Does WWE Rely Too Much on Its Legends?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Neptune, Oct 23, 2015.

  1. WWE Forums is giving away a copy of WWE 2K18 for any platform! More info: WWE 2K18 Giveaway (PS4, Xbox One, Steam)
  1. Keep reading...

    Honestly, I think they do. When you think about how and why they book them.. They do it to spike ratings even if it is only for one night or one match.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Pretty much. The second ratings go to shit they wheel out the legends, instead of actually producing a good product.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. I agree with you.

    And, oh boy, how I wish HBK superkicked Rollins on RAW, when Rollins kept saying "Play my music, play my music!"
    HBK saying "Here's your music. It's the Sweet Chin Music." after hitting him with that glorious Superkick would've been awesome! I would've marked out.
    • Like Like x 4
  4. People have been complaining about this for what feels like ages now. Of course they rely heavily on part-timers, and I don't think it's entirely a bad thing, but the issue is that they usually expect them to be a quick fix to their problems and as the record low Raw rating for this past Monday proved, they're not the solution after all.

    Ironically, my problem with the use of the legends on Raw had more to do with how little they were used rather than the fact that they were used at all. Like Balor said, why not have HBK super-kick Rollins before his match with Ryback? In fact, have him kick him unconscious and then as he starts to leave the ring through the ropes, he sarcastically turns around and says to a fallen Rollins, "Oh, by the way, I forgot to tell you before, but you have a match up next... against Ryback." (You could then cut to a commercial break immediately after just as a convenient way to give Seth a little time to recover.) And if Seth still ends up winning the match, he could brag/rant to Michaels backstage about how he came out on top despite Michaels' cheap shot. (It's worth pointing out that I had the least problem with this segment than I did with any of the others. At least there was some back and forth dialogue between the two here.)

    They had Austin on the show and had him do nothing more than introduce the Undertaker. Why not have him interrupted by someone, and then have him open up a can of whoop-ass on that person (or at least have them eat a simple stunner) as a result? I'd kill to see he and Kevin Owens exchange some words with one another. Why only have Ric Flair introduce Roman Reigns for his match instead of having Paige get in his face and talk about how much more talented she is than his own daughter?
    • Like Like x 1
  5. They have no choice. The guys they currently have can't draw a dime, not that it's their fault, I don't know who's booking the show nowadays, but the creative direction is awful. They clearly don't know how to book an interesting show anymore, half of the roster is irrelevant and in meaningless feuds, and the few main-eventers they have are barely over themselves.
  6. This is still a topic? I remember this being asked like two years ago. lol
    Seeing as how Taker, Kane and others are STILL around, the answer is probably yes.
  7. I've been so far against the legends on Raw my whole tenure here. Hate seeing them (sans Lesnar) hate relying on them, just wish they would go away...

    But, I've really grown to be okay with it for two reasons:

    1: Just overexposure. People just get tired of the same faces every week. Having someone show up to spark some variety or to get people talking can only be a good thing, be it an NXT callup, a guy you don't see all the time on Raw (like Cesaro), an injury return... always feels like a big deal.

    2: They're at least trying with the young talent now. They're failing, but they're trying. Rollins has had the belt for 6+ months. Reigns was given the megapush and they had a well-crafted plan to get him over. Daniel Bryan, shoot/work/whatever, became a star. Owens beat Cena clean. Dorito and Sheamus got everything under the sun. Wyatt is much more relevant than Big Show most of the time.

    The problem with this, though, is the obvious case of "They don't know what they're doing" on top of... Do you really get excited to see legends any more?
    Next time you hear "Shawn Michaels on Raw!" you're going to think "oh to introduce Ryback? cool yay". These guys never do shit
  8. To the people suggesting HBK kicking Rollins:

    How would that segment be better by HBK superkicking Rollins? It only furthers the message that is already being sent, namely that the guys today are shit, the guys from yesteryear are gold.

    If you have to wheel out a legend, don't do so on the expense of the guys who are out there week after week and then complain when those guys don't become as big a star as you need. If you want a character to be a star, book them as stars. Make them big deals. Mr. Casual wear Jesus Shawn Michaels coming out to kick your current champion in the face does not do your current champ any favors.

    What they did with Slater and the legends leading into RAW 1000 worked, but that hinged on Slater being a comedy midcard figure. A legend shouldn't get a one up on your current top crop, never ever. At least when it is the Undertaker there's still the possibility of a Wrestlemania match for the other guy involved. But not with one of the retired guys.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. At least Rollins can be considered a star out of that new crop.
  10. It takes a lot for them to trust Rollins to do the interview when they revealed the WWE highlights on ESPN deal. When was the last time such a major "media" appearance wasn't given to the old guard (Cena)?
    There's been little small forgettable interviews (like Paige on Conan) but something this massive going to Seth explains everything they feel about the current champ. Awesome.

