Page 1 of 152 1231151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 6067

Thread: WWE General Discussion Thread

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038

    WWE General Discussion Thread

    I noticed that a lot of general WWE news seems to fall through the cracks on the boards, so I thought I might stimulate some conversation.

    WWE's most recent move was to promote Stephanie McMahon from EVP Creative to Chief Brand Officer.

    I won't assume that this takes her off of the creative team, but she's no longer the head of the division. It wouldn't surprise me to see that mantle fall to Triple H (EDIT: Just finished reading the release, and it turns out that it is) as he seems to be bringing in more "business" people on the corporate side of things reaching out to more and more "wrestling" people.

    Could this mean that once The Authority wraps as an entity and we once again have one person running things, Stephanie's time as an on-air performer is over again? I'm sure she'd rather be back in Stanford working on branding and growing the company and home with her kids every night than flying out every Monday to another city.

    Personally, I like the way WWE's future it looking. They've had Vince McMahon for years who learned the business but works hard enough to be three people. As he gives up power little by little, it looks like we're going to wind up with Stephanie running the business side of things with the business people, and Triple H focusing on the wrestling and talent side with "wrestling" people.
    Last edited by Team Farrell; 12-04-2013 at 06:52 PM.

  2. #2
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    Let's see how or if anything changes after WrestleMania season then.

  3. #3
    A Professional Sort Of
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    2,059
    It would make sense for the Authority storyline to end at Wrestlemania and for the family to get back to their respective roles of running the company. Stephanie (as great as she looks) needs to put her communications degree to better use and try and get more viewers for the business.

  4. #4
    Deal or no deal on how low the ratings from this past RAW reportedly are.


  5. #5
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    It would be cheating, because I saw them.

    But it's not pretty.

    How did MNF do, anyone know? Nothing else was new on Monday.

  6. #6
    From what I understand Monday Night Football pulled in over 15 million viewers. The problem is that RAW failed to draw at all after the game was a blowout (the final hour of RAW was the lowest rated hour all year). RAW also ranked behind a show called Major Crimes on TNT (it's a spin off from The Closer and not something I'd call a major TV show). Losing to the NFL is one thing, but also losing to a show like Major Crimes? It's not good, especially for the Cena-Orton program.


  7. #7
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,835
    "MNF's" Saints-Seahawks on ESPN: Most-Watched Show on Monday Night

    Second-Most Watched MNF Game Ever on WatchESPN with 16.5 Million Live Minutes

    This week's Monday Night Football telecast - a Seattle Seahawks' 34-7 victory over the New Orleans Saints - ranked as the No. 1 show on Monday night across cable and broadcast in households, viewers and all key male and adult demos. The telecast also helped ESPN win the night on Monday among all networks (broadcast or cable) in those same categories.

    The Saints-Seahawks telecast earned a 9.7 US rating, representing an average of 11,289,000 households and 15,500,000 viewers (P2+), according to Nielsen. Coverage peaked from 9:45-10 p.m. ET with an 11.9 US rating.

    In New Orleans, the game delivered an 18.0 rating on ESPN and a 37.2 on WDSU-NBC, for a combined 55.2 rating in the market. In Seattle, the game delivered a 21.3 rating on ESPN and a 25.9 on KONG-IND, for a combined 47.2 rating in the market.

    The top 10 metered markets (in addition to the markets of the competing teams) were Sacramento (16.0), Charlotte (15.4), Las Vegas (15.2), Portland, OR (14.9), San Diego (14.7), Norfolk (13.5), San Francisco (13.5), Richmond-Petersburg (13.3), Phoenix (13.1) and Greensboro (13.1).

    Through 13 weeks (14 games), ESPN's MNF is averaging an 8.5 US rating, 9,888,000 households and 13,504,000 viewers in 2013, increases of one, three and three percent, respectively, versus the same period in 2012.

    Read more at http://www.thefutoncritic.com/rating...gGyosatSRWu.99

  8. #8
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Cult Icon View Post
    From what I understand Monday Night Football pulled in over 15 million viewers. The problem is that RAW failed to draw at all after the game was a blowout (the final hour of RAW was the lowest rated hour all year). RAW also ranked behind a show called Major Crimes on TNT (it's a spin off from The Closer and not something I'd call a major TV show). Losing to the NFL is one thing, but also losing to a show like Major Crimes? It's not good, especially for the Cena-Orton program.
    Once you lose them, though, it's really hard to get them back, especially if they left because they just weren't interested in what they were watching. There's no incentive to flip back and see what else is happening if you tuned out because you just weren't interested.

  9. #9
    A Professional Sort Of
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    2,059
    So The Bellas said this in an interview...

    During a Q&A with The Las Vegas Review Journal, Brie Bella commented on UFC star Ronda Rousey's arm bar:

    "The Ronda Rousey arm bar doesn't look too pleasant. I wouldn't want to get stuck in a (UFC) cage with that."

    Nikki then commented that she could break Ronda's arm.

    Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe/...1WFzLM4QFwL.99
    WWE, put Rousey and Nikki Bella in a steel cage. PLEASE!!! PLEASE!!! No referee, no interference, just let Rousey destroy that stupid stupid woman. I would pay money for this to happen!!

  10. #10
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    Justin LaBar of [another site] is reporting that WWE has a targeted launch date of February 24th for the WWE Network, which is the day after the Elimination Chamber pay-per-view. This confirms a previous report from PWInsider.com, but LaBar's sources provided him with a few extra tidbits about the Network:


    - Initial price point will be in the $10-$12 a month range, with the sign-up being for six months.

    - You'll be able to watch WrestleMania 30 on the Network, with the plan still being the reported "every non-WrestleMania pay-per-view airing on the Network in the future".

    - It won't be a channel on television, but an app-like service along the lines of Netflix that you'll be able to watch online and on devices like smart TVs, PS3, PS4, X-Box 360, X-Box one, and so on.

    - There will be a live, 24/7 stream of content on the Network, which is the thing that will separate it from apps like Netflix, which focuses more on-demand viewing. However, on-demand viewing will still be a part of the Network, as the entire library of Raw and Smackdown episodes, as well as pay-per-views, will be available to watch at launch.

    If any more information comes out, we'll be sure to pass it along to all of you.
    I pay $8 per month for Netflix happily. If The Network is a service like Netflix that I can pay $10/mo for to have HD access to large portions of their video library, new programming, pay per views and it's only $10-$12 per month rather than requiring me to add a channel to my cable package, they've got a customer in me.

  11. #11
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,835
    I would have paid up to $20 a month for it. Fucking A, sign me up.

  12. #12
    rahman82
    Guest
    every episode of Raw and Smackdown? interesting I wonder if old ppvs will be available on demand.

    from the main page, the wwe wants their talents to stop selling their losses, just smile ,slap hands and go to the back, that sounds like a really dumb idea.

  13. #13
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    Yes, it really does.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    75
    There's some sense to that. They want their faces showing sportsmanship, and not act like sore losers. But overall it's a bad decision.

    The report may be fake and just a jab at Eva Marie.

  15. #15
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    If we really get all of that for 10 a month, I'm IN. Hopefully I can watch Main Event,NXT & Superstars on demand.

  16. #16
    A Professional Sort Of
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    2,059
    Big Show hits a Knockout Punch, pin, superstar gets straight up afterwards without any after effects.

    Bad idea.

  17. #17
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    I pay $8 per month for Netflix happily. If The Network is a service like Netflix that I can pay $10/mo for to have HD access to large portions of their video library, new programming, pay per views and it's only $10-$12 per month rather than requiring me to add a channel to my cable package, they've got a customer in me.
    Quote Originally Posted by T.O. View Post
    I would have paid up to $20 a month for it. Fucking A, sign me up.
    Quote Originally Posted by phemom View Post
    If we really get all of that for 10 a month, I'm IN. Hopefully I can watch Main Event,NXT & Superstars on demand.
    I was never more excited for the Network than when I read that it would be a Netflix/Online service. It might have been worth a cable subscription, but avoiding that is even better. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if I said as much in a MP column. I should look for that...

  18. #18
    I was saying Boo-Urns. lunchbox1981's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Santa Maria, CA
    Posts
    2,409
    Apparently the WWE has decided on a location of Santa Clara, CA for WrestleMania 31. The future home of the 49ers Levi Stadium will be playing host to the event.

    If WM really is coming back to California then I am going to try my best to get tickets and go. Iíve been to 2 of the big 4 signature events but never the Granddaddy of Them All. This might be the last opportunity I get for a while to go somewhere relatively close to home since I have no clue when theyíll comeback this way again. Itís more of a drive than it would be if they had it in LA but still well worth with it.

  19. #19
    Anyone buying this AJ-Michelle Beadle story?


  20. #20
    Follows buzzards Smart_Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Gotham, MS
    Posts
    2,578
    Story definitely seems off. Don't recall ever reading about any backstage issues with her. Also, if it's all true, officials have every right to have a problem with it, which makes Punk's alleged reaction somewhat peculiar.

    If she loses the title tonight, then it will be accepted as fact anyway.
    I think it's awesome that the word lisp has an "s" in it.

  21. #21
    I was saying Boo-Urns. lunchbox1981's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Santa Maria, CA
    Posts
    2,409
    Whether the story ends up being true or not I expect she’ll lose the belt tonight. You are right though if the title does chance hands I am sure a lot of people will read into it as being punishment for this alleged outburst.

    I have a hard time believing it’s real. My gut says the WWE is trying to work fans. After all this sounds like something her character might do. It’s hard to tell though.

  22. #22
    Follows buzzards Smart_Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Gotham, MS
    Posts
    2,578
    I hope it's full work. Would WWE go through the trouble of getting a B-list (at best) celebrity to go along with a minor storyline for a non-headliner?
    I think it's awesome that the word lisp has an "s" in it.

  23. #23
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    I hope it isn't a work....only because the Divas (well some of em ha!) deserve shine without male wrestlers or celebs this time.

  24. #24
    A Professional Sort Of
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    2,059
    Who is Michelle Beadle?

    -Courtesy of every person outside of the United States

  25. #25
    She works for NBC as a sports reporter; her claim to fame was doing that Sportsnation show with Colin Cowherd back when it first started on ESPN. She's somewhat of a name, but I wouldn't call her a major celebrity.

    There seems to be a lot of shit going on backstage with AJ at the moment. Earlier there was a report about a cartoon going around backstage mocking AJ and her fandom of Lita; the cartoon is actually depicting AJ meeting Lita in on scene, then another of AJ and Punk together in bed with her telling him to call her Lita. Someone backstage definitely isn't a fan of her.


  26. #26
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    It appears as if it's slipped under the radar somewhat (I haven't seen or heard it really mentioned anywhere) but apparently Stephanie McMahon made a comment that the WWE Network logo that they incorporated into the WrestleMania 31 logo is going to be the company's new logo going forward (I would guess that's starting after they make the official Network announcement in January and probably after Mania, even).

    For reference, here it is:



    I personally love it. It's modern, it plays off of the one that they've been using for 15-odd years, while still kind of feeling like a bit of a throwback to the old mid-90s metal logo.

    The old one has felt so dated for so long. To look at it, it feels very "late 90s pro wrestling" where everything was scratches and barbed wire.

    EDIT:

    For reference, this is presumably what it'll look like when you take away the beveling and effects (on t-shirts, printed on the turnbuckles, etc.):

    Last edited by Team Farrell; 12-16-2013 at 02:15 PM.

  27. #27
    The Greatest of All Time LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    The AWA Territory
    Posts
    1,875
    Yeah, the scratch logo feels so 90's. When I was in high school, and the WWF charged to the scratch logo it was a bog deal. It was a sign that the WWF wasn't messing around anymore. Then WCW changed their logo, but that almost felt like desperation.

    In the 90's, this....



    Was cooler than this...



    But at the same time in 2013, this...



    Seems dated and not PG.

  28. #28
    Is Your Superior PEN15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    That WCW logo really should be in a Hall of Fame of worst logos ever.

  29. #29
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    Fact: I've seen that logo a million times, I watched WCW religiously from 97 up until the day they closed (though, at that age I watch wrestling in general religiously). Until this year, I had no idea that the white blobs in the centre were the letters W-C-W. I always just figured that it was a bluish-white logo with a black outline.

    That's the sign of a bad logo.

    The red one WWE introduced when they bought the company makes so much more sense now.

    EDIT: Funny thing is, as bad as WCW was in general when it came to logo design (check out some of their atrocious PPV logos), you can clearly see some Starrcade influences in the current generation of WrestleMania logos:





    Last edited by Team Farrell; 12-16-2013 at 02:57 PM.

