This is a discussion on Did The Attitude Era ruin Wrestling? within the General Pro Wrestling : Classic & General forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; Wasn't wrestling supposed to mean 'WRESTLING IN THE RING' and not cutting flashy promos,Back in the day before the attitude ...
Welcome to Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forums
Hello and Welcome to WrestlingClique - Wrestling Forums!
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services.
You're currently viewing our site as an unregistered guest which means you are limited to most discussions and features.
Take a few minutes to browse around, and if you like what you see, Register a free account to gain access to :
• Richer content, access forums that are not viewable by the public.
• Complete access to post topics, respond to polls, communicate privately (PM), take part contests, arcade, photo sharing, networking, groups.
• Create your personal profile and bio
• Meet and Chat Live with other members who share similar interests
Registration is simple and fast. Won't take you more than a minute and of course it's completely free.
So Join our Community today!
Wasn't wrestling supposed to mean 'WRESTLING IN THE RING' and not cutting flashy promos,Back in the day before the attitude era superstars who lacked charisma were also handed the world title but these days the wrestling skills matter less and the mic matters more so isn't that going away from the actually thing.Believe me i loved the attitude era,it was wholesome entertainment but i really didn't get to see a long nice & smooth match without the usage of weapons at the time.Shelton Benjamin is really talented athlete he is only held back because of his lack of verbal skills,Now i think that is unfair ,Wrestling is about wrestling ,promos matter but the attitude era gave them a bigger weight age over the wrestling skills.Before the attitude era all kinds of Gimmicks could have been world champion as long they had the wrestling skill but today do you think Umaga(fired) can be a world champion(he is very talented for a fat guy).
"Cutting flashy promos"? Promos have been apart of wrestling since the 70's atleast and are a fundemental part of developing character. Name me some of these wrestlers who had no charisma and yet were "handed" world titles.
Umaga was let go because he was a drug addict.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Wasn't wrestling supposed to mean 'WRESTLING IN THE RING' and not cutting flashy promos,Back in the day before the attitude era superstars who lacked charisma were also handed the world title but these days the wrestling skills matter less and the mic matters more so isn't that going away from the actually thing.Believe me i loved the attitude era,it was wholesome entertainment but i really didn't get to see a long nice & smooth match without the usage of weapons at the time.Shelton Benjamin is really talented athlete he is only held back because of his lack of verbal skills,Now i think that is unfair ,Wrestling is about wrestling ,promos matter but the attitude era gave them a bigger weight age over the wrestling skills.Before the attitude era all kinds of Gimmicks could have been world champion as long they had the wrestling skill but today do you think Umaga(fired) can be a world champion(he is very talented for a fat guy).
Really, was Hulk Hogan amazing in the ring during his heyday? He understood psychology and how to work the crowd, but he was hardly putting on classic 5-star matches for the most part. If Hogan couldn't cut a promo and get over the crowd, he never would have become the star he did.
And he's hardly the only example. Ric Flair could do it on the mic as much as in the ring. Lex Luger was a multi-time WCW world champion and he was hardly amazing in the ring. Disel (Nash) had one of the longest WWF world title reigns since Hogan. I could go on. Actual in-ring ability has only been one part of the equation for a long time, and not just for the WWE.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Wasn't wrestling supposed to mean 'WRESTLING IN THE RING' and not cutting flashy promos,Back in the day before the attitude era superstars who lacked charisma were also handed the world title but these days the wrestling skills matter less and the mic matters more so isn't that going away from the actually thing.Believe me i loved the attitude era,it was wholesome entertainment but i really didn't get to see a long nice & smooth match without the usage of weapons at the time.Shelton Benjamin is really talented athlete he is only held back because of his lack of verbal skills,Now i think that is unfair ,Wrestling is about wrestling ,promos matter but the attitude era gave them a bigger weight age over the wrestling skills.Before the attitude era all kinds of Gimmicks could have been world champion as long they had the wrestling skill but today do you think Umaga(fired) can be a world champion(he is very talented for a fat guy).
If you're talking about the WWE, the WWE was never a company built around the best pure wrestler being the champion. It was whoever could be marketed the best. That's why wrestlers like Hulk Hogan, The Ultimate Warrior and Yokozuna were World Champions while Ted DiBiase, Rick Rude and Rick Martel were not. Back in the day, Hulk Hogan's promos were typically longer than some of his matches.
