[quote name='onetrackmind']For the life of me i cannot understand the persistant ball washing of K-Fed on other message boards. These people act like hes the greatest wrestling heel of the past 20 years or something. I just don't get the praise. He's a heat machine cause hes a douchebag not because hes some brillant wrestling mind. That match was

ing terrible last night.[/QUOTE]
It's indicative of more than that, IMO. We're hungry for some characters to absolutely *hate* right now, as we've been starved of it for ages. I just read Eric Bischoff's book on Sunday, and while I think there is both good and bad about it, I think he does understand the wrestling business. He talks about the 5 elements wrestling needs - "SARSA" - Story, action, reality, suspense, and anticipation.
The current WWE has action, and some story. There's no suspense due to the predictive nature of the shows, and those things that can create suspense (losing a match to Kevin Federline, for example) just don't matter anymore. It's completely inconsequential that John Cena lost to a "Surreal Life" caliber celebrity. So, there's no suspense.
There's no reality - due to the stereotypes (Cryme Tyme, Umaga) of some characters, and the thinness (Carlito, Chris Masters) of others. When I think about the WWE, and how they are in the business of "making movies," I think like a filmmaker - when I have a character, give me a character sketch: what's this guy's background, his motivations, his likes, his dislikes, his strengths, and his weaknesses? The WWE gives us none of that. Carlito has been around for years, and all we know is that he says "cool," spits apples, and has big hair. Chris Masters has been around for years and all we know is that he has muscles and the masterlock challenge. Gene Snitsky has a foot fetish (bet you forgot about that, or wish you had!). There's no dimension, there's no thickness, at all, to these characters. If I had access to WWE creative, I'd say to them "give me a character sketch of, say, Shelton Benjamin. Tell me 5-10 bullet points about this guy that I, as a viewer, should know."
I'd get one of two things: Points on a thick and well-developed character that have never been used on WWE tv before, or nothing at all, because they have no character sketch for him.
That is a MAJOR problem with the WWE right now. Let's face it; it's not because we demand great wrestling, as though we may, we all started watching because of Hogan or Stone Cold (or Demolition, certainly no ring technicians!). Good wrestling is made great by good characters, while great wrestling is only enjoyed by a handful of people, I'm afraid, if it involves guys like Dean Malenko or Jerry Lynn.
So, compared to these guys, Kevin Federline is a thoroughly-developed heel (thanks to shows like "Extra," and People magazine). He

ed America's Sweetheart and now she's used up white trash. He's the country's most well-known couch surfer since Kato Kaelin. He's ridden coattail after coattail to fame and fourtune. He's mostly a heel because he's just like all of us - a talentless hillbilly piece of trash - who just happens to have lucked his way into fame and fortune. And he's a cocky prick about it.
It's all there. Is he the greatest heel of all time? No, but for the moment, he circumstantially is. The WWE brings that on themselves by giving us characters so paperthin as to remove the reality from it all. Screech from "Saved by the Bell" was more developed than damn near everyone on the WWE roster.
Let me give you an example: take the current ECW champion, Bobby Lashley. Tell me something about him. Who is he, what are his interests, what's his persona, what's his motivation...sell me on him. Why should I want to see him?