Does the WWE Roster Lack Ambition?
Live Feed
Bam Smack Pow
In the space of a week, two podcast interviews have developed a great deal of interest and controversy in the realm of professional wrestling. CM Punk’s appearance on Colt Cabana’s ‘The Art of Wrestling’ rocked the sport last week, when he claimed that WWE lacked creativity, business sense and risked the well-being of it’s athletes to an unreasonable extent. Holding nothing back, Punk ripped into the state of the company that caused him to lose his love for wrestling and re-evaluate his happiness in life. He painted a very negative picture of the manner in which WWE has exploited their monopoly over sports entertainment, and how he and other wrestlers suffered for it.
Only days later, following the broadcast of Monday’s RAW, Vince McMahon appeared on a live televised edition of the Stone Cold Steve Austin podcast. In this hour-plus interview, both reminisced about their chemistry and how that was the fire that lit up the Attitude Era and the Monday Night Wars. But, Austin also held little back in grilling McMahon on a number of issues, including the growth of the Network, Randy Savage, Jim Ross, and of course, CM Punk. To his credit, McMahon did not back down from any of these, and whilst some of his answers were short and sweet, he was willing to go into great detail on a number of key points regarding booking and the difficulties of running WWE.
WWE.com
However, one major point from both of these sensational interviews is the subject of this article. Most explicitly presented in McMahon’s appearance, he stated the following when questioned by Austin about the attitude of the roster:
“This is a different group of guys and gals, it’s millenials. They’re not as ambitious quite frankly, and they’re not trepidatious at all I just don’t think they necessarily want to reach for that brass ring. The last person who really reached for that brass ring in all likelihood was John Cena… nobody wants to fail, and there’s this feeling, this insecurity that if you fail, you’re exposed”
This was a rather damning statement towards the roster at this moment in time, outright saying that most within the WWE roster at this time are too scared to take their opportunities and run with it to the top. CM Punk inferred a similar situation, stating that only he and John Cena would openly challenge the creative direction and business acumen of booking decisions. He noted that so many people are wary of rocking the boat too much that they are thrown overboard with little alternatives out there. With WCW gone, TNA floundering and companies like ROH and AAA still in early stages of development, WWE is the only place wrestlers can perform with the promise of money and exposure.
WWE.com
So, with the opinions of Punk and McMahon open for the world to hear, it doesn’t present a spectacular view of the roster at present. McMahon sitting opposite one of the biggest stars in wrestling history in Austin emphasized the point, making one question which superstars currently in WWE would be granted such an honor in the future. If John Cena truly is the last person to reach out and clasp the metaphorical brass ring for his own, that means that nobody has done the same since at least 2005. That is almost a decade of nobody reaching the star power and prominence of a single superstar at the top. McMahon does state that newcomers like Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, Roman Reigns and Bray Wyatt are making a play for this task, but whose to say they will be different than those that came before?
Therefore, is there any truth in McMahon’s questioning of the ambition of the locker room? Well, his musings about the new platforms that the roster has to deal with now are likely important variables. The greater television coverage, internet rumors and social media open up superstars to the public more than ever before. Whilst that has positives in terms of their exposure and interaction with the audience, it also opens them up to abuse and being placed under a microscope. Mistakes are in the public eye more than ever before, and too many mistakes could destroy a career. The original Sin Cara is a case in point, where the worldwide display of his numerous botches halted his progression.
WWE.com
The lack of ambition might be somewhat true as well. In a roster packed with talented performers, charismatic talkers and unique gimmicks, it is difficult to stick out and become ‘the guy’. This could result in the majority of the roster becoming disillusioned in their position, and feeling comfortable in the mid-card as a cushy position. Superstars and divas might not push the boat out and stretch their limits for fear of failure or losing the crowd, and with it their safe place on the roster. If a superstar aspires to the main event and comes up short in that regard, it could start a downward spiral that they never recover from.
They’re not as ambitious quite frankly, and they’re not trepidatious at all I just don’t think they necessarily want to reach for that brass ring – Vince McMahon on the WWE roster
However, it seems harsh to pin all of the problems for superstars’ failures to progress as due to a lack of ambition. Although many legends of the business credit their rise to making the most of a sub-par gimmick and riding that wave to stardom, exactly how far can a character like Fandango be expected to rise? Does McMahon really think that the Bunny is going to remove his costume one night and receive a massive reaction? Whilst the boss would be unlikely to criticize the booking and creative input in favor of pinning most of the ‘blame’ on the lack of ambition of the roster, stating on numerous occasions that they are given bountiful opportunities to get the crowd invested in them.
But Punk did not have the same need to appease the creative team, suggesting they no very little about wrestling and don’t consider the long-term implications of the storylines they create. Cena, the last man to grab the brass ring, is the only superstar that seems to get any lengthy consideration of what he’s doing year on year, and the only other beneficiaries are whoever he feuds with. Outside of that, it does seem to be pretty clear that a number of superstars’ pushes have been derailed due to a lack of booking sense or direction.
WWE.com
Cesaro is a case in point that was explicitly brought up in the McMahon podcast. He was praised as a physical marvel with immense strength and in-ring prowess, but had issues with charisma and personality that detracted from his connection with the audience. McMahon even went so far as to suggest that he didn’t have ‘it’. But, one could equally argue the point that the creative team dropped the ball more than anything else. Cesaro was getting a lot of exposure in the months leading up to WrestleMania 30, and his subsequent victory in the Andre the Giant Battle Royal and alignment with Paul Heyman were met with thunderous reactions.
Yet, now he finds himself stuck in the mid-card with little hopes of recovery soon, currently in a tag team with Tyson Kidd. Is that due to a lack of ambition, or is it creative mismanagement? Perhaps more the latter than the former. Arguably, he became too complacent in agreeing to join up with Heyman, rather than present a case for himself considering the great babyface reactions he was receiving. Instead, he conformed to the concept presented to him, but that also is the fault of the creative team. They sided Cesaro with Heyman, but that relationship didn’t result in anything solid, as when Brock Lesnar returned for SummerSlam, Heyman moved away, showing they had no real idea of how this partnership would work long-term.
WWE.com
In the end, if McMahon is willing to point out the flaws in the drive of the roster but not those in the creative/booking departments, he is not only misinformed but is creating the conditions for a divide to spawn. Whilst he openly admitted to making mistakes, suggesting that as a booker he doesn’t have all the answers and a great deal rests on the performers themselves, if they are given garbage to work with they can’t be expected to produce a masterpiece every time. Is the fact that Lesnar was chosen to end the Undertaker’s streak due to lack of other realistic options a mark on the ambition of the superstars, or a creative failure to build these stars correctly? The answer must be somewhere in the middle.
Maybe the superstars should try to take advice from the likes of Cena, Austin and Triple H as to how a superstar challenges the hierarchy effectively without putting their job security on the line. But, as McMahon pointed out, this is a different time, and even he stated explicitly that they shouldn’t p*ss people off. Yet, names like Shawn Michaels, Austin and even Punk made their way into the main event by have the stones to challenge their creative direction and butt heads with those at the top. If that is no longer viewed as an acceptable means to push for the main event anymore, then how can superstars realistically grasp at the brass ring. If crowd reactions, merchandise sales and in-ring prowess aren’t enough, then what is?