So, wrestling is cyclical... What's going to be the next "nWo"?
 

Got to thinking after reading the other thread. It's always been said that wrestling is cyclical. There are 3-5 years of 'good' followed by many years of shit. In the 80's it was Hogan and wrestling going mainstream (Mania, NBC, etc). In the mid-late 90's is was the nWo and a crank-up in Attitude.

So, the question is what's going to launch us into the next big era? An angle? A drastic change in the way things are booked (versus the past 10-12 years or so)? A combination? Will it be a new promotion taking the helm? WWE branching out properly (completely distinct brands)?

Discuss.

*Cyclical

Also CHRIS FUCKING SABIN

That's what I said. :shifty:

I dont know If wrestling will ever regain its popularity it once had during the 80's and late 90's. I think that the mcmahons views are too old fasioned to gain todays audience

I keep thinking that next new wave of wrestlers' sons and daughters will be amazing. We're about to hit that part of the cycle I think.

Vince steps down

lol.

cynical.

Shut up, it's late. :(

TNA and WWE need to go head to head, at least one night a week.

I would like to see Impact go up against ECW. They could potentially at least dent the ratings even now.

Well if the type of event you describe is to take place, the whole nature is its something we wouldn't predict or imagine, or whatever. So the bottom line is nobody has a FUCKING CLUE what will "save" wrestling, if anything. So personally its one of those things to just sit back and wait til it happens, but not hold my breath.

I don't know, or really care, what causes the next wave of great televised wrestling. I just want it to happen. I'm sick of having to turn to ROH for all of my wrestling needs.

Not that I'm sick of ROH. I just wish I could get more good wrestling for free.

We're hypothesizing, dick. It's part of the fun of being a human being. Thinking about shit.

I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just giving my 2 cents. The question was whats gonna happen next, and I said "nobody has a FUCKING CLUE by its nature". I wasn't trying to come off as a dick or kill the discusion and I'm sorry if I did.

You see, Wrestling is cyclical when it was about wrestling. Nowadays its all business, so like American Idol for example, the most marketable will triumph over the most talented every time.

Now on with the hypothesising.

I think that eventually, the brand split will end. Be it in a couple of years or whatever. Probably when TNA actually starts to really compete. The brand split really was the start fo the downturn for the WWE, it propelled wrestlers who weren't really ready or talented enough into positions of power.

This will create a feeling of evolution within the WWE, the bad will be weeded out and the best will remain.

A stable involving Carlito, Ken Kennedy, Chris Masters, Brian Kendrick and Paul London could be a decent draw in a reunited brand. They are all pretty young and all could do with the rub that a dominant stable would give them.

Two words: New Blood

looks like we found the buzzword of the week in cyclical, lol

Or cynical(sorry Xero)

I think the answer is in more Kevin Nash. :shifty:

Well, this wouldn't be the first time people have thought that. On the other hand, getting 3s in ratings no longer means what it used to, so on top of dwindling numbers, they have increased standards to fight.

I think WWE will hold on for quite some time, but honestly think this is the beginning of a slow slide to failure. WWE isn't losing money, but you compare their rosters and operating costs, and it's clear even they're feeling the pinch.

If I'm wrong on this, I'll be glad. I've been watching WWE since I was like 6, and wrestling in general. I don't want to see wrestling off TV, and I don't even want to see WWE off my TV. I love wrestling, I'm just really tired of shitty wrestling. Instead of focusing on the wrestling, though, they've spread out to other venues, meaning that they're working on movies (Bad idea). Granted, the movies aren't failing, but they're not particularly succeeding, either. And remember, I thought the Marine was solid.

The problem is, Vince has never had his finger on the pulse, but he thinks he did and still does. Hogan more or less fell into his lap, Austin more or less fell into his lap, it was pure luck that his nWo knockoff outdid the original, and even Bischoff's own doing that fans switched over to Raw (Ironically, that's WWE's version of the story, evdiently. It's a bit more complex, but WWE's said on a couple occasions that, effecticely, the only way for them to come out on top is for the competition to shoot itself in the foot).

"Say, would you like a chocolate covered pretzel?"

Vince's attempts to be popular culture have quite frankly proven he doesn't get entertainment. Further, I postulate that the Attitude Era (and to an extent, the Hogan Era) only occurred because of things which are not allowed: A degree of spontanety, an excitement that left even smarks feeling like Joe Jobber could walk out with the title on a given night, despite the reality of the situation, high flying (I'm sorry, but there's no way the Cruisers would have been popular on either show as they are now, and the Hardyz wouldn't be much either), moves that made the fans legitimately go "Holy shit!" a degree of fan interactvity, etc.

Honestly, I think if TNA ever got their shit together, they could kill WWE, as long as they didn't fuck it up. I really do imagine TNA, booked by Heyman, with fewer ego problems and hasbeens, could dominate WWE without any effort. WWE would more than likely attack their competition, through suits, contract wars, etc., And barring truely divine luck (Or perhaps infernal luck), WWE could find themselves sucking tailpipe in short order. Potentially. The reality is, I doubt any of this will happen, and I think wrestling will fester instead of removing the dead tissue.

If Shane McMahon takes over the WWE, then wrestling will drastically improve.

When Vince dies, any hope of WWE reclaiming former glories officially die with him.

Wrestling is NOT cyclical. Or if it is, how the fuck did WCW go out of business? Maybe they are getting ready for the next up part of the circle or something.

Tsk Tsk. Common sense and real-world examples? They're not going to like you at all.

What else is new?

I covered the WCW thing in another thread.

I think wrestling is cyclical in the sense that one generation loves it, but then they hate it because it becomes so fucking stupid. Then their kids love it because the staged violence appeals to them, and since their parents hate it, they love it.

I can see why the WWE tries to book for the younger generation. Do I agree with it? Fuck no. But I can understand it. As long as wrestling is hated by the general populus, it's going to find that younger base of "REBELS!!!11" that adore it just to stick it to their oldies. And even if it is just a phase, there is going to be some new kids who watch it. It's a shame, but I can honestly see the WWE surviving even if it flies on auto-pilot.

Anyway, with that little disclaimer out of the way, now onto my prediction of "the next big thing". As jeritron5000 said, it's probably going to come out of the blue, and we're not going to have any clue what it will be, but if I had to place bets on what will get people watching, here's what it would be:

The Youth Revolution

This flows with my idea of younger viewers watching, and it seems to be what the WWE is aiming for with their constant pushes of young guys (Randy Orton, John Cena, Chris Masters and Kenny Dykstra come to mind). It could also get smarter and older viewers watching if the right young guys were pushed.

There are a lot of young guys who have damn-near perfected the craft. Kenny Dyksta, CM Punk, Bryan Danielson, Harry Smith, Teddy Hart, Johnny Jeter, Paul Burchill, Idol Stevens, Paul London, Brian Kendrick, etc. I believe all of them are under 30 years of age. They are the guys the WWE can push to appeal to both demographics.

I am of the thought that Kenny Dykstra, CM Punk or Paul Burchill should end The Undertaker's WrestleMania streak. I would not object if Paul London, Brian Kendrick & Ashley Massaro joined up with Shawn Michaels to continue DX. Yes, it is a pipe-dream, and it is me whacking off the talent that is Paul London and Brian Kendrick, but if the WWE pushed them to mean something as a tag team, people will buy into them. Throw Shawn Michaels, Paul London & Brian Kendrick into a feud with Harry Smith, TJ Wilson and Teddy Hart, and you have yourself a fun, fun, fun, fun feud. When Triple H returns, have him upset that HBK continued on DX without him, and have him form an alliance with Kenny Dykstra and Idol Stevens, who share the same training under Killer Kowalski as Triple H.

I think the WWE is having their cake, but they can also eat it too. They have young talent who can appeal to the younger demographic, but they also have young talent who can wrestle. They love nostalgia, but they can actually produce it while helping the future (New Hart Foundation is an example).

I think the next wrestling boom, if it comes, will actually be because the politics fade away, and the WWE has its veterans put over the young, fresh talent.

Right there is a problem. No new fans are watching wrestling. Kids aren't getting into wrestling now and there is no reason to. When we grew up, there were characters and personalities. You knew Hogan's, Sting's, Warrior's, etc would win all the time but the rest was pot luck. Now even my 8 year old nephew knows the business revolves around Triple-H and he doesn't even know why. That's how obvious their TV is. There is nothing to appeal to new fans. All the wrestlers look the same, talk the same and have the exact same matches with the exception of the few really good workers left - Benoit, Regal, Finlay, Guerrero, Edge, etc.

I see what you're saying, and you bring up a mighty fine point.

My little nephew loves it, though. He doesn't love SmackDown!, he much prefers RAW ("the only good thing about SmackDown! are the cruiserweights!"), but even he thought the Rosie vs. Donald segment was stupid.

The kids over here in Australia are pretty stupid. I get the feeling they're buying into the product. Red Rooster has been advertising WWE-based toys with their kids meals, I see a lot of kids wearing shirts, and my nephew is one of the "jocks" at his primary school, and all his friends watch it, so I'd say it's a trend over here.

On an unrelated note, my dad is the ultimate casual fan. He knows it is fake, wouldn't normally watch it if I didn't appreciate it, and he tends to laugh more than anything. Not at its crappiness, at the little things he notices. He laughed at Test because of the way he reacted when a fan touched him, he points out things like "you know they're not going to fight when they're wearing a watch", etc. He also hates John Cena, thinks Vince McMahon is a whackjob, loves the Big Show, hated Brock Lesnar, thought the Rosie vs. Donald segment was ridiculous, etc. I think one of the biggest mistakes the WWE can make is thinking that casual fans are going to jump through their hoops, rather than make their own decisions on what they like, and what they don't.

And nobody thought it was worth a shit there, either. :y:

Maybe WWE can move over to your neck of the woods. That is, if they're not too defensive that you called their sport fake. :p

It's not pulling in new viewers over here, that's for sure. There's an increase in kids, but the real question is, how much of an increase. People keep asserting that Cena and ocmpany are bringing in a load of new fans, but if that's true, it makes the exodus of the old fans even scarier.

I'd seriously fall out of my chair laughing if some kid went to Mania with a "Spoiler: Triple H wins" sign.

Seriously, though, my ex's 8 and 10 year old nephews are the same way. They're bored with Triple H and Cena (Though in the latter case, maybe because they're not wiggers).

I think it's pretty cleear though that it's not cyclical. By Alienoid's definition, almost all products are cyclical. The difference is, most products are able to offer something to new people on a regular basis, even in entertainment, without severe booms or busts. Wrestling is the bastard son of soap operas and carnivals, and neither are particularly tied to this problem. Wrestling seems to be the only industry that suffers like this without any external economic factors, and it magically only seems to affect the TV variety (Most companies would not survive these cycles, otherwise).

So many logical fallacies in this argument.

The "cyclical" thing I see that needs to happen is for a billionaire with unending pockets to buy a wrestling company, a viable TV time slot, hire someone bloodthirsty to run the company with the sole purpose of taking WWE head on.

There has to be a billionaire out there with a love for wrestling....doesn't there? WWE is like the Wall-Mart of professional wrestling. Mom and Pop shops can't survive. Someone has to end the monopoly.

What billionaire would want to piss away millions of dollars in a carny business?

There is a reason they are billionaires in the first place. THEY AREN'T FUCKING MARKS!


I don't give a shit how stupid people thought of the 1990 characters of wrestling. Legion of Doom, Earthquake, Tito Santana, The Rockers, Jake Roberts, Brutus Beefcake, etc, etc, They all drew in the kids. I like John Cena but he isn't drawing in a new audience. Nobody is because their characters are all too directed towards 18-35 year olds.

Carny business????? That's ridiculous. Whether you think wrestling's a joke or not, there's a ton of money to be made out there, it has nothing to do with being a mark or not. Done the right way, a new company could make a shit load of money going head up with WWE. There's a market out there that is being untapped at the moment. A market WWE had at one time, but is now spending their money elsewhere. I would just think a love for wrestling would help the cause. Look at Mark Cuban. The guy obviously loves basketball and competition. A billionaire with the same qualities, but directed towards wrestling would help the cause IMO. Someone with a keen business sense, but a passion for the industry.

Wrestling doesn't need to die with the McMahon family. There has to be someone else out there.

You clearly don't know this business.

Only 2 people ever made any good money promoting pro wrestling - Vince McMahon and Ted Turner. And Turner had 3 good years before losing more money in the last 2 years than he ever made. So in short, he lost money overall.

If you think wrestling isn't a carny business then you are a fool.

If there is so much money to be made, why aren't people jumping on board? Why do these upstart companies last about 7 shows?

Want to talk about money marks? Panda Energy. You know the company that owns TNA? Yeah they lost money hand over fist on wrestling and still continue to do so. Where exactly is this money that is to be made?

For that matter, why back a dying horse, when you can back MMA or something that's, you know, POPULAR?

Yeah, I'm sorry to offend you sissies with mention of that evil MMA stuff, but seriously, why would anyone, even someone who loves wrestling, want to piss away that kind of money?

There was but he didn't really know what the hell he was getting into. WCW anyone?