Zing! I posted this not to advocate a return to the attitude era, no, I just posted this because how asinine the WWE is. I've constantly heard how Vince can do what he wants with "his" company, well, we pay the bills, so I think catering to us is just as important.
WWE Removing Attitude Era Content After Linda McMahon's Campaign Is Attacked
- Thread starter The Jeff
- Start date
Zing! I posted this not to advocate a return to the attitude era, no, I just posted this because how asinine the WWE is. I've constantly heard how Vince can do what he wants with "his" company, well, we pay the bills, so I think catering to us is just as important.
Think some of you best watching TNA if you want some more over the top content. WWE removing content is no big deal. What is it costing the viewers? Nothing...I would rather them focus on continuing to better the product for now and the future. Buy a best of Raw DVD if you want to watch Attitude Era stuff.
DarkLordFett:
d_henderson here wasn't wishing for the Attitude era to go away as much as he was wanting the expectations surrounding that era to go fuck themselves. In other words, the unique circumstances that gelled into WWF Attitude won't happen again ever (unless TNA becomes serious competition in the next... hmmm... thousand years or so) and we must content ourselves with the things they offer us now, not as much as they're all that is left but because they're honestly not bad.
d_henderson here wasn't wishing for the Attitude era to go away as much as he was wanting the expectations surrounding that era to go fuck themselves. In other words, the unique circumstances that gelled into WWF Attitude won't happen again ever (unless TNA becomes serious competition in the next... hmmm... thousand years or so) and we must content ourselves with the things they offer us now, not as much as they're all that is left but because they're honestly not bad.
DetectiveZelix
King of Zecropolis
If they're just doing it to their site, that's fine but youtube and everywhere else is ridiculous. there's lots more in WWE and WWF's past that can screw them than just the Attitude era
mikekinkade
Dark Match Jobber
WWE not standing up for their product once again. How do you think fans will react when they hear about WWE removing content for Linda's campaign? It's pathetic. It sends the message WWE is ashamed of their past, despite it being the reason they are still around.
As for Linda, if I were a voter, I would wonder why Linda is not defending her billion dollar company's past. If she doesn't want to stand up for her own company, why would I expect her to stand up for my interests? The people that actually vote aren't idiots. Blocking "shocking" content is just foolish.
As for Linda, if I were a voter, I would wonder why Linda is not defending her billion dollar company's past. If she doesn't want to stand up for her own company, why would I expect her to stand up for my interests? The people that actually vote aren't idiots. Blocking "shocking" content is just foolish.
d_henderson1810
Mid-Card Championship Winner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly, I notice that you only quote the first part of my post. So, am I to assume that that means that you agree that 2001-2003 was better than the Attitude Era? Otherwise, why haven't you said how you think it isn't, and point out where the examples I cited aren't as good as your beloved Attitude Era?
Secondly, how do you know that WWE would have folded if they had not done the "Attitude Era". WWE could have done something different again, pushed a different star, and still made it work. WCW was a ticking time-bomb which would have fallen over eventually anyhow, considering how much stroke Hogan and Nash had. So, if WWE had changed their programming just a bit, and even didn't do a total overhaul, then they still could have won.
Besides, WWE mainly sucked then because they were too focused on WCW, doing skits like "Billionaire Ted", and having a fake Diesel and fake Razor Ramon. If they had better writing, if HBK had not gone to "find his smile", if Bret Hart didn't mope and whine all the time, and if other things fell into place, then WWE could have survived a WCW onslaught.
Also, don't forget, Vince was coming off his steroid trial at this stage, so his program was limited to what he could do, or face more scrutiny (a bit like today, where WWE need to be on its best behaviour post-Benoit).
Having Triple H be an evil boss that someone needs to stand up to. Yeah, because that worked when Austin stood up to Bischoff, or the Rock or Triple H stood up to Vince McMahon.
Look, that storyline worked because of the perfect pairing of "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Vince McMahon. Whenever they have removed one of them from this type of storyline, it never works with the replacement. It's only really been ratings gold with them.
Also, you show that you are a pedantic smartass by correcting my spelling, meaning that (a) you don't have anything else meaningful to say, and (b) you had better go correcting a lot of wrestlezone posters and magazine writers too, because I have seen it spelt this way plenty of times. Are you an English teacher or something?
Its the same over here in the UK, politicans will DO ANYTHING TO GET YOUR VOTE and then retract those policies that got your vote and screw you even more & to put bad press on the opponent, like when one of David Cameron's MP's admitted to smoking pot when he was 18 and there was a media shit-storm over it.
Has anyone a link to the said video Linda's opponent used with "Attitude" attack footage, so we can all judge?
