He doesn't have to be around the title forever, it just makes sense for him to be now given how Wrestlemania ended. I don't really agree with the criticism of Rusev either - I think he's an awesome promo! I've also heard that he plays up his accent for TV and actually has a bit of a southern states twang in his real voice, which is pretty weird to think about.
[/QUOTE]
Rusev with a Southern twang - goodness that really is a thought :-D
To be clear I like Rusev and certainly think he is OK on the mic but I don't think he's outstanding and just think Heyman would outclass him a little and so would have to do his usual hype a lot.
Maybe I'm being harsh though based a little on the promo and exchange on Raw on Monday with Owens - the 'you have two first names' thing was both an awful line and poorly delivered and I'm probably slightly harsh as a result.
To be clear I like Rusev and certainly think he is OK on the mic but I don't think he's outstanding and just think Heyman would outclass him a little and so would have to do his usual hype a lot.
I think you're being a little unfair on Heyman as well who's more than capable of modulating and changing his performance when needed. We all thought Reigns would end up looking like absolute shit opposite Heyman but Heyman went out of his way to build Reigns up as well (presumably because he at least recognises that that makes the whole situation more compelling for the audience). That kind of treatment is something a lot of the roster could use.
The Cena match was great, but it had the wrong result and a few crap segments because they hadn't brought back Paul to do the talking. The Punk feud and match was absolutely brilliant. All the stuff that sucked was on HHH. I agree that he's a terrible babyface.
Don't forget the Big Show feud.
And the build to the Taker match - and the match itself.
Basically bar the Punk stuff (which us why I memtioned there were exceptions) not much was a home run. That changed post WM30.
To be honest I think what you meant to say on HHH is that you find him terrible face or heel lol.
On the subject of Triple H I find it strange that for a guy who has had so much success (and such sustained success) he's almost completely incapable of connecting with the audience in kind of real human emotional level. That's why his face runs have always been so awful. He's like the guy who can hear a joke understand the various parts of it and why its funny but is somehow completely incapable of reconstructing it and telling it himself.
I think you're being a little unfair on Heyman as well who's more than capable of modulating and changing his performance when needed. We all thought Reigns would end up looking like absolute shit opposite Heyman but Heyman went out of his way to build Reigns up as well (presumably because he at least recognises that that makes the whole situation more compelling for the audience). That kind of treatment is something a lot of the roster could use.
I'm being nice actually to Heyman - probably wasn't clear enough. What I meant is that he'd have to do more of the work - like he did in the Reigns feud - putting over the opponent while also saying Lesnar will destroy them. Heyman is no doubt more than capable of that.
Not that I'm saying Rusev is terrible or anything (again I stress I like Rusev) - just that I think Heyman might have to do more of the work than he does for some other feuds which is a slight drawback.
And to give Heyman his due - he was brilliant during the contract signing on Raw. Hopefully WWE can give him better material than the '11th Commandment'.
To be clear I like Rusev and certainly think he is OK on the mic but I don't think he's outstanding and just think Heyman would outclass him a little and so would have to do his usual hype a lot.
Maybe I'm being harsh though based a little on the promo and exchange on Raw on Monday with Owens - the 'you have two first names' thing was both an awful line and poorly delivered and I'm probably slightly harsh as a result.
I think him shouting all those completely random insults are hilarious!
Don't forget the Big Show feud.
And the build to the Taker match - and the match itself.
Basically bar the Punk stuff (which us why I memtioned there were exceptions) not much was a home run. That changed post WM30.
To be honest I think what you meant to say on HHH is that you find him terrible face or heel lol.
On the subject of Triple H I find it strange that for a guy who has had so much success (and such sustained success) he's almost completely incapable of connecting with the audience in kind of real human emotional level. That's why his face runs have always been so awful. He's like the guy who can hear a joke understand the various parts of it and why its funny but is somehow completely incapable of reconstructing it and telling it himself.
