Mango kid Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 and they still do today but no there a difference when the brand was split in 2002 to what it was in 2008 in 2008 the brands mingle they both use the same pay per views before 2008 the brand split was pretty much had no cross over other then some random fued each brand had there own pay per view with only there brand wrestlers minus the big 4 after 2008 they mingles so the brand split was pretty much going away and led to the universe era 1. No. What is the last time you saw a WWE Event or went to WWE.com? 2. No. The Tag-Team Divisions got unified in 2010, but that's all. Unless you're talking about that SmackDown & ECW talent exchange thing, which was still just between ECW & SmackDown. Raw was completley seperated from the other two brands. 3. So what? Because they didn't have brand exclusive PPVs anywmore there was no draft split? 4. You're totally confusing 2008 with 2011/12 umm no raw and ecw had a talent exchange in sept of 2008 mnm and hardys just cuz they have the brands still doesn't mean there still a brand split if so I wouldn't be seeing smackdown guys wrestle on raw or raw on smackdown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 Talent exchange, like in a crossbranded contract, not a permanent draft to another brand. (That happened during RA too btw) and no...you didn't see Raw guys competing on SmackDown and vice versa outside the tag division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 no u just see smackdown and raw guys fighting on ecw for the ecw title rvd held both wwe and ecw titles even tho it was different brands agree to disagree to me the eras are golden new gen attitude ruthless universe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crack. Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 I divide it like: - Early Ages - Golden Era - Bret Hart Era - Attitude Era - The InVasion - Undisputed / Brand Extension Era - Ruthless Aggression / Evolution Era - PG / HD Era - Reality / Supershow Era - 3 Hour / Universe Era Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rosh Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 2002 - 2004: Minor League 2005 - 2008 - Entertaining, at it's best. A genuine alternative to WWE. 2008 - 2010: Decent. 2010 - Present: Clusterfudge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellblazer14DMN Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 there are none no matter what u say u cant have eras when the company only 11 years old13 years in WWE:Attitude Era Transitional era 1 (Invasion) Ruthless Aggression Transitional Era 2 (changing back permanently to TV-PG) Reality Era Universe Era....it is possible there no transitional era the invasion is in attitude era and it what ended the era then ruthless aggression then universe there is no reality era 1997-2001 attitude era 2002-2005 ruthless aggression 2005-2011 pg era 2011-2013 reality era 2013- current i dont know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crack. Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 Hellblazer, the PG era can't be 2005-2011 if the shows didn't go PG until 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maskedmaniac Posted September 3, 2013 Report Share Posted September 3, 2013 Dat 70's era? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted September 3, 2013 Report Share Posted September 3, 2013 no u just see smackdown and raw guys fighting on ecw for the ecw title rvd held both wwe and ecw titles even tho it was different brands agree to disagree to me the eras are golden new gen attitude ruthless universe Dude...RVD wasn't even with the WWE anymore in 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Legacy Posted September 4, 2013 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2013 The WWE Eras aren't really up for debate. Golden Era New Generation Era Attitude Era Ruthless Aggression Era PG Era Reality Era ^This is the general consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted September 4, 2013 Report Share Posted September 4, 2013 The WWE Eras aren't really up for debate. Golden Era New Generation Era Attitude Era Ruthless Aggression Era PG Era Reality Era ^This is the general consensus. sorry yes it is like everything else general consensus doesn't mean it 100% set in stone inless wwe saids what eras are what it cant be a pg era then a different era if it still pg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Legacy Posted September 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted September 5, 2013 Golden Era and New Generation Era are both PG. Attitude Era and Ruthless Aggression Era are both TV-14. The PG Era and Reality Era are both PG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted September 5, 2013 Report Share Posted September 5, 2013 those don't count cuz they never called them pg era if it a pg era and it still pg then the era didn't change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEGION Posted September 5, 2013 Report Share Posted September 5, 2013 Golden Era and New Generation Era are both PG. Attitude Era and Ruthless Aggression Era are both TV-14. The PG Era and Reality Era are both PG. PG is a TV rating, not a era.AE had some PG rated shows too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Legacy Posted September 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted September 5, 2013 PG Era was just used because of the lack for a more fitting title to describe that time period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewSheep Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 TNA Eras? Oh let's debate WWE Eras instead Too lazy to make the meme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarGreymon77 Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 NWA-TNA Fox Sports Net (when guys like DDP were there) move to Spike Hogan-Bischoff Era Impact Wrestling These wouldn't be official names. I'm just trying to remember the major time periods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 well in wwe a era is define by a new face of the company who was the face of the company in tna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Legacy Posted September 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 The only era to have a definitive face of the company was Golden Era when hulk was the face. all other eras have debatable faces of the company. and AJ styles has been the face of TNA forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 The only era to have a definitive face of the company was Golden Era when hulk was the face. all other eras have debatable faces of the company. and AJ styles has been the face of TNA forever. not really for me golden was Hogan new gen was bret hart