CALDWELL'S TAKE CORNER CUBE FRIDAY 3/14: A day of hype - TNA vs. ROH hype last night Mar 14, 2008 - 10:51:43 AM

CLICK FOR BIO

Email This Article - Contact Us - VIP Sign-Up - Back to Home Page

|

Updated throughout the day from the corner cubicle, Torch columnist James Caldwell's weekday blog focuses on hot topic current events and other items of interest from around wrestling.

Updated Friday, March 14, 2008

When I look at the hype that was necessary for the two wrestling shows I watched last night - Impact and ROH's PPV - there are some basic conclusions to draw on keeping the viewer's attention versus getting their attention in the first place.

Last night, TNA attempted to keep the viewer's attention by hyping a "bombshell" announcement from Karen Angle throughout the show. With viewers having a short attention span, TNA has the weekly assignment of keeping viewers tuned in through the cartoon gimmicks, decent-to-good wrestling, and other assorted TNA "stuff" we all know and love.

But, when it came time for this week's big storyline twist, it was a major letdown. Karen asking for a separation might play into storylines down the road after Kurt called Karen's bluff, but based on the hype for this week, the announcement didn't work.

We live in 2008 where "bombshell announcement" goes something along the lines of Karen is pregnant with A.J.'s love child. Asking for a separation? C'mon, that's far too tame for the TV audience in 2008. It was an example of going for a short-term payoff of a minimal ratings spike, while not paying attention to long-term implications.

In the long-term, fans aren't going to take TNA seriously the next time they offer an outlandish hook for the show. TNA is the company that cries wolf, and going forward, they'll be dependent on TNA fans having a severe case of short-term memory loss for the next "hook" on the free TV show.

Sure, we'll all forget about this in a few weeks because pro wrestling shows move so quickly from storyline to storyline, but every little bit of hype that doesn't deliver is a strike against the company. Not only for the free show, but also for the PPVs. Every time they fall below expectations on free TV, they plant the wrong seed in viewer's minds that TNA must not be able to deliver on the pay show as well.

With ROH, the key is getting the customer to spend money. That's been the difficult part for ROH thus far in the PPV era, as marketing to the Internet can only take a company so far. There is a cap on dollars available from online wrestling fans.

That plays into ROH marketing to sophisticated wrestling fans. They aren't appealing to a diverse audience like WWE and TNA, so they can do more subtle things with their marketing to get people interested in the PPV product. But, subtlety is difficult to translate into dollars in 2008.

We live in a crazy world where people are inundated with so much information where Average Joe wants to be told what to think or what to believe. ROH doesn't buy into that. They would rather have the viewer discover the product on their own, rather than being smacked over the head with huge hype. There are drawbacks to that approach in the short-term, but helps build a loyal fanbase over time.

Looking at the actual PPV main event of Aries vs. Nigel, I questioned why there wasn't a pre-match video or promo from the competitors to build up the importance of the match. After digesting the show, I realized it was unnecessary.

There were subtle things on the PPV that had the same effect of a major hype video without ROH needing to hit viewers over the head promoting the match. For instance, Nigel vs. Aries was the only match that received full ring introductions. Most of the other matches were joined in progress or started very abruptly. When Nigel vs. Aries started, you knew it was important. No hype was needed on the actual show.

ROH can experiment with subtlety on the PPVs because they have a captive audience with people already plopping down $10 or $15. And, when ROH delivers on the hype and allows the viewer to experience the product, it builds long-term goodwill with the audience.

Because ROH is going after a sophisticated fan, their available market is limited. But, that audience will also be loyal as long as ROH delivers on each PPV.

TNA is still looking for a loyal fanbase that won't just show up for the free TV show, but will pay for the product on PPV. Continuing to strike out on the free TV hype won't help TNA in the long-term. On the other hand, ROH isn't going to realize overnight success with their marketing approach, but I believe their approach of letting the show hype itself is sustainable over time.

