I just can't read this thread below and not think "hm yeah he's having a future office role locked down"

 

 

That thread pretty much nails the biggest problem with WWE. If I only want compelling characters and storylines, I could watch almost anything rather than WWE.

13 minutes ago, kas said:

That thread pretty much nails the biggest problem with WWE. If I only want compelling characters and storylines, I could watch almost anything rather than WWE.

They have it all so backwards.  Can you imagine today's amazing in-ring performers combined with actual good storylines that go somewhere?  It'd be the best wrestling ever.  Instead, it's shitty, sub-b-movie level stories and acting.

Regarding the question in the thread title: no, because he is (or at least seems to be) not the brightest candle. Post in-right career, he might survive in a stooge role, though by then Vince likely is retired, dead or gone otherwise, so who knows how the corporate structure post-Vince will look like. If Vince sells the company instead of passing it over the Stephanie (which there were rumors about a couple of months ago), I don't see a future for the "stooge"-like guys.

Spoiler

 

Spoiled for size.

That tweet is pretty much where I am with Seth. Even when I see what he's trying to say, he does such a poor job of expressing himself and he comes off so bad as a result.

Seth's nowhere near politically canny enough to be HHH's heir. There's no way in a million years Hunter would have allowed something like this to happen to him.

Come on, he's the smartest, he's practicing social distancing.

Seth's best hope would probably being the next Road Dog in a Hunter Administration. 

This could be in its own thread, but the notion that audiences, specifically younger audiences, can't be "hooked" and have no patience for long-term storytelling is such a crock of shit.

If that were true, movies like The Avengers would have done consistently worse over time as more and more of the audience impatiently abandoned the franchise. Game of Thrones would've never taken off. I knew plenty of 18-34 year old, in high school and college in the early-to-mid-00s, who stuck around for The Wire, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul, Mad Men, etc. because the characters and storytelling were strong. 

The idea that the generational gap is so huge that the show can't run coherent storyline because the audience won't stand for it is just throwing in the towel. 

This belief suggests that audiences were more patient in the past. My parents would definitely beg to differ - my brothers and I were impatient brats. It also suggests that children today have more options for entertainment, which is true, but kinda overblown. Video games were already massive popular, widely available, and pretty affordable for most families by the late 90s. Netflix wasn't around yet, but its not like it was the 50s with only a handful of channels. If you had USA (which aired WWE), you likely had MTV, ESPN, Nickelodeon, Disney, Comedy Central, etc. If you were bored by the WWE, you could change the channel. By the mid-to-late 90s, nascent social media like chat rooms and AOL Instant Messaging, was also huge for teens.

Even the idea of kids (and adults) multi-tasking isn't all that new and really isn't an excuse for better storytelling and writing (or a need for countless replay videos). Again, think about the audience in the mid-to-late 90s. Does the WWE really believe that they sat, completely passively, staring at their screens each Monday for 2 hours? Its absurd. People channel-surfed or checked the score of games. People might've been watching while also in chat rooms via laptops or desktops. People skipped episodes and then came back when they heard about a good storyline. 

Seth's point is actually not giving the WWE *enough* credit. The WWE was more successful in the past not because the audience was dumber or more willing to watch garbage (which is what he's implying), but because the WWE was putting on a show that was routinely more interesting, more exciting, and more engaging than what other networks had. Seth is kidding himself if he thinks that if you aired a current episode of RAW back in 1998, it would've been considered good. The stuff they are doing now would've been considered shitty back then too. 

I don't know what to say. They are saying Shayna is going to be on Raw Underground tonight. This might have actually meant something years ago but in 2020 with a pandemic going on. I just don't buy it. I think this pandemic proved that WWE has ZERO idea how to book with it going on. I watched last week to see what Underground was and then laughed my head off and watched Shark Tank instead. I mean come on......is anybody really thinking this is getting over in anyway......it's wrestlecrap at best....... 

AEW was really smart about putting wrestlers around the ring and giving them some kind of atmosphere which doesn't seem as forced but WWE putting these talents around the ring and then piping in forced chants and stuff. It just comes across as trash. I watched The Kross debut and then the "Fall and Pray" chants started and I just rolled my eyes. Even when they control the reactions it still comes across bad.

Wrestling is a fun subject because where it's all a work. Everybody has a way to make it better. It's why fantasy booking is such a big hit because you get the power to change things in anyway that you seem would make things better.

I roll my eyes anytime Seth tweets or speaks. He comes across as a company man. Which is amusing cause just like real life these big companies don't give a shit about their employees and it's always amusing when those employees defend the big companies and their boneheaded moves. I just laugh it off and take everything he says with a grain of salt.

@DMJ, I was telling a friend recently that WWE should be leaning into history more.  They should play up the history between wrestlers. 

Avengers: Endgame is like the biggest movie of all time and it largely assumed that its viewers had at least a passing knowledge of 20+ movies that had come before it.  But WWE assumes its viewers are goldfish who forget what they see after each week ends.

I would rather WWE did not lean into history more, because their way of leaning into history always is "Hey our product completely sucks now, remember when we were awesome!! Relive those days on the Award-Winning WWE Network!!"

On a sidenote, Mickie James is advertised to return tonight. That's one return that I'll welcome.

1 hour ago, DMJ said:

Game of Thrones would've never taken off.

Remember when that show was tightly scripted? And then from the fifth season onward it turned into SCHLOCK? And all because the showrunners wanted to ruin write Star Wars movies? 

Good times. Maybe there are more parallels to be drawn there?

 

But well, we got Shayna on the UNDERGROUND, maybe they'll smarten up and have Xia Li beat up fools?

9 minutes ago, KawadaSmile said:

Remember when that show was tightly scripted?

Come on now. From the very first season it was all mindless violence, tits, ass, constant misogyny (rape as a gimmick) and "swerve bro". Game of Thrones was booked by Vince Russo from day 1. Yeah, I was never a Game of Thrones fan at all, but watched the whole thing, WCW style.

It was Russo-like in the sense they had a beginning but no end in mind, but the twists were internally consistent and at no point did any actor start SHOOTING on camera using real names, so it's very harsh to say it was booked by Russo from day one.

1 minute ago, El-P said:

Come on now. From the very first season it was all mindless violence, tits, ass, constant misogyny (rape as a gimmick) and "swerve bro". Game of Thrones was booked by Vince Russo from day 1. Yeah, I was never a Game of Thrones fan at all, but watched the whole thing, WCW style.

I dunno. I feel that the show's worst tendencies were more transparent from season 5 onwards. Specially the rape as a gimmick (lol at them considering that to be character development). It's not Sopranos or The Wire or even Twin Peaks season 1, but most things made sense internally and had some sense of intrigue. 

To me it was bullshit from the get go, terrible writing, complacent shocking violence for the sake of it, it was only saved by a few really good actors (Dinklage, Clarke) and a few cool characters (well, the same, plus Sansa in the latter seasons, Arya until her booking became dumb as fuck).

Gotta love all the parents naming their little baby girl Dany from the first few seasons because she was such an empowering female character and whatnot and then... wooops 

BTW and to go back to pro-wrestling, am I the only one who coud not unsee Chris Jericho when Jaime Lannister was on screen ?

34 minutes ago, El-P said:

BTW and to go back to pro-wrestling, am I the only one who coud not unsee Chris Jericho when Jaime Lannister was on screen ?

Dunno, but Hafthor Bjornsson would be better than Braun at everything. Probably could shoot flip an ambulance, too.

I never watched so much as a millisecond of Game of Thrones, which meant that checking my Facebook feed on Monday mornings during the show's run was like reading Finnegans Wake.

Dom's theme is actually pretty good.

Why are they dressing Dom up like a high school student?

The babyfaces in this company are useless - nobody wants to save Dom.

Dominik Mysterio is DYING for our sins