    The future is certainly bright for Seth. As harsh as this title reign may feel sometimes, he should be able to get one hell of a babyface run here soon. Hopefully.
  11. As a heel he has been booked fairly well. He's an amazing wrestler and knows it, but he doesn't want to wrestle unless he absolutely has to. Very much like Ric Flair. Or Triple H in 99-2001
  12. If I go based on what I see (smackdown, PPV) and not what I read (Raw) I see a champion being booked just fine.

    Many of his wins have been fluky or creative or a result of stuff happening around him (the SKO was excellent), but I don't get the vibe that "He can't beat you" like I did with Miz or Magnus or Orton's last reign. See a lot of people bringing up his infamous win-loss record, but those losses are often Cena (ugh, but still the top guy) or matches with story finishes or Raw tags where he doesn't take the pin...

    I'm going to research this tonight. Stay tuned.
  13. WWE is relying on the veterans to help the main rooster. But this is a bad idea. Reminding us all how great the attitude era was. Also the fact that some wrestlers are considered Version 2 veterans. They should make their own name and legacy. Sometimes WWE tends to use vets too much and it kills the main rooster.
  14. Besides Stone Cold, I personally do not care for the legends. Ric Flair, Taker, HBK all 3 of them on RAW the other night bored me. Undertaker has been wrestling in WWE longer then Ive been alive. He just doesn't have gas in the tank anymore. I read people saying "he's in great shape" gimme a break. The dude looks like his body is about to break down any moment.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. A legend dropping a younger guy with his finisher isn't a big deal. Both Austin and Rock did this plenty back in the day, and I never heard anyone (at least not anyone being rational) argue that it made them look bad. It's a segment, not a wrestling match. And what you're basically saying is that you have no issue with Rollins cheating to win 99% of his matches, but if HBK hits him with some Sweet Chin Music by surprise during a promo, it somehow makes him look bad. OK.

    Comparing Rollins' run to Triple H's run in 2000/2001 is crazy. HHH didn't lose anywhere near the same amount of times as Seth has, and he won a shit ton more times cleanly as well. In fact, his run was notorious for being one of the strongest booked heel runs (in terms of clean wins) a world champion has ever received. Rollins loses what feels like 90-95% of his television matches. Heel or not, that's pathetic when you're the WORLD champion. Save the Honky Tonk Man-esque reigns for the midcard titles.

    IMO Seth should be booked more like heel Kurt Angle used to be. Angle cheated and used nefarious tactics most of the time, but there were also a long string of matches (and I'm talking about big PPV matches here, too) that he won cleanly on his own and yet he still managed to maintain his heel heat all throughout. This cowardly chickenshit heel run feels more befitting of a heel like The Miz than it does Rollins.
  16. WWE relies too heavily on its legends because their product is stale and shitty for the most part. Focus on booking and creativity, not just the past.

    I don't mind legend appearances, but to depend so much on them is insane.
  17. I agree with this 100%.

    If Shawn kicked Seth to just make a point, it doesn't mean Seth, the world champ, would all the sudden become health slater? Health was jobbing then already and was there to be a dummy for the legends. He played his part.

    If Seth just ate some sweet chin music and was out for a bit, then let ryback come out... It would've been the perfect Segway for Shawn to leave and introduce his match with ryback. Seth still could've been won after recovering, too.

    I know you and I see eye to eye on Seths run. And it's insane to compare him to triple h. Seth is always losing, having others be involved, or simply just getting lucky, probably more than any other world champion I can recall. It doesn't fit his body type, ability, or anything, and it's been utter bs. I'm glad he's still seen as the "top dog," but I also feel that this gimmick for his is bs and he should be seen as a real threat.

    Brock should be able to beat Seth, but barely. Like, when they fought, Brock should've been pushed more than he has been since defeating the streak. But, Seth just gets killed like he does all the time. Same how he got the #cenawins treatment. It's all bs.
  18. yes
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. I agree with using them now and again to put guys over, depending how they do it sometimes it can work well..

    Unfortunately they have a lot of spots where the 'legends' just come on out and talk, or become a manager etc. This is done because when WWE went through its' silly little PG Era it never really made any stars and so it relies heavily on out-dated guys as it has no other choice.
  20. I think the PG move was good, specially now how people are so sensitive with things. Also, marketing with kids in mind, well that is a no brainer if you want the big $$$. The problem is, they use the legends to get pops from the older fans who remember the attitude era. It is a cheap way of saying "Yeah we remember what we did too... But we aren't going back there again so this will have to do." .

    Most children/kid fans have no idea who Stone Cold is or what he used to do. Let alone how Cena became Cena. They didn't see Orton in his prime or the Rock being the Rock. They get the end result of the PG move. And I agree, they dug themselves into a hole. They don't have enough wrestlers I would consider a "legend" in 15+ years... And that is sad.
    • Like Like x 1
Draft saved Draft deleted