View RSS Feed

The Brown One

The Attitude Era was OVERRATED

Rating: 3 votes, 3.00 average.
You heard me. I think the era proclaimed by many as the "best period in wrestling" was greatly overrated. Now don't get me wrong, I liked the Attitude Era, especially for giving us arguably the two most popular wrestlers of all time: The Rock and Stone Cold, but it wasn't as great as everyone seems to remember it. Heres my reasons as to why the era wasn't as great as people think it is.

Hardcore Wrestling
I just got finished watching the infamous Mankind v Undertaker Hell in a Cell match, and the top comment read as follows: "This was back when there was good wrestling". That made me think the guy who posted it was a bloodthirsty redneck. Not taking anything away from the Hardcore Legend Mick Foley, but the Attitude Era was crammed with hardcore matches, which many fans thought made for great wrestling. It added to the match, but it wasn't wrestling. It was spots and bumps. It also had a downside - it shortened careers and caused injuries. Take for example Edge, who could have probably had a longer career if he didn't put his body through so many dangerous matches. It really disappoints me when people like the WWF mainly for their hardcore wrestling, instead of the wrestling itself.

Title Prestige

Now I've heard several people saying in the last couple of months that the WWE's titles don't have prestige anymore. Bull-f*cking-shit. People seem to remember the Attitude Era's world titles being held by the likes of The Rock, Stone Cold, Kane, The Undertaker, Mankind, Triple H and Chris Jericho. The Attitude Era marks think that the world titles being held by the popular wrestlers above gave the titles prestige, but they seem to forget how quickly the world title changed hands during that time. Remember Kane's 1 day reign? How does that add prestige to the WWF title? It doesn't. Today, we get title reigns of similar length compared to those during the time of the Attitude Era, except with wrestlers that Attitude Era marks deem as "boring" - John Cena, Randy Orton, Sheamus, The Miz etc. But by holding on to the titles for a decent amount of time, they ARE adding prestige to them. Its just that they aren't as popular as the wrestlers of the AA.

The Women
We did get some good matches out of the women back then, but most of the time the women were only around for sex appeal. We had Tori, Trish, Sable and Lita running around in scandalous clothing, having pillow fights and mudpool matches to get the teen guys and horny men off. People complain about the current crop of Divas being unable to wrestle, but the WWF had its fair share of "no-talented" bimbos in the Attitude Era too. Unfortunately the AA fans seem to have a cloudy memory of how crappy the majority of the women wrestled back then, and replace that with memories of matches of Jazz, Trish, Molly Holly and Lita.

Misconceptions
Ever since the "PG Era" came into existence, several WWF fans have been complaining "We're sick of this PG era crap, we want the Attitude Era back!". Well the AA also had its moments of stupidity which fans tend to overlook. Remember when Mae Young gave birth to a hand? The Big Show having pooping problems? Compare that to John Cena saying "I'll kick your butt!" and Hornswoggle running through a wall. Not so different after all, are they? - they are both ridiculous. Many WWE fans complained about having horrible celebrities in the WWE - Snooki, Bob Barker etc. Yet they don't bring up the likes of Mike Tyson and Drew Carey being in the freakin' Royal Rumble!

People claimed that the wrestling in the AA was a 100% better than what Vince McMahon produced gave us after it. But several matches were short, 5 minute matches, with very little wrestling. They relied on run-ins and the use of weapons to make the crowd pop. Thats not wrestling. Wrestling is having matches of DECENT length, with great offence from both wrestlers, and using wrestling moves rather than foreign objects to make a great match. Again, not taking anything away from The Rock, Stone Cold and Triple H, but they weren't the best wrestlers alive. They were great characters, who cut amazing promos, but when I think of wrestling, I think of Chris Jericho, Bryan Danielson and Kurt Angle.

In closing, the Attitude Era appealed to fans because it was produced at a time where swearing, consuming alcohol, scandly-clad women stripping and bloody matches were popular. It was good while it lasted, but times have changed. This isn't 1999 anymore, its over 10 years later, and wrestling has matured. Post your hate, thoughts and opinions below, and thanks for reading.

Submit "The Attitude Era was OVERRATED" to Digg Submit "The Attitude Era was OVERRATED" to del.icio.us Submit "The Attitude Era was OVERRATED" to StumbleUpon Submit "The Attitude Era was OVERRATED" to Google

Comments

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
  1. maar13's Avatar
    Good blog man, but in the analysis you are just pointing to the negatives, which is a good analogy of the negatives, but all the positives are left out.

    Also, with out going too far into this, want to know why the Attitude Era was not overrated? Because everyone keeps bringing the damn subject. I mean there are lots of people who wants it to be back (which is a big mistake in my view) and some other like you want to point more to the parts of why it was not the best time. Trying to diminish its impact to the business as whole. Also Angle and Jericho were part of the attitude Era, the last part but they were, so where the Radicalz.

    Your argument is like the one of people saying "Hogan could be replaced back then and anyone could take that role". Absolutely wrong, Hogan, as much as I dislike him, is a unique individual and no one could take that role and be like him, case and point? Lex Luger and The Ultimate Warrior.

