The NExt boom period maay be upon us.

[Indifferent Clox]

All the new guys are steppin gup in WWE a new era approaches

Tna is getting better and may actually eventually become competiition for WWE. Almost like wcw

And ROH is similiar to ECW in that it's the distant third that many consider best.

[The One]

I'm not going to argue that a new boom period may be upon us, I mean looking across the rosters right now there are SO MANY ways they could take any number of people and a lot of guys could make a big splash is used correctly...

HOWEVER, RoH is in no way like ECW other than it's diehard fans have been brainwashed into thinking what they doing is anything more important than selling out a crowd the size of a high school basketball game. TNA is so fucked up that it simply can't compete with WWE in any way, and before you point out WCW was a mess, remember that WCW had two things working for it, Turner's check book and Bischoff's willingness to do ANYTHING to get a head. TNA doesn't have it. TNA has some INCREDIBLE talent, but no one to oversee everything and no potential for a big time angle to center the promotion around.

If WWE got off their asses and worked with what they have, quit dicking around with the brand split, and focused on quality over quantity, it could give us in my opinion some of the best television ever. Of course for that to happen Vince would need complete freedom, something he doesn't enjoy now that WWE is a publically traded company, he would need to quit relying on old methods which he's proven time and time again he won't or can't do, and they would need am image overhaul.

TOVO Fact: Tovo hates Hybrid cars.

[ron the dial]

lol boom

i don't see a boom like we once saw ever happening again

i can't stomach WWE or TNA and ROH is nowhere near (and doesn't need to be) that level

[Mister Sinister]

Did I here someone say

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/3115/madden6nj.jpg

BOOM!

[LoDownM]

:lol:

[Dave Youell]

I've already said, Boom periods co-inside with Democrats being in the white house, so when Hilary is elected, you can expect another ‘boom’

[What Would Kevin Do?]

I've already said, Boom periods co-inside with Democrats being in the white house, so when Barack is elected, you can expect another ‘boom’

[Funky Fly]

lol boom

i don't see a boom like we once saw ever happening again

i can't stomach WWE or TNA and ROH is nowhere near (and doesn't need to be) that level

What this nigga said.

[Londoner]

lol, don't people say this every year?'The next boom period could be up on us' lol, maks me laugh. Lets face it, the majority of that era have grown up and realised how much it sucks these days, until something dramatically changes, things will nevvveerr, evvveerrr be that way, AGAIN.

[What Would Kevin Do?]

Honestly, things MIGHT change a little when Vince goes. Their in-ring product might improve, since the recent rumor seems to be that HHH and HBK will be in chage of in ring stuff.

The bigger problem though will be that Steph will be in charge of storylines, so it may get much worse....

[The MAC]

This isnt a boom. Its the period where they have exhausted every recycled idea and brought back anyone they thought would make a difference.

Vince really has to come up with something new an innovative now.

[Tommy Gunn]

2008 has alot of potential, more than 2007 had I think.

I just want to see a heel or tweener win the Rumble. Most battle royals this year have resulted in the heel going out under the ropes and coming in at the end to throw out the 'winner'. I hope MVP or Kennedy pull off a sneaky win at the Rumble.

Also, I stopped watching WWE for a few years in 03-06 so I missed John Cena's heel run, so I'd love for him to come back with an edgy character as opposed to gay/toilet humour superman.

[JT]

I've already said, Boom periods co-inside with Democrats being in the white house, so when Hilary is elected, you can expect another ‘boom’

Wasn't a republican in the house during the 80's boom period?

[Kane Knight]

Wasn't a republican in the house during the 80's boom period?

Are you going to let a little something like "facts" and "logic" get in the way of a perfectly good myth?

Anyway, Clox, your threshold for what's good is far different than most posters around here, let alone the average Joe's. I'm betting this response will get your typical "lol I'm so high right now" response, and every time you're high, you think you're insightful, but really, no.

A Boom period is marked by mainstream popularity and commercial success. TNA doesn't start the boom by just being GOOD, they have to actually draw in crowds and make money. They have to get high ratings. They have to be competing with WWE, and right now, they're not. You talk about the distant third that RoH is, and TNA is a distant second. In fact, they're a de facto second place. They're not second because they're competition, merely second because there is no real competition. When you only draw a third of the TV ratings in a non-competitive time slot, you're not competition in any meaningful sense.

So where's the Boom period? What indicates that we may be in another boom period? You enjoy it, and therefore, it's the next Attitude Era? No.
It doesn't work that way. The only promotion making a huge profit right now is WWE, and that's not so much off wrestling, as it is off their video and merch departments. Mostly video, which they've done by stepping up production of videos. That's a stopgap measure, though, not a strong longterm business model. TNA? No. RoH? I won't even dignify that one.

[.44 Magdalene]

SONIC BOOM


http://www.goodcowfilms.com/farm/basement/ga-archive/html_data_files/sf2t_guile.gif


Period.

[RVDmark]

I wouldn't say its upon us, but the potential for one does seem to be getting closer. If X factor can get that many viewers, so can wrestling!

TNA has huge potential which they seem to be flushing away on a daily basis. TNA needs a better arena in my view. There's no point to 2 entrances, its too dark, and everything looks like its made of MDF and plywood.

