Post by Fred Richards on Jul 7, 2016 4:54:49 GMT -8
Let's take this away from a puritanical "talent" perspective just for a moment and talk the realities of business.
It is commonplace for a card to be built around a Championship match. In order for the card to attract paying customers, the Champion, who comes at a higher cost than other talent, must be a draw - - something unique.
A Champion doesn't have to be a grappling master. Never did. Never will. Financially successful (for the Promoter) champions must stand out from the ordinary, everyday baby/heel.
Imagine a belt around, going back in time, Abdullah The Butcher. Fans know Abby's matches are routinely bloodbaths. Just as they knew that legends like Blassie, Dusty, et al., brought a product that was worthy of main event. As Monsoon wisely opined: "this is what they came to see."
High spot, high spot, high spot ad nauseum. Facial grimace, clenched fist in the air ad nauseum. BORING! PREDICTABLE!
Many Champions of today's minor league, rigamortis-infected "brands" are workers either on their way up or on the downhill slide. A sad commentary on the creativity of the "brand." A pitiful commentary on the creative "foresight" of the office that controls the :"brand." Especially when it is the CEO or his minion(s) that have life-and-death control over who is the standard bearer for said "brand."
A "brand" is supposed to create a character for its' standard bearers - - not buy up used, second-hand, played-out, hand-me-downs. A "brand" must be unique if it is to be, in fact, a "brand."
You pick someone. You invest in someone. You market someone. You get your licensees in-line. You exercise quality control and not merely pose for photos with your store-bought, tarnished dentures showing and steal the camera from your "champion" in order to showcase your bottomless pit of egomaniacal neuroses.
A "brand" needs money resources. After investing in a competent standard bearer (a/k/a "Champion") you keep him/her as an exclusive chattel. Not an unsecured journeyman/woman who can be hired by a competitor. But a pseudo-"brand" can't do that. A "brand" that is run by ego and not sound business principles is deaf, dumb and can't see over it's crooked nose no matter how thick the lenses in its' eyeglasses or how zombie-like its' office boy.
So where is the creativity? Where is the support, the guidance, the leadership of the alleged "office" that the "brand" tells those who spend $$$ to purchase licenses it maintains? Where is that expertise that fosters "tradition."
Is it all just a tease? Is it the Amway gimmick come to the squared circle? Did the paying customer come to see the "brand" or did they come to see "rasslin"?
Rasslin they can see at any of the hundreds of mom-and-pop promotions that come-and-go in all states, in all nations?
That burden rests with the "office." That is what the licensee pays their hard-earned money to buy.
The input of "brand" loyalists in this forum and elsewhere makes it abundantly clear that the magic, the box office draw, the suspense, the melodrama, the sensationalism, the headline grabbing ability, the aura of a "Champion" within this "brand" is in dire straits.
The conspicuous lack of mainstream press bangs the drum - - softly. Headlines that are earned - - not purchased.
Bob Backlund was and remains a great technical wrestler. However, to many paying customers he was a "hot dog without mustard." When the "office" found it could not morph him into a better box office draw, his reign was, necessarily, brought to blissful conclusion.
Bruno Sammartino was one of the greatest purist wrestlers I have ever seen in a ring. But keep in mind, he was anointed solely because of contemporary demographics that existed at that point in time. It came when the New York City telephone directories showed an immense Italian American population. The same thing happened, albeit Latino names, when it was decided to crown Pedro Morales.
Can this "brand" that is a focal point of friendly debate rise to that level? After all, licensees deserve justice. Paying customers deserve justice. The business deserves justice.
Will justice prevail?
The jury is out.
It is commonplace for a card to be built around a Championship match. In order for the card to attract paying customers, the Champion, who comes at a higher cost than other talent, must be a draw - - something unique.
A Champion doesn't have to be a grappling master. Never did. Never will. Financially successful (for the Promoter) champions must stand out from the ordinary, everyday baby/heel.
Imagine a belt around, going back in time, Abdullah The Butcher. Fans know Abby's matches are routinely bloodbaths. Just as they knew that legends like Blassie, Dusty, et al., brought a product that was worthy of main event. As Monsoon wisely opined: "this is what they came to see."
High spot, high spot, high spot ad nauseum. Facial grimace, clenched fist in the air ad nauseum. BORING! PREDICTABLE!
Many Champions of today's minor league, rigamortis-infected "brands" are workers either on their way up or on the downhill slide. A sad commentary on the creativity of the "brand." A pitiful commentary on the creative "foresight" of the office that controls the :"brand." Especially when it is the CEO or his minion(s) that have life-and-death control over who is the standard bearer for said "brand."
A "brand" is supposed to create a character for its' standard bearers - - not buy up used, second-hand, played-out, hand-me-downs. A "brand" must be unique if it is to be, in fact, a "brand."
You pick someone. You invest in someone. You market someone. You get your licensees in-line. You exercise quality control and not merely pose for photos with your store-bought, tarnished dentures showing and steal the camera from your "champion" in order to showcase your bottomless pit of egomaniacal neuroses.
A "brand" needs money resources. After investing in a competent standard bearer (a/k/a "Champion") you keep him/her as an exclusive chattel. Not an unsecured journeyman/woman who can be hired by a competitor. But a pseudo-"brand" can't do that. A "brand" that is run by ego and not sound business principles is deaf, dumb and can't see over it's crooked nose no matter how thick the lenses in its' eyeglasses or how zombie-like its' office boy.
So where is the creativity? Where is the support, the guidance, the leadership of the alleged "office" that the "brand" tells those who spend $$$ to purchase licenses it maintains? Where is that expertise that fosters "tradition."
Is it all just a tease? Is it the Amway gimmick come to the squared circle? Did the paying customer come to see the "brand" or did they come to see "rasslin"?
Rasslin they can see at any of the hundreds of mom-and-pop promotions that come-and-go in all states, in all nations?
That burden rests with the "office." That is what the licensee pays their hard-earned money to buy.
The input of "brand" loyalists in this forum and elsewhere makes it abundantly clear that the magic, the box office draw, the suspense, the melodrama, the sensationalism, the headline grabbing ability, the aura of a "Champion" within this "brand" is in dire straits.
The conspicuous lack of mainstream press bangs the drum - - softly. Headlines that are earned - - not purchased.
Bob Backlund was and remains a great technical wrestler. However, to many paying customers he was a "hot dog without mustard." When the "office" found it could not morph him into a better box office draw, his reign was, necessarily, brought to blissful conclusion.
Bruno Sammartino was one of the greatest purist wrestlers I have ever seen in a ring. But keep in mind, he was anointed solely because of contemporary demographics that existed at that point in time. It came when the New York City telephone directories showed an immense Italian American population. The same thing happened, albeit Latino names, when it was decided to crown Pedro Morales.
Can this "brand" that is a focal point of friendly debate rise to that level? After all, licensees deserve justice. Paying customers deserve justice. The business deserves justice.
Will justice prevail?
The jury is out.