TBH, I was on WWE's Youtube page, and most of the videos of the attitude era I clicked on either on a PC or the WWE/Youtube app(s) on my wife's Iphone was "Sorry this content is not available in your country", so as far as WWE removing the attitude videos, im not really that fussed as I cant see them anyways.
As far as Linda's current campaign goes, the last one failed & she re-bid again this time, so it wont really make any difference what happens as far as PG rating goes because she'el just re-bid again for next time (whenever that is) as I dont know what the time frame is for a re-bid for senate is?
How is it foolish? She has invested $50 million dollars in her campaign...and content like the edgier stuff is what the Democrats targeted her with; labeling her “marketing sex and violence to little kids,”. They're not erasing history so much as toning down the content on the website. This is what she was ultimately attacked on in 2010. With her having a slight advantage over her opponent, last thing she wants to do is offer him any artillery. Get a clue - voters aren't idiots? You're one of them.
Why Always Me
WWF Champion
I personally could not care less about Linda running for office, I live in England and so it doesn't affect me anyway.
Whether people/mods like it or not, the Attitude Era was the most successful period in wrestling ever, and a big reason why we still post on here about the WWE today. It seems wrong (not stupid as such) to remove Attitude era content when it was such a big part of the then WWF.
The really confusing part for me though is the fact that WWE 13 is centred heavily around the Attitude Era and I also believe an Attitude Era dvd is going to be released later this year. Surely Linda's opponents will just use that against her.
I still like to watch WWE wrestling, although I don't enjoy at as much as I did during the Attitude Era. No, that does not make me an 'Attitude Era mark', I just enjoyed the edgier content and more adult storylines, because they were things that young adults could relate to back then. Stone Cold Steve Austin became HUGE during the Attitude Era and The Rock was launched further into the stratosphere than anybody else, does that mean they will have to be erased from WWF/WWE history in case it hurts Linda's campaign to see Austin attack Vince McMahon in hospital and make him piss his pants, or seeing The Rock talk about pie and use other innuendos?
I hope I am wrong, but this to me says that in time, the WWE is going to be more kid friendly, which IMO is not what is needed (mods, feel free to bite and debate this as it seems they are all for this for some reason).
Whether people/mods like it or not, the Attitude Era was the most successful period in wrestling ever, and a big reason why we still post on here about the WWE today. It seems wrong (not stupid as such) to remove Attitude era content when it was such a big part of the then WWF.
The really confusing part for me though is the fact that WWE 13 is centred heavily around the Attitude Era and I also believe an Attitude Era dvd is going to be released later this year. Surely Linda's opponents will just use that against her.
I still like to watch WWE wrestling, although I don't enjoy at as much as I did during the Attitude Era. No, that does not make me an 'Attitude Era mark', I just enjoyed the edgier content and more adult storylines, because they were things that young adults could relate to back then. Stone Cold Steve Austin became HUGE during the Attitude Era and The Rock was launched further into the stratosphere than anybody else, does that mean they will have to be erased from WWF/WWE history in case it hurts Linda's campaign to see Austin attack Vince McMahon in hospital and make him piss his pants, or seeing The Rock talk about pie and use other innuendos?
I hope I am wrong, but this to me says that in time, the WWE is going to be more kid friendly, which IMO is not what is needed (mods, feel free to bite and debate this as it seems they are all for this for some reason).
MayorMcCheese
Pre-Show Stalwart
WHY is WWE so invested in Linda winning?
They are obviously trying to gain something.
They can continue dumbing down the product, but their core audience is still over 21 years old(70%) if they continue alienating that base, and keep pandering to all the diaper wearing bastards the ratings will reflect peoples unhappiness.
Hopefully Linda loses, I hate how her running for office has to get the product to be horrible
They are obviously trying to gain something.
They can continue dumbing down the product, but their core audience is still over 21 years old(70%) if they continue alienating that base, and keep pandering to all the diaper wearing bastards the ratings will reflect peoples unhappiness.
Hopefully Linda loses, I hate how her running for office has to get the product to be horrible
d_henderson1810
Mid-Card Championship Winner
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You say that the "Attitude Era" is the most successful period in wrestling, ever. I actually don't agree with you.
There is an era which believe was more successful in WWE, and witout it, there would have been no "Attitude Era" or any other era for that matter.
It was "The Rock 'N Wrestling Era".
This was the era which started in 1985. Vincent Kennedy McMahon jr bought most of AWA's talent, and then started to make his father's company bigger than it ever was.
Firstly, he found a star to build a company around. His name was Hulk Hogan. He put the WWF World Title on Hogan, and built the company around him. Hulk Hogan became a cultural icon, and WWF was known mainstream years before Twitter or Tout were around to promote it.
Next, Vince held an event which blended the music industry (which was huge in the 80's), and wrestling and put it on national television. That event was called "Wrestlemania".
