What gave it away?
The InVasion or the WWEnWo?
The InVasion didn't work because McMahon made it all about the McMahon's. Period.
The WWEnWo didn't work because it was the nWo. By that point, and even before WCW went under, the nWo didn't mean anything anymore. You see, the original had a purpose and a goal. They wanted to take over the company on the basis of a faux-invasion. Once the marks were wise to it not being a real invasion, everything fell apart. There was no longer any substance to it, just a logo and a theme and a history of it being a vehicle for heels with no wheel to steer it with. Period.
Or, you know, they could've got Goldberg when it mattered (the InVasion) and maybe make some real money instead of wasting him like they did