WWE Removing Attitude Era Content After Linda McMahon's Campaign Is Attacked

[WWEIsLife2]

The same can be said for the current product and anything from 2007 onward. Hornswoggle, The Dating Game, Raw is Looney Tunes, 2009 DX, guest hosts, Muppets, dance-offs, hug-it-outs, anger managements, recent Santino crap, social media crap, announcers feuding and being covered in BBQ sauce, Little Jimmies, all of that cheesy, cringeworthy, over-the-top nonsense which had nothing to do with wrestling product. Betcha they won't have a conniption and get rid of those pieces of footage.

Im not talking about the current product because IMO the WWE has pretty much gone back to making the Wrestling the focal point of the Product of the late 80's,early to mid 90's. Personally some of that stuff you mentioned has been funny including the Anger Managment bits recently. If you didn't enjoy that you don't have a sense of humor.

Yes the Attitude Era was great overall and will never be duplicated but some people can't deny that some of the stuff they did was a little over the top and had nothing to do with the In-Ring Product. Now granted I loved the stuff Austin did to Vince and DX's skits every week on RAW. However alot of it was Characters with Sexual overtones like Mark Henry or Val Venis. Remember the Sammy incident? That was way over the top. I liked Val but he is mostly remembered for the stuff he did outside the Ring in the AE Era.

This notion of Linda "killing" the WWE is stupid because I don't see any Campaign ads during RAW or Smackdown. Do you?

 

[d_henderson1810]

To me, it depends on how far they go.

If it is removing some of the more offensive things from the WWF Attitude Era (such as Katie Vick), then it is okay, and the WWE's right to do it, as they are the copyright owners.

But if it is erasing all footage from the WWE Attitude Era, not showing anything on their shows pertaining to it, pretending like it never happened, not releasing DVDs with matches and vignettes of SCSA and others, during the Attitude Era, then it is the "erasing Chris Benoit from existence" crap all over again.

If this happens, I hope it is about removing "Attitude" footage from outlets where WWE has no control of it, and only showing it where WWE give permission for it to be shown (such as on "WWE Raw"), where they can decide the footage and when to use it. If so, then WWE are only doing what happens with music all the time, and that is protecting their product form being misused, or used without permission. But if it is pretending that the "Attitude Era" never existed, then that would be a misstep of massive proportions.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Typical double standard WWE bullshit.

They are heavily pushing a video game, WWE 13, in which a major part of gameplay revolves around the content that they are removing. I'll bet anything that they won't change anything to do with that, it's too much of a money maker.

If it wasn't for the Attitude Era putting the WWF/E on the mainstream landscape, Linda wouldn't be known at all to even stand in an election.

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

You make a good point about WWE '13.

I read that WWE '13 even has footage from the WWE Attitude Era in the game. What is to stop Linda's political opponents buying the game, then using the footage from that, (or WWE Legends Of Wrestlemania, which also uses footage) to further push their point, and then throw in the dangers of video-game playing as well.

If Linda's political opponents have to resort to bashing WWE, then they mustn't have any good policies to get themselves elected. If Linda was smart, she would turn the debate back to political issues, and put the idea out there that her opponent is attacking her husband's company, because he has no policies to offer.

 

[d_henderson1810]

It seems that the WWE are willing to do pretty much anything to it's company to help Linda win her Senate campaign. The product is already as boring as hell, what's the next step, going g rated?

If WWE want to keep their older fans entertained they are going to have to give us something worth watching or most of us aren't going to watch. I have already gave up on Raw since it became 3 hours. It's watered down, lame, and if it is for kids then why does it come on past kids bedtime? The WWE are trying to have their cake and eat it too. They want to make the product family friendly, yet they want the attitude fans to stick around as well, but give us little to nothing to care about.

We had the Punk speech last summer, The Rock comeback, Brock return and a few other things but nothing really substaintal that will keep older fans tuned in. Brock and rock will come and go, but then what? With a lame edgless product, with no real sign of it getting anymore interesting(IMO) why should people like myself, who helped make Vince rich and helped WWE win the monday night wars keep tuning in for.

The ppv`s besides Mania, aren`t much better then raw and SD. Even if they stay pg for a while their lame storylines and lack of star building is pathetic. Cena has been the face of the company for 7 years now, with little competition to his title. Only punk has become any bit of a challenge. But with weak storylines how can he get over to Cena`s level. Cena rose to fame back when the product still had some edge but now it`s just a shell of it`s former self. How can Punk or anyone get to that level without being able to do edgy material. All he has been able to do is that one pipe bomb, then had the belt through on him, but not allowed to main event a ppv. How will they ever have a top star besides Cena with this way of going about things.

