Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Where is the Board of Directors?

Who's in charge, and why?
Photo by WWE
By Chad Smart
@chadsmart & @my123cents on Twitter

In my last blog, I wrote about how I couldn’t really get into the Daniel Bryan/Randy Orton feud due to the way Daniel Bryan was being presented and the WWE track record over the past few years in regards to pushing new talent. After last night’s RAW, there’s a new reason I am not interested in the story being told. That reason is one we’ve often complained about here at My 1-2-3 Cents, the lack of attention to detail.

It wasn’t but about two years ago when Triple H, then a face, was relieved of his title of COO because the WWE Superstars were claiming an unsafe work environment due to Mark Henry running wild on anyone he felt. During this time, I believe Vince McMahon also had his power stripped and the Board of Directors stepped in to, well, I honestly don’t remember because I got tired of Evil Management/General Manager storylines ten years ago and think they need to never be used for at least 20 years.

Steph vs. Dusty Rhodes
Photo by WWE
The point I’m trying to make is recently the WWE Board of Directors removed Triple H from power due to problems perceived by the wrestlers. Why then, after three weeks of Triple H and Stephanie McMahon belittling talent, ordering wrestlers to attack “innocent” people and all around evilness, hasn’t the Board stepped in to remove Hunter and Steph from power and put Booker T in charge so he’ll at least have a logical reason to be hanging around backstage? 

Dancin' Homer
I’m not asking for Chikara level of detail where something trivial happens one week and you find out five years later the reasoning, but is it too much to ask for some continuity in the WWE Universe?  Or should we as fans look at WWE more in terms of a cartoon than a serialized show? How many jobs has Homer Simpson held, yet each week he’s still employed by the Power Plant and no one questions why he isn’t a boxer, mascot, astronaut, baby proofer, imitation Krusty, truck driver, hippie, plow driver, food critic, conceptual artist, grease salesman, carny, mayor, grifter, body guard for the mayor, country western manager, garbage commissioner, mountain climber, farmer, inventor, Smithers, Poochie, celebrity assistant, fortune cookie writer, beer baron, Kwik-E-Mart jerk, homophobe, or missionary anymore. Should we just accept that on a weekly basis, WWE will tell whatever story they feel like telling at this moment in time and it has little to nothing to do with any previous story that’s been told? 

Maybe if I can change my way of thinking regarding WWE programming, I will be able to enjoy the show more because the actual wrestling parts have been really good lately. If I can’t get past the bad storytelling, at least I can still be entertained by NXT.  

No comments:

Post a Comment