View RSS Feed


WWE Programming

Rate this Entry
I've been a WWE fan since 1990, since then hings have changed. Eras, talent, and WRITING TEAM.

Golden Era which had the faces of the company such as Hulk Hogan, The Ultimate Warrior, Macho man and later down the road Bret Hart.

Attitude Era which we had The Rock, Mick Foley, The Undertaker and Stone Cold as the face of the company.

PG-Era and we have......... John Cena and Randy Orton.

Can we see the lack of depth in the faces of the company now? Only two people, both of which are forced down our throat. The talent pool has shrunk and so has product quality. Both the Golden and Attitude Eras had pay-per-views worth watching. We had King of the Ring (which almost always pointed to the next big star), WrestleMania which has always had it's celebrity appearances but they actually used talent on their roster and didn't have to resort to former employees because of fear they won't get buys. The Survivor Series which were always full of ss matches and always exciting.

Now we are stuck in the PG-Era. What does WWE give us? Half assed pay-per-views. Poorly structured storylines, and an announcer who doesn't know how to put over a wrestler if his life depended on it. For crying out loud we get two pay two pay-per-views with the same concept. Bragging Rights and Survivor Series. Both are identical with having ONLY one 10-man tag elimination match. The only difference is the winning team at Bragging Rights gets a trophy.

Then we have WrestleMania. We've had Mania after Mania with heavyweight title matches headlining and this year it's rumored a heavyweight title defense is the opener. An opener would be the diva's tag match, or the 12-man elimination match which determines the GM for both shows. If a title match doesn't headline please tell me what's the point of the Royal Rumble? Then we have Triple H/Taker 3, where's the roster depth needed to give Taker a new challenger? We've seen it twice already just because you put them in a HiaC and HBK as a guess ref doesn't make it better. To top it off we have a person who is not champ and a man who doesn't wrestle anymore headlining. So we have a non title match headlining and the same match we've seen two Manias previously.

When a company focuses on a feud between two on-air personalities more than your wrestlers you have a problem. Who the GM is doesn't put asses in seats. Wrestlers properly pushed put asses in seat. If we had more wrestlers to care about maybe buy rates would be awesome. You can produce several memorable pay-per-views with established stars. Rushing superstars to the top is a joke and a mistake. Look at Swagger, how many of us remember he was heavyweight champion? His title run was useless, he lost every smackdown match he's had as champ and dropped the title to Santino. Same with Sheamus. Yet we have an established star in Christian and he drops the title at the next Smackdown taping.

Yes, many people acknowledge the Attitude Era as the best, we have to look at why. WWE was in a ratings war with WCW. Who does WWE have to compete with? TNA? TNA would have to get their act together and force WWE to up their game. Step one would be not letting Flair participate at this year's HOF ceremony. Never would you have seen a WCW talent participating in a WWF event. Nor would a WCW star be featured in a WWF game like RVD did in last year's SvR.

Submit "WWE Programming" to Digg Submit "WWE Programming" to Submit "WWE Programming" to StumbleUpon Submit "WWE Programming" to Google



  1. Mikeyboy7777777's Avatar
    i agree about the christian thing and the building up stars though sheamus is playing the face quite excellent now him vs d-bry are entertaining i do not like the big show as the unstoppable man either but i hope ric flair will come on tv in a speech for the HOF but remember wwf did mention the name wcw on tv but wwe never mentioned tna on tv so. i think it's a big difference wwe just doesn't care putting the best show together every single night they lost the spirit of competition sometimes they do have it but mostly they don't we need more talents like ziggler & ryder etc. to put on great matches i mean the low carders tyson kidd & michael mcgillicutty are in a great feud right now both very talented both not on the main shows i don't get it.
  2. bharath's Avatar
    Nice blog.

    What I agree with:
    1. That the faces lack the 'punch'
    2. That the product quality is bad, including pay-per-views
    3. That WWE has largely poorly structured storylines
    4. That they have messed up priorities in terms of handling talents
    5. That the PG era contributes to sub-standard products dished out week after week by WWE.
    6. Almost everything else in your blog. Almost.

    What I disagree with:
    That the talent pool has shrunk. How the talent is being handled may be the biggest beef all viewers have with the WWE (if they get this right, many other inter-linked issues fall in place automatically), but the talent available - unquestionably abundant. Harnessing talent is an art which the WWE used to get right about 50-50. Now that has gone down to getting it right only about 25% if the time.

    Nice blog once again, bro!

© 2011 eWrestlingNews, All Rights Reserved.