Mr Butternut Squash Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Yeah being PG is fine, honestly. The problem is Vince being an old cornball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted January 29, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted January 29, 2019 52 minutes ago, Winston said: In an era where they're struggling to make mega stars and can barely throw together an interesting men's WrestleMania main event, could be argued everyones being restricted by the PG product now. Talents are shackled and being fed shit. Can't believe it's still 2009. I get another chance at that girl from uni! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 30, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2019 Blaming PG for everything just strikes home how much long term damage the Attitude Era did to wrestling in reality. Yes, it was great at the time but all it meant that everyone shot their load over a 3-4 year period and ended up in advertisers leaving in droves and an audience asking "So, what do you have next?" Wrestling's default is certainly not an adult orientated programme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPDTT Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 6 hours ago, garynysmon said: Wrestling's default is certainly not an adult orientated programme.  WWEs default is certainly not an adult orientated programme. I don't think that can be said for NJPW, ROH, NJPW or the majority of indie promotions. Perhaps it's better to say that the product should be more catered toward the 18-35 demographic than to fixate on the PG rating, but I for one agree that PG is an issue and I hope AEW doesn't got PG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted January 30, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) MPDTT have you actually watched any wrestling outside of that youtube show with the inflatable cocks? What exactly does ROH and New Japan that is targeted to 18-35 year olds? Impact is the only one who really does that 90s bullshit, and that's because they've just shown up on a channel where the wrestlers on the show outnumber those who get the channel on their service. Its amazing how of all the things to have a go at WWE about (the lack of credible babyfaces, heels with no heat, the worst interviews in years etc.) that "being PG" is still an example for some people. People want to try watching those Raws and Nitros when Russo was in charge. They are horrenous. 1999 Raw was shit at the time, too. Edited January 30, 2019 by IANdrewDiceClay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) I long for the days of human sacrifices, unprotected chair shots to the head and miscarriages. Edited January 30, 2019 by Max Power Can't spell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted January 30, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2019 47 minutes ago, MPDTT said: Perhaps it's better to say that the product should be more catered toward the 18-35 demographic than to fixate on the PG rating No, it isn't. It's absolute nonsense. Wrestling appeals to children. The vast majority of people got into wrestling as children. Some weirdos, like us, never grow out of it but the number of people who happen upon it as adults and become fans is probably tiny. Because fundamentally it has the stigma of being a fake sport and it's the character, colour and drama that attracts impressionable minds. If you lose that constant influx of new fans then your business will eventually die. People may point to the attitude era as evidence to the contrary bit that's a massive anomonally. It's also only a period of 4 years in the grand scheme. Had that continued with sponsors not fancying the "edgy" product, constant bad press from the PTC and the like then again, the business would eventually die. There is no reason whatsoever why you can't have niche products aimed at older fans. ECW proved that and others have since. But they are niche for a reason and they will rely on WWE constantly making new fans as much as anyone. And beyond all of that, idiots still refuse to accept that the biggest problems that face WWE are to do with poor storytelling, poor characterisation and poor use of the tools they have available and nothing to do with vulgarity. it still wouldn't be for everyone but it'd be for a damn sight more people than watch now. And still, it wouldn't be for the seven people who need the attitude era after 20 years but they can find something for them elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPDTT Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, tiger_rick said: No, it isn't. It's absolute nonsense. Wrestling appeals to children. The vast majority of people got into wrestling as children. Some weirdos, like us, never grow out of it but the number of people who happen upon it as adults and become fans is probably tiny. Because fundamentally it has the stigma of being a fake sport and it's the character, colour and drama that attracts impressionable minds. If you lose that constant influx of new fans then your business will eventually die. People may point to the attitude era as evidence to the contrary bit that's a massive anomonally. It's also only a period of 4 years in the grand scheme. Had that continued with sponsors not fancying the "edgy" product, constant bad press from the PTC and the like then again, the business would eventually die. There is no reason whatsoever why you can't have niche products aimed at older fans. ECW proved that and others have since. But they are niche for a reason and they will rely on WWE constantly making new fans as much as anyone. And beyond all of that, idiots still refuse to accept that the biggest problems that face WWE are to do with poor storytelling, poor characterisation and poor use of the tools they have available and nothing to do with vulgarity. it still wouldn't be for everyone but it'd be for a damn sight more people than watch now. And still, it wouldn't be for the seven people who need the attitude era after 20 years but they can find something for them elsewhere. Tiger_rick you make some good points here. But what is niche now could also be an alternative