What wrestler do you think isnt as good as they used to be?

[Celtic_Emperor]

Well, it was cool I guess. Even though it was sort of an "undercover" thing, they probably designed it in an attempt to make wrestling look real and debunk attempts to call it otherwise. Sure these men get hurt over time, and sometimes freak accidents happen that end careers, but its by no means from going all out in the ring. They aren't even allowed to do that, and they have to let someone else win. Thats a pretty shameful way to earn a paycheck I think. At least in the sense you'd be clearly living/performing a lie, and riding that lie to fame or to constant defeat. I wonder if that aspect of the business has ever caught up with any of the wrestlers that would prefer to just wrestle and say to hell with selling a plot. What happens happens. I think it would be a turn for the better if everything wasn't so controlled. Our "champions" aren't champions at all. Let them wrestle eachother for real. We'd probably have different champions in that case, and they will have earned the title, even if they feel the pain from it. Their big men, and theres guidelines that could be set up to keep it from going too far. So what are they worried about? If they are willing to go this far to make it fake, why not go a bit further and make it real?


- Damien

 

[BigJim]

Things have certainly gotten more spectacular in recent years, but I don't think it's necessarilly the change from Federation to Entertainment that's responsible. The company used to be called World Wrestling Federation Entertainment on it's headed notepaper. After the World Wildlife Fund sued it for the initials WWF, McMahon had to drop the Federation bit.

I think the rest of it has been natural evolution, although I do think that it's a BIG BAD mistake to have so many damn titles and have them changing hands so bloody often. It get's confusing when a fortnight is considered a long reign these days. JR remarked the other day that Hogan had won the world title 6 times and Rock had won it 7. That's all very well, but Hogan's second longest title reign (he won it from Randy Savage at Wrestlemania 5 and lost it to The Ultimate Warrior at Wrestlemania 6) was longer than all 7 of Rock's reigns put together! And Hogan's longest reign was from the year before Wrestlemania 1 until halfway between Wrestlemanias 3 and 4!!! 3 and a three quarter years!!! Now that may be too long, but the current state of affairs is frigging ridiculous.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I agree. They don't allow the wrestlers to have a belt for too long, because I'm guessing they think passing it around will keep things fresh. And there are too many belts, and too many people competiting for them. But then again, a wrestler's skill doesn't determine how long he has a title belt. When the plot calls for a wrestler to take a dive, they have to do it. It would be different if they were actually beating the snot out of everyone else, however.

The business has become more exciting over the years, but I still don't think in half of the cases that the wrestler's performance has gone down. They simply aren't allowed to really do what they could. The older wrestlers, yes, their performance has gone down, but thats only natural.

But even though this is entertaining, its all wrong. " I'm Vincent McMahon, and I'm in the business of making professional wrestlers LOOK like their wrestling."- Vince McMahon. Its like thats what he's saying anyways..


- Damien