WWE is doing storylines on Raw that their new audience clearly isn't familiar with

[kobrad]

Okay i have been thinking about this for awhile and to me it seems like Bret should of definitely gotten a lot of cheers and a lot of heat for McMahon but i finally figured out why not:

THE WWE IS ALL ABOUT KIDS.
Let me explain. How many 7-12 year olds know about the Vince Hart feud. Unless their parents told them they have no idea. And to truly respect the feud you almost have to see the past and know the indepth history of the feud at hand.

The WWE has screwed up big time. They brought back a feud for the older wrestling fans in a kid friendly environment. This was to be honest a dumb idea WWE needed to not be in the PG era to bring back Hart. All the people at shows are kids nowadays and those kids know nothing about this feud's past.

and with Tyson what kid would know about this as well. Last night on RAW Tyson barely got heat or cheers and that is because not many kids avtually know the true story of the Tyson DX stuff.

Do you feel the audience is too new to understand or appreciate any of these storylines? Is WWE wasting their time doing them? Why or why not?

 

[iamcountrymusic]

You're exactly right. Most kids don't know any of that.

Maybe it's because they'll miss out on the hardcore fans during these times with TNA. Maybe they thought if they brought back something like this, you thought you would never see, it would keep us from TNA.

 

[619girl4life619]

You're right, but bringing their past back taught the kids... so NOW they actually know about the feud... I didn't know about it before a week before bret hosted monday night raw!

 

[fredstephenson]

well without going into great detail i think the wwe is going through a bit of an identity crisis it thinks it can pretty much show its older generation of fans were the door is by putting on there current bullshit and expect to bring back bret hart and everyone will know the story wwe just needs to figure out what its going for in terms of direction what wwe is doing now is actually worse then all the edgy violent carnage they put on before {which for the record i thought added to the fun of the show} neway what they are doing is pushing a violent show which involves sledgehammers and steel chairs on children and they think thats okay because they take out blood and the word ass and i think that is much worse then anything they ever did before coz at least what they did before wasnt aimed at young children

 

[Mr. TM]

Because the audience is still made up of young adults, who are the majority, people who grew up around the time of Bret Hart leaving and the formation of Degeneration X. Just because the WWE is now targeting the youth, a very good strategy, does not mean that they WWE should NOT produce stories that their majority audiences know about.

 

[SuicideDive]

I can understand point sides of this discussion. The E does need to kind of decide which direction they want to go. When your target audience is 7-12 year olds, how can you bring back a 12 years old feud and just expect everyone to know what is going on.

Luckily I am old enough to vividly remember the original Hart/Mcmahon feud. But for the younger audience I wish there would have been a better way for them to sort of "re-visit" that period to educate them. All we really kept seeing was Michaels applying the Sharpshooter, McMahon calling for the bell and Bret spitting on Vince. To make a long story short, yeah that's it, but aside of all the idiotic fans do now days, overall most are more educated, or want to be more educated about what is going on.

 

[Kliq]

So what exactly are you saying? That because the WWE has decided to cater to younger fans, they should NEVER bring back an old feud for those of us who would want to see it? That is ridiculous! That is like seeing a fireman help stop a mugger and then slapping him because he isn't a cop. Why can't we have this? I love it, a lot of people love it, but because there are kids who won't get it, WWE shouldn't have done it? Who cares if it goes over their heads. A fan who doesn't watch Raw for a couple weeks might not 'get' a storyline going on when they tune in again, but they'll continue to tune in anyway to eventually come to understand what is going on. The 12 year olds who watched all of the Hart video packages should now know who he is and what's going on.

Just because they didn't get an even greater reaction in terms of what you would expect, doesn't mean it was a bad idea to do. I've seen a lot of angles that didn't get the reaction they deserved, but by all means I'm glad WWE went through with them.

 

[rko102]

I haven't been satisfied with the WWE product since late 2007, yet I still watch since I'm a loyal fan and I absolutely love professional wrestling...and I've gotta agree, when it comes to the Bret Hart thing, yeah these younger kids don't really have a clue what the true history and meaning of it all is, but at the same time for me I like seeing that because it's something that brings back the old Attitude era does, which I personally believe were the best years of WWE/WWF. The problem with the WWE now is that everything is geared towards young kids and people my age and older are getting more and more unsatisfied with the product that unfortunately gets aired on television each and every week. The only stuff I see as being good right now is the Bret Hart/McMahon thing and where it's gonna end up going towards Wrestlemania, as well as CM Punk's character on SmackDown, because aside from Jericho his promos have really entertained me the past few weeks. Bottomline: WWE should never have gone PG, because kids always watched anyway.

 

[codebreaker212p]

I agree with everything Kliq said. Why should we adults not be able to see past storylines just because WWE is mainly targeting kids now.. I doubt kids really know about the entire career of Goldust, same thing goes with Hurricane or even Austin, but they still will watch it to better gain knowledge of their wrestling history. If anything I think this is a great thing with Bret coming back. It will give todays kids a better understanding to how WWE used to be before the PG ratings took over. We adults have suffered through this PG era, so Im sure the kids will be just fine watching something they havent seen before

 

[sordidboySavoy]

well on all the ''did you know'' bits than they have after every commercial on Raw it says more males or people AGES 18-34 watched Raw than any other show on this or that channel. so that should be their target audience. i mean i watch raw with a 55 and 50 year old hispanic guys (my girlfriends dad and uncle)

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

The PG-era is about merchandise, nothing more. Vince knows that wrestling fans will watch wrestling, and he wanted to add kids to the mix, especially those with wrestling-fan parents who will buy merchandise. But they are definitely going through an identity crisis. With TNA on the rise, and they are on the rise, WWE is going back into competition mode, which led to Bret Hart coming back. Would he have come back anyway? Probably, but more than likely not in the major role he is about to play. If TNA picks up steam, and starts taking away the older crowd, WWE will have no choice but to backtrack on its PG rated shows. Vince is a business man, and if he is backed into a corner, he will do ANYTHING to save his show. So, I am personally hoping TNA steps up their game, forcing WWE to care less about merchandise sales and more about having a good, cutting edge product.

 

[tellen]

But you have to remember, while their target demographic might be 7-12 year olds, they still have millions of fans between 18-35+ males and females who still remember who Bret Hart is, and what happened back in '97. But at the same time, they can't be too terribly pissed, that their ratings weren't OMG as they have lost alot of their fan base, and replaced them with a new generation of fans.

 

[Meilichia]

I find it funny that at one point or another most people have complained about how WWE is aimed at kids, while still sat there watching it (as an young adult or adult) themselves. Yet now WWE has aimed a storyline or two at an older fan base, they also complain, saying they have screwed up, neglecting their younger audience.

Hmmm well for a start the majority of the audiences at WWE shows aren't children, they make up a big part of audience figures, but it's about 30/70. Those 30% that are children, say under the age of 13, well don't they watch old things? When I was that age I certainly did, we bought old VHS of wrestling, watched classics, and such. Not to mention today it's even easier to get hold of old WWF stuff on the net.

Now for the adults who didn't come back to WWE for one appearance of Bret Hart... not everyone liked Bret Hart in the first place, I certainly didn't. So it might be aimed at adults, but it's not like one name can bring every single fan back. So yes the ratings were not amazing, but in both cases they hadn't neglected any target audience, and they are not going through some sort of identity crisis.

The guest host falls as it must, and it often occurs that old storylines could be brought up because of the host, like with Tyson. There is no identity crisis, it's the pre Wrestlemania push the show needs, and with added pressure of other programmes, they are simply pushing a little harder.

 

[sleamey316]

I think people need to realize that PG does not mean its for kids. The 80's and 90's were PG. Bret and Shawns famous iron man match was PG. It seems to me that some of you think adults must watch bad language and nudity. The only only thing I would complain about is the way they handle blood on Pay Per Views. Other than that you can have good adult storylines in a PG setting. Look at CM Punk for instance - Hardly a childs storyline. Also we see plenty of tables, ladders, chairs. I would say that even though they are PG, it is still more adult than the 80's and 90's were.
What i'm saying is, you can still make exciting feuds and matches in a PG setting. I agree that sometimes the product could be better, but most of the time I still enjoy it just like I enjoyed Jurassic Park or Toy Story which are PG.

 

[Jetspete]

I think you are underestimating a 10 year old's ability to process information. What's there to get? Vince and Bret dont like each other based on a long history. that is not exactly a tough storyline to sell to a ten year old. It is also not difficult to sell that storyline to the parents of said 10 year old, who make the decision whether or not to purchase the pay per view.

 

[thepalaceprince]

You say it was a terrible idea yet the ratings have been up big tim the last two weeks so Im goin to have to dissagree with you they have shown the video behind this feud a thousand times and Im sure plenty of parents have explained it to them and there always the internet a kid can do plenty of research and watch videos of hart and the screwjob. I think that while maybe it doesnt mean a whole lot to these kids they are certainly capable of understanding the feud and if they arent completely invested they stil have cena and dx and hornswaggle to cheer for every week. This feud however is creating alot of excitement amongst people who stopped watching wrestling or who had become more casual fans and as a result ratings have gone up so I dont think they made a mistake because clearly people are taking interest and that was the point of bringing hart back

 

[simplyry]

This is like Hogan slamming Andre, Hogan turning on WCW, Sting turning Crow, Ausin stunning McMahon, Ric Flair winning his first worl title, Superfly jumpn off the cage! These are important moment in wrestling history that every kid that watches now needs to know. Baseball fans raise their kids on memories of the babe, basketball fans raise their kids on MJ, Magic, and Bird. This is the moment wrestling threw the book out and brought reality to table. The Mike Tyson one was not as impactfull I will admit, I was pissed when Michaels didnt show back up for 4yrs, I was actually hopen to see the famous turn and kick on Tyson. But oh well. If you are a devoted wresting fan as a parent and your kids are watching it with you and they ask who that was or they want to know a story of wrestling past that is a tragedy, legend, folk lore you would want to tell them about!

 

[MammaJamma22]

So basically you want the WWE to completely erase anything before, say, 2000 -- because their supposed target audience of children will be clueless as to anything that ever took place before that.

So then why is DX together? Most kids had no idea about DX until they reunited....and even then, I bet most young DX fans today have no idea about DX's past. Yet somehow, DX seems to be popular and sell tons of merchandise. So why can't the Bret and Vince angle garner any sort of interest in similar fashion? Short answer...it can. If the crowd cheering upon the announcement of Bret hosting, his arrival that night on Raw, and the crowd chanting "We Want Bret" when McMahon came out this past night, isn't enough for you to realize it's anything BUT a disaster....well....you're probably a Hornswoggle mark.

I think Meilichia made the best point....you whine when they do kiddie stuff and when they throw you older fans a bone, you cry it's not for the kiddies.

Oye...

 

[Persona]

I understand both sides as well. However, for the people who wanted and finally did see Bret back in the WWE, it was a great moment we, the older audience, shouldn't be deprived of that. The PG rating is so for merchandise, and also so WWE programming won't be blocked if there are parental setting on the cable or TV unit.

To say not bring back things from the 90s is foolish, Austin is hosting Raw in March and I know I will watch that Raw now. Most of his success happened before 2000 but they still bring him back. Why? To try and get back those old fans. Also, an old wrestler that a younger person doesn't know is a treat to them, for they see a great wrestler who is new to them and now know that there is very entertaining wrestling to be had.

 

[sevastra82]

Even though WWE's target audience is 7-12 year olds, it doesnt mean that million of viewers in the next age demographic doent watch. I'm almost positive that there are just as many 25-40 year olds that vividly remember Bret Hart watching the WWE today as there are 7-12 year olds that dont. Heck, I would even wager to say that theres MORE people that watch it that remember the feud that dont.

Point being, just because this "fued" doesnt focus on the WWE's "target" age range for this decade doesnt mean that it doesnt still target 65% of the audience.