I have always thought that a wrestling business should be a product for adults. It involves fighting, name calling, bullying, possible blood, and big angry men kicking each others butt. how is this product something for children. The Be a Star campaign having WWE involved is such a joke. The wrestling business is full of bullies and jerks and people willing to stomp on other peoples throats to get ahead. All, long time wrestling fans know this. I wish The mcmahon`s went back to doing what they do best, which is entertaining wrestling fans, with the edgy product that made WWE the best in the business. Seeing what the WWE has been reduced to in the past few years is depressing and dissapointing to say the least. I think the mcMahon`s might find out the hard way that being too power hungry and too greedy can destroy a family built business. And that will be a shame to all loyal WWE wrestling fans for sure.

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

The first half of your post is just the same hating on WWE that is constant on this site by IWC haters. Just the same old boring arguments about not being able to watch wrestling unless it is "edgy".

Secondly, you say that "the wrestling business should be a product for adults". Who says? If so, then you can't have followed wrestling a long time, because, pre-Attitude, WWE always catered to kids.

What about "Hulkamania"? That catered to children, who would wear red and yellow headbands and shirts like they wear green or red shirts and caps today. There was more kiddie content back then. You had toys, ice-cream bars (yes, they existed before C.M. Punk opened his mouth), and even a cartoon. Hulk Hogan preached about "saying your prayers, and eating your vitamins" (which would, in today's society, be considered offensive to the non-religious, and be promoting drug use, and then the IWC would consider what Hogan said as "wet"). We had kiddie friendly characters, such as clowns, a tag-team who brought a dog to the ring, and a guy dancing with a bird on his hand etc. Today's wrestling doesn't sound nearly as kiddie-friendly as this was.

But you know the funny thing, a lot of people who bag today's product, talk favourably about those times. They hypocritically say that they hate how the product was PG, but then got interested in wrestling when it was G.

Look, I will cut you some slack. I know that you are simply a sheep, parrotting that "Attitude" is better than today's product, because it is considered "cool" and "hip" to do so.

WWE didn't invent "edginess" anyway. ECW was more edgy than anything WWE did. The NWO was doing things that "Stone Cold" Steve Austin could only think of doing in his wet dreams, so don't act like the entire professional wrestling universe was only good between 1997-1999.

You mock WWE catering to children. Do you have children? Do you plan on having any? Because I would imagine that you would want to get your kids to love wrestling, like you do. Are you going to introduce them to today's product, or the product you like instead? To give your kids a love of wrestling by showing them tapes of the "WWE Attitude Era" is like giving them "the talk" by showing them porn.

So, if you don't want kids to love wrestling, that means:- (a) you don't care if your kids love wrestling, because, deep down, you never loved it either (i.e. you just went along with the crowd), or (b) you will never have kids, because no woman would procreate with you, or (c) you don't care about teaching your children morals, good behaviour or values.

No wonder kids are screwed up today. They have parents who love the values taught by "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, as their role models.

 

[WWEIsLife2]

Another thing too the WWE is releasing an Attitude Era DVD in November and WWE 13 is being based around the AE Era as well. So no they are not erasing anything and if thats the best Linda's oppenent (s) can do is attack a by gone point in WWF/E's History than they have nothing to go on. If she wins,fine but if not then fine. Who cares what happens and try to enjoy whats going on in the Ring.

 

[d_henderson1810]

I'm surprised Linda's oppenent hasn't used the clips of Stephanie slapping Linda(happened on 2 separate occasions), Linda kicking Vince in the balls, Linda kicking JR in the balls firing him and then making fun of his misery with her family, Linda getting piledrived by Kane, Linda getting stunned by Stone Cold, Linda getting kicked in the gut by Sable, Vince beating and choking out their own daughter, Vince pie facing Linda, Linda being "heavily medicated" and being forced to watch her husband make out with Trish, and tons of other things which would make for funny anti-Linda commercials. Point is Linda doesn't really have a chance because there's too much crap that can be usd against her! Sorry Mrs. McMahon, YOU LOSE!

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

But isn't it a shame that politics is that way? That candidates have to dig up dirt on each other, rather than point out holes in each other's policies.

This is the problem with politics, especially in America. All the media is interested in is, which candidate was a "boy scout" or lead a wholesome life, not whether an issue they are standong for is of benefit to the country or not.

