Undefeated Steak Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 The thought of Vince stepping down makes me sad. WWE will never be WWE without him. It will be a bigger game changer than the territories getting swallowed up or WCW going under IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shane O' Mac Version 2 Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 For all intents and purposes, it seems that's already happened. Vince still has the job title, but Triple H and Steph are really running everything. If the online stuff regarding Kurt Angle looking to rejoin WWE is true, then Trips pretty much has all the power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted October 24, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) The stuff regarding Kurt Angle isn't true. The Angle situation is all on Vince McMahon, who hasn't wanted him back for the fear of a gold medalist dying on his watch. Vince has final say on everything. Hence why people from NXT are pushed to the moon as the future of wrestling, and once they get to the main roster Vince thinks they are indy geeks. Like Adam Rose. McMahon and Kevin Dunne took a dislike to him because they think he's opening match fodder who wasn't worth the hype. That's the big fear when the likes of Sami Zayn and Kevin Steen finally get called up. Terry Taylor, William Regal and Triple H can love you as much as they want. There's still only one man you need to impress to become a star. Â Cesaro is the perfect example. Vince apparently said he was boring as fuck in a creative meeting last year. And Cesaro got over for a period, but If Vince has the opinion you are boring, that's a killer. You can over come height (like Daniel Bryan), you can over come look (like Punk) and you can even over come the tag team stigma (Bret, Shawn etc), but if Vince thinks you are dull, that's a hard one to convince him otherwise. Edited October 24, 2014 by IANdrewDiceClay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twelve_grand Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Do you think the 'tropes' of WWE come from him them or the writers/HHH? I'm thinking about things like 'always lose match(es) before winning the title/turning face', start/stop booking for pushes (including Cesaro), stupid comedy promos when they should be serious and never let the lighter fliers have the chance to shine against each other. Because those sorts of things that really annoy me and are reasons I delete or fast forward Raw each week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Au Posted October 24, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 Do you think the 'tropes' of WWE come from him them or the writers/HHH? I'm thinking about things like 'always lose match(es) before winning the title/turning face', start/stop booking for pushes (including Cesaro), stupid comedy promos when they should be serious and never let the lighter fliers have the chance to shine against each other. Because those sorts of things that really annoy me and are reasons I delete or fast forward Raw each week. I think that's a very, very good question and certainly something worth discussing. Â The vast majority of us here have been wrestling fans since we were kids, we're still watching, still keeping up with the product but how many of us just don't bother watching Raw, Smackdown, etc? I haven't watched Raw regularly for about 10 years now. I might catch the odd episode here and there but that's only if I hear good things about it online. Â All of the things listed above are the reasons I don't watch. I find myself getting actually annoyed at the decisions made in the way they present their product. It's almost like it's become this meta product where they realise that wrestling fans will watch wrestling no matter what so why bother trying? Â I went back and watched Raw from 96 and 97 last year and almost every week was compelling viewing. I know it was a hot period for the company but almost every single storyline felt like it meant something. You even had midcard feuds like Razor vs Goldust closing out the show. You just don't get that now, it's like they only have any confidence in the absolute top of the card and getting elevated to that level when most of the titles are now meaningless is a huge thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members FLips Posted October 24, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) I started a new job on a 3pm - 10.30pm shift about 6 or 7 weeks ago and at first I was like "Great, it means I can watch Raw on the Monday and get my sleep on the Tuesday" but it soon became apparent that I was only watching Raw out of habit.Now I have limited time in the day to do things and see people, Raw isn't a priority at all because for the majority of the time it's fucking shite. I stopped watching Main Event, Smackdown is mostly Raw replays or rematches, and my WWE Network Sub only got renewed for the sake of PPVs, I never use it for anything else.The product is stale, and when they seem to have a big thing on their hands (Cesaro's push, Ambrose vs Rollins, Cena vs Lesnar) they run it into the ground or kill it dead without warning, because they make the show for themselves, not for the fans. Edited October 24, 2014 by FelatioLips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted October 24, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) I find it incredibly confusing. The writers and head honcho's just seem so fucking lazy when it comes to the actual content of the shows. In terms of production, marketing etc. they are world class masters but when it comes to actually writing a couple of shows each week they seem to do the bare minimum. I've tried to pinpoint when it got like this but I can't. Maybe around 2010? I just can't believe that on Tuesday mornings people like Triple H, Vince McMahon and Michael Hayes or whoever wake up and say "that was a great show, I'd watch all 3 hours of that if I was a wrestling fan". Edited October 24, 2014 by LaGoosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthofsin Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 I find it incredibly confusing. The writers and head honcho's just seem so fucking lazy when it comes to the actual content of the shows. In terms of production, marketing etc. they are world class masters but when it comes to actually writing a couple of shows each week they seem to do the bare minimum. I've tried to pinpoint when it got like this but I can't. Maybe around 2010? I just can't believe that on Tuesday mornings people like Triple H, Vince McMahon and Michael Hayes or whoever wake up and say "that was a great show, I'd watch all 3 hours of that if I was a wrestling fan".  