Lessons learned from watching every WWF show from the year 2000

[XIV]

So, as stated in another topic, I recently sustained an injury that kept me off work. Nothing too serious or life threatening, but meant I was sat at home. What could I do with all this free time I'm not used to?

I began watching wrestling around late 1998, 1999 off an on when I was 9 or 10 years old, but the first vivid period of wrestling I can truly remember was watching in the year 2000 where I was religiously watching shows weekly on Sky Sports and then the PPV's were free to air on Channel 4! Nostalgia is an amazing thing, so I figured I would go back and watch every WWF show from 2000, starting with Raw on January 3 2000 and finishing up with Smackdown December 28 2000. This included watching everything in order, complete with PPVs. The only thing I did skip were the minor shows like Heat.

Now, from here I deduced that there are lessons that can be taken away from going back in time, not in a wrestling sense, but certainly the formats of wrestling shows. Here, I'll dive into this.

Nostalgia vs Reality
When seeing wrestlers from this era return or talk about the old days, people distinctly feel that everyone in the attitude era got massive pops every time. This could not be further from the truth. There are many wrestlers who came out to very lukewarm receptions, Al Snow, Steve Blackman, Mark Henry, Crash & Hardcore Holly and guys in that lower to mid range on the card at that time largely received minor responses, although what I will say is that crowd were far more into the matches and things within the confines of a match could get bigger pops than you'd get today, but on the whole, reactions weren't always as strong. I think a lot of people (including myself to a degree) remember those reactions to The Rock & Stone Cold and apply them to everybody when the reality is very different.

Notable mentions
- Rikishi's turn was cold. He was really bad at promos and I can see why they changed directions to Triple H being the mastermind.
- I'd have pushed Steve Blackman more. What he lacked in a lot of areas, he made up for in others, I'm not saying he was World champion material, but he could have done more.
- I'd have pushed T&A more, but I think they came in one of WWF's golden eras for tag teams with the Hardyz, Dudleys, Edge & Christian and other over teams like the APA & Too Cool and I can see why they went cold.
- Big Show was boring even then.
- On reflection, I can see why Chris Jericho went a little cold in mid-2000 and it took longer than even Vince expected to get him near the WWF title scene. He did a lot of WCW-isms and had many bad habits.
- 95% of the Hardcore title skits were terrible. (who didn't enjoy Crash Holly in the fun house?) and just poor on par with the 24/7 title skits. Awful. As an 11 year old, I loved these skits, as a 33 year old, I realise they're terrible.

Everyone got promo time
The most striking thing here is that everybody got promo time, even Essa Rios got the mic a few times. This largely came before matches in the form of a quick 30 second promo. The Godfather would invite people to come aboard the Ho Train, Road Dogg would welcome everybody to the Dogg House, Jericho would cut basically the same promo every week, about people Never EEEEEEVER being the same AGAIN, for me, if you watch Kurt Angle at this time, still fresh into the business, just going out and repeating the same promo again again where he'd insult a local hero or team, say "it's true, it's true" and mention his 3 I's gave him the space to get comfortable on the microphone and gauge reactions. You can really see the improvement in both Chris Jericho & Kurt Angle on the microphone over the course of the year as they do this very simple thing, same promo week in and week out, and it worked as both became some of the premier talkers in the business. Just small things like that.

There were a lot more short skits backstage to try and get people over like Al Snow or Steve Blackman's whole "Head cheese" angle. Now, they weren't always good, definitely not. Whereas if you compare that today, everybody has these drawn out longer promos that have to be a few minutes long, lots of script and it's just unnecessary. Send a guy or girl out for the first few months, have them recite a very simple short snappy promo in under 30 seconds before their opponent comes out to the ring and eventually they'll get comfortable and improve their own stuff. Definitely a big lesson learned there.

The in use roster was very small
The roster in 2000 may have had a lot of names, but those used on the two main shows were largely the same, it was constantly a combination of The Rock, DX, Angle, Jericho, Benoit, Guerrero, Chyna, Saturn, Malenko, Steve Blackman, Al Snow, Kane, Test, Albert, Undertaker, Big Show, Rikishi, Too Cool, Hardyz, Dudleyz & Edge & Christian. That alongside tiny appearances from others for the Hardcore Title skits, a few debuts & returns along the way like Austin and the Right to Censor. That was it, the shows all focused around those guys with the occasional others thrown in. There was even a period during the McMahon-Helmsey Faction angle that without all the did was outdo each other by making matches for people against Big Show, Kane & Rikishi, just to always have people facing big men which was quite predictable. But despite a small roster, somewhow it didn't always feel boring like it does now when you have the Usos vs New Day for the 143rd time.

There was a reason behind most matches
Now, cold matches are rare in this period, they exist, but they're rarer. so many matches, even the matches down the bottom of the card often had a short story behind them such as bumping into the guy backstage or interrupting them somehow. But what was also prevalent was that the announcers were very good at bringing forward why two guys could reasonably be wrestling each other. Some announcers are good at that today, most are not or they focus on the wrong things that don’t push why wrestler x and y would be having this match. I’ll use a fine example I noted along the way, It was Guerrero vs Jericho wrestling on Smackdown and Michael Cole tied it in with a simple line like “well, both these are guys are former Intercontinental Champions and you have to feel that winning this would get them back in that hunt” and this style of line happened a lot “The Acolytes winning this match would put them right back in the Tag Team Title contention”. It shined up the contest, the wrestlers intentions and gave prestige to the title, all with a simple 5 second line. This is rarely done today for a lot of angles. And quite frankly, if your kayfabe intention as a wrestler isn’t to win championships, then what are you even doing right?

JR was only good for the big moments
Now, time for a more opinion-based section. I truly believe that JR’s commentary isn’t always as good as people remember it to be. Don’t get me wrong, he called big moments and big matches well and when he was screaming things like “why god damn it, why” or calling Triple H a “son of a bitch” it always added to the mood. But every single show, he’d get names wrong like confusing the Hardy Boyz with Edge and Christian, or call matches “tag team title matches” without the champions even being on screen when they’re just basic tag team matches. He was prone to a lot of errors, much like he is now.

What I will say though, is that the announcers (JR, Lawler & Cole) had more character, were more animated and better at reacting when things were going on, now, there seems to just be a mild calm amongst the announcers because of the heavily scripted and sanitised nature and it makes what’s on screen feel less important.

The running thread

“Stone Cold will be here tonight and what will he have to say about what happened on Smackdown”, “what will The Rock say when do gets here?”, “What will Austin do when he gets his hands on Rikishi in that cage tonight?”

All these phrases were “threads” that were pushed throughout the whole thread of the show with the intention of keep people watching from minute 1 until the end. You didn’t know if Stone Cold or The Rock were going to turn up 20 minutes into the show or 2 minutes from the end, but whatever that show’s thread was, was pushed throughout, always carrying an element of “unknown” or mystery about it with the intention of wanting people to stick around waiting for that explosive moment.

A lot of stuff is announced too formally up front now, you know what order things are going to happen in and you don’t have this “mystery” or “thread” running through the show. Most of the time, people have their section, move on and it’s done and dusted, never to be mentioned again. Back in this era, you would see Triple H, Rock or Austin 4 or 5 times throughout the show and they’d be mentioned alongside their actions or intentions another 6 or 7 times at differing points. Now we’ll see Roman Reigns or the big star once, maybe twice if their promo and match are separate.

Other points of the show's overall format
- Show opening
The opening of a show felt so much bigger in the year 2000, opening with the music, crowd shots, fireworks and a familiar voice announcing the start of the show like “Welcome to the sold out Gund Arena, Jim Ross and Jerry ‘The King’ Lawler alongside 13,000 fans with you for another explosive night of Raw in what promises to be a big night” and then give a quick over view of recent events and who’s going to be around. Now I know WWE doesn’t command the same crowd sizes and maybe they don’t want to announce them. But there’s still ways of doing these things to make the opening of the show feel bigger.

- No adverts during matches
At no point, during any point in the Year 2000 do WWF take a commercial break during a wrestling match. Not once. They have lead ins like seeing The Hardyz walking backstage towards the ring with the announcer’s signing off with “The Hardyz, in competition, next” or “Jericho looks like he’s on his way out here, we’ll find out what he’s gonna say, next” so you knew what was coming on the other side of the commercial break. Now you make the matches feel insignificant by breaking in the middle of them. The UFC doesn’t put breaks in the middle of matches, no sporting event does either, you do it during down time periods, half-times, or around promos and things. I don’t know when this trend started, but it is annoying and will no doubt annoy me more now I’ve been on this journey.

Final thought
Overall, wrestling television shows were formatted so much better back then, more things felt like they had purpose, simplicity was king and I think there are so many lessons that can be applied now, if we only look backwards.

[Big Red Machine]

- I'd have pushed T&A more, but I think they came in one of WWF's golden eras for tag teams with the Hardyz, Dudleys, Edge & Christian and other over teams like the APA & Too Cool and I can see why they went cold.

Just starting to read this now, but I have to say, when I saw the beginning of this sentence, my thought was "T&A? Really?" but then when you got to that list of other teams, it clicked with me. The Dudleys didn't really have another big team to brawl with when they were babyfaces, and the Hardyz didn't really have anyone they could go all out with the "big monster heels with underdog babyfaces" story with, and T&A fit both of those roles perfect (and have Trish as a foil for Lita). I think Test was just too green (Albert was similarly inexperienced, but at least he was good. I think Lance Storm at one point named him and Kane as two of he safest big-men he had worked with).

