Hypothesis: If PG ended tomorrow
 

What's the one thing you most want to see in today's WWE which has been outlawed by the PG era thing?

For me, I want to see Shaemus vs. Orton in a fucking brutal Last Man Standing match, blood and barbed wire bats and all.

Also, CM Punk and the Miz being allowed to do more 'cutting edge' promos.

Definitely agree with the CM Punk and Miz promos.

You don't seem to care about the Superstars who seek to entertain you.

Although not IWA-MS Punk where he's swearing all over the place.

The main reason I never watched ECW was because of the Barbed Wire shit, there is no need for any of it.

The one thing I would like is for the trainers too piss off when someone is bleeding.

I don't even specifically want him to be able to swear... I just want him to really push the limits of his gimmick. Every gimmick in WWE right now is lacking in intensity, simply because the guys are not allowed to exploit probably their most interesting parts i.e. stuff that children wouldn't necessarily understand, or would scare them.

Would love to see Cena go back to the anti-hero style that got him over in the first place.

The promos could be "spiced" up a little, however, like I said before the unnecessary violence is uncalled for. The barbed wire, glass, tacks, and all that garbage should have died along with the garbage promotion that used them.

Just wanna say ECW was much more than the trash matches.

I think a barbed wire bat, used properly, is relatively harmless.

Ala Royal Rumble main event 2000. And it just adds a little edge to the match.

I just want the PG era to end so everyone can shut the fuck up about it.

Fair enough, however, I am going to need some examples

lol are you kidding me?

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rdRo9JsfBZM?fs=1&amp;hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rdRo9JsfBZM?fs=1&amp;hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

lol 1:00.

You know what? I'm lying. ECW was trashcans and tables the entire time. Goodbye.

OK THX

Yeah but it did have its share of those too.

...Okay... This is me agreeing...

Thanks for your pointless and laughable take on things.

Thanks for my take.

hahahaha :lol:

I like the idea of edgier promos. Especially for Punk.

I do think the PG rating has watered down the intensity of certain fueds. The Jericho/HBK fued when Jericho turned was immense. I feel that we will never get such a personal fued like that so long as the PG era is relevant.

Outside of Orton/Triple H from 2009, I can't think of any fued that pales in comparison. Seems as if that was last blood fued in WWE.

The thing is, PG can be done well with a decent amount a violence, and it can be done like it is with WWE, catering to a younger audience.

The original Nexus beat down was easily PG, and that was fucking awesome, even without the tie choking (which was probably TV-14 to be honest).

If swearing and blood is all you care about for wrestling, good for you, but you're missing A LOT of the really good stuff.

Also, I'm pretty sure they could get away with a little blading here or there on a PG rating, as long as it wasn't in bucket loads or a common occurrence, which it SHOULDN'T be, anyway. It should be something that means something to the angle or match, not just there as a passive prop.

This isn't a matter of the ratings, it's a matter of WWE's style and how they cherish special effects and cheesy storylines over realistic feuds and engaging storylines.

Do you not think that cheesy storylines are just far more likely to happen in a PG rated show? Realism is hard to attain with PG when what wrestling feuds are really about is the desire two guys eventually have to beat the living shit out of each other. How do you get two guys to that point without breaking PG rules? I'm genuinely interested to hear suggestions.

Suggestions? It's obviously been done for a while now.

How many feuds have come off as gripping and realistic in the current era?

Taker vs HBK?

http://olympia.fortunecity.com/stonecold/443/savage.jpg NEVER Swore



http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.co...s/sting/43.jpg NEVER Swore


The point I am getting at is, if a character is really well built there is no need for swearing, or extreme violence.

They're far more likely if you present your company in a certain way, yes.

The PG rating really comes down to more extreme violence, language, blood and sexual content. None of this is required for good wrestling.

If they replaced the current characters with UFC-like persona and just had them wrestle matches in a competitive atmosphere, it would be easily attainable on a PG level. I'm not saying they SHOULD go this route, but it's one route that's possible.

Matches now, while slower and a bit safer, aren't that much less violent than (non-hardcore) Attitude Era matches (Taker vs Austin SummerSlam 98, for example). And that's another thing you need to realize. Even if the PG rating was dropped, they would still be presenting the safer, less fast paced in-ring product to protect their workers.

The first one is supposed to be Randy Savage but I am too lazy too change it

And gee, that was a VERY SIMPLE, PG story.

2009: Shawn Michaels never faced The Undertaker at WrestleMania. Well, let's do this. Shawn needs to qualify. He does. He cuts some promos, they brawl a bit. Match happens, best match of 2009.

2010: Shawn Michaels is obsessed with losing to The Undertaker. He tries to qualify, loses. Costs Undertaker a match. Undertaker is pissed. Let's do this. Match happens, best match of 2010.

WWE doesn't write this stuff often because the majority aren't over to the point of Michaels and Taker are and, more than likely, both Taker and Michaels had A LOT of say in everything they did.

