I don’t watch much WWE anymore, and I’m seriously consider giving it up entirely. I probably would if it weren’t for John Morrison (who is out with a bum ankle at the moment, so there goes that excuse). This is my rant on SOME things the WWE is doing wrong. I don’t have a week to write this, so I will miss some stuff.

The first thing that bugged me the most, though they seem to have gone back on it a bit, is the ban on blood. I mean, there’s been blood in wrestling since before anyone can remember, I’m sure, and I know that since I started watching wrestling since I was little (I grew up with it), there’s been blood. People have busted themselves open for the sport. And call me barbaric, but I loved it. They had ways to make sure they didn’t REALLY injure themselves, so it was just for looks. I totally knew that, but enjoyed it nonetheless. Then suddenly after so many years they claim that if a guy gets blood in his eyes they could go blind. I don’t think so. That seems like a bit of a stretch for me. People get stuff in their eyes all the time and don’t go blind. It’s an excuse to make the WWE PG so younger fans will watch it. The problem is, in favour of a younger demographic, they’re costing themselves the older demographic that’s been watching it for years. I understand their desire to hook fans early, as it makes them more money, but when they grow up, they’ll think it’s silly (like so many people do now). I don’t see the need for it, as a lot of their talent, like Kofi Kingston, Rey Mysterio (especially him), and even John Morrison, appeal to younger fans because they’re smaller guys that fly around and do crazy stuff and are ridiculously athletic. They don’t need the PG gimmick to get children fans. Not only that, but the crowd that like seeing the blood and the weapons will turn to TNA.

(On a side note, what was up with the refs in Swagger’s matches wearing rubber gloves??)

The WWE also has a lot of amazing talent they don’t utilize to their full potential, and they even released some of their best athletes! My first example is John Morrison (because I am a huge fan of his). He’s been in tag teams with R-Truth for a while, and now that he got drafted to RAW, we haven’t really heard about him (though that is largely due to his ankle). He has tons of charisma, ring talent, athleticism, and mic skills. I mean, he’s FUN to watch! And he’s only ever had one shot at a top Title, and it didn’t even really count as it was an Elimination Chamber match. I mean, he should be in the hunt for a top Title at the moment, if only for a while. It’ll show people that the WWE doesn’t wanna just stick with the tried and true names, and he doesn’t have to win the belt. He needs a bit more development I think before he’s ready for that, and the WWE just doesn’t seem like they think it’s worth the time!

CM Punk I think deserves a mention here too. I mean, he's not untalented. He's one of those guys that just has what it takes to be a WWE superheel. Like Edge and Randy Orton, people love to hate him. But I loved him when he was a face and actually TEACHING people to be straightedge, rather than forcing it down people's throats. It was a good thing for the WWE to have a postive role model like him, but now they're making it seem like a bad thing! Doesn't that seem a little backwards to you? They’ve been trying so hard to make it look like their industry doesn’t have issues with drugs, and their only guy who addresses the issue does it as a heel? It bewilders me. BUT from a character standpoint, I LOVE his character. He’s that guy that people love to hate, including me (but that’s also because I have a bit of a mark-grudge against him for retiring Jeff from the WWE…), and that’s a cornerstone of the business!

I mean, I have no problem with Cena or Triple H or any of those guys, but we see them in the title hunt ALL THE TIME! I mean, it's time for someone new to get a shot!

And I know you're gonna tell me that Swagger's got a title now, but he's TOO new! Just like Sheamus. I mean, the both of them have talent, yes, and the both of them have the potential to be Champions in the future, but they put the belts on them too soon. I understand that they're desperate to get new names into the picture so their product doesn't go stale, but they can afford some time to build them up first.

