Comparing today’s WWE product

If I had to compare today's WWE product to the past from a CREATIVE and entertainment standpoint (NOT business/financial success), I'd say it's very similar to 1996/first months of 1997

Loaded with talent, from serviceable midcarders (Owen, Bulldog, Rocky, HHH, Mero back then. Guys like Balor, Gable, Rusev, Bar, Usos these days. Much better workers these days obviously) to excellent main eventers (Bret, Shawn, Taker, Austin, Vader back then. AJ, Cena, Owens, Miz, arguably Brock and Braun now).

The problem is the same: horrible repetitive, mostly bland or offensive/cheap/crappy out-of-touch ideas, characters and feuds.

Back then, Vince ans Vince stepped it up and tried to create something different, even though the overuse of brutality, raunchy quarternaked women, blood and cursewords was a sign-of-the-times zeitgeist thing. Why not repeat that, do something different (see Lucha Underground as an example), create unique characters, angles and situations. Why rely on old ideas all the time? How low can viewership for the TV shows and show attendance (outside of the big attractions) go before Vince tries to get TRULY creative again?

I know stuff like Woken Matt Hardy (yeah inspired by his TNA run but why, not), wacky Bray Wyatt angles (not the best execution, see last year's WM and House Of Horrors), Cruiserweight division (old concept, good idea, again bad execution) passes as new and fresh, but execution is lacking…

​Matt's not new or fresh at the moment.  He's in a better position than he was, but it's basically just him being all crazy and laughing without ever getting the original point of the gimmick.  Right now the wrestling nerd zeitgeist is New Japan and the Bullet Club, and Vince's reaction to that has been sending out legal threats for shooting video in his parking lot. ​That's not the actions of someone who is in interested in anything but maintaining the status quo.  And hey, they make millions of dollars, good on them.