Maybe you as voters need to stop voting for the most "family-friendly" candidate, and vote on which candidate's policies best benefit you and your country. Then, when pollies pull political stunts like criticise their opponents' families, the voters will vote against the candidate who focuses on the person, rather than their policies.

 

[d_henderson1810]

and 90% of the matches were extreme violence, language and the overall theme saw Sex Violence and Warfare, so where do they stop on editing it?

anyway it doesn't say anything about media beyond the internet.

They can't physically go out and take every single copy of media out there that would take decades. all they can do it try to minimize the most obvious references, and either way she's already heavily linked to WWE and what it has done, nothing any of them can do will change that fact, she needs to give up seriously, i'm not American but how would she stand a chance against the corruption that is politics.

oh and they better scrap the "slightly edgier" content they've been showing of late and eliminate any references to Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman aswell.

If it's not all just bullshit someone reporting crap that is only a part truth. but no that would never be coming from a "wrestling spoiler" site. It has to be gospel
which btw there is within 1 link from the front page. Hell in a Cell movies, WWE's most evil moments, WWE forced weddings, and old ECW video's up on WWE.com atm, and not hard to find either, gee isn't that "attitude"?
pretty sure even if they couldn't instantly remove it they could take the pages down for "re-design"

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

This is the same problem that WWE faced with erasing Chris Benoit stuff from all DVDs etc. There is so much of it, they might leave some around accidentally.

I don't see why WWE should even apologize for this stuff. I mean, did Arnold Schwarzenegger's opponents try to show all the violence and killing he has done on screen as Terminator, or in Total Recall, Conan The Barbarian etc? Well, Arnie became Governor of California, so obviously most people voted for him anyway, despite his killing on-screen.

Also, wasn't Ronald Reagan in cowboy films, where he had to shoot people? If that had been used against him, do you think it would have hindered his Presidency?

I guess that my biggest issue is that they underestimate the intelligence of the voting public, and they should just push Linda's policies, and believe that people will vote for her based on that.

 

[slice_of_life]

It's gotten so bad that they don't even call it wrestling anymore. I already don't watch Smackdown, and if it weren't for my pure love of wrestling and it being something to do with my roommates on a Monday night, then I wouldn't even watch RAW.

WWE is so watered down. It's not about going back to the attitude era, but jesus fucking christ, wrestling always has had and always should have an edge, which WWE doesn't have at all. It's one of the reasons people love CM Punk because he knows this, talks about it in his promos, and has tried countlessly to change it. When he bladed on RAW I was doing cartwheels.

They have every right to do it, and while it may or may not be affecting Linda's campaign -- which it is -- it wont even matter because that stuff already happened. There is no erasing it. It's a bad business move and a lost cause politically.

 

[GameOver]

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

The first half of your post is just the same hating on WWE that is constant on this site by IWC haters. Just the same old boring arguments about not being able to watch wrestling unless it is "edgy".

Secondly, you say that "the wrestling business should be a product for adults". Who says? If so, then you can't have followed wrestling a long time, because, pre-Attitude, WWE always catered to kids.

What about "Hulkamania"? That catered to children, who would wear red and yellow headbands and shirts like they wear green or red shirts and caps today. There was more kiddie content back then. You had toys, ice-cream bars (yes, they existed before C.M. Punk opened his mouth), and even a cartoon. Hulk Hogan preached about "saying your prayers, and eating your vitamins" (which would, in today's society, be considered offensive to the non-religious, and be promoting drug use, and then the IWC would consider what Hogan said as "wet"). We had kiddie friendly characters, such as clowns, a tag-team who brought a dog to the ring, and a guy dancing with a bird on his hand etc. Today's wrestling doesn't sound nearly as kiddie-friendly as this was.

But you know the funny thing, a lot of people who bag today's product, talk favourably about those times. They hypocritically say that they hate how the product was PG, but then got interested in wrestling when it was G.

Look, I will cut you some slack. I know that you are simply a sheep, parrotting that "Attitude" is better than today's product, because it is considered "cool" and "hip" to do so.

WWE didn't invent "edginess" anyway. ECW was more edgy than anything WWE did. The NWO was doing things that "Stone Cold" Steve Austin could only think of doing in his wet dreams, so don't act like the entire professional wrestling universe was only good between 1997-1999.

