WWF new generation

[amishpyrate]

Im goin to start with please!!!!!! no one fuck with this thread. it's one of my first and I believe its a good one so if you want a pissing contest go somewhere else now... onto my point

Now I rarely hear about this WWE era and hearing talks about another less talked about era "the ruthless aggression era" made me think about this time when hogan was out and stone cold wasn't there to give the finger and drink steveweisers. I just want to know what people thought of the era and how if it helped or hurt the wwe/wrestling later. Personally I think it helped/hurt the wwe and just hurt wrestling as a whole. I was a casual wrestler watcher during the golden era and by casual I mean barely watched yet I could still tell you who hulk hogan, ultimate warrior, macho man, sergeant savage and a few others were. i remember during this time I didn't watch wrestling much and from the ads I was turned off seeing the likes of goldust, luna vachon, and others I was honestly kinda frightened of as a young kid. However when I was really getting into wrestling during the attitude era people used to tell me that wcw was full of old wwf has beens and they were all too old. as an impressionable 14 year old I took these peoples words and wouldnt even turn the channel to wcw..... Now here we are years later and alot of people almost demand a wrestler retires once he hits the 40 year old mark. So while i believe it helped at one point, now I believe it hinders wrestlers who still can go but are older. So to sum up this tangent, do you believe this helped the WWE and do you believe it hurt wrestling as a whole? If people need their memories refreshed here's and old wwf commercial making fun of wcw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EgVqurGPfI

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

WWF was just pissed that WCW had all the star-power, all the big draws and WWF had nothing left but a bunch of mid-carders so they started mocking WCW talent by making promos etc.

1996 was the lowest point in WWF. They had very little star power at that point and most fueds sucked. The whole "New Generation Era" focused on the age of wrestlers which in my opinion hurt Wrestling as a whole. WWF/WWE made this image in many fans mind that a Wrestler can only wrestle till the 40s and after that they should retire. If a person can still compete then why not.

Pro-Wrestling isn't a "Real" Sport so that doesn't require any age limit surely many matches are grueling but most of the times they are just acting.

New Generation Era was just a transitional period which created no big stars. Only guys that were big during the New Generation Era were Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels.

I thought the New Generation Era sucked and WCW was way better than WWF at that point.

 

[RicSpade]

I thought about it for a moment so I'll give you this one, its not that we need our memories refreshed but I think now its about passing the torch when we bring in wrestlers from the past, for example go back to when NWO was brought back of Hall, Nash and Hogan and we had Icon vs Icon in Hogan vs. Rock now here we are 10 yrs later and you are getting Icon vs Icon again with Cena vs Rock. Yes its nice to see some of these other guys but you have to think sometimes they want just one more run, look at the Hacksaws and the Pipers who can somewhat still go, or even Ricky Steamboat do you know anyone his age that can do what he did at WM?

 

[HBKperfect23]

I personally enjoyed the new generation but it was definitly a transistion period for the WWF. From 93-95 WWF put on some great matchs and changed pro wrestling (in the wwf) from the super heros to the best technical wrestling. Although it lacked star power, Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart changed pro wrestling forever. The "glass ceiling" that guys like that couldnt carry the ball was shattered by Bret during the main event of Summerslam 1992 and the remains of it were swept away for good during the iron man match.

WCW from 93-95 was "WWF light", bringing in all their stars from the late 80s early 90s.

 

[xavyer]

The fact that people sometimes want a wrestling superstar to retire in his 40's sometimes is understandable, in a way that fans want to remember their heroes when they are in their prime, unstopable, powerfull, fast, etc., and in some cases that's exactly what hapens, but also if they are 40 and can still go at it, why not keep it up, for example, Shawn Michales retired two years ago, he still has some mileage left, but he did the right thing retiering while he still was at the top of his game, and i hate my self saying this because he's one of my all time favorites,if not, my favoriote of all time, The Undertaker,i think at this moment he should retire considering that it is obious that he's injury prone, he can get hurt anytime in a match, and as a fan i want to remember the Undertaker for being dominant, powerfull and for destroying his oponents, i felt bad for him last year when he had to be carried out of the arena, in my opinion that's a sign of retierment, and when i see Hulk Hogan these days i feel disapointed because i remember during the 80's and 90's when he was a force, now i see him in TNA that sometimes gets in the ring, and i feel awufull to see him wrestle when he can barely walk, and that's probably why people want wrestling superstar to retire when they hit their 40's........

