DISCUSSION - The WWE needs to do a better job of creating distinctive CHARACTERS

[Heyman]

DISCUSSION - The WWE needs to do a better job of creating distinctive CHARACTERS

I watched the Survivor Series PPV tonight, and was a little amused by the 1st match....more specifically, the way the heels entered the ring, and composed themselves throughout the match. So - you had Dolph Ziggler, Jack Swagger, The Miz, and Drew Mcintyre. Maybe it was just me, but I noticed way too much similarity in character between the 4 men. All 4 men were young, relatively good looking, and cocky. On the face side of things, you had a bunch of guys that were all self-contained yet determined. Now - am I saying that all of these characters are the exact same? Of course not. However, I think the WWE needs to do a better job of creating DIFFERENT characters that are extremely unique in their own way. Each character should be a "symbol" of sort....for atleast one type of person or demographic.

In today's WWE, the heels are either....

A) Big, ugly, and dominating (i.e. Sheamus, Mike Knox, Vladimir Kozlov, etc.)
B) Average sized, cocky, and somewhat good looking (i.e. Miz, Ziggler, etc.)

Compare this "cookie cutter" strategy to what you had during the Attitude Era. Undertaker, Mankind, Kane, Val Venis, Gangrel, Edge, Christian, Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Goldust, Rocky Maivia, Hunter Hearst Helmsely, Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Owen Hart, D'Lo Brown, X-Pac, Raven (one of my fav characters of all-time by the way) etc. During the attitude era, you had sooo many different heels and faces, but each CHARACTER was so distinct in its own way.....and each character symbolized atleast one specific demographic or target audience. While I appreciate what the WWE are currently doing, in terms of developing their under-card, I would like to see them make more distinctive characters. Santino Marella = good. Hell, even Hornswoggle = good.

The writers need to go DEEPER with each and every character.....and make them as distinct as possible. This was one thing that the WWE did an EXCEPTIONAL job of during the Attitude Era.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I was thinking about something like this the other day. I remember thinking about just which characters are the greatest ever. I thought over Goldust, Kane, Mankind, Sean O'Haire, Muhammad Hassan, The Brian Kendrick and such. Sad thing about good characters in wrestling, is that they are rarely as successful as the simple ones.

Character is something that I would love to focus on. I think TNA does a good job with that. Well, better than the WWE does, anyway. I would like to see a really good character come along. Even if they dig into other established characters from other mediums to do bring to their programming. I mean, look at "Crow" Sting...

Edge was very Joker-esque last year, at one point (heading into Hell in a Cell against The Undertaker). I really enjoyed that Edge, and actually felt like cheering him. Another character could get some Joker-like eccentricity to them and really connect with crowds. I dunno.

[Heyman]

Good post Noid.

The WWE has to be especially careful here, because they aren't in the Wrestling Business. They are in the SPORTS-ENTERTAINMENT business.

Think of all the most successful television shows from yester-year and today: Seinfeld, Simpsons, Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Two and a Half Men, etc., etc.

What makes/made each of these shows great, was the diversity in the characters....and the fact that each characters STOOD for something....and that each and every viewer could relate to almost each and every character, in a DIFFERENT way. That's what made the WWE era so great. Even if someone was a face or a heel, it was for an entirely different reason. Val Venis was loved for an entirely different reason than Stone Cold was.

Since the WWE are PG and have children aged 12 and under as their chosen demographic, it is even MORE important that the WWE focus on Character Development....and create actual CHARACTERS.

Let Gregory Helms go back to being the Hurricane. Why not bring back Kerwin White for Chavo Guerrero? Again - CHARACTERS. DISTINCTION. IDENTITY.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I feel that the deepest characters on the WWE roster right now are Chris Jericho, Batista, William Regal (just because Regal knows exactly what to bring out), John Morrison, Dolph Ziggler, Paul Burchill, Kofi Kingston, Ted DiBiase and CM Punk. Besides that, I feel that all the others are very simply motivated, or just don't have anything motivating them besides the usual.

Of all the gimmicks in FCW, I think the one that most interests me is Heath Slater's "I hate guys with relatives in the business because I had to earn my way in" character. It could have issues with both face and heel wrestlers. I'm not sure how Slater is as a performer, or even if he is a face or a heel in FCW right now (I'd guess heel), but the best forms of fictional entertainment have depth to each of their characters.

[Mr. Nerfect]

The writers should sit down and evaluate each guy on the roster, and think about what motivates him/her and why they are doing what they are doing. Even the referees and commentators. Get the performers to give their ideas, and what actually motivates them, and then get the individual persona for each wrestler.

Does Sheamus hate America? Why/why not? Does he have an ego? Does he have something to prove? Where did he train? What style is his strong-point? What does he think of fellow Irish Superstars, Finlay and Hornswoggle? Why does he feel he is better than other rising stars like Drew McIntyre and Jack Swagger? If he saw a Diva getting harassed by another Superstar, what would he do? Why does he wear short trunks, instead of long trunks?

If each wrestler knows the character they are playing, then everything will hopefully click.

[kareru]

they need to look more at the culture of todays society to draw their character inspiration from
take a look at raven, it was the 90's and the counter culture was the grunge culture and raven did this very well.
http://www.australiansportsentertainment.com/graphics/raven.jpg

so maybe the someone on the roster could go with an emo gimmick ala jimmy jacobs
or something along those lines but you get my point

[Vastardikai]

The writers should sit down and evaluate each guy on the roster, and think about what motivates him/her and why they are doing what they are doing. Even the referees and commentators. Get the performers to give their ideas, and what actually motivates them, and then get the individual persona for each wrestler.

Does Sheamus hate America? Why/why not? Does he have an ego? Does he have something to prove? Where did he train? What style is his strong-point? What does he think of fellow Irish Superstars, Finlay and Hornswoggle? Why does he feel he is better than other rising stars like Drew McIntyre and Jack Swagger? If he saw a Diva getting harassed by another Superstar, what would he do? Why does he wear short trunks, instead of long trunks?

If each wrestler knows the character they are playing, then everything will hopefully click.

Honestly, I think the writers are off the hook on this one. I think these questions should be answered by the workers THEMSELVES. Have the writers create the gimmick (good, bad, whatever) and have the wrestlers (Superstars) develop it. By developing their own character, it allows them to make the character their own.

[blake639raw]

Wow, Noid, I pretty much agree with everything you said, except for one thing. You mentioned Ted Dibiase as having one of the best characters? Really?? He's the blandest guy on the whole roster, maybe wrestling in general. Not saying he doesn't have talent, but as of right now, I would put him even behind Cody to be honest. Kofi seems to be on the way, but more introduction to his background would be nice. I actually think The Miz has a good thing going. Yeah, it's just the whole cocky heel schtick, but he's a natural heat magnet, and knows how to interact and work the crowd like few others. Morrison has a look, but I think instead of becoming a baby kissing face, he should have stayed like he was as a heel, but just insult the heels instead of the faces. His character should be super conceited, like The Rock was. He will get over like hotcakes if they did this.

[Heyman]

Some excellent responses in this thread. :y:

I will get back to them later. I just wanted to mention one more thing as it relates to character distinction and character growth. I think the WWE needs to do a better job of matching theme songs with wrestlers.

-Make the theme songs less generic (i.e. give them lyrics)
-Make sure that the song/theme actually matches the PERSONALITY of said wrestler.

Although I love Jack Swagger's theme, I'm not sure how it fits into his personality or character. It's almost as if Swagger chose the theme himself because it sounded cool. Well that's great and all, but it doesn't match his character! I also don't see where the WWE are going with John Morrison as a face. He seems bland as hell in my opinion.

Speaking of "names", I would like to see the WWE go back to creating actual WRESTLER names.

Back in the day - we had Gangrel, Edge, Christian, Goldust, Kane, Mankind, Godfather, etc., etc. Although generic first/last names existed, they were far less common. The WWE needs to go back to that in my opinion.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Wow, Noid, I pretty much agree with everything you said, except for one thing. You mentioned Ted Dibiase as having one of the best characters? Really?? He's the blandest guy on the whole roster, maybe wrestling in general. Not saying he doesn't have talent, but as of right now, I would put him even behind Cody to be honest. Kofi seems to be on the way, but more introduction to his background would be nice. I actually think The Miz has a good thing going. Yeah, it's just the whole cocky heel schtick, but he's a natural heat magnet, and knows how to interact and work the crowd like few others. Morrison has a look, but I think instead of becoming a baby kissing face, he should have stayed like he was as a heel, but just insult the heels instead of the faces. His character should be super conceited, like The Rock was. He will get over like hotcakes if they did this.

The thing I like about Ted DiBiase's character are its priorities. It's got very different priorities to any other character on the WWE roster. During that "match" with Randy Orton, DiBiase heard the fans going wild for him. He has been disrespected by Orton before. Randy has even kicked DiBiase in the head, and cut Ted's own brother off from Legacy. He was kicking the crap out of Ted, but instead of making a name for himself, what does DiBiase do? Chooses Legacy over himself.

It's a slow-build, and don't get me wrong -- I'm not the biggest Ted DiBiase fan in the world -- but recently the guy has been good in the ring, good on the mic, and what makes up his character is really quite interesting. More interesting than it really is in practice.

[jerichoholicninja]

It seems whether you are a heel or a face determines your character, instead of your character being a heel or a face. Basically the cookie cutter theory that has been mentioned before. It's just lazy on the part of everybody. Look at Jericho. I think it was safe to say that many people did not like his new heel persona, but most have grown to like it now. It was definitely a huge chance that he took and it worked. That needs to be tried more often.

[Vastardikai]

^

He also works more on his persona(s) than most. Much of the complaints I hear from the Vets are that the young guys are too busy "frequenting the Buffet table and Chatting up the Divas when they could be working on their characters" (I believe that's JR's quote, there)

[Heyman]

^

He also works more on his persona(s) than most. Much of the complaints I hear from the Vets are that the young guys are too busy "frequenting the Buffet table and Chatting up the Divas when they could be working on their characters" (I believe that's JR's quote, there)

I think a large part of this problem stems from...

A) The overall workload and demand required from the Wrestlers. Seriously - these guys are busting their butts over 300 days of the year. When these guys have even a little bit of time off, do you really think they want to be thinking about wrestling?

B) The glass ceiling. If wrestlers feel that they will get held back no matter what they do, then what incentives do they have to invest some time into thinking about their characters?

[Anybody Thrilla]

I'd agree that they could use some distinctive characters in the mid card. Gangrel and Road Dogg were both fairly over, yet nothing alike.

[Heyman]

I'd agree that they could use some distinctive characters in the mid card. Gangrel and Road Dogg were both fairly over, yet nothing alike.

Exactly.

The deeper the character is, the less likely a casual fan will flip channels when 'such and such' guy is on.

During the Attitude era, each and every guy had their thing. What if Val Venis did another video? What if Gangrel and the Brood did their blood bath? What if Goldust kicked a guy in the nuts? What if Kane set someone on fire? What if DX did a hilarious skit? What if Godfather had a beautiful ho? What if Bossman ate someone's dog?

Just little things like this always added to someone's character, and kept the fans captivated even when the lowliest of jobbers were on TV.

Even if guys like Mideon and Viscera were on T.V., people stayed tuned. "these guys are associated with Vince and Taker....what if the corporate ministry does a run in here?....what if Austin comes out to make the save?"

Just little things like that made the whole show "connected" in each and every way. Every segment of RAW or WWE programing had some kind of relevance.

[screech]

One guy that comes to mind for me is Vance Archer.

I know he is new and is still in his squashing jobbers phase, but he will have to face "real" opponents eventually. When that time comes, what will his deal be?

Is he really just out there to "prove himself?" Is he out to rid the roster of "chumps and punks?" Does he have an issue with a particular group of people? Is there some other dimension he could have that I am missing?

Or, the most likely, will he be Hoss #1027?

[DaVe]

I will get back to them later. I just wanted to mention one more thing as it relates to character distinction and character growth. I think the WWE needs to do a better job of matching theme songs with wrestlers.

-Make the theme songs less generic (i.e. give them lyrics)
-Make sure that the song/theme actually matches the PERSONALITY of said wrestler.

lolwut

I agree with pretty much everything in this thread other than that. Unlike today, in the Attitude Era, barely anyone had lyrics; their songs were all composed by James Johnston, and unlike today, were (mostly) also performed by Johnston. The reason their themes worked is that they were written and performed by a genius, who made their themes suit their character. These days they're all just the same thing: generic songs that all sound the same, with lyrics done in roughly the same vocal style. They're no longer proper wrestling themes; they're simply songs.

[Heyman]

DaVe,

I agree with what you said and wish I could take back my original statement (i.e. lyrics/attitude era). Of course lyrics weren't used all that much during the Attitude Era and I erroneously stated as such.

What I meant to say was, "have the theme match with the wrestler....and not just have it be 'another song'" (as you stated).

[Mr. Nerfect]

Vladimir Kozlov, as much as I am not really a fan of the guy, could be a really interesting character. What motivated him to be a Sambo fighter? Why is he in the WWE? He's proud to be Russian, but is he anti-American? Why/why not? He could be either a convincing face or a heel based simply on who he is feuding with by just being a guy born and bred to do what he does.

Ezekiel Jackson is another example of this. When he was with The Brian Kendrick, he was introduced as "the biggest, baddest brother I (Kendrick) could find." Why did he want to be second-fiddle to Brian Kendrick. Did he respect Kendrick? Did he want to the knowledge Shawn Michaels had passed onto Kendrick, to put together with his size and power? There was actually a lot of subtle ambition in the Zeke Jackson character.

That could remain, as Jackson is now studying under William Regal. However, a lot of the "mystery" behind Zeke has been washed away, and he is now just an angry big guy. He lacks the cool detachment he had when he was with Kendrick, where everything just seemed like business. "I don't personally dislike you, Jeff Hardy, but I am going to toss you into this barricade when the ref isn't looking because you're beating up my boy."

Why William Regal chose these two men is also interesting. Is he teaching them? Is that beneficial to him? If Vladimir Kozlov and/or Ezekiel Jackson learn everything there is to learn from Regal, then their size gives them an edge over the aging master. Is Regal doing it because he feels his time is now, and then he wants to leave his legacy to Kozlov and Jackson? Is he doing it because he believes that he is mentally stronger than both men, and can leave them in the wind with nothing if they decide they want to overtake him?

Those three could be some of the more interesting characters in the entire WWE. Jackson nor Kozlov may not be great workers, but with Kozlov's desire for competition and to be the best; Jackson's potentially manipulative nature and Regal's desire to grab power -- there is so much there. Instead, at times, it appears Kozlov and Jackson are just backing Regal...because they're big?

[Schlomey]

There is a total insurgence of bland workers these days. I agree completely with the original post.

Basically, to be considered a bad guy anymore all you have to do is come out with a frown on your face or act like a cocky asshole.

I miss the days you had to work your ass off to stand alone and be hated. Heel turns are a great thing. HBK throwing Jannetty through the glass. HHH giving Orton the thumbs down. Paul Bearer turning on The Undertaker. ...All memorable.

Anymore, the depth of most of the younger/mid card talents is:

1. If your a heel you have dark moody entrance music.
2. You scowl or smirk like a cocky asshole.
3. Grow a beard.
4. Wearing black is almost mandatory.

There are a few exceptions to the rules. I LOVE Mr. Woo Woo Woo Zack Ryder. While he has been nothing more than a bland cocky heel, he is doing certain things to stand apart. His ring attire, the fact that he actually has a catch phrase or 2 & most importantly he has honed his microphone skills enough to be given a chance to talk....


There is a lot to be desired regarding character development. Basically it stinks currently & unless your already a house hold wrestling name it will be hard to really stand out in the current climate.

[thedamndest]

I think part of the reason that you may be seeing some of the guys you listed as "cookie-cutter" when you compare them to the Attitude era is that they are much more based in reality than the characters of the Attitude era. Mike Knox, Kozlov, Zeke Jackson, are nothing alike character-wise, nor are Miz, Morrison, and Ziggler. For the most part, these are guys that you could picture going putting on street clothes and going home when they get done wrestling.

With the mid-card characters in the Attitude era, it was harder to make this distinction. Where did Mideon shop? Did Viscera own a dog? Does the Godfather do anything besides pimping hoes? Where does Gangrel buy hair products? The best modern day version I can think of for this would be Kizarny. After weeks of vignettes for this guy, he debuted with no heat. He was let go. Why? There was no one like him on the roster.

You do need something though. You can't go out there and just say, "Hi, I'm Steve Jones and I'm going to wrestle tonight." If you are off the deep end, you need to be in normal wrestling gear nowadays, I guess is what I want to say.

[Vastardikai]

I think a large part of this problem stems from...

A) The overall workload and demand required from the Wrestlers. Seriously - these guys are busting their butts over 300 days of the year. When these guys have even a little bit of time off, do you really think they want to be thinking about wrestling?

B) The glass ceiling. If wrestlers feel that they will get held back no matter what they do, then what incentives do they have to invest some time into thinking about their characters?

Ok...

A) Your point? They are on the road a long period of time, yes. I mean hell, if they're sharing a ride with someone (and most on that level likely are.), WHY NOT think about improving your career when you're not driving? WHY NOT think about important aspects of your character while in the tanning bed, when you're not doing much else?

B) That just sounds like a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.

Do you think the writing staff from WWF circa 1996 any different from WWE Creative now? This midcard guy asked for a new gimmick and was given shit like "Baron Von Ruthless" and "Ice Dagger." He literally had to come up with his own gimmick. Some lucky breaks later, He got to cut his own promo where he said "You talk about your Psalms, and your John 3:16, well Austin 3:16 says I just whipped your ass!"

In order for the Attitude Era to begin, there had to be guys like Austin, like Foley, to take the ideas given to them and tweak them to their own liking or to make their own gimmicks. Mick had to do a great deal of tweaking to save Mankind from being Mason the Mutillator. How over would the legendary Rattlesnake have been if he just went with "Chilly McFreeze?"

[Phenomenal 1]

I think that WWE is doing a great job along with Phil Brooks (CM Punk) in broadening his straight edge character and gimmick and following through with it to good fashion as consistent top heel on Smackdown. Look at the pop that was given in the Cigarettes/Pills/Whiskey being thrown on him segment. The fans are into seeing Punk to either boo him or see someone outdo him.

[Vastardikai]

You do know the Straight Edge character existed WELL BEFORE Brooks entered WWE, right? Part of the thing when he brawled through the crowd at indy shows, the fans would offer him a beer.

[Phenomenal 1]

Yes I do know the Straight Edge gimmick was in place with Punk well before his time in the "E"....but you also have to remember, not everyone follows or chooses to follow the independent scene and may not be aware of the gimmick's previous existence. Some fans only follow what they can see on mainstream TV.

[Vastardikai]

I'm just saying, it's a matter of a character getting over on his own, using the WWE Marketing Machine to help them do it. It doesn't always work (The Con Man), but at least they're trying.

Truth be told, Punk proves my point.

[Phenomenal 1]

maybe they will cast Punk to be the returning Heel version of Doink the Clown...ROFL

[Phenomenal 1]

or the Chicago Brawler.....Brooklyn Brawlers long lost cousin

[Inadequacy]

How over would the legendary Rattlesnake have been if he just went with "Chilly McFreeze?"

I reckon anyone could get pretty over if they went by "Chilly McFreeze"

[Mr. Nerfect]

I'm just saying, it's a matter of a character getting over on his own, using the WWE Marketing Machine to help them do it. It doesn't always work (The Con Man), but at least they're trying.

Truth be told, Punk proves my point.

Maybe, but how unusual is it for the WWE to allow a guy to bring his independent persona to the larger stage? I never really thought we'd see "Better Than You" heel Punk in the WWE. At least taken as seriously as we have seen him be taken.

I'm not sure what you are referring to in regards to "The Con Man." Rob Conway? Was that gimmick his idea?

[The Mackem]

I watched Raw a few weeks back when the Osbournes were guest GM's and one of two main things that stuck out was the lack of character development equating to a lack of crowd reaction.

Point in case was one of the matches I watched; Sheamus vs. Jamie Knoble. This match was technically good, a squash match putting over Sheamus' power. The commentary on putting this over was excellent, however there was little reaction due to - 1. Not many people being into Sheamus as a threat because 2. Nobody really cared about Jamie Knoble being destroyed.

The reason for this is I felt was because they had this running one dimensionally. Sheamus had no other programme to speak of other than new monster guy in squash match. It was an introduction of sorts for him to the Raw audience but I think it would have benefitted by having another superstar being onvolved somehow i.e Sheamus destroying Knoble ahead of a match the next week against somebody else with Sheamus articulating that he'd do worse next week to *insert superstar*. At the same time nobody cared about Knoble who hd no TV intro and apparently hadn't wrestled in weeks. He was just one step away from 1992 superstars jobber.

The Sheamus point is moot now though as I understand he went on to bigger and better stuff following this but I think it shows your point. Sheamus is one of a long line of monster heels who come in, destroy everybody who eventually get burried by a solidified Main Eventer eventually and are then lucky if they are not released.

The attitude era was great for the unexpected, the twists and the character involvement which made it exciting to watch. The product which I saw a few weeks was very one dimensional, predictable, yet at the same time not too far away from being good. They are missing some key components which follows on to the second thing I noticed.

The serious lack of direction for WWE as a whole I feel tends to lead to uninteresting characters as well. When WWE was at it's best it had a good main event storyline; Canada vs. USA, Austin vs. McMahon, The Corporation etc. The lower card eventually rode the back of this or were dragged in via stables or matches. When I watched Raw the only 'show' Storyline was the Raw guest GM which for me is a poor reason to watch the show especially when the guest GM's have little to no mic skills. A good storyline builds anticipation and can raise interest in lower card matches.

I don't know if they find this difficult due to the number of shows they have, it's laziness, they have lack of good ideas or past failures are putting them off.

I think the key word from your topic title was 'creating', anybody could go into the writer's job and throw matches together based on what people have 'created' previous. What shows your worth is actually doing something with what you've got and progressing into something of note.

It was weird becasue I thought they weren't too far away from an truely entertaining show but they could do with focusing on these two key components; Character development and Overall Show Direction.

[Juan]

I think people would be into Sheamus more if they just watched ECW. He had some good matches there with Goldust and Shelton Benjamin.

[The Mackem]

I think you could set ECW alight and still only a small percentage of the WWE fans would raise a whimper when you move to and then appear on Raw/Smackdown. I like Sheamus but then I'd seen some of his UK and Irish work on the internet and on TWC before he even signed a development contract. It's not so easy for people seeing a guy appear on Raw which will most likely be their first exposure, just to see a big guy destroy a small guy with little to no explaination as to why.

Also, I'm not sure if I'm accurate with this but they may have a problem with too much programming. Somebody mentioned in the Raw thread that I just read that people in attendance watched 4 hours wrestling. If that's true and it's a struggle to watch 4 hours in one sitting live, it may be a problem for people to watch all WWE programming in a week which leads to a problem when people move from ECW which is obviously watched less than Raw.

[Juan]

Well it was a 3 hour Raw, which only happens about 3-4 times a year. Add in the the dark matches and the Superstars taping and that equals 4 hours.

[Mr. Nerfect]

The serious lack of direction for WWE as a whole I feel tends to lead to uninteresting characters as well. When WWE was at it's best it had a good main event storyline; Canada vs. USA, Austin vs. McMahon, The Corporation etc. The lower card eventually rode the back of this or were dragged in via stables or matches. When I watched Raw the only 'show' Storyline was the Raw guest GM which for me is a poor reason to watch the show especially when the guest GM's have little to no mic skills. A good storyline builds anticipation and can raise interest in lower card matches.

This is an interesting point. What would be considered the "main event storyline" of the WWE? John Cena vs. Randy Orton was fairly uninteresting, and is dead and buried. There was no real theme behind it. D-Generation X are in their own little world, and don't really have rivals.

Which brings me to ask something that has been going through my head for a while: If D-Generation X had a program going with a team that opposed what they represent -- could that be key? It sort of interested me when John Morrison & The Miz had their little altercations with DX. Morrison & Miz were often "edgier" than they were. Two guys like that could come along, and be more "cutting edge" than DX, to try and step on their toes? It'd need to be two guys with credibility, though. They have to appear threats to DX. I think it would even be beneficial if they weren't treated as "heels" in the classical sense, but just two guys who are looking to step-up.

Another big storyline that seems like it could be looming, is the "conspiracy" that had been alluded to involving Vince McMahon. It seemed for a while that he was angling things to get the World Heavyweight Title off The Undertaker. That has seemingly been toned down, but there are still definite rumblings that Vince is manipulating Teddy into doing things that Teddy doesn't want to do, and that Vince then distances himself from.

The "conspiracy" could involve guys that Vince wants in power. The "ideal" champions. CM Punk would fit into this -- as he is clean and not likely to be suspended. Drew McIntyre is Vince's pick for a "future World Champion." Vickie Guerrero seems to have Vince's backing, and with Vickie comes Chavo Guerrero. DX could "shock the world," and reveal that they are Vince's buddies (specifically Triple H), and that their merchandise sales makes Vince a lot of money. Even John Cena could be in there.

Against them could be guys like Christian, who Vince has "never believed in." John Morrison could stand up for the immaterial, and fight for what he really believes in. Rey Mysterio could be a wild card, going either way. He makes Vince a lot of money, but he could also be seen as "too small" by Vince. Kane could also be a wild card. Sure, he's a "company man," but maybe Kane feels stepped over by McMahon, and finally wants to be the man to carry the belt.

Chris Jericho could actually turn face with an angle like this, and talk about how he has faced so many obstacles in his career, but he never asked for a hand-out, and earned everything he had based on his talents and being "the best in the world at what he does." The Miz could also rise up, and have something to prove during this saga. He seems to want to prove his merits on his own, and he doesn't seem like the guy who would fall into place behind Vince. I think fans would actually mark out for a face Mizorrison reunion -- perhaps even against a heel DX.

Even someone like Funaki could get involved. Does Funaki toe company line like he has for years, or does he go off on his own and try and bring change? I could see Funaki being the coffee boy for McMahon's boys for a while, before he finally snaps and does something for himself for a change.

An angle like this would flip face/heel alignments on their heads, and give each character their own reason for doing what they are doing. I could even imagine segments where Stone Cold Steve Austin returns, and sponsors the guys against Vince, saying that he never won the war against McMahon, and he hopes that these guys can bring the change that he never did. Cue CM Punk interrupting Austin and talking about alcohol and such.

One guy who could really become a star through this, is Randy Orton. He is not on good terms with Vince, nor DX or John Cena. If they all formed a front to keep the WWE "a money making machine," Orton would logically be one of the leaders on the front against this, feeling that he has personally been screwed out of the WWE Title. If Legacy are still with Orton, perhaps they could also turn face under these circumstances -- although I would expect one to remain heel and do what is best for himself, and get on Vince's good side.

[kareru]

there needs to be more heel factions, i see ziggler as a leader of a heel faction full of badasses, just look at SS you had the heel team vs the face team and the chemestry on the heel team was fantastic

taking inspiration from this, the leader of the rogues reminds me so much of ziggler

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/Nabasheen/rogues03.jpg


"morrison come out to plaaayyyaaay, morrison come out to PLAAAYYYAAAY,

[screech]

I think people would be into Sheamus more if they just watched ECW. He had some good matches there with Goldust and Shelton Benjamin.

I watched him on ECW, and I'm still not a fan. Yes his matches were good with Goldust and Shelton, but I didn't see much in Sheamus. I honestly don't see what makes him so special (granted I never saw any of his pre-WWE work).

[Mr. Nerfect]

I think Sheamus is a solid talent. I haven't seen anything absolutely AMAZING from him, but for a guy his size, he seems to get psychology better than most.