You mock WWE catering to children. Do you have children? Do you plan on having any? Because I would imagine that you would want to get your kids to love wrestling, like you do. Are you going to introduce them to today's product, or the product you like instead? To give your kids a love of wrestling by showing them tapes of the "WWE Attitude Era" is like giving them "the talk" by showing them porn.

So, if you don't want kids to love wrestling, that means:- (a) you don't care if your kids love wrestling, because, deep down, you never loved it either (i.e. you just went along with the crowd), or (b) you will never have kids, because no woman would procreate with you, or (c) you don't care about teaching your children morals, good behaviour or values.

No wonder kids are screwed up today. They have parents who love the values taught by "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, as their role models.

and on the flipside during the 80's they had spousal abuse, racism, gang warfare, obvious breaking the law, attempted murder, bullying amongst other things, and i disagree Hulkamania was aimed soley at kids, Hulkamania was aimed at everyone, Kids, Teens, Adults and Parents everyone could stick by it, Hogan wasn't a fruity pebble he was a strong guy that stood for right and justice but could certainly talk the talk and give a verbal bashing aswell.

Cenation has went even more watered down then that. IMO. until the last few years ofcourse.

and kids are screwed up by society, all the chemicals in foods and drinks and so called vaccinations, Media (biggest contributor) and the lack of any responsibility for there actions, not just there parents, can't blame the parents when they aren't legally allowed to do anything for fear of being arrested for child abuse.

Not saying there aren't bad parents and role models out there cause there certainly are, but you can't blanket blame everyone

 

[New Hot Fed]

This shows the hypocrisy Vince has entertained all these years. He's always painted himself a Conservative yet during the Attitude era, he used every trick in the book to get ratings, becomes as crass as he could, doing the opposite of the Convervative traditional family values. While on the other side you had Ted Turner's WCW, a company that was giving a more traditional product yet Turner is a Liberal.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

While I can see why they are doing it, it does seem extremely hypocritical when the new game is supposed to be "attitude" based. On one hand they are hiding stuff away yet trying to sell a watered down version of it.

There are instances of the same kind of problems in later material, using more recent stars. Batista for example, who in one segment was portrayed as "coming on to" Melina. the next segment, she was "visibly shaken, implying rape". She was going to sue, then the angle was dropped... but it's still there somewhere in their vaults, this was about 2008!

The reality is this is Vince repaying Linda for her support over the years, she could have dumped him, taken him for half, destroyed him if even half the rumored antics are true. She has towed the family line and now it's her turn to take centre stage.

We as fans have a simple choice, if we don't like how WWE is changing, don't watch, don't buy merch, watch old videos or interact with WWE in any way. Reality is their model is about kids too young to be on this forum... it was when we got into wrestling and we just grew up. Attitude was nothing to them but a desperation tactic that they got lucky with.

 

[GameOver]

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

This is the same problem that WWE faced with erasing Chris Benoit stuff from all DVDs etc. There is so much of it, they might leave some around accidentally.

I don't see why WWE should even apologize for this stuff. I mean, did Arnold Schwarzenegger's opponents try to show all the violence and killing he has done on screen as Terminator, or in Total Recall, Conan The Barbarian etc? Well, Arnie became Governor of California, so obviously most people voted for him anyway, despite his killing on-screen.

Also, wasn't Ronald Reagan in cowboy films, where he had to shoot people? If that had been used against him, do you think it would have hindered his Presidency?

I guess that my biggest issue is that they underestimate the intelligence of the voting public, and they should just push Linda's policies, and believe that people will vote for her based on that.

Thought exactly the same thing. and i agree with you but it's not our call. still think this whole topic is bogus, since that content is still present on WWE.com atm and the only people claiming it to be true is a Wrestling spoiler/news site which you know has to mean it's 100% accurate.

anyway she's got bigger problems then being associated with WWE, if they were using it against in here while saying she was involved in tax avoidance.
Seriously they need to worry about that and not about what people who don't even watch wrestling think about the business or her involvement.

 

[GameOver]

This shows the hypocrisy Vince has entertained all these years. He's always painted himself a Conservative yet during the Attitude era, he used every trick in the book to get ratings, becomes as crass as he could, doing the opposite of the Convervative traditional family values. While on the other side you had Ted Turner's WCW, a company that was giving a more traditional product yet Turner is a Liberal.

They were being killed by the big name talent leaving and in the ratings as a result and going broke, they had to pull out the stops and imo they did it better then WCW ever did which in the end saved there asses, they just went too far alot of the time, but so did WCW and ECW was always over the edge..