HHH does a great job with NXT without the big writing team and Vince. So it does make you wonder how the main show would be under a similar model of HHH in charge with a couple of creative guys (in NXT's case i assume these are the agents). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Benno Posted October 24, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) I agree 100% here. I no longer have a TV license and all my viewing comes via Hulu Plus, HBO Go, Netlfix, 4OD, BBC iPlayer. In regards to WWE Network, i have a sub and generally only use it for the PPVs or NXT Specials. But i used to pay $8.99 for an unofficial HD PPV stream every month to watch live. So the extra $1 to pay out guarantees me a smooth service. Definitely worth it to me, as i never have an intention of gettign a Sky sub ever again. Given the only 'sports' i ever watched were wrestling, the Sky sub was damn expensive purely for that. Even before PPV charges. I think the Network will do well here in the UK. Maybe not huge numbers, but i figure there must be many in the same boat as me who want to watch the PPVs, but don't want to have to fork out for the Sky sub.I'm in the same boat when it comes to cutting the cord. Getting Unotelly DNS to access the Network opened up a new world to me as a former serial torrenter. I wound up building a Home Theatre PC to access the Network and subsequently got hooked to Hulu Plus and the US Netflix. I've also ended up binning the TV Licence and my Sky Sub and use the spare money to rent the films I used to illegally download, through Blinkbox and the cheaper US based Vudu service. I must admit though, I do use an American's cable account to get access to Xfinity/HBO to see the shows I can't get through Hulu/individual Network websites and do on occasion use my parent's Sky Go/BT Sports logins. Hopefully in future when the likes of HBO launch online properly I won't have to do that.  With all that said, I still don't see the Network over here being a massive success immediately if it's online. I think this forum is a good sample of the types of people who'd buy it, and anecdotally, it just doesn't feel like there's that many more people who are waiting for the proper launch, when compared to the people like us who got Unblock US/Hola etc and access it already. It feels about 50/50 at best and I'd bet that's going to be reflected elsewhere at the end of a month when they release the new subscriber number and the international numbers don't end up as big as they thought they would.  A good chunk of the hardcore's already have it and unless it's on telly where you might have a chance of grabbing more of the casuals, I just don't see much growth until cordcutting becomes more mainstream. Edited October 24, 2014 by Benno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthofsin Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Yeah, the no license on demand setup is great once you you have access to the likes of Hulu Plus and HBO Go. Better still i get to use all of them via my PS3 lol. I'm sure all the apps will be on PS4 sooner than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) I've tried to pinpoint when it got like this but I can't. Maybe around 2010? Smackdown 2009 is when I first noticed it. Smackdown had a pretty nifty roster after that draft -- you had Jeff Hardy (for a bit), Umaga (for a bit), Edge, CM Punk, John Morrison, Chris Jericho, Mysterio, Ziggler, Undertaker. They should have you sorted for months of pay-per-view feuds. And then for some reason, they just decided within weeks to blitz every combination in overlong TV matches that had no reason to exist. That's become the standard for WWE now, with very few full-time exceptions. Â It definitely became more of a thing after Raw went to three hours, because they had more time to waste, and it's a lot easier to just pick two workrate shitehawks out of a hat and throw fifteen minutes of TV at them than it is to write stuff. Â I can't see anything being helped by changing/cutting the creative team as the stagnant shows likely have very little to do with the writers and everything to do with Vince. Edited October 24, 2014 by King Pitcos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yeah, the no license on demand setup is great once you you have access to the likes of Hulu Plus and HBO Go. Better still i get to use all of them via my PS3 lol. I'm sure all the apps will be on PS4 sooner than later. If you're watching BBC iPlayer without a TV license them you're breaking the law, it's worth pointing out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ladiesman345 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Â Yeah, the no license on demand setup is great once you you have access to the likes of Hulu Plus and HBO Go. Better still i get to use all of them via my PS3 lol. I'm sure all the apps will be on PS4 sooner than later. If you're watching BBC iPlayer without a TV license them you're breaking the law, it's worth pointing out. Â Â Â It's only if you're watching a live stream it's illegal. Any OD stuff is fine without a licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Benno Posted October 25, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) If you're watching BBC iPlayer without a TV license them you're breaking the law, it's worth pointing out. No it isn't, but that's a common misconception.  http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ103  Will I need a TV Licence to watch programmes on BBC iPlayer? If you use the BBC iPlayer to watch TV programmes at the same time as they are being shown on TV (live) then you will need to be covered by a valid TV Licence. You can buy a TV licence online. If you use the BBC iPlayer to watch BBC programmes after they have been broadcast either to download or via streaming on demand then you will not need a TV Licence. Edited October 25, 2014 by Benno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I stand corrected! Â Do you ever listen to BBC Radio or anything? Â The TV License is one of those things that everyone should pay - we're so lucky to have the Beeb in this country, and it's massive value for money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts