Going back and rewatching it... the Attitude Era sucked balls

Attitude era lasted IMO from late 1997 till around 2001, up to the purchase of WCW. The reason IMO that people loved the attitude era was not because of the matches or the wrestling ability of some. But because of the story lines, because each member of the roster had a little bit of importance.

It kind of annoys me to see people refering to the attitude era as being from 1998 - 2003/04. Vince said the attitude era was over at WM 20 in 2004, that doesnt mean that the attitude era lasted that long. I remember the day after Vince said that, it was all over the net at the time people were laughing at the fact Vince thought it was still the attitude era a month ago.

Attitude era lasted IMO from late 1997 till around 2001, up to the purchase of WCW.

The reason IMO that people loved the attitude era was not because of the matches or the wrestling ability of some. But because of the story lines, because each member of the roster had a little bit of importance.

In the attitude era, guys like Caylen Croft, Trent Baretta, Yoshitatsu would of had things a bit more interesting than they have now.

WWE atm have 60% of their roster that most people dont really care about. Great talents like Dolph Ziggler, Kaval, Drew Mcintyre, R Truth and others have very little going for them at the moment and dont have storylines that make people interested. Back in the attitude era, whether you like them or not, a storyline that got a fair bit of air time and got a lot of crowd reaction was Kaientai vs Taka, then Taka joining them to go against Val Venis.

That could never happen these days. If they tried they would see it got little reaction and give up instead of doing what they done 10 years ago, and give them a bit more time to get people interested.

Right now WWE has Darren Young, Zach Ryder, William Regal, Primo, Yoshitatsu, Chavo, Drew Mcintyre, Dolph Ziggler, Kaval, Curt Hawkins, Trent Barretta, Chris Masters, Mark Henry, The Usos and until recently, MVP, Ted Dibiase, Goldust, The Hart Dynasty, all have/had nothing going on. Some may say Dolph is going up against Kaval at SS but that has NO build and has generated no interest.

In the attitude era, most of these would be doing something, even if its minor.

You could argue that some arent that good and you dont mind that they're doing nothing but thats not the point.

Also back in that era, people got released yes, but very fer per year because "Creative had nothing for them" That in itself is a joke. If Creative has nothing for you, why are there so many writers working for WWE? Does it take 10 people to come up with one storyline? When people like Paul Heyman, Vince Russo and Ed Ferrera could come up with things on their own?

Yes, these days, the wrestling skills are better, most of the matches are better in ring. But i still like to be interested.

You could have Danielson vs Punk in a match at a PPV but of its had no storyline to back it up and just been put together as so many matches are these days...why would i bother? I like wrestling skills, but i like a good storyline more. Id be more interested in Skip Sheffield vs Darren Young if it had a good build to it.

That is why the attitude era is considered better. Not because of blood, Not because of sex appeal, Not because of the matches. But the characters and storylines that went with it.

Ive been watching wwf/e since 1990 and listening to crowd reactions, guys like Cena, Orton, Miz, Mysterio and others havent come near to getting a big pop/major heat like Austin, Rock, Taker, DX, Jericho, Benoit, Goldberg and the NWO.

And thats a shame.

ncG1vNJzZmien6fCrr%2BNsKmeq6Shsru7zZ5lnKedZMGpvsSam6xnl6S2r7OMm5ico12Wu6V50Z6umqyTnbavs4yiq2asmJp6osDToquunJVisrOtjKysnKOVmXqjrculqmdpZGaAcnyO

 Share!