[Indifferent Clox]

Are you going to let a little something like "facts" and "logic" get in the way of a perfectly good myth?

Anyway, Clox, your threshold for what's good is far different than most posters around here, let alone the average Joe's. I'm betting this response will get your typical "lol I'm so high right now" response, and every time you're high, you think you're insightful, but really, no.

A Boom period is marked by mainstream popularity and commercial success. TNA doesn't start the boom by just being GOOD, they have to actually draw in crowds and make money. They have to get high ratings. They have to be competing with WWE, and right now, they're not. You talk about the distant third that RoH is, and TNA is a distant second. In fact, they're a de facto second place. They're not second because they're competition, merely second because there is no real competition. When you only draw a third of the TV ratings in a non-competitive time slot, you're not competition in any meaningful sense.

So where's the Boom period? What indicates that we may be in another boom period? You enjoy it, and therefore, it's the next Attitude Era? No.
It doesn't work that way. The only promotion making a huge profit right now is WWE, and that's not so much off wrestling, as it is off their video and merch departments. Mostly video, which they've done by stepping up production of videos. That's a stopgap measure, though, not a strong longterm business model. TNA? No. RoH? I won't even dignify that one.

Ok I have met people at my school, nonwrestlng fans before who are all about some TNA like I've met people who will make fun of WWE and be like TNA i s cool though, UFC is getting huge and wiht it being on hte same channel, people give it a chance perhaps. I think TNA has been odoing pretty good, I don't like it it as much as I did 3 weeks ago or so but I still see massive potential. They are the alternative to WWE and people are seeing that, whether you've been off the computer and out in the real world long enough to figure that shit out or not.

WWE Has that new era of people that is just perfect for what they want to do. It'll switch and people will tune in because of all the new guys that seem so popular.

ROH Man Up is one of the best PPVs I have ever seen. They specialize in technical style wrestling much like ECW technalized in Hardcore, but they also have guys who represent various styles, the big difference in them iand ECW is ECW had older guys wheres ROH is mostly younger up and comers. Also they don't have a writer like Heyman.

[Kane Knight]

Ok I have met people at my school, nonwrestlng fans before who are all about some TNA like I've met people who will make fun of WWE and be like TNA i s cool though, UFC is getting huge and wiht it being on hte same channel, people give it a chance perhaps.

That really doesn't mean anything, though. The ratings really haven't changed, so obviously this interest is not reflected beyond a couple of people you may have met at school.

UFC is getting huge and wiht it being on hte same channel, people give it a chance perhaps.

UFC's been notable for quite some time. This still hasn't affected TNA's popularity significantly. It hasn't elevated it to a WWE competitor. And that doesn't make RoH any better an example, either.

I think TNA has been odoing pretty good, I don't like it it as much as I did 3 weeks ago or so but I still see massive potential.

Read: I like it; it's actually backsliding, but ignore that.

They are the alternative to WWE and people are seeing that, whether you've been off the computer and out in the real world long enough to figure that shit out or not.

Dude.

After going emo about your party to me, you do NOT want to be comparing social lives. Seriously.

That aside, what is the "real world" saying about pro wrestling right now? Anything? Some kids at school don't really change the fact that wrestling is currently not popular culture, nor is it doing well by any measurable trait. That is the real world. The reality is that wrestling isn't doing great right now, not in terms of ratings, not in terms of mainstream exposure, not in terms of popularity with casuals.


WWE Has that new era of people that is just perfect for what they want to do. It'll switch and people will tune in because of all the new guys that seem so popular.

Based on what, praytell? It still reads as "I want it to be, so it must be." WWE's ratings are horrible, so people aren't watching more. WWE's in pop culture right now only as a result of being the butt end of Benoit jokes and steroid investigations, so it's not that people are more interested on that end. Dedicated fans don't react and non-dedicated fans don't watch. What part of this reads as "seem so popular?"

WWE's only in good shape finiancially right now, and even then, only because they've radically diversified themselves recently (Well, diversified might be a stretch, since all they're doing is flooding the market with DVDs and other crap).

ROH Man Up is one of the best PPVs I have ever seen.

Yes. You like it. That doesn't mean it's going to garner more popularity. People have been saying this shit about RoH performances for ages, and even about the PPVs since they began. Doesn't mean they're going to be the enxt ECW.

They specialize in technical style wrestling much like ECW technalized in Hardcore, but they also have guys who represent various styles, the big difference in them iand ECW is ECW had older guys wheres ROH is mostly younger up and comers. Also they don't have a writer like Heyman.

Or a National TV deal. Or the kind of support ECW had. Those last two are pretty important differences. I won't even get into the ECW specialisation bit, because it's not worth it, but ECW also caught on when pro wrestling was on fire, something that's sorely lacking in the current environment. If there was another Monday Night War, this could benefit RoH, but that's putting the cart before the horse. First we need a boom period to occur before that can happen, and it'll be successively into the boom period that any such effect will be realised. So what you need is a boom period to happen within your own argument for an imminent boom period. RoH could potentially develop the difference needed to propel it to a third party competitor, but without that boom period, without popular interest, it won't happen. That's a "real world" truth that "I liked it" cannot trump.

[BigDaddyCool]

The next boom period always may be upon us. That is the beuaty about indefinite words like may. You are never wrong. Convesersely, the death of wrestling may be upon is equally as true.