***

Today, I'll have two blog entries on hype in pro wrestling. It's certainly of the most important elements of creating a stand-out product that draws people to invest time and/or money in wrestling. Later today, I'll look at the difference in hype between last night TNA's Impact and the ROH PPV that I watched last night. There are very stark differences in TV hype (retaining the viewer) vs. PPV hype (drawing the viewer to the product), and I'll be looking at how each company executed their respective hype.

First, though, Jason Powell at ProWrestling.Net is running a poll on which of the big four WrestleMania matches has received the worst hype thus far. The choices are Orton vs. Hunter vs. Cena, Undertaker vs. Edge, Michaels vs. Flair, and Mayweather vs. Big Show.

After the March 3 Raw, I would have said Mayweather vs. Big Show based on their promo exchange debacle, but WWE clearly rebounded with that program on March 10. I haven't been thrilled with Raw's three-way hype, as I believe they've given away too much in the ring to water down the match. Michaels vs. Flair has been the most consistent by hitting the right notes on Raw each week, especially last Monday.

Which leaves Edge vs. Taker as receiving the worst hype of the Big Four. Is it a huge problem? Not really, but it's important for evaluating the perception of the Smackdown brand. First of all, anytime Undertaker makes an in-ring appearance to wrestle a lesser opponent, it diminishes the "special attraction" value inherent to his character. It's best to keep him fresh in the eyes of viewers by limiting his in-ring appearances on free TV.

I understand trying to establish his triangle choke, but a state-of-the-art video package hyping that move would be far more effective than WWE booking Taker for a five-minute match against a lesser opponent that very, very slowly builds to that move as the submission finish.

The second reason for the weak hype is based on what was presented on the three-hour Raw. The casket match played into the first factor of devaluing Taker's drawing power. It was an OK match, but it cut into Taker's "special attraction" status and didn't get anyone excited for Edge vs. Taker. Then, Edge wrestled C.M. Punk later in the show in a four-minute filler match. Taker was nowhere to be found and Edge didn't come across very important in the context of the show.

Related to the actual hype on Smackdown, I don't see a tangible issue is between them. Sure, Edge is trying to end The Streak, but the hype is missing a real punch because the focus seems to be more on Edge and Vickie's relationship, which gives viewers the impression that his character isn't concerned about the match. If he doesn't appear to be concerned, then why should viewers be concerned?

Granted, WrestleMania isn't a one-match show, but it would be nice for the Smackdown brand to have a decent presence on the biggest show of the year to keep the brand strong for the other 364 days in the year, especially with a new TV situation coming up this fall. It will be interesting to see how the hype progresses on Smackdown tonight, with only two weeks until WrestleMania.

***

Updated Thursday, March 13, 2008

I've received some quality emails this week on the Jeff Hardy suspension topic I've written about the last two days. It's a very important topic, as it touches on several factors that serious pro wrestling fans deal with on a show-by-show basis. We want to see Jeff Hardy on TV, but at what expense? Can we enjoy watching wrestling when it's evident many wrestlers are living with constant pain in order to provide entertainment? I'd like to think we can ask the tough questions of how another trashcan shot to the head is going to affect Tommy Dreamer in the long-term.

It's a very serious topic that casual viewers aren't thinking about. Two weeks from now, 95 percent of the audience will forget about Jeff Hardy (if he's actually taken off TV during his suspension). When he's forgotten, will his bodily sacrifices be worth it?

In a "what have you done for me lately?" society, wrestlers pay a very real price. Often times, the juice (that adrenaline rush of performing in front of a crowd) isn't worth the squeeze (the constant pain that is the price of performing).

I want to present one piece of feedback on the topic of whether there is a double standard for how Jeff Hardy's suspension is being viewed compared to someone like Chris Masters. Torch reader Rob S. wrote: I wouldn't call it a double standard but more of a case by case standard. I just think that potential value to the company as well as the company's investment in a wrestler comes into play.

Jeff Hardy is not only a great wrestler but also an established one. I'm just saying it might buy him one more chance than a Joey Mercury or a Chris Masters. I think that's just business. Would the Yankees give Derek Jeter more chances than a rookie minor leaguer? I think so. At the same time I do think those chances are limited. They should offer Jeff help cleaning up his act. If he agrees and goes into rehab then give him another chance, otherwise I think they have to let him go. If he does return and falls off the wagon again then release him immediately.

JC: Rob brings up a good point about the potential value to the company. I believe at one time, Masters would have had more value to the company than Hardy, who took a while to re-build confidence with WWE management. That seems impossible in 2008, but WWE invested a considerable amount of TV time into Masters until he became the butt of Triple H's jokes. But, in 2008, Hardy is worlds more valuable than Masters, which affords him another chance if WWE doesn't outright release him during the 60 day suspension. WWE is a company before a charity, so it's understandable to give Hardy another chance, if Hardy is healthy.

Also, context to Chris Masters's firing is important. In November 2007, Congress was paying attention to and looking into pro wrestling following the Chris Benoit murders when WWE suspended Masters for 60 days, then released him. WWE used Masters to show they were serious about the policy. In March 2008, WWE could be using Hardy to set an example that they're not going to shy away from suspending a top star right before WrestleMania.

Hardy is a big enough star to make it look good in a press release, but it's not like Hardy was booked for a headline match. Rather, he was scheduled for a match where there will be five-to-seven other wrestlers to carry the action. WWE could afford the loss of Hardy for one PPV to "make an example" out of a fairly big star to promote their Wellness Policy.

In other words, WWE isn't completely altruistic here. Sure, there is real concern over Hardy's health and it's not like WWE randomly looked at the roster and decided to make an example out of Hardy - there had to be a violation before WWE could suspend him. But, the Wellness policy is almost being used as a means to an end.

The end game is trying to avoid government involvement in WWE's business by creating the perception that they are serious about cleaning up the company. Meanwhile, the wrestlers continue to be pawns in WWE's game of chess. Corporations play political games all the time to create goodwill with government regulator, stockholders, and clients. In this case, it just so happens to involve the health of WWE's wrestlers.

***

Updated Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Hardy Suspension Day 2. After reading several of your emails and reading various opinions on Jeff Hardy's 60-day suspension announced yesterday, I'm seeing two over-riding themes. One theme is people feeling sorry for Jeff Hardy. Some of that is the carry-over from Hardymania leading to the Royal Rumble, as well as people seeing him rebound in life and in his career after his first WWE stint ended in a total mess.

The second theme is people believing there is a double standard with Hardy's suspension being treated with soft hands. I agree with the double standard sentiment, which ironically, was helped along by the Hardymania that I admittedly contributed to.

At the time, I felt Hardy had a chance to be a special WWE champion, who they could build the Raw brand around. It wasn't until a week after the Rumble where I asked the tough questions on Hardy's health issues to see that WWE made the right call not going with Hardy as champion.

The evidence used for the double standard theory relates to Chris Masters, who was suspended for 60 days in November 2007 after a second Wellness violation. He was subsequently released a week later, and the overwhelming sentiment from fans was good riddance. When Hardy's 60-day suspension was announced yesterday, the reaction was quite the opposite.

There are a few other reasons for the second theme of a double standard. It relates to the in-ring style and push of Hardy vs. Masters. The vast majority of fans enjoy watching Hardy wrestle, and they felt like they were part of something special with his main event push. As a result, there's selfishness in play with people wanting to see Jeff perform, even if his physical well-being is at stake.

Masters, on the other hand, always carried the stigma of being an uncoordinated musclehead who WWE kept force-feeding on TV. He represented the entire group of big wrestlers who carried the perception that they couldn't wrestle, and were only on TV due to their size. When Masters was released from WWE, it was considered a victory for fans who have no desire to see larger-than-life muscleheads on their TV.

Another factor is steroids vs. pain pills. Whether or not Hardy violated the policy due to prescription drug abuse is not known at this time. But, the perception is that he's in that category, while Masters carried the perception of being a steroids user. Society has created this idea that pill-popping is considered the lesser of two evils, with steroid use being considered the worst possible offense. Never mind that a wrestler high on pills is probably more dangerous to his fellow wrestler in the ring than a wrestler jacked to the gills on steroids.

