Buttonhole's master grappler speaks his mind
Sun, 9 January 2005
by: The Gimmick
Email the Author
You know, so many times I watch the wrestling of today and think back on how much better it was when I was growing up in the glory days (1985/1990) as opposed to today. I’ve discussed and argued with my brother, and others, about the pros and cons of the two eras so many times it has left me rendered with lockjaw on three separate occasions. So instead of arguing heavily, and potentially suffering with an aneurysm, I decided to put down a ten-point plan for all to read. These are things that (perhaps in my mind only) might help to improve the current state of wrestling. I understand that, with the business world the way it is, some of things I say here aren’t entirely feasible- but these are just my personal opinions and I believe they’re worth thinking about. So, in no particular order, here we go:
#1- BRING BACK JOBBERS:
Those of you who haven’t been watching wrestling all that long might not know what a jobber is/was- so allow me to quickly explain. A jobber was a wrestler with an abysmal win/loss record. Their role (or job- hence the name I suppose) was to lose to a top performer (in other words “do the JOB!”) in a short period of time. These one sided bouts were known as “Squash Matches”. The benefit of having such matches on TV back in the day was that it helped establish a top superstar’s gimmick (or “get him over”) in terms of character, personality and wrestling style. It would bolster their win/loss record at the jobber’s expense. The other advantage of these matches was that you weren’t seeing the same superstars wrestling the same opponents every week on television. Yes I know, as I mentioned earlier, that from a business point of view (and the obsession with TV ratings) the return of the jobber seems unlikely. But think about what you’re watching these days; top notch matches, every show, twice a week. By the time the supposed big matches on Pay Per View are screened, you’ve seen most of them for free on one of the regular TV shows. So you probably don’t get as excited as you would if you’d never seen them at all. Trust me, the build up and anticipation of finally seeing some big names taking each other on used to make a huge difference. So be like me, make a stand, sign a petition, go on strike, go up to a stranger and say “I Wanna See Jobbers!” What’s the worst that could happen? OK, maybe I should rephrase that, because the last thing you want to see is a stranger’s “Jobbers!”
#2- MORE ANGLES:
Question: What makes a good match a great match?
Answer: No, not beer (though that helps too!). I’m talking about story lines or (as they are known in the wrestling business) angles.
See, good angles generate interest, which puts asses on seats, which creates atmosphere, which then makes for a great match. It’s almost mathematical.
GM (Good Matches) = A (Angles) + A (Asses) + A (Atmosphere). Unfortunately, WWE seems to have forgotten about creating decent angles for many of the wrestlers. As a direct result of this fan interest goes down and so do the ratings and PPV buy rates. It almost seems that these days well thought out angles and feuds are reserved for “main eventers”. Some of the greatest feuds and angels I’ve seen through the years were between mid-carders, or wrestlers who weren’t involved in the world title picture at the time. The extra attention paid to storylines helped produce many classic feuds, such as: Ricky “The Dragon” Steamboat and Randy “Macho Man” Savage. Ted DiBiase and Jake “The Snake” Roberts. Greg “The Hammer” Valentine and “Rugged” Ronnie Garvin. Randy “Macho Man” Savage and Jake “The Snake” Roberts. All of these guys were involved in awesome angels and the build up captured the fan’s imaginations, resulting in some incredible matches. The angles of yesteryear lasted for months. These days when they come up with angels it usually gets old after 2 weeks, but I’ll get to that a little later. For now, remember this; angles = fan interest and that’s just gotta be a good thing all ‘round.
#3- BOLSTER THE TAG TEAM DIVISION:
I don’t see this as a huge problem, just an annoying one. I love Tag Team wrestling and I find it sad to see the division dying a slow death. I guess it’s not as bad as it could be, but it is worse than what it should be. It’s probably not fair to compare the Tag Team division of today to that of fifteen or twenty years ago- those glory years of WWE tag wrestling when we had legendary teams like Demolition, The Hart Foundation, the British Bulldogs, The Legion Of Doom, The Brain Busters, The Rockers etc. I look at it like this; if you have 2 guys struggling to “get over”, then a lot of times in the past you would stick them together as a team and all of a sudden they had something to do. I hate seeing rosters full of guys with nothing to do and no one to feud with. This way you would eliminate that problem and also have many more teams so that the tag division might become more interesting. Both shows at the moment are lacking good teams and that’s a real shame.
#4- PAY PER VIEWS AND TV:
Over exposure- another one of those little things, that can have a huge effect on the overall product. Now, I know that Raw and Smackdown are shows with two different rosters, but lets face it, there is an over saturation of WWE TV. Even if you only take into account the “big ones” you’re looking at twelve different Pay Per Views a year and couple of two-hour television shows every week. I am the biggest WWE fan you could imagine, but even I have to admit- that is just too much for one company. The biggest problem is that they usually follow a set cycle and try and cram too much into it. The basic formula seems to be: two hours a week, per show to set up all the rivalries and stories, finish all of that up on their respective PPV’s, then start again fresh as soon as they battle. Rinse and repeat.
As I said earlier, it’d be much better for them to take it easy and spread all the angles and feuds out over a few months. Several years ago they had only the big five PPVs and a one-hour show per week and that worked perfectly. What would happen was, an angle setting up a feud would take place on TV, then they would play it up in the following weeks and the wrestlers involved would only face each other in House Shows (non televised shows). That’s where they would make their money (from gate receipts). So when it came time for the rivals to finally square off against each other on either TV or PPV, the anticipation had built up to a huge level. So there was much more interest from the fans (see point number 2). This is how over saturation can hinder the product.
#5- BRING BACK ECW:
This is one I would LOVE to see again. It’s a purely selfish one, but I know I’m not alone. I miss having that “Extreme” wrestling alternative. If you have never seen the real ECW (not the piss poor invasion angle version that was played out a few years ago) you are missing out on something truly special. It was the perfect mix of Hardcore, High Flying and Technical Wrestling I had not seen before and haven’t seen since. Stationed in south Philadelphia in an old Bingo Hall, ECW would put on performances never seen before or again in the USA. If you think you have seen the best of guys like Rob Van Dam, The Dudley Boyz, Tommy Dreamer, Taz, Tajiri, Rhyno, or Lance Storm in the WWE then you definitely need to check out ECW. When Vince and the WWF/WWE were kicking ass in the mid 90’s, ECW was a throwback to the good old days. No pyros, no huge arenas, just straight wrestling. ECW was hardcore before hardcore was cool. Hopefully with the recent sales of the new ECW DVD and the talk of a supposed one off special ECW Pay Per View, it may rise again like a phoenix. A man can only dream.
#6- T&A AND FILTH:
Now I am all for freedom of speech, but there is a time and a place for everything. Originally, when WWF/WWE started doing risqué content, it was solely to steal back viewers from WCW during the now famous ratings war. It was dubbed “Shock TV” and the premise was simply that; to shock the audiences’ back to viewing WWF/WWE TV again. It consisted of foul language, lewd gestures, scantily clad women and a little touch of violence. Boy did it work! It worked so well that viewers couldn’t get enough if it and it was one of the main reasons why the whole influx of edgy TV, that is now so mainstream in the USA, became so popular. It was dubbed “The Era of Attitude” and it served a purpose. But it is now roughly 4 years since the death of WCW, and the Monday Night Wars. So why is it still around? Is it because of the audience’s insatiable appetite for this style of TV? Or is it because the brains trust of WWE can’t come up with anything better to keep their audiences amused? I think a little bit of both. Audiences don’t like change, but WWE has always been about changing with the times. So I think the time is now to revert back to the days where wrestling fans went to wrestling shows to watch wrestlers get in the ring and wrestle. But to be fair, lately, it hasn’t been too bad and with two recent world champions on their respective brands (Chris Benoit & Eddy Guerrero) who are considered the best “wrestlers” in the world, the future looks like it could be in good hands once again.
#7- MORE GIMMICKS:
I was really weary about including this one, but maybe it deserves a look. I just think that with so many wrestlers today using their real names, instead of nicknames or gimmicks there could be an element of blandness. I remember when every single wrestler in the WWF/WWE had a gimmick and there never seemed to be a dull moment. Flamboyant guys like Randy” Macho Man” Savage, ladies men like “Ravishing” Rick Rude, crazy savages like Kamala and even a big fat white guy who thought he was a black guy named Akeem “The African Dream”. I know I may sound a bit contradictory when I said, in the ECW section, that ECW was great for their no frills approach to wrestling, but the gimmicks were a fun way of setting everyone apart. I know we don’t want bad gimmicks back like Doink The Clown, Damien Dimento and Repo Man but there must be a healthy medium. Example: look at JBL now. He got a great gimmick and is now, as of this writing, the WWE champion and I think it has a hell of a lot to do with the gimmick I also think guys like Batista, Snitsky Jindrak, Luther Reigns etc would benefit dramatically from a gimmick. Perhaps the WWE head honchos have used up every single gimmick known to man. Hey, maybe they should create a gimmick where a young black guy turns into a weird white guy and is always in trouble in the news for say, dangling a kid from a balcony. Nah, we’d never see anything like that on our TV’s…Would we?
#8-ELIMINATE BACKSTAGE SEGMENTS AND MORE INTERVIEWS:
You know when something changes, or you loose control of something over a period of time and you’re not quite sure when it happened? Well I kinda feel like that towards all the backstage segments on WWE TV these days. My main dilemma with it isn’t the stupidity of it all. I mean look at it- As if all the guys or girls backstage can’t see the group of techs with cameras and boom mics standing within the vicinity of them. As if they are unaware that people are recording and broadcasting what they’re saying and doing to the surrounding arena and millions on TV around the world. That, I can overlook as just trashy soap style TV. But it came at a cost, and that cost was interviews. No, I’m not talking about a 20 minute in ring interview by Triple H. (I swear if I hear another one of those long winded tirades by him again I’m gonna do something I’ll regret, like watch a Will & Grace marathon from start to finish.). I’m talking about backstage ones conducted by an interviewer (like the great Mean Gene Okerlund). Where the wrestlers looked down the barrel of the camera and kept it short and sweet, before and sometimes after a match. Nowadays they hit the ring at the start of the show and piss and moan for about 20 minutes, like a pom whinging about why they should have won the ashes, or anything for that matter. As far as I’m concerned, good interviews are officially a lost art, and it’s a real shame. I guess it’s just not as important to the new generation of fans as it was to the old schoolers.
#9- GOOD OL’ J.R AND JERRY “THE KING” LAWLER:
First things first, I have no problem with Jim Ross and Jerry Lawler as commentators. What I do have a problem with is their current style. Jim Ross used to be one of the best announcers going around, back when there were more of them than Collingwood supporters, and Jerry Lawler was the most entertaining and witty commentator I’d heard since the awesome duo of Gorilla Monsoon and Bobby Heenan. But now it seems that Jerry Lawler can’t go twenty minutes without commenting on the female superstar’s “puppies” or ogling at their other parts and discussing them in detail. I find his “horny teenager” style really creepy. He’s talking about women young enough to be his daughters. If I wanna hear that sort of talk I’ll go down to the pub and listen to the old winos talking about the time they brushed up against the school girls on the train. Yes the WWE divas are attractive, but its wrestling, not the playboy playmate review. It also seems that he drags Jim Ross down to talking about things other than what they should be talking about. Try commenting on the wrestling guys, like you used to years ago. After all, it is what you’re paid to do.
#10- MORE MANAGERS:
This point may be a bit unfair as there aren’t a lot of managers active these days, or being trained for that manner, but wrestling seems to be a lot better when there are managers around. A good manager can take a midcard wrestler and, just by being around them, make them a main eventer (even if it is just for a few matches). Look at the good job Theodore Long did on Raw with the guys and gal he was representing. Granted, in terms of their injuries, his luck wasn’t too crash hot, (in fact if it was raining women, he’d get hit in the head with a transvestite) but he got all of the people he was managing noticed and into main events. Why do you think guys like Bobby “The Brain” Heenan, “Classy” Freddie Blassie and “The Grand Wizard” are considered legends? Because they didn’t just stand outside of the ring, they were an integral part of any company’s success. Getting more managers would be very difficult- but just think how much better things would be if there was another “Heenan Family” or a “Dangerous Alliance”.
I know that a lot of these things aren’t too likely to happen for more reasons than one. But to get wrestling back to the heights of what it was without using any of these suggestions would be harder than Chinese algebra. Anyway, I guess I should go back to my lounge and watch some old WWF/WWE TV, before I become normal like all of you.
And remember; never trust a midget or anyone with 2 first names.
by: The Gimmick
Email the Author
More articles by The Gimmick
|
Latest Game
Latest DVD
Latest Music
Latest Wrestling
By Australian Ninja