[Mr. Nerfect]

That is actually a surprisingly smart statement from BDC.

[BigDaddyCool]

All my statments are smart. That is actually a suprisingly short statement for Alienoid. See we can get along.

[BigDaddyCool]

Also, there is no point in arguing maybes or other hypothetical situations that are nothing more than vague possiblities such as the "next boom may be upon us" or "RoH may be the most dominate wrestling promotion in the next 10 years" or shit like that with a long or indefinite time line. Because there is no solid point to argue against in a universe of inifinite possibilities who actaul chance increase over time.

[Indifferent Clox]

yeah but it's a conundrum, with no real point. A million Mere cat's could enter your room right now holding their genitals and flailing about wildly discussing Kane Knight's anal lice, but just because it could happen doesn't mean it is as likely to happen.

KK, I don't know, I see people getting interested again soon, I didn't say it's happened yet, but I expect ratings to rise and stay that way. Just my prediction and my opinion.

don't want genital holding mere cats in your room or kane knight anal lice? Vote for me in this years spammys!

[Theo Dious]

...remember that WCW had two things working for it, Turner's check book and Bischoff's willingness to do ANYTHING to get a head.

Bischoff tried to hire Al Snow?
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
If you can make fun of my typos I can make fun of yours! :rant:

[BigDaddyCool]

No, a million merecats can't not enter my room right now holding their genitals or whatever else. My door is locked. It is possible it may eventually happen. And over time its probablity may increase, but it won't actaully happen right this second.

[Kane Knight]

KK, I don't know, I see people getting interested again soon, I didn't say it's happened yet, but I expect ratings to rise and stay that way. Just my prediction and my opinion.

Predictions and opinions have a couple things in common. The one I'm interested in is that they have the most merit when based upon something concrete.

For example, it's an "opinion" that the Earth is flat. It doesn't make it any less laughable, just because someone it entitled to their opinion.

The problem is that you're making this prediction on pretty shaky logic, which is primarily "I like what I'm seeing" and "People at my school seem interested." And it's fine. I'm not disputing that you've enjoy the show, or that you've encountered people who like TNA or are getting interested in it because of what goes on on the same channel. What I'm disputing is what bearing that has on more than you and your circle. I mean, even now, I have no trouble finding people interested in pro wrestling. It means less to me now, because I don't really watch wrestling much anymore (The Raw anniversarry and Jericho's debut aside), but I still find people who watch the shows. That doesn't mean wrestling is booming or will boom, though. Nor does your measure mean anything particular.

Also, while we're talking predictions, I think the odds are better of BDC and Alienoid BOTH getting sex changes in the next two years than wrestling booming in that same time. I'm not saying it's impossible, just that the odds are astronomically against. And if you want, I'll explain why. But I've gone on long enough for one post.

[Mr. Nerfect]

No, a million merecats can't not enter my room right now holding their genitals or whatever else. My door is locked. It is possible it may eventually happen. And over time its probablity may increase, but it won't actaully happen right this second.

Is there a gap under your door? I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but those things can be mighty slippery. Move some boxes in front of it, just to be sure.

[BigDaddyCool]

Is there a gap under your door? I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but those things can be mighty slippery. Move some boxes in front of it, just to be sure.

No, there is no gap. It actaully is a little tight with the carpet. Plus, scruffy would scare them off. Scruffy is my girlfriend's dog and he barks at everthing.

[Kane Knight]

Is there a gap under your door? I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but those things can be mighty slippery. Move some boxes in front of it, just to be sure.

They could also have spontaneously evolved to have teleportation capacities. Be afraid, BDC! :D

[Loose Cannon]

well, going by history, technically, we should be right around it

Wrestling boomed in the mid-late 80's

Wrestling boomed in the late 90's.

2008-2010??

[Mr. Nerfect]

No, there is no gap. It actaully is a little tight with the carpet. Plus, scruffy would scare them off. Scruffy is my girlfriend's dog and he barks at everthing.

The behaviour of the mere cat would imply that Scruffy would scare the shit out of them, and even if they could get through the non-existent gap, then they probably wouldn't choose to do so.

So you're right in saying that it is very unlikely. Although, if they have evolved like KK said, there might be one behind you right now.

[BigDaddyCool]

They could also have spontaneously evolved to have teleportation capacities. Be afraid, BDC! :D

Hmmmmm, I need to get my hands on the teleporting merecats and use them for evil.

The behaviour of the mere cat would imply that Scruffy would scare the shit out of them, and even if they could get through the non-existent gap, then they probably wouldn't choose to do so.

So you're right in saying that it is very unlikely. Although, if they have evolved like KK said, there might be one behind you right now.

Still if they did have the teleporting powers, scruffy would still scare them.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Hmmmmm, I need to get my hands on the teleporting merecats and use them for evil.



Still if they did have the teleporting powers, scruffy would still scare them.

This is true, unless Scruffy was freaked out, and decided to smoke something to cool down. Telepathic powers also seem to suggest the ability to think. If they can mentally transport their physical matter from one place to the next, then they must be able to contemplate and plan.

Just playing devil's advocate. What we really need to fear are merecats developing telekinesis.