[XIV]

- I'd have pushed T&A more, but I think they came in one of WWF's golden eras for tag teams with the Hardyz, Dudleys, Edge & Christian and other over teams like the APA & Too Cool and I can see why they went cold.

Just starting to read this now, but I have to say, when I saw the beginning of this sentence, my thought was "T&A? Really?" but then when you got to that list of other teams, it clicked with me. The Dudleys didn't really have another big team to brawl with when they were babyfaces, and the Hardyz didn't really have anyone they could go all out with the "big monster heels with underdog babyfaces" story with, and T&A fit both of those roles perfect (and have Trish as a foil for Lita). I think Test was just too green (Albert was similarly inexperienced, but at least he was good. I think Lance Storm at one point named him and Kane as two of he safest big-men he had worked with).

Perfect example of how T&A could have been used. Now you’ve mentioned Test’s greenness, I think that may be a part of why something just didn’t quite click. Like, he never really got beyond throwing big boots and scoop slams. Albert is definitely the standout in the team. But looks-wise, with Trish, a phenomenal looking outfit, who could have as you said, had a few better feuds than they actually had.

[Big Red Machine]

So much to think about!

I totally agree about the short promos. They serve the important function of letting us hear the characters' motivations first-hand, which is always the most effective way to do that. An announcer just can't replicate that same emotion of hatred or determination or whatever. I'm fine with long promos (I probably like them more than most), but they will also stand out more if you save them for the situations that need them and/or the people who can actually pull them off.

I also totally agree on the announcing. Tazz was also excellent at this (and still is, when he gives a sh*t, which has been a lot more often than not in AEW, to his credit). That being said, I think it's important that an announcer's character be consistent, or else you wind up undermining things via hypocrisy.


I don't think your overall point about the positive effects of match-framing is wrong, but I think that you're misdiagnosing the problem. Announcers still do do that very often. The problem is that it comes across to us as bullsh*t because we've seen those claims not be followed through on too much, or exposed as general bullsh*t. Michael Cole can talk until he's blue in the face about how big it would be for *INSERT UP-AND-COMING WRESTLER HERE* to beat Miz or Dolph or Kofi because they're former world champions/multi-time IC/US champions/whatever, but we've seen those guys not be booked like major stars for years and get fed to just about everyone Vince had the whim to temporarily push, so the idea that someone is going big places because they beat someone like that comes off phony. It's similar with AEW and the win-loss records, when people are just handed title shots left and right while big names who almost always win and against better competition aren't given title shots.

One concept I've grown more and more appreciative of over the years is the Pick 6 that ROH did between Fall 2009 and Summer 2010. The way it worked was that in order to be considered for a world title shot, you had to be in the Top 6 (and they later amended it that you could get a title shot for winning one of their annual "win and you get a title shot" traditional matches), but Top 6 spots were defended in every match everyone in the Top 6 was in. If you lost , the person who beat you got your number, you slid down one, and everyone else below you also slid down one, so that the person who used to be 6 was out.
I think the reason this worked better than any other similar thing ever has is that fans understood the consequences of victory and defeat for every match. There was nothing nebulous about it. It also gave a few extra matches consequences that otherwise wouldn't have had them, and made certain wrestlers (especially the guys at 5 and 6) feel like bigger stars.


As for the "running thread" thing, I was surprised that you didn't mention the "walking backstage" shots along with it, as these were what allowed for that in a way that didn't feel intrusive upon other matches happening while the announcers plugged things later on the show (and which WWE in particular got a lot of criticism for). I will admit that I wasn't a fan of them, mostly because I prefer the "this is a sports broadcast" format as opposed to the WWE-style "just pretend the cameras aren't here" style, and the latter makes these much easier to do, but I suppose you could show "earlier today" footage of the wrestler in question arriving at the arena (and later of the antagonist doing the same) to give you spots to do that.

As for things being announced up front, I do like that, because I like the more sports-like presentation. I think the way to build mystery into that is to almost never advertise a promo unless it's someone reacting to something major, or if you can frame it in a way that sets up the mystery (by which I mean a real question of what is on the person's mind, like a situation where a retirement tease or breaking up a team is believable, not just "what is on WRESTLER X'S mind?!").

Also, I think some of the issue is that things have become too pattered. With your Rock and Austin example, nowadays, we'd know that if those two (or any top stars) are going to mix it up on Raw, SD, or Dynamite, it will almost certainly be either at the top of the show, during an hour crossover, or in the main event. I think that's an antiquated view on the part of bookers, hoping that the big names will catch the interest of channel-surfers.


As for no advertisements during the matches, while I agree with you in principle, I think that the fanbase's tastes have evolved to the point where that's just not feasible. Fans wanted longer matches because they think that makes the matches better (and, more often than not, it does). Vince went on a kick of "no wrestling during the commercials, because that doesn't happen in real sports) during the spring and summer of 2019, and everyone hated it.

Similarly, small roster sizes are a thing of the past. AEW certainly makes the mistake of having too big of a roster and not following up on people well, and WWE at times has had way too small of a roster with the brand split (which is why people got sick of New Day vs. Usos even though they had a great match together almost every time).
I think the solution is a larger roster, but with a lot of attention paid to how appearances are managed. If you want to start building up an undercard wrestler for a shot at the secondary title, it's okay for five of the eight wins to be on Dark/Main Event, but you need to make sure that interspersed in there are two on actual TV, make sure the eighth win is on TV and against someone semi-credible, make sure that the wrestler cuts a promo beforehand (ideally the TV show before) to build it up, and each time that wrestlers appears on TV during the build make sure announcers remind us of their previous TV win and tell us all that they have since accumulated more wins on Dark/Main Event.

Part of the reason for this is that you don't quite have enough TV time to give everyone time because unlike in 2000, a promotion today is expected to have a women's division with a fully-functional midcard (which really only AEW does). That takes up time and attention that, in the past, would have been spent on men's undercard characters, so you need to make more care with undercard wrestlers (of all genders) today.

[XIV]

I totally agree about the short promos. They serve the important function of letting us hear the characters' motivations first-hand, which is always the most effective way to do that. An announcer just can't replicate that same emotion of hatred or determination or whatever. I'm fine with long promos (I probably like them more than most), but they will also stand out more if you save them for the situations that need them and/or the people who can actually pull them off.

Short promos were so good at providing little motivations for many matches even if it’s just “you spilled coffee on me, now I’m gonna whoop you” sort of thing. Longer promos do have their place to tell more complex or major stories, I whole heartedly agree. I just think these shorter promos should be on top of that. They only take 25-30 seconds out of a given match time.

I also totally agree on the announcing. Tazz was also excellent at this (and still is, when he gives a sh*t, which has been a lot more often than not in AEW, to his credit). That being said, I think it's important that an announcer's character be consistent, or else you wind up undermining things via hypocrisy.

I don't think your overall point about the positive effects of match-framing is wrong, but I think that you're misdiagnosing the problem. Announcers still do do that very often. The problem is that it comes across to us as bullsh*t because we've seen those claims not be followed through on too much, or exposed as general bullsh*t. Michael Cole can talk until he's blue in the face about how big it would be for *INSERT UP-AND-COMING WRESTLER HERE* to beat Miz or Dolph or Kofi because they're former world champions/multi-time IC/US champions/whatever, but we've seen those guys not be booked like major stars for years and get fed to just about everyone Vince had the whim to temporarily push, so the idea that someone is going big places because they beat someone like that comes off phony. It's similar with AEW and the win-loss records, when people are just handed title shots left and right while big names who almost always win and against better competition aren't given title shots.

Your point about not being followed through is the difference here. I look at 2000, and so often if Cole or JR mentioned the Hardyz or someone getting back in title contention by winning the match, more often than not, you saw them get closer or get the next title shot. Another thing that was valuable was using a person’s previous accomplishments better. I recently watched two matches which framed this perfectly, Regal vs The Rock & Val Venis vs the Rock for the WWF Championship. Whilst being a fan now, it was clear the Rock would never lose these matches, the announcers did an amazing job of telling people not to count out Regal because he was the current WWF European Champion and should be taken seriously, or that Val Venis should be taken seriously because he’s a multi-time WWF Intercontinental Champion same as Austin and HBK, whilst he was dressed as a goof in Right to Censor at the time, having him announced side by side those names made him feel like a bigger deal, if only in the confines of that match.

One concept I've grown more and more appreciative of over the years is the Pick 6 that ROH did between Fall 2009 and Summer 2010. The way it worked was that in order to be considered for a world title shot, you had to be in the Top 6 (and they later amended it that you could get a title shot for winning one of their annual "win and you get a title shot" traditional matches), but Top 6 spots were defended in every match everyone in the Top 6 was in. If you lost , the person who beat you got your number, you slid down one, and everyone else below you also slid down one, so that the person who used to be 6 was out.
I think the reason this worked better than any other similar thing ever has is that fans understood the consequences of victory and defeat for every match. There was nothing nebulous about it. It also gave a few extra matches consequences that otherwise wouldn't have had them, and made certain wrestlers (especially the guys at 5 and 6) feel like bigger stars.

Pick 6 is a great concept, the issue is, much like it did, it had a limited life-span. It was useful to make even smaller matches feel bigger because a number 5 or 6 spot was up for grabs, or someone could come out of nowhere and claim a spot in the Top 6. This issue is that unless you are consistently long term booking, you do have only finite things you can do under those constraints. Particularly for World Championships. There’s pros and cons to this approach.

As for the "running thread" thing, I was surprised that you didn't mention the "walking backstage" shots along with it, as these were what allowed for that in a way that didn't feel intrusive upon other matches happening while the announcers plugged things later on the show (and which WWE in particular got a lot of criticism for). I will admit that I wasn't a fan of them, mostly because I prefer the "this is a sports broadcast" format as opposed to the WWE-style "just pretend the cameras aren't here" style, and the latter makes these much easier to do, but I suppose you could show "earlier today" footage of the wrestler in question arriving at the arena (and later of the antagonist doing the same) to give you spots to do that.
As for things being announced up front, I do like that, because I like the more sports-like presentation. I think the way to build mystery into that is to almost never advertise a promo unless it's someone reacting to something major, or if you can frame it in a way that sets up the mystery (by which I mean a real question of what is on the person's mind, like a situation where a retirement tease or breaking up a team is believable, not just "what is on WRESTLER X'S mind?!").

Also, I think some of the issue is that things have become too pattered. With your Rock and Austin example, nowadays, we'd know that if those two (or any top stars) are going to mix it up on Raw, SD, or Dynamite, it will almost certainly be either at the top of the show, during an hour crossover, or in the main event. I think that's an antiquated view on the part of bookers, hoping that the big names will catch the interest of channel-surfers.

I did mention the walking backstage shots when discussing the use of adverts during matches, because WWF used to lead into most adverts with these types of camera shots, which allowed the viewer to know Chris Jericho is facing Kane on the other side of the break and made people who were fans of those not want to miss it.
These days there aren’t as many channel-surfers because of catch up TV, Peacock and other recording devices, but what you can attempt to prevent is something AEW really falls foul of, is people having their segment and not being seen again. AEW regularly starts their TV with 900K to 1.2 million viewers or so and then drop by about 300K by the end of the show. Making it more of a mystery when MJF is going to show up or making people wait for things, will make even 150K of those homes wait before the switch off or whatever because they’ve seen what they want to see. There’s still a place for threading a story.

As for no advertisements during the matches, while I agree with you in principle, I think that the fanbase's tastes have evolved to the point where that's just not feasible. Fans wanted longer matches because they think that makes the matches better (and, more often than not, it does). Vince went on a kick of "no wrestling during the commercials, because that doesn't happen in real sports) during the spring and summer of 2019, and everyone hated it.

Right to try it, but there’s definitely a better way to have done it. Most TV matches do go too long, yes some longer matches are great, but save them for the bigger matches. There’s no need to have Ricochet vs Mustafa Ali take 18 minutes of TV time and go through a break. Save longer matches for Premium Events or else what is the motivation to watch those events?

Part of the reason for this is that you don't quite have enough TV time to give everyone time because unlike in 2000, a promotion today is expected to have a women's division with a fully-functional midcard (which really only AEW does). That takes up time and attention that, in the past, would have been spent on men's undercard characters, so you need to make more care with undercard wrestlers (of all genders) today.

I don’t think a promotion should have a women’s division “just because”. This has until recently been AEW’s problem, they shoehorned one in with a terribly booked division, slowly star power is getting better on that side of things. But overall, WWE has about 7 hours of “live” TV time per week and AEW has I think 5 hours. Roster size aside, that should be plenty of time to get talent over. Controversial opinion maybe, but not everyone needs to be booked every single week.

[Big Red Machine]

As for no advertisements during the matches, while I agree with you in principle, I think that the fanbase's tastes have evolved to the point where that's just not feasible. Fans wanted longer matches because they think that makes the matches better (and, more often than not, it does). Vince went on a kick of "no wrestling during the commercials, because that doesn't happen in real sports) during the spring and summer of 2019, and everyone hated it.

Right to try it, but there’s definitely a better way to have done it. Most TV matches do go too long, yes some longer matches are great, but save them for the bigger matches. There’s no need to have Ricochet vs Mustafa Ali take 18 minutes of TV time and go through a break. Save longer matches for Premium Events or else what is the motivation to watch those events?

I think the toothpaste is just out of the tube on long matches. It would take a tremendous investment of time to reeducate fans (especially in a pre-existing product instead of one where you're starting from scratch), and the result was that of the guys who weren't already made names, the only ones who came off as stars were guys who got decent time for their matches or guys who were heavily focused on story-wise.

If you give Mustafa Ali and Ricochet eighteen minutes on TV and the match is framed via giving us even a slight reason to care about the journeys or the outcome, people are going to want to tune in to see both of those guys next week.
The reason to watch the PLEs is that that's where you get your resolution to the stories or at least your next big chapter-point (obviously I'm not saying that you can't have major developments on TV, but every match on a PLE should either resolve a feud or should lead to am important change in the status quo).

Part of the reason for this is that you don't quite have enough TV time to give everyone time because unlike in 2000, a promotion today is expected to have a women's division with a fully-functional midcard (which really only AEW does). That takes up time and attention that, in the past, would have been spent on men's undercard characters, so you need to make more care with undercard wrestlers (of all genders) today.

I don’t think a promotion should have a women’s division “just because”. This has until recently been AEW’s problem, they shoehorned one in with a terribly booked division, slowly star power is getting better on that side of things. But overall, WWE has about 7 hours of “live” TV time per week and AEW has I think 5 hours. Roster size aside, that should be plenty of time to get talent over. Controversial opinion maybe, but not everyone needs to be booked every single week.

I agree that having a women's (or cruiserweight, or tag team, or anything) division "just because" is not good... but with the way society is today, if you want to be a major player, you need to have a women's division. I agree that WWE and AEW shouldn't have major issues with time because of this (it's more of a major problem for the MLWs and pre-Khan ROH's of the world), but there is still some opportunity cost of time.
Granted, said time would be found if your suggestion of keeping matches shorter were implemented, but as I said above, I think we're past the point of no return on that.

[XIV]

As for no advertisements during the matches, while I agree with you in principle, I think that the fanbase's tastes have evolved to the point where that's just not feasible. Fans wanted longer matches because they think that makes the matches better (and, more often than not, it does). Vince went on a kick of "no wrestling during the commercials, because that doesn't happen in real sports) during the spring and summer of 2019, and everyone hated it.

Right to try it, but there’s definitely a better way to have done it. Most TV matches do go too long, yes some longer matches are great, but save them for the bigger matches. There’s no need to have Ricochet vs Mustafa Ali take 18 minutes of TV time and go through a break. Save longer matches for Premium Events or else what is the motivation to watch those events?

I think the toothpaste is just out of the tube on long matches. It would take a tremendous investment of time to reeducate fans (especially in a pre-existing product instead of one where you're starting from scratch), and the result was that of the guys who weren't already made names, the only ones who came off as stars were guys who got decent time for their matches or guys who were heavily focused on story-wise.

If you give Mustafa Ali and Ricochet eighteen minutes on TV and the match is framed via giving us even a slight reason to care about the journeys or the outcome, people are going to want to tune in to see both of those guys next week.
The reason to watch the PLEs is that that's where you get your resolution to the stories or at least your next big chapter-point (obviously I'm not saying that you can't have major developments on TV, but every match on a PLE should either resolve a feud or should lead to am important change in the status quo).

Part of the reason for this is that you don't quite have enough TV time to give everyone time because unlike in 2000, a promotion today is expected to have a women's division with a fully-functional midcard (which really only AEW does). That takes up time and attention that, in the past, would have been spent on men's undercard characters, so you need to make more care with undercard wrestlers (of all genders) today.

I don’t think a promotion should have a women’s division “just because”. This has until recently been AEW’s problem, they shoehorned one in with a terribly booked division, slowly star power is getting better on that side of things. But overall, WWE has about 7 hours of “live” TV time per week and AEW has I think 5 hours. Roster size aside, that should be plenty of time to get talent over. Controversial opinion maybe, but not everyone needs to be booked every single week.

I agree that having a women's (or cruiserweight, or tag team, or anything) division "just because" is not good... but with the way society is today, if you want to be a major player, you need to have a women's division. I agree that WWE and AEW shouldn't have major issues with time because of this (it's more of a major problem for the MLWs and pre-Khan ROH's of the world), but there is still some opportunity cost of time.
Granted, said time would be found if your suggestion of keeping matches shorter were implemented, but as I said above, I think we're past the point of no return on that.

You may be correct that we're past the point of no return, because NWA have somewhat been forced into this because of their shorter show formats in the Corgan era, and whilst at first it was refreshing, NWA just hasn't risen above it's comeback (for many reasons, this being one). But I think on TV ther difference between a 12 minute match and a 22 minute match is actually moot. I hardly think many people would notice. Sure, have a couple of 20+ minute matches, but every match doesn't need this time. Braun Strowman, Wardlow, Richochet, Mustafa Ali, The New Day, The Young Bucks and so many more should not be doing 20+ minute matches on TV. There's literally no reason to.

I understand your point that if you're going to make matches, particularly that long, you need a reason to care and that's in the r writing and booking so not always the guys faults but as we well know, if we see 15 dives, a apron slam and 16 finisher kick outs in every match, nobody gives a shit about the outcome anymore.

Save the longer matches for PLE/PPV, make people pay for the big spots, to see the big dives. Did Mick Foley ever go through a burning table on TV? No, he did it at Wrestlemania, did Rikishi dive off a cage on Raw? No, both times he did it, it was on PPV, did Shane McMahon get suplexed through glass on Raw just because it would be a good spot? No, he did it at on PPV where people paid to see him get the shit kicked out of him. You have to make people care about the bigger moments and this includes things like dives and big moves, else you've given them away on TV and nobody remembers. Make people pay for you hurting yourself. WWE at least, somewhat sticks to this in a lot of cases. AEW does not. They rely on title changes and debuts for their big PPV moments.

