DISCUSSION - The current WWE era and their failed strategy to "make everyone look credible."

**Mr. Nerfect** · 10-06-2015, 10:58 PM

This seems like solid reasoning to me. At some point, fans are going to get sick of seeing their favorites lose as much as they win. The idea of heels losing even when they are champions is detrimental too. If you're sending the message that the win matters for the good guy, then the loss needs to matter for the bad guy. You can't pay Paul without robbing Peter. But the company constantly sends the message that the wins and the losses don't matter. They don't want anyone looking any poorer, but no one looks any richer either.

I think the WWE is also afraid they will get top stars. Whether it's Bobby Lashley or Brock Lesnar to blame for this is debatable, but it seems that the WWE wants everyone to have some sort of "TV acceptable" level of being marketable, without anyone truly getting over to the point where they could leave and be a success anywhere else. Keep everyone warmish without being hot seems to be desired goal. The only thing is that with only so much emotional investment people can have, this is spread more and more thinly.

A thought experiment I often do: Can you think of any contracted performers that the WWE could absolutely not be the same without in 2015? The only person who really comes to mind is John Cena. Now, they wouldn't release Randy Orton, but does anyone really notice his semi-frequent absences from television?

And a lot of this does stem from the WWE's desire to be "entertainment" and not "professional wrestling." I'm sorry, but it's true. Part of the attraction in professional wrestling is having two guys with a simulated conflict fighting over a belt as proof as to who is the best. That means they have to be better than a bunch of guys. That means they can't lose to all the other guys. If wrestling found a more "sports-based presentation," as I believe the lingo is these days, then more and more guys might tend to get over and begin to sell merchandise, get people into arenas, etc.

10-06-2015, 10:58 PM	#2
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,634	This seems like solid reasoning to me. At some point, fans are going to get sick of seeing their favorites lose as much as they win. The idea of heels losing even when they are champions is detrimental too. If you're sending the message that the win matters for the good guy, then the loss needs to matter for the bad guy. You can't pay Paul without robbing Peter. But the company constantly sends the message that the wins and the losses don't matter. They don't want anyone looking any poorer, but no one looks any richer either. I think the WWE is also afraid they will get top stars. Whether it's Bobby Lashley or Brock Lesnar to blame for this is debatable, but it seems that the WWE wants everyone to have some sort of "TV acceptable" level of being marketable, without anyone truly getting over to the point where they could leave and be a success anywhere else. Keep everyone warmish without being hot seems to be desired goal. The only thing is that with only so much emotional investment people can have, this is spread more and more thinly. A thought experiment I often do: Can you think of any contracted performers that the WWE could absolutely not be the same without in 2015? The only person who really comes to mind is John Cena. Now, they wouldn't release Randy Orton, but does anyone really notice his semi-frequent absences from television? And a lot of this does stem from the WWE's desire to be "entertainment" and not "professional wrestling." I'm sorry, but it's true. Part of the attraction in professional wrestling is having two guys with a simulated conflict fighting over a belt as proof as to who is the best. That means they have to be better than a bunch of guys. That means they can't lose to all the other guys. If wrestling found a more "sports-based presentation," as I believe the lingo is these days, then more and more guys might tend to get over and begin to sell merchandise, get people into arenas, etc.