    Should the Attitude era last forever? No, like everything, it had its time and its time was great, but everything needs to evolve, is just the way life is.

    Should it be brought back? No, see the statement above, case and point? TNA during past years, not right now, everyone have seen that and now something new has to come up.

    People don't really realize that things has to progress, that is why someone like Cena is a constant but is not gathering more fans, He can claim he is himself and there are no heels or faces anymore on twitter, but he is a clear cut face and deep down he knows it and is nothing wrong with that, but he is. That is why when TNA relies to violence does not gathers more fans, all of us have seen or known about that before.

    That is why someone like CM Punk is appealing right now, he is no Hogan, or Stone Cold by a long shot, he is different, is he the guy to carry all from now on? Only time will tell, maybe he is not and is just preparing the floor for someone else.

    Why the Attitude Era should not get back? because its time has passed, you don't bring back dead because you never know what you are really bringing back, with out the stars that formed part of it, there is no Attitude Era, now it is time for something different, when will this come up, who knows but the Attitude Era was great and should stay Dead as it is right now.
    Updated 09-04-2011 at 11:40 PM by maar13
  2. The Brown One's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by maar13
    Good blog man, but in the analysis you are just pointing to the negatives, which is a good analogy of the negatives, but all the positives are left out.

    Also, with out going too far into this, want to know why the Attitude Era was not overrated? Because everyone keeps bringing the damn subject. I mean there are lots of people who wants it to be back (which is a big mistake in my view) and some other like you want to point more to the parts of why it was not the best time. Trying to diminish its impact to the business as whole. Also Angle and Jericho were part of the attitude Era, the last part but they were, so where the Radicalz.

    Your argument is like the one of people saying "Hogan could be replaced back then and anyone could take that role". Absolutely wrong, Hogan, as much as I dislike him, is a unique individual and no one could take that role and be like him, case and point? Lex Luger and The Ultimate Warrior.

    Should the Attitude era last forever? No, like everything, it had its time and its time was great, but everything needs to evolve, is just the way life is.

    Should it be brought back? No, see the statement above, case and point? TNA during past years, not right now, everyone have seen that and now something new has to come up.

    People don't really realize that things has to progress, that is why someone like Cena is a constant but is not gathering more fans, He can claim he is himself and there are no heels or faces anymore on twitter, but he is a clear cut face and deep down he knows it and is nothing wrong with that, but he is. That is why when TNA relies to violence does not gathers more fans, all of us have seen or known about that before.

    That is why someone like CM Punk is appealing right now, he is no Hogan, or Stone Cold by a long shot, he is different, is he the guy to carry all from now on? Only time will tell, maybe he is not and is just preparing the floor for someone else.

    Why the Attitude Era should not get back? because its time has passed, you don't bring back dead because you never know what you are really bringing back, with out the stars that formed part of it, there is no Attitude Era, now it is time for something different, when will this come up, who knows but the Attitude Era was great and should stay Dead as it is right now.
    I would have put everything you just said into my blog, except it would be too long :P
    However, I agree with most of what you just said. Again, I stress the reason that I created this blog was to point out the negatives to an otherwise enjoyable period in wrestling. Many fans always bring up the Attitude Era as this perfect time in wrestling, when it wasn't. Its easy to just say how amazing those times were, but hard to admit that it had its weaknesses - which is what I aimed to address in my blog.
  3. maar13's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by The Brown One
    I would have put everything you just said into my blog, except it would be too long :P
    However, I agree with most of what you just said. Again, I stress the reason that I created this blog was to point out the negatives to an otherwise enjoyable period in wrestling. Many fans always bring up the Attitude Era as this perfect time in wrestling, when it wasn't. Its easy to just say how amazing those times were, but hard to admit that it had its weaknesses - which is what I aimed to address in my blog.
    Point taken. and yes, nothing is perfect. I have got to tell you, I loved that era but like everything, it has its flaws.

    Then again, it was cool while it lasted
  4. Dubs's Avatar
    To be honest, long title reigns doesn't make a title prestigious. The variety of great wrestlers who hold the title makes it more prestigious.
  5. The Brown One's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by DUBS
    To be honest, long title reigns doesn't make a title prestigious. The variety of great wrestlers who hold the title makes it more prestigious.
    Not if they have monthly title reigns like Impact Wrestling do :P
  6. Dubs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by The Brown One
    Not if they have monthly title reigns like Impact Wrestling do :P
    Touche.

    But I think you can give anybody a long title reign but the fans are gonna have to buy into the title reign or else it won't work.
  7. The Brown One's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by DUBS
    Touche.

    But I think you can give anybody a long title reign but the fans are gonna have to buy into the title reign or else it won't work.
    Fair enough. A great example of this would probably have to be The Miz' long US title reign last year. He barely defended his title, and lost several matches to "newcomers", such as Daniel Bryan.
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

© 2011 eWrestlingNews, All Rights Reserved.