 

[Xumer]

The saddest part about this shit is that the PG "family friendly" content is so deeply ingrained now that fans actually support it and defend it. Well what the hell, let them delete it, wish I could go back in time and DELETE the revenue I gave them while supporting their product during that time. Well actually Linda's campaign is doing that for me. Enjoy your 20 minute Cena rants and insults like "toolbox" and "poopie pants".

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The saddest part about this shit is that the PG "family friendly" content is so deeply ingrained now that fans actually support it and defend it. Well what the hell, let them delete it, wish I could go back in time and DELETE the revenue I gave them while supporting their product during that time. Well actually Linda's campaign is doing that for me. Enjoy your 20 minute Cena rants and insults like "toolbox" and "poopie pants".

It was ALWAYS that way until 1996-1997 and the company was on the verge of collapse. Attitude was their last shot and happily for us it worked. We got 4 years of content that was tailored to those of us who had grown up watching PG cartoon stuff. Then once the war was won, and we all turned into IWC, downloading compainers who didn't buy tickets but streamed the show we had out lived our usefulness and become the elephant in the room.

Vince has always been a kids marketeer, Hulkamania, Ice-Cream bars, plush toys and action figures is what it's been about since he took over. To save his company he had to make a "deal with the devil" and go to places he didn't want to take his company because WCW were more than happy to do that. Most take the Bret Hart/not paying up his contract situation as being disingenous, I see it as more "damn, this Austin/Attitude stuff has made me a fortune in a short space of time, I can pay Bret now, but he'll oppose this and I need to continue for a while, hopefully I can get rid to WCW."

Now he wants to erase as much of it as he can to the casual who wouldn't know any different but again, the monster he created was us! Going back and "deleting" your contribution wouldn't change that cos millions of us did the same.

WWE is now back to being a thing I could take my kids to (if I had them) and that's not a bad thing in itself. Where the problem comes though for me is that Vince hasn't come out and just said the above. That would end the argument once and for all. he continues to "pick and choose" how he uses the legacy of it and this is wrong for me but there of course comes the unmentioned reason.

They are taking this footage away from us to sell it back to us via the Network!

Blaming Linda isn't going to change a thing, this path would have happened regardless. The moment Benoit "put a crossface" on a child (if you believe that) then he was gone from history. The moment Lionel Tate rock bottomed a little girl to death, then Attitude was over and an elephant in the room.

 

[Piss Bucket]

Part of the problem is that stupid kids, who are obviously ******ed, copy what they see on WWE, even with their sporadic "Don't try this at Home" videos on live and other TV, and it's the fact that these idiot kids get hurt, or worse, copying WWE Superstars that's got people all upset, I mean come on, haven't you seen a kid trying to "Pedigree" or do an "Attitude Adjustment" or whatever on their litle Brother or whoever?

 

[amc1350]

after watching a lame ass RAW this week,i was on the verge of quitting wwe,,this is there flagship,it should be good but it isnt,,its been hit and miss for a long time now,luckily SMACKDOWN was a lot better .
what the hell is going on...theres no wonder all you can hear is the chants of boring ..
why does l.m want to be a senator?
her little dream is going to have drastic consequences for the wwe.
vkm put your foot down.
hope you have plenty of savings cos your fuckin your company with pipe dreams

 

[closet_fan]

I'm surprised Linda's oppenent hasn't used the clips of Stephanie slapping Linda(happened on 2 separate occasions), Linda kicking Vince in the balls, Linda kicking JR in the balls firing him and then making fun of his misery with her family, Linda getting piledrived by Kane, Linda getting stunned by Stone Cold, Linda getting kicked in the gut by Sable, Vince beating and choking out their own daughter, Vince pie facing Linda, Linda being "heavily medicated" and being forced to watch her husband make out with Trish, and tons of other things which would make for funny anti-Linda commercials. Point is Linda doesn't really have a chance because there's too much crap that can be usd against her! Sorry Mrs. McMahon, YOU LOSE!

They did. I believe one of her opponents used it during the last campaign. You might be able to find it on YouTube somewhere.

Since that one was used, they likely want to find new material.

As for the WWE pulling content; it doesn't matter to me. Like people have here said; A lot of the stuff from the AE was so over the top, it doesn't even qualify as wrestling or even entertainment (Not for me anyway). I doubt this will change once Linda loses....again.

If you want to see the stuff they are pulling, you can easily find it somewhere else.

 

[d_henderson1810]

We had a WWE Hall-Of-Famer almost die in front of everyone this week, and it may be a long time before he is ever completely well again, and yet the biggest problem a lot of you have is that you may be deprived of footage that happened almost 15 years ago.

The Attitude Era was friggin' over a decade ago. Time to move on, please!

 

[Marv95]

Im not talking about the current product because IMO the WWE has pretty much gone back to making the Wrestling the focal point of the Product of the late 80's,early to mid 90's. Personally some of that stuff you mentioned has been funny including the Anger Managment bits recently. If you didn't enjoy that you don't have a sense of humor.

Yes the Attitude Era was great overall and will never be duplicated but some people can't deny that some of the stuff they did was a little over the top and had nothing to do with the In-Ring Product. Now granted I loved the stuff Austin did to Vince and DX's skits every week on RAW. However alot of it was Characters with Sexual overtones like Mark Henry or Val Venis. Remember the Sammy incident? That was way over the top. I liked Val but he is mostly remembered for the stuff he did outside the Ring in the AE Era.

This notion of Linda "killing" the WWE is stupid because I don't see any Campaign ads during RAW or Smackdown. Do you?

Except back then they didn't treat the word "wrestling" as it were taboo or a four-letter word. And newsflash: when the Ruthless Aggression era started it was more "wrestling" oriented, even in the 2nd half of the AE after Vince Russo left. It didn't just start 4 years ago. And once again, they didn't treat the word "wrestling" like some sort of disease unlike today.

I never said Linda "herself" was killing the company; that's on Vince.

No wonder the WWE is going anal on YT by taking away vids and having accounts closed. It all adds up.

 

[Con T.]

Some of the most critically acclaimed and culturally popular forms of entertainment in the past decade contain tons of sex and violence. Nobody gives a shit outside the PTC types that nobody listens to. Arnold could run for office and win in spite of all the sex and violence in his movies. I don't see the producers of Game of Thrones having trouble running for office if they wanted to. Or the CEO of Activision. The key difference with WWE is that the whole show is presented in such a low brow, controlling, embarrassing manner. And WWE has never gotten that. The cleaning up of the product has made them no less respectable to mainstream America. If anything, they're held in lower regard than during the Attitude era because of the embarrassing tone and terrible writing and characterization.

One addendum: at times the intersection of the tackiness and sexuality/violence is where they come off the worst. Like the Trish Stratus segment, where showing a woman in her underwear is no big deal but the crass presenHtation of the whole thing made it so much worse. But again, that's more about the presentation of the whole thing than the fact there was violence or sexuality.

Don't get me wrong, I think all the bitchers here are missing the point, but I think WWE is missing the point just as poorly. This isn't going to change public perception of the company; if anything, it's going to call to attention their actions. People are still aware of the Song of the South, in spite of Disney's best efforts to seal it away from the public. The only difference is the way they present their product.

This won't change a thing
If anything, this was worse
But it's not that bad

 

[Pepper Wadman]

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

The first half of your post is just the same hating on WWE that is constant on this site by IWC haters. Just the same old boring arguments about not being able to watch wrestling unless it is "edgy".

Secondly, you say that "the wrestling business should be a product for adults". Who says? If so, then you can't have followed wrestling a long time, because, pre-Attitude, WWE always catered to kids.

What about "Hulkamania"? That catered to children, who would wear red and yellow headbands and shirts like they wear green or red shirts and caps today. There was more kiddie content back then. You had toys, ice-cream bars (yes, they existed before C.M. Punk opened his mouth), and even a cartoon. Hulk Hogan preached about "saying your prayers, and eating your vitamins" (which would, in today's society, be considered offensive to the non-religious, and be promoting drug use, and then the IWC would consider what Hogan said as "wet"). We had kiddie friendly characters, such as clowns, a tag-team who brought a dog to the ring, and a guy dancing with a bird on his hand etc. Today's wrestling doesn't sound nearly as kiddie-friendly as this was.

But you know the funny thing, a lot of people who bag today's product, talk favourably about those times. They hypocritically say that they hate how the product was PG, but then got interested in wrestling when it was G.

Look, I will cut you some slack. I know that you are simply a sheep, parrotting that "Attitude" is better than today's product, because it is considered "cool" and "hip" to do so.

WWE didn't invent "edginess" anyway. ECW was more edgy than anything WWE did. The NWO was doing things that "Stone Cold" Steve Austin could only think of doing in his wet dreams, so don't act like the entire professional wrestling universe was only good between 1997-1999.

