Why Do People Think Aew Is Bad Exploring Criticisms Concerns

Since its debut in 2019, All Elite Wrestling (AEW) has disrupted the professional wrestling landscape with fresh talent, high-flying action, and a fan-first philosophy. Yet, despite early acclaim and rapid growth, a growing segment of fans and critics argue that AEW has lost its way. While many still praise the promotion for revitalizing American wrestling, others point to recurring issues in storytelling, booking decisions, and long-term planning as reasons for concern. Understanding why some believe AEW is “bad” requires more than surface-level complaints—it demands an honest look at creative missteps, management challenges, and evolving audience expectations.

Creative Booking and Storyline Inconsistencies

One of the most frequent criticisms leveled against AEW involves its booking—the process of deciding who wins matches, how feuds develop, and how storylines progress. Early seasons were praised for their organic rivalries and emphasis on in-ring competition. However, over time, fans have noticed a pattern of unresolved angles, abrupt character shifts, and underutilized talent.

For example, several wrestlers have been pushed heavily for months only to vanish from television without explanation. Others win major titles but fail to generate heat or defend them consistently. This inconsistency disrupts narrative momentum and leaves audiences disengaged.

Tip: Pay attention to how often feuds conclude meaningfully—recurring open-ended stories may signal deeper booking issues.

The reliance on long-term “slow burn” storytelling has also drawn criticism. While patience can build anticipation, when stretched too thin, it risks viewer apathy. Fans expect payoff; without it, even the most compelling setups lose impact.

Talent Utilization and Missed Opportunities

AEW boasts one of the deepest rosters in modern wrestling, featuring world-class athletes from diverse backgrounds. Yet paradoxically, this depth has contributed to another major critique: underbooking.

Many performers, particularly on the lower and mid-card, receive limited screen time or repetitive match types without meaningful progression. Wrestlers like Danhausen, Komander, and Skye Blue have built strong fan followings but struggle to break into main event narratives despite clear potential.

Wrestler	Potential Shown?	Current Role	Fan Sentiment
Maxwell Jacob Friedman (MJF)	Yes	Main Eventer	Positive
Powerhouse Hobbs	Yes	Mid-Card	Mixed
Julia Hart	Yes	Supporting Role	Frustrated
Rey Fenix	Yes	Tag Focus	Underused
Anna Jay	Limited	Feud Participant	Neglected

This uneven distribution of opportunities leads to frustration among both fans and talent. When viewers invest emotionally in a wrestler, sudden disappearance or lack of advancement feels dismissive.

“We’ve got some of the best workers in the world, but not everyone gets a shot to show what they can do.” — Bryan Danielson, AEW Executive Vice President & Wrestler

Overreliance on Nostalgia and Part-Timers

While AEW initially positioned itself as the home for full-time independent stars and younger talent, recent years have seen increased appearances by part-timers and legends. Names like CM Punk, Brock Lesnar, and Kenny Omega (during injury layoffs) dominate headlines, sometimes at the expense of full-time roster members.

CM Punk’s controversial run exemplified this issue. His return generated massive buzz and ratings spikes, but his limited availability and eventual backstage suspension left long-term storylines in disarray. The fallout affected multiple performers whose arcs were tied to him, creating ripple effects across programming.

Nostalgia draws eyes—but when it overshadows current talent, it undermines AEW’s original promise: to build new stars, not just recycle old ones.

Mini Case Study: The Rise and Fall of the ‘Punk Era’

In 2022, CM Punk’s arrival was hailed as a turning point for AEW. Ratings climbed, media coverage expanded, and live events sold out. But behind the scenes, tensions arose. After a now-infamous backstage incident at a post-Dynamite meeting, Punk was suspended and eventually released. Storylines built around him—including rivalries with MJF and Jon Moxley—had to be hastily rewritten or abandoned.

The aftermath revealed a structural vulnerability: overdependence on a single, non-full-time star to carry major narratives. While MJF ultimately thrived by adapting, others involved in the angle saw their momentum stall. It served as a cautionary tale about balancing star power with sustainable booking.

Production and Presentation Issues

Another area of consistent critique involves production quality. Compared to WWE’s polished presentation, AEW’s broadcasts sometimes feel inconsistent in pacing, camera work, and commentary.

• Commentary teams frequently talk over key moments, drowning out crowd reactions.
• Camera angles miss crucial spots, especially during fast-paced multi-man matches.
• Segment transitions can feel awkward or rushed, breaking immersion.

These technical shortcomings may seem minor individually, but collectively they detract from the viewing experience. For casual fans accustomed to high-definition storytelling, these flaws make AEW feel less “major league,” regardless of in-ring excellence.

Checklist: Signs of Poor Booking in AEW

1. Championship changes without buildup or consequence
2. Long-running feuds ending without resolution
3. Top stars disappearing for weeks without explanation
4. Repeated use of the same finish (e.g., outside interference) to end matches
5. Low-card talent getting minimal mic time or character development
6. Overuse of surprise returns or debuts to close shows

Management Structure and Decision-Making

AEW’s unique ownership model—co-owned by Tony Khan, the Jackson family (The Elite), and investors—has been both a strength and a liability. On one hand, it allows for collaborative creativity and avoids top-down corporate control. On the other, it introduces complexity in decision-making.

Critics argue that blurred lines between creative input and executive authority lead to favoritism. Members of The Elite (Kenny Omega, The Young Bucks) have historically received prominent roles, even during periods of injury or reduced performance. While their influence helped launch AEW, their continued dominance raises questions about equity in opportunity.

Additionally, Tony Khan serves as CEO, Head of Creative, and play-by-play commentator—a triple role that stretches any individual thin. Mistakes in booking or timing are often attributed to burnout or lack of delegation.

“When you wear too many hats, something’s going to slip. Creative needs checks and balances, not just one person calling all the shots.” — Dave Meltzer, Wrestling Observer Newsletter

FAQ

Is AEW really “bad,” or are critics being too harsh?

“Bad” is subjective. AEW produces some of the best in-ring action in the industry and has elevated numerous careers. However, legitimate concerns exist around storytelling consistency and long-term planning. Critics aren’t necessarily saying AEW is poorly made—they’re asking for improvement in areas beyond the ring.

Why do some fans say AEW doesn’t have “stars”?

Unlike WWE, which builds larger-than-life personas (e.g., John Cena, Roman Reigns), AEW emphasizes realism and athleticism. While this resonates with hardcore fans, it can limit mainstream appeal. Wrestlers like MJF and Jade Cargill have broken through, but many remain niche. Developing broader audience connection remains a challenge.

Can AEW fix these problems?

Yes—many are correctable. Hiring additional creative team members, improving production training, and committing to defined long-term arcs could address core issues. The foundation is strong; refinement is needed.

Conclusion: Room for Growth in a Competitive Industry

Labeling AEW as “bad” oversimplifies a complex reality. The promotion has undeniably changed wrestling for the better—offering alternatives to scripted monotony, spotlighting diverse talent, and reinvigorating fan engagement. But with growth comes scrutiny, and valid criticisms reflect audience investment, not mere negativity.

The concerns raised—about booking, utilization, production, and leadership—are not death knells. They are signals pointing toward evolution. Every major promotion has faced similar crossroads. What matters now is how AEW responds: Will it double down on short-term fixes, or commit to sustainable storytelling and equitable opportunities?

💬 What do YOU think? Has AEW lived up to its promise—or fallen short? Share your thoughts and join the conversation below.