I remember when wrestling used to be a live presentation. People used to go and leave the house and actually watch that shit.

I really want Jim Cornette to sign up to these forums and just eviscerate CyNick.

I feel like I'm unwillingly sucking the consciousness of Jim Cornette into this thread, and am going to cause the poor man headaches.

No matter what I said, you would say he "eviscerated" me.

I would out point him though. Guaranteed.

What they are doing now is simply not working, it is doing the exact opposite. It is the reason why aside from John Cena they have part timers. They need to have the occasional jobber in there, perhap rather than wrestle every week they sit in during a match and talk smack and maybe even cost someone a match that way.... to further the feud rather than have Cesaro lose because the Big Show needed a win before the PPV. The ratings are down because the product is STALE, the fanvorites are JOBBING OUT every other week killing their momentum.

Yep they know how to make stars .. just look at the indy talent on the main roster.... Their main issue is they do not know how to push the stars the fans create... You know the ones that give them their money....

So in your mind they are struggling to make money?

Just going off the title but I think everyone is credible. That is what is wrong though. There is no one who stands out anymore because everyone is on or very close to the same level as everyone else.

I think the issue is more that the people who follow dirt sheets like a certain style of product. So when they see a new guy that THEY like, they want to see them pushed to the moon.

When WWE brings in a guy, I think they take guys they see a future in and like to throw them in the deep water to see how good they are and to quickly establish them as someone in the top mix.

But a variety of things can happen, maybe the guy doesnt get over quickly, maybe they are a nightmare backstage, maybe they just run their course and come back to the middle of the pack. This has happened throughout the whole history of WWE, it's not a new thing. But people are acting like it's new.

Not at all the fact that people can tell when they hear a pin drop in the arena and shit not getting over... or they can just tell plain crap t.v. Not that at all.

The "certain style of product" argument doesn't hold much weight either. I've spent plenty of time arguing with people about the indy darling type not being the kind of guys you should build a company around if you want to appeal to a more mainstream audience. I know a lot of guys here who prefer more of a "sports entertainment" product that pure "rassln'".

And the one place they can all come together on is "My God, whatever they're trying to produce right now is dog shit." They somehow manage to be so bad at the basics of pushing guys long term, building heat for matches and simply telling coherent stories. that they fail miserably on both sides of the spectrum.

Sports entertainment

How about answering my post?
In any case i believe that although they are making money their booking is probably costing them more money in the long run. With the talent they have and the avenues available to them this company should be making more money than what they are and part of that is how they push their roster.

I've thought this for awhile now.

Kinda in the "too much of a good thing" school of thought. An hour of WWE a week (pre RAW- All American Wrestling, Superstars of Wrestling), and maybe a half an hour of whatever else you could get a fix of from NWA/WCW or any regional territory with some local weekend TV time. There seemed to be more done with less.

And it is not just reflected by possibly having "too much" TV time (and squandering a lot of it on the same talent all the time), but booking these large, very impersonal venues. A live WWE wrestling event has evolved into a social event instead of a spectacle for fans, if you get what I mean.

It is one of the (myriad of) reasons for the success of NXT- and I don't just mean the tapings, but the live events. And with the possible exception of the Takeover from Barklay's Center (as there were *other things* going on), pretty much the crowds are more on the intimate side. The people who are there want to be there. They want to see the talent and enjoy the show for what it's supposed to be instead of going to simply say they were there. NXT is sort of in the same feel as ECW in the mid 90's, or a WWE house show in the early to mid 80's.

They've been able to create a hot atmosphere in large venues in the past though. It just takes good booking over an extended period of time that draws in a vocal crowd who can get lost in the show as opposed to the crowds now who come for wrestling but then realize it was a bad idea when they get there and basically sit on their hands for 3 hours trying not to fall asleep.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wOy6b6X9lws" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This was 3 years ago. If only they were competent enough to roll with this instead of willingly pissing it away and leaving themselves in the situation they're in now where they're praying Roman Reigns can get to the point one day that they managed to get Ryback to then.

I don't think Roman Reigns is as incompetent as Ryback though. It'll be tough.

They will likely bring in more money this year than they ever have. In your expert opinion, how much revenue should WWE be making for YOU to consider them successful.

How many consecutive Mania shows should they sell with more than 60k fans? If they sell 100k for Dallas does that tell you the product is hot or cold? They are one of the most popular You Tube channels. Does that mean they are doing well or poorly?

When people come back and buy tickets again its usually because they had a good time the previous show.

You really got a hard on for Ryback eh? He at least seems to speak up for himself. If only he was more talented.

Ryback is anazing. The WWE screwed up so bad with him.

Amazingly bad in the ring.

Ryback > Whatever thing it is that DTTS loves

I've got a "hard on" for well-booked guys with star quality. I actually like the "Vince type". I think they draw well in wrestling when booked properly, too. Ryback was a prototypical WWE superstar, they pushed him as such... and it actually worked.

If only they didn't derp it away by saying "Holy shit, this guy we made into a monster and put in the main event is getting over with the crowd! Now let's start having him lose and let it culminate with a clean loss at WrestleMania to Mark Henry!" Genius booking.

Why is he bad exactly? He keeps me entertained though all of his matches.

And what happens once the Part timers are too old or too busy to come back?
What happens if Cena injuries catch up to him and he ends up on the shelf?
How are their house shows doing compared to 10 years ago? 15 years ago?

Think there's a difference between making loads of money and having an interesting, well written product. CM Punk's pipe bomb said it best; Vince McMahon is gonna make money in spite of himself. However, just because the company is making money, it doesn't mean it can't get better or be more entertaining to the masses. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Some random points:

* Fastway is a bad-ass.

* I'm not a big Ryback fan. At all. But jobbing him out to Henry was one of the dumbest fucking things I've ever seen in my life.

* There's a difference between revenue and profits.

* A business model goes much deeper than anything CyNick has implied.

* The creative direction of something is, indeed, much different from its commercial success. Criticial success and commercial success are not causally linked.

* I appreciate the WWE's success, which is why I don't expect them to drop Total Divas or RAW's third hour anytime soon.

* lolstockdrops

* You can use cloak and dagger tactics to dress up increases or decreases in many different ways.

* The WWE product still fucking sucks.

* Cesaro is the best.