WWE: No Definitive Era Is the Best

Hey, guys. I'm back with another endless topic amongst the IWC enthusiasts. What really is it with wrestling fans and comparisons?

It's like, they see a metaphorical mirror beside every superstar in the WWE.What I am referring to is the unjust comparisons made amongst specific wrestling eras. These eras are as follows:

The Golden Age Era (1984 - 93)
The New Generation Era (1994 - 96)
The Attitude Era (1997 - 2001)
The Ruthless Aggression Era (2002 - 06)
The PG Era (2008 - present)

I keep on hearing that the PG Era sucks and the Attitude Era is the best. The PG Era is actually pretty good from where I see it. Truth be told, I DO like the Attitude Era the most—but that's just it.

I like it the most, but I know to a fact that it is not the best. That's only my opinion, and I could more than comprehend certain reasons as to why some people may confute. But, like I said, it's just an opinion—every person has a right to them.

All eras have their pros and cons, and it is an obvious fact. Want an even more interesting fact? No WWE era is the best. Why? Because they are all incomparable. Let's read on, shall we?

Firstly, every era had a different time-span. No era lasted the same length of time. In fact, the PG era seems strong and still going. The point I'm trying to make here is that each era had its own time to have certain feats introduced, as well as have them accomplished.

Each era had its own individual and respective superstars and megastars, and each era had a different number of these superstars and megastars. I'll elaborate more on this later. What people don't seem to realize is that as each era progressed, and progresses (in the case of the PG Era), the WWE seems to improve their role as one of the greatest known organizations.

In other words, with each passing year they get put more and more on the map. It would be unfair to compare which era made the business most popular anywhere in the world, or which era motioned the WWE to be more widely known. In my opinion, all of these eras had their own roles in doing this.

Earlier I mentioned that every era had its individual superstars and even megastars. We all know who these people were. I also mentioned that there were feats being introduced and accomplished in every era. This would be my second point.

The Golden Era's most popular accomplishment, in terms of what went on in the squared circle, is probably the "The Slam Heard 'Round The World." I can only be referring to the confrontation that saw Hulk Hogan body slam "Andre The Giant."

Now, you have to think about this. In the 1980's, a feat like that was extremely rare. I believe it was the first time that the world of pro-wrestling had ever experienced a man of Andre's size being lifted off his feet. That single move sent the crowd into hysteria. These two prolific wrestler would go on to change the landscape of pro-wrestling.

The Golden Era was succeeded by the era of New Generation Wrestling. There were younger stars out to make a name for themselves, and two of these stars had set the stage for what entertainment really was all about. One of this era's most phenomenal feats is the Ladder Match from Wrestlemania 10 in its entirety, featuring Shawn Michaels versus Razor Ramon.

This match featured many never-before-seen spots and innovation was at its finest here. Like Hogan and Andre did, these two superstars would pave the way for future improvements in their fields of expertise.

Further innovative work was done by The Hardy Boyz, The Dudley Boyz and Edge and Christian in The Attitude Era in their Ladder Matches. Up to this day, their work with Tables, Ladders and Chairs are unmatched, and I dare to wonder if it ever will be. The inception of the TLC Match only meant great things for them because it was new, and had never been seen before. Will this stipulation match be overshadowed by another type of Ladder Match in the future? If so, one thing is certain: It is because of these superstars that it would become possible in the first place.

The Ruthless Aggression Era came in the form of several new superstars on the main roster of WWE television, and their abilities were no joke. One of the greatest moments of this era came in the form of a Triple Threat Match for the World Heavyweight Championship at Wrestlemania 20. This unprecedented match involved Triple H, Chris Benoit and Shawn Michaels and set extreme standards for any person calling themselves a megastar in the WWE.

That match up, in my opinion, also elevated the status of the World Heavyweight Championship, making it more important and prestigious than it was before this match took place.

The PG Era involves many of the stars that saw great success in the Ruthless Aggression Era. One of the groundbreaking moments of the PG Era saw Shawn Michaels face off against "The Undertaker" at both Wrestlemania 25 and Wrestlemania 26. It captivated any real fan of pro-wrestling around the world and their show-stealing performance in 2010 and 2009 set a standard on what stealing a show is all about, at a Wrestlemania event nonetheless.

These feats only made the respective individual eras stand out more and allow them to be more memorable.

Don't you see? The IWC have been comparing the birth of wrestling to its successors. They have been comparing what helped to pave the way to greatness to its several stages in evolution. Yes, evolution. It entails changes and this is just what occurred as the years passed by. As time went on the crowd, as a unit, had changed.

No longer were they pleased by simple physical accomplishments. They needed to be entertained at greater heights. Why? They had already seen everything, and gained knowledge on what was "old news" and what was not. Their knowledge also evolved pertaining to what the business had to offer.

When Brock Lesnar performed an F-5 on "The Big Show," the crowd was shocked. Nobody had ever seen a giant get completely manhandled the way that "The Big Show" was.

When Kane scoop-slammed "The Great Khali" at Wrestlemania 23, the crowd was not in that much of awe. They were entertained, yes, but had it not happened already at Wrestlemania 3, perhaps it would have left the crowd going crazy. Perhaps.

Had "The Undertaker" and Shawn Michaels not burst onto the scene in the early 1990's of wrestling in the WWE, their confrontation at both Wrestlemania 25 and Wrestlemania 26 would not have been as meaningful and significant as it was. It is because of the Golden Era, the New Generation Era, the Attitude Era and the Ruthless Aggression Era that these two men came to be so popular, and it is also the reason why these two men were able to further advance their roles as characters in the business.

Like I said, the business evolves and you really cannot compare what was and what is that entertaining factor suited to an audience—it is what they have and have not already been introduced to. With so many feats and accomplishments already introduced to the WWE, the future of the business have their work cut out for them.

My third point would include the frame of mind of the audience. It somewhat falls under the category of the points mentioned in the previous paragraph. The audience pretty much decides the fate of the product being put out.

During the Golden Age Era, the fans placed their loyalties into the characters being displayed by the wrestlers (gimmicksand seemed to care very little about the wrestling abilities of their favourite superstar. Hulk Hogan was, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the most loved superstar of The Golden Era. His morals and values lead him to the success and rewards he reaped from the business—even though he wasn't that great of a wrestler.

As more superstars were being introduced by the New Generation Era, technical prowess became extremely popular. This era saw the seemingly perfect blend of both wrestling talent and gimmicks being proportionately combined. What resulted was the audience's attention to not only morals and gimmicks, but with the new sort of talents being introduced, more action was brought to the table.

The Attitude Era came to be only because of WWE having a rival promotion at the time who was not afraid to play dirty. This era was all about the drama ad involved countless new ideas being introduced to the completely transformed WWE. The frame of mind of the audience who experienced the Attitude Era would not have easily accepted the super-heroic antics of "The Ultimate Warrior" and Hulk Hogan at that time.

The Attitude Era was liked for its controversial ideas and adult themes, as well as the great superstars who made it stand out. This era had its top stars deliver their life's best work, and even called for them to just be themselves. This era even turned Rocky Maivia into The Rock. Why? He was too nice, so he was booed out of arenas by the vast majority of crowds who were just tired of seeing the same nice guy routine over and over. Seriously.

The point is, the audience was changing with respect to what would please them and it changed them as to who they really were. The crowd is the most powerful group of individuals to ever affect the WWE product, and it is a fact.

My fourth point for this seemingly endless debate would involve restrictions placed on the WWE products. This, however, would involve mainly the PG-Era of pro-wrestling. The audiences of the Golden Age Era of wrestling had no problem with their product; they loved what was being done. However, they also had no idea of what it could have been at that point in time because it was the first stage of the WWE's evoluton of pro-wrestling.

After the Attitude Era, the crowds who experienced pro-wrestling were ever-changing. Now that the ideas of screw-jobs and stipulation matches involving blood were introduced, I imagine it would be very difficult to not want such unorthodox forms of entertainment.  Also, it is no secret that the superstars were told to be themselves when cutting promos and could do just about anything to garner crowd reactions.

