PDA

View Full Version : 2nd/3rd generation wrestlers



xrxprtyx
07-01-2011, 06:42 PM
I've been wondering a lot why WWE doesn't take advantage of the history that 2nd/3rd generational superstars (Randy Orton, Cody Rhodes, Goldust, Michael McGillicutty, Ted DiBiase, Jr.) bring to the table. Granted, they have their fathers occasionally appear to support them in a storyline, but it would never get old to me to have these guys say that the WWE ruined their father's careers with politics and gimmicks, and that they are out for vengeance, to bring back the legacy that their last name should bring. This CM Punk storyline is so interesting because they are striking raw nerves that almost make us all feel uneasy, like is this real or not. Wouldn't it be great for McGillicutty to say that WWE planned all along ways to keep his dad from winning the WWE Championship, or Cody to say look what they've made his father and brother wear, and stupid things they made them do? I think when you blur the lines between reality and storyline is when things get really interesting. There's just a million ways to go with this, what are your thoughts? Have you ever really seen the WWE do this type of thing before?

efrum
07-01-2011, 06:47 PM
I personally think it's good to draw a line between these guys and their parents.
I'd rather have WWE put across that they are there on merit and not because of their family (whether that be the case or not)

Rilla
07-01-2011, 06:56 PM
I personally think it's good to draw a line between these guys and their parents.
I'd rather have WWE put across that they are there on merit and not because of their family (whether that be the case or not)

This.

Cool, your father was a big shot in the WWE, WCW, or what have you.

But, if you're good, you're going to make it regardless.

ihearvoices
07-01-2011, 06:57 PM
I've been wondering a lot why WWE doesn't take advantage of the history that 2nd/3rd generational superstars (Randy Orton, Cody Rhodes, Goldust, Michael McGillicutty, Ted DiBiase, Jr.) bring to the table. Granted, they have their fathers occasionally appear to support them in a storyline, but it would never get old to me to have these guys say that the WWE ruined their father's careers with politics and gimmicks, and that they are out for vengeance, to bring back the legacy that their last name should bring. This CM Punk storyline is so interesting because they are striking raw nerves that almost make us all feel uneasy, like is this real or not. Wouldn't it be great for McGillicutty to say that WWE planned all along ways to keep his dad from winning the WWE Championship, or Cody to say look what they've made his father and brother wear, and stupid things they made them do? I think when you blur the lines between reality and storyline is when things get really interesting. There's just a million ways to go with this, what are your thoughts? Have you ever really seen the WWE do this type of thing before?

This would of been perfect for Legacy but to do it now just seem kind of late unless you get another group of 2nd/3rd generation superstars and people would have to forget about legacy too

xrxprtyx
07-01-2011, 07:04 PM
I don't think that really applies because already the only real surefire way to bring in a wrestler AND have them be successful right away is to have them be heel and win repeatedly by taking shortcuts, I think it's usually unsuccessful to bring them in as a face because nobody knows them so nobody cares if they win (this can be avoided by a very very good storyline), and it would be a joke to have every new guy beat all the guys who lose the majority of the time straight up because then these guys make the wwe overall roster look weak, and it's too predictable. The problem with nxt is you see too many flaws in these newbies, and you're always judging them. When they come in as a heel from the get-go, they may not belong in your eyes, but they are a force to be reckoned with, you can't deny the fact that they're winning and succeeding. So, whether or not they belong, in time, will eventually come to prove itself. If they don't, they're gone. But when they can use history to make their matches/motivation interesting, I would say use it every time. It was cool when CM Punk reminded Randy of several years ago he cost him his ECW title when he punted him in the head. Made it feel like a storyline with promise, rather than I just attacked you because you're my next target.

AOF666
07-01-2011, 07:06 PM
Maybe if they did it with the IC belt. McGullicutty stepped up and called out the WWE on how great wrestlers like his father held the IC title and the WWE turned it into a joke. Ic belt use to be important.

blink
07-01-2011, 07:20 PM
I'm pretty much down with anything that involves dibiase getting a push and actually winning

tad locust
07-01-2011, 07:28 PM
The most successful 2nd/3rd generation wrestlers are those who are different from there father so I don't think this will help.Dibiase had his father appear and stole his fathers gimmick,look where that got him.

xrxprtyx
07-01-2011, 07:32 PM
I don't think they should steal their fathers' gimmick(s), at all, in fact I think they should try to be as completely far away from them as possible. Moreorless, they really shouldn't have so much of gimmicks as just a style all their own. There's a million different movie characters, all different because they have different mannerisms, way of talking, etc. I say avoid the stereotypes that made up basically all of the 80's-90's wrestling era (and stables seem to kill individuality too). But there's a difference between character and storyline. I say they don't have to be so much hand-in-hand, especially when the character isn't so much of a gimmick.

68wPayne
07-01-2011, 07:54 PM
Sometimes the younger just can't live up to the elder's legacy. David Flair, Shawn Stasiak, and Jesse from Jessie and Festus spring to mind. They just never could live up to their father's legacy so why would they make the attempt at pushing them as a big time 2nd generation wrestler.

xrxprtyx
07-01-2011, 08:03 PM
lol, argh. getting frustrating trying to basically make the point i'm trying to make. wwe needs storylines, and characters, not gimmicks. if david flair, shawn stasiak, etc. don't deserve the push, well then don't bring them on up. if you're going to bring a wrestler to raw or smackdown, you give them that initial push, early on success, albeit likely via controversy (which as i before explained, is good). here's the thing, if you bring up a star and immediately have them lose their fair share of matches, they are going to linger there probably forever, until they're dropped. it's like any movie, you bring in a monster, as soon as you show all their flaws, that monster isn't scary, the movie becomes a dud. you bring these guys in, and you have them look like forces to be reckoned with, and if they screw it up, THEN expose their flaws, have them lose their way to the next up-and-comers they want to push, and disappear. you don't go "oh here's david flair, that's ric flair's son, now he's going to look like some wet-behind-the-ears loser, and expect them to ever succeed. so here's what i'm saying, bring in a wrestler, give them that push, and as long as they're doing a good job, they push their way up that ladder. if not, lose, lose, then goodbye.

eyehatecena
07-01-2011, 10:18 PM
I don't think they should steal their fathers' gimmick(s), at all, in fact I think they should try to be as completely far away from them as possible. Moreorless, they really shouldn't have so much of gimmicks as just a style all their own. There's a million different movie characters, all different because they have different mannerisms, way of talking, etc. I say avoid the stereotypes that made up basically all of the 80's-90's wrestling era (and stables seem to kill individuality too). But there's a difference between character and storyline. I say they don't have to be so much hand-in-hand, especially when the character isn't so much of a gimmick.
Teddy Jr doing his dads gimmick could have worked, with some tweaks- but Jr just is not up to par with his dads confidence, believabilty. With Jr, it just seemed fake, he just really could not get into the character, and wisely, it was dropped. Even with Daddy involved as a guest host and working a lil storyline with Jr, it didn't work.
Dustin and Cody Rhodes have done it right. There is no way in hell they could have even tried to be like Dusty. Dustin became Goldust and his career took way off. Cody, started off ok, but has moved on along greatly. Dusty has been involved in storylines with both of them at times(against them and with them, and it worked out great pretty much each time.
Stables- they work out some times. Hart Foundation- all of the version, even Hart Dynasty worked. But others just dragged on

Viper
07-02-2011, 11:06 AM
so why is DiBiase suddenly Cody's bitch when Ted had more chances of being the break out star during their time in Legacy???

eyehatecena
07-02-2011, 10:27 PM
I think Cody lucked out by being sent to SD where he would not be buried by the whole roster like he would have on Raw. Thats pretty much what happened to Ted. Cody grew on SD, Ted stagnated on Raw. Now hopefully Ted will get used better on SD, he has had more TV time since being drated than he had his last few months on Raw.