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

As many other people have said, there are millions of older people watching who DO remember the feud. But to go a step even further, having Bret Hart host Raw didn't alienate the 7-12 fans any more than having The Steamboat or Sgt. Slaugter appear on Raw. If they had no idea who these people were, then they just thought it was another guest host their can see their favorite wrestlers interact with.

 

[y2straightedge]

I agree with you. Some kids who didn't watch it till it was PG but I am 11 and watched it since I was born. I know the whole story.

Bret wanted to go to WCW, wanted the title and Vince didn't want him to take the title and didn't like that because Bret was a huge draw to the kids giving out the glasses and stuff.

So, some kids don't know cause they weren't allowed because it wasn't PG but some do like me cause I am allowed to watch whatever.

 

[Aud]

The problem is not who the WWE is targeting the problem isn't even this pg era. the problem is that everything is so predictable. Bret Hart would have been a big deal to young and old alike but everything else surrounding this story is so blah that its just not that exciting. PG doesn't mean boring and thats what i am terrible bored.

How can i fully appreciate Shawn Michaels making up with Bret Hart when he was just involved in Little People's Court? How can i take any thing that happens on raw seriously when at 10 pm there is a commercial for WWE action figures? My children are sleeping at 10 pm on a Monday night so none of this makes any sense to me.

The WWE is targeting 7-12 year olds now. the majority of people still watching may be 25-40 but as far as I'm concerned thats because I personally am waiting for something spectacular to happen. i have loved wrestling for years and it was NEVER this boring. I'm still watching because I'm used to watching wrestling on Monday nights. If and when TNA moves to Monday nights permanently i will not be watching raw anymore.

 

[Brainbusters]

Okay i have been thinking about this for awhile and to me it seems like Bret should of definitely gotten a lot of cheers and a lot of heat for McMahon but i finally figured out why not:

THE WWE IS ALL ABOUT KIDS.
Let me explain. How many 7-12 year olds know about the Vince Hart feud. Unless their parents told them they have no idea. And to truly respect the feud you almost have to see the past and know the indepth history of the feud at hand.

The WWE has screwed up big time. They brought back a feud for the older wrestling fans in a kid friendly environment. This was to be honest a dumb idea WWE needed to not be in the PG era to bring back Hart. All the people at shows are kids nowadays and those kids know nothing about this feud's past.

and with Tyson what kid would know about this as well. Last night on RAW Tyson barely got heat or cheers and that is because not many kids avtually know the true story of the Tyson DX stuff.

Do you feel the audience is too new to understand or appreciate any of these storylines? Is WWE wasting their time doing them? Why or why not?

This is EXACTLY what the WWE needs to bring. They need something to create interest and curiosity. People not knowing about the Hart/McMahon feud will research...it's called the internet. Same with the Tyson stuff. They're bringing back storylines from a time when the WWE was at it's peak...or near it.
I've been watching wrestling since Wrestlemania 4...there has never been a more exciting time then the late 90's.

Vince is making a huge mistake trying to cater to the young audience. He wants to bring back the rock'n'wrestling cartoon era like it was in the 80's. I'm sorry...but times have changed. He's up against the NFL and UFC...and he's trying to put on programming for kids....no wonder his business is going down the shitter.

He needs to quit with the comedy central crap too. We all know it's sports entertainment and not professional wrestling. We understand it's an entertainment business and you can't take yourself too seriously. But people want to see good storylines...and without that realism people aren't going to care. Bret/Vince/Shawn had a very realistic feel to it. Go check out youtube and you'll see a big difference. Nowadays we get Cena cracking stupid jokes instead of tense heated feuds. It's a shame nobody "gets it."

 

[Davi323]

The Bret Hart angle doesn't matter to the kids, its true...however, it does matter to the kids parents. The ones who buy the tickets, buy the t-shirts, buy the toys for their kids. You have to understand the demographics of your audience. Just because the WWE is now PG rated, that doesn't mean they want the same audience as Hannah Montana. Bret Hart matters to those who actually spend the money on WWE stuff, and because they are the ones old enough to remember, the WWE will continue to have storylines like this. Especially this time of year, when they gear up to start announcing HOF inductees...more wrestlers that the 9 year olds have never heard of, but their 40 year old dad used to watch every week...