WWE's Current Slow Build Back To The Adult Audience?

[punchline]

In the past we've all been critical of the WWE's PG direction, but there's also been a bit of understanding on why it's there. Over the past year or so however, I've noticed that WWE has started towing the line a bit between it's audiences.

Cena is still the top guy and will always appeal to the kids, and guys like Kofi Kingston, Evan Bourne, Rey Mysterio, and Sin Cara aren't going away anytime soon either. On the other hand however, you have the push of guys like C.M. Punk, the return of The Rock, the fact that matches are no longer stopped to clean up blood and blood is no longer censored, Divas allowed to pose for Maxim again (it's not playboy, but still a nod back), and of course the current Triple H and Kevin Nash feud, which the kids could care less about.

Now, the WWE would never ignore the kids as that's where the ratings and merch money is right now. But it's become quite apparent that they have begun looking at their older audience again and are slowly building back up to catering to them as well. Which leads me to 2 questions:

1. What do you think of this slow build back to a more adult oriented show and do you think it's the right time?

2. What would you do different to help gain back viewers lost after the Attitude Era?

I think I already answered my first question, but to answer my second question, i would use the brand split as an era split. Make one show rated PG, and put guys like Cena, Ryder, the tag teams and high flying cruiserweight type wrestlers all on that show to cater to the younger audiences. Then make the 2nd rated TV-14 and put guys like Punk, Triple H, Kevin Nash, etc on that show and maybe bring the hardcore title back as well and cater that show to the older audiences. It is a bit like what they're doing now as Smackdown is the more wrestling oriented show, but i would go full stop with a clear line of division.

 

[Fear&Loathing]

its simple craziness attracts viewers, people love seeing craziness I definitely like the idea of having a PG show and a TV-14 show so WWE can keep all its demographic. the hardcore title is definitely perfect to slowly bring the TV-14 show into effect. i loved the Hardcore title and its 24/7 rule it was definitely an entertaining time to be a wrestling fan. and definitely keep away from the stupid skit for example mae young giving birth to a hand

 

[VinnieSunshine]

Not another one of these threads...

Look. The WWE isn't going to be like the attitude era. Just because The Rock is back does not mean they are pursuing adult viewership. Personally I dont care about Rock being back, I think HIS SPOT AT SS & MANIA SHOULD GO TO SOMEONE CURRENTLY ON THE ROSTER THAT WOULD BENEFIT THEM IN THE FUTURE! Am I glad Rock is back...to an extent, Im not going to hide the fact that I marked out when he came back.

WWE does not need to bring blood back...at least not in the extreme that they have in the past. Would it have made the Nash/Triple H angle 2 weeks ago better? No, but it would've made it more believable. Dont tell me someone is going to take a sledgehammer shot like that and NOT bleed.

As far as the K2 Maxim cover...its a cover. Maxim is NOT equivalent to Playboy. Maxim is a mag for for teens to adults...there is nothing wrong with it. Content wise itsclose, but its all about girls in bikinis. Kids can look at the Divas and see pretty much the same thing each week on TV. Geez, go to a beach and they see it, or at a pool.

They already have 2 shows, they're called RAW and Smackdown. RAW is all about storytelling, Smackdown is more focused on action. I dont want 2 separate shows to be used for adults and kids...I dont watch Smackdown as it is.

The WWE is right where they need to be. Have they had some hiccups? Yes. BUT WWE is doing fine without having to resort to the old ways of the attitude era.

 

[DeathClutch]

In the past we've all been critical of the WWE's PG direction, but there's also been a bit of understanding on why it's there. Over the past year or so however, I've noticed that WWE has started towing the line a bit between it's audiences.

Cena is still the top guy and will always appeal to the kids, and guys like Kofi Kingston, Evan Bourne, Rey Mysterio, and Sin Cara aren't going away anytime soon either. On the other hand however, you have the push of guys like C.M. Punk, the return of The Rock, the fact that matches are no longer stopped to clean up blood and blood is no longer censored, Divas allowed to pose for Maxim again (it's not playboy, but still a nod back), and of course the current Triple H and Kevin Nash feud, which the kids could care less about.

