For whatever reason, I still watch wrestling. I don't really know why. I think it is partly just watching out of habit and partly just hoping it will return to the promising days of the mid 80s and late 90s. That is kind of why I still watch the Bills or Sabres. It's habit and I'm hoping to recapture better days gone by. The wrestling product isn't exactly stellar these days, but that's a piece for another day.
The point here is diehard wrestling fans vs. the WWE.
See, there's a small portion of the fan base who are called marks. It is a fan who is aware of and interested in the backstage and non-scripted aspects of wrestling.
They are the types who read dirt sheets and websites. (Dirt sheets are a mixture of TMZ, the National Enquirer, and actual journalism.) If wrestling is in the title of the show, they are going to watch, period. They are not the casual fans the WWE covets. The marks want to watch guys who can wrestle. Marks are stereotyped as fans who don't like storylines, promos, or any bad comedy. They just want *Ding, ding, ding* some fighting, a winner, and repeat the cycle. They are against muscle-bound creatures who can't hardly move in the ring.
Some conspiracy theorists believe that the WWE loathes these types of fans. WWE wants BIG guys who can entertain via comedy or get that mainstream attention from Hollywood. Marks are kind of like wrestling hipsters and they loathe that scene. To bottom line it: WWE views marks as a small percentage of the fan base. Eric Bischoff, who's worked for WCW, WWE, and TNA once said that he thinks the dirt sheet crowd is only 5% of the viewing audience.
They are maybe just too passionate for their own good and shouldn't really be the focus for the WWE because they're going to watch no matter what. It even gets to the point where some fans think the WWE purposely tries to piss off the marks by screwing over their favorite wrestlers.
Examples: Daniel Bryan, who was a huge sensation on the independent circuit before signing with WWE, lost a 3 second match at Wrestlemania last year against a muscle bound freak who the WWE was really high on. Zach Ryder, who was a jobber on the WWE roster (a jobber is someone whose primary job is losing to better known wrestlers), blew up on the Internet by independently doing a hilarious weekly show on YouTube which generated a lot of buzz with the marks. The WWE responded by putting him on TV more but decided to keep using him mostly as a jobber. They have pretty much made him look silly and stupid.
The relationship between marks and the WWE makes me think of the relationship between hockey fans and ESPN.
I'm sure we have all heard about Stephen A. Smith not knowing about ties in hockey. On the surface, you might think that Smith just didn't know the rules. That is pretty fricken sad when you are the co-host of the #1 shitty sports debate show in the country. My assumption was that he's just some numbskull who doesn't watch the NHL. However, the producer who goes over topics with the talent beforehand didn't inform him that ties don't exist? This is SportsCenter. They show highlights. Tons of them. I haven't heard the word tie mentioned in hockey in almost a decade on ESPN. How does someone not either yell in Stephen A's ear piece that there aren't ties or better yet discuss it with him ahead of time?
What was more insulting was when Smith decided to flippantly acknowledge that he didn't even know Columbus had an NHL team. What was the point of that? I know…Embrace debate and sensationalize opinions. Then this happened a few days ago.
"ESPN embarrassingly trotting out Stephen A. Smith to try and analyze the Blackhawks' streak, even though he was not aware of the basic premises of the sport. The next day it was college basketball analyst Seth Greenberg's turn to debate the merits of the Blackhawks, evidently because he was the guy standing closest to the set at the time. Today, it was Chris Broussard's turn, and although he fared better than the previous two, he looked like he'd rather break down quantum mechanics."
Are you fucking kidding me? ESPN decided to trot out college and NBA experts for this? That is just the ultimate trolling move. Why on earth couldn't ESPN hire a freelancer from Philly or Boston or maybe even fly in some jackass from TSN? You know, the network that is actually owned by ESPN across the border? This is the ultimate fuck you to hockey fans.
ESPN=WWE while hockey fans= Wrestling Marks.
ESPN doesn't care about hockey because they don't have TV deals with the NHL and more importantly, they know hockey fans would rather watch NHL Network or local hockey programming. The NHL fan base represents a small portion ESPN's viewing audience and because of that, ESPN doesn't care what those fans think of them.
They also probably know that NHL fans detest the way the network presents their sport, so hey, let's just troll them. Let's just shove Chris fricken Broussard down the viewing audience's throats when we actually have to talk hockey. I think 85% of Buffalo knows more about hockey than he does. Shit, the #illhangupandlisten crowd could take his job as hockey expert.
Make no bones about it, the Blackhawks point streak is a BIG deal, which is the reason why ESPN probably decided to finally talk about it on their daytime program. But when you decide to put in non-hockey experts or even non-fans of the sport as your talking heads, what does that tell you?
Hockey fans have always had a chip on their shoulder because of the lack of respect the national media gives the sport they love. In a way, wrestling fans are the same because the majority of adults don't respect wrestling. They are just trying to find their way into getting what they want out of the genre's they love.
It is just too bad that the controlling powers only care about the masses and not the ones who care the most.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