And the Divas. Wow. They need work. It's insane. I mean, I like Beth Phoenix a lot, because she's dominant and kicks so much ass she should almost be fighting guys. I like that they put the belt on her, but there's no real competition. I mean, Michelle McCool? REALLY? That's just sad. And this stupid LayCool business is unnecessary. Vickie Guerrero is LONG past her expiration date too. I liked that she kept at the business after Eddie died (God bless you Eddie), but she's not doing the Guerrero name any good... Kelly Kelly could be good, but she needs some more development, but other than that, I think the Divas need a total revamping. They got rid of the only Diva that was really any good, because she backtalked management about how she wasn’t being used properly. That’s right, I’m talking about Mickie James. She is an AMAZING talent, and because she had a bit of creative input (that, and a side project that the WWE wanted their greedy paws on), they didn’t want anything to do with her anymore. That seems really stupid to me. And I loved Victoria, but because the WWE wasn’t treating her right, she left too. I don’t really know the circumstances behind her leaving, but I really think the WWW should have taken the steps to make her happy and keep her around.

I think the release of Shelton Benjamin is stupid too. I mean, for the last couple of years he’s been the highlight of the Money In The Bank ladder matches because of his athleticism and the crazy things he can do. He is super talented, but they did NOTHING with him until he chose not to resign with them because they weren’t giving him a shot. Another stupid move.
And the WWE seems to only care about their big names, and don’t give anyone else a shot. I won’t elaborate on this because it seems everyone else seems to share this opinion too. This bugs me the most.

And that’s it for now. I can’t seem to think about anything else right now. Forgive me if I seem a little… inexperienced. This is my first blog on this forum. Please be nice.

I feel WWE went downhill around 2004/05.

I first started watching WWE aorund 1991/1992 and really enjoyed it. But as i grew up and WWE was putting stories together like Billy and Chucks "gay" wedding and the whole AL Wilson rubbish with Torrie and Dawn Marie i felt that WWE seemed to loose the plot.


I felt as a fan that WWE was seeming to forget bout its older fans and starting to put out any old rubbish. WHY??? Well WWE had no competition. ECW and WCW had both been bought by McMahon and TNA was in its very earlier stages so wasnt ready to compete with WWE.

All my favourites seemed to be leaving and either ridiculous storylines or ridiculous characters were appearing on WWE programming.

Eventually i started to watch WWE less and less and switched to TNA. TNA was great as it had a "hungry" attitude with new talent but still had some faces i was famililar with like Jarrett, Raven, Rhino and Ron Killings.

Altho i feel now both have seriously gone down the pan.

Well the WWE has been slipping for a number of years, but I feel like they've just stopped caring lately. I just recently got into TNA so I dunno what it was like before. Comparing the two now, TNA is DEFINITELY better.

REALLY?? I would say TNA is appalling at the min. Sure they have a very good roster with the likes of Elijah Burke, Angle, Nigel Mcguinness, Sting, RVD, Anderson ect but the programming has been weak. Theres too much segments of Hogan/Flair/Bischoff and not enough decent long matches.

If you like TNA now watch TNA from around 2004 to about 2008. It will blow your socks off

While kids will watch a show that isn't rated PG- their parents might not let them. I know a whole bunch of parents who don't want their kids watching a show where women run a round in skimpy outfits, people hit each other with weapons, and run each other over with cars. Those kids might find a way to watch the show, but they don't have the money to pay for merch or order PPVs. Their parents do.




I think that the thing that hurt Morrison the most was Rey's refusal to drop the belt to Ziggler. Morrison had just picked up two non-title wins over the Punk during his reign, and had taken Jeff to the limit in a title match. Instead of continuing to challenge for the World Title- especially against a champ he had BEATEN twice, Morrison was forced to go back to winning the stepping stone belt, then had to lose the stepping stone belt- becoming a stepping stone himself.


You're misunderstanding the angle. Punk isn't a heel because he is Straight-Edge. Punk is a heel because he is trying to force his views on others. This is why the Punk character needed to debut as a face- and win as a face- before turning heel. WWE isn't telling people that being Straight-Edge is bad... they are telling people that forcing your beliefs on others is bad, and that you aren't "better" than someone just because that person makes different lifestyle choices than you.





