Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

WWE: The Two Fanbases / Hot Crowds


Matt D

Recommended Posts

This could have gone in one of the preexisting notes but the Extreme Rules one has turned into Brock F5ing people off ladders and the other one is in the midst of an Ambrose/Reigns tag team title run.

 

I think it's big enough that we should break it out.

 

I think that WWE currently has two major fanbases.

 

1.) The smarky, ironic, insider crowd that lives and breathes this stuff, that travels to the big shows, that are situated in the Northeast and Chicago and a few other big cities (and the UK), that want to hijack events, that want what they consider to be high workrate matches, that love NXT, etc.

 

and

 

2.) Middle america, the kids, the ones who buy merchandise, who will freely boo Rusev because he's unamerican, who go to house shows and that follow wrestling heavily but not necessarily in a backstage sort of way.

 

It's not a casual/hardcore split. It's not even necessarily a smark/mark split since it's not like group 2 thinks it's real or anything. I think a lot of is urban/rural or geographically centered. I think there's some age component to it. The crowd for the Royal Rumble or the post-Raw is very different than a crowd for a Raw in Nebraska or Iowa or whatever. They're different crowds with different needs. That's not to say there aren't elements of both groups in any crowd but the balance shifts from show to show. Group #1 is more vocal online and their presence can strongly be felt in a show where they're a big part of but I don't know if, in total, Group 1 is bigger than Group 2.

 

I think part of the WWE's problem is that they have to appeal to both groups in order to achieve what they're trying to achieving.

 

One reason why Daniel Bryan was such a big deal was that he appealed to both groups. Maybe it's just that everyone loves chanting yes or that kids could get behind the bearded look and the explosiveness and the fact that they were small, so they could relate instead of just idol worshiping like they might have with Hogan or Warrior in years past. Maybe it's because everyone's felt held down at one point or another and that was very much the story that they were telling with Bryan. But he blew up as big as he did because he appealed to both groups. Even then, in front of certain crowds, he wasn't quite as over. These were Group 2 crowds.

 

I think group #2 not only buys what WWE is selling a lot of the time, but are, in fact, the audience for what they're selling. Their preference matches up with the sort of things WWE traditionally offers in the first place. To offer something else would be to leave them behind.

 

For years and years, wrestlers and creative team members and executives would publicly dismiss group #1 because they were just a vocal minority. I'm not entirely sure that's the case anymore, but I also don't think that group #2 can be wholly left behind either. I think Group #2 is affected a lot more by whether or not someone is booked strong, as a winner. I don't really think that group #1 cares. They're going to like who they like no matter what's presented on screen. Matches and outcomes can be booked to make them happy but if that's done without presenting a product that group #2 can get behind, they'll end up with apathy in front of certain crowds instead of boos.

 

So yeah, maybe I think that putting Reigns superstrong over Kane (in a near squash) after a month of Kane not getting a hell of a lot of heat on him and then pretty strong over Big Show after a month of Show not getting all that much heat on him (and Show is one of the most protected guys in the company over the last six months or so) is at least equally as important of having Reigns work long, more even matches with guys like Harper and Cesaro/Kidd. Now, if those latter guys were built up in a way that would make them seem more important to Group #2, then that'd be a more ideal solution, but the booking hasn't been there for that. On the other hand, no amount of booking is going to matter for Group #1 when it comes to someone they don't want to see. Show's the most protected guy in the company and he's the one who draws "Please Retire" chants from these guys.

 

I think there has to be something of a balance, but that's because I think a boring, dead crowd in Des Moines is as damaging as a completely hostile crowd in Philadelphia, maybe even more so. I just don't know where the balance is and what's most important. I do think that pandering to Group #1 and leaving Group #2 entirely behind isn't the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm stereotyping. Work with me. But also, doesn't that sort of fit what a Group #2 audience would want? Stars that feel like stars and are protected as such even though Sting isn't about to have a great match and Orton is fairly problematic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we've seen instances were guys on the post-Mania RAW (Fandango mainly) were given pushes after the show because of how they were over on that show and then bombed. It's definitely a fine line they have to tread and I wonder how promoters of the past would've handled today's climate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, maybe it's a regional thing, but never got the house show only brings in families talking point. The house shows I go to, everyone usually goes, from the so-called smart fans to local workers to local celebrities to families to people just wanting to see a show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm stereotyping. Work with me. But also, doesn't that sort of fit what a Group #2 audience would want? Stars that feel like stars and are protected as such even though Sting isn't about to have a great match and Orton is fairly problematic?

I'm just being a ball buster with the Des Moines thing.

 

I agree that it's a possibility the crowd was hot for Sting and Orton because of what you said though. This is actually something I'm going to pay more attention to now that it has been brought up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Group No. 1 wants to feel that same raw passion and emotion that Group No. 2 gets when watching wrestling. They get that feeling when seeing guys like Bryan, then get pissed when Bryan is pushed down the card for no logical reason.

 

Group No. 1 will always love and watch wrestling, even if all they do is bitch about it. That's why WWE can get away with mocking Group No. 1 and continue to give more of the spotlight to guys who appeal more to Group No. 2.

