Remarkable Claims About WWE That Personally Baffle Me

[Wildcat66]

Let face it, we as a fandom are not perfect. In fact, we have a lot of issues. But for the most part, we're good in terms of fandom standards on discussing topics eloquently and without causing much of an argument for the most part.

I've been a fan for about seven years now (I first discovered WWE from a video game back in 2009) and I've learned enough about wrestling to know that a lot of you guys are good people that can be good debaters and give out a good point.

But every now and then, there's that one declaration or point that you just have to ask what their mindset was or if they can explain more on the point.

Disclaimer: Out of respect for their privacy, i'm not going to reveal the names as to who made those claims. I'm not getting into any drama.

With that out of the way, here are a few personal claims that continue to confuse me and maybe yourself as well:

Claim I: "CM Punk killed wrestling":

Remember that thread about C.M Punk and if the pipebomb ruined pro wrestling? Well, this was the quote that got me thinking about the idea. I know the person in question tried to explain why CM Punk allegedly destroyed all of wrestling, but the reasons he gave me don't really add up to me.

Example: "He crossed the boundaries of reality and kayfabe"
Of course he did, so did Steve Austin, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, The NWO, the list goes on and on. Everyone knows the story at this point, Vince told CM Punk that he had an open mic and told him to say whatever he wanted to say. So he did. It's 2017 and so far the wrestling business hasn't been killed yet, if anything; it's doing even better than it has been in years.

Claim II: "Vince McMahon is a terrible genius"

This one isn't as bad as the others for the most part, on one hand; there's actually a leg it stands on and to be fair there are some good points as to why. But the notion of Vince being a 'bad genius', to me at least is a little much. On his best days; he's a incredible promoter who had a few flaws in terms of booking and on his worst? Well...we've seen him at his worst. Basically, Vince McMahon is about as double edged as a double edged sword can get.

Claim III: "Raw is 'dead'/the worst show on television"

I've joked about this before, but I feel the need to talk about it again; because this one to me makes no sense. Raw is dead? In what way? Did USA cancel their contract? No. As far as I know, RAW's scheduled for tomorrow. Are they dead spiritually then?

I can go on and on about the person who made this claim (i'm going to guess some of you know who i'm referring) and my personal problems with his analytical wrestling videos, but i'll save it for another time. (TL;DR: I'm not a big fan of them...his mashups are good though) For context on this, let me explain. This was just a few months into the brand split where SmackDown was beating RAW in terms of quality of shows every week and everyone was saying that the show was in the quality of NXT's hey-day. Basically, he was just another voice on their side. And a rather loud voice at that.

Claim IV: "RAW today is worse than the dying days of WCW Nitro"

(Rant incoming)

...No. Just no. If you are going to say at any point of it's time RAW was worse than what WCW was doing from 1999-2001, unless you give me a masterful essay on the subject, you lose all credibility with me; no discussion. I don't care if you are a professional wrestler, journalist, YouTuber, whatever. If your saying RAW or WWE in general is doing worse than WCW's dying days, you better have some damn good evidence to prove this.

Even when WWE was at is lowest points ('94, '95, '02, '15, insert bad year for WWE here) it was still better than what was happening back in WCW.

Now listen, am I saying that you shouldn't criticize WWE or RAW no matter what and suck it up whenever they give you something bad? No. You have as much a right to complain as anyone else, but if you're going to tell me that WWE or RAW in general is somehow worse than WCW when Vince Russo was handled things; i'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

Claim V: "WWE needs a new competitor"
This one is a bit of a paradox. I actually addressed this situation a year ago in another forum, (GreyDogSoftware, fantastic site, great people there too) but really Brian Zane explained it a lot better than I could ever dream of doing. TL;DR: The only way an actual competitor can come up is if someone decides to go head first into their audience and brings in casuals. And there aren't as many of them as there used to be.

Plus, even if there WAS a competitor; it's not like they're going to be perfect either. Likely they'll have to deal with the same stuff that goes on in WWE, (Yes-men, writers, money, quality wrestlers, etc, etc) yes WWE was at it's peak when it was competition with WCW in the Monday Night Wars, but just because there's no competition; it doesn't mean WWE is bad again. (WWE goes through a lot of eras anyways, all of which have their good and bad points; at this point it's all about the ride)

And finally, the last claim for me that would probably befuddle even the smartest of fans...

Claim VI: "Vince McMahon is secretly a communist"

Think about it for a moment, we've all heard the troubles with 50/50 booking, no character standing out, Cruiserweights and back in the day women being treated as inferior products, and so on and so forth. What if behind our backs, Vince McMahon was secretly continuing the trends that the Soviet Union once held many years ago?

Shocking isn't it? Well, first off; it's not true, I made that one up. But that leads into my second point: If you're going to say something; think hard about what your going to say before actually doing so. Because if you don't, you'll end up saying something rather silly in front of an entire audience of people. And I don't think you'd want on your rep do you?

But those are just a few of my personal pet peeves, you got any bizarre claims or statements you want to share?

 

[ilapierre]

Let face it, we as a fandom are not perfect. In fact, we have a lot of issues. But for the most part, we're good in terms of fandom standards on discussing topics eloquently and without causing much of an argument for the most part.

I've been a fan for about seven years now (I first discovered WWE from a video game back in 2009) and I've learned enough about wrestling to know that a lot of you guys are good people that can be good debaters and give out a good point.

But every now and then, there's that one declaration or point that you just have to ask what their mindset was or if they can explain more on the point.

Disclaimer: Out of respect for their privacy, i'm not going to reveal the names as to who made those claims. I'm not getting into any drama.

With that out of the way, here are a few personal claims that continue to confuse me and maybe yourself as well:

Claim I: "CM Punk killed wrestling":

Remember that thread about C.M Punk and if the pipebomb ruined pro wrestling? Well, this was the quote that got me thinking about the idea. I know the person in question tried to explain why CM Punk allegedly destroyed all of wrestling, but the reasons he gave me don't really add up to me.

Example: "He crossed the boundaries of reality and kayfabe"
Of course he did, so did Steve Austin, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, The NWO, the list goes on and on. Everyone knows the story at this point, Vince told CM Punk that he had an open mic and told him to say whatever he wanted to say. So he did. It's 2017 and so far the wrestling business hasn't been killed yet, if anything; it's doing even better than it has been in years.

Claim II: "Vince McMahon is a terrible genius"

This one isn't as bad as the others for the most part, on one hand; there's actually a leg it stands on and to be fair there are some good points as to why. But the notion of Vince being a 'bad genius', to me at least is a little much. On his best days; he's a incredible promoter who had a few flaws in terms of booking and on his worst? Well...we've seen him at his worst. Basically, Vince McMahon is about as double edged as a double edged sword can get.

Claim III: "Raw is 'dead'/the worst show on television"

I've joked about this before, but I feel the need to talk about it again; because this one to me makes no sense. Raw is dead? In what way? Did USA cancel their contract? No. As far as I know, RAW's scheduled for tomorrow. Are they dead spiritually then?

I can go on and on about the person who made this claim (i'm going to guess some of you know who i'm referring) and my personal problems with his analytical wrestling videos, but i'll save it for another time. (TL;DR: I'm not a big fan of them...his mashups are good though) For context on this, let me explain. This was just a few months into the brand split where SmackDown was beating RAW in terms of quality of shows every week and everyone was saying that the show was in the quality of NXT's hey-day. Basically, he was just another voice on their side. And a rather loud voice at that.

Claim IV: "RAW today is worse than the dying days of WCW Nitro"

(Rant incoming)

...No. Just no. If you are going to say at any point of it's time RAW was worse than what WCW was doing from 1999-2001, unless you give me a masterful essay on the subject, you lose all credibility with me; no discussion. I don't care if you are a professional wrestler, journalist, YouTuber, whatever. If your saying RAW or WWE in general is doing worse than WCW's dying days, you better have some damn good evidence to prove this.

Even when WWE was at is lowest points ('94, '95, '02, '15, insert bad year for WWE here) it was still better than what was happening back in WCW.

Now listen, am I saying that you shouldn't criticize WWE or RAW no matter what and suck it up whenever they give you something bad? No. You have as much a right to complain as anyone else, but if you're going to tell me that WWE or RAW in general is somehow worse than WCW when Vince Russo was handled things; i'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

Claim V: "WWE needs a new competitor"
This one is a bit of a paradox. I actually addressed this situation a year ago in another forum, (GreyDogSoftware, fantastic site, great people there too) but really Brian Zane explained it a lot better than I could ever dream of doing. TL;DR: The only way an actual competitor can come up is if someone decides to go head first into their audience and brings in casuals. And there aren't as many of them as there used to be.

Plus, even if there WAS a competitor; it's not like they're going to be perfect either. Likely they'll have to deal with the same stuff that goes on in WWE, (Yes-men, writers, money, quality wrestlers, etc, etc) yes WWE was at it's peak when it was competition with WCW in the Monday Night Wars, but just because there's no competition; it doesn't mean WWE is bad again. (WWE goes through a lot of eras anyways, all of which have their good and bad points; at this point it's all about the ride)

And finally, the last claim for me that would probably befuddle even the smartest of fans...

Claim VI: "Vince McMahon is secretly a communist"

Think about it for a moment, we've all heard the troubles with 50/50 booking, no character standing out, Cruiserweights and back in the day women being treated as inferior products, and so on and so forth. What if behind our backs, Vince McMahon was secretly continuing the trends that the Soviet Union once held many years ago?

Shocking isn't it? Well, first off; it's not true, I made that one up. But that leads into my second point: If you're going to say something; think hard about what your going to say before actually doing so. Because if you don't, you'll end up saying something rather silly in front of an entire audience of people. And I don't think you'd want on your rep do you?

But those are just a few of my personal pet peeves, you got any bizarre claims or statements you want to share?

I've only once in my life heard one of these six claims made by anyone and it is the only claim with validity. And that claim is that RAW is as bad or worse than WCW Monday Nitro circa 1999-2001. I believe you threw together 5 wild claims (made by no one) to try and convince readers to associate the reasonable claim with all the bizarre ones you made up.

Unless I write you an essay on this subject, I will lose all credibility with you? If I wrote an essay on something so plain as day obvious I would lose credibility with anyone who matters. Monday Nitro was painful to watch at times in 1999 and it got pretty much unwatchable in 2000-2001. I find WWE Raw completely unwatchable and it has been that way for me for years. There are good shows and segments here and there but there's far too much crap to sit through or fast forward through to make it worth my while.

WWE flat out sucks and the TV ratings are proof. Obsessed WWE fanboys will never see that as proof because they've been conditioned to sit through anything McMahon spoonfeeds it. It's extremely sad. BTW I am a journalist and I can offer you all the proof necessary. RATINGS. WCW had a 5 week period of ratings above 4.5 in 1999 and got as high as 5.2 in February 1999. WWE ratings today are no higher than 2. Even when WCW was producing their worst shows, they were still getting ratings in the mid 2s. Even Thunder was watched more than RAW is being watched now. Biased WWE fanatic know nothings forget that WWE still had many wrestling legends wrestling on those cards in the dying days. Regardless of what dumb storyline Vince Russo was creating, fans still tuned in to watch Ric Flair, Scott Steiner, Booker T, Kevin Nash and Goldberg. As bad as it was, WCW never had someone as overall horrible as Roman Reigns leading the company.

 

[Wildcat66]

I've only once in my life heard one of these six claims made by anyone and it is the only claim with validity. And that claim is that RAW is as bad or worse than WCW Monday Nitro circa 1999-2001. I believe you threw together 5 wild claims (made by no one) to try and convince readers to associate the reasonable claim with all the bizarre ones you made up.

Unless I write you an essay on this subject, I will lose all credibility with you? If I wrote an essay on something so plain as day obvious I would lose credibility with anyone who matters. Monday Nitro was painful to watch at times in 1999 and it got pretty much unwatchable in 2000-2001. I find WWE Raw completely unwatchable and it has been that way for me for years. There are good shows and segments here and there but there's far too much crap to sit through or fast forward through to make it worth my while.

WWE flat out sucks and the TV ratings are proof. Obsessed WWE fanboys will never see that as proof because they've been conditioned to sit through anything McMahon spoonfeeds it. It's extremely sad. BTW I am a journalist and I can offer you all the proof necessary. RATINGS. WCW had a 5 week period of ratings above 4.5 in 1999 and got as high as 5.2 in February 1999. WWE ratings today are no higher than 2. Even when WCW was producing their worst shows, they were still getting ratings in the mid 2s. Even Thunder was watched more than RAW is being watched now. Biased WWE fanatic know nothings forget that WWE still had many wrestling legends wrestling on those cards in the dying days. Regardless of what dumb storyline Vince Russo was creating, fans still tuned in to watch Ric Flair, Scott Steiner, Booker T, Kevin Nash and Goldberg. As bad as it was, WCW never had someone as overall horrible as Roman Reigns leading the company.

Again, I would tell you who those people were; but as I refuse to partake in any drama, I will not. If you wish to hear their names, I will tell you via PM.

Also, I will come out and admit it right now, some of it is hyperbole; you don't have to write an essay on why RAW is worse than WCW during 99-01. Nor will I lose respect for you. Will I want to debate you? Yes, but that's just it.

Now the ratings thing; So basically WWE sucks because ratings. Even though ratings these days don't mean nearly as much as they once did. I'm not a journalist like you, but I also pay attention to TV ratings enough to know that television is not as it was in the days of the Attitude Era. In fact, RAW still leads or is in the top five for their channel and most other television shows in the ratings.

Doesn't help that there are more channels than ever before, more people getting their fix on the internet, (which WWE also does well with) more promotions out there to watch. Basically, what i'm saying is ratings don't mean as much as they did before. That's not me being biased, that's me stating facts.

P.S: I'm pretty sure these ratings aren't all Roman's fault. Just saying.

 

[Navi]

Again, I would tell you who those people were; but as I refuse to partake in any drama, I will not. If you wish to hear their names, I will tell you via PM.

Well I think you've started drama anyway by even referring to what previous poster's have said. If you are going to call someone out, then call them out for God's sake, don't be sneaky about it. Oh by the way I don't really want to know who they are, the forum search function can be used if I really wanted to know.

Now the ratings thing; So basically WWE sucks because ratings. Even though ratings these days don't mean nearly as much as they once did. I'm not a journalist like you, but I also pay attention to TV ratings enough to know that television is not as it was in the days of the Attitude Era. In fact, RAW still leads or is in the top five for their channel and most other television shows in the ratings.

Doesn't help that there are more channels than ever before, more people getting their fix on the internet, (which WWE also does well with) more promotions out there to watch. Basically, what i'm saying is ratings don't mean as much as they did before. That's not me being biased, that's me stating facts.

RAW sucks because of how it's being booked. They have one of the strongest roster in years and are wasting it. Let's face facts here, the whole main event scene is in a holding pattern until Reigns meets Lesnar at Mania next year. The WWE has already said that Lesnar/Samoa Joe will be a one of and I'm presuming everyone else will get the same treatment. So it's a slow build until Reigns gets the title back in New Orleans. Total waste of a year and talent, like I said on another thread.

And no ratings aren't the be all end all like they used to be. With DVR's and the amount of channels out there, yes people are watching other program's and not watching RAW. It used to be must see TV, not anymore. But ratings do matter if you are a sponsor paying millions of dollars to have your product shown. The less eyes every week on that show means money wasted, and RAW is slowly losing viewers. As a matter of fact their ratings this year have reached historic lows if the news is anything to go by.

Fans are tuning out and getting the results online simply because RAW is painful to sit through some weeks. And again the booking is what is turning them off. Book a good show and fans will watch, give people the same old, same old each week and they won't. Wrestling fans are a strange bunch, a niche group and they will stay invested but they won't watch crap. Smackdown Live which did horribly in the ratings for years is slowly catching them. SD Live has only beaten RAW once, but the gap is narrowing and for RAW being the flagship show, that's not good news.

P.S: I'm pretty sure these ratings aren't all Roman's fault. Just saying.

No it's not all his fault, but he isn't helping it either. I don't care how much merchandise he moves, he's not pulling in the viewers like Cena or Lesnar does. The numbers are much higher when they are around, so what does that tell you.

 

[Wildcat66]

Ok, I've slept on it...

In retrospect; this thread was a bad idea. A very bad idea. If I knew it was going to cause some drama, I probably wouldn't have done it.

This thread was the mixture of poorly done hyperbole, not explaining my sources, and simply me being a naïve little boy deprived of sleep.

Navi, thank you for the thrashing. I needed that wake up call.

I guess since the cat's out of the bag, I might as well reveal who I was referring to. Here you go.

#1: MTOmarReviews (Who i'm subscribed to...and should probably unsubscribed to, he's pretty bad all things considered)
#2: WhatCulture (Who are actually really good, so was their video on Vince McMahon. Then again, most of WhatCulture's wrestling videos are good)
#3-#4: Dalyxman (Who I can go on and on about my personal opinion on him, but I won't)
#5: KNection (Who is a very good friend of mine from GDS, again; it's a great forum site from a company that makes wonderful games. Nice guy really)

I think at this point we all know that the last one was my doing.

I'd like to think I have a decent reputation with you guys here; and I don't want that to be tarnished because of something I may have said.

So if any mod wants to close this thread or send it to the trash before things really escalate downward; it would be appreciated. I apologize whole-heartedly for this thread and promise to choose my words a lot more carefully from now on.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Closed and trashed per request of the threadstarter.