I read an interview by "Rowdy" Roddy Piper where he said that, if the first Wrestlemania had failed, WWF would have to close its door, as Vince had put all his life savings into that one show. It would make or break WWF. Forget WCW putting WWE out of business, a bad Wrestlemania could have ended it much sooner. Thankfully, it was a success and lead to a yearly event, which is the biggest wrestling event in the world.
Vince also went global by using closed-circuit TV, and one of the first to have "Pay-Per-View". This made wrestling international, which is today seen in vitually every country on the planet.
Without Vince buying out a lot of territories or talent, without Hulk Hogan, without Wrestlemania, without wrestling going global, there would not be an "Attitude Era", or a "Stone Cold" Steve Austin.
If Vince had not bought out his dad's company, if Hulk Hogan hadn't become a star, if Wrestlemania had failed, then WWF would have died long before the "Attitude Era".
The "Rock 'N Wrestling" Era, or "The Hulkamania" Era is the most successful era in wrestling history, because most of today's stars were introduced to the sport through it, PPV is used by most wrestling companies, and wrestling became known, not through "E" news or talk-shows, but by Hulk Hogan appearing in "Rocky III", by ice-cream bars, the "Piledriver" album or the cartoon show. Hell, Cyndi Lauper even had a music clip with WWF wrestlers in it ("Goonies 'R Good Enough").
If 50 people have heard of "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and the Rock, a 100 have heard of Hulk Hogan and Andre The Giant.
While the "Attitude Era" is the IWC's favourite period of wrestling, it was not the most successful.
Why Always Me
WWF Champion
Fair enough - I look forward to the release of WWE 14 which will be centred around The Rock 'N Wrestling Era.
I thought the Attitude era and the rise of stars like DX and Austin was what helped the WWF win the Monday Night Wars, obviously I was wrong.
I have always thought 2000 was the WWF's most successful year, if 1985 was actually the most successful year then I apologise.
More people know who The Rock is than Andre The Giant.
Maybe the Rock 'N Wrestling Era was important in layng the foundation, but that doesn't make it the most succesful era. Chris Benoit aside, the WWE should not remve the old Attitude Era content, Linda and Vince were quite happy to push that 12 years ago, for them to know want to distance themselves portrays them as 2 faced. The Attitude Era will always be fondly remembered and it's a slap in the face to fans who went to live events, purchased merchandise, watched Raw, Smackdown and Heat each week and bought the monthly ppv's during the Attitude Era, we may as well not bothered.
In all honesty, I don't think they're really "erasing" it all. It's not like they're blanking it from our minds so that we don't remember it, or anything that happened.
WWE has been removing Youtube videos for years due to copyright anyways, so I don't know why this changes anything. People will still get away with uploading WWE videos, so you'll still see Attitude Era clips on there. On top of that, I believe WWE is release an Attitude Era DVD in November, so buy it when it comes out, and you'll have all the Attitude Era action you want.
I mean you had to have seen this coming. They did the same thing back in 2008. In my opinion, it is kinda silly...Linda ended up losing anyways, and chances are the same thing will happen. She'll get attacked whether they remove the stuff or not, just because her opponents can STILL use a lot of things against her with the WWE. All the have to do is bring up the Be A Star program, and mention how it contradicts the events that go on in the business.
But I still disagree with her opponents using the company against her. After all, it is just Entertainment. It's a TV Show, like CSI or Suits. But it is politics after all, and they'll use whatever they can against you. It'd be smarter for Linda just to say she is no longer associated with the company, sort of like Shane did. Of course I think that'd be kind of difficult considering I'm sure she's involved with how the funds and payrolls work.
Either way, it is their company, and they have the right to do whatever they wanted to. If Vince wanted to shut down the company tomorrow, and never air another WWE Show again, he has the ability to do so and none of our opinions would matter on it. It's just how business work, and us fans have to either deal with it, or watch something else. You want footage of the Attitude Era, buy the DVD that's coming out in two months.
d_henderson1810
Mid-Card Championship Winner
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would love to have "WWE 14" centred on the "Rock N' Wrestling" Connection. Imagine all the cool Legends in the game. Good idea.
However, that is the only good thing you said. The rest of your post is the height of smartarseness.
I know that you think wrestling never existed before "Attitude" , but it did.
There were no "Monday Night Wars" back in the 80's, smartarse. But if there had been, who is to say that WWE wouldn't have won.
2000 was a more successful year, money-wise, because the company is bigger, and has more revenue streams. You will make more money when you have 12 PPVs (like in 2000), as opposed to 2 (like in 1985).
Most people only know the Rock as a Hollywood movie star. When he was full-time, we wasn't as known in the mainstream.
Andre The Giant was more well-known as a "wrestler", so knowing who he was brought attention to wrestling. When most people outside of wrestling hear about the "rock", they think Dwayne Johnson the guy in the movies.
"R N W laid the foundation, but that doesn't make it the most successful era". REALLY! REALLY! REALLY!
Okay, if you say so. I mean, the era that only established the company and made it what it is today, isn't as important as your favourite era.
"Attitude" may have kept WWE going, but without "Rock N' Wrestling", there would be no WWE to keep going in the first place!
Mustang Sally
Sells seashells by the seashore
WWE isn't interested in her winning......Vince McMahon is.
While the company has every right to add and subtract content from their broadcasting to suit whatever goals they want, I find that it stinks to have the direction of their programming dictated by the political aspirations of the candidate......if that is indeed what they're doing, as seems likely.
Two years ago, I voted against Linda because I thought she didn't know what she was doing in the political arena.....and I'm voting against her again this year for the same reason. But one way or the other, if WWE content gets racier after the election (win or lose), I'll see it as proof positive the company "adjusted" what it put on the air in order to kowtow to Linda's political ambitions; a practice I find to be dishonest and deliberately misleading.
If Candidate McMahon isn't ashamed of what went on in her family business during the years she operated it, she shouldn't feel the need to delete that content from the airwaves so that the voters can't see it. But it's even more dishonest to alter the direction of the entire operation today simply to make her look "cleaner" for her constituents.
Sexcellence of Sexecution
#SwerveKing
Yes, because the Attitude Era was, as we know, highly intellectual.
I don't understand where this idea that the modern product has been dumbed-down comes from, as wrestling has never been intelligent. Much like in the Hogan Era, the current product is family friendly. However, family friendly does not necessarily equate to "stupid" as there are many films, for example, that are enjoyable for all ages but are still rather complex and quite sharply written.
While the Attitude Era could certainly be described as cutting edge or controversial, it by no means was smart TV, quite the contrary. A Japanese man tried to chop off male porn star's penis with a katana, an old woman gave birth to a plastic hand, a large black man got a blowjob from a transvestite, the main protagonist was a piece of Texas trailer-park trash who hit both men and women, two old men fought in an "Evening Gown Match", a man's pet dog was killed and cooked, another guy was slammed into a pile of dog poop, and the list goes on and on. This idea that the Attitude Era was "mature" is a falsehood, and it would be more accurate to call it sophomoric or pseudo-mature.
Despite everything I just said however, I don't want to see this era erased by the WWE, it happened and a lot of people liked it (myself included). Trying to cover it up for political reasons is pointless and will ultimately be a fruitless endeavour as well.
Why Always Me
WWF Champion
Thanks.
Bit harsh.
I know, otherwise I would have never had the idea for WWE14
Actually, due to me exercising more and watching my diet, my arse is smart now.
So I was correct in stating it was more successful.
The Rock is probably the most well known wrestler ever, him being in Hollywood just makes him even more well known.
Valid point.
No they don't.
Yes Miz, REALLY.......
Okay, if you say so. I mean, the era that only established the company and made it what it is today, isn't as important as your favourite era.
Oooooh watch your head.
I agree 100%, as I said, Rock N' Wrestling laid the foundation. Doesn't make it the most successful period ever. And if you are going to multi quote me, please don't insult me, opinions are like bumholes, we all have one and I am sharing mine (opinion, not bumhole).
The Fabulous Rougeau's
Championship Contender
What gets me with this whole smear campaign is why Linda's side doesn't point out that the WWE was and always is an entertainment buisness. It is just like a tv show or movie. Should the director of a tv show or movie be smeared when trying to run for office because of the content of their show or film?
Also the show had an appropriate rating so its not like they were marketing it and trying to get kids to watch there shows. It was adult entertainment (not that kind) that was rated for and geared towards adults.
Also the show had an appropriate rating so its not like they were marketing it and trying to get kids to watch there shows. It was adult entertainment (not that kind) that was rated for and geared towards adults.
mikekinkade
Dark Match Jobber
To start, it's ILLEGAL for the WWE to make decisions in relation to Linda's campaign. So Linda already risks getting into trouble by this censorship move (check out Federal Eelection Commission). Secondly, the voters have already seen this footage from the 90's. Informed responsible voters would take the time to check out this footage and understand it's context. The people that take the time to vote are more concerned with Linda's business acumen and abilities. Are you seriously that stupid to believe this censorship would help Linda?
All this censorship really does is disrespect the fans who supported the company during the AE. Lots of fans today enjoyed the raunchy material, and it's a slap in the face for them.
At the end of the day what is it costing YOU? You feel disrespected - you going to stop watching the product? Were you watching the attitude era material or are you complaining about this because it is the trendy thing to do this week? I enjoyed that period in wrestling just like the next fan but overall its 10 years removed.