Now, the WWE would never ignore the kids as that's where the ratings and merch money is right now. But it's become quite apparent that they have begun looking at their older audience again and are slowly building back up to catering to them as well. Which leads me to 2 questions:

1. What do you think of this slow build back to a more adult oriented show and do you think it's the right time?

2. What would you do different to help gain back viewers lost after the Attitude Era?

1. I understand why WWE went PG in the first place with the whole Benoit deal and wanting to get as far away from him as possible so they changed their whole product to reflect they were targeting the pre-teen fans, in doing so they alunated themselves from the post-teen fans, and with attendences being down it's pretty much confirmed WWE's fears that the 13+ year old fans pretty much turned off. Since Punk's promo back in late June I've really taken to RAW a lot more than I had since 2007 but WWE can't continue to be hot then cold which what they've been like since September, hopefully they continue to be edgy but keep it within the PG guidelines apart from the occasional 14+ rating.

2. Firstly I'd unify the belts, one WWE Champion, one IC/upper mid card champion, I'd bring back the Hardcore Championship for the lower card guys and to add something different to the shows and I'd bring back the Light Heavyweight belt (Yes the LHW Championship) for the smaller guys.

Secondly I'd officially cease the brand split and cease the GM's of each show and have a "board" with a spokesperson who manage everything. Give it a more corperate feel.

Third, I'd have 12 PPV's, 6 annual ones I'd bring back King of the Ring, Havoc (Halloween Havoc) and 6 none annual like names that enhance feuds like Vendetta, Cena VS Rock II, you get the gest.

I'd also have Smackdown LIVE on a weekly basis.

I know some of this isn't mightn't be different but I'd give it a year to trial and error PPV's, SD going live ratings and ceasing the GM roles and have one over-all leader, if ratings didn't change then fire me.

 

[phoenixphreek]

i kind of like the idea of splitting audiences between shows, but i think it could potentially hurt their ratings.
do most fans watch both raw and smackdown? because if thats true, ratings will be heavily effected i think. the "hardcore" fans might only watch the hardcore show and the same for the "pg" show. whereas right now you never know if the hardcore stuff will be on smackdown or raw, so you have to tune in to see. or just not watch either i guess.

i think this idea could work if the differences between the two shows weren't drastic.

 

[The12thMan]

For once I actually agree with somebody in the IWC about the current wrestling product..which trust me is not often.

I do believe its time for the brand split to end. I think in someways we're seeing that occur indirectly with the Raw Supershows. But one of the biggest problems I have with the WWE is that currently, they aren't really building any real young superstar to be the guy. Even though I like them, Zack Ryder and Sin Cara doesn't count. Cena, Punk and Orton are already established stars. But like anything, you need more.

Mason Ryan will truly be a star sooner rather than later. After him...who knows. Personally I like Sheamus but there's something about his character I just don't buy as a face. I just don't buy Daniel Bryan yet as a guy to carry a world title.

Hardcore title would definitely help the roster along with one world title and a LHC. Talent development is there biggest issue right now.

 

[punchline]

Look. The WWE isn't going to be like the attitude era. Just because The Rock is back does not mean they are pursuing adult viewership. Personally I dont care about Rock being back, I think HIS SPOT AT SS & MANIA SHOULD GO TO SOMEONE CURRENTLY ON THE ROSTER THAT WOULD BENEFIT THEM IN THE FUTURE! Am I glad Rock is back...to an extent, Im not going to hide the fact that I marked out when he came back.

I never said that they're bringing the Attitude Era back, but just that they might be catering a bit more to the older fans who they may have lost since those days. You have to admit there has been alot more material geared towards them lately than there has been in recent years.It's not perfect, but it's starting to look like the WWE has realized that outside of catering to the kids, they can start looking towards the older audiences as well. It doesn't matter what your opinion of The Rock is, or of the other examples i listed for that matter. point is, those things aren't happening for the little kids in the crowds, it's for the older fans still around. It might not be much, but i appreciate the slight swerve in direction towards us.

