1st thread: Attitude vs today

**dablackguy** · 08-21-2005, 03:15 AM

The story starts last week when me and 2 of my friends both long time fans, watched Wrestlemania X7 (Think: Rock/Austin w McMahon swerve, HHH/taker, hardcore 3 way) We sat there and even though we knew what was going to happen we couldnt help but watch the whole way through 4 hours of entertainment.

Fast forward to now, even as we compared to more recent Wrestlemanias, its obviously isnt the same, so we wondered why this is, some answers are obvious, some are more subtle, here's some of what we came up with:

A) IMO, the same effort isnt there, if you wanna call it passion, I'll believe that, but it doesnt seem like the same effort is going into the matches not on the writers parts, but on the wrestlers themselves. Some guys arent technical wreslting gods, understood. But you dont have to be a technical wrestling guru to put on an entertaining match. Hell, Rock/Austin was an entertaing match even though there was little technical wrestling to speak of, same goes for the hardcore 3 way. IMO Kurt Angle/Chris Benoit now is nothing compared to Angle/Benoit of old.

B) One of my friends cited the lack of gimmicks, what do you guys think of this? Before we had Kane, Biker underfaker so forth and so on.(even though everyone, me included bitched about him) Now, it seems, everyone is just "Chris Masters" or "Shelton Benjamin" or "Muhammad Hassan" there are no characters anymore, in a way, and some will kill me for saying it was fun because it was over the top. Everyone is just themselves "with the volume turned way up" simple, but not always entertaining. I still believe there should be gimmicks in a way but not under any circumstances at the cost of wrestling ability.

C)The writing today is garbage, enough said.

In a way, I think that the roster of today is more athletic (but not necessarily more talented) than the roster of old, yet the product is weaker. Make no mistake the attitude era had Austin/Rock/HHH/Foley/Taker but to say that guys like Benoit/Guerrero/Benjamin/Cena/Batista are not more agile and athetic in the ring may be a misnomer.

I believe that the difference in today vs then is the "it" factor. So to all of you, what is that "it" factor?? What is it that's missing and would you trade the product now for the product then? Maybe its apples and oranges comparing an upswing in wreslting popularity to now, but never hurts to have an opinion...

08-21-2005, 03:15 AM	#1
dablackguy Tacos! Posts: 795	1st thread: Attitude vs today The story starts last week when me and 2 of my friends both long time fans, watched Wrestlemania X7 (Think: Rock/Austin w McMahon swerve, HHH/taker, hardcore 3 way) We sat there and even though we knew what was going to happen we couldnt help but watch the whole way through 4 hours of entertainment. Fast forward to now, even as we compared to more recent Wrestlemanias, its obviously isnt the same, so we wondered why this is, some answers are obvious, some are more subtle, here's some of what we came up with: A) IMO, the same effort isnt there, if you wanna call it passion, I'll believe that, but it doesnt seem like the same effort is going into the matches not on the writers parts, but on the wrestlers themselves. Some guys arent technical wreslting gods, understood. But you dont have to be a technical wrestling guru to put on an entertaining match. Hell, Rock/Austin was an entertaing match even though there was little technical wrestling to speak of, same goes for the hardcore 3 way. IMO Kurt Angle/Chris Benoit now is nothing compared to Angle/Benoit of old. B) One of my friends cited the lack of gimmicks, what do you guys think of this? Before we had Kane, Biker underfaker so forth and so on.(even though everyone, me included bitched about him) Now, it seems, everyone is just "Chris Masters" or "Shelton Benjamin" or "Muhammad Hassan" there are no characters anymore, in a way, and some will kill me for saying it was fun because it was over the top. Everyone is just themselves "with the volume turned way up" simple, but not always entertaining. I still believe there should be gimmicks in a way but not under any circumstances at the cost of wrestling ability. C)The writing today is garbage, enough said. In a way, I think that the roster of today is more athletic (but not necessarily more talented) than the roster of old, yet the product is weaker. Make no mistake the attitude era had Austin/Rock/HHH/Foley/Taker but to say that guys like Benoit/Guerrero/Benjamin/Cena/Batista are not more agile and athetic in the ring may be a misnomer. I believe that the difference in today vs then is the "it" factor. So to all of you, what is that "it" factor?? What is it that's missing and would you trade the product now for the product then? Maybe its apples and oranges comparing an upswing in wreslting popularity to now, but never hurts to have an opinion...