I think part of it stems from the fact that HHH has had the most inorganic pushes of all time and is elevated in WWE mythology to a level that no one truly believes he's at. His attempts to be funny are excruciating in particular and he's worked so many overwrought and dull main events that I'm not really sure that anyone finds him overly exciting or entertaining. It took him way too long to realise that he should embrace the online perception of him instead of trying to be this much adored legend.
And I'm trying to book around what WWE look likely to do. Give me some credit. I'm trying my best lol
That's a good enough reason haha.
I understand. It's legitimately a tough position to fit The Undertaker on the show with a valid reason. I think the best thing would probably be for him to come out for a promo (again, hard to think of why) and then get attacked by Sheamus. Those two then have a match at SummerSlam, with Sting coming out after the match and then challenging Taker at WM.
No one else cares about Kane either. I'm not exactly salivating about the prospect of Kane having to have a main event run after this injury angle.
I care about Kane. Might be the only one. I'm hoping he gets his mask back, becomes The Big Red Machine again and then helps to legitimise the IC title. It's a long shot, but I'm a dreamer.
I think him shouting all those completely random insults are hilarious!
Essentially.
No one else cares about Kane either. I'm not exactly salivating about the prospect of Kane having to have a main event run after this injury angle.
I think part of it stems from the fact that HHH has had the most inorganic pushes of all time and is elevated in WWE mythology to a level that no one truly believes he's at. His attempts to be funny are excruciating in particular and he's worked so many overwrought and dull main events that I'm not really sure that anyone finds him overly exciting or entertaining. It took him way too long to realise that he should embrace the online perception of him instead of trying to be this much adored legend.
I'm not sure it was meant to be hilarious though lol.
Don't worry I'm sure nobody else would have guessed you meant that :-D
I know you're not his biggest fan but do think Haitch can definetely produce good matches when he cuts out the 'trying to make an iconic moment' way he can do matches. And as a heel he is just a fantastic troll of the crowds.
Can't disagree with some of what you've said though - and can't stress how much I hated his face runs.
On the subject of Triple H I find it strange that for a guy who has had so much success (and such sustained success) he's almost completely incapable of connecting with the audience in kind of real human emotional level. That's why his face runs have always been so awful. He's like the guy who can hear a joke understand the various parts of it and why its funny but is somehow completely incapable of reconstructing it and telling it himself.
I really hope at some point this becomes his gimmick.
I've seen this argument put forward before and I can totally see it, but I would be interested in it being laid out fully.
I think because the Attitude Era became the benchmark for what 'wrestling' should be despite actually going against what 'wrestling' had been for decades. For WWE itself, I think it took Vince McMahon far out of his comfort zone (and where he actually wanted to be) which was family friendly, PG style programming that could reach everybody from the 5 year olds to the 75, man or woman. Instead, WWE was successful with a very slim demographic.
For the industry, the Attitude Era WWE (and ECW in fairness) was a bastardised, strange mix and was successful enough that traditional family friendly wrestling wasn't popular anymore on the scale it once was and when the Attitude Era bubble popped, WWE was the industry and the smaller companies didn't really stand much of a chance being a post Attitude Era company trying to do what WWE had done and they had even less hope of being able to revert back to traditional, family friendly 'wrestling'.
There are still traditional wrestling companies, and they must do some business, but the wrestling industry in part because of the Attitude Era will never reach the level it was in terms of a number of companies. IMO obviously.
I think because the Attitude Era became the benchmark for what 'wrestling' should be despite actually going against what 'wrestling' had been for decades. For WWE itself, I think it took Vince McMahon far out of his comfort zone (and where he actually wanted to be) which was family friendly, PG style programming that could reach everybody from the 5 year olds to the 75, man or woman. Instead, WWE was successful with a very slim demographic.
For the industry, the Attitude Era WWE (and ECW in fairness) was a bastardised, strange mix and was successful enough that traditional family friendly wrestling wasn't popular anymore on the scale it once was and when the Attitude Era bubble popped, WWE was the industry and the smaller companies didn't really stand much of a chance being a post Attitude Era company trying to do what WWE had done and they had even less hope of being able to revert back to traditional, family friendly 'wrestling'.
There are still traditional wrestling companies, and they must do some business, but the wrestling industry in part because of the Attitude Era will never reach the level it was in terms of a number of companies. IMO obviously.
I'm not really disagreeing, but by mid 1997 the wrestling landscape was down to three promotions anyway after USWA couldn't draw more than 300 fans. I'd even argue a broken down 2015 version of TNA is more known to the masses than ECW was prior to 1999. Increasingly absurd booking would have exposed wrestling like never before and likely turned away a lot of customers over the age of 12 prior to Vince going all out. Robocop, Chamber of Horrors, Papa Shango, Shockmaster, The Undertaker's antics, Dungeon of Doom etc. The one dimensional gimmicks and jobbers matches were looking archaic, yet those gimmicks left wrestling looking ridiculous..
The thing is, WWE hasn't really moved on from the Attitude Era. Sure they've transitioned into slow burning stories as opposed to the rapid fire of before. Blading has been eliminated, although it seems more people are bust open these days than before! Chair shots to the head have gone. The overall presentation of Raw is still very much the same, the invisible camera remains, there is still the shades of grey with the exception of Cena, of course. The rudimentary heel boss(s), the obvious set up to the big stunt (i.e the Cadillac).
Either way, they could have focused on the family demographic long before 2008. WCW was dead in the water by August of 2000 and true competition was over, yet Vince continued with a similar approach to 1998 onward. On some occasions he went further than anything before WM 17. For example: the Hot Lesbian Action and Katie Vick segments in 2002, Nick 'Eugene' Dinsmore and Kane/Lita in 2004, Muhammad Hassan in 2005, the live sex celebration and God in 2006. Male on female violence and bra & panties were continued. Blood letting was ramped up to the point it seemed Triple H was blading every PPV and chair shots to the head continued.
I wonder if they regret not toning everything down 5 years before they actually did...
I'm not really disagreeing, but by mid 1997 the wrestling landscape was down to three promotions anyway after USWA couldn't draw more than 300 fans. I'd even argue a broken down 2015 version of TNA is more known to the masses than ECW was prior to 1999. Increasingly absurd booking would have exposed wrestling like never before and likely turned away a lot of customers over the age of 12 prior to Vince going all out. Robocop, Chamber of Horrors, Papa Shango, Shockmaster, The Undertaker's antics, Dungeon of Doom etc. The one dimensional gimmicks and jobbers matches were looking archaic, yet those gimmicks left wrestling looking ridiculous..
The thing is, WWE hasn't really moved on from the Attitude Era. Sure they've transitioned into slow burning stories as opposed to the rapid fire of before. Blading has been eliminated, although it seems more people are bust open these days than before! Chair shots to the head have gone. The overall presentation of Raw is still very much the same, the invisible camera remains, there is still the shades of grey with the exception of Cena, of course. The rudimentary heel boss(s), the obvious set up to the big stunt (i.e the Cadillac).
Either way, they could have focused on the family demographic long before 2008. WCW was dead in the water by August of 2000 and true competition was over, yet Vince continued with a similar approach to 1998 onward. On some occasions he went further than anything before WM 17. For example: the Hot Lesbian Action and Katie Vick segments in 2002, Nick 'Eugene' Dinsmore and Kane/Lita in 2004, Muhammad Hassan in 2005, the live sex celebration and God in 2006. Male on female violence and bra & panties were continued. Blood letting was ramped up to the point it seemed Triple H was blading every PPV and chair shots to the head continued.
I wonder if they regret not toning everything down 5 years before they actually did...
That last paragraph shows that WWE had the same fundamental misunderstandings about the Attitude era as many fans do. The ratings and house show numbers were is serious decline around 2003 and they thought doing stupid 'edgy' stuff would pop the ratings. 1998-2001 weren't just popular because they did wacky shit, but because they had characters and stories that people were invested in and two bona fide mega stars the likes of which HHH could only dream of being. Plus, a company can get away with more when it's hot than it can when the product is cold, and by that point the bubble had well and truly burst.
