Your "True Opinions" Of Posters?

[Big Nick Dudley]

Or maybe there are really that many people that find this era superior?

The Attitude Era was great and all, but it didn't have nearly the amount of talent that the PG Era has.

That's bullshit. The mid-card guys during the AE blow these guys away. Most WWE mid-carders today are green as grass, and have no character.

Benoit and Guerrero? They weren't top talent until the era was over. Same with Jericho.

They didn't need to be "top" talent. They were outstanding mid-carders, better than anything WWE has to offer today.

HBK was never a part of the Attitude Era as it's beginning coincidentally coincided with his retirement.

Are we going to ignore DX? First group of guys to go "attitude" outside of Steve Austin. HBK was about as AE as it got.

Undertaker was an established star before the era began, and has been more of an asset before and after the Attitude Era than he ever was during.

I would say constantly feuding with Steve Austin, the 2nd biggest superstar in the history of the wrestling business, is a big deal, much more important than anything he did prior to 1997/8.

So really all you have is Triple H, Angle, Rock, Foley, and Austin.

Depends on when you officially believe the AE began and ended.

Good era, yes, but I like PG better.

When did you start watching wrestling? I'm pretty sure I've read you didn't even watch the Attitude Era. Hard to judge something you didn't watch live.

 

[JGlass]

Your last comment is fair, Nick. I started watching (consistently anyway) in 07, so I didn't get to live through the magic of the PG Era when it was happening. The fact that I've watched the PG Era from the beginning might make me a little biased, but it doesn't change the fact that there have been no less than a dozen main eventers during the PG era where the Attitude Era had to juggle the same 5 or 6 guys around over and over again.

 

[JGlass]

Your last comment is fair, Nick. I started watching (consistently anyway) in 07, so I didn't get to live through the magic of the PG Era when it was happening. The fact that I've watched the PG Era from the beginning might make me a little biased, but it doesn't change the fact that there have been no less than a dozen main eventers during the PG era where the Attitude Era had to juggle the same 5 or 6 guys around over and over again.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

but it doesn't change the fact that there have been no less than a dozen main eventers during the PG era where the Attitude Era had to juggle the same 5 or 6 guys around over and over again.

Between 1997 and 2001? HBK, Bret Hart, Mick Foley, Taker, Austin, Kane, Rock, HHH, Benoit, Angle, Big Show, Jericho, and Booker T. Oh, and Vince McMahon.

They had plenty of guys. We shouldn't blame the top two or three for being as over as they were. Over enough to stay on top.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Who are the dozen or so main event guys now? I can only see 5 or 6 to be honest.

 

[JGlass]

Between 1997 and 2001? HBK, Bret Hart, Mick Foley, Taker, Austin, Kane, Rock, HHH, Benoit, Angle, Big Show, Jericho, and Booker T. Oh, and Vince McMahon.

They had plenty of guys. We shouldn't blame the top two or three for being as over as they were. Over enough to stay on top.

Except the Attitude Era didn't begin until 1998, taking HBK and Bret Hart out of the equation entirely. People keep saying Benoit was a main eventer during the Attitude Era... he main evented like, what, 2 minor shows? Jericho wasn't much better. Booker T didn't even participate in a WrestleMania until the Attitude Era was over.

Now look at the PG Era. You have Cena, Orton, Miz, Edge, Jericho, Kane, Undertaker, Triple H, HBK, Mysterio, Sheamus, Christian, CM Punk, Batista, and Jeff Hardy, and you could make arguments for the likes of Swagger, Del Rio, and Ziggler, though I wouldn't. Even if all the guys you listed were legitimate main eventers during the Attitude Era, the PG Era guys still have them outnumbered.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Except the Attitude Era didn't begin until 1998, taking HBK and Bret Hart out of the equation entirely.

No one can pinpoint an exact start date, sorry to say. Things were much more edgy in 1997 than you're giving credit for. If WWF didn't have the Attitude label while Bret was around (I honestly can't remember), it should have.

HBK main evented WM14, in 1998, and was the founder of DX. He was present for the start of the Attitude movement, no question about it.

People keep saying Benoit was a main eventer during the Attitude Era... he main evented like, what, 2 minor shows? Jericho wasn't much better. Booker T didn't even participate in a WrestleMania until the Attitude Era was over.

They main evented PPV's, and were on their way to main eventing many, many more.

