Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Actually Using LayCool To Make Stars

Last week, I mentioned that Michelle McCool was not working out as centerpiece and that the argument can be made that a heel is supposed to make other workers look good. McCool (LayCool) never led to any faces becoming major stars. Blame the WWE more than The Bride of Undertaker. They should have handled things better. I want to suggest a way they could have handled it.

Before I go into that, let me make a comparison. Go back to that epic feud between Stone Cold and Mr. McMahon. Some might argue that Vince McMahon was Austin's greatest foe during the Attitude Era, not The Rock. That feud put Austin at the top. Some people argue that the reason it worked out so well is because people enjoyed seeing Austin beating up and humiliating the boss. It connected with the audience. They loved seeing that. Now, change two things. First, after Austin had owned Vince once or twice, depush Austin back to the midcard, killing his momentum. Second, keep bringing back Vince McMahon to make life hell for another face, then have that face own Vince once or twice, and then depush him like you did Austin. Repeat until Vince gets tired and leaves. Or dies. How effective would that have been? For one thing, Austin definitely would not have gotten the great career he did get. Second, I don't think this cycle would be effective. Vince McMahon would be the constant more than any single worker who gets a chance to stick it to him. In the end, none of these workers would really be making it and Vince McMahon would be the one persevering through it all to keep coming. Are the fans really going to love that story? They may enjoy the moments Vince gets beaten up and looks bad, but they'll probably end up seeing moments of the boss making life hell for people more than anything else. After a while, they will see no individual is ever really overcoming the boss and it would be annoying.

Compare that to LayCool. Vince is obviously a much better heel than them, but what about the storyline and the actual way they were used? That's my point. LayCool were bullies who made life miserable for many divas. They frequently got owned here and there, but not one diva who did get a moment over them ever got developed after to become a major star. LayCool remained on top. This is exactly the same situation you would have had if the WWE had handled Austin-McMahon like I just said. After a while, the audience will just get the idea that the bullies are never really going away and no one who is getting these moments over them can ever really end them. Remember how that LayCool angle ended? McCool was leaving. Layla beat McCool. The group collapsed on itself. It didn't put over any face that went on to become successful off that momentum. The WWE did not even move on to developing Layla as centerpiece. They tried with Kelly Kelly.

What should the WWE have done? As I have said before, I'm sometimes a bit of a pushover. I would give the WWE a chance to see if it works, but when they see the experiment is not working, they should have used LayCool to put over someone they could eventually develop as a major star of the diva division. Do something along the lines of what you had between Austin and Vince. I would have developed Natalya consistently after she beat them for the Diva's Championship. Remember when she put McCool and Layla through a table? That was a big moment. If they had been consistent with Natalya after that, that could have been an iconic moment in Natalya's success story. I'm not saying she would have ended up as big as Austin, but it would have been better strategy than overpushing two annoying heels in an annoying fashion. The WWE could have also tried this kind of thing with Kelly Kelly, but I think Natalya would have been the better choice. That's not my bias towards female wrestlers getting better, fairer opportunities talking. I think it would be more believable if a female wrestler had crushed the two bullies.

I already said what I thought of the LayCool angle from the standpoint of an analyst. It was not productive and not handled smartly. Speaking as a fan, that angle was one of the most draining things I have ever seen in the 15 years I have been watching pro wrestling regularly. I found it annoying, lame, and stupid. In a word, it was draining. I don't even find Vickie Guerrero as bad as LayCool. I am a fan of great heels. When I started watching, my favorites happened to be heels at the time. Unlike so many others, I didn't like Austin during his feud with McMahon. I did not find LayCool to be great heels. They tried to be great heels, and the WWE certainly did more than they should have in pushing them, but it was just a painful overload from them. I'm not saying that I would have liked them if the fans started booing them regularly. I'm not that kind of fan. I am saying that they were not the type of heels that I am entertained by. They were not the kind of heels that make me want to see them get owned, as I was discussing before. They were the kind of heels that make me not want to be a WWE fan anymore. I sometimes hear people saying that Cena annoys them so much that they want to stop watching. Cena isn't even a heel, but that's the best way to put how I found LayCool.

No comments:

Post a Comment