I think that period may have been one of the worst for backstage politics as well, with everything being sacrificed at the alter of the McMahons and HHH wanting to cosplay an NWA heel title run. Woeful.
That last paragraph shows that WWE had the same fundamental misunderstandings about the Attitude era as many fans do. The ratings and house show numbers were is serious decline around 2003 and they thought doing stupid 'edgy' stuff would pop the ratings. 1998-2001 weren't just popular because they did wacky shit, but because they had characters and stories that people were invested in and two bona fide mega stars the likes of which HHH could only dream of being. Plus, a company can get away with more when it's hot than it can when the product is cold, and by that point the bubble had well and truly burst.
I think that period may have been one of the worst for backstage politics as well, with everything being sacrificed at the alter of the McMahons and HHH wanting to cosplay an NWA heel title run. Woeful.
Ironically enough I think it could have all been avoided. They had three mega angles in their arsenal - WCW vs. WWF, ECW re-birth, alliance of ECW/WCW and NWO. Even without Vince getting WCW a time-slot there is enough material there to last 2-3 years. Yet they squandered it in something like 9 months. I know it's been discussed a lot but it's still mind boggling how they screwed it up.
A greater focus on Austin's heel run, Chris Jericho getting a mega face push, DDP and RVD and Booker T given singles babyface pushes (unrelated to anything WCW or ECW), Kurt Angle as a total creep stalker, The Rock and Austin concluding their feud, McMahon family taking some timeout. That bridges the gap until Flair, Hogan and Bischoff are brought in to kick things off.
I just like that literally nobody noticed someone graffiting the entire outside of WWE HQ. :-D
I agree though - wasn't a fan of either reunion. That said the 'I just superkicked Stan' segment is still brilliant. :-D
I thought in 2009 both Shawn and Hunter looked their age. They looked old and that was me taken out of the show.
I believe if you are going to have stars on the show they have to look like stars. It's the same with the Undertaker now and Hulk Hogan, i'd rather not see them because it ends up they look like parodies of themselves. I think many fans do too. We'd rather remember them from their prime. No one wants to see old people still trying to act young and do the things they used to but againt it just shows you that even after all those years, they still went back to DX. Rather than thinking of a new fresh storyline or pushing some new younger talent the answer is always to fall back on what you know. Go back to what you know and because Vince McMahon never understood why the Attitude Era was successful, because he had writers like Vince Russo and Ed Ferrara, both of which went to college and studied it, Ed himself wrote for television, McMahon never understood why the shows worked the way they did. There was a lot more to it than 2 guys goofing around and being rebellious so when you try and recreate it 10 years later, it wont work.
And i don't really know what the purpose of that 2009 reunion was. I guess to give them something to do and do what they know best.
And that's the thing with Vince McMahon. He always goes back to what he knows best which is family friendly wrestling which is 30 years out of date and WWF is what made Triple H who he is, Stephanie has grown up with WWF/WWE and now works with her Dad so that is all she knows. You have people like Michael Hayes and Pat Patterson and until recently Dusty Rhodes and Ricky Steamboat and others who are at the very least.........30 years past their prime, teaching young talent how to wrestle and how to talk and how to work...........the same way they did.........30 years ago. There's not one person on the WWE roster that talks into a microphone and sounds like a real person. Not even Paul Heyman. My client will do this and that and this and that and it's the same thing every week lol. No one talks like that in real life. You need to laugh at it.
And if you go back to those original Raw episodes with DX and watch what they did and how they did it, everything was natural. That's why it worked. You can make any character or story work in wrestling if you know how to approach it. WWE have long forgotten how to do produce good TV. That's what it comes down to.