 

WWE doesn't have to worry that much about losing Group No. 1. They're lifers. What WWE has to worry about is hooking Group No. 2 enough so that when they graduate to Group No. 1, they continue to watch and invest in the product, even if all they do is bitch about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get why crowds can be so much quieter in non-smart cities than smart cities. If you're a crowd full of "less-hardcore" fans, wouldn't you expect them to eat up the product more and react more how WWE expects them to? Rather than sit on their hands?

 

In theory RAW crowds everywhere should be more enthusaistic. With their nationwide touring, to any town pretty much ever RAW is as special an occasion as the post-WM RAW. It should be a pretty big deal to go and the crowd should be enthused like the post-WM crowd is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the core-periphery model that geographers use is one that can easily be applied to modern fandom, accept I think they have two cores and those two cores are the ones outlined by Matt. In that sense I suppose you could argue that the WWE is kind of like Australia with it's East Coast traditional core (arguably the "family" base in the WWE scenario) and the "newer" West Coast core that has historically been centered around mining interest in and around Perth (this would be the "smart" fan core, that has historically been centered around more intensive and modern forms of fandom like tape trading, net culture, et.). The issue of two cores provides a challenge because the periphery matters big time as well, but it's hard to even address the periphery when the two cores can't agree on important things and/or are in competition with one another. This is especially complicated because the new standard for full integration isn't "who buys merch and goes to shows," it's "who is a member of the Network?"

 

I think Matt is right about Bryan in that he appealed to both core's. He was a legitimate shot at getting both core's on the same page, and while that will never completely happen, I think the internet is rapidly changing the game on that front and eventually they will be close to getting there. The problem is what sort of state will the company be in as it regards new stars and talent when that point comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an idea I kicked around in my head for a while and I think it fits in this thread, so I'll bring it up. And I think that while Matt is obviously generalizing, there are some truths to what he's describing. Anyhow, I wonder if 'infectious booking' as I've dubbed it in my mind, is the way to go. In most places, we see that a small group of fans can hijack a crowd or turn it in another direction. This is super common in NYC, Toronto, Chicago, Philly, etc., and less so elsewhere, but I think you're getting it across the US at this point. The WWE might be better suited trying to appeal to this vocal minority, realistically I think that means playing them/working them in the direction they want, then use their vocal nature to get the rest of the crowd to follow around. I don't mean to say that the WWE should book solely to appeal to smart fans, but rather they can try to harness the vocalness of fanbase 1 to drag up fanbase 2's interest. Easier said than done, but I think guys coming up from NXT can be a show of this if they don't keep getting the Dunn-Vince treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it that makes a city/town/area consistently hot in terms of crowd reaction? Territories and towns historically have gotten hot and peaked in attendance from time to time thanks to great booking and promotion, like JYD in New Orleans, but I don't think New Orleans generally carries the reputation of being a hot crowd nowadays. Chicago, on the other hand, is consistently regarded by wrestlers and fans alike as being arguably the most vocal crowd in the US, but why is this? Part of it is the layout of the Allstate Arena, which all things considered is pretty small and leaves everyone right on top of the action compared to say the United Center, which is like a half an hour away (God and traffic willing). Osaka has the same reputation, but I've never heard of the Bodymaker Coliseum being a building renown for its acoustics, but maybe it is. So, my question is this: what makes some crowds so consistently hot, while fans in other towns range from hit-and-miss to sitting-on-their-hands and silent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it that makes a city/town/area consistently hot in terms of crowd reaction? Territories and towns historically have gotten hot and peaked in attendance from time to time thanks to great booking and promotion, like JYD in New Orleans, but I don't think New Orleans generally carries the reputation of being a hot crowd nowadays. Chicago, on the other hand, is consistently regarded by wrestlers and fans alike as being arguably the most vocal crowd in the US, but why is this? Part of it is the layout of the Allstate Arena, which all things considered is pretty small and leaves everyone right on top of the action compared to say the United Center, which is like a half an hour away (God and traffic willing). Osaka has the same reputation, but I've never heard of the Bodymaker Coliseum being a building renown for its acoustics, but maybe it is. So, my question is this: what makes some crowds so consistently hot, while fans in other towns range from hit-and-miss to sitting-on-their-hands and silent?

A lot of it has to with history of great cards and a lack of bad booking their town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll probably find out how alive/dead Chicago is for now based on the Extreme Rules crowd next month. I sorta see what you're saying, Grimmas, but there are also towns with great wrestling history, like Baltimore comes to mind, where the WWE went there recently and the crowds were nothing special or downright bad. Not even talking attendance, really, though that has to play a part, but crowd noise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WWE dominates english language wrestling fans to the point that it's impossible to say their audience are purely WWE fans.

 

They've been forced to accept non WWE fans as part of the audience, and vice versa. It's been interesting, to say the least.

 

I think the "vocal minority" (ie: the audience movement behind Bryan) is driven by the outward effects of kayfabe's death.. well, it's sort of a theory.

 

Depends on how you define kayfabe.. but I've always viewed it as the contract between wrestlers and fans. The "death" of the contract has been a subtle under current to much dis content and criticism.

 

I tend to think of this part of the fan base as New Tradionalist, more than Smarks or any such term.

 

Anyways, theoretical. Would be interested if anyone has additional thoughts..

 

Even if it's "Yr frickin crazy, bub" 😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...