attitude was Austin ruthless aggression was the rock universe was cena to me the only one debatable is new gen with hbk or bret but I chose bret as aj the face witch is the only one I no of for tna but I don't think he is anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWF WrestleFest Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 For WWE: 1984 and earlier - old school professional wreslting 1985-1992 - Golden era, Hulkamania era, Rock 'n Wrestling era, Federation era, whatever you wanna call it 1993 was a bit of a transitional year 1993-1997 - New Generation 1997 was another transitional year 1998-2001 - Attitude 2002 was a transitional year 2002-2007 - Ruthless Aggression 2008 was a transitional year 2008-current - PG era, Universe era, Reality era, whatever you call it today But anyway, this is about TNA. and I've only followed TNA since like 2009 or 2010 or so, and I don't really know the history, so I don't really feel i'm qualified to divide that into eras The only era to have a definitive face of the company was Golden Era when hulk was the face. all other eras have debatable faces of the company. and AJ styles has been the face of TNA forever. not really for me golden was Hogan new gen was bret hart attitude was Austin ruthless aggression was the rock universe was cena to me the only one debatable is new gen with hbk or bret but I chose bret as aj the face witch is the only one I no of for tna but I don't think he is anymore Golden was Hogan, no doubt. New generation, it was Bret at first, HBK the second half. Kind of depends how you split it. Attitude was Austin, no doubt. Rock has gone on to become a bigger star through Hollywood and all that, but during the actual Attitude era, there was no doubt it was Austin # 1, everyone else a distant second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTI- Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 2002-2007 (The good years) 2008-2010 ( ) 2010-present ( :poo: ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted September 14, 2013 Report Share Posted September 14, 2013 For WWE: 1984 and earlier - old school professional wreslting 1985-1992 - Golden era, Hulkamania era, Rock 'n Wrestling era, Federation era, whatever you wanna call it 1993 was a bit of a transitional year 1993-1997 - New Generation 1997 was another transitional year 1998-2001 - Attitude 2002 was a transitional year 2002-2007 - Ruthless Aggression 2008 was a transitional year 2008-current - PG era, Universe era, Reality era, whatever you call it today But anyway, this is about TNA. and I've only followed TNA since like 2009 or 2010 or so, and I don't really know the history, so I don't really feel i'm qualified to divide that into eras The only era to have a definitive face of the company was Golden Era when hulk was the face. all other eras have debatable faces of the company. and AJ styles has been the face of TNA forever. not really for me golden was Hogan new gen was bret hart attitude was Austin ruthless aggression was the rock universe was cena to me the only one debatable is new gen with hbk or bret but I chose bret as aj the face witch is the only one I no of for tna but I don't think he is anymore Golden was Hogan, no doubt. New generation, it was Bret at first, HBK the second half. Kind of depends how you split it. Attitude was Austin, no doubt. Rock has gone on to become a bigger star through Hollywood and all that, but during the actual Attitude era, there was no doubt it was Austin # 1, everyone else a distant second. idk much about the new gen but wasn't hbk a heel at the time that the main reason I chose bret as I don't think a heel can be the face of the company Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarGreymon77 Posted September 14, 2013 Report Share Posted September 14, 2013 Ruthless Aggression was Triple H. But this is about TNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWF WrestleFest Posted September 14, 2013 Report Share Posted September 14, 2013 For WWE: 1984 and earlier - old school professional wreslting 1985-1992 - Golden era, Hulkamania era, Rock 'n Wrestling era, Federation era, whatever you wanna call it 1993 was a bit of a transitional year 1993-1997 - New Generation 1997 was another transitional year 1998-2001 - Attitude 2002 was a transitional year 2002-2007 - Ruthless Aggression 2008 was a transitional year 2008-current - PG era, Universe era, Reality era, whatever you call it today But anyway, this is about TNA. and I've only followed TNA since like 2009 or 2010 or so, and I don't really know the history, so I don't really feel i'm qualified to divide that into eras The only era to have a definitive face of the company was Golden Era when hulk was the face. all other eras have debatable faces of the company. and AJ styles has been the face of TNA forever. not really for me golden was Hogan new gen was bret hart attitude was Austin ruthless aggression was the rock universe was cena to me the only one debatable is new gen with hbk or bret but I chose bret as aj the face witch is the only one I no of for tna but I don't think he is anymore Golden was Hogan, no doubt. New generation, it was Bret at first, HBK the second half. Kind of depends how you split it. Attitude was Austin, no doubt. Rock has gone on to become a bigger star through Hollywood and all that, but during the actual Attitude era, there was no doubt it was Austin # 1, everyone else a distant second. idk much about the new gen but wasn't hbk a heel at the time that the main reason I chose bret as I don't think a heel can be the face of the company Bret was the babyface and HBK was the heel. This is around 93-95. Bret's the world champ at this point, second face of the company would probably be Lex Luger during the first part of Bret's run (see WM10), then Diesel around '95 (see WM11). Shawn really got pushed as a face once Diesel (Nash) and Razor (Hall) (along with Luger a year earlier) left for WCW But he had been such a good heel for so long, it was hard to see shawn as the babyface,and this was around the time WCW was at their peak with the nWo angle, so HBK's run as the top guy was really at a terrible time as WWF was pretty much second rate at this point. It wasn't until he turned heel again with the original DX, and Austin got pushed as the main face that WWF really took off with the "Attitude" era. So anyway, basically Bret was the face of the New Generation at first, then Shawn was for the second half of that era, but Shawn's run as the top guy came at the worst possible time as no one was going to outdraw the nWo juggernaut when that first started. So looking back, yeah, I'd probably put Bret as the face of the New Generation era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.