Is AE the greatest Era in the history or Pro wrestling?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Donald Trump_, May 29, 2012.

  1. All the kids watching todays wrestling who werent around during the attitude era and have no clue what they are missing.

    AE was when you idolized wrestlers.

    DX ,The Rock, and Stone Cold were the best that ,made the whole attitude era great and memorable. The best writing they will probably they will ever have, thanks to them eliminating all the competition. WCW back then were beating them in the ratings and NWO were big enough to help hurt the WWE and MAKE them come up with something worthwhile. During the Attitude Era, you had a lot of less popular WWE superstars wrestling a lot more and had almost as equal storylines as the the most popular superstars. The WWE Intercontinental Championship had as much meaning as the WWE Championship and the World Heavyweight Championship. To be honest, kids watched the attitude era as well. I guess parents didn't like what was going on or Vince McMahon just wanted to make more money. I dont know why, but I wish it would go back to this era or atleast create a new one with atleast 40% of the things that they could during the Attitude Era. Ruthless Agression was good too, but Attitude Era was amazing. It was always entertaining and it had the best Superstars. Without question, it was amazing. from a wrestling standpoint it was not. but if you are going how it shows what a promotion can do to survive and take down a Juggernaut that wants to end your fed like WCW tried to do to them. well it was the best wrestling that they had at the time. The Attitude Era was almost all gimmick matches where weapons were used in pretty much every match. Today's WWE is made up of mostly cookie cutter wrestlers who all do pretty much the same thing. I'd say the best wrestling that WWE ever had was the early 90s and before. Not necessarily at the main event level, with guys like Hogan, Andre, and Warrior, but in the midcard. Guys like Texas Tornado, Mr. Perfect, Bret Hart, Roddy Piper, Shawn Michaels, Tito Santana, Rick Martel, Jake Roberts, etc. Do I think it was the best ever? Not really. There possibly have been better wrestling periods for the WWE. As someone said earlier, there was surprisingly a huge amount of good wrestling actually after the Attitude Era around 2002-2004 or so, especially out of Smackdown. The early 90s and 80s also had tremendous wrestling at points.

    However, I think that the Attitude Era's wrestling is up there purely because they had the right performers to do so. This was an era based solely on gimmicks, stipulations and storylines, not wrestling. By all means, it should have been a horrible period for actual wrestling. Luckily for the WWE, however, they had a roster stocked full of talent during the Attitude Era, and that's how they managed to still put out good matches. Guys like Austin, Foley, the Rock, Undertaker, etc. knew how to wrestle and kept the main event matches at a high quality. Meanwhile, you had the midcard stacked with wrestlers like Edge & Christian, the Hardyz, Val Venis, Goldust, Benoit, Jericho, etc., many of whom would become future breakout stars in the future. If the WWE didn't have such good wrestlers, then the wrestling quality would be miles from good, but an extremely solid roster helped the match quality stay surprisingly consistent.

    People do overrate the Attitude Era because it's usually the period they started watching at, so they don't really know any better (despite the fact that good wrestling continued afterwards, as previously mentioned). It's also a really hip thing to say for some of the newer smarks, sort of a bandwagon thing. But that being said, the Attitude Era may not be the best ever, but it's up there.
  3. Thank you big show. :yay:
  4. First of all. I assume it is me you are sort of pointing out there. I was born in 1990. I saw the attitude era. I was target demographic. It's just that the concept of Attitude being what would save the WWE is just stupid. Swearing, blading, bleeding and such does not equal quality.

    The Attitude Era did a lot of things right but also a lot of things wrong. In today's society a lot of the things they did would get RAW thrown of TV faster then a speeding bullet. What they need to do is go back to the ruthless aggression era but focus on more quality storylines and characters and focus in on the importance of the titles again. That's when they will get a good product again. And all that can be done under the PG banner. PG can still equal shows for adults.

    Nothing becomes good by going back to something that worked at one time. Cause there is a almost 99% guarantee that it won't work now. And that's my beef with the Attitude Era. I respect it and like it but going back to it now instead of adapting a new better product would more likely kill WWE then help it.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. It's not about the wrestling aspect alone why AE is considered good. It's also the characters involved. Unlike every other era, in AE you had 2 mega stars, austin and rock. And as you pointed out, some of the thigns they did would get RAW thrown off of TV. Which is perfect because the 90s was the perfect time to do it.

    AE is great because it's something that can never be duplicated. Whilst you can always bring back the aggression era. AE is also what saved WWE and wrestling as a whole. I doubt WCW would've made it to 2012 if they had won.
  6. I grew up with WCW in the mid 90s before switching over to WWF in the late 90s (and I've since gone back and re-watched a lot of Nitros/Raws/& PPVs from this time frame) and IMO the WCW's run from 96-98 was better than the AE. I would also say that the 'Ruthless Aggression' era that followed the AE was overall a better product.
  7. I agree that the AE was a great era and probably one of the greatest. That was never my beef with it. My problem with AE is with the people that say that bringing it back today would change the WWE for the better. It is as you say, it can never be duplicated.

    It would be like WWE resigning Ric Flair and then throwing him into the title hunt. We all know Flair as one of the greatest of all time but he cannot possibly get the same results in the ring as he could 30 years ago. The risk in bringing the Attitude Era back is that they will just try to recreate the feel of it. Not the quality of most of it. It would just be the gore and hardcore without the substance. And that is not good for the product without substance.

