As a Puro watcher, let me elaborate, from my point of view.
When you see and really get into Puro, you'll understand exactly why stuff like WWE today is so god awfully bad.
First off, the storytelling in Puro is very layered. On the surface, you see Tanahashi working on Okada's arm because that's the limb he's targeting for the match. But below that, you know its because Okada needs that arm to hit the Rainmaker, and if he can't use it, he's at a big disadvantage. Its practical, but logical. And they go all out to target that weakness or specific area, which makes complete sense. If a guy has an injured leg, why wouldn't you exploit it as much and believably as you could? Quite honestly, I RARELY see that in WWE. It so often just feels like two guys just hitting moves back and forth with no real rhyme or reason. I know that people loved Bray vs Bryan at the Rumble but I couldn't really get into it overall for this reason. Bray would have the advantage, then Bryan would come back, then repeat until Bray wins. In good Puro, it makes a million times more sense what they're doing. And of course, the guys actually SELL what's happened to them. When Okada hit the Rainmaker, his arm was in so much pain that he couldn't go for the pin right away, allowing Tanahashi time to recuperate and be able to kick out of it when Okada finally did try for a pin half a minute later. That makes total sense. If your leg hurts, limp. It makes it more real. This is aside from the fact that the Japanese are renowned for working stiffly, which makes it all seem infinitely more believable.
Second, the commentary. I know people feel they need commentary, but I love the Japanese commentary without understanding 99% of it. When Shinpei Nogami is going crazy screaming BOMA YE or LARIATOH, it feels like what's going on is a big deal because he makes it a big deal. He sounds genuinely excited by what's going on. By that alone, I get more excited and into the match. Contrast that to Michael Cole and his disgusting, disingenuous OH MY. I feel ill even comparing the two.
Third, the in ring. Puro doesn't put idiotic restrictions on a guy's move set. For some reason in WWE they do, which I hate. There's also the fact that once in a WHILE someone will kick out of a finisher, as opposed to Cena/Rock where nobody expects the match to end unless Cena kicks out of 3 Rock Bottoms and a People's Elbow. I find it embarrassingly lazy when guys have to resort to finisher spamming and kick outs to build tension in a match.
Fourth, and this is an extension of #1, is the callbacks. Puro is famous for linking long standing feuds together with nods back to previous matches. Its a really nice touch to link everything together. OK, Kawada is murdering Kobashi's leg because previously, Kobashi did that to Kawada's leg, so Kawada is getting his revenge. Simple, yet it shows that they care about tying up that little part of the story. It makes them seem so much more competent as in ring and overall storytellers. I can count maybe a couple times when WWE has done something like that and it makes their stories feel so much more scripted.
These little things are really what bother me about WWE. Let's look back at one of Puro's most famous matches-Kobashi/Misawa vs Kawada/Taue on June 9th, 1995. GOAT tag match, bar none. At the time, Misawa and Kawada were in the middle of a really bitter feud that had been going on for a while. So to keep them apart, Taue and Kobashi start the match for their teams. Then Kawada tags in. He and Kobashi exchange blows and Kobashi reverses an Irish Whip into the ropes. Kawada responds by running at Misawa and kicking him in the face and knocking him off the apron. Why is this significant? It was a cheap shot, and logically, you'd expect something like that from Kawada (a heel) against beloved babyface Misawa. Not only is it heel tactics, but these two were in a major feud. Its natural for them to try and get at each other to fight. So what happens? Misawa gets back on the apron, shakes the cobwebs loose and tells Kobashi to tag him in. The audience goes OOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH at the prospect of these two enemies just stepping into the ring with each other.
Now, contrast such an interaction with the Rock/Cena feud. WM28 match. This feud has been brewing for a year plus at this point. What's the first thing these two mortal enemies do? Lock up. What the hell sense does that make? That's how any other Superstars match starts. Its also not how mortal enemies behave. I was expecting something more like Shibata/Ishii that Pyro mentioned where they come out of the corners and start swinging for the fences. Two guys who hate each other would logically want to beat the other to a pulp, so they should act like it. Locking up doesn't say blood feud, it says "just another wrestling match." If I'm fighting a guy I despite and who has talked **** about me for over a year, I'm not going to lock up with him. I'm going to try and break his face at first chance. It makes the feud feel real, like Misawa/Kawada. That felt intensely personal because the first chance they got, they were trying to beat the crap out of one another, like real enemies would. Rock/Cena felt scripted to the gills. That's just an example of what I mean.
There's also the slap and chop fights that a lot of people don't really get. This is absolutely the best explanation for it I've ever seen (credit goes to Woolcock)
Quote:
Someone like Kawada will do a strike exchange early but either decisively win or lose the exchange to establish the hierarchy, e.g if Kawada is the veteran he might obliterate the younger opponent with a kick to establish the kid can't match him strike for strike. Then Kawada will progressively give more to the opponent, and by the end you'll see the youngster flooring Kawada and you can believeably see Kawada losing because he's gradually relinquished control and the tone of the match has shifted. Nowadays you get repeated elbow, forearm and slap exchanges but very few guys (bar Ishii) use them to communicate a theme: i.e one wrestler proves dominant initially. Instead guys just seem to hit each other and then move onto the next sequence and it just irritates me and takes me out of a match.
Consequently back in the 90s you'd have strikes exchanged but the best wrestlers utilised them in a way that communicated a story that added to the match and built to a moment later in the match where one wrestler would finally win an exchange. They're like a match within the match. Meta, if you will. Its one of those tools that helps convey the story. Its not that WWE needs to utilize this, but for some reason they rebel against certain techniques in ring because "that's not how you properly work." Honestly, I don't even think casual fans would understand the point of it.
Essentially, it boils down to the fact that Puro makes so much more sense to me, as a wrestling fan. What they do, I look at and say to myself "that is completely logical, I can see that actually happening and in the context of the story, I understand why they did that perfectly." In WWE, I rarely say that. Its just guys hitting the moves that the WWE has allotted them and once in a blue moon does it ever mean something, or is it used to convey an overall greater meaning. What happens in ring has to mean something and help tell the story, and I find the WWE in ring stories not only formulaic, but boring. Aside from the truly great matches like Austin/Bret, they mean little to me anymore. Its just WWE Generic Story #3 told between (Insert Wrestlers X and Y).
Yes. 
