For the longest time now, the WWE has been the reflection of one Vincent Kennedy McMahon’s whims and understandably, both its highest points and lowest troughs have been attributed to the thick-set businessman.
While some may point to the increasing locus of control that Triple H seems to be garnering backstage, the product still resonates with Vince McMahon’s will, and bears his seal of approval before hitting TV screens.
That being said, the blame for some of the mistakes that have been are repetitively made by the WWE have to fall squarely on his (McMahon’s) shoulders. The audience may lobby for change, but the WWE have managed to desist it, no matter how hard-pressed to conformity they have been.
Here then, are 5 such biggest mistakes that the WWE have continued committing over the years.
#5 Ridiculous characterization
Today’s product seems to have dulled the edge of kayfabe, and the WWE just can’t seem to catch on with that concept.
Stuck on in an age where larger-than-life personas and heroic deeds straight out of a comic book sold straight, the WWE seems to be grappling between imposing their tried and tested ideas in characterization and embracing a changing dynamic of audience to whom that just doesn’t appeal anymore.
For every Superstar like Kevin Owens that keeps it real, there is a duo like Primo and Epico whose gimmicks just don’t beget sense, much less realism.
For every character like Finn Balor, or his alter ego, an extremely talented performer the likes of Cody Rhodes leaves the company because his far-fetched and childish gimmick was being persisted with despite clearly not yielding any traction with the audience.
Caught between a rock and a hard place, someone like Cesaro is losing his identity of being an inimitable ring wizard in pursuit of the proverbial brass ring, with a James Bond-esque gimmick that he is clearly not well-suited, pun unintended, to execute.
The worrying question is, ‘how many more talented performers will fall prey to this rigid approach of the WWE?’
#4 Cutting down a pro-wrestler’s moveset
This is a common theme amongst WWE Superstars that haven’t been bred in the ‘WWE way’, and the worst affected ones are those that come from the Indies, or of late, even from the so-called developmental brand that is NXT.
Superstars that are dexterious in the ring, and can perform a plethora of moves, are often required to cut down their movesets in order to make their character and gimmick more palatable to the audience. The thinking behind this is simplistic; lesser the number of moves, easier it is for the audience to identify with the Superstar.
While this makes sense on face value, curtailing the expressiveness of a pro-wrestler in the ring often times ends up stifling a performer in the long term.
And considering how many performers today are characterized by their in-ring dexterity, it is of little wonder that Superstars like Cesaro, Tyson Kidd, Sami Zayn – and until he started the Yes! Movement – even Daniel Bryan, were all written off until they went out of the way to buck the odds.
A precious few make it inspite of the restrictions imposed by the WWE, while most fall by the wayside, relegated to ‘5 moves of doom.’
#3 Nationalistic Stereotypes
Especially since the WWE is based out of the USA, playing to the patriotic sentiment of the crowd has always been a salient selling point for the company. But when one Superstar is portrayed in the spotlight as a knight in shining armour based on a nationalistic point of view, it also requires another one to play the foil.
And in the WWE, inevitably, the villainous character as a foreign heel has become an overused and highly cliched character.
From Ivan Koloff and Iron Shiek to present day, when Rusev and Jinder Mahal have assumed the mantle of the ‘foreign devil’, not much has changed in terms of stereotyping Superstars that don’t hail from the USA.
I don’t mean to decry their methods, but to merely point out that having Jinder Mahal chant “shanti, shanti” while he goes on to unleash his rage on an unsuspecting jobber is hardly a sound plan if the WWE are looking to expand their global reach.
For the longest time, I was also confused if Rusev was Russian or Bulgarian. Anywhere will do I guess, as long as it isn’t from the USA. Perhaps it is that condescending mentality, that has to change.
#2 Scripting promos
This is another facet of WWE programming that has come under intense scrutiny and criticism from many quarters. WWE Superstars, history shows, get over much more indelibly with the audience when they are allowed to organically peruse the microphone.
Today’s WWE product has so many political implications that scripting promos becomes a necessity, however, and intrinsically inhibits WWE Superstars from impressing their personality on the audience.
This is a very counter-intuitive approach by the WWE, especially in an industry that requires Superstars to get over with the audience by establishing themselves as relatable personas, for which microphone skills present an pivotal platform.
Superstars that find a way to circumvent the restrictions can get over, but they remain the exception rather than the norm.
#1 Prototypical main eventer
This is a dynamic that is changing in today’s New Era, but it still noticable that Vince McMahon is of the mind that Roman Reigns should take over from John Cena as the top babyface n the company.
And before John Cena, the top spot belonged to the likes of Stone Cold, The Rock, and before them Hulk Hogan and Bruno Sammartino...you get the picture. From one prototype to another, the mantle of top dog has passed on to Superstars that fit a certain mould, for whom Vince McMahons’ glass ceiling magically caves in.
This is something that has to change. Championed by CM Punk, the cause of the voiceless has to be moved forward in the WWE, something that looks unlikely judging purely by the WWE’s track record thus far.
But there is still hope, as Kevin Owens and AJ Styles will attest. It just remains to be seen if this New Era is a false dawn, as has been the case many times in the WWE, or a true indicator of a changing paradigm within the product.
