| 0 |
Subject: A couple misc. WWE rants
Posted by: Species
- Leader [07724916] Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 17:52
Not to take away from the Eddie tragedy, but these topics have been floating in my head for a while and I wanted to throw 'em out there:
1 - Why does the WWE have to change the names of people that come from elsewhere?
Let's assume for a moment that copyright issues are not a part of it. Why couldn't Mickie James continue to be Alexis Laree? Why couldn't the Tolands remain the Tolands? Why Joey Mercury instead of Joey Matthews? Etc etc etc.
The WWE has been opening their eyes to the 'power' of the internet fan - sometimes to their advantage. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the consistency of the names when they bring in new talent? Those who remembered Alexis Laree from ROH would be more inclined to recognize her by that name than her real name. What is CM Punk going to be named, "Punk Boy"?!? I guarantee they change it somehow to some idiotic related creation, instead of keeping the name and using his success and charisma from other promotions to perhaps attract new fans. I suppose an argument can be made that CM Punk fans won't care, but it just seems silly.
2 - Is it just me, or have most of the more popular wrestlers made their marks as heels?
This could be my heel-loving mentality, but it is me or do most popular wrestlers make their name as heels. With Hulk Hogan perhaps one exception, names like The Rock, John Cena, Ric Flair, Randy Savage and many others all made their marks as heels. When Rocky Johnson became The Rock and started "Roody-poo"-ing and "Jabroni"-ing, his popularity skyrocketed. When Cena was cutting his raps as a heel, his natural charisma started to shine through. Ric Flair is popular as the "Dirtiest player in the game" and we fans LOVE it when he uses the ropes for leverage, clips the back of the knee or gives a thumb in the eye. Kurt Angle is hilarious and has almost always been heel - the WCW invasion and a few "All American" angles aside. My adoration for old 80's heels like Dibiase and Rude are no secret……is it just a natural thing to remember and be more fond of these antics over the cleanliness of the faces?
|
| 1 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 18:12
|
1. Besides copyrights, which you mentioned, they often change names because they don't want the fans to think of someone else. They don't want two "Steves", for instance. I hate that too, and think it's ridiculous. It used to be a running joke with my brother and I-----whenever someone was coming to WWE(F), we'd guess at how bad their name would be. And we'd hate it. Especially when they'd simply use a new nickame----like The Narcissist. Huh??? That's Lex Luger, you @ssholes!
2. More fun to yell and scream at a heel than to "go see your hero" at a wrestling event. Who has heros at all anymore, much less in wrestling? Did you like enjoy watching the bad guy in Highlander? The bad guy in Spiderman or Superman movies? Same thing. They often represent the other side of what people would like to be, or be able to act like, anyway, deep down inside, even if for one day, one hour........
|
| 2 | Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 18:13
|
Blue Blazer----why? Because back then, Bret was the only Hart allowed, except for Jimmy Hart, who was not a wrestler. And with the Tolands, the name change fits their gimmick, at least.
|
| 3 | blue hen
ID: 349532121
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 18:17
|
The Rock is my hero.
As for the names, I think it's better now than it's ever been. Terry Bollea? Jim Hellwig? Glen Jacobs? Mark Callaway?
It's all about building an image, just like Samuel Langhorne Clemens did once upon a time. Same with Cornelius MacGillicuddy. The name Joey Mercury is MUCH more interesting than Joey Matthews. They stick to real names with a whole lot of guys these days - Kurt Angle, John Cena, Shelton Benjamin... and Eddie Guerrero.
|
| 4 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 18:21
|
Mike D - regarding #2 I hear you.......but what's interesting is how often these guys turn face because of their popularity as a heel. Batista was a bad guy/enforcer with Evolution, but now he's the top face on SD! Cena got popular cutting his raps as a heel, and he's pretty much the top babyface in the company. The Rock turned a few times during his popularity too (I really did miss the heel Rock though). They tried to turn Orton face because he was so popular as another heel in Evolution - but that one was just too soon. I remember columns about Matt Hardy's entrance, back in his V.1 days having to be edited from the broadcast because he'd get such a big pop and they were pushing him as heel.
I thought of the other one:
#3 - Where are the factions?!?
Why have they gotten rid of the factions. The Four Horseman, The Corporation, DX, Evolution, UnAmericans. Where for art thou?
I think factions are a lot of fun. You can elevate the game of all of the members pretty easily by playing off of one another - whether it be tag teaming, run ins, etc. Factions can take less experienced guys and turn them into stars. Recently, Batista and Orton come to mind. It was perfect to pair them with established stars like HHH and Flair, to show them the ropes and be the mouthpiece at the same time.
Good guy factions aren't bad either.....but I miss heel factions.
|
| 5 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 18:26
|
bh - I don't necessarily mean that new names are bad, but if a wrestler has established themselves in another promotion (and I'm probably talking more about since I've started to pay attention to other promotions since this league started) that it seems silly to purposely change the name if for no other reason than to silence the fact that they had made a name and mark for themselves in another promotion. I would want to capitalize on their existing fan base, which should only make it easier for them to make their mark in the WWE.
|
| 6 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 25337239
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 18:51
|
I don't think you can put aside the copyright issue. Its the greatest factor. If Alexis Laree's real name is Alexis Laree, they can't copyright it. Unless it's not the wrestler's real name, a name is a commodity. WWE can use it as a bargaining chip, both in resigning talent (get to stick with their recognizable name) and in dealing with other media (sell licensing rights to the name), even after the talent is no longer with WWE. Is Rock as marketable as Duane Johnson? However marketable or unmarketable HHH is, how marketable is Paul Levesque?
As far as fans recognizing stars by their identities in previous outfits, I don't think its currently much of a factor. I doubt there are enough small circuit fans out there who are oblivious to their talent going to the WWE to cater to by foregoing a commodity. And if the previous identity isn't the star's real name, then they'd have to purchase the rights to that name from whoever owns it (the previous outfit, most likely). Maybe its worth it in some cases (Punk maybe) but it probably isn't usually.
And more subtly, I get the feeling there is a certain culture of submitting to management control in wrestling. Wrestlers have to agree to present themselves in often very unflattering ways and I believe accepting the identity that management assigns you, for better or worse, is a part of that. Look at what that poor fool, Boogeyman, is willing to do on national TV. And he's in his late 30s or early 40s, right? I'm not a rich man but you'd have to pay me an awful lot, certainly more than I think he's likely getting.
Good question about the factions. I think the WWE tends to rotate their story structures. They'll focus on the tag division or on the womens and cruiser divisions. They go through periods where SD and Raw feuds seem to mirror each other. This year they've shied away from stables and pushed with a series of inter-show promotions. Is it me or are there not nearly as many hosses these days? Especially undercarders like Bull Buchanon, Matt Morgan, Albert, Nathan Jones, etc..
Perhaps the thinking regarding factions is that staying away from them keeps each show looking a little more unified in the Raw vs SD stuff.
|
| 7 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 19:01
|
Alexis Laree and CM Punk both wrestled in ROH under those names, right?
They were then signed by WWE to developmental contracts, but wrestle(d) under those names in OVW. If those names were owned by ROH, why were they used in OVW? And if OVW has been (although supposedly not for much longer) WWE's developmental promotion, why would they structure agreements that didn't allow them to use their name upon 'promotion' to WWE?
I suppose I'm making something out of nothing. Outstanding point about not necessarily wanting to have your real name attached to some of the things these performers have to do - but my question was more pointed towards changing the name from what the wrestler had been known as in a different promotion.
|
| 8 | Great One
ID: 4910431620
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 20:31
|
That is a brilliant thought about wanting to own the rights to the name that makes them famous... because they can't take away the rights to your real name, they go and change it to even further control you.
Regarding factions - I was just wondering that the other day, there isn't a single faction on either show unless its the Mexicools maybe but they are more like a 3 way tag team. Look what the rub from Evolution did for Orton and Batista - great exposure.
This talk of Punk reminds me I wanted to post a Coldplay/Punk video I came across. Check it out in the other thread.
|
| 9 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 25337239
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 20:51
|
There's a number of reasons for that. For one thing, licensing rights are certainly much cheaper for OVW programming than for WWE. OVW currently appears on one station, WBKI-34 in Louisville. Outside of that market of under 600,000 households (as of 2001), you can't see it. I purchase video for a cable network and I can tell you difference in broadcast licensing fees between rights for a show on a local station in a secondary market and for one on national basic cable network, a national broadcast network and also international syndication is huge.
I think in a lot of cases it makes more sense for OVW to spend a little cash and buy the "brand name" than for WWE to spend a giant bundle on it when it probably won't result in too many extra viewers, anyway. From ROH's perspective, a small fee for licensing is better than no fee at all. From WWE's perspective, whether Alexis Laree is her real name or not, I doubt there are many ROH fans who knew of Alexis Laree and don't know that she is now Mickey James. And if Alexis Laree fans aren't willing to watch her on WWE, it probably isn't bacause they changed her name.
|
| 10 | Tree
ID: 3010351719
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 21:06
|
Alexis Laree and CM Punk both wrestled in ROH under those names, right?
They were then signed by WWE to developmental contracts, but wrestle(d) under those names in OVW. If those names were owned by ROH, why were they used in OVW? And if OVW has been (although supposedly not for much longer) WWE's developmental promotion, why would they structure agreements that didn't allow them to use their name upon 'promotion' to WWE?
they did use those names in ROH, and other promotions.
those names were not owned by ROH, nor the other promotions. the wrestlers own them.
the bottom line is that it is completely about trademark issues for the WWE, so you can't take it out of the equation. with rare exception, wrestlers don't leave the WWE and retain their name, even if they had the name BEFORE coming to the WWE - Spike, D-Von, and Bubba-Ray Dudley are the most recent exampkes.
|
| 11 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 25337239
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 21:09
|
And of course if Alexis Laree is her real name, it probably helps OVW a lot more tif they can sport the "brand name" than it helps WWE to build a name for the personna while she's still in the developmental stage. Most WWE fans won't have heard of her anyway.
|
| 12 | Tree
ID: 3010351719
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 22:10
|
And of course if Alexis Laree is her real name, it probably helps OVW a lot more tif they can sport the "brand name" than it helps WWE to build a name for the personna while she's still in the developmental stage.
oddly, and interestingly, Mickie James is her real name...
|
| 13 | Great One
ID: 4910431620
Thu, Nov 17, 2005, 22:11
|
Well doesn't that just blow all our theories out the window!?! lol...
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|