Now look at the PG Era. You have Cena, Orton, Miz, Edge, Jericho, Kane, Undertaker, Triple H, HBK, Mysterio, Sheamus, Christian, CM Punk, Batista, and Jeff Hardy, and you could make arguments for the likes of Swagger, Del Rio, and Ziggler, though I wouldn't. Even if all the guys you listed were legitimate main eventers during the Attitude Era, the PG Era guys still have them outnumbered.

Of course they have more main eventers now, they have two rosters. The roster split took place long before PG started, hence the need to elevate more superstars.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Except the Attitude Era didn't begin until 1998, taking HBK and Bret Hart out of the equation entirely. People keep saying Benoit was a main eventer during the Attitude Era... he main evented like, what, 2 minor shows? Jericho wasn't much better. Booker T didn't even participate in a WrestleMania until the Attitude Era was over.

Benoit used to main event the weekly shows on a pretty regular basis and so did Jericho. Booker came in towards the *** end of the AE but did a good job. And in any case, you had asked for talent. What is wrong with being a good midcard talent? Nothing, especially if the midcard scene rocks too.

Now look at the PG Era. You have Cena, Orton, Miz, Edge, Jericho, Kane, Undertaker, Triple H, HBK, Mysterio, Sheamus, Christian, CM Punk, Batista, and Jeff Hardy, and you could make arguments for the likes of Swagger, Del Rio, and Ziggler, though I wouldn't. Even if all the guys you listed were legitimate main eventers during the Attitude Era, the PG Era guys still have them outnumbered.

WOW, did not expect to see so many names here but perhaps I should have considering the fact that PG has run much longer than AE and the brand extension has helped in creating more main eventers. Still, a lot of guys on that list did not get their big push until after 2010 so you could apply the same 6 guys in the ME arguement for the PG era as well before 2010. Also numerical superiority does not mean that these guys were actually better than the talent AE produced and that is pretty much the case.

 

[JGlass]

No one can pinpoint an exact start date, sorry to say. Things were much more edgy in 1997 than you're giving credit for. If WWF didn't have the Attitude label while Bret was around (I honestly can't remember), it should have.

But generally speaking it kicked off when Austin was crowned champion at WrestleMania 14. Without setting a fairly agreed upon date, one can just keep on going back in time and pinpointing certain things that influenced the Attitude Era. Some will say it was Austin 3:16, some will say it was Bret vs. Austin, some will say it was the Montreal Screwjob, some will say it was when Dx formed, some will say it was when the Canada vs. USA storyline began. Some people will probably try to link it to Paul Roma (since his name has already been used today). The official length of the Attitude Era is from WrestleMania 14 to WrestleMania 17. It's what I've always used to describe the era, and what I'll continue to use.

HBK main evented WM14, in 1998, and was the founder of DX. He was present for the start of the Attitude movement, no question about it.

That he was... then he didn't wrestling a single match for the rest of it. Oops.

They main evented PPV's, and were on their way to main eventing many, many more.

How many PPVs did Jericho main event? One? Two? In that case, Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler get added to my list, Vladamir Kozlov too. It doesn't matter if they were "on their way to main eventing many, many more," we're talking about main eventers DURING the Attitude Era.

Of course they have more main eventers now, they have two rosters. The roster split took place long before PG started, hence the need to elevate more superstars.

So? Where's the problem? Two brands=more main event talent=more awesomeness. It doesn't matter why they have more main eventers, just that they do.

 

[The Bearded One]

I love how threads almost always get wildly offtrack.

 

[enterkey]

I love how threads almost always get wildly offtrack.

I know, who brings up wrestling in The Bar Room? Honestly

 

[JGlass]

Benoit used to main event the weekly shows on a pretty regular basis and so did Jericho. Booker came in towards the *** end of the AE but did a good job. And in any case, you had asked for talent. What is wrong with being a good midcard talent? Nothing, especially if the midcard scene rocks too.

Nothing wrong with being a midcard talent, they just aren't as exciting as main event talent. People buy the PPVs for the main eventers, not the midcarders.

WOW, did not expect to see so many names here but perhaps I should have considering the fact that PG has run much longer than AE and the brand extension has helped in creating more main eventers.

Eh, if you say the PG Era is from 08-current then it's the same length as the Attitude Era as I defined it (98-01).

