by Tony Kowalski 
Exclusive to OnlineOnslaught.com

When trolling through various websites and message boards that deal with professional wrestling, one tends to notice very obvious trends amongst the prevalent opinions. This is probably due to two things. The first is that like-minded individuals tend to inhabit message boards together and create web pages together, and it makes sense that their opinions tend to have striking similarities. The other is that opinions are like cockroaches; the ones that survive get to breed and flourish. 

Note for example how the five-star system has become the internet standard for rating a wrestling match (thank you very much, Scott Keith) and that TV show recaps have to have some kind of wise-cracking spin to them (I'm not even going to touch that one). If you asked any internet savvy "smart" wrestling fan whom his/her five favorite wrestlers are, you can pretty much guarantee that the names Benoit, Angle and Guerrero will be uttered. Conversely, if you inquired about his/her five least-favorite wrestlers, names like the Undertaker and Hulk Hogan are sure to appear.

Based on the prevailing concept of what a professional wrestler should be, certain criteria have been established for what we like and what we don't like. Recently, there has been somewhat of an underground movement wherein certain circles seek to, in some small way, de-"smart" themselves and reclaim their mark virginity, so to speak, with a view towards being able to enjoy wrestling more on a simpler level, the level on which it is intended to reach the masses.

To further this deprogramming, I now look at one of those criteria which internet types seem to hold dear; the payment of one's "dues." Members of the IWC feel that wrestlers like Our Beloved Benoit have paid their dues and should be duly rewarded. At the same time, the IWC loathes it when a wrestler does not have to pay his dues and gets pushed to the forefront, such as Brock "I'm A Shooting Star" Lesnar, today, and Bill "Let Me Entertain Your Children" Goldberg in the natal stages of his career. The sentiment felt for or against a wrestler as it pertains to whether or not he has paid his "dues" is subtle, but it does exist, and while it won't be the defining reason why someone loves or hates a wrestler, it will be on the list. My question is, "Does it really matter?"
 
Why the hell do we care about these things? Does a man's failure to spend years in the indies setting up the ring, riding from town to town in the backseat of a Ford Aspire — with six other guys who couldn't shower because the pipes in the bingo hall they performed in the night before were antiquated — while eating nothing but Taco Bell drive-thru for weeks on end somehow make him inherently unlikable? Are we simply angry that some rise to prominence so easily while our favorite stars, whose careers we have watched progress step by painstaking step, wallow in mediocrity waiting for a chance that may never come? Or are we looking for reasons to hate those people, and the fact that they haven't had to jump through rings of fire is an easier reason to convey than their lack of talent or charisma (in some cases, at least)? 

On the other side, how does a wrestler's inability to rise to the top quickly somehow make him more endearing? Shouldn't the opposite be true? Shouldn't we be lampooning the dead weight that hasn't cut it yet, rather than blaming the nebulous "bookers" for keeping them down? At the same time, should we not also be championing those who have been able to reach the main event?
 
Why don't we apply this criticism equitably? We can knock Brock now and Goldberg in the day for suffering from massive pushes (although I'm not sure any winning streak that includes multiple victories over Jerry Flynn can be qualified as a "push"), but we call for the heads of the Undertaker and Hulk Hogan who have paid their dues to the business and then some. We also overlook the fact that Kurt Angle won every major title in less than a year after becoming an on-screen personality while we bash Triple H, who busted his ass to get where he is, for ostensibly fighting to stay where he is. 

We stand by Chris Benoit and Booker T, claiming that their workrate, along with their stature, should entitle them to championship gold, while nobody is demanding the pushes of Hardcore Holly or Al Snow. I realize that most people bash Brock for his lack of charisma and, in my girlfriend's case, for his freakishly shaped head and his absence of a neck. We bash Hogan and Taker for what we consider atrocious workrate and refusing to leave the top spot. We bash Goldberg for his lack of respect for the business and his apparent belief in his own messianic stature among the people. We generally don't speak of Holly or Snow. But when we start knocking a new guy who's being shoved down our throats, the fact that he didn't "pay his dues" is inevitably mentioned, although it may not be harped on.
 
The WWE doesn't care about "dues." They are in the business of promoting what they can sell. They are like a record company pushing a new boy band, and the fans in the arena might as well be the screaming teenage girls outside of TRL holding up "I Love Carson Daly" signs and trying to look old enough to buy cigarettes. Brock Lesnar and Bill Goldberg, like boy bands, are sellable to the niche market to which the WWE appeals. The fact that they haven't paid any dues never enters into the equation, and rightfully so, from a business standpoint.

The IWC, feeling that they are too "smart" to buy into what the marketing machine is throwing at them, demonstrates a vehement backlash against these ploys, and stands by their Benoits and Guerreros instead. We sometimes forget that we are a niche inside a niche market, and the majority of wrestling fans do not share our opinions and criteria for judgment. The last time that the marketing machine truly failed on a widespread level noticed by smart and casual fans alike (and anything from the last two years of WCW is exempt from this statement since I'm firmly convinced they weren't really trying) is the Rock's initial push as Rocky Maivia. Even this miscalculation was turned around, and I hear they managed to salvage the Rock's career.
 
The guys in the back, for the most part, don't seem to pay much heed to "dues" either. Sure, Steve Austin walked out rather than job to Lesnar, and Bob Holly yaps that the WWE should push older stars that have done their time opening the shows, but they are the exception to the rule.  Brock Lesnar was put over by Hulk Hogan, the Rock, and the Undertaker in his first year. Those are all guys who have just as much right to play the stature card as Steve Austin, and they didn't do so. If the guys in the back are willing to accept the fact that they can work for years, wearing out their bodies and minds in the business and still have some new kid come in and jump over them, to the spot they've been so desperately trying to reach, why shouldn't we? When it comes down to it, the hierarchy in the wrestling locker room really shouldn't be our business. If we are so desperate to see the hierarchal interaction and disputes of a group dynamic on display, I suggest "Survivor" as an alternative to wrestling politics. At least in reality television you get to witness the breakdown of societal structure, rather than just reading about it. That, and guys falling face first into a fire.
 
It appears that in the end, our concept of "dues" is really meaningless.  We are passing judgment based on the criteria put forward by a minority, and we all know that the world doesn't work like that (unless your first name is George and your last name is Bush). In conclusion, I resolve to never again worry about whether Brock Lesnar has paid sufficient "dues" to merit the status he has achieved. Instead I'll worry every time he climbs to the top rope, and let my girlfriend comfort me by pointing out that he doesn't appear to have a neck to break.

E-MAIL TONY
BROWSE THE OO FEATURES ARCHIVE

All contents are Copyright 1995-2009 by OOWrestling.com.  All rights reserved.
This website is not affiliated with WWE or any other professional wrestling organization.  Privacy Statement.