue the argument that the rating is causing fans to stop watching TNA is getting some of the lowest ratings with the 18-49 audience. Disney Junior shows such as Bubble Guppies, Doc McStuffins, Choo Choo Soul, and Mickey Mouse Clubhouse are beating them in the 18-49 demographic, and TNA is TV-14.

Smackdown for the first few years it was on was mostly PG, and it was very entertaining.

To the whole marketing to kids, WWE has always marketed to teenager and kids. Let's look back to the attitude era, two grown men running around showing their butt and screaming suck it? Does that really sound like that was for adults to enjoy, no that is what 12-15 year olds find entertaining. There has always been stupid, corny shit on wrestling whether you wanna admit it or not, it's not something that is new because of the rating.

 

[SilverBullet1929]

The biggest thing I say to counter-argue the argument that the rating is causing fans to stop watching TNA is getting some of the lowest ratings with the 18-49 audience. Disney Junior shows such as Bubble Guppies, Doc McStuffins, Choo Choo Soul, and Mickey Mouse Clubhouse are beating them in the 18-49 demographic, and TNA is TV-14.

Smackdown for the first few years it was on was mostly PG, and it was very entertaining.

To the whole marketing to kids, WWE has always marketed to teenager and kids. Let's look back to the attitude era, two grown men running around showing their butt and screaming suck it? Does that really sound like that was for adults to enjoy, no that is what 12-15 year olds find entertaining. There has always been stupid, corny shit on wrestling whether you wanna admit it or not, it's not something that is new because of the rating.

Kids and teens are totally different in every way including as a demographic. DX showing their butts and yelling suck it is for teens and young adults but definitely not for "kids." It sounds like youre saying the attitude era was for kids when it clearly wasnt.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

There is no problem. If there was a problem, it would be that too many wrestling fans need there to be a problem at all times; something to blame things they don't like on. "Ugh, if WWE wasn't PG, John Cena wouldn't always be the WWE Champion."

Wrestling is cyclical, we've all heard that buzz word here before. But what wrestling is, more than anything, is criticized by the people who grew up watching it a decade prior to the current product. So if you grew up watching Hulk Hogan in the '80s, maybe you didn't like the way the product went without him. Maybe you didn't like Bret Hart becoming the face of the company. Hell, maybe you didn't like them trying to replace him with the Ultimate Warrior, then with Lex Luger, then with etc etc.

Most of todays wrestling fans complaining about PG grew up watching wrestling in the Attitude Era. It may not be everything they know about wrestling, but it's why they fell in love with it. So there's nothing wrong with wanting to go back to what they perceive as "wrestling roots", it's just a lack of perspective.

Personally I grew up watching WCW cruiswerweights when i was young. That's what I got into. I was an X-Pac, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, and Jericho fan. Those were my guys; the curtain jerkers that would wrestling 20 minutes to start shows. They were my heroes. When I finally made the switch to WWF/E, the Attitude Era was half over. I actually started watching because Chris Jericho jumped ship. So in today's product, I bitch about things like a lack of cruiserweights, the misuse of guys like Tyson Kidd, etc. I don't give a shit about blood or swearing.

Like I said, there is no problem. The WWE is really good right now. It wasn't always int he past five years; there's always going to be growing pains between generations. We're now in a new era, with exciting stars like THe SHield, Daniel Bryan and CM Punk populating the main event. Cena is, sooner rather than later, going to either fade from where he is, or have to turn heel to freshen his character. Happened to Hogan, it will happen to Cena eventually.

Wrestling is good. There's a lot of stuff to enjoy. The rated-G crap is fewer and further between. For the last six months we've had so much wrestling on Raw. I'm not sure if people are just ignoring it, but we're consistently having 3 or 4 really solid matches every week. The main events are almost always solid and worth watching. I genuinely don't think there's a problem with WWE programming right now.

 

[anthony_b]

Agreed. PG isnt the problem. What the problem is, is that the E focus' too much on making money which isnt a BAD thing, but they try to hard to FORCE something down our throats. We want wrestling. Not to have 2.5 hrs of a 3 hr show be backstage segments with pointless plugs

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Pg isn't the problem because if you did half this stuff in chimaera smarks would love it. Bashing wwe is the cool thing to do. To not perfect, but their shows are a LOT better than people give them credit for. Also, stop looking at just ratings, that's archaic. Cable is going to be dead in 15 years, get with the times.

 

[Downnice]

WCW was PG during the NWO so that proves they can be edgy. The Attitude Era is over and people need to get that dream out of their head that the attitude era will return and if you want attitude era buy WWE 13 or watch videos on YouTube.

Anyways PG is not thr problem it is them catering to the lowest demonator