10 Ways WWE Are Worse Than They Were A Decade Ago

5. Start/Stop Pushes

WWE wouldn't need to rely on part-time stars if it could create some of their own. Perhaps it is because they know they can always dust off a Brock Lesnar or a Sting for WrestleMania that they don't bother putting the effort required into creating new stars. There are lots of talented performers on the WWE roster right now. In terms of athleticism and creativity, it is probably better than it was in 2005. But athleticism and creativity are nothing without character and being over. You can put on all the four star matches you want to, but without a decent push and some character development it's worthless. WWE has a habit of starting pushes for wrestlers before abruptly stopping them. And then starting them again. Before stopping them just as quickly. A key example of this was Cesaro, who WWE couldn't seem to make their mind up on. It's hard for fans to invest in a wrestler when WWE loses interest in them so quickly. Imagine if WWE had decided in 2005 that it wasn't sure about Batista or John Cena? What if WWE decided that Edge wasn't worth the hassle? WWE should really focus on building up some new guys and not giving up on them so quickly.
Contributor
Contributor

Student of film. Former professional wrestler. Supporter of Newcastle United. Don't cry for me, I'm already dead...