Up and down the Information Superhighway we go, blasting our horns, waving our fists out the window, mouthing expletives that the kids in the back hear on TV every night. The source of our road rage isn't the traffic, however. In fact, the majority of vehicles tearing up this silicon strip are venting their steam over the very same reasons.
Those reasons being whatever WWE has done to upset us this time.
By "we" and "us" I refer, of course, to the Internet Wrestling Community in general. We don't all share the same views and we don't all get mad over the same things. But a lot of us are frequently found complaining about the state of WWE, and sometimes, nearly rupturing a spleen over it.
The question is, why? Is WWE not living up to its promises? Is it failing to deliver on what it has set out to do? Is it denying us the reality of what it claims to be?
Surprisingly, the answer may be no.
Perhaps instead of "Why WWE Frustrates Us," the title of this column should be "Why We're Frustrated By WWE." For in fact, the cause of our agitation lies not with World Wrestling Entertainment but with our flawed perception of what WWE truly is.
Vince McMahon spelled it out recently in an interview on 'The Score' in Canada. Explaining why Jerry Jarrett's promotion is not competition, he stated that TNA is in the wrestling business, while WWE is in the entertainment business.
There you have it, then. McMahon has for many years referred to his product as a weekly action-adventure series, but never has it been put in such black-and-white terms: WWE is not a wrestling company.
Is it any wonder, then, that WWE hires writers from Hollywood and the sit-com world, instead of those with experience of professional wrestling? If WWE is primarily an entertainment company, as the chairman says, and not a wrestling company, why would they lead themselves down the path of the latter?
We expect certain things from WWE. As the market leader, we look to this behemoth for a definition of what wrestling is. And when the answer we receive is unsatisfactory, we lose our cool. Yet, WWE has already told us that they are not a wrestling company. So why should we expect pushes for the guys who can wrestle? Why should we feel short-changed when a two-hour show contains only three matches? Why have we placed ourselves in a position to be so frequently disappointed? It's all our fault.
The two most common responses to such questions will likely be, "WWE is the biggest, it should be the best," and "WWE's the only wrestling I can watch, I have no choice."
To both of these, I must now say phooey. Yes, you heard me - I said the 'P' word. I hope Eugene isn't reading.
To "WWE is the biggest, it should be the best," let's add some kind of noun to that phrase. The biggest and best what? Wrestling company? Nope - remember, WWE is not one of those. WWE is an entertainment company or, more precisely, a sports-entertainment company. How many of those are there? From where I'm sitting, I see only WWE placing that tag on itself. TNA, ROH, New Japan... they're all wrestling companies, by their own declaration. So is WWE the biggest? Is it the best? Yes on both counts, by default!
But I still hear cries of "WWE's the only wrestling I can watch, I have no choice." And like I said, phooey. Alternatives are springing up all over the place. If you really wanted to, I'm sure you could acquaint yourself with TNA Impact, Pro-Pain-Pro, Fake You TV, or at least one of the many other wrestling products floating around the airwaves. And if you live in the UK or Ireland, the birth of The Wrestling Channel three and a half months ago has left you with no excuses. Wherever, the majority of wrestling fans are not limited to WWE by any means. Only because we are creatures of habit do we stick with what we know.
Or maybe, though we're too proud to admit it, we really are hooked on the soap opera that WWE provides. Maybe the reason we all keep tuning in, despite our frustrations, is that we do feel emotionally attached to the characters, and we do want to see what happens next. Maybe we're looking for an entertainment company after all.
For our wrestling needs, however, we are clearly barking up the wrong tree. Or perhaps we're just barking mad. Who goes to a butchers and demands to be sold cheese? Who goes to a supermarket and throws a fit when they can't buy a car? Yet we repeatedly knock on the door of a self-professed entertainment company, and request something that they claim not to provide - wrestling. Mad as a balloon. As a hatter. As a March hare.
I jest, of course. For the last time I looked, it still said 'wrestling' on the marquee. But if Vince McMahon insists that World Wrestling Entertainment is not in the wrestling business, how can he expect to be taken seriously by a wrestling scribe?
"Why does WWE frustrate us?" Because they pull this kind of sidestepping stunt instead of addressing the problems that spawned the criticism. If they did improve their wrestling output, they wouldn't need to cover up the deficiencies by claiming it's of no concern. They wouldn't need to remove themselves from comparison with TNA and other wrestling companies, for fear of what the results might bring. And they wouldn't have to slap their followers in the face by telling us that watching WWE doesn't make us wrestling fans.
Now, out of my way. I've got to burn some rubber and let out this aggression. Pity the next fool who cuts me up.
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement
| What Did You Think About WWE Backlash 2008? |
|
|