The writing staff, for the most part, is inept at booking wrestling. They book entertainment. Again, it's a matter of WWE's style, not the rating.

Thanks Champ, but I didn't ever say that I wanted peeps to be able to swear. I take your point... good stuff can be attained without extreme violence, but it's not like Sting has never bladed to make a match more entertaining. Shit, he's (his stunt double) been set on fire and thrown off the top of the Nitro Tron. Anyway I guess that's beside the point.

Xero... the stuff about worker protection... you think Vince would care quite so much if A. his wife wasn't politicking and B. it looked as though less safe working conditions would lead to a greater market share?

And your suggestion about the faux UFC route... I know you didn't fully endorse it but do you think that could really work? It'd be a shot to the heart of everything unique about pro wrestling. But then again... maybe that's what it needs.

And I said HBK Taker feud DID work... no need to go off on me like that.

The PG era began much earlier than Linda's campaign.

OK. But Vince currently believes that 'PG' will earn him more money through sponsors. If that money goes away, does he go back to how it was?

A. Yes. He has way too many people on his ass right now and is a target of the government and the media.

B. That may technically be true, but it's also not good for anyone, really, except the fans. And personally, I don't want to see anymore early deaths and anything that can prevent it I'm all for it.

And yes, I do think that the UFC realistic route could really work. It would take A LOT of retooling and years of transition if WWE were to do it, but if done right it could be money for them. Though of course I don't mean straight up UFC, they need to add SOME aspects of sports entertainment in there to keep it as a different entity. But the silly stuff could be done away with and they could do more Taker vs Michaels stuff.

The transition to PG really started around Mania 20 (very very general time frame). Unless another company comes along and starts to damage WWE directly like WCW did, I don't see them going all the way back. Maybe incorporate some of the slightly more "edgy" stuff (blood will be back, I have no doubt about that, but no where near what it once was), but for the most part what we see today is what we're going to see until the day Vince leaves the company or gives his major power over to Hunter.

One thing you don't seem to understand is that Vince changed because he HAD to. The Attitude Era was not Vince McMahon's vision. The Rock 'n Wrestling era and today's era are Vince's vision. Until the company is on the brink of extinction , I don't see things ever going back to how they once were.

Also, WWE is fucking enormous right now. Without someone like WCW coming along, it would take them YEARS to slide back to where they were in the Rock 'n Wrestling era, let alone 92-96.

Aye. I do agree in a way I guess. But you go down that route and the Taker character would never be able to exist; at least, not the one we know these days.

Also, it would perhaps lead people to say: why the hell should I watch these guys slug it out in a UFC style when there is REAL UFC on the other channel? Sports entertainment is glorious because of the ridiculous drama it is able to create. Take that away... I worry that it'd become dull and well, pretty much die.

As a post-it note here: I don't want to see guys being put in unnecessary danger. Chair shots to the head which go unblocked SHOULD be banned. Cutting oneself with a tiny razor on the forehead probably shouldn't, so long as it is used sparingly and safely. I'm more bothered by the idea that the 'edge' of rivalries is not always there because these guys cannot let loose in promos etc.

I accept this is a tricky topic to discuss and am in no way committed to my own convictions, as I know relatively little about the business.

PG has nothing to do with the realism of storylines. You can have a personal fued, sans cussing and bleeding, if written correctly.

Danielson's original fued with Micheal Cole came off as a very realistic situation that any hard working individual could relate to. You have a guy who has a proven track record everywhere he's been, has an elite level of ability, and yet here he is, feeling he's being held down by the company becuase he doesn't fit their model of a wreslter even though he has earned the oppurtunity through past work.

That's not realistic? The problem has been stated; the writing team doesn't understand how to book a wrestling show.

Then Danielson tries to inject raw emotion into things by choking a guy on RAW during a brutal attack, and gets fired. But until then, the feud had been brewing nicely, I agree.

Also Xero, good point about Vince's real wrestling vision. I guess when I consider how AMAZING his own TV work was during the Attitude era, I just presume he liked how things were. Maybe not.

-We get more half-naked divas (i.e return of bra and panties matches)
-Return of blood
-More cursing (doesn't have to go overboard though)
-Better wrestling.

Better wrestling? Do you mean, in technical terms? How?

1. The tie choking thing was understandable. I don't agree with them firing Danielson for it, but I get why they felt they had to. The fued still has steam behind it becuase Danielson is still trying to prove he's better than the Miz and indirectly prove to Cole he belongs.

2. WWE was amazing in the 80s too. The crowds were hot, you had a hot midcard and the main event featured some of the greatest heels and most memorable matches of the time. The thing is back then, and in the Attitude Era, Vince was gunning for something. He wanted to mainstream wrestling in the 80s and had to bust his ass and pull out all the stops to do so.

He then had to save his sinking ship of a company and regain control of the market in the mid and late 90s becuase WCW was taking over and hurting Vince's wallet.

What we see now may be Vince's vision, but it doesn't have the same driving force behind it becuase Vince pretty much owns the market. There is no real competition, and with no one to push Vince's limits, he has no reason to push hard for the current era. That's why what we see now is likely what we are going to be seeing for the forseeable future.

1. You can get that elsewhere.
2. The return of blood would be welcomed so long as it was built to mean something and not made to be commonplace.
3. Cursing doesn't exactly equal bette, more intense promos. Would cursing really help Punk's promos? I think wreslters with mic time being given more freedom to say what they want, so long as it followed PG guidelines, would be better than just allowing cursing.
4. Like someone said, how would the wrestling be better? If anything, the current era challenges the roster to step up and really learn how to tell a story since the matches are not as fast paced and hard hitting as before.

That was usually piss-take time so it's amusing seeing this as a want.

You Roman or something?

You 12 or something?

What?

The removal of the PG stamp would not equate better wrestling. More fast paced maybe, but definitely not better. Because when you just blast through things, people can get hurt, severely.

The return of blood would be welcomed, like many have said though. As long as it fits the story and gets a point across, not just used willy nilly and irresponsibly.

Allowing the superstars more freedom during promos would be awesome. It is much easier to show raw emotion (anger, excitement, etc.) when you aren't reading from a script.

Which may have something to do with the lack of top tier talent and writing, rather than the rating.

Wait, sorry, that would be injecting an element of logic into an argument that seems solely designed around wish fulfillment. Let me correct myself.

PG ratings make good writing impossible. Linda is killing wrestling. Blood can totally make everything better.

Tongue in cheek? Wazzat?

of course, how could I not see it? That attack wouldn't have worked at all without the tie choke!

:roll:

Kane Knight, you seem to just pick bits of what I say out of context and then make some smarmy statement about them which really has no significance in terms of what I was actually discussing. Thanks for your input, though.

Try not being so stupid, then.

I mean, you can complain about the latter comment being "picked" out of context, but the prior one, I ran with going with the line of logic you were putting forth.

Complain about "smarmy" comments all you want (And by the way, lrn2english), but your statements are overwhelmingly stupid in context.

Now, back to your "convictions...."

lol

I still love that people blame Linda for PG. It always makes me laugh.

Again the problem is the lack of talent. Everybody is talking about HBK/Taker, Sting, Randy Savage, Stone Cold, ect. These guys don't need to swear or be violent, they are just incredibly talented. The wrestlers now a days are shit. Guys would get over if they could go in the ring, show a little psychology and be able to talk on the mic. I don't know where I read it but somebody mentioned how back in the day guys spent years on the road learning their craft, now it's 9 months and you're hired.

PG, 14A, R, doesn't mean shit if the talent isn't there.

If I owned the WWE, I would immediately fire Johnny Ace and hire someone who knows wrestling talent and focus the promotion into more wrestling and less talking.

People blame the "PG rating" for the tame WWE product nowadays, but they were PG in the past - even during the Attitude era in its early stages - and still used weapons, blood and mild profantities.

The WWE's current on-screen product isn't really to do with matching the criteria of a PG rating per se (they could probably be a little more risque and remain "PG"), it's to do with the megabucks deal they cut with Mattel. A PG rating is simply the byproduct of adhering to the policies and rules laid out by Mattel as part of the deal.

Linda's campaign has fuck all to do with it, because it's not as though there isn't a decade of Attitude archive material for her opposition to use against her anyway, and she is no longer officially working for WWE in any capacity.

If anything, it could be construed as more detrimental. After all, to the uninformed observer it seems that when Linda McMahon runs WWE, it's a sexed-up haven of violence and swearing. As soon as she leaves, it morphs into a family friendly tame television show.

By the way, the Mattel deal is 5 years I believe so you can bank on a PG product for at the very least the next half a decade.

I'm not buying that talent comment at all. With the way WWE restrains their roster from going all out in the ring that statement has no validity. If we were actually allowed to see what these guys could actually do in the ring then you may have a point. But right now, unless they have a well documented past for putting on great matches elsewhere (Danielson, Punk, Kaval) then I don
t feel we can make that sort of judgement.

If PG ended people would complain about how hard WWE tries to be edgy.

It has to do with the way guys come up. Twenty years ago you went around the world and honed your craft against all different kinds of opponents before you got the call up. Now you spend a year or two in FCW and that may be it.

Well, let's see. There was Taker vs HBK, JBL vs HBK, Jericho vs HBK, Flair vs HBK, Batista vs HBK.......

I'm sensing a pattern here....

:y:

I was wondering if something had changed in that aspect, seems it has.

I do agree with that point to a certain extent seeing as how many guys the WWE tried to homegrow didn't pan out. But I still think it's hard to judge who really has in ring ability and talent and who doesn't. For example, Cena's a homegrown product, and I think he is miles better than what he's allowed to be.

If being brought up too quick is your (well founded gripe) then I think itLs more of a case of WWE rushing their prospects and not taking enought time to develop them than it is the lack of talent and ability.