Looking at whether there is a double-standard will hopefully give us pause next time Hardymania ensues for other wrestlers. It's easy to get caught up in pro wrestling storylines, especially when the storytelling is well done and creates an easy suspension of disbelief.

We just need to remember that whether or not we like or dislike a wrestler shouldn't be a determining factor when evaluating a wrestler's health or well-being. If Jeff Hardy misses WrestleMania to get treatment, we shouldn't be upset.

If Hardy gets treatment as part of the Wellness violation, we should be glad he is getting help to ensure his personal well-being. Not for selfish reasons with the idea in mind that he can generate future entertainment by putting his body at risk again. But, for the reason that Hardy can maintain a sustainable, healthy lifestyle that's not dependent on drugs to make it from the bed to the sink every morning.

***

Updated Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Jeff Hardy suspension. Unfortunately, we should have seen this one coming, as Sean Radican wrote this morning. It also shows that WWE made the right call at the Royal Rumble of picking Cena over Hardy as the top babyface going into WrestleMania.

Remember the interviews Jeff Hardy did before the Royal Rumble, especially where he talked about how banged up he was with Kevin Eck of the Baltimore Sun? Torn up ankles. Herniated discs in his back. Bone chips in his elbow.

Right now, we don't know what drugs showed up on Hardy's Wellness test that drew a violation of the policy. But, I believe it's a fair conclusion that he hasn't been fighting the pain with two Advils and a glass of water.

As I wrote in the Torch Newsletter a few weeks after the Rumble - after the disappointment of Hardy not winning the WWE Title subsided - Hardy doesn't have a good track record. He hasn't gone through the stress of being WWE champion, which could have compounded his injuries and risked more health problems. Certainly, Hardy had been rebuilding his reputation in his second WWE run, but someone like Cena has been a model citizen since the day they gave him the ball and told him to run.

I hope that Hardy will be able to recover, WWE will get him whatever help he needs, and both sides will re-evaluate Hardy's injuries to see if he needs more than 60 days to take care of his body. We should pause when more information comes out about this story to remember priorities. A wrestler's health and well-being should always take precedence over any entertainment he generates for the fans with his body.

Big Show vs. Mayweather. I think the funniest thing about the build-up to Show vs. Mayweather isn't the imaginary $20 million figure or Mayweather's storyline injury last night. It's that we don't even know what the match is.

WWE is basically asking people to pay $50 for the WrestleMania PPV to find out what they paid for. It would be like going to the store and buying a TV, but not being told ahead of time what features are on TV. Sure, you know you're buying a TV, just like you're ordering Mania for a "match" between Show vs. Mayweather. But, people aren't going to find out what they bought until WWE has their money.

Based on the intriguing build-up for Mayweather vs. Show, many mainstream reporters have slowly stuck their nose in the story to first, mock the whole thing so they ensure their pretty reputation isn't soiled by spending a second covering wrestling, and second, speculate on exactly how the match is going down. I'm sure it's frustrating for reporters who aren't aware how the pro wrestling hype machine works to know exactly what they're supposed to be covering. Or even speculating on.

Not explaining what type of match will commence between Show and Mayweather is all part of WWE's sales pitch for WrestleMania. They've got a salesman with a quick wit and fast tongue straight from the carnival trying to sell you the TV out of a blank cardboard box. They're banking on your trust that the TV will work to your expectations once they have your money. Oh yeah, refunds not available.

Comment on this Article Below

(CLICK FOR COMMENTS RULES OR TO REPORT ABUSE)

(CLICK FOR COMMENTS RULES OR TO REPORT ABUSE)

ALSO DISCUSS MORE SUBJECTS IN OUR PWTORCH FREE FORUM

For more BREAKING NEWS on WWE, TNA!
VISIT OUR AFFILIATE - PROWRESTLING.NET

For UFC NEWS & BLOGS:
VISIT OUR SISTER SITE - MMATORCH.COM

Upgrade to PWTORCH VIP: DETAILS & SIGN-UP INFO

(c) 1999-2009 TDH Communications Inc. - All rights reserved.