[Indifferent Clox]

No, a million merecats can't not enter my room right now holding their genitals or whatever else. My door is locked. It is possible it may eventually happen. And over time its probablity may increase, but it won't actaully happen right this second.

DO NOT LIVE IN FEAR OF THE MERECATS ANY LONGER!

vote for me or the merecats will kill you

[BigDaddyCool]

Merecats will not evolve that way. Dolphins will.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Merecats will not evolve that way. Dolphins will.

Thank God there's no water in my house for them to teleport into.

[BigDaddyCool]

Shut up 'Noid.

[Mr. Nerfect]

BDC, do you really think I will shut up because you told me to? Pretty redundant post Mine can be long, but at least they aren't 100% wasted. More like 80%.

[RVDmark]

well, going by history, technically, we should be right around it

Wrestling boomed in the mid-late 80's

Wrestling boomed in the late 90's.

2008-2010??

By 2009 TNA should have had enough exposure to be big, they just need to step up their game with some quality product. The wrestling is fine, the rest of the program does tend to make heat/velocity look quality.:no:

[Chavo Classic]

There's also the distinct possibility that there won't be another boom period. Nothing lasts forever, take for example soccer in America in the 1970s - it was huge. There were huge names like Pele, Best and Cruyff, huge crowds and huge interest. However, within years it died, and took over 20 years to be resurrected as MLS and brought back as the poor, neglected cousin to the NBA, NHL and NFL.

While I'm not saying that the WWE will die, but it might remain at its current level for the rest of its existence. However, there's also nothing to say that it won't go the way of WCW. Bischoff and Russo were convinced in 2000 that their fortunes were going to change, and all they needed to achieve this was an angle or a wrestler to catch on, and it never happened. Even scarier still is the fact, as KK wisely brought up, that a majority of the WWE's profits come from DVD and merchandise sales. This is a finite market and can, and will, eventually become saturated. The WWE can't rely on fans to continue buying their products to keep afloat, especially when their fanbase gets older and departs.

[Kane Knight]

There's also the distinct possibility that there won't be another boom period. Nothing lasts forever, take for example soccer in America in the 1970s - it was huge. There were huge names like Pele, Best and Cruyff, huge crowds and huge interest. However, within years it died, and took over 20 years to be resurrected as MLS and brought back as the poor, neglected cousin to the NBA, NHL and NFL.

While I'm not saying that the WWE will die, but it might remain at its current level for the rest of its existence. However, there's also nothing to say that it won't go the way of WCW. Bischoff and Russo were convinced in 2000 that their fortunes were going to change, and all they needed to achieve this was an angle or a wrestler to catch on, and it never happened. Even scarier still is the fact, as KK wisely brought up, that a majority of the WWE's profits come from DVD and merchandise sales. This is a finite market and can, and will, eventually become saturated. The WWE can't rely on fans to continue buying their products to keep afloat, especially when their fanbase gets older and departs.

I think it's realistic to assume that it won't bounce back just because of the past. And while things could change, the current environment does not engender hope that there will be another boom. Sure, things could change, but there's no reason to predict, currently. Wrestling is currently a specialty market, and is making no real effort to step beyond that. Except for WWE, who's not doing it.

[Chavo Classic]

Personally, I think it needs to change it's entire direction. The last boom was in simplest terms, a movement from cartoon-style family wrestling to real-life risque television, and was something bigger than a single angle or wrestler catching on.

At the moment, the product is half way between the former cartoon style family show or the early 90s and the gritty show of the late 90s. It needs to leave that spectrum all together and head off on a new tangent. The guy who identifies what that tangent is, will be richer than all the Russos, Bischoffs and Heymans put together.

[Kane Knight]

Personally, I think it needs to change it's entire direction. The last boom was in simplest terms, a movement from cartoon-style family wrestling to real-life risque television, and was something bigger than a single angle or wrestler catching on.

At the moment, the product is half way between the former cartoon style family show or the early 90s and the gritty show of the late 90s. It needs to leave that spectrum all together and head off on a new tangent. The guy who identifies what that tangent is, will be richer than all the Russos, Bischoffs and Heymans put together.

It probably does, to be completely honest.

[Dorkchop]

TNA has the potential to put on some of the best wrestling matches you can ever see, but their booking is so fucked up I doubt it will ever happen. Every once in a while we're treated to a great match... but that usually ends in 3 run-ins and a roll up.

WWE is only great when there's competition. They were great in the 80s because they were competing with some great territories. They were great in the late 90s because they were competing with WCW. WWE has been for the most part ok since they bought out WCW because they don't have to try hard because there is no competition.

[Theo Dious]

No, there is no gap. It actaully is a little tight with the carpet. Plus, scruffy would scare them off. Scruffy is my girlfriend's dog and he barks at everthing.

That is also why I love the caulk.
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</></>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
</>
WAIT JUST A GOD DAMN MINUTE!!! :rant:

[Theo Dious]

Thank God there's no water in my house for them to teleport into.

Dolphins breathe air, you silly wanker.

[Jeritron]

I think we'll know if and when the boom is upon us, and with confidence I can say it's not now.
Things are much better right now, as is usually the case around Mania time.

I do feel however the current product and direction it's taking is more than just a mania surge, and in a very good place overall. However, this doesn't indicate a boom period per se. Just better than average (or recent) wrestling product. I'll take it, since it's very good for a change, but as we know that can change very quickly in either direction. It can keep getting better, or fade out again.