 

[King of the Words]

To answer question #1. It's about time, should have started this a couple years ago before Cena got Lame and Boring.

To answer Question #2. I like the idea of Raw being for the Kids with Super Cena and high flyers. Smackdown for adults would be great with The Game, hardcore title, and some old fashion Diva action. I would have 12 PPV's a year. 4 for Raw, and 4 for Smackdown. Raw one month and Smackdown the next month and so on.... I would bring the brands together for 4 Interpromotional PPV's, which would be The Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summer Slam, and Survivor Series. Maybe a King of the Ring too. Can you Imagine Team PG vs. Team T.V.-14 at the Survivor Series. All Interpromotional PPV`s would be half and half, for everyone. I would love WWE if they did this with their Product.

Right now WWE is trying to have their cake and eat it too by smashing it all together in the same shows and really not giving a full pg performance or tv-14 one either. As I have said before WWE seems to be in a state of disfunction, with bad writing and very little Big Time Talent coming up the line. Just one major cluster fuck IMO.

 

[Syborgg]

I don't know why there is this HUGE misconception that WWE is/was geared towards kids only. In this "PG" era, WWE has been marketing themselves toward the entire family. I guess just like a Disney movie, most guys(especially single) between 16 & 25 aren't going to be keen on family oriented programming. Calling it a kid's show though is a little too extreme. Try watching an actual kid's show on Treehouse or the Disney channel and tell me that's the same as WWE.

I for one don't see TV-14 programming ever returning to WWE. Possibly PG-13, but that's as far as I think it will go. They've already proved that they can put forth compelling storylines without breaking the PG "laws". So as far as it being more adult oriented, it's obvious they've relaxed on some of the little things, but I don't see them having matches that are all out blood-baths or having any bra and panties matches.

To answer the 2nd question, I don't think WWE should bend over backwards to bring back fans of the old AE. WWE knows that alot of those fans have moved on to UFC or NFL or what not. What WWE is trying to do is possibly keep the attention of the whole family. Also, maybe, just maybe they got so strict on alot of the stuff that it has brought back some of that awe factor when someone does get busted open, or utters the word "ass". The Attitude Era got so out of hand that my friends and I were having pools to see who would get busted open during the next PPV. Alot of the changes they have made is for the health of the superstars and I for one hope they continue to look out for the wrestler's well-being.

 

[Headman]

Why do people keep saying they want a more "Adult" show and then bring up the hardcore title? In my opinion there was nothing more childish from the attitude era than the hardcore title and the lame matches that went with it. I believe a more adult show would consist of more complex storylines and a heavy focus on in-ring story telling that your average younger fan wouldn't get. In otherwords, a more grown up show for me would be old midsouth, not some vile perverted sketch comedy show that was RAW during the attitude era.

 

[DeathClutch]

Why do people keep saying they want a more "Adult" show and then bring up the hardcore title? In my opinion there was nothing more childish from the attitude era than the hardcore title and the lame matches that went with it. I believe a more adult show would consist of more complex storylines and a heavy focus on in-ring story telling that your average younger fan wouldn't get. In otherwords, a more grown up show for me would be old midsouth, not some vile perverted sketch comedy show that was RAW during the attitude era.

I urge you to watch some of the Hardcore matches from 1999, they were highly enteraining, Hardcore matches only became childish when the 24/7 rule was introduced, what's sad about this is that WWE kept the rule going for about 2 and half years longer then it should have.

The problem I have with a lower card belt is that the matches will be rushed and it's the same match they've just watched and will watch next and so on, WWE needs the Hardcore belt to give another edge to their show and get their moneys worth from some of these lower card guys who get paid to sit backstage at tv tapings and tour the house shows.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

WWE has never been "adult oriented" maybe stupid adults with the minds of 16 year olds. the Tude era wasn't 'adult' it was trash TV, like Jersey Shore, which draws. Teens and dumb adults (white trash) eat that shit up. Adult is like CSI, the tude era wasn't watched by intelligent adults, the demographics show that. Pro wrestling fans in the tude era were 15-35 and lower income.

Today's product is like 1996-1998 nitro, family friendly with adult themes (such as the lockout, contracts, etc, but still with kid-friendly words and less nudity).

 

[dman1373]

well the only reason that wwe got less Quote on quote adult was because of the benoit fiasco. It was blamed on steroids and chair shoots to the head and blah blah blah. Well that is why wwe tried to become the john cena of wrestling companys if you will. The wwe didn't want to give those cynics anything else to through in their face. So I definitely think that eventually the wwe will leave that pg rating and go back to tv 14.

By the way twjc, csi is a terible show that ******s watch so that they can feel smart because they figured out the case 5 minutes before the show reveales it. Its like a dora the explorer for forest gump.

 

[WORD-LIFE-16]

I know that several Wrestling fans may disagree with me here and if so then go ahead but to me even in the modern era from 2007-present or as certain people may refer to as the Universe Era, the era where Cena is the Alpha-dog. Raw to me has always been the more adult orientated show and where all the entertainment value is, which is why I always go to Raw on the UK world Tour because that is where all of the best entertainment value is. Smackdown has and always will be the B show Period. But it is also where all of the real wrestlers and not entertainers are placed. Randy Orton for example is the face of Smackdown the wrestling show because he's more of an athlete than Cena, however Cena is tens time more exciting to watch outside of the ring than Orton is. Now to answer your question I agree recently there seems to have been a very slow and gradual build back to a more adult show, since the start of 2011 and into 2012 I expect to see big changes as we have experienced in 2011 and onwards. I really hope they can do this. Raw is Raw and Smackdown is Smackdown. entertainment and wrestling. However WWE will never change their rating to TV-14 and if it does happen then it won't be for atleast another 3 years and even then it's questionable. But I can surely see where you are coming from, SD is more for the kids to watch and understand and where content is aimed more at kids, which is why the HHH and Nash feud is happening on Raw because a 12 year old kid could care less about that rivalry. Because they don't understand and only fans from the AE remember the whole clique angle.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Remember how WWE took back the day from WCW in the Attitude Era? It was becoming hard-edged (and sometimes downright obscene) that did it. Back then, you truly didn't know what would happen next. Seeing Bret Hart (of all people) and Psycho Sid yelling "bullshit" on basic cable TV was one of the damndest things ever. That "Beaver Cleavage" skit pushed the envelope so far it was amazing the censors didn't drop dead watching it.

Was it all too much? Maybe it was, but it made us watch, made us anticipate what might be coming, made us turn from uber-wealthy WCW back to WWE, the true innovators of pro wrestling.

Later, WWE went too far in the opposite direction. Whether they were concerning themselves with cleaning up for Linda McMahon's Senate campaign (ugh!) or whether the company suddenly developed an all-encompassing concern for children, they got completely away from what made them a raging success in the late 90's.

Kids are going to follow what they're going to follow.......let their parents determine if something is too hard-edged for them to see on TV. Pro wrestling isn't for kids, IMO, although there are plenty of elements they will enjoy.

Yes, I think the company should build back to tailoring their product for adults. I like it rough.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Another one of these? Man, it's really getting old having to explain the actual facts about the WWE audience to people that are too lazy to look up the facts or are purposely ignoring them just for the sake of creating a thread just to piss and moan about something.

The WWE isn't catered towards kids, it's catered simply in a more family friendly direction. The vast majority of the WWE audience is made up of male viewers. Roughly 75 percent of the Raw audience are adult males. If you look out at the Raw audience, you'll see people of all age groups out there and that's what WWE has gone for.

I honestly have no idea where this idea that "adults" are only supposed to like programs with lots of cursing, blood, sex and mindless chaos. Now there's not anything wrong with that type of programming, I do enjoy watching stuff like that too, but that doesn't mean that a fully mature adult male can't fully enjoy a show that can be ok for people of any age to watch.

Some of you people are just simply too hung up on the simple labels. In your minds, for some odd reason, PG equals crap while TV-14 equals quality. That viewpoint is complete nonsense. Throughout 2010 and most of 2011, TNA went out of its way to try and be more "adult" in the same sense as WWE's Attitude Era and it resulted in the overall worst wrestling programming I've seen since the last year or so of WCW. Every other word wrestlers would say in a promo seemed to be a swear, they were often featuring at least 1 match on tv each week in which someone bladed, the Knockouts were reduced to nothing more than TNA versions of Divas, you'd typically have an entire card of matches lasting 3 to 4 minutes, you'd have brawls featured on every other episode, gimmick matches that lasted less than 5 minutes, etc. TNA was doing this stuff just for the sake of doing it and just so someone would say "man, this is some edgy shit they're doing here". The latter didn't happen as TNA was just putting out a shit product. And yes, it was reminiscent of some of what went on during the Attitude Era.

Cursing every other word in promos isn't necessary for them to be good. WWE has proven that time and time again. Wrestlers swearing only every so often is what keeps that little edge that people might want. WWE has proven time and time again that it can have great hardcore matches without blood. The hardcore matches of the late 90s were mostly crap. Most of them were highly forgettable matches that amounted to little more than guys getting hit in the head with trash cans, trash can lids and cookie sheets.

The point is that quality can be quality regardless of what it's television rating is. I've seen some really good stuff come out of both PG and TV-14 and I've also seem some just plain awful stuff come from both as well. Quality isn't exclusive to one or the other.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

1. What do you think of this slow build back to a more adult oriented show and do you think it's the right time?

I think that from now on you will get to see a few more risque or asyou put it "adult" elements on WWE television. Some of the guys are going to swear a bit from time to time, you might even get to see a bit bleeding in some of the matches but as far as a complete shift to an Attitude Era type product is concerned, that is never going to happen anytime soon. The product is working well and there is no need to take any unneccesary risk.

2. What would you do different to help gain back viewers lost after the Attitude Era?

Again NO. The attitude era as has been said countless times, was a fad and the huge ratings that you saw at that time was a result of that fad. In fact the WWF started losing viewers towards the very end of the Attitude Era itself. The product did not change by much, the superstars did not change by much, it is just that people got bored of it. Other things also happened like more TV shows and the Benoit scandal and all things considered WWE still does a good job. In fact Raw is still one of the most popular shows in US television.

 

[rocksaviour]

What I would change about the WWE is taking it back to 12 PPVs a year, in those give the KOTR some proper build meaning then the winner goes on more like in the past (being chosen as the next star) not someone who has been around and needs the win to move a tiny bit up the card just to be squashed back down again.

For me I know it won't return to the old days but lets just move on, what happened back then happened. The WWE just need to think about star building and getting storylines that people care about, yes currently there is a more adult-themed one but then I seem to remember it but in reverse about 8 1/2 years ago (Hunter and Nash were heel and face back then).

Having one World champ and one upper mid card champ as well as bringing back a Hardcore and/or Crusier titles may help and have a board of directors in terms of the authority. What happened to the ANON RAW GM STORYLINE??????????????? For instance, we as WWE fans have a degree of frustation sometimes but I don't see this being a build towards TV-14 and Attitude Era V.2 anytime soon.

 

[Headman]

I urge you to watch some of the Hardcore matches from 1999, they were highly enteraining, Hardcore matches only became childish when the 24/7 rule was introduced, what's sad about this is that WWE kept the rule going for about 2 and half years longer then it should have.

The problem I have with a lower card belt is that the matches will be rushed and it's the same match they've just watched and will watch next and so on, WWE needs the Hardcore belt to give another edge to their show and get their moneys worth from some of these lower card guys who get paid to sit backstage at tv tapings and tour the house shows.

I watched enough of them as they happened. All the matches were pretty much the same. Two guys fight all over the building. Couple fake trash can spots. Add in a silly parking cone or crutch. And let's not forget just about any weapon one could ever want hidden under the ring. Al Snow vs Big Boss man and Bob Holly vs Jesse James are not what I consider great matches. And these were the best the hardcore title scene ever produced.

 

[J.J.]

I watched enough of them as they happened. All the matches were pretty much the same. Two guys fight all over the building. Couple fake trash can spots. Add in a silly parking cone or crutch. And let's not forget just about any weapon one could ever want hidden under the ring. Al Snow vs Big Boss man and Bob Holly vs Jesse James are not what I consider great matches. And these were the best the hardcore title scene ever produced.

Steve Blackman? Jeff Hardy? Rob Van Dam? Those are just 3 names off my head that I know held it, 2 of them went on to have great runs in WWE

 

[lowandmighty]

I agree with that brand split Idea but I'd also add that they bring back ecw except make it R rated for audiences (18+) so there's the two mainstream products and then a seedy third promotion aired really late at night and the events could be a kind of club atmosphere with some really risqué content.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

I agree with that brand split Idea but I'd also add that they bring back ecw except make it R rated for audiences (18+) so there's the two mainstream products and then a seedy third promotion aired really late at night and the events could be a kind of club atmosphere with some really risqué content.

Why? to satisfy you? People would still know and it'd hurt their reputation. No one likes sleazy wrestling. It had it's time in the 90s and it killed the reputation of the business. There's a reason CZW happens in front of 500 people. really REALLY bad idea. Like borderline "jump off a cliff" level thought process there.

dman1373, I don't watch CSI, but I know a lot of adults who do. Fact is, it's not a crude show. I don't care if it's for "******" who want to feel smart. My point was that Attitude Era Raw was for white trash. It wasn't really "adult" unless you mean "adult" as in "adult website" as in "sleazy".

You guys all sound like a bunch of attitude era marks. That time was fine, but it killed the reputation of pro wrestling. Today's wrestling isn't "geared towards kids" it's family friendly. Just because there aren't 8th grade level dick jokes, tits, and blood and people drinking beer doesn't mean it's not good. In fact it kinda makes it better that they don't have to resort to that crude horseshit. Anyone ever go back and actually watch the Tude era? I don't mean the PPVs (well those were pretty shit too), I mean like watch a raw from like 1999. It's 100% garbage TV. It's like Jersey Shore.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Why? to satisfy you? People would still know and it'd hurt their reputation. No one likes sleazy wrestling.

No one? I think the millions and millions of people who watched wrestling in the late 90's would disagree. They watched the shows, bought merch, and paid for PPV's. Money is money, and the Attitude Era made a lot of it.

It had it's time in the 90s and it killed the reputation of the business.

I've heard this time and time again, and it still sounds really stupid. Several things have given the wrestling business a bad name (steroids, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, women being flaunted as sexual objects, murder... oh, and it's fake), so we probably shouldn't act like the 80's and early-to-mid 90's made it respectable.

My point was that Attitude Era Raw was for white trash. It wasn't really "adult" unless you mean "adult" as in "adult website" as in "sleazy".

You sound like a PG-Era mark. I understand "mark" is a label you like to toss around, but you read the same as the rest of them.

You guys all sound like a bunch of attitude era marks. That time was fine, but it killed the reputation of pro wrestling.

No, it didn't.

Just because there aren't 8th grade level dick jokes, tits, and blood and people drinking beer doesn't mean it's not good.

If you think the Attitude Era consisted only of the things you've listed, I doubt you watched. Maybe you did, but you obviously have a selective memory.

In fact it kinda makes it better that they don't have to resort to that crude horseshit.

They didn't "resort" to anything. They put on a show people wanted to see. At that time, people were interested in that sort of show. It drew money, and its top stars were more over than anyone WWE has right now. Fact.

Anyone ever go back and actually watch the Tude era?

I didn't have to "go back." I watched it live.

I don't mean the PPVs (well those were pretty shit too), I mean like watch a raw from like 1999. It's 100% garbage TV. It's like Jersey Shore.

