For volume two, im chosing not two suck@ss wrestlers, but two suck@ss companies. WHO SUCKS WORSE?
WCW in 2000 vs modern day WWE
Give me good reasons for your answers please! Im not going to be bias,I will rate your answer based on elaboration. Good luck!
2006-08-09 20:04:35 · 12 answers · asked by HizardcoreMike 2 in Sports ➔ Wrestling
Modern WWE, it's been going downhill ever since it became "World Wrestling ENTERTAINMENT!!!". The WWF was cool because it was more based around the wrestling and less around the same, repetative storylines. Sure some wrestlers got more attention than others(Stone Cold, The Rock, the old DX) but at least the story changed each week, nowadays the story is always the same: blah blah blah, King Booker. Blah blah blah, John Cena. Blah blah blah, Lita's a slut. Blah blah blah blah blah, it's the same thing every week. I actually sent Vince McMahon and E-Mail asking him to get back to the glory days(haven't heard back yet, doubt he cared). If the WWE could get back to what it used to be, then it may be a little easier to watch, but until then I'll just stick to TNA.
2006-08-09 22:00:51 · answer #1 · answered by crazy8s622 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
WCW in 2000 is still much worse than WWE right now. Old WCW's Nitro's main event was always a dq and a runover by the NWO. Too repetitive. It worked for a few years but fans got tired of it. Wrestlers were a bunch of overpaid guys who are too old and washed up like Hulk Hogan, Macho Man, DDP and many others.
Modern day WWE doesn't have much competition these days so they don't really have to push the envelope like they used to against WCW. Many of the big time wrestlers are gone and pursued other interests just like the Rock, STONE COLD, Brock Lesnear and many others. They need to create wrestlers that could be as big as these guys and could bring in the ratings. A serious competition would be good too.
2006-08-09 21:20:09 · answer #2 · answered by tyrone b 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
WCW 2000...the storylines were weak (but then again, a lot of WWE's right now are too), but at least the quality of wrestling in WWE today is better than WCW circa 2000...most of the superstars back then didn't care about the product as long as they were pulling in paychecks, with a few exceptions (most of which survived the Invasion and are still with WWE today)...
2006-08-09 21:37:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
good question. i think wcw because none of the wrestlers who werent involved in the nWo storyline got a chance to do anything. Instead of watching very talented mid carders get their chance to shine we got to sit through Horace Hogan and Stevie Ray fight Konnan and somebody else from the WolfPac.
I think that the WWE right now is not as bad because you are seeing newer wrestlers (Lashley, CM Punk, Carlito) get a chance to show their skills and get decent tv time. Instead of having Triple H or Undertaker with the belts you have Edge (who never would have touched gold in WCW) and Booker T (who was a decent champ but not really used propperly) as your champs. If the WWE can continue to give new talent the chances they are getting now then I dont think that they will get to the point of WCW
2006-08-10 02:07:45 · answer #4 · answered by crippler5511 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i don't remeber wcw in 2000 that was 6 years ago i was like 13 then. so since i don't remember than i will tell you why vince mcmahon is like a vampire. vince mcmahon is like a vampire because he is sucking the life out of the wwe. all of these storylines that he has now. first its batista fueding with mark henry then it's batista and mr. kennedy now batista and lashley are fighting regal and finlay on smackdown this week. its confusing!!!! yes storylines are good but when you get too much of them at the same time it's just annoying. they should have some storylines but they should mostly have wrestling. because the wrestling matches is the only reason that i even watch wrestling. unlike most girls who only watch the wwe to see hot guys.
2006-08-09 20:24:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have to say present day WWE is worse. They're completely recycling everything, there are no new ideas or interesting stories that we haven't seen before.
WCW in 2000 was dying a horrible death, but at least Kevin Nash and Russo knew it and decided to have fun while it lasted. It had that same feel as the early days of the nWo, where you had to watch because you had no idea what could happen on any given week. In today's WWE there's no reason to watch because you know exactly what is going to happen.
2006-08-10 02:27:26 · answer #6 · answered by Steven S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WCW in 2000, based off the fact that WCW never tried to push new stars with the exception of goldberg, and possibly Benoit. It caught up to them in 2000 when the Hogans, and Savages were gone. It left them with a ball and noone to carry it. Atleast WWE is still trying to make new stars with Bobby Lashley, and hate to admit it John Cena.
2006-08-09 20:35:05 · answer #7 · answered by bundynomics 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't remember WCW much, I was like 8 in 2000. I would say WWE. They are trying to hard with the "sex sells" idea. Noone cares anymore!
2006-08-10 02:38:44 · answer #8 · answered by Teh Tommy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
honestly, it all depends on which incarnation of wwe you're talking about. wwe in general, raw, smackdown, or ecw? if general, i'd have to say wwe currently. but if against the individual brands:
raw vs. wcw- wcw. towards the end they started having better matches
smackdown vs. wcw- smackdown. taker's there.
ecw vs. wcw- ecw. more entertaining.
hope this helps...
2006-08-09 20:28:30 · answer #9 · answered by disturbed_since_2000 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
World steroid entertainment
2006-08-10 03:29:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