Thread 19238217

Did WCW have a different style to WWE like AEW does now?

Yes.

No.

>>19238217 (OP)
AEW's style is "everything WWE does wrong but even worse".

>>19238217 (OP)
Most of the time yeah

>>19238217 (OP)
Yeah it kind of did, ESPECIALLY earlier on
Bit slower, more holds

>>19238217 (OP)
Yes, WCW's was better, but both WWF and WCW still understood the point of what a weekly TV match was and what they were supposed to accomplish better than WWE and AEW do now.

>>19238277
It did, it was more based around the southern style of pro wrestling . WWE didn’t create babyface versus heels but nowadays Dave will try and act like they did .

>>19238299
>WWE didn’t create babyface versus heels but nowadays Dave will try and act like they did
I hate when modern smarks in general use "you've been conditioned by WWE/brainwashed by Vince" or whatever when you expect basic fundamental stuff that's been in wrestling since it was at county fairs and exists for a reason.

>>19238293
You can pick any throwaway Beautiful Bobby TV match from the early 90s on YouTube and it'll probably be better than anything you'll see on TV this week

>>19238217 (OP)
Yes and in a lot of the same ways. The PPVs were where it showed most. Fed shows were built around high spots and scripted storytelling while WCW was very much a in ring showcase where the talent made calls on putting on a match except for the inevitable blue balling booking with endless run in garbage finishes.

>>19238217 (OP)
It's more that WWF had a different style than WCW, if that makes sense.
WCW had its roots in traditional southern pro-wrestling. WWF embraced a more "show" oriented style. It gained prominence by basically forcing other companies in the territories out of business through a variety of anti-competitive and unethical tactics. A lot of the guys who ran those territories ended up with Jim Crockett Productions, which later got bought by Ted Turner and became WCW.
As a result, WCW reflected traditional pro-wrestling. While WWF leaned into a sort of "cartoony-ness" at the time, WCW presented itself as being an actual sport full of over-the-top characters. It felt more "real" without going overboard into workrate mark territory, if that makes sense.
A lot of the booking was shit (run-ins galore) but the stories were fun at its prime and WWF was hot dogshit until Austin really started going.

>>19238561
100% accurate

>>19238483
Somebody posted a random Booker T vs. La Parka TV match a few weeks ago and it's insane how much worse wrestling is now on a logical level. Smark bullshit won out in the 2010s and now every TV match is 12+ minutes and full of the same tope suicidas and 2 commercial breaks as opposed to a good 5ish minute match where everything has a purpose.

>>19238827
I'm not even shitting on modern wrestling. The early 90s WCW roster was just GOATed. They didn't even know how good they had it back then which is why Austin and Foley left

>>19238561
WCW sadly did go through cartoon phases. First with Jim Herd trying to copy Vince's gimmicky shit in 1991, and again trying to recreate 80's WWF with Hogan in 1995. They always got in their own way and never realized that their Southern fans just really wanted to see good wrestling.

>>19238827
>as opposed to a good 5ish minute match where everything has a purpose
And if you have a bigger roster, you'd want to have shorter matches to get as many guys in as possible. Does Raw or Smackdown even do those short matches to showcase their roster anymore?