Older WWF Era Was Incredible

I prefer the mid 1980s, but attitude era was also fun.

Mid 1980s had a good balance of technical wrestling ability with good gimmicks (at least when you include both NWA and WWF).

1990s was gimmick and presentation heavy.

Today, almost no one has a decent gimmick or any personality and the wrestling is mostly a series of big moves/dives and kick outs. There is no build to anything. There isn't a lot of emphasis on audience participation.

I loved the simple things like the good guy getting beat up until the crowd starts cheering for him and then the crowd erupts when the good guy starts knocking the bad guy on his ass with a simple punch.
 
Why the thread title change <Lmaoo>
 
I liked the era with Piper-Snuka feud, Iron Sheik-Slaughter before WWF became too cartoonish.
 
BreatheSherBro said:
I prefer the mid 1980s, but attitude era was also fun.

Mid 1980s had a good balance of technical wrestling ability with good gimmicks (at least when you include both NWA and WWF).

1990s was gimmick and presentation heavy.

Today, almost no one has a decent gimmick or any personality and the wrestling is mostly a series of big moves/dives and kick outs. There is no build to anything. There isn't a lot of emphasis on audience participation.

I loved the simple things like the good guy getting beat up until the crowd starts cheering for him and then the crowd erupts when the good guy starts knocking the bad guy on his ass with a simple punch.
Click to expand...
People keep saying stuff like this but it’s only true with a handful of wrestlers. Honestly the wrestling is flat out better that most of it was in the 80s and 90s. Outside of the really good workers like Bret and Henning. A lot of the audience participation stuff was super cheesy. Especially with Hogan. And the no build to anything is flat out not true. Every era has its crap workers who don’t know how to work a crowd or build up a match.
 
BB in Crazy!!!! said:
People keep saying stuff like this but it’s only true with a handful of wrestlers. Honestly the wrestling is flat out better that most of it was in the 80s and 90s. Outside of the really good workers like Bret and Henning. A lot of the audience participation stuff was super cheesy. Especially with Hogan. And the no build to anything is flat out not true. Every era has its crap workers who don’t know how to work a crowd or build up a match.
Click to expand...

The matches being micromanaged/overbooked and all having to fit within a certain style (I'm talking WWE only) creates a very paint by numbers "corporate" product.

I don't know if I agree today's "superstars" are better than yesterday's "wrestlers" in ring.

Look a Brock, one of the last of an old breed, dude has more detail and psychology in his 5 min matches as a 'monster' archtype than some of the 20 min spotfests.
 
Thrawn33 said:
The matches being micromanaged/overbooked and all having to fit within a certain style (I'm talking WWE only) creates a very paint by numbers "corporate" product.

I don't know if I agree today's "superstars" are better than yesterday's "wrestlers" in ring.

Look a Brock, one of the last of an old breed, dude has more detail and psychology in his 5 min matches as a 'monster' archtype than some of the 20 min spotfests.
Click to expand...
I’ll give you that. It it very micromanaged to the WWE style. Even AEW is guilty of having wrestlers with a certain style that focus too much on athletics and not enough on psychology. At the same time, there are some very good matches today that do have it. And plenty of matches back then that didn’t.
 
BB in Crazy!!!! said:
People keep saying stuff like this but it’s only true with a handful of wrestlers. Honestly the wrestling is flat out better that most of it was in the 80s and 90s. Outside of the really good workers like Bret and Henning. A lot of the audience participation stuff was super cheesy. Especially with Hogan. And the no build to anything is flat out not true. Every era has its crap workers who don’t know how to work a crowd or build up a match.
Click to expand...
Better is subjective, but I strongly disagree.

It's hard to compare wrestling from the 1980s and 1990s to today because it has changed so much that they aren't even attempting to do the same thing. In the 1980s and 1990s wrestlers were leaning very heavily on audience participation. That's what their matches were structured around. That's why they called matches mostly in the ring rather than planning out everything from start to finish beforehand like they do now. What they did in the ring changed based on how the audience was reacting or how they anticipated the audience would react much more so nowadays. It had a story. It had drama.

Today's wrestling is centered around big moves and spots. Matches are scripted from bell to bell now and don't change course even if the audience is dead. You will never get consistent reactions today like you did back then. Entire arenas would erupt again and again over just a simple punch because the wrestlers back then would build to it and hit it the punch at just the right moment.

Most of the drama and storytelling has been removed. Given that today's matches are just a series of spots, most wrestling shows should be condensed to just 10 minute highlights. Why watch hours and hours if the only thing that matters is hitting dives and Canadian destroyers?
 
BreatheSherBro said:
Better is subjective, but I strongly disagree.

It's hard to compare wrestling from the 1980s and 1990s to today because it has changed so much that they aren't even attempting to do the same thing. In the 1980s and 1990s wrestlers were leaning very heavily on audience participation. That's what their matches were structured around. That's why they called matches mostly in the ring rather than planning out everything from start to finish beforehand like they do now. What they did in the ring changed based on how the audience was reacting or how they anticipated the audience would react much more so nowadays. It had a story. It had drama.

Today's wrestling is centered around big moves and spots. Matches are scripted from bell to bell now and don't change course even if the audience is dead. You will never get consistent reactions today like you did back then. Entire arenas would erupt again and again over just a simple punch because the wrestlers back then would build to it and hit it the punch at just the right moment.

Most of the drama and storytelling has been removed. Given that today's matches are just a series of spots, most wrestling shows should be condensed to just 10 minute highlights. Why watch hours and hours if the only thing that matters is hitting dives and Canadian destroyers?
Click to expand...
I do agree on some parts, but overall you are wrong. Fans get hyped all the time. The attempts for fan reactions have changed, you are 100% correct there. But they still rely on fan reactions. If the match is dead and they keep doing what they are doing, they are failing. Plenty of matches today have fans going nuts after someone starts making a comeback or reversal or kickout. I do agree today too many focus on spots to get reactions and less on ring psychology and fan interaction.

But again. You use a few poor examples from today and use it was the standard. Matches are not always planned bell to bell, maybe just big matches. Many were back then too. Mach Man vs Steamboat and Wrestlemania 3 was literally planned bell to bell and is considered one of the best matches of all time. I would suggest watch more wrestling and less highlights, and stay away from Orange Cassidy and the Young Bucks. Not everyone is doing dives and Canadian destroyers over and over. I don’t recall LA Knight or Gunther hitting a Canadian destroyer yet. And those two have a very old school fan audience reaction with pretty base moves styles. There are plenty of other.
 
nonoob said:
The pinnacle of wrestling was from the late 90's until the non-PC people took over.
Stone Cold, The Rock, DX, Booker T, Gold Dust, The Godfather, and so many others were all a part of the insane and funny promos and skits. Vince's hospital stay with Stone Cold was great. When Booker T and Gold Dust partnered, it had humor in and out of the ring.
Enjoy !


Click to expand...



that or early mid 80s NWA.
 
I miss the Attitude Era. Mark Henry & the Mae Young were great

 
ryun253 said:
I miss the Attitude Era. Mark Henry & the Mae Young were great
Click to expand...

Early 2000 had so many non-PC comical relationship drama & insults...Stephanie McMahon/Jericho, Vicky Guerrero/The Rock, Mae Young, the list goes on.
 
Edge used the Impaler on Nick Wayne which is Gangrel's known finisher. Is it possible for The Brood to reform on AEW? I think its possible that Christian's (awesome) heel run ends with him and Edge reuniting and feuding with another faction, then having to recruit another guy, then it turns out to be Gangrel.

 
nonoob said:
Early 2000 had so many non-PC comical relationship drama & insults...Stephanie McMahon/Jericho, Vicky Guerrero/The Rock, Mae Young, the list goes on.
Click to expand...
The Rock and Vickie Guerrero interacting at all sounds so strange to me, let alone they apparently had a mini rivalry. I even had to google it to make sure you weren't confusing the Rock with someone else lol
 
It amazes me how hbk and Bret hart completely missed the attitude era. Specifically bret harts short stint.

He wasn't really a star in the golden era. He was a new generation wrestler and had like a four year run of relevance.

I always think of him as being more iconic but judging by his career, you could probably list 20 wrestlers ahead of him.

New gen was such a flop. Diesel, hbk, Bret hart were all terrible draws. Maybe it wasn't them, but the product was dull.

I think attitude started with Steve Austin kotr, picked up steam with Hart's heal turn, and by 98 was in full swing. Stone colds heal turn was too early the rock going to Hollywood stripped the top stars.
 
WarHawk said:
It amazes me how hbk and Bret hart completely missed the attitude era. Specifically bret harts short stint.

He wasn't really a star in the golden era. He was a new generation wrestler and had like a four year run of relevance.

I always think of him as being more iconic but judging by his career, you could probably list 20 wrestlers ahead of him.

New gen was such a flop. Diesel, hbk, Bret hart were all terrible draws. Maybe it wasn't them, but the product was dull.

I think attitude started with Steve Austin kotr, picked up steam with Hart's heal turn, and by 98 was in full swing. Stone colds heal turn was too early the rock going to Hollywood stripped the top stars.
Click to expand...

Yea I am with you. Attitude era was a thing in late 96. Think of the sid/Shawn and Austin/Hart feud. Before SS 96 Steve said if you put a letter s in front of hitman you have my exact opinion on Bret Hart.

They would of never let him say that previously
 
nonoob said:
The pinnacle of wrestling was from the late 90's until the non-PC people took over.
Stone Cold, The Rock, DX, Booker T, Gold Dust, The Godfather, and so many others were all a part of the insane and funny promos and skits. Vince's hospital stay with Stone Cold was great. When Booker T and Gold Dust partnered, it had humor in and out of the ring.
Enjoy !


Click to expand...

What was WWE problem with Booker T dude was getting buried by Austin,Rock,Rikishi and Edge in his first year in the company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
Anyone else think Eric Bischoff doesnt get enough respect or credit ?
Replies
8
Views
643
Kowboy On Sherdog
Kowboy On Sherdog
Two Crows
WrestleMania 2: Another Review
Replies
17
Views
842
Two Crows
Two Crows

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,113
Messages
55,468,174
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top