[Kane Knight]

I wouldn't say it's in a "very good" place. I think the current state of wrestling is indicative of something that is mostly treading water.

We will see the signs when a boom period comes, though. It's a thing you can tell, and it usually starts with a singular moment, be it Hulkamania or Austin 3:16.

I gotta say, though, that the last boom period was a series of happy coincidences. Austin's character happened to catch on. Hogan "turning" and Hell, the Outsiders going over to WCW. DX catching on. The Rock. Hell, the Rock and Austin would be screwed nowadays, because they wouldn't be allowed to shine. The Outsiders wouldn't have the capacity to go to WCW and trash the titles. I'm not even sure spoiling Raw would make a difference right now. Noncompetition, rigid definition of character, ignoring the fans, these are poison.

However, I'll say one thing. Whatever the next boom period is, if it ever comes, it'll not look like the Attitude Era. It will either be sheer dumb luck, or a major reformation. In the case of the former, we will see the change in advance, and it ain't on the horizon here. In the case of the latter, we'll know it when we see it, but this still ain't it.

The potential's always there; the series of random events that sparked the last one should indicate that. Kind of a worthless statement, because anything really can happen, no matter how hard Vince tries to stop it.

I really do think Vince McMahon is the biggest enemy to another boom period.

[The Optimist]

Kane Knight's totally right. I might have added "treading duck water", other than that spot on.

[Kane Knight]

I don't know the phrase "treading duck water." Any significant difference?

[Mr. Nerfect]

Dolphins breathe air, you silly wanker.

Yeah, but their bodies have specifically evolved so they can stick to the water. Unless they suddenly turn into *gasp* apes, then we should have nothing to fear unless they appear in our pools when we are swimming alone.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I don't know the phrase "treading duck water." Any significant difference?

It's got more shit in it?

[The Optimist]

It's got more shit in it?Bingo.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Personally, I think it needs to change it's entire direction. The last boom was in simplest terms, a movement from cartoon-style family wrestling to real-life risque television, and was something bigger than a single angle or wrestler catching on.

At the moment, the product is half way between the former cartoon style family show or the early 90s and the gritty show of the late 90s. It needs to leave that spectrum all together and head off on a new tangent. The guy who identifies what that tangent is, will be richer than all the Russos, Bischoffs and Heymans put together.

I actually thought the WWE was heading in a great direction with Heyman's SmackDown! in 2002/2003. It had its own feel and style. On that show, you had amazing wrestlers getting the chance to be amazing wrestlers. The two biggest stars SmackDown! had at its disposal were Kurt Angle and Brock Lesnar, two guys with amateur backgrounds.

This era under Heyman also brought us the first signs of real pushes for Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit. Los Guerreros really got Eddie over. When he returned in 2002, he was originally on RAW, and was solid, but was in the mid-card, and still the same Eddie Guerrero that bored me in 2001 (with my limited knowledge of the guys abilities). Then he joined his nephew on SmackDown!, and they became Los Guerreros, and wow. I don't think anyone could deny that Eddie would have gotten his massive face push in 2004 if it weren't for getting so over with the "lying, cheating and stealing" thing.

Chris Benoit's defining moment came when Paul Heyman just put him in a match against Kurt Angle. He just let them wrestle, and after the match the fans really got on Benoit's side, and he would never be a heel again (until he murdered his family, there I made the joke so no one else does).

Wrestling never really "boomed" under Heyman's vision for SmackDown!, but I think I remember the ratings surpassing RAW a lot of the time. KK might remember, because I didn't care for ratings at the time (still don't, all I need to know is that they are a parody of what they once were), but I'm fairly certain SmackDown! was doing quite well for itself.

It just felt different. I remember it just being so colourful. I used to be really invested in SmackDown! with Heyman behind it. I actually used to consider John Cena vs. Matt Hardy a potential dream match: Thuganomics vs. Mattitude. What happened there?

But yeah, that time has come and gone, and it was never really a boom; just solid TV. I agree that it will be something completely different that will capture the imaginations of the fans, however.

[What Would Kevin Do?]

Wrestling probably won't see any kind of boom until there's a wrestler on the big stage ( which right now is only the WWE) who is actually popular. Cena is aimed at kids, so the 14-25 and up crowd really isn't into him. People like Undertake are great for nostalgia, and older fans. HBK is awesome as a wrestler, but he's not "cool."

The boom was because you had people like Austin (and to an extent, the Rock) who transcended wrestling. THe NWO contributed to this greatly as well. You need people who teenagers will buy the merchandise ( and wear it, and not be embarassed.) The most worn wrestling merchandise I ever saw was the Austin 3:16, and the original NWO shirts. They were actually "cool" to a lot of people, when wrestling itself never was.

Honestly, I see very few people who could garner that kind of response right now. In fact, the only person who really spring to mind (besides MAYBE a heel Cena) who could pull it off (and he'd need to work on his mic skills), but...... Homicide.

I'm not the biggest fan of the guy, but there's something raw about him, which most wrestlers lack nowadays. It'll never happen, but it'd be interesting. He has that average guy look, he doesn't give a fuck, he's an ass kicker, and he doesn't come off as fake.

I'm in no way saying Homicide could cause a boom. I'm just saying to have a boom, you need to have likable and exploitable figures, and he's one of the very few potential figures I see.

[Kane Knight]

Another thing I want to point out is that all the potential in the world means nothing if you don't act on it.

I made this analogy recently in the music forum, but I think it fits the scenario. In this post, I compare WWE to John Denver.

See, John Denver had some great studio musicians who worked with him on a regular basis. Some of these guys are brilliant musicians. The thing is, they're studio musicians. John Denver wants to sound like a certain way, they will. And as a result, John Denver sounds like crap.

Basically, WWE always has a ton of talented wrestlers on hand. TNA does, too. But as long as they've got them dressing up as Kangaroos or caught in dumb gimmicks, that's all there is to them. WWE and TNA, as such, are both much like John Denver. Denver could have the next Hendrix under him, and you'd never know it. WWE could have the next Austin or Rock, and it wouldn't show.

So when I say that we're not going to see another boom period with the current state of things, it's not a shot at the wrestlers. Wrestling's got a ton of good wrestlers--from a "smark" perspective.

...And the second the "smarks" are capable of creating a boom, we'll talk about what that means.

[GD]

TNA + Eric + Money= boom shakalaka.

[Heyman]

All the new guys are steppin gup in WWE a new era approaches

Tna is getting better and may actually eventually become competiition for WWE. Almost like wcw

And ROH is similiar to ECW in that it's the distant third that many consider best.


I think the WWE certainly has the potential to ignite the next "boom period", but they've had this potential for years......and squandered it. Guys like RVD, Jericho, Orton, Guerrero, Benoit, Lesnar, Cena, Angle, and countless others were NOT maximized to their potential IMO.......not even close.

In my opinion, this was largely due to incompetent management, the "powers that be" not being on the same page, and the wrestlers themselves not rising to management's (unreasonable?) demands.

So in short - does the WWE have the potential to create another boom period? Yes. Based on the WWE's recent history, should feel we any reason whatsover to believe that this will happen? IMO - no.

[Mr. Nerfect]

That's an interesting point you make about Homicide, WWKD, and I agree. Just looking over the rosters, it's hard to find a wrestler that you could show to someone who had no clue who they were, and they could slip in "I'm a professional wrestler" without there being an extra chair placed between them and the person they were talking to.

One guy I'd like to throw out there, though, is MVP. The man has quite a story to him. He grew up in the ghetto, went to prison for something like nine years, and then became a wrestler. It's a very real and humble (that's one word for it) past, and I can see that adding an edge of "real" to the guy.

I actually see quite a lot of people out there with that kind of potential, and a lot of them would get funny stares from a lot of people here, as the list contains names like Ron Killings, CM Punk, Colt Cabana, Paul London and Brian Kendrick. No, I'm not trying to imply that they could lead a boom, but I think Punk seems comfortable enough with who he is to be charismatic enough to be a sensation. Killings for a similar reason to MVP. Colt Cabana is just hilarious, and seems like he could just be purely entertaining enough to wash away the "raaawwwr, I'm on steroids" association that goes with most wrestlers. Paul London & Brian Kendrick are both similar in that they seem to be different enough from your normal wrestlers. I honestly can't see why they can't be as big as The Hardy Boyz in a more nurturing environment.

Not saying that they could lead booms, but I could see each of these guys being somewhat successful and having their own cult of fans if wrestling were a more popular form of entertainment.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I think the WWE certainly has the potential to ignite the next "boom period", but they've had this potential for years......and squandered it. Guys like RVD, Jericho, Orton, Guerrero, Benoit, Lesnar, Cena, Angle, and countless others were NOT maximized to their potential IMO.......not even close.

In my opinion, this was largely due to incompetent management, the "powers that be" not being on the same page, and the wrestlers themselves not rising to management's (unreasonable?) demands.

So in short - does the WWE have the potential to create another boom period? Yes. Based on the WWE's recent history, should feel we any reason whatsover to believe that this will happen? IMO - no.

This is another relevant point. Not only did the WWE miss the boat with pushing people (most recently the list includes Matt Hardy and Christian), and TNA is not too much better (Eric Young was damn hot for a while), but they kept a lot of their top guys where they were for too long. They didn't really bow out, and establish the next generation of main eventers.

Take Edge for example. To me, he doesn't feel like as big a deal as he should be. The man has had four World Title reigns, which should statistically put him above Mick Foley and Attitude era Shawn Michaels. He doesn't feel that way, though. Edge was pushed to the top because the company finally said "OK, now you're a main eventer."

Stone Cold Steve Austin's last match was against The Rock, who was part-time himself at that point. No one really passed out in the Million Dollar Dream, did they?

That's why Triple H was pretty much dominant during the early days of the brand split (and really still is, to this day). The WWE has no really major stars from the Attitude era, and realised they had none created. They created Brock Lesnar, who actually felt like a star, and they built up John Cena quite well, although they went a bit wonky at the end with him, but apart from that, they had lost Austin and The Rock. Triple H was arguably the third man behind them.

They really need to use Triple H to make some established stars, rather than protect him, though. He seems to be doing that now with Jeff Hardy. They also teased that for a while with Shelton Benjamin, who also got a verbal rub from Stone Cold Steve Austin, but they didn't follow up correctly.

A lot of Attitude era main eventers left without really passing the torch. The WWE should make sure that the few they have left (Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and to a lesser extent, Kane), really pass the torch to someone. Someone needs to end The Undertaker's streak, someone needs to finally out-wit Shawn Michaels, and someone needs to out-strategise The Game. No, it won't single-handedly save the WWE, but it would actually help main event talent look established when these older guys aren't around anymore.

The WWE also needs to follow hot leads. Matt Hardy and Christian were both very hot in 2005. Instead, they had Matt return, kiss Vince's ass, and get knocked out in a few minutes against Edge at Summerslam. Both men even got shafted off to SmackDown!, instead of being kept on RAW.

Unestablished guys can have great feuds that catch on with the fans, don't get me wrong, but that's usually in the mid-card. For example, MVP and Matt Hardy have had a splendid little feud over the United States Championship. You put the World Heavyweight Title on MVP, though, and as great as it would be, a lot of the magic would be lost. Neither MVP nor Matt Hardy is established as a main eventer. You need to have some A guys turn B guys into A guys, but what the WWE tends to often do with their main eventers these days, is just say "OK, now you're an A guy."

[Kane Knight]

This is another relevant point. Not only did the WWE miss the boat with pushing people (most recently the list includes Matt Hardy and Christian), and TNA is not too much better (Eric Young was damn hot for a while), but they kept a lot of their top guys where they were for too long. They didn't really bow out, and establish the next generation of main eventers.

On the one hand, it's a tough call, and it's hard to piss off your money makers. On the other, there are a lot of reasons to pull old stars and make new ones. One of the most obvious isn't even popularity, but longevity. The company's fucked if Tripe H gets injured, because he's made half the roster look bad. And frequent injuries for champions, to boot.

Take Edge for example. To me, he doesn't feel like as big a deal as he should be. The man has had four World Title reigns, which should statistically put him above Mick Foley and Attitude era Shawn Michaels. He doesn't feel that way, though. Edge was pushed to the top because the company finally said "OK, now you're a main eventer."

Or rather, "I like you, so I'm going to make you go places."

It was the same thing they did with JBL, an JBL was a horrible champion from a business perspective. And Hell, without Eddie to carry him, that would have been godawful itself. JBL's great on the mic, but can't wrestle for shit, and really didn't get people to fork over money (The most important part of a seuccessful champion).

Edge got booed as a face, and almost no reaction as a heel. If he didn't bang Lita, he'd probably still be getting a minimal reaction. Maybe they don't know what to do with him, but they were pushing him whether we liked it or not, and that's a poor model for making someone a main eventer.

So while I can catch what you're saying about needing stars to make stars, there's another piece of the puzzle.

That's why Triple H was pretty much dominant during the early days of the brand split (and really still is, to this day). The WWE has no really major stars from the Attitude era, and realised they had none created. They created Brock Lesnar, who actually felt like a star, and they built up John Cena quite well, although they went a bit wonky at the end with him, but apart from that, they had lost Austin and The Rock. Triple H was arguably the third man behind them.

If nothing else, he WAS a de facto third man.

A lot of Attitude era main eventers left without really passing the torch. The WWE should make sure that the few they have left (Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and to a lesser extent, Kane), really pass the torch to someone. Someone needs to end The Undertaker's streak, someone needs to finally out-wit Shawn Michaels, and someone needs to out-strategise The Game. No, it won't single-handedly save the WWE, but it would actually help main event talent look established when these older guys aren't around anymore.

My biggest worry is that they end up doing this for a quick fix. You know, Cena ending Taker's streak, and whatnot. Trips has already put him over, and it seems like they'll come up with other ways to make him look epic as he falters.

The WWE also needs to follow hot leads. Matt Hardy and Christian were both very hot in 2005. Instead, they had Matt return, kiss Vince's ass, and get knocked out in a few minutes against Edge at Summerslam. Both men even got shafted off to SmackDown!, instead of being kept on RAW.

You'd think Vince would have run with them JUST because they were legitimately over. You know, for the novelty alone, if nothing else.


Unestablished guys can have great feuds that catch on with the fans, don't get me wrong, but that's usually in the mid-card. For example, MVP and Matt Hardy have had a splendid little feud over the United States Championship. You put the World Heavyweight Title on MVP, though, and as great as it would be, a lot of the magic would be lost. Neither MVP nor Matt Hardy is established as a main eventer. You need to have some A guys turn B guys into A guys, but what the WWE tends to often do with their main eventers these days, is just say "OK, now you're an A guy."

Or they could try not pushing people for the sake of not pushing them. MVP might one day actually get up there on his own merits, but if they just push him when they decide he's a good guy, or he's "paid his dues," then there's a problem.

[Mr. Nerfect]

That's very true what you said, KK. Idealistically, you push guys that have the fans invested in them enough to support the direction. I mean, as much as I enjoyed Snitsky as a comedic act at times, no one is taking him seriously as the WWE currently has him packaged. Even if he ended The Undertaker's streak and was the guy to retire Ric Flair, I doubt people would care.

Part of me thinks that the WWE has forgotten how to push someone. Jeff Hardy is getting a really effective push at the moment (I'm almost angry that his push has been so good, actually, considering I personally don't think Hardy deserves it in respect to other performers), and Batista's road to WrestleMania in 2005 was great. Before then, it would have been just pulling the trigger with Chris Benoit and letting him win the World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania.

And it really pisses me off that Vince didn't run with Matt Hardy and Christian. As you said, just for the novelty. If it didn't catch on, it's not like it'd be a failure on scale with the XFL, and if it succeeded, then Vince would have had two potential money makers on his hands. Sometimes I think that Vince hates money.

[Kane Knight]

I'd laugh my ass off if Snitsky did Headline a Mania or become champion, though. It'd suck, but...

I think with both Matt and Christian, it was sour grapes. Christian was outpopping the Golden Boy on a regular basis (Not exactly the greatest achievement, given people had already started to turn on Cena, but that had to piss Vince off), and I think a lot of the reaction to that was anger.

Matt was hired back because the fans were essentially ruining segments, and Vince did the absolute minimum to appease the fans then jobbed him out. I think these were both pretty big "fuck yours," though I think the primary issue wasn't so much getting even with someone as it was lashing out in general because he doesn't like being wrong.

Jeff doesn't deserve his push, I don't think, but at this point, I think it's kind of a "what fucking choice do we have?" Sort of thing. I mean, Matt and Christian were both over at the time, but each was over while others were getting cheered. Compared to almost everyone else right now, though, Jeff's getting monster pops because the crowd's almost universally dead otherwise. The problem is, they're banking on a guy with a shitty rep having cleaned up his act, and that might be as bad an idea as putting the title on someone who's getting no reaction.

But again, from WWE's point of view, they may not see it as much of a choice.

Of course, they could have avoided this by not waving their assholes at the fans for so long, but who knows?

[Theo Dious]

TNA + Eric + Money= boom shakalaka.

The idea that Eric Bischoff is some kind of magical force of wrestling, and that everything he touches turns to gold, is the biggest pile of shit that keeps getting flung at me over and over and over again. Bischoff can't save a company. If he could, he'd have saved WCW. But the fact is that the man had like three good ideas: hire as much top WWF talent as possible, form the nWo, and heap as much shit on McMahonland as we can. It worked for a while because it was new and refreshing, but at the end of the day WWF programming was more desirable to fans. Bischoff couldn't have made WCW what it was without Hogan, Hall, Nash, and the rest of the WWF talent he pilfered. What's ge going to do today? Lure top WWE talent away? They've gotten enough WWE castoffs that they can't do anything with, and I doubt your Cena, Batista, or Edge is going to make tons of WWE fans change the channel. MAYBE if WWE and TNA had simultaneous Monday night programming, some real competition would ensue, but I doubt it. Mostly because WWE and TNA can both be called crap right now, but if so, then TNA is a steaming, fly-covered pile of crap in the middle of a field, whereas WWE looks like a carefully collected, sealed, and stored stool sample in a lab. Which leads me to this:

I really do think Vince McMahon is the biggest enemy to another boom period.

And it's not because he's a jerkass, or because he wants the product to fail. It's because he is far too set in his ways, and is very unlikely to rehash his style of presenting his product. And not only that, look at the people who are booking WWE and TNA today, for the most part it's the same names, faces, and ideas as we had ten years ago. The next "boom" period, when it comes, will come because of new ideas, thought up by new bookers and creative leaders, and will be presented to a new generation of potential fans. It won't be done by the old names using and rehashing the old ideas. Imagine for a moment: Bischoff is named creative God of TNA and given all the money he wants... what's he going to do? Hire away all of WWE's top talent and use them to form a mega-stable that attempts to "take over" TNA? Tell me you can't already hear the legions of fans complaining that it's just another rehash.

[Kane Knight]

To be fair, new ideas can come from old people. Bischoff is not all he's chalked up to be, and neither is Paul Heyman. And I'll put the odds against any revolution coming with them at the head.

In fact, it's the same nostalgia/quick fix mentality that drives the IWC, which is probably short sighted and damaging, but....

[Theo Dious]

To be fair, new ideas can come from old people.

Absolutely, but the odds are against a steady stream of new ideas coming from that source.

[Kane Knight]

Absolutely, but the odds are against a steady stream of new ideas coming from that source.

Unfortunately for all involved, Vince isn't looking to expand his ideas. He's hired a bunch of people who write to what entertains him, and as time goes on, that's more and more out of step with what entertains the viewing public.

What's worse is that TNA's management seems to be okay with not being even remotely competitive.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I thought Eric was referring to Eric Young. :shifty:

Seriously, though, there is so much wrong with TNA that even a smark could fix it. It doesn't take a genius to realise that TNA should be charging admission for at least their PPVs, and cutting the older talent on their roster that really doesn't serve a purpose (The Voodoo Kin Mafia, Rick Steiner, and probably even Scott Steiner).

TNA's getting their highest ratings for their fucking women's division! This is probably because it's the only real thing they offer that viewers cannot get from the WWE. When they treated the X-Division Championship and Tag Team Championship as equal belts to the World Heavyweight Championship, it made the company look different. I don't think it would make them competition, but if they just altered their focus a little bit, and made each Championship worth contending for, ratings would increase a little. At least to the point where it actually looks like they've grown with the move to two hours.