 

[vampirek]

The fact that people sometimes want a wrestling superstar to retire in his 40's sometimes is understandable, in a way that fans want to remember their heroes when they are in their prime, unstopable, powerfull, fast, etc., and in some cases that's exactly what hapens, but also if they are 40 and can still go at it, why not keep it up, for example, Shawn Michales retired two years ago, he still has some mileage left, but he did the right thing retiering while he still was at the top of his game, and i hate my self saying this because he's one of my all time favorites,if not, my favoriote of all time, The Undertaker,i think at this moment he should retire considering that it is obious that he's injury prone, he can get hurt anytime in a match, and as a fan i want to remember the Undertaker for being dominant, powerfull and for destroying his oponents, i felt bad for him last year when he had to be carried out of the arena, in my opinion that's a sign of retierment, and when i see Hulk Hogan these days i feel disapointed because i remember during the 80's and 90's when he was a force, now i see him in TNA that sometimes gets in the ring, and i feel awufull to see him wrestle when he can barely walk, and that's probably why people want wrestling superstar to retire when they hit their 40's........

You do know the whole carrying him out of the arena was a plot of a storyline for this years Wrestlemania, right? Undertaker himself could easily have left the ring on his own accord. So I don't see the point you are making here. Had you said Undertaker has done it all and nothing else to then yes it can cause an argument as to whether he should retire but his Wrestlemania streak a) keeps him relevant b) is a big match c) hell if we only get him once a year its better than nothing. The streak is his legacy and is really the only reason why he is still going (and pretty much made it into one big storyline with HBK/HHH over the last four years). As long as Taker is fit and considering he has now had the proper time off, I don't see it being an issue and the right match is there i.e. the big names I see no reason for it.

Yes a wrestler can wrestle for too long and turn into some kind of joke but age is only a number, the likes of Sting, Taker, Flair have proved that.

Getting back to the topic, the new generation was basically the WWF trying to continue whilst lacking a lot of its big names it had years prior. Whilst they did have Bret Hart, Taker, HBK and for a while Diesel they lacked a lot of power and never truely recovered which of course lead to a change of strategy otherwise now known as the Attitude Era. However it did some good and people forget this about this era, whilst WCW had the big names and kicking WWF's ass and the WWF mocked the ages of Hogan and Savage (and then later with fake Diesel and fake Razor), they did one thing that helped them later on... they brought in a bald Texan wearing black trunks, a blue-blood with a funny looking nose and a rookie third generation wrestler nobody liked. They mocked WCW and those who jumped ship but you could argue they saw a problem with their business plan, what happens when the big names just get too old and too irrelevant? (which proved to be the case in WCW too) Whilst WWF programming at this time wasn't the best, it allowed them time to develop for the future

 

[The12thMan]

I look at it this way, if the wrestler can still go and be a draw then so be it....its when wrestlers still perform at an old age and don't draw is when its a problem. Look at guys like Hogan, Flair, and Sting. These guys are still decent enough to go (in their minds) but they look awful in the ring, and quite frankly can't draw anymore without help from Vince.

This is a touchy subject because some wrestlers should retire at 40 and some should keep going..it really depends on a number of things. Such as a wrestlers position (spot), health and more.

 

[scottyshowman82]

WWF 's New Generation campaign was in direct relation to Hulk Hogan leaving in 1993. It's funny I was around the same age as the OP and I bought what WWF was saying back then hook line and sinker. People had the signs in WWF "WCW- Wheel Chair Wrestling" but doesn't that make Mcmahon the biggest hypocrite for hiring back Hogan and Flair when WCW went under. Hogan won the WWF Title and Flair was a tag team champ at this time. So it all had to do with business.

I could picture Vince in a meeting saying ok they have Hogan and they have Savage what can we do to make these guys seem old, so we feel younger and fresh.
In 1995 if you asked Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart if you wanted a crack at Hogan they would have said yes. Hogan was and still is the bar setter and they would have loved to beat him. I enjoyed Hogan and Savage in WCW. Hogan got to be a heel and have some fun and he was good at it. And Savage in 1995 was no where near wrestling to his full potential and he had some great matches in WCW. So WWE was smart to run the new generation vs old guys in WCW campaign but in reality Hogan and Savage, still had a lot to offer the business and it showed.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

I think it helped more then it hurt the WWE.

While they weren't making as much as before and they lost much of their starpower, it forced them to create their own. During this time we saw Bret rise to the top, Shawn go from heel to face on his way to the top and Diesel and Razor while not WWE grown talent, got main event pushes here. One could argue that the WWE's success of building these guys from within gave them a blueprint down the road for attitude era stars like Austin, Rock, HHH and Angle.

Also, and maybe more importantly, you see the transition from PG to attitude during this time. There is a near 2 year gap from the infamous Austin 3:16 at KOTR96 till WMXIV where the era offically started. In this inbetween time you see the changes with better matches and edgier storylines that paved the way for the greatest time in pro wrestling.

 

[FlairFan2003]

WWF was just pissed that WCW had all the star-power, all the big draws and WWF had nothing left but a bunch of mid-carders so they started mocking WCW talent by making promos etc.

1996 was the lowest point in WWF. They had very little star power at that point and most fueds sucked. The whole "New Generation Era" focused on the age of wrestlers which in my opinion hurt Wrestling as a whole. WWF/WWE made this image in many fans mind that a Wrestler can only wrestle till the 40s and after that they should retire. If a person can still compete then why not.

.

Well, I dont know if WWE created the idea that "Wrestlers should retire when they hit 40" - in the last 10 years they milked the hell out of HHH, HBK, Taker, & Flair, all guys who saw 40 more than a decade ago.

I think you are right the WWE was upset that WCW had the star power at this time and was trying to find ways to make them seem less relevant. WCW ratings started tickling upwards noticeably in 1994, before Hogan arrived, then continued upwards to a place where the companies were essentially tied from that point until the NWO angle debuted.

Some people think that the NG era was bad because Vince was preoccupied with the Federal Investigatio into steroids, not paying as much attention to his product. That may be partly to blame, also it's hard to just CREATE stars, you just cant take anyone you want and get the audience to believe in them as superstar main eventers. Just like in sports, not everyone can hit as well as Albert Pujols, no matter who you surround them with or where you bat them in the lineup. You can help a guy, make him more productive, but natural talent eventually gives way. WWE was trying a lot of new characters and trying to elevate a lot of guys into main event caliber status, it just wasnt working. Hart was a well known commodity from the 80s and he worked hard, he benefited from the lack of star power around him but considering what he had to work with, he did well. The NG era did elevate HBK to star status, and Kevin Nash, and to a lesser extent Scott Hall, a guy who bounced around the circuit for several years without really catching on. WCW relied heavily on Hogan, Flair, Savage, Sting, Arn Anderson, Luger, but did very little to attempt to elevate or create new stars, mostly relying on those guys facing each other all the time. It was more appealling than watching Hart face Isaac Yankem but while WWE was failing to create new top guys WCW for the most part wasnt trying. This is when Undertaker took off and became a legit main eventer as well.



Realistically, HHH, Rock, & Stone Cold all came in during the NG era, we forget that and basicaly say they were a part of the following promotional era, "Attitude" - certainly they were a big part of that but they were all guys linked to the NG era, they just hit their stride when WWE changed their booking style. Lets not forget HBK & Taker were a big part of "Attitude" as well. With HHH, Rock, & Austin WWE found their Superstars, if those guys had all hit their mark in 1994 maybe we'd look at that era differently for WWE.

As far as who was more entertaining 93-96, I was watching WCW a lot more. I dont know if it was really that much better but they did have all the guys who were top stars and at least those matches appealed to me more than what WWE was doing most of that time.

 

[Slash-LN]

Looking back I think it's funny that WWF had Bob Backlund in the company around this time. Not only that but he was a champion.
I was much more a WWF fan than a WCW fan mostly because I didn't have cable so the only wrestling I really watched was Superstars on saturday morning unless I was at a friends house. Even then we only watched RAW. WCW seemed old school to me and as a 10-12 year old that wasn't really what I had an interset in.
I was also a big Shawn Michaels fan so I gravitated to the WWF.