    What WWE should do is look at the Attitude Era and Ruthless Aggression era and see what worked. Take some of these elements and implement into their current product. Then I can guarantee that the Reality Era could be one of the greatest eras of all time. They should not duplicate the AE. But just like Punk, Bryan and Ziggler build on the legacy, gimmicks and techniques of legends. WWe should build of off what worked in the AE to produce quality shows. Not gorefests and constant hardcore matches and softcore porn divas matches. But Quality wrestling shows. The AE can be a cornerstone in the Reality Era but it should not be resurrected in it's entirety. It would not work and it would tarnish the legacy of one of the greatest eras in wrestling.
  8. I've always said RA > AE.

    AE has some classic moments but if you look back on it it was quite an insult to the fans IQ.
  9. The storylines were cool but the booking was pretty lame. You never got clean finishes. The world title matches all becoming no DQ really killed the match quality as most just became brawls that went about the arena. 9 Raws out of 10 just ended with chaos and 15 people in the ring brawling
  10. I'm not sure which one's the greatest era, but the AE is up there for sure. Saved the WWE, was a great product, very high ratings, granted. It was a great time. But as Stopspot said, recreating the Attitude Era today would destroy WWE. Taking a few ideas from there and putting it together with the current product could help. But that's not the problem. If the current product sucks, it's not because of the lack of talent. It's not because of PG, it's not because of which era we're in, it's because WWE can't (or at least doesn't try) to put on a good product by booking their shows well and managing talent. We saw great matches on Extreme Rules and Over the Limit, even at WM, why can't we get that constantly? Because WWE simply doesn't do it. The last big summer storyline we had with Punk? What happened to that? They didn't book it well and it went down the drain. WWE has everything in their hands to deliver a great product, but they just don't do it. No AE characteristics are necessary.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. AE was also the era with the highest ratings on an Episode and highest segment rating.
  12. And Lil Wayne sells a ton of CDs. More people watching & listening doesn't always mean it's better.
  13. Wasn't implying it was. Simply stating facts. :burns:
  14. Those ratings did not come just from quality shows Steph. Most of it was shock value. People calling their friends saying "Dude! Turn on USA and watch this mongo get powerbombed through a burning table. Stupid idiots most likely gonna die". People were either appalled by what they saw or were just hoping to see someone get hurt or die.
  15. Plus, it was a boom period for wrestling. WCW was already getting big ratings before that (not as big as the ones from AE, granted), and wrestling as a whole was popular. Probably, if we had WWE and WCW fighting for ratings today, both were going to get low ratings, because people who watch wrestling are fewer now, and they'd be split between two shows.
  16. Ironically, the highest rated segment was this is your life. :burns:
  17. That was a example of Quality writing and shock value working together. People did not expect it so when it happened they called their friends and told them to check out what the hell mankind was doing. I have stated that there was a lot of quality in the AE. But one cannot ignore it's faults either. RA was much better booked for example.
  18. In terms of ratings and money drawn, Attitude Era made more money than any other era of wrestling, and since wrestling is a business and thus all about making money, AE wins. But I, like a lot of others, think the 80's/early 90's boom period was more significant in a way because that's when wrestling first became acceptable as mainstream entertainment. Hulk Hogan, who was the biggest star of that era, is a name that almost everyone has heard at some point in their lives, wrestling fan or not, and they know to associate his name with wrestling. Ask a non-wrestling fan today would Steve Austin is, and most probably won't have a clue. Unless they've seen one one of his B-movies, that is (and even then, they'll associate him as an actor, not a wrestler, which makes my point.) There's even some people who were around when wrestling became huge during that era that still know names like Randy Savage, Jake Roberts and even Big Bossman. I mean, even Bossman. How many midcarders from the AE can a average non-wrestling fan (who was alive and aware that wrestling was in a boom period in the late 90's) name off the top of their head?

    For me personally, it was never the more raunchy, shock value elements from the AE that appealed to me. Sure, Austin pushed the limits by cursing and flipping people off and drinking beer, and DX could get a bit raunchy, but those sort of things could exist without the whole product being 'edgy' per se. My favorite year personally was 2000, which is when a lot of the shock TV aspects of things was toned down quite a bit. I also think it's still WWE's most profitable year ever. In fact, other than the occasional bra and panties match, the year 2000 could have happened perfectly well in a PG environment. Which just proves that PG itself isn't the problem.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Good AE quote.

    "The Attitude Era symbolizes all that can be rebellious, shocking and brazen about wrestling. In many ways it embodies the best of the industry, and was responsible for some of the greatest personalities and storylines of all time. During the late '90s, the WWE lived on the edge, and sometimes crossed the lines of decency, to beat its competition. The result was a period of unprecedented success."
  20. You can't use the ratings argument. The internet was only just starting back then. There were no IWC really, apart from Google groups. If you wanted to watch it, you watched it live. Otherwise you missed an episode. Now, you have YT, spoilers etc. If the AE took place now with the same talent etc, the ratings wouldn't be anywhere near as high as they were. That's pure fact.
Draft saved Draft deleted