Still, a lot of guys on that list did not get their big push until after 2010 so you could apply the same 6 guys in the ME arguement for the PG era as well before 2010. Also numerical superiority does not mean that these guys were actually better than the talent AE produced and that is pretty much the case.

I disagree with both things, though I'm not exactly sure what you meant by the first half of it. The PG Era stared in 08 (to the best of my knowledge), and I usually pinpoint it beginning with Cena's surprise return to the Rumble, though I'm not sure that's techincally correct.

And while you are right in saying that Quantity≠Quality, I would argue that the PG Era has provided stars that were just as exciting as the Attitude Era, and I'd also say that quantity can sometimes be better than quality. John Cena is going to wind up being a top 10 wrestler of all time, if not top 5. Randy Orton seems to evolve into a better wrestler every month. Edge proved that he could keep a crowd on their feet whether he was a face or a heel. Rey Mysterio can't put on a bad match, he just can't. CM Punk is exactly what he says he is, the voice of a new generation/voiceless. Now sure, the Attitude Era produced three of the best ever in Austin, Rocky, and Trips (maybe four if you want to count Angle, which I kind of do), but the PG Era isn't far behind.

Additionally, having quantity might be a better asset than quality. We're always hearing about how people's attention spans have grown shorter and shorter, and that we're always demanding the next best thing. In the Attitude Era you had the same 5 guys feuding for the title. In the PG era you have dozens of guys in and out of the title picture, providing a nearly endless number of combinations for potential feuds.

Think of it this way: You're a single man, partying every weekend. Would you rather sleep with the same 10 every weekend, or would you rather sleep with a different 9 every weekend? There's no right answer, but I know which one I'd lean towards.

 

[The Bearded One]

I know, who brings up wrestling in The Bar Room? Honestly

Exactly. The Bar Room should be for one thing and one thing only. Enterkey posting amazing tit pics. Actually, that should be the entire forum.

 

[enterkey]

Exactly. The Bar Room should be for one thing and one thing only. Enterkey posting amazing tit pics. Actually, that should be the entire forum.

 

[enterkey]

I know, who brings up wrestling in The Bar Room? Honestly

This is the only wrestling we need!

 

[Final Form Snyper.]

I love that these threads always get spiteful. That's why they are posted. It is because of the "LULZ" occurring during the havoc.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Nothing wrong with being a midcard talent, they just aren't as exciting as main event talent. People buy the PPVs for the main eventers, not the midcarders.

And somehow, despite the PG era having more main eventers the domestic buyrates for PPV's and the TV ratings are much lesser in the PG era as compared to the Attitude Era. That should indicate something about the quality of the product.

Eh, if you say the PG Era is from 08-current then it's the same length as the Attitude Era as I defined it (98-01).

I disagree with both things, though I'm not exactly sure what you meant by the first half of it. The PG Era stared in 08 (to the best of my knowledge), and I usually pinpoint it beginning with Cena's surprise return to the Rumble, though I'm not sure that's techincally correct.

Actually, a lot of people associate the PG era with the time during which Cena gave up his rapper gimmick and turned into the All American babyface as we know him to be today. That is when his gimmick got toned down and he started getting all the hate. I know that WWE went PG in 2008 but the foundations for it had started being laid long before that. That would be around 2006and from that time till 2010 is what I am reffering to as the first half of the PG era. That would give it four years and during this time you did have the same five six guys in the main event till the youth push started in 2010.

And while you are right in saying that Quantity≠Quality, I would argue that the PG Era has provided stars that were just as exciting as the Attitude Era, and I'd also say that quantity can sometimes be better than quality. John Cena is going to wind up being a top 10 wrestler of all time, if not top 5. Randy Orton seems to evolve into a better wrestler every month. Edge proved that he could keep a crowd on their feet whether he was a face or a heel. Rey Mysterio can't put on a bad match, he just can't. CM Punk is exactly what he says he is, the voice of a new generation/voiceless. Now sure, the Attitude Era produced three of the best ever in Austin, Rocky, and Trips (maybe four if you want to count Angle, which I kind of do), but the PG Era isn't far behind.

Cena could be as good as you are saying he is but I am undecided about the rest. Orton wrestled a number of years, won number of titles and got a number of pushes before striking it big. As such he has failed more times than he has succeeded. Mysterio is a great wrestler but over the years he has largely been a perrenial upper midcarder who gets pushed to the main event when there is no one else. Edge flopped as a face when he returned in 2010 and his second run wasn't too hot either. Punk may make it big but at this point, it is too early to say.

Additionally, having quantity might be a better asset than quality. We're always hearing about how people's attention spans have grown shorter and shorter, and that we're always demanding the next best thing. In the Attitude Era you had the same 5 guys feuding for the title. In the PG era you have dozens of guys in and out of the title picture, providing a nearly endless number of combinations for potential feuds.

I get your point but the fact is that the fans did not lose interest in the Attitude Era despite the same 6 guys main eventing again and again. In fact, if anything, your arguement implies that the talent of the AE was better than the talent of the PG era as people are bound to lose interest sooner or later if the same six guys main event over and over again. But that, as I said earlier did not happen.

Think of it this way: You're a single man, partying every weekend. Would you rather sleep with the same 10 every weekend, or would you rather sleep with a different 9 every weekend? There's no right answer, but I know which one I'd lean towards

Depends on their individual qualities, like in the case of most other things.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

Exactly. The Bar Room should be for one thing and one thing only. Enterkey posting amazing tit pics. Actually, that should be the entire forum.

I 100% support that thought Beardy, in fact I think enterkey should have his own tit thread

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

Enterkey did have his own tit thread. I mean it was named after someone else, but so what. We all knew whose thread it really was.

 

[Johnny Scumm]

True. He still posts in it every now & then.

#WeWantTits.

 

[latino World order]

I have no opinions on anyone

 

[JGlass]

And somehow, despite the PG era having more main eventers the domestic buyrates for PPV's and the TV ratings are much lesser in the PG era as compared to the Attitude Era. That should indicate something about the quality of the product.

It has more to do with how we've evolved as a consumer society than the quality of the product. It's actually quite remarkable that the WWE has managed to be as big a force as they have been given the pretty dramatic differences in the world of television between the late 90s and today.

Actually, a lot of people associate the PG era with the time during which Cena gave up his rapper gimmick and turned into the All American babyface as we know him to be today. That is when his gimmick got toned down and he started getting all the hate. I know that WWE went PG in 2008 but the foundations for it had started being laid long before that. That would be around 2006and from that time till 2010 is what I am reffering to as the first half of the PG era. That would give it four years and during this time you did have the same five six guys in the main event till the youth push started in 2010.

Not this origins shit again. You could trace the origins of it back to Hulk Hogan or Ed Lewis for all I care, an era has to kick off with a measurable event, such as Cena's surprise return to WWE and winning the Royal Rumble.

Even if I did play by your cockamamie rules, between 06 and 2010 you had Jericho, HBK, Triple H, Cena, Edge, Orton, Hardy, Batista, Taker... you get the picture? A lot more than the same "five or six guys."

Cena could be as good as you are saying he is but I am undecided about the rest. Orton wrestled a number of years, won number of titles and got a number of pushes before striking it big.

It's not like anybody who was successful in the Attitude Era failed MISERABLY before he found his stride. I'm talking about The Rock

Mysterio is a great wrestler but over the years he has largely been a perrenial upper midcarder who gets pushed to the main event when there is no one else.

Yet he was a credible main eventer that had main event feuds and won world titles.

Edge flopped as a face when he returned in 2010 and his second run wasn't too hot either.

Are you kidding? His first face run in 2010 was lackluster, but to say it flopped is laughable. People still cheered for him, the WWE just couldn't properly utilize him. His second face run, however, was nothing short of brilliant, and it was probably the most I had ever enjoyed Edge in my WWE watching career.

Punk may make it big but at this point, it is too early to say.

Main eventer? Check
World title holder/competitor? Check
Entertaining enough to merit being in the main event? Checkarooni.

I get your point but the fact is that the fans did not lose interest in the Attitude Era despite the same 6 guys main eventing again and again. In fact, if anything, your arguement implies that the talent of the AE was better than the talent of the PG era as people are bound to lose interest sooner or later if the same six guys main event over and over again. But that, as I said earlier did not happen.

I don't see why my argument implies that the 15 main eventers of the PG Era have any more talent than the 6 of the Attitude Era. I don't follow the logic of your argument here.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Sorry for going off topic again ladies and gentlemen.

Actually, no, I'm not. It's the Bar Room. Fuck off.

But generally speaking it kicked off when Austin was crowned champion at WrestleMania 14.

No, technically, according to some official paperwork, it kicked off at WrestleMania 14. Anyone who watched during this period understands it (the shifting of content) started in late 1996/early 1997 with Bret Hart and Steve Austin.