[Big Red Machine]

Right to try it, but there’s definitely a better way to have done it. Most TV matches do go too long, yes some longer matches are great, but save them for the bigger matches. There’s no need to have Ricochet vs Mustafa Ali take 18 minutes of TV time and go through a break. Save longer matches for Premium Events or else what is the motivation to watch those events?

I think the toothpaste is just out of the tube on long matches. It would take a tremendous investment of time to reeducate fans (especially in a pre-existing product instead of one where you're starting from scratch), and the result was that of the guys who weren't already made names, the only ones who came off as stars were guys who got decent time for their matches or guys who were heavily focused on story-wise.

If you give Mustafa Ali and Ricochet eighteen minutes on TV and the match is framed via giving us even a slight reason to care about the journeys or the outcome, people are going to want to tune in to see both of those guys next week.
The reason to watch the PLEs is that that's where you get your resolution to the stories or at least your next big chapter-point (obviously I'm not saying that you can't have major developments on TV, but every match on a PLE should either resolve a feud or should lead to am important change in the status quo).

I don’t think a promotion should have a women’s division “just because”. This has until recently been AEW’s problem, they shoehorned one in with a terribly booked division, slowly star power is getting better on that side of things. But overall, WWE has about 7 hours of “live” TV time per week and AEW has I think 5 hours. Roster size aside, that should be plenty of time to get talent over. Controversial opinion maybe, but not everyone needs to be booked every single week.

I agree that having a women's (or cruiserweight, or tag team, or anything) division "just because" is not good... but with the way society is today, if you want to be a major player, you need to have a women's division. I agree that WWE and AEW shouldn't have major issues with time because of this (it's more of a major problem for the MLWs and pre-Khan ROH's of the world), but there is still some opportunity cost of time.
Granted, said time would be found if your suggestion of keeping matches shorter were implemented, but as I said above, I think we're past the point of no return on that.

You may be correct that we're past the point of no return, because NWA have somewhat been forced into this because of their shorter show formats in the Corgan era, and whilst at first it was refreshing, NWA just hasn't risen above it's comeback (for many reasons, this being one). But I think on TV ther difference between a 12 minute match and a 22 minute match is actually moot. I hardly think many people would notice. Sure, have a couple of 20+ minute matches, but every match doesn't need this time. Braun Strowman, Wardlow, Richochet, Mustafa Ali, The New Day, The Young Bucks and so many more should not be doing 20+ minute matches on TV. There's literally no reason to.

I understand your point that if you're going to make matches, particularly that long, you need a reason to care and that's in the r writing and booking so not always the guys faults but as we well know, if we see 15 dives, a apron slam and 16 finisher kick outs in every match, nobody gives a shit about the outcome anymore.

Save the longer matches for PLE/PPV, make people pay for the big spots, to see the big dives. Did Mick Foley ever go through a burning table on TV? No, he did it at Wrestlemania, did Rikishi dive off a cage on Raw? No, both times he did it, it was on PPV, did Shane McMahon get suplexed through glass on Raw just because it would be a good spot? No, he did it at on PPV where people paid to see him get the shit kicked out of him. You have to make people care about the bigger moments and this includes things like dives and big moves, else you've given them away on TV and nobody remembers. Make people pay for you hurting yourself. WWE at least, somewhat sticks to this in a lot of cases. AEW does not. They rely on title changes and debuts for their big PPV moments.

The way to do that, I think, requires an overhaul in style/focus to shift more towards a roster of guys like Danielson, Gresham, ZSJ, Daniel Garcia, Wheeler YUTA, Gulak, Thatcher, Gable, Axiom, Fish, O'Reilly, etc. I've long argued that while there is a diminishing return on every dive (and to a slightly lesser extent, head-drop and weapon-shot) we see over the course of a show, that isn't the case for working a body part, as the meter resets itself each match because it's a new person's leg/arm/neck/whatever. But in order to make those matches feel exciting, you're going to need the average match to go longer than you would if the average match were using the dives/superkicks/weapons shortcuts. I'd be interested in seeing you take the WWE or AEW roster and format a few weeks worth of shows to see what it looks like.

In something of a defense of AEW from your last sentence, may of their stories are about the title chase and thus those title changes at the PPVs are the big moments at the end. The problems there are more in the way the stories are told/pace of the stories, the characterization (or lack thereof) or the fact that the fanbase latches on the "wrong" people (MJF, Hayter, Baker) in ways that (sometimes- I do blame them for MJF and Baker) aren't really the promotion's fault.