  30. #30
    Follows buzzards Smart_Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Gotham, MS
    Posts
    2,578
    I love looking at how the WM logo has developed over the years. It's like looking at a pokemon that's evolved 29 times.
    I think it's awesome that the word lisp has an "s" in it.

  31. #31
    rahman82
    Guest
    the wrestlemania 25 logo looks like a straightup rip of the starrcade logo, and not all wcw logos were bad the halloween havoc ones were pretty cool.

  32. #32
    Don't WHAT? Me.
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Little Caesars Arena
    Posts
    4,620
    The WM13 logo still looks like it was made in geocities.

  33. #33
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    It appears as if it's slipped under the radar somewhat (I haven't seen or heard it really mentioned anywhere) but apparently Stephanie McMahon made a comment that the WWE Network logo that they incorporated into the WrestleMania 31 logo is going to be the company's new logo going forward (I would guess that's starting after they make the official Network announcement in January and probably after Mania, even).




    I personally love it. It's modern, it plays off of the one that they've been using for 15-odd years, while still kind of feeling like a bit of a throwback to the old mid-90s metal logo.

    The old one has felt so dated for so long. To look at it, it feels very "late 90s pro wrestling" where everything was scratches and barbed wire.

    EDIT:

    For reference, this is presumably what it'll look like when you take away the beveling and effects (on t-shirts, printed on the turnbuckles, etc.):

    However, I do not think the WWE will change its "general logo" too soon. After all they finally changed the WWE title after years of it being the spinner belt. And the new belt has the Scratch Logo as its most prominent design feature.

    For reference, here it is:
    dPXlak1.jpg

    So why only after a year, would the WWE change their logo to not match their brand new title belt? If they knew they were going to change their logo (which I believe they did), then why not have the brand new title belt represent the new logo? It doesn't make any sense. So I do not think they will change the general logo, unless they go back to PJD and have them create another new title with the updated title. That is what they should have done last night. Given Orton the new belt with the new logo as the titles are now unified.

  34. #34
    Follows buzzards Smart_Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Gotham, MS
    Posts
    2,578
    According to Hogan, WWE goes through multiple physical belts. I doubt the strap Orton has right now is the same piece of leather and gold that was presented to Rock. Point being that they could slap another centerpiece on it without disrupting the entire design.

    Has anyone else ever wondered why they never tried to incorporate the E into their logo? Theoretically, it could've been just as simple as using an F at the end. Probably would've looked a little tacky, but still something I've always wondered.
    I think it's awesome that the word lisp has an "s" in it.

  35. #35
    I beat up Kong! Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,834
    Not disagreeing, but they still need to redesign it. I do not know if you ever watched American Chopper, but the labor is in the design, and the belt is crated from the water jet machine. Once the design is made, it is simply just running that program once again. But if they change the logo, the WWE will have to pay not only for a new belt, but a new design as well. Will they? probably, but why didn't they wait? Is my question.

  36. #36
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    Quote Originally Posted by dpowder View Post
    Not disagreeing, but they still need to redesign it. I do not know if you ever watched American Chopper, but the labor is in the design, and the belt is crated from the water jet machine. Once the design is made, it is simply just running that program once again. But if they change the logo, the WWE will have to pay not only for a new belt, but a new design as well. Will they? probably, but why didn't they wait? Is my question.
    For a company WWE's size, it'll cost probably into the tens of thousands for a complete re-brand of just the corporate side. We're talking stationary, business cards, promotional material (pens, lanyards, whatever else that they might have to give away in their office), re-painting their building and jet, the whole shebang and any good PR person will tell you that the whole re-brand needs to be rolled out at the same time (it muddies your brand big time if you've got new logo business cards but are still printing on scratch logo letterhead). That's before we even get to the production side of things and you're looking at buying and re-screening sets of turnbuckles (for your TV rings, house show rings and Performance Centre rings), getting new skirting, announce table caps, merchandise to have on-hand etc.

    If they're going to spend that much money, you might as well drop a few grand on a new title belt, too.

