Blueprint Detailing How To Repair the WWE and Bring It Back to Glory

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
Blueprint Detailing How To Repair the WWE and Bring It Back to Glory

Even when speaking with the most die-hard and devout professional wrestling fans, I believe the majority of us are willing to accept that the WWE as it is today, leaves much to be desired in a number of areas.

While there are a great number of factors that separate today's generation from the "Attitude Era" or the earlier "Golden Age", there are a number of possible solutions that could be implemented to help ensure a greater deal of success.

The following article is a list of things that could be done to improve the overall product.

 

1. Stability

This might be the most important factor in improving the WWE. While we are all aware that professional wrestling is a form of entertainment that is both scripted and choreographed, there is no reason why the product as a whole cannot be presented as realistically as possible.

That is not to say that gimmicks (think of Santina Marella) do not have their place and comedic value, there just has to be a greater deal of stability surrounding the programs as a whole.

If that can be done, there will always be room for moments of comedic relief and somewhat supernatural events (think of The Undertaker).

But how should the WWE establish stability?

In my view, you need to have a very strong authoritative figure who is interesting, entertaining, and qualified.

Current and former general managers such as Vicki Guerrero, Teddy Long, and Mike Adamle have never struck me as being overly-qualified.

If you want an example of a good general manager, look back to Eric Bischoff.

He had both the history and actual creativity to pull of the role while also adding stability to the program. There are some people whom we will simply can't provide those vital characterisitcs.

Celebrity guest-hosts are prime examples.

The angle might have it's potential in the here and now but I do not feel that it would be a good move to continue for any extended period of time.

 

2. Separation of Brands

There was a brand-extension for a reason.

Since the WWE has decided (and in all honestly, has to) separate the many talented Superstars through different brands, it's important to keep it that way and maintain that structure.

This follows my theme of stability in a major way as well.

To have Superstars of different brands appearing on multiple programs per week with often little-to-no explanation, wreaks of lack of structure and stability.

I'm not saying that Superstars should never appear on other programs, there just needs to be a justifiable reason for them to do so.

A good example of this would be when The Undertaker came to Raw to face Randy Orton because Stephanie McMahon asked Kane to do her a favor and have his brother come to Raw.

There have been some Superstars that you have no idea what brand they are even exclusive to and that's a real problem if stability and structure mean anything to you.

3. Bring Prestige back to the Championships

The major titles in the WWE (World Heavyweight Championship, WWE Championship, & ECW Championship) have managed to carry their prestige to a reasonable degree anyway.

One thing that takes away from that is having title-swaps occur on a regular basis. It takes away from the value of even winning the championship to begin with.

I'm more concerned with the Intercontinental, United States, Tag Team, Women's, and Diva's championships.

While often times we do see quality champions such as Kofi Kingston, Shelton Benjamin, and Beth Phoenix, we also see people like Santino Marella and Maryse holding championships for reasons of comedic relief and sex-appeal.

Those are not justifiable reasons to make champions out of people, especially for extended periods of time.

That is, if you value the prestige the championships are supposed to hold.

 

4. Deal with the Issue of Babyface-Favoritism

As much as fans love to see their heroes win on a regular basis, there has to be some sort of balance to ensure the value of those victories.

The "Super-Cena" we saw circa 2005-2007 was a prime example of how to make many fans stop watching the product just to increase your merchandise sales.

But the greater issue isn't John Cena specifically, the favoritism thrown in his direction is if nothing else, no where near as horrible as it once was.

How many "Top-Heels" can you think of in the WWE today?

Randy Orton, Edge, and maybe guys like Chris Jericho and Big Show?

Now think of the "Top-Faces" in the WWE today?

John Cena, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Batista, Jeff Hardy, CM Punk (that might change),  etc.

That to me is a substantial differential in talent.

Not only that, but the top heels like Randy Orton and Edge rarely manage to hold onto championships for any extended period of time so it's not like the top heels are making up for the difference.

 

5. Intensity & Unpredictability

While most of the WWE Superstars are spectacular athletes, rarely do you see a great deal of intensity from them.

I'm not saying that they don't compete well or train hard.

I'm saying that even during the most personal of feuds, how often does the acting make the viewers feel like one of the competitors might really lose it and harm the other?

A good example of a rare time that this intensity was executed was during the Edge/Cena feud leading into Backlash.

When both men tore off their shirts (let's keep the jokes to a minimum shall we because I already see them coming) and looked like they really wanted to destroy each other.

That's a different kind of intensity than when Batista grabs the ropes and stomps like an animal.

So while the Internet has changed things a great deal, the product shouldn't be as predictable as it has become.

One of the great things about the "Attitude Era" was that you felt like you were on the edge of your seat and didn't know what would happen next.

I'd argue that the WWE has a more talented roster now than they did then.

They're just not as creative.

 

6. Eliminating PPVs prior to Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Survivor Series, & the Royal Rumble

Those four legendary pay-per-view events need to be promoted as such.

While no event could equal the quality and excitement of Wrestlemania, the other three should be events that are both highly-anticipated and well-remembered.

The matches should not simply be filler feuds that happen to coincide with that particular month.

Eliminating PPVs one month prior to each event would enable the WWE to work up quality feuds to be settled at those major events.

 

For now, those are the best ideas I could get out.

I'm sure that there are a great many more that could prove to be beneficial to the WWE at this point in time.

I don't mean to come off as a fan who doesn't enjoy the product, because I do a great deal.

But as with anything else, there is always room for improvement.

Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

WWE

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.