[XIV]

I think the toothpaste is just out of the tube on long matches. It would take a tremendous investment of time to reeducate fans (especially in a pre-existing product instead of one where you're starting from scratch), and the result was that of the guys who weren't already made names, the only ones who came off as stars were guys who got decent time for their matches or guys who were heavily focused on story-wise.

If you give Mustafa Ali and Ricochet eighteen minutes on TV and the match is framed via giving us even a slight reason to care about the journeys or the outcome, people are going to want to tune in to see both of those guys next week.
The reason to watch the PLEs is that that's where you get your resolution to the stories or at least your next big chapter-point (obviously I'm not saying that you can't have major developments on TV, but every match on a PLE should either resolve a feud or should lead to am important change in the status quo).



I agree that having a women's (or cruiserweight, or tag team, or anything) division "just because" is not good... but with the way society is today, if you want to be a major player, you need to have a women's division. I agree that WWE and AEW shouldn't have major issues with time because of this (it's more of a major problem for the MLWs and pre-Khan ROH's of the world), but there is still some opportunity cost of time.
Granted, said time would be found if your suggestion of keeping matches shorter were implemented, but as I said above, I think we're past the point of no return on that.

You may be correct that we're past the point of no return, because NWA have somewhat been forced into this because of their shorter show formats in the Corgan era, and whilst at first it was refreshing, NWA just hasn't risen above it's comeback (for many reasons, this being one). But I think on TV ther difference between a 12 minute match and a 22 minute match is actually moot. I hardly think many people would notice. Sure, have a couple of 20+ minute matches, but every match doesn't need this time. Braun Strowman, Wardlow, Richochet, Mustafa Ali, The New Day, The Young Bucks and so many more should not be doing 20+ minute matches on TV. There's literally no reason to.

I understand your point that if you're going to make matches, particularly that long, you need a reason to care and that's in the r writing and booking so not always the guys faults but as we well know, if we see 15 dives, a apron slam and 16 finisher kick outs in every match, nobody gives a shit about the outcome anymore.

Save the longer matches for PLE/PPV, make people pay for the big spots, to see the big dives. Did Mick Foley ever go through a burning table on TV? No, he did it at Wrestlemania, did Rikishi dive off a cage on Raw? No, both times he did it, it was on PPV, did Shane McMahon get suplexed through glass on Raw just because it would be a good spot? No, he did it at on PPV where people paid to see him get the shit kicked out of him. You have to make people care about the bigger moments and this includes things like dives and big moves, else you've given them away on TV and nobody remembers. Make people pay for you hurting yourself. WWE at least, somewhat sticks to this in a lot of cases. AEW does not. They rely on title changes and debuts for their big PPV moments.

The way to do that, I think, requires an overhaul in style/focus to shift more towards a roster of guys like Danielson, Gresham, ZSJ, Daniel Garcia, Wheeler YUTA, Gulak, Thatcher, Gable, Axiom, Fish, O'Reilly, etc. I've long argued that while there is a diminishing return on every dive (and to a slightly lesser extent, head-drop and weapon-shot) we see over the course of a show, that isn't the case for working a body part, as the meter resets itself each match because it's a new person's leg/arm/neck/whatever. But in order to make those matches feel exciting, you're going to need the average match to go longer than you would if the average match were using the dives/superkicks/weapons shortcuts. I'd be interested in seeing you take the WWE or AEW roster and format a few weeks worth of shows to see what it looks like.

In something of a defense of AEW from your last sentence, may of their stories are about the title chase and thus those title changes at the PPVs are the big moments at the end. The problems there are more in the way the stories are told/pace of the stories, the characterization (or lack thereof) or the fact that the fanbase latches on the "wrong" people (MJF, Hayter, Baker) in ways that (sometimes- I do blame them for MJF and Baker) aren't really the promotion's fault.

You make some compelling points, but I will take your idea of formatting a show and I will create a show format, that I feel would work modern era. Give me a week or two on that because I’ll need to research average commercial time vs show time and stuff, but I’ll put something together.

[Big Red Machine]

It's usually 8 minutes of commercials per half hour, but I don't know how much leeway shows get in terms of where to place them,or if ybey can go short in one place to make it up in another

[XIV]

It's usually 8 minutes of commercials per half hour, but I don't know how much leeway shows get in terms of where to place them,or if ybey can go short in one place to make it up in another

So for the sake of ease, I'll just break them down into 4 minute chunks where necessary and make sure there's enough for each show.

So, I'm going to do this based off AEW and their current roster. Using the Dynamite show. I'm at a slight disadvantage in that I haven't watched a single episode of Dynamite in about two months BUT, it's about formatting the content of a show using the lessons I've learned, not necessarily the actual booking of the matches and angles.

REVISION: I'll watch tonight's Dynamite and use this to inform the show's content where appropriate.