Eric Bischoff Talks The Problem With WWE Programming Today

People are hailing AEW for being something new and fresh on the wrestling scene and it's been a while since WWE has been described with those terms. Eric Bischoff and Conrad Thompson discussed today's WWE product on the 83 Weeks podcast, with Thompson calling WWE promos formulaic as they essentially stick to the same script and format over and over.

Advertisement

Thompson asked Bischoff about this "sameness" that goes on with WWE programming.

"That's one of the observations I've had about WWE in general for a long time. As great as they are ? and I wanna preface this that this is not a criticism, it's a perspective," said Bischoff. "When a show becomes so formulaic, when the format becomes so standard and you see the same thing, especially for a live show like Raw ? you see the same basic open, the same clothes, the same talent, the same style of interviews ? nothing ever really changes.

"It's boring and you kinda kill that desire that you want to develop in the audience to go, 'Oh man, I can't wait to see what happens next week' because you know what's going to happen next week. It's the same thing, basically, that happened the week before."

Advertisement

In December Bischoff talked to Wrestling Inc. about the low numbers for SmackDown on FOX and fewer people watching wrestling now than during the Monday Night Wars. Having a staleness to your product won't attract new fans or retain old ones but this formulaic programming has been going on in WWE for years.

"It's working very well for WWE and it has for a long time. But even now when you watch the show there's a sameness to it," stated Bischoff. "There's a filter that exists within the creative process and in order for ideas, concepts, formats to get through that filter and make it to your TV screen, they end up being so similar in so many ways that it's hard to get excited about it."

If you use any of the quotes in this article, please credit 83 Weeks with Eric Bischoff with a h/t to Wrestling Inc. for the transcription.

Comments

Recommended