Every other genre in TV has surpassed themselves and moved forward and made good money. In the past 15 years we have seen so much good drama on TV, some of the best shows in history have been made in the last 15 years. Right away in your minds you know the names of them. TV comedy has reached new heights, the zombie genre has ended up taking over TV and the Walking Dead is now the biggest TV show in the world, real sports still draw big numbers like WWE will find out fairly soon on Monday nights. Even kids shows. Disney, Nickleodeon have had huge success with some of their biggest shows ever. Their 2000's output is far better than anything they did in the 1990's.
The only genre in TV that hasn't changed is wrestling. Still in arenas. Still the same format. Still a big screen on the stage. Fireworks. The pretend hidden camera backstage that picks up on conversations at the right time. The over dramatic way of talking in promos. Still the same faces from 15 years ago. Doing the same stuff, the same faces and names wrestling on weekly TV. Good guys vs bad guys. The genre hasn't moved forward at all. The evil owners that make the matches, the bad guys that run away from the good guys until the PPV. Heck........a PPV every 4 weeks?! In 2015? I think most fans will hit the internet rather than worry about networks and PPVs. Kinda like the itunes thing paying 99p for an mp3 file........yeah. good luck with that lol. A very outdated way of looking at things and assuming the fanbase will keep up with it.
Comments
Rusev with a Southern twang - goodness that really is a thought :-D
To be clear I like Rusev and certainly think he is OK on the mic but I don't think he's outstanding and just think Heyman would outclass him a little and so would have to do his usual hype a lot.
Maybe I'm being harsh though based a little on the promo and exchange on Raw on Monday with Owens - the 'you have two first names' thing was both an awful line and poorly delivered and I'm probably slightly harsh as a result.
Don't forget the Big Show feud.
And the build to the Taker match - and the match itself.
Basically bar the Punk stuff (which us why I memtioned there were exceptions) not much was a home run. That changed post WM30.
To be honest I think what you meant to say on HHH is that you find him terrible face or heel lol.
I'm being nice actually to Heyman - probably wasn't clear enough. What I meant is that he'd have to do more of the work - like he did in the Reigns feud - putting over the opponent while also saying Lesnar will destroy them. Heyman is no doubt more than capable of that.
Not that I'm saying Rusev is terrible or anything (again I stress I like Rusev) - just that I think Heyman might have to do more of the work than he does for some other feuds which is a slight drawback.
And to give Heyman his due - he was brilliant during the contract signing on Raw. Hopefully WWE can give him better material than the '11th Commandment'.
He will if Vince tells him to
And I'm trying to book around what WWE look likely to do. Give me some credit. I'm trying my best lol
I think him shouting all those completely random insults are hilarious!
Essentially.
No one else cares about Kane either. I'm not exactly salivating about the prospect of Kane having to have a main event run after this injury angle.
I think part of it stems from the fact that HHH has had the most inorganic pushes of all time and is elevated in WWE mythology to a level that no one truly believes he's at. His attempts to be funny are excruciating in particular and he's worked so many overwrought and dull main events that I'm not really sure that anyone finds him overly exciting or entertaining. It took him way too long to realise that he should embrace the online perception of him instead of trying to be this much adored legend.
That's a good enough reason haha.
I understand. It's legitimately a tough position to fit The Undertaker on the show with a valid reason. I think the best thing would probably be for him to come out for a promo (again, hard to think of why) and then get attacked by Sheamus. Those two then have a match at SummerSlam, with Sting coming out after the match and then challenging Taker at WM.
They just need to keep Taker away from Lesnar.
I care about Kane. Might be the only one. I'm hoping he gets his mask back, becomes The Big Red Machine again and then helps to legitimise the IC title. It's a long shot, but I'm a dreamer.
I'm not sure it was meant to be hilarious though lol.
Don't worry I'm sure nobody else would have guessed you meant that :-D
I know you're not his biggest fan but do think Haitch can definetely produce good matches when he cuts out the 'trying to make an iconic moment' way he can do matches. And as a heel he is just a fantastic troll of the crowds.
Can't disagree with some of what you've said though - and can't stress how much I hated his face runs.
It's started already. You missed a Bray Wyatt promo.
I wasnt't a fan of the DX reunions in 2006 and 2009.
Oh no, however shall I cope?!
Thanks.
I really hope at some point this becomes his gimmick.
"So there was a dog, right? And it didn't have a nose ... which is sad, obviously. But not my fault .."
* a single cough can be heard from the capacity crowd, which is otherwise silent *
" ... And the dog smelled bad. Really bad. But dogs sometimes do ... I mean ... I mean, I like dogs, but .. "
I think because the Attitude Era became the benchmark for what 'wrestling' should be despite actually going against what 'wrestling' had been for decades. For WWE itself, I think it took Vince McMahon far out of his comfort zone (and where he actually wanted to be) which was family friendly, PG style programming that could reach everybody from the 5 year olds to the 75, man or woman. Instead, WWE was successful with a very slim demographic.
For the industry, the Attitude Era WWE (and ECW in fairness) was a bastardised, strange mix and was successful enough that traditional family friendly wrestling wasn't popular anymore on the scale it once was and when the Attitude Era bubble popped, WWE was the industry and the smaller companies didn't really stand much of a chance being a post Attitude Era company trying to do what WWE had done and they had even less hope of being able to revert back to traditional, family friendly 'wrestling'.
There are still traditional wrestling companies, and they must do some business, but the wrestling industry in part because of the Attitude Era will never reach the level it was in terms of a number of companies. IMO obviously.
I just like that literally nobody noticed someone graffiting the entire outside of WWE HQ. :-D
I agree though - wasn't a fan of either reunion. That said the 'I just superkicked Stan' segment is still brilliant. :-D
I'm not really disagreeing, but by mid 1997 the wrestling landscape was down to three promotions anyway after USWA couldn't draw more than 300 fans. I'd even argue a broken down 2015 version of TNA is more known to the masses than ECW was prior to 1999. Increasingly absurd booking would have exposed wrestling like never before and likely turned away a lot of customers over the age of 12 prior to Vince going all out. Robocop, Chamber of Horrors, Papa Shango, Shockmaster, The Undertaker's antics, Dungeon of Doom etc. The one dimensional gimmicks and jobbers matches were looking archaic, yet those gimmicks left wrestling looking ridiculous..
The thing is, WWE hasn't really moved on from the Attitude Era. Sure they've transitioned into slow burning stories as opposed to the rapid fire of before. Blading has been eliminated, although it seems more people are bust open these days than before! Chair shots to the head have gone. The overall presentation of Raw is still very much the same, the invisible camera remains, there is still the shades of grey with the exception of Cena, of course. The rudimentary heel boss(s), the obvious set up to the big stunt (i.e the Cadillac).
Either way, they could have focused on the family demographic long before 2008. WCW was dead in the water by August of 2000 and true competition was over, yet Vince continued with a similar approach to 1998 onward. On some occasions he went further than anything before WM 17. For example: the Hot Lesbian Action and Katie Vick segments in 2002, Nick 'Eugene' Dinsmore and Kane/Lita in 2004, Muhammad Hassan in 2005, the live sex celebration and God in 2006. Male on female violence and bra & panties were continued. Blood letting was ramped up to the point it seemed Triple H was blading every PPV and chair shots to the head continued.
I wonder if they regret not toning everything down 5 years before they actually did...
That last paragraph shows that WWE had the same fundamental misunderstandings about the Attitude era as many fans do. The ratings and house show numbers were is serious decline around 2003 and they thought doing stupid 'edgy' stuff would pop the ratings. 1998-2001 weren't just popular because they did wacky shit, but because they had characters and stories that people were invested in and two bona fide mega stars the likes of which HHH could only dream of being. Plus, a company can get away with more when it's hot than it can when the product is cold, and by that point the bubble had well and truly burst.
I think that period may have been one of the worst for backstage politics as well, with everything being sacrificed at the alter of the McMahons and HHH wanting to cosplay an NWA heel title run. Woeful.
Ironically enough I think it could have all been avoided. They had three mega angles in their arsenal - WCW vs. WWF, ECW re-birth, alliance of ECW/WCW and NWO. Even without Vince getting WCW a time-slot there is enough material there to last 2-3 years. Yet they squandered it in something like 9 months. I know it's been discussed a lot but it's still mind boggling how they screwed it up.
A greater focus on Austin's heel run, Chris Jericho getting a mega face push, DDP and RVD and Booker T given singles babyface pushes (unrelated to anything WCW or ECW), Kurt Angle as a total creep stalker, The Rock and Austin concluding their feud, McMahon family taking some timeout. That bridges the gap until Flair, Hogan and Bischoff are brought in to kick things off.
I thought in 2009 both Shawn and Hunter looked their age. They looked old and that was me taken out of the show.
I believe if you are going to have stars on the show they have to look like stars. It's the same with the Undertaker now and Hulk Hogan, i'd rather not see them because it ends up they look like parodies of themselves. I think many fans do too. We'd rather remember them from their prime. No one wants to see old people still trying to act young and do the things they used to but againt it just shows you that even after all those years, they still went back to DX. Rather than thinking of a new fresh storyline or pushing some new younger talent the answer is always to fall back on what you know. Go back to what you know and because Vince McMahon never understood why the Attitude Era was successful, because he had writers like Vince Russo and Ed Ferrara, both of which went to college and studied it, Ed himself wrote for television, McMahon never understood why the shows worked the way they did. There was a lot more to it than 2 guys goofing around and being rebellious so when you try and recreate it 10 years later, it wont work.
And i don't really know what the purpose of that 2009 reunion was. I guess to give them something to do and do what they know best.
And that's the thing with Vince McMahon. He always goes back to what he knows best which is family friendly wrestling which is 30 years out of date and WWF is what made Triple H who he is, Stephanie has grown up with WWF/WWE and now works with her Dad so that is all she knows. You have people like Michael Hayes and Pat Patterson and until recently Dusty Rhodes and Ricky Steamboat and others who are at the very least.........30 years past their prime, teaching young talent how to wrestle and how to talk and how to work...........the same way they did.........30 years ago. There's not one person on the WWE roster that talks into a microphone and sounds like a real person. Not even Paul Heyman. My client will do this and that and this and that and it's the same thing every week lol. No one talks like that in real life. You need to laugh at it.
And if you go back to those original Raw episodes with DX and watch what they did and how they did it, everything was natural. That's why it worked. You can make any character or story work in wrestling if you know how to approach it. WWE have long forgotten how to do produce good TV. That's what it comes down to.
Every other genre in TV has surpassed themselves and moved forward and made good money. In the past 15 years we have seen so much good drama on TV, some of the best shows in history have been made in the last 15 years. Right away in your minds you know the names of them. TV comedy has reached new heights, the zombie genre has ended up taking over TV and the Walking Dead is now the biggest TV show in the world, real sports still draw big numbers like WWE will find out fairly soon on Monday nights. Even kids shows. Disney, Nickleodeon have had huge success with some of their biggest shows ever. Their 2000's output is far better than anything they did in the 1990's.
The only genre in TV that hasn't changed is wrestling. Still in arenas. Still the same format. Still a big screen on the stage. Fireworks. The pretend hidden camera backstage that picks up on conversations at the right time. The over dramatic way of talking in promos. Still the same faces from 15 years ago. Doing the same stuff, the same faces and names wrestling on weekly TV. Good guys vs bad guys. The genre hasn't moved forward at all. The evil owners that make the matches, the bad guys that run away from the good guys until the PPV. Heck........a PPV every 4 weeks?! In 2015? I think most fans will hit the internet rather than worry about networks and PPVs. Kinda like the itunes thing paying 99p for an mp3 file........yeah. good luck with that lol. A very outdated way of looking at things and assuming the fanbase will keep up with it.