Without setting a fairly agreed upon date, one can just keep on going back in time and pinpointing certain things that influenced the Attitude Era. Some will say it was Austin 3:16, some will say it was Bret vs. Austin, some will say it was the Montreal Screwjob, some will say it was when Dx formed, some will say it was when the Canada vs. USA storyline began.

All of those things count, yes.

Some people will probably try to link it to Paul Roma (since his name has already been used today).

Don't be an ass.

The official length of the Attitude Era is from WrestleMania 14 to WrestleMania 17. It's what I've always used to describe the era, and what I'll continue to use.

So people should ignore what happened for more than a year prior to WM 14 because someone who chooses a date tells them to? That doesn't work for me, sorry.

That he was... then he didn't wrestling a single match for the rest of it. Oops.

Who gives a shit? He took part for well over a year. Again, we're arguing over dates.

How many PPVs did Jericho main event? One? Two? In that case, Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler get added to my list, Vladamir Kozlov too. It doesn't matter if they were "on their way to main eventing many, many more," we're talking about main eventers DURING the Attitude Era

Add them, I don't give a shit. I have clearly stated this era has more main eventers. Too bad not one guy you just mentioned would have made it past Sunday Night Heat in 1998.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Not this origins shit again. You could trace the origins of it back to Hulk Hogan or Ed Lewis for all I care, an era has to kick off with a measurable event, such as Cena's surprise return to WWE and winning the Royal Rumble.

*Sigh*

I tend to believe that eras are defined by biggest superstars of that era which in this case happens to be Cena. Now ideally, the era should have coincided with Cena's first title win but in this case we can't do that because Cena won his first title as a completely different character. That is why I have chosen to define the era from the time he started to represent the characteristics that have made him famous( or infamous) today.

And who says that you there isn't a measurable event in 2006 to start off that era. You can have the WM 22 match with HHH at Chicago with Cena, the guy that should have been the babyface getting heckled. Or you can go to ONS 2006 and his match against RVD where something similar happened. The point is the PG era started way before 2008 because even though WWE went PG in 2008 the salient characteristics of that era were prevalant much before 2008. Therefore the PG era has been much longer than the Attitude Era and therefore a direct numerical comparison cannot be made.

Even if I did play by your cockamamie rules, between 06 and 2010 you had Jericho, HBK, Triple H, Cena, Edge, Orton, Hardy, Batista, Taker... you get the picture? A lot more than the same "five or six guys."

That's eight. You have 8 guys in four years and the AE had 6 guys in three years. What's this large number of Main eventers in the PG era( the larger part of it anyway) as compared to the Attitude era that you are talking about?

It's not like anybody who was successful in the Attitude Era failed MISERABLY before he found his stride. I'm talking about The Rock

Orton failed more and was in the wilderness for a longer time. Three years to be exact. He failed as a main event face against HHH and again as the heel of Smackdown in 2006. He was pushed hard first in 2004 and yet until 2007 he was a guy who competed for the IC title quite often against the likes of Carlito. Also Rock's push was at a much lower level.

Yet he was a credible main eventer that had main event feuds and won world titles.

Credible? Sure. Permanent? Nope. That suggests to me that he is entertaining in spurts.

Are you kidding? His first face run in 2010 was lackluster, but to say it flopped is laughable. People still cheered for him, the WWE just couldn't properly utilize him. His second face run, however, was nothing short of brilliant, and it was probably the most I had ever enjoyed Edge in my WWE watching career.

The fact that Edge had to be turned heel after just one feud is proof that his run did not succeed. As for being cheered, sure he got cheered but the reaction was much quieter for his matches as compared to some of the other matches on the card.

His second face run featured him in a feud with Kane that featured some of the most illogical storylines that have been seen in recent times. Honestly, what else have you got? A feud with Alberto that was as cookie cutter as it can get. People probably have rated his last run more highly because of the fact that he retired during it.

Main eventer? Check
World title holder/competitor? Check
Entertaining enough to merit being in the main event? Checkarooni.

Great draw? Remains to be seen. Can't believe I wrote that?

I don't see why my argument implies that the 15 main eventers of the PG Era have any more talent than the 6 of the Attitude Era. I don't follow the logic of your argument here.

It seems I misunderstood this part of your arguement.

 

[Johnny Scumm]

This Thread went off track.