They don't really develop anyone anymore. They may give someone a push and then completely bury them later for months at a time. We could have multiple top level guys right now but WWE now pretty much sticks to the same old formula.
What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
They don't really develop anyone anymore. They may give someone a push and then completely bury them later for months at a time. We could have multiple top level guys right now but WWE now pretty much sticks to the same old formula.http://www.youtube.com/user/TymesRhymes <--- Check it Out. -
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
I disagree completely. Punk and Sheamus are both relatively new guys that have gotten huge pushes and long title reigns in the past month. I know Punk isn't a 'new' champ but this is definitely the biggest push of his career by far. Not to mention Bryan and ADR (love him or hate him) who have also gotten pushed, and Ziggler being on the cusp of a big push.Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
He said develop,not push.
"and then completely bury them later for months at a time."
That's the key line there.
EX: ADR has had 12 world title matches (maybe 13 or 14 now) and only won once. He's no longer a believeable contender and gets no reaction at all.
For further information see: Jack Swagger.Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
Start at the top Vince needs to retire he doesn't have a freaking clue whats good and whats not. I don't have any faith in Stephine because she is just like Vince. Create stories for adults stop insulting our intelligence every week with this booking for people under 10! Cut down to 3 titles. World Title IC Title and Tag Team Title. Mold the baby faces and heels more. Not every heel needs to be a chick**** guy who runs away. Give me some badass characters to enjoy.Comment
-
The majority of WWE fans are children , you demanding stories for adults indicates your a little to old to be watching wrestling , if you knew anything about marketing its all about the young people , they outnumber the older no life sit at home people like you therefore they are going to please the majority of their fan base .
Whoa...Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
He said develop,not push.
"and then completely bury them later for months at a time."
That's the key line there.
EX: ADR has had 12 world title matches (maybe 13 or 14 now) and only won once. He's no longer a believeable contender and gets no reaction at all.
For further information see: Jack Swagger.
Punk has been developed from an upper midcard guy to a legit top babyface and now legit top heel on the roster. Bryan (somewhat accidentally) developed from a guy that was struggling to connect w/ the crowd as a midcard face to a legit top guy as a heel and more over than 90% of the roster.
I still disagree when you say they don't 'develop' guys anymore, just bc they aren't always the guys everyone wants them to develop (Ziggler, Rhodes, in your case Ambrose and Rollins) doesn't mean they aren't developing guys and won't continue to do so in the future. They practically have to now given how many top guys are getting older and retiring.Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
Why nothing will change.
1. Too much television. 3 hour Raws and 2 hour Smackdowns make PPVs not so special. Having gimmick themed PPVs makes said gimmick matches not so special. Most people who really wanna see PPVs either stream them for free or watch it at a bar. Cut down the TV. They don't have enough talent either on screen or behind it to warrant all the hours of programming.
2. Politics. A lot of you don't like Sheamus. Too bad, he's not going anywhere for a while. Why? He's buddies with "Trip O'Laitch". Some people like Drew McIntyre. He was given a huge push, then buried for 2 years because of something his, EX-WIFE DID.
3. They're not just a wrestling company anymore. WWE is a corporation. It's goal is to be an entertainment conglomerate. That's why they have a movie division. Vince has to answer to stockholders. So they can't take risks like they used to. Turning Cena heel might raise the ratings and PPV buyrates some. But would it be enough to make up for the loss in merchandise sales? Probably not.The New England Patriots cheated to win four Super Bowls.Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
You mean the guy with lackluster mic skills and little to no charisma? Yeah it's hard for me to see why he flopped when they gave him a push...
Punk has been developed from an upper midcard guy to a legit top babyface and now legit top heel on the roster. Bryan (somewhat accidentally) developed from a guy that was struggling to connect w/ the crowd as a midcard face to a legit top guy as a heel and more over than 90% of the roster.
I still disagree when you say they don't 'develop' guys anymore, just bc they aren't always the guys everyone wants them to develop (Ziggler, Rhodes, in your case Ambrose and Rollins) doesn't mean they aren't developing guys and won't continue to do so in the future. They practically have to now given how many top guys are getting older and retiring.
Been over the rest 32950 times so not going to bother other than to say the last line is correct.Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
One thing I noticed and I dont know the answer since ive been away from it for a few years and it seems like it fits here. I've been playing WWE '11 smackdown vs raw video game and I know the roster is 2-3 years old at this point. But it seems like half the roster on the game is no longer in the WWE. Any reason why?Retro Redemption - Starting over with a oldschool PowerBone Offense
My Youtube
Twitter
PS5 ID = BubbasCruiseComment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
^^^
There's always been a lot of turnover with the roster in WWE, especially at the bottom of the card. Those guys have always had a tendency to either be released or ask for their release fairly quickly. In the last few years though, a lot of the top guys have also left the business for various reasons.Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
Being a child in the 90s, you weren't cool unless you watched WWF(WWE). It was the best thing to watch and never got boring.
Now being older, I rarely watch it but a few times a year. It's so predictable. I'd go months without watching it and it'd still be the same storylines, champions, matches, etc. Its just do predictable now a days. There's no more decent matches to watch unless you buy paper-views. There's no more blood, no title matches on Raw/Smackdown, no nothing but boring "drama". Tag Team is basically dead. Divas used to be actual wrestlers, now it's just models in bikinis pulling hair and slapping.
I think if I would watch WWE again, they'd have to bring back what made it famous. Theres no more high flying, hardcore, brutal, fun to watch matches. It's like Roger Goodell took over WWE.Comment
-
--
Have you ever wanted to coach or play basketball at the next level, but something prevented you from achieving that dream? Fret no more. Ask me about SimWorld Hoops to see how you can create your virtual self, and follow your path from the prep-level to the pros.
#SeeTheGameBeTheGameComment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
COMPETETION !!
Also, the creative staff is lacking... They mess up way to much to overlook the good stuff they do ...Comment
-
Re: What does WWE need to do to be dominant again?
well apparently from all the things I read on here, the answer is to just debut dean ambrose lol. I dont know much about that guy (other than seeing him when I went to a RAW Live Tour event), but I don't want to be spoiled so I refuse to watch anything of his until I see him on RAW.
Honestly though reading through this thread was pretty cool; imagining some of these things happening was great.Last edited by UMhester04; 11-04-2012, 09:15 PM.Comment
Comment