The Author of this article is right on the money:
Title: Why WWE's TV product must change - back to the basics or complete TV drama
Author: Ben Tucker, PWTorch TV specialist
Vince McMahon, for as much as he has tried to shy away from the concept of "wrasslin'," is still clinging on to its roots more than he even knows. Because right now, amidst a sea of lifeless mid-card "feuds" and main events supported by mediocre writing, WWE is working without a true identity of what it wants to be. And that's an issue, because the company has two options for its future that it needs to choose between.
A typical debate may revolve around whether or not they should follow the context of the old days of wrestling and feature talents in simple stories, focusing more on the sports aspect of "sports entertainment." Make the titles the sole focus of the promotion, other than the typical "blood feud," and don't fill the whole time slot of television with promo after promo.
The other option is the one that some in WWE and in USA Network's office probably secretly desire - turning the WWE into a full-on television drama. Go all the way in creating a cinematic feel for the show by focus increasingly more on the stories and drama outside the ring with a full theme for each episode and a conflict that is resolved by the end.
Backstage segments would be shot in multiple different cinematic angles like a typical drama and would delve into the actual goals and motivations for each wrestler, while the actual action in the ring would be reduced to maybe two or three matches per show. Essentially, make WWE compete more with programs like "Game of Thrones," only in front of a live audience.
But for years Vince McMahon himself has prevented WWE from turning into the program that he wants, relying on incompetent scripts for shows and a program model that does not hold up in 2013.
Everything in life changes. Even the most solitary rock in the world is slowly being chipped away at by nature until it is nothing. The same holds true for stories - everything is changing, all the time. Those who are unflinching in their beliefs and attitude change as well - they get worse. The more they're affected by external factors, the more resolute and opposed they are to the change around them, holding tighter and tighter to their beliefs.
The longer that WWE writers cling to the unchanging John Cenas and Randy Ortons, the worse the product going to get.
The main event players in WWE do not change. There's occasionally a C.M. Punk who will evolve his character over a long period of time. But, more likely than not, we will see John Cena doing the exact same two promos (the "poopy joke" promo or the "passionate and taking names" promo) while he touts the exact same mantras and wrestles the exact same style. Randy Orton will continue to slither down to the ring and pretend to be a psychopath who has no care for his opponents. Big Show will continue to switch between smiling babyface and easily angered heel. WWE tries to circumvent the problems of lacking character development by turning a wrestler face or heel, but that only works to such an extent without an actual arc (just ask The Miz or Alberto Del Rio when they turned face out of nowhere). Just like with popular television dramas, true character arcs are needed to be able to invest in these talents for long periods of time, or else they get stale.
Look at the WWE roster over the years and try to find the wrestlers who have evolved over time. Look at the television that was produced during their character changes and see how great it was. There were C.M. Punk's slow burning heel and face turns both last year and this year. Batista had a huge character change when he turned heel. All of these were examples of evolution, and they provided great television. Even The Undertaker, for as little as he has worked over the last several years, has altered his character multiple times, going from "The Last Outlaw" to a man who was weakened going into battle with Triple H at WrestleMania 28. These are the wrestlers that we are most interested in seeing because they are the most interesting to watch.
Just look at The Shield - they were exciting when they debuted because they were new and fresh. Roman Reigns now is the most compelling of the group because he is developing an edge. The faction as a whole is losing their luster because they have not evolved since their debut last year.
Fandango has lost a ton of steam because he hasn't developed past his one-dimensional dancing gimmick. In fact, look at every other wrestler in the company with a dancing gimmick, and you can see how the lack of progression is apparent throughout so much of the company. Vince McMahon seems to want to have a fully-fledged drama on his hands, but for it to be effective his writing team can't have a little change here or there. Change needs to pervade throughout every character, story, and facet of the promotion in order to produce the most compelling television possible. Instead of having three entertaining segments per Raw that are surrounded by match after match of filler.
It's true that characters can get by without evolution. Rey Mysterio has hardly changed his act over the years and still has an immediate connection with WWE's fanbase (when he's not injured). John Cena has carried the company on his shoulders since 2005 with zero character change whatsoever. Yet they would certainly be more interesting (and profitable, for that matter) if they actually did change themselves, wouldn't they? Would you rather invest in a dominant Cena who plows through every opponent, or a Cena who is down on his luck, losing matches, and finds a way to slowly overcome his adversity and improve himself for the better?
Insert every single WWE storyline into a professional TV drama setting with expert writers and the intensity of these rivalries would only increase, free from the restraints of typical wrestling conventions. It's time the product matured from segments that always end with a wrestler distracting someone by standing at the top of the stage and doing nothing or hitting them with a chair behind the referee's back.
The only reason the John Cenas and Rey Mysterios of the company have had any entertaining programs over the last several years are because they participate in a solid story arc with a fresh character that evolves over time (like Rey Mysterio and the "Un-Dashing" Cody Rhodes or Cena and the post-Pipebomb promo Punk). Watching Big Show do the same match over and over again against different opponents before getting a title shot would not draw as much money as Big Show facing off against an old tag team partner that turned heel on him. Neither would sell as well as Big Show being turned on by an old tag team partner and being taken out of action, returning with a vengeance and a new drive to take out the guy who took him out.
The better the evolution, the more intriguing the story is, but WWE ignores this idea, especially with the undercard. Unlike most television shows, WWE programming features essentially an ensemble cast. While there's certainly a hierarchy to the importance of talent on the show, even lower-card wrestlers need to hold the attention of the audience in their respective segments. And because of this, they need to have more than one-dimensional characters and/or one-dimensional stories in play. That's why the mid-card today is so unbearable. If WWE is going to have a story-driven product, then there needs to be actual attention given to the whole roster.
Instead of featuring in-depth characters and dramatic scenes, McMahon instead throws out meaningless talents in Even Steven booked matches where nothing gains any momentum. Maybe it's just that WWE is incapable of producing multiple complex, engaging narratives. Evolution is a necessity in storytelling, but not all change is necessarily good. WWE Creative either isn't allowed to, isn't capable of, or the infrastructure is not there to provide intriguing storylines with fully multidimensional characters and one clear story arc for a three-hour show.
Instead, in the few times that they do attempt to show their creative muscle, they focus on only one or two major arcs that are terribly written half the time and are filled with plot inconsistencies. Triple H certainly evolved a lot over the last several months, and it was perhaps to the detriment of the company, with the heel authority figure taking center stage every week on television when he's not positioned to actually main event pay-per-views. Does anyone really think that shows like "Breaking Bad" would feature plot devices as inane as the Big Show lawsuit? You know, after he was fired from his job where he had an iron-clad contract? Or having three side plots on one episode end with one character failing due to an enemy distracting them?
And, this is a serious comparison, too, because these are the shows that WWE is competing with. The show is a fictional representation of sports, yes, but it is still fiction. It is competing with both sides of the viewing spectrum (sports and fiction) and Vince McMahon needs to realize that. So instead of halfway writing dramatic material for Raw (like with Daniel Bryan's quest for the title, where his sports-esque rise to the main events was muddied by the drama-ridden McMahon power struggle), McMahon has a choice - either take a step back and go all the way in with character arcs, drama, and dedicating more time than ever to creating a logical and cohesive narrative, or do a 180 and go back to the basics of what made wrestling what it is. Because this mediocre excuse for programming can be so much more than what it is.
In today's TV world, people really do notice issues like small plot inconsistencies that WWE features every week. They must either change their standards to adapt to the changing and maturing times for TV, or be lost in the shuffle. While they aren't on a course to doom, they aren't performing at an acceptable level for TV writing.
WWE has to change. They don't have an option.
