Does wrestling really not matter in the WWE?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Stopspot, Apr 25, 2013.

  1. This is a statement that is thrown around from time to time, "wrestling doesn't matter in the WWE". But is that really the case?

    Most proponents of that statement claim that you don't need to be a good wrestler to be a main event talent, that all that is needed is a character that gets over. But isn't that just looking at half of the picture? A lot of wrestlers who are or have been at the top of the WWE keep saying that to be on the top you need to be the total package, which is described by guys like Cena, Edge and Jericho in multiple videos as including in ring ability. Whilst connecting with the crowd and being able to talk is without a shadow of a doubt important parts of a wrestlers success but you also need to be able to work good - great matches. Especially as part of the upper mid card/main event, aka as a top guy. Because you are the guys that are supposed to keep the people coming back and thus you need to be able to put on good matches, even with wrestlers worse than you.

    So why do people seem to think that to be the top dog in the WWE you don't need to be able to wrestle? Let's look at the guys who have been THE guy in the company:

    Hogan - Actually a pretty talented wrestler, not just a walking leg drop and finger point waiting to happen. His matches in Japan were really really good from a pure wrestling standpoint.
    Bret Hart - Need I say anything other than it is Bret flipping Hart?
    Steve Austin - Was before his neck injury a pretty talented technical wrestler, but after the neck injury he dumbed his style down a lot to protect himself.
    John Cena - When a guy gets praise from guys like HBK and Jericho for being a fantastic wrestler then he is obviously doing something right. Cena seems to be a guy though that needs an opponent that motivates him, this might be a result of him being so alone on the top for so long though.

    The reason all these guys (with the possible exception of Hart) work/works pretty simple styles as the top guy is not because they couldn't wrestle, but rather it was Vince protecting his investment.

    Then we have all the guys in the upper card like HBK, Triple H, Orton, Rude, Savage etc were good wrestlers. The only two excpetions I can come up with are Warrior and Batista.

    So does wrestling really not matter to become a top talent? Is there anyone you can think off who has reached to the top in the WWE without some wrestling ability? Why do people persist with saying that wrestling doesn't matter in the WWE?
  2. Well Miz has reached the top without any ring ability, his mic skills and all round character got him to the top. I still think wrestling in some ways does matter when getting to the top as you are Main eventing ppvs and you got to put a show on for the fans or they will not buy into you. Image/character comes first but ability to some extent comes into it.
  3. To say it doesn't matter AT ALL is an overstatement, obviously. Otherwise we'd have matches like Snooki vs. Paris Hilton or Donald Trump vs. Mike Tyson, since those "matches" would most likely draw.
    Taking a statement like that literally is a bit silly.

    Anyway, I don't think Wrestling matters all that much though, no. It's probably like 70% charisma, mic skills, look, etc and 30% 'Rasslin skills.
    Rocky, Austin, Hogan could have been mediocre and they'd still be the G.O.A.T.
    I think you just need to be able to work a decent match, so you don't stink the place up and cause everyone to leave/tune out, and that comes with experience.
    You don't need to be the most technical or have 5* star matches to be successful.
  4. Well it really depends on your definition of "wrestling". John Cena doesn't have much technical ability, he won't break out highspots and rarely tries new moves, but he's really good at working crowds, psychology and the like. When he has a good storyline to work with it's almost a lock that the match will deliver.

    Wrestling matters in terms of working a style that the fans will enjoy. You can't be as aloof as the Great Khali and expect to be taken seriously as a main eventer, but fans love seeing guys like Batista running around clobbering people with his basic set of power moves just like seeing Jeff Hardy jumping off things in the least athletic way possible. Those two weren't "technical", but were over because of their wrestling nonetheless.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. I think wrestling matters in WWE to get over with the fans at times. Obviously during the Attitude Era, not really everything was based on wrestling, but more on promos and back scene segments and stuff like that. The transaction out of the Attitude Era and into the Ruthless Aggression era changed that, wrestling began to matter more then promos. Matches were great, and were more focused on since there were two brands that showcased talent. I agree with Rain, there are different types of wrestling that'll attract different people.

    Daniel has the technical move set, much like Benoit and people recognize that well enough and give them credit for it, but also at the same time you have to have mic skills to back it up, or else you'll end up like Dean Malenko. People want excitement, people want something that'll take their breath away. Seeing Hardy jump from a tall ass ladder onto one outside the ring and landing on his opponent, it's crazy, it's amazing. Seeing someone like Brock Lesnar having sheer power, but doing moonsaults for his size, that's amazing. Seeing Goldberg speer opponent after opponent and doing that crazy ass scream, it's amazing.

    I do think wrestling is important, but I think that WWE wants someone who is over as well. Look at Ultimate Warrior, the only thing he had was intensity, and that got him over, since we all know his in ring sucks horribly, and his mic skills were those equal to Respect Gohan. WWE wants that intensity, that star power, something that'll wow the fans. And if wrestling was really the case, whenever Cena does have good matches, people would acknowledge them, same as when Punk botches. People ignore these things purposely, so it seems as though not many people do care for wrestling as they say they do.
    • Like Like x 3
  6. It matters, but not to a very large extent. I think it's mostly something the IWC/indy fans say, as it matters less than it does on smaller companies but it still does matter a lot. And as previously said, not technical wrestling, but overall in ring ability.
  7. I think the "wrestling doesn't matter" thing started when Vince started to move towards calling it "sports entertainment" performed by "superstars". The whole Vince thinks wrestling is a dirty word thing is IMO what fuels the haters to say things like this.
  8. To be fair, the word wrestling isn't completely a dirty word. It still gets dropped on the show now and again and it's used on all the time.

    However, wrestling skill definitely takes a huge backseat to gimmick/charisma and promo skill and marketable look. It's not even arguable. If you want proof, then look at how technical the two biggest names in WWE were at their peaks (Hogan and Austin), the most popular era in the WWF (the Attitude Era, which was heavily based around characters and storylines and stunts to draw in viewers as opposed to wrestling), and what the worst era of the WWF was (the New Generation in the mid 90's, despite two of the best ever in the ring - HBK and Bret - being the biggest names to come out of this era.)