It was raunchy, no question. However, the Attitude Era had real wrestlers, same as today. Steve Austin is probably the most over guy (next to Hogan) in the history of the business. He drew money, more so than any guy we've seen since him. The Rock is, for my money, the most charismatic guy the business has ever seen. He didn't get over making gay jokes, or being crude. He got over because he was great at what he did, hence his ability to cross over into mainstream films. You constantly accuse others of sounding like marks, yet you sound no different. You sound like someone who is forced to defend the PG Era, even if half of what you spout is complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Headman]

Steve Blackman? Jeff Hardy? Rob Van Dam? Those are just 3 names off my head that I know held it, 2 of them went on to have great runs in WWE

The people who held it have nothing to do with how good or memorable the division was. The title was very gimmicky and as all gimmicks go it was only a matter of time before it ran it's course.

I agree with that brand split Idea but I'd also add that they bring back ecw except make it R rated for audiences (18+) so there's the two mainstream products and then a seedy third promotion aired really late at night and the events could be a kind of club atmosphere with some really risqué content.

Pro-Wrestling is finally starting to regain it's reputation as a form of family entertainment. I don't see Vince or the shareholders making a move that would undermine that effort. During the attitude era the mainstream media took Vince to task over the kind of programming he provided. It's hard to put forth a family show while defending yourself against accusations of being a smut peddler.

 

[Headman]

No one? I think the millions and millions of people who watched wrestling in the late 90's would disagree. They watched the shows, bought merch, and paid for PPV's. Money is money, and the Attitude Era made a lot of it.



I've heard this time and time again, and it still sounds really stupid. Several things have given the wrestling business a bad name (steroids, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, women being flaunted as sexual objects, murder... oh, and it's fake), so we probably shouldn't act like the 80's and early-to-mid 90's made it respectable.



You sound like a PG-Era mark. I understand "mark" is a label you like to toss around, but you read the same as the rest of them.



No, it didn't.

Just because there aren't 8th grade level dick jokes, tits, and blood and people drinking beer doesn't mean it's not good.

If you think the Attitude Era consisted only of the things you've listed, I doubt you watched. Maybe you did, but you obviously have a selective memory.



They didn't "resort" to anything. They put on a show people wanted to see. At that time, people were interested in that sort of show. It drew money, and its top stars were more over than anyone WWE has right now. Fact.



I didn't have to "go back." I watched it live.



It was raunchy, no question. However, the Attitude Era had real wrestlers, same as today. Steve Austin is probably the most over guy (next to Hogan) in the history of the business. He drew money, more so than any guy we've seen since him. The Rock is, for my money, the most charismatic guy the business has ever seen. He didn't get over making gay jokes, or being crude. He got over because he was great at what he did, hence his ability to cross over into mainstream films. You constantly accuse others of sounding like marks, yet you sound no different. You sound like someone who is forced to defend the PG Era, even if half of what you spout is complete and utter bullshit.

With all due respect, if Vince could still get away with the sort of programming he provided during the attitude era and make money he would be doing just that. Times have changed and so must the industry. I think it's perfectly fair to lable certain people as "Attitude era marks" because that's exactly what they're doing; marking out for the attitude era. And quite frankly it gets annoying that people cannot see beyond their own nostalgic bias and view the current product in context. The product is the way it is because this is what it has to be. The bulk of the late 1990's audience did not leave because the attitude era ended. The attitude era ended because the bulk of the audience got tired of wrestling. Add in all the scandals and the stigma of wrestling being trashy no clear thinking human being can deny it was necessary to clean up the product and once again become more family oriented.

I also don't think the quality of talent from that time period was ever in question, even by the poster you were responding to. To be fair to the current talent, the attitude era consisted of the last of the territory guys and younger guys like the Rock were not the norm. I've said many times that the attitude era pissed away one of the most talented generations in pursuit of higher ratings. A more wrestling oriented product during that era could have been something truly great, but the times called for an edgier product to survive much as the "PG era" was needed today.

In closing I give credit to the superstars of this generation who have gotten over within the restraints of the times. It's easy to get over while swearing and talking about shoving things in people's asses, but a few of these guys have become legit stars without going there. I was in my late teens and early 20's during the attitude era. I remember it well. And in my honest opinion it wasn't that great.