With Sheamus, I agree with you, but only in hindsight, because they didn't make him look like a credible champ DURING his reign (and Triple H accidentally burying the WWE Title didn't help much either).
With Swagger- part of the point of MITB is to be able t skip build up. We all know that Swagger is credible- the submission strategy has ALWAYS worked- look at matches like Benoit vs. Big Show from Smackdown in early 2003. I think that Swagger needs a submisison finisher, too, but other than that- it put the belt on a credible guy, and is letting him be built up through giving him time to do what he does best.



I'm going to disagree with a few things here. The first is your implication that Michelle McCool isn't good. She is probably one of the top 10 female wrestlers in North America. Mickie James isn't on that list. Also, LayCool is GREAT. How many heels in WWE currently have more heat that Lay-Cool?
The second is your reason for Mickie being released. That might have been part of it, but she was also late a lot on their European tour, and most importantly, she didn't want to wrestle anymore.
Victoria wanted to retire. Vince even gave her time on the air for a retirement speech.
Also, about Beth having no competition- If Gail Kim can beat Kong, she can beat Beth Phoenix.
Most of the divas are- at the very least- passable in the ring, and some of them are actually quite good. People have these anti-WWE blinders on that prevents them from seeing almost anything good in WWE, unless it involves an established indy worker or a guy who was around during the 90s (Rey, Edge, Christian, Jericho, Taker, HBK),. The automatic hate is thrown towards the divas, Cena, and Triple H- especially when the question is in-ring ability.



I mostly agree with this point, too. Any time that Shelton got momentum, they did something dumb and messed it up.



CM Punk. Sheamus. Jack Swagger. Drew McIntyre. The Miz. Kane & Taker putting over MVP & Kennedy back in late 2005. Turning JBL from an undercard tag team guy into a superheel champion.

WE has been slipping for some time, but there is no reasonable way to say that TNA has a better product. They probably have a more talented roster, but their product has been TERRIBLE.

This is true, but I grew up with it and I turned out just fine. XP But there are a lot of good reasons to watch it. When I was little I didn't have a dad around, and I learned a lot of things about persistance, determination and hard work from wrestling. The good guys always won because they tried their hardest and pushed themselves until they succeeded, no matter the obstacles that got in their way.

I think this much makes up for the stupid bikinis and overly barbaric/unrealistic gimmicks like running people over with cars or dying in explosions *cough*Vince*cough*. At least, this is my opinion. Others might not agree.



I didn't realize this was the case. I'm kinda surprised, as Rey seems to be the guy that does what is right for the company. That disappoints me a little.

And you're right, that match between Jeff and Morrison was OUTSTANDING. I love both of their styles so this match was like candy for me.



That was what I was trying to get at. I understand that he's not a heel because he is Straightedge, because he was when he came into the company and was a huge face. People still loved him, and he was a positive role model. He's a heel now because he's shoving it down other people's throats.

And I understand that they're trying to show people that forcing your opinions on others is bad, but the way they're showing Punk just makes me think that they're turning people off the message. Like Rey said, it's the messenger, not the message.



I think these guys definitely are Championship material, don't get me wrong, they are both super talented (though I think Sheamus needs some character development), but in my opinion, they should have given them a little more time to grow.

However, I see your point with Swagger. And I think he should utilize his size for a dominating submission.



I should have been more clear with that as well. McCool DOES have talent in the ring, but her character SUCKS in my opinion. I hate how they're making LayCool look like a bunch of teenagers from high school. Yeah, they have heat, but they make me change the channel. I've been through high school already, don't wanna do it again.

I didn't realize she didn't want to wrestle anymore. In that case, I was mistaken.

But if Victoria didn't want to wrestle anymore, why did she go to TNA afterwards anyway? That, to me, just says that she wasn't getting what she wanted from WWE.

I like Gail Kim a lot actually, but she has almost ZERO in ring time. She's eye candy, that's all really.

The WWE just seems to be making the same mistake TNA has fallen into as well, and that's using girls that are attractive, rather than focusing on in ring talent. I feel comfortable enough using Alicia Fox as an example here. And she's not even that good looking, in my opinion.



I will agree with you on Punk, but with Sheamus and Swagger I think they pulled them in as quickly as they did because they were desperate to get some fresh faces before their established guys started dropping out. Drew McIntyre isn't getting the push he was before because they saw how, essentially, anti-climatic it was when they did it with Sheamus and he got a lukewarm reaction as Champion. He does have talent though. Too bad he's high maintenence.

There are time when the WWE seems to realize that they need fresh faces, especially in the past, but lately, it seems, they didn't realize this until it was too late to build them up properly.

Maybe I'm that fan that wants to see the guys get a proper push and some development BEFORE they get a title, not the other way around, though putting a title on prematurely, especially with Swagger, seems to get a lot of heat, so maybe in that regard they're doing something right.

Thank you for teaching me about a lot of stuff I seem to have missed.

Me, too- but parents don't realize this for a while.


Why try and make up for it when you can just cut out the bad stuff?




I was surprised, too, but some people surprise you like that. I was amazed when I found out that Foley won the WWF Title at Summer Slam 99 because Austin refused to drop the belt to Triple H.




Having been a HUGE CM Punk fan for a while (since his ROH days), I will say that heel Punk is SO MUCH BETTER than face Punk.
I see your point, though, but I think that WWE is doing an excellent job of doing exactly what they are intending to do.


I think with Swagger, part of the issue is that he did a lot of his growing under the radar, winning the ECW belt first, rather than the IC or US.
Sheamus definitely needs some character development, but they could have done that as champion
(he is a monster who can also talk- it shouldn't have been too hard). This was one time where WWE dropped the ball a bit.


Their personalities have changed over the last few months, but they were PERFECT heels throughout the Mickie James feud, and it wouldn't take too much work for them to switch back.
I also think that his might be a "writers doing the writing" problem, because I remember Maria and Melina both also starting to sound like stereotypical teenage girls early last summer.


I'm not sure, but she tried training for MMA before she decided to go to TNA. She might have chosen to go to NTA afterwards for the oppritunity to wrestle against women like Kong and Cheerleader Melissa before she retired.



WWE does do this, but I feel that the main problem with mainstream women's wrestling (especially in WWE) isn't a lack of talent, but rather, a lack of time given to that talent. Tiffany and McCool put on the beginnings of a great match last week on Superstars. How much better would the match have been if they had been given 10 minutes, rather than four?


The reason people feel this way about Sheamus was that he was booked poorly AS champion. He shouldn't have won by DQ at Royal Rumble. Instead, they should have had Dibiase or Rhodes accidaentally distract the ref to cost Orton the win, then have Priceless try and get involved to cover up their error, but have Sheamus take them out, then beat Orton cleanly. This accomplishes the same goal of exacerbating the internal turmoil that had been plaguing Legacy while still getting Sheamus over. It also creates the feeling of "Orton had Sheamus beat- maybe he should be the champ" that can be revisited and resolved once Orton has turned face after feuding with Rhodes and Dibiase, They also messed up Sheamus' booking in the Triple H feud. THis mainly stems from Triple H acidentally burying the WWE Title while putting over Wrestlemania, which buried Sheamus' one claim to fame, then having Sheamus lose to Triple H at Mania.
If you want to see a more traditional "build up" for Sheamus, check out my "BRM gives WWE a shot in the arm" fantasy booking thread. I haven't gotten to Sheamus yet, but it is in the works.

Good point. Sometimes parents can be overprotective of their children.



Some people (like me) enjoy that (not the bikinis or the cars running over people). It's another reason to watch it. At least, it was when I was growing up with it. All my friends and their parents watched it because it was so insane. Now a lot of the people I talk to that stopped watching it feel it's gotten too tame. Maybe I just have twisted friends.



I heard that about Austin in his day. I'm not really surprised he didn't wanna drop it, but dropping it to Triple H of all people should have been respectable enough that he wouldn't have had an issue with it. Iunno, sometimes people just do stupid things.



I don't get Superstars where I am, so I didn't see it. I'm surprised with Tiffany though, she's a good little wrestler. I totally agree that they don't give talented Divas the time to showcase themselves.



This I agree with. Sheamus should not have won by DQ. It did sort of ruin his credibility as a champion. He should definitely be a champ in the future though.

OMG, where do I begin with what WWE is doing wrong? Let's see...
1. Bad, illogical storytelling
2. Too many backstage skits, not enough in-ring action
3. Matches are often too short and of poor quality
4. Divas, Divas, Divas. Too many are just eye candy (Bella Twins, anyone?) with no real talent. Those who do have talent (Gail Kim chief among these) are not allowed to show their true talents.
5. Feuds are too short. They aren't allowed to develop so that fans can actually invest in the participants or the story they're trying to tell. Instead, they are used only to sell pay per views.
6. Bad announcing. I have nothing against Michael Cole personally. Actually enjoyed him on Smackdown, but he lacks the passion and the product knowledge of JR. Letting JR's contract lapse and not keeping him as an announcer was a bad mistake on WWE's part. Jerry Lawler was once the best color man in the business, but he has declined precipitously in recent years and is a shell of his former self. On the bright side, Matt Striker shows promise.
7. Misuse of existing talent. Where do I begin with this one? Shelton Benjamin tops the list of those who were held back in WWE and never allowed to live up to their full potential. There is no excuse for not making him a major champion with his freakish athletic ability. Also Jack Swagger (though they've begun to correct that mistake) still loses entirely to much for a world champion. Kane, Vladamir Kozlov, William Regal, Evan Bourne, and the list could go on.
8. Lack of a serious cruiserweight division. WWE has some great cruiserweights, including Rey Mysterio, Evan Bourne (who's simply AMAZING) and Chavo Guerrero (although he's getting older). Cruiserweight matches are among the most exciting on any card. So why did WWE retire the Cruiserweight belt? Having someone like Bourne compete against wrestlers twice his size simply doesn't make logical sense, and too often it results in serious injury. Just ask Mysterio.
There's more I could say on this subject, and I might in another post, but that's all for now! LOL

I COMPLETELY agree.

my only gripes with the wwe is really the no blood thing and the guest hosts. The way i see it in regards to the misuse of talent that will eventually fix itself as the big names retire. and the storytelling , while not as good as in the past is at least better than TNA's(not that I'm against TNA i actually like their talent just not their writers). And in regards to cruiserwieghts there is really only about 3 or 4 left. way I see it wrestling goes in a cycle, and while now wwe is rather bad, it'll pick up in a few years and then suck agian. but in the end we only have so much say so i don't see the point in complaining.

Some of the best heels are when they are right, which Punk is. You can well understand that he's turning his back on the fans when they cheer a drug addled loser who threw away every chance he was given over Punk.

Perfect 'I'm right but you boo me anyway' promo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAgUfDIFIQ4

And that’s it for now. I can’t seem to think about anything else right now. Forgive me if I seem a little… inexperienced. This is my first blog on this forum. Please be nice.

you hit the nail right on the head. WWE gives no names like Swagger and Sheamus world title reigns and their work horses that have had multiple IC and US title reigns nothing. Prowrestling is a popularity contest but from a fan's point of view: how well you put on a show should determine how soon you get to be world champion. Sheamus and Swagger made their names by pounding wrestlers half their size. Pit them with larger guys with more experience and show me what happens. They loose? Well *CENSORED*... who knew?

You did quite well for a first post. We are looking for actual debate, with actual intellectual arguments, and you brought both.

As to your point, I agree, to an extent, but at the same time, if a guy is good enough, hotshotting like that can work. Look at Brock Lesnar. Austin Aries' first singles win in ROH came in 2 out of 3 fall match against Bryan Danielson, and Aries had only had 3 singles wins in ROH before he ended Joe's 21 month long World Title reign. It depends on the talent of the guy in question. I think that Sheamus is good enough that it can (and is) working (barring some booking errors that were made early on). Im not saying the Sheamus is as good as Aries or Lesnar, but Big Show managed to pull it off, and I would say that Sheamus certainly has the potential to be as good as the Big Show (actually better, because of he doesn't have the issue of his size limiting his booking options).