Jump to content


Open Club  ·  37 members  ·  Free

Wrestling

Are we too critical?


Guest MillionLiraMan

Recommended Posts

Guest MillionLiraMan

A lot of criticism is made, more so at the moment than in previous years, of the way in which the WWE is being run. Apparently the wrong people keep getting pushed, other talented workers are being held down by backstage politics, hardly a day goes by when we don't have some comment or other about the likes of Triple H and Undertaker, or whoever, doing something to 'keep their spot'. But I have to ask, is this really something about which we should be complaining? I'll explain myself a bit more clearly.

 

Let's look from the point of view of wrestling being a sport, first of all. Can we talk about it like any other sport? What I mean is, if Celtic and Rangers win matches in the SPL every week, are we to complain that they should be 'putting over' the likes of Dundee United and Kilmarnock? Are we to praise England's cricket team because they don't have a problem with 'jobbing' to Australia and Pakistan? Do we lambast Stephen Hendry or Phil Taylor for making talents like Jimmy White and Rod Harrington 'look weak' and for refusing to drop their titles? We don't, so how can we say the same thing about Triple H not losing to Booker T at WrestleMania, or Hulk Hogan being a near constant WWF champion for nearly ten years?

 

Then we can look at it from the point of view of it being something choreographed, like films or theatre. If we don't like the production, don't we just simply choose not to watch it? If you liked Rocky 1 but sat through Rocky 2, 3 and 4 and thought they were crap (you couldn't but I just wanted to use that as an example!), then why would you go to see Rocky 5 if you pretty much know that you won't like what you would see?

 

The other point of view is a business one. Why should Vince McMahon change the way that he runs his business when it is his money and company to risk, and that has nothing to do with us? If we don't like it, surely it's not our place to try to tell him what to do if he doesn't agree with us? If thousands of us wrote to Slipknot telling them to change their style of music to Jazz or Bossa Nova just because we prefer it, what chance would there be of them taking that advice? None. Vince McMahon also has that right.

 

I'm not saying that I'm blameless in terms of criticising 'spot hoggers' at all, but in playing Devil's advocate for the sake of this thread, it does raise some interesting points for discussion about what role fans should play with the WWE and what rights we actually have. I'll be interested to hear your responses.

Edited by MillionLiraMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the dat the WWE is a business and Vince Mcmahon gives the championship to the guys he think can carry the ball and make the best business. and face it the likes of Hogan, Triple H, and Taker make money. I do think that bigger pushes should be made to young superstars like the Hurricane so there will be a WWE after the legends hang up their tights.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest SiMania
The main reason I don't post on here that often anyomore is becuase of the constant negativity, usually towards HHH based on Internet rumours etc, I prefer a bit more positivity as I do enjoy the WWE product and don't wish HHH was dead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Rikidozan
Hogan, HHH and Undertaker make money?....erm, complete pish. The reason people are so critical of WWE is because they've made just about every mistake possible during the last two years, and the most annoying part of it is that all the mistakes are WCW made for feck sake. In other words, they could have been avoided. Tis simple.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cactus Jack
Originally posted by SiMania

The main reason I don't post on here that often anyomore is becuase of the constant negativity, usually towards HHH based on Internet rumours etc, I prefer a bit more positivity as I do enjoy the WWE product and don't wish HHH was dead

 

Totally agree with you there Si

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too critical? No.

 

You just can't expect to perform any art form/sport in front of a worldwide audience and not expect criticism, especially when you consider that a large proportion of the wrestling audience is made up of kids, the least patient and tollerant things on Earth.

 

Everything is criticised online. That's the principle of the internet, it allows shmucks like us, with no credentials, to voice our opinions. Will you agree with everyone's opinions? No.

 

Frankly, I think the criticism is perfectly justified. Vince is putting out a shoddy product, and I'd say the people who keep him in business are entitled to moan.

 

If WWE was putting out hours of decent wrestling action each week, without guys past their prime or "divas" attempting to wrestling, and people were still complaining, then I would agree with you. But with the poor quality of recent shows, I think it's right that people are criticising WWE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Crippler

The Internet on a whole is critical of everything. It is full of negative people. I do think the WWE is over criticised, sure it isn't perfect but it never has been. It's an easy thing to say but really if you think the WWE is so bad, just go and watch another promotion.

 

I do think there are a few problems in the WWE but not as many as these people who pride themselves on being Internet smarts make out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Craig Van Dam
Well you can't deny that over the past 18 months or so WWE has been complete crap but I do agree that we are too critical and for once we should look past the negative thing and look at the good things about WWE(there isn't much buy they still is some decent wrestling on Smackdown)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we're too critical.

 

From my point of view I live in the UK, so the only regular wrestling action I realistically have the opportunity to regularly see is WWE. I've been watching for 11 years, and I've never seen anything worse than whats going on today.

 

HHH is obviously seen as "the man" by the booking team and nothing could be further from the truth, he's a physical wreck, his in ring work is shoddy at best and his mic skills, which were always his saving grace, are incredibly stale and boring. Personally I feel he doesn't even warrant a regular spot on Raw, let alone be seen as the guy who will turn it around. By the way how long are they gonna keep the belt on him before thay realise no ones interested in him?

 

Aside from HHH, I think RVD has lost it lately, probably due to lack of motivation, this guy was the most interesting thing on WWE TV for some time and it got him nowhere. The Undercard is also bad, The Dudley Boys being the perfect example of talent that needs to go elsewhere for theirs and WWE's sake.

 

And I haven't even got started on the old timer's returns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dickie Hyde

I disagree. Nothing is bad in the WWE, it's just the way it goes. Fans should just enjoy it. Everyone seems to comment on the "bad stuff" so ot speak but no one ever comments on good things that happen. In my opinion, Triple H is a great wrestler and he's been around a long time, and done most things. Yes, he can be classed as "the man" or atleast one of them. His mic skills may seem boring but that's good, you have to have wrestlers which don't appeal to you aswell, otherwise it'd be hard to pick a winner. Personally, I like Triple H's mic skills and his in ring ability. He has the best entrance music, one of the best themes (the game), he's an ex member of DX, the world heavyweight champion and enjoys his job. (I hope)

 

Personally, I'd like to see Stone Cold Steve Austin join Ric Flair and Triple H and accompany HHH to the ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we are too critical, ok maybe sometimes on Triple H. But you can only be too critical when you're expecting things that won't ever happen, like we are too critical of Tim Henman, sure he's a good player, but he'll never win Wimbledon, yet we always say when he doesn't "oh he's fluffed it again, what an idiot".

 

With WWE we've seen the heady heights and days of 97-2000, we've seen the great matches, the great feuds, we know just from experience and foresight, what we want to see, and as fans who buy the product, who we want to see, thus are we being too critical of course not?

 

After seeing Chris Benoit buried on many ocassions, Trips beating everyone easily, and people not jobbing, we all know how those things can be changed for the better, through historu and examples, thus we can criticise, because we've seen it done better. Admittedly if it was done just a few times, ok maybe overly critical, but when it's done constantly, I think we have every right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...