Loss
Admins
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Loss
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I'm saying that they run something that's working into the ground and don't make any changes until they have started to fade in popularity, instead of predicting what's coming and trying to beat the trend. Everyone on message boards I posted on at the time could see a decline coming after Wrestlemania X-7, but I'm not sure WWE did. If Chris Jericho had been portrayed on the same level as Steve Austin and The Rock in 2000, he could have carried the company when they left and WWE wouldn't have dropped in popularity, or if they had, it would have been minimal. HHH, the guy who actually was put in a position to carry the company during that time, also would have benefitted because he would have had a rival that was seen at his level. Yes, it takes more than new stars to usher in a boom period, but a boom period can't really be created with old guys. Even in exceptional cases like Hogan, Hollywood Hogan was such a radical reinvention that it was the equivalent of a new guy. I'm still not sure that wrestling promoters understand that attempts to "recapture" something almost never work. You could probably count the cases where it has on one hand and have fingers left over.
-
Yes, wrestling's popularity has been cyclical, but it's always struck me as something promoters have used as an excuse to justify downturns in business. Wrestling wouldn't be cyclical if promoters would create new stars *during* peak periods instead of waiting to rebuild when things fall apart.
-
The main event of this year's Wrestlemania was built on that good guy extracting revenge on the evil one thing.
-
Flair would need to put up his hair or something to show that he was trustworthy. If he swerved Sting, he'd get his head shaved.
-
The worst thing about WWE announcing is the verbatim reading of tweets and quoting of earlier promos. I could probably deal with the other idiosyncrasies and not complain too much if that one would stop.
-
-
-
-
-