Are rehashed storylines REALLY that bad?

[HunterSniderBrand]

All the time, I read people bashing rehashed storylines. But, when you think about it, every storyline in wrestling is a "rehashed storyline" in some form or another. Good guy vs Bad guy has been done since the beginning of time, you've had Boss vs Employee, Stable vs Stable, Invasions, etc. Its ALL been done, and its all going to continue to be done as long as Wrestling is alive and well.

I'm not saying to go an reform the Nation, or The Horsemen, etc. But, I dont understand why people have an issue with the same story lines. Now granted, if it sucks, it sucks. I get that, but if you have the right workers and the right creative stance with the storyline, I still think it would draw. So, for those of you that have a problem with rehashed storylines, why the hate?

[The Industry]

What storyline hasn't been rehashed? It's all about the execution. The perfect example of this being Kane/Bryan, they have been doing the dyfunctional tag team formula since 1997 and most of the time it's boring. Then you get something like Team Hell No and it's gold, it also had helped the whole tag division.

[Stefan]

Didn't Cornette come up with some sort of seven year rule? I'm no Corny fan but I agree with him on that point. Every seven of so years most of the fans change, especially in today's WWE where many of the kids and teenagers were either not born or very young several years ago, so why not recycle elements of storylines? Don't do them exactly the same, but try using things that worked. Avoid stuff that didn't work.