You mock WWE catering to children. Do you have children? Do you plan on having any? Because I would imagine that you would want to get your kids to love wrestling, like you do. Are you going to introduce them to today's product, or the product you like instead? To give your kids a love of wrestling by showing them tapes of the "WWE Attitude Era" is like giving them "the talk" by showing them porn.

So, if you don't want kids to love wrestling, that means:- (a) you don't care if your kids love wrestling, because, deep down, you never loved it either (i.e. you just went along with the crowd), or (b) you will never have kids, because no woman would procreate with you, or (c) you don't care about teaching your children morals, good behaviour or values.

No wonder kids are screwed up today. They have parents who love the values taught by "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, as their role models.

Oh my God, where do I start with this mess? First of all, I like how you 'cut him some slack' and say that you know that he is simply a sheep for being on the bandwagon of people who enjoy the Attitude Era. Really? You know this? Using common sense I can tell that someone liking the Attitude Era more so than today's is an OPINION. They are allowed to have it and just because they do, doesn't mean they are trying to fit in. I for one enjoy the product of '97-'02 much more than the product today. It's not because I am a 'sheep' or that I'm trying to fit in. To be honest, I am the only one I know in my small town in Eastern Canada to actually watch WWE. I'm not saying I'm the only one who watches it, I'm just saying I'm the only one I know. My friends don't enjoy it, my girlfriend who might as well be my wife as we have been together for 8 years (7 of those living together) doesn't enjoy it. Just me. So I'm not trying to fit in with anyone. It's simply my choice and opinion.

You can always tell who's playing the Devil's advocate if you look hard enough. This fellow I am replying to quite clearly is playing one. I mean, it's so easy to like what most people like. I'm obviously guilty for it in regards to the topic of this thread. But it has to be real difficult to be the guy who goes against the grain and tries to be different, doesn't it? Not really. Every argument or topic usually has one. Being a musician I can tell you how many hipsters ruin any topic on that [music] for me. But I digress, there's always someone in the bunch who play's the devil's advocate and in this case it's easy to tell who. Simply because you can tell he isn't disagreeing in a sensible manor. If he did, he wouldn't have said half the things he said. Take this comment for example:

"Do you have children? Do you plan on having any? Because I would imagine that you would want to get your kids to love wrestling, like you do. Are you going to introduce them to today's product, or the product you like instead? To give your kids a love of wrestling by showing them tapes of the "WWE Attitude Era" is like giving them "the talk" by showing them porn."

To this I have a bit to say but I'll keep it short. Who says that you would want your kids to do anything? Who says that you want to influence what your kids do in such a way that you promote wrestling? I know my parents always thought wrestling was ridiculous and never promoted it in any way until I found it through a friend who was watching at the time. After that, yes they fed me merch but only after I found the product myself. Also, if I was to show them footage of the product from '97-'02, how would that be the equivalent to showing them porn to teach them about sex? I for one watched wrestling starting around the attitude era. I grew up with very sensible parents who did not ever discourage me from anything I tried. Professionally, right now I am not only a musician, but a teacher of Drama and Music. I mention this for two reasons. One: My parents were not those things. My father was a care worker for the homeless and still is, and my Mother is a hair dresser. My parents never forced me to go in a certain direction or tell me not to get into music or teaching because it has no money in it. Nor did they tell me to stay away from that mean old Steve Austin and the rest of the WWF/E. And Two: I tell you because I grew into something. I didn't watch the attitude era and grow up a delinquent. I grew up and became something. But by your logic I should be WARPED in the head. By your logic, when I was taught about sex I should have been shown straight up porn! Ridiculous theory. Makes no sense and shows that you are just simply trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

"So, if you don't want kids to love wrestling, that means:- (a) you don't care if your kids love wrestling, because, deep down, you never loved it either (i.e. you just went along with the crowd), or (b) you will never have kids, because no woman would procreate with you, or (c) you don't care about teaching your children morals, good behaviour or values. "

A: Not true. I don't care if my children don't love wrestling because I don't feel like forcing them to watch or love anything. If they love wrestling, okay. If they love Cena instead of Austin, fine by me. If they love ponies instead and grow up that way, fine by me. God forbid we let our children choose to do what they feel.
B: I know several people who agree to not have children so this comment is simply an attack. To be honest, despite my previous statements I will share (since it's relevant) that my girlfriend, who I had mentioned being with for 8 years, and I have decided not to have any. That has nothing to do with it. We both don't really feel the need for children. So stop assuming things. What you said was simply an attack on males who don't want or (god forbid) cannot have children.
C: This statement must be from a nice conservative

Here let me re paste it without all the a's and b's. Here's a direct quote:

"So, if you don't want kids to love wrestling, that means you don't care about teaching your children morals, good behaviour or values."

What!? That doesn't even make sense. So now we have to force our kids to love wrestling simply to teach them morals, good behavior and values? We have better things to do for that. I assume you meant that teaching them from the attitude era would kind of tilt those morals and values a bit as opposed to teaching them with the current product. Well again, that's simply not true. I was raised well and I grew up on the attitude era product. Much like my choice in career, my family never once tried to stop me from watching the edgy attitude era product as a child just like I grew up on horror films as a child. You are the same person who assumes that watching horror movies breeds murderers. If that were the case, we'd all be running around with hatchets. Again, not a hateful bone in my body. Couldn't even hurt a spider despite my immense fear of them, however, grew up watching slashers when I was 6. You can't base any of this on the product's content at the time. And, quite honestly, I'm sick of hearing about it.

On Topic and post rant- I think that the WWE can do whatever it wants with it's old footage. It has every right. I simply think that it doesn't make sense. And I have to disagree with Klunderblunker (I think that's it) because I believe the attitude product brought WWE to where it is today. It made them the money they have currently and, let's face it, the roster back then are legends. When people compare the new guys and how they aren't ready, they say that the last crop of main eventers were The Rock, Austin, Taker, HHH, etc. Attitude guys. They say that they don't compare. Jerihco speaks of these guys. Not only that, but the attitude product brought WWE from bankruptcy. It would have folded, I've no doubt. Silly storylines or no, it was losing to WCW and the attitude era brought it back to life.

 

[willross]

LMAO this is hurmerous. If you actually have a life than you aren't constantly looking up Attitude Era content on youtube anyway. Personally, I have a life, I have friends, etc. and I do not have that much time to be youtubing video after video after video lol.

Put in an old VHS or DVD if you want to see it. What would you do without the Internet? Back when the Internet didn't exist, there was no content for you to view so freely. You are blessed to have any at all to view.

WWE has every right to remove everything from YouTube. There was a time when WWE content started to get packed on Youtube that WWE was getting it all removed for copyright infringement. Now they actually allow it to stand as long as it isn't PPV or DVD content. So what if they decide to remove shit off the Internet lmao.

It is pathetic that people are actually complaining about this stuff being removed like it is ending their lives. Its no different than if anyone else had stuff removed from the Internet that may be used against them. Clearly this is a temporary thing. To be honest, I read this and went to Youtube to see the extent of these removals for shits and gigs and I can't say that much seems to be missing. Still alot of Austin, Rock, and Undertaker stuff on there. Beulah's nip slip is still there lmao. Whack away boys, whack away.

 

[Y-2-Jay]

As long as they didn't remove it from other people's YouTube accounts, it shouldn't matter to anyone.

Funny you say that. Quite a lot of WWE videos from around the Attitude era time (Up until 2005) on Youtube have been deleted lately. There is still a few Attitude Era videos though.

 

[The Jeff]

LMAO this is hurmerous. If you actually have a life than you aren't constantly looking up Attitude Era content on youtube anyway. Personally, I have a life, I have friends, etc. and I do not have that much time to be youtubing video after video after video lol.

Put in an old VHS or DVD if you want to see it. What would you do without the Internet? Back when the Internet didn't exist, there was no content for you to view so freely. You are blessed to have any at all to view.

WWE has every right to remove everything from YouTube. There was a time when WWE content started to get packed on Youtube that WWE was getting it all removed for copyright infringement. Now they actually allow it to stand as long as it isn't PPV or DVD content. So what if they decide to remove shit off the Internet lmao.

It is pathetic that people are actually complaining about this stuff being removed like it is ending their lives. Its no different than if anyone else had stuff removed from the Internet that may be used against them. Clearly this is a temporary thing. To be honest, I read this and went to Youtube to see the extent of these removals for shits and gigs and I can't say that much seems to be missing. Still alot of Austin, Rock, and Undertaker stuff on there. Beulah's nip slip is still there lmao. Whack away boys, whack away.

you're a ********. Anyway, the point it you can't just ignore something as big as 5 years of your company's history. If this was being done to the Hogan era, you'd have people still bitching about it too.