For the most part, gimmick wrestlers weren't given World Championships in the WWE. With the exception of Warrior, most of the WWE champions in history were regular men with their attitude crank up higher. As for said gimmick wrestlers, most were low carders who's sole job was to entertain the fans in the first few matches.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Guys I'm not talking about the 90's or the late 80's because they had all that stuff .Hogan was nothing special,he could only run his mouth.Basically my reference was to the NWA,Sure Ric Flair was good on the mic but he was also good in the ring,they were worth being seen in a main-event but not all this hype which is being made about him being the greatest.The Undertaker won the world title,Kane won the world title.Fortunately TNA still gives the chance to all contenders.
Guys I'm not talking about the 90's or the late 80's because they had all that stuff .Hogan was nothing special,he could only run his mouth.Basically my reference was to the NWA,Sure Ric Flair was good on the mic but he was also good in the ring,they were worth being seen in a main-event but not all this hype which is being made about him being the greatest.The Undertaker won the world title,Kane won the world title.Fortunately TNA still gives the chance to all contenders.
Put. A. Space. After. A. Period. Or, a comma. Otherwise it looks like a giant run on sentence which is annoying as shit to try and read.
What the fuck does NWA or TNA have to do with the Attitude Era? Or Undertaker and Kane winning titles? Do you even understand what your trying to say, because I sure don't and I doubt I'm the only one.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Guys I'm not talking about the 90's or the late 80's because they had all that stuff .Hogan was nothing special,he could only run his mouth.Basically my reference was to the NWA,Sure Ric Flair was good on the mic but he was also good in the ring,they were worth being seen in a main-event but not all this hype which is being made about him being the greatest.The Undertaker won the world title,Kane won the world title.Fortunately TNA still gives the chance to all contenders.
The Undertaker won the WWE title twice before the Attitude Era even began. Once again, the WWE was never like the NWA where the champion had to be the best wrestler in the company. If you're talking about champions in various promotions not being the best wrestlers, let's go back to 2004. At one time, you had Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, Samoa Joe and AJ Styles as World Champions. That's every single World Title that means a damn thing in America around the waist of someone who could get the job done inside of the ring. All of which I would say are better wrestlers than Shelton Benjamin, who I assume is your measuring stick of what a champion should be. Depending on when you feel the Attitude Era ended, that's a few full years since it ended. That right there proves that the Attitude Era didn't "Ruin" the former great champions.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Damn,I'm new here and already being disrespected for a very small reason.
The summary of all that i have been writing is that the attitude Era further gave mic skills a prominent position over wrestling skills.Bruno Sammartino was very charismatic but he was 'good' in the ring compared to any of the wrestlers in his time that is why he was given the world title.Now was Stone Cold a good wrestler?No,he did not even have a move-set,Just punches throughout the match but the guy was incredible on the mic thats why he got the world title.Well considering your point lord Steventon about Hogan,I would say that the Attitude Era did not ruin wrestling but just further increased charisma's weight age over wrestling than it already was.
Caesar,I agree with you i do have a problem with my grammar,I'll try correct myself.
Lord Steventon,Why are there 2 Lord Steventons?Are they the same guys?
Damn,I'm new here and already being disrespected for a very small reason.
The summary of all that i have been writing is that the attitude Era further gave mic skills a prominent position over wrestling skills.Bruno Sammartino was very charismatic but he was 'good' in the ring compared to any of the wrestlers in his time that is why he was given the world title.Now was Stone Cold a good wrestler?No,he did not even have a move-set,Just punches throughout the match but the guy was incredible on the mic thats why he got the world title.Well considering your point lord Steventon about Hogan,I would say that the Attitude Era did not ruin wrestling but just further increased charisma's weight age over wrestling than it already was.
Caesar,I agree with you i do have a problem with my grammar,I'll try correct myself. Lord Steventon,Why are there 2 Lord Steventons?Are they the same guys?
No they are not.
And an extensive moveset does not = good wrestling. Austin was a great brawler (after his neck injury when he didn't do much technical wrestling anymore) and had great psychology.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Linear Mode