with money behind it. Again I'll say, I'm less fixated on the rating and more on a product targeting the 18-35 demo. I don't think you need bad language and sex to target that demo (although I'm loving the Scarlett Bordeaux stuff), but for me it's around the stories you choose to tell, the gimmicks you give the talent and the style in the ring. I think back to the videos of the old NWA, the in ring style of NJPW and ROH, of NXT.....all attract that older demo. And you don't need TV-14 for that....just a more engaging in ring product. Oh and for the record, I don't want to see unprotected chair shots, choppee choppee pee pee, men pissing themselves or ANY of the like.... In short, an alternative well funded product can target a 18-35 demo without giving up a PG TV rating and in doing so could retain advertisers and TV execs interest Edited January 30, 2019 by MPDTT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPDTT Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 Just read that KENTA is done with WWE too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted January 30, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) WWE is a publicly-traded company. Their goalâas a businessâis to make as much money as possible. Their investors arenât going to be happy if WWE go back to targeting 18â30 year olds as theyâre then limiting their market (and ergo, the area of the market they can serve). So long as WWE is trading on the stock market and has investors to answer to, its going to be a PG product to target as many customers as possible. Edited January 30, 2019 by Your Fight Site Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mal the Glorious Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 If you're not going to do the whole swearing, sex and ultraviolence thing, what does a product aimed at 18-35 year olds consist of that can't be done with a PG rating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPDTT Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) 29 minutes ago, King Mal the Glorious said: If you're not going to do the whole swearing, sex and ultraviolence thing, what does a product aimed at 18-35 year olds consist of that can't be done with a PG rating? That's my point. Banned moves can return under PG A little blood can return under PG A more intense, more athletic style can be performed under PG Story telling that is of more interest to the 18-35 demo can happen under PG Edited January 30, 2019 by MPDTT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Your Fight Site said: WWE is a publicly-traded company. Their goalâas a businessâis to make as much money as possible. Their investors arenât going to be happy if WWE go back to targeting 18â30 year olds as theyâre then limiting their market (and ergo, the area of the market they can serve). So long as WWE is trading on the stock market and has investors to answer to, its going to be a PG product to target as many customers as possible. It was TV-14 and publicly traded for 9 years. Investors care that it's making money, not that it's PG/14. Anyway, I went to a q&a thing with King Kong Bundy and Demolition a few years ago and one nob end went on a rant about "PG" and asking Demolition if they thought PG was ruining WWE and after a few minutes of his rant one of Demolition said "um, it was PG when we were there and it was pretty good then" and the guy ranting said "NO IT WASN'T". I think that was Winston. Winston almost certainly thinks they only started saying Sports Entertainment in 2008 and Kevin Dunn only started working there in 2008 aswell. Edited January 30, 2019 by The Dart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted January 30, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, MPDTT said: Again I'll say, I'm less fixated on the rating and more on a product targeting the 18-35 demo But you said... 2 hours ago, MPDTT said: but I for one agree that PG is an issue and I hope AEW doesn't got PG. And as others have mentioned, only the 'edgy' stuff (which when you look back at the Attitude Era is the worst and most cringe-worthy parts anyway) is missing in PG rating.  20 minutes ago, MPDTT said: That's my point. Banned moves can return under PG A little blood can return under PG A more intense, more athletic style can be performed under PG Story telling that is of more interest to the 18-35 demo can happen under PG Nonsense. Moves aren't banned because of a PG rating, certain moves (are there even any these days? Piledrivers perhaps?) are banned because of safety and wellbeing concerns for their wrestlers. Likewise with chairshots to the head. PG does not dictate a wrestling style, so the 'more intsense, more athletic style' comment is complete rubbish- especially when the style in WWE is practically indy anyway. If WWE matches had a Will Ospreay style all the time, bearing in mind they wrestle pretty much every night, their talent will be retired far sooner than Edge did. I mean, Ospreay is a perfect example of the style having negative effects- in his early 20s he was already complaining of numbness in one of his arms or something. It's called working smart, it has sweet FA to do with PG. What story telling that can be more of interest to the 18-35 demo can they currently not do due to PG? Rape angles? Necrophilia? They're an absolute blast aren't they. Edited January 30, 2019 by PunkStep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WyattSheepMask Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 26 minutes ago, The Dart said:  Anyway, I went to a q&a thing with King Kong Bundy and Demolition a few years ago and one nob end went on a rant about "PG" and asking Demolition if they thought PG was ruining WWE and after a few minutes of his rant one of Demolition said "um, it was PG when we were there and it was pretty good then" and the guy ranting said "NO IT WASN'T". Iâve seen a clip of that on YouTube, and itâs both utterly cringeworthy hearing the guy ask the question and his proceeding âno it wasnât! No it wasnât!...â, but I think it was Smash who answered the question and his âwho the hell are you on about?â delivery was superb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts