|
Panic/Disgust
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: definitly not nebraska
Posts: 74,774
|
Top 5 Things WWE Doesnt Need
TOP FIVE THINGS WWE DOESN’T NEED
by Joe DeProspero 7/29/2003 8:31:00 PM
After a weekend that consisted of a long overdue trip to the Jersey shore, and a trip to Hooters to watch Vengeance, I welcome you back to The Plancha Weekly. If any of you e-mailed me regarding my last column, bear in mind that my home Internet connection has been less cooperative than a stray dog on speed. So, if you haven’t heard from me, rest assured that I’m right on top of it.
I have nothing further as far as an intro goes, so I’ll go right into my picks for the Top Five Things WWE Doesn’t Need…
1) Insulting the Fans’ Intelligence
While I’m sure there are a few people out there who need spoon-fed narrations as to what’s going on in WWE, I know the majority of us certainly do not. I also know we aren’t all brain surgeons out here, but I think for the most part we’ve figured out that: Linda is Vince’s wife; Stephanie is Linda’s daughter. Kane is a monster. And so on and so forth. For starters, if it requires telling that these things are so, WWE isn’t doing something right. And if it requires a LOT of telling, then WWE simply doesn’t understand the expression, “Actions speak louder than words.” To add to this, our disbelief has to be suspended so often watching WWE that it never comes back down to earth! Now, I know pro wrestling isn’t the most realistic of television shows, but when you have a man on house arrest who somehow manages to make it from his house to two sequential Raw programs in different states, even the most naïve of people start shaking their heads. Or how about when the dreaded New World Order took out The Rock in an ambulance with a truck, only to have Rock show up the following week unscathed? Too often WWE books illogical stories on their shows, and it tells us one of two things: Either they are content with inconsistency, or they think their fans won’t notice. This is one person who notices.
2) Hotshotting
This hasn’t been as prevalent of late, but WWE has certainly been guilty of this in the recent past. I’m all in favor of having meaningful matches on Raw and Smackdown, but there is a difference between having a meaningful match and giving a match away on free TV. This was never more prominent as when Stone Cold walked out of the company after hearing of a plan to have a Steve Austin-Brock Lesnar match on free TV. In fact, Austin’s sudden departure was the only thing that stopped it from happening. Another time it was Hogan-Flair, with minimal build-up on a random episode of Raw. Recently, it seems that WWE may have learned their lesson. It’s been quite a while since we’ve seen a ladder match or a table match on television. And big-name matches are starting to get the hype that they deserve. I hope that this pattern continues.
3) The McMahons
Not to sound like a broken record, or like any other wrestling columnist, but the McMahons appearing on any show should be a special occasion in my view. Remember when Vince returned to Raw at the Meadowlands to throw a wrench in the plans of the McMahon-Helmsley faction? Or how about when Linda showed up on Raw in PA to announce that the returning Stone Cold would be in Rock’s corner to take on Triple H for the title? If the McMahons all kept their appearances to a “once in a while” basis, they would easily jump off of this list. And as I’ve said, Linda and Shane are not the McMahons I’m talking about here- they exhibit the type of on-air behavior that I feel is necessary. The bottom line is that Stephanie and Vince are overexposed. End of story. If they make themselves scarce, and allow us to actually enjoy their characters, I think we’d all be much happier, and WWE programming would be better off.
4) Too Many Non-Wrestling Matches
Now, I can already hear the taunts of, “Don’t pull that wrestling purist stuff with me, Jack.” But allow me first to say that I feel, when spaced out over time, wrestling matches that feature non-wrestlers can be quite entertaining. The Vince McMahon-Triple H street fight from Armageddon, for instance, served a purpose in that it turned Stephanie heel, while allowing the audience the opportunity to really route for the underdog. But Torrie vs. Dawn Marie? Stephanie vs. Sable? Test vs. Kevin Nash (Okay, this one doesn’t count, but I figured I’d include it in here anyway)? In my opinion, if WWE is going to give us a match strictly for the “sports entertainment” aspect of it, it should be rare (just as the appearances by the family McMahon should be). The recent Sable/Stephanie match from Vengeance would have meant ten times more had it happened two or three months down the road. But nowadays it seems that two people on a show have a beef with each other, and they jump into the ring before you can say, “Give me my money back.” Remember back when Dangerous Danny Davis stepped into the ring for the first time? It was like an event. People couldn’t wait until he was finally tagged into the match. And when he did, he was the legal man for three seconds before he tagged back out again. It was entertaining, and most of all, it was something different. Now it’s not so different anymore, and the number of people on the shows who have never had a match is very, very small. I know that times change, but too much of a good thing becomes a bad thing.
5) Pointless/Tasteless Angles
Al Wilson. Katie Vick. The UnAmericans. Need I say more?
__________________
Feme Sole: you can work at subway
Feme Sole: and give me free hoagies
|
Linear Mode