    They've got plenty of time. If they're re-branding, I don't expect it to roll out until after WrestleMania. The scratch logo is pretty well engrained in all of the WrestleMania promotional material, promos, logos, etc. They'll no doubt debut the new logo in January with the Network announcement, but won't go for a full overhaul of their brand until after Mania (like they did with the "Get the 'F' out" campaign the night after WrestleMania).

    That gives them plenty of time to get a new belt made. And what better excuse to get rid f the Big Gold Belt than to have Orton carry around both until Mania, and the "new" WWE World Heavyweight Championship belt shown off the night after Mania, essentially being the old belt, but with the new logo.

    Funny thing is, I love the new logo, I love the new belt design, but the way I see it looking I don't think I'll like the combination.

    A funny aside: An old prof of mine once did a re-brand for a university. She was paid in the ballpark of $15k to do it, they dropped thousands probably $20k on having everything ready, and at the last minute decided not to re-brand. They blew $35k on a re-brand that never happened, and there's probably $20k worth of useless crap sitting in a storage room somewhere on campus right now (unless it was given away or sold off on the cheap to staff who didn't care) because they're not about to just throw away that much money worth of stuff, that makes them look completely incompetent.
    Last edited by Team Farrell; 12-17-2013 at 11:58 AM.

  37. #37
    Goldberg Rules!
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Saint Paul, MN
    Posts
    4,835
    So supposedly FOX and ESPN are considering bidding for WWE TV rights when the USA deal expires.

    Assuming this is true and not the usual internet BS, if WWE signed with either of them, how much would it impact their TV strategy? Would ESPN move RAW from Mondays during football season so as not to compete with itself? Would FOX urge WWE to fire Mark Henry for impersonating Santa Claus?

  38. #38
    I'd seriously doubt Fox would go for it, as it would mean they'd have to bump all their Monday night programming off the air to show all three hours of RAW. ESPN could make it work however, as they could move Monday Night Football to ABC (as they have the whole ESPN on ABC deal), which works because as far as I know ABC doesn't have any major programs on Monday night from 8-11.


  39. #39
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,038
    If FOX bought it, they could easily put Raw on FX on Monday nights. They're clearly trying to bolster that channel with UFC and some interesting original programming.

    FX doesn't really have anything particularly interesting on Monday nights, is only slightly behind USA in average weekly primetime viewership and is actually slightly ahead in 18-49 primetime viewership.

    They might even consider bringing back SNME to Fox.

    UFC and WWE under one umbrella. That'd be batty. UFC was nowhere near the level they are now last time that happened.

    I see WWE sticking with NBC/Universal as long as they're NBC isn't trying to fuck them over and assuming nobody will want to pick them up.

    Vince made a bonehead move though, stating outright that he was going to at least double rights fees with this negotiation. Gotta play it a little closer to the chest, under promise and over deliver unless you want your stocks to take a hit. Unless, of course, he's actually expecting to reasonably triple or quadruple their fees and that is under promising.

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    392
    I'm not sure I see ESPN making an offer - though, you never know, *maybe* Disney will bite and that would give WWE the opportunity to have shows on ABC, ESPN, and A&E (History too) due to WWE's recent "family friendliness."

    If you ask me, though, their partnership with NBC/Universal is the right place for them. When they worked with Viacom, it was a disaster as they overstretched onto MTV (a network based ENTIRELY on the fickleness of teenagers) and the relatively unknown TNN (now Spike) with, from what I remember, very little exposure on CBS (maybe I'm forgetting if they actually had any specials on the network??).

    Not only has USA been the historic home of RAW for most of its duration, it's also been treated quite well in terms of promotion and marketing with lots of crossover opportunities. It may not be treated like the jewel of the network the way "Monk" was, but its hardly been treated like the backwoods cousin either. NBC has also aired several specials over the years, even after the ratings have been unimpressive, and, truthfully, as NBC struggles to re-assert itself with fledgling ratings across the board, the WWE is in a good position to make demands that NBC will HAVE to accept. To me, its better to stick with someone who needs you than someone who wants to "find a space" for you.


    As for Fox...well, that could be an interesting story as FX and the newly-launched FXX wouldn't be odd places to find wrestling and I could even see Fox Sports picking up a show or two. Still, in terms of options, I think NBC/Universal has them beat, especially when it comes to where a show like Friday Night Smackdown could end up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •