| How many of you buy into the theory that there is a down or up cycle in the wrestling business?
I do not buy into it at all.
Here are my reasons...
*Saying that there is a cycle to wrestling implies that the owners, bookers, writers, and wrestlers have no role in their given product. This means that no matter what happens wrestling will be popular and then unpopular, with no bearing coming from the active parties of the company. How could this possibly be? It can't.
*How come there were no cycles in WCW, ECW, AJPW or NJPW? This is Papa's idea but I'm stealing it. It's absolutely true. If pro wrestling had cycles then it would apply to all companies.
*WWF/E has only really had two major ups and downs. Sure, WWWF had some smaller cycles but this doesn't really count. The product wasn't national then. Some of the circuits did well, others didn't, and sometimes business changed. A business change doesn't always mean that it follows a cycle or pattern.
I think the cycle theory is false. Ia lso think it proves how McMahon uses his product in the Main Stream. He finds a trend, he milks the cash (up "cycle") out of that trend until it's absolutely dead (down "cycle") and then moves on. This isn't a cycle, it's how McMahon does things. And that's McMahon---not other wrestling comapnies, just one.
The theory doesn't hold water.
Let's hear some arguments and opinions though. |