They were given more freedom and as a result they were able to perform more believable promos and the crowds were be able to buy into their character more easily. The only reason we got to see this vast change was because of WWE's inferior standards to WCW at the time.

Fast-forward to the PG Era: There can be no blood, there can be no harsh language and obscenities and there cannot, under any circumstances, be any openly-made sexual references. When cutting promos, the superstars are not liberated to do as they want and are told what to go out and say most of the time. The product has changed and for a WWE product that has so many restrictions placed in it, I would say that the PG Era is doing quite well for itself.

I understand the business' decision to go PG and I do approve of the changes made, but nobody can deny that this has forever affected the credibility of many stipulation product. The children have effectively, unfortunately, impacted the product we see every week. There are a lot of restrictions faced nowadays and it would be unjust to compare today's product to that of yesterday. Don't you think?

Of all the eras, there are two which are always being compared to one another: The Attitude Era and The PG Era. I believe it is very unfair that people would bash the PG Era for its blatant disregard for sheer violence. In actuality, there is no reason for there to exist such extreme violence, indeed.

In fact, people compare eras yet they tend to forget that firstly, each was made in part due to business decisions. Business decisions are made from the knowledge available at hand, and there is no need for changing the PG Era if there is no danger of business. There exists no competition for the WWE right now, and I doubt there will be for a long time to come. There exists no WCW to wage war and turn the world of pro-wrestling upside down again. Why compare the PG Era to an era which needed this change to survive?

I have given reasons for why I believe no single era is comparable to the next, and it is only fair that I give an explanation as to why I love the Attitude Era above all else. In a nutshell: I grew up in the Attitude Era. If I didn't grow up watching the Attitude Era, I'm very positive I would not expect such high standards of entertainment from the WWE in its current position.

I had no alternative. I grew up knowing wrestling being cutting edge and shrouded with mysterious figures and dramatic, over-the-top storylines. I love it mainly because of the storylines involved, though some may have been just stupid. But every era had its share of silly and questionable storylines, anyway. The actual wrestling involved at that time is not something I'd refer to as wrestling.

Individuals who have gotten their first glimpse of wrestling in the PG Era would be another story by itself. They would not be accustomed to the stuff back in the days, and they would accept the PG Era as "the best form of entertainment." I respect that. Why? They don't have anything to compare the WWE product to.

It's a shame that some people like only the Attitude Era, though. I love all eras; I just prefer the Attitude Era the most. I believe the Ruthless Aggression Era is my second favourite, right up there with the Attitude Era. This era had some epic moments and, above all else, it involved true athletes who really knew the game of wrestling. The storylines were really good, and I believe wrestling came in its finest form in this era.

My third favourite would be the PG Era. I believe this is the most underrated era in the history of the business. It has really great wrestlers, but some people are always complaining and too blind to realize what they have on front of them. They won't miss it until it's gone.

My last two favourites are the New Generation Wrestling Era and the Golden Age Era. But I prefer the former over the latter. Keep in mind that this does not mean I dislike these two eras. How can I not? They were the first two stages of evolution, and really set the standards to be matched and surpassed for its successors.

These are only my opinions, anyway. I'd respect anyone's opinions on which era's their favourite, why they hate some eras and why they love others.

Like I said before: "All eras have their pros and cons."

As of now, I think I'll close this article up. Now, there are probably many more points to this heated topic but right now I think my head is overworked. I probably am going to garner much heat for this article, since the IWC are most of the IWC are always in denial, and hate being told what to think.

That's the thing: I'm not telling you what to think—just trying to put some things in perspective for you. I thank you all for your time in reading this article, and what I would like you all to do is kindly place your comments in the section below. Tell me what your favourite era of wrestling is and why.

Also, if I did actually miss some major points out, feel free to let me know. Remember, I said that everyone has an opinion of their favourite eras, but no single era is the relative actual best. I'm not telling you what to think—just trying to shed some light on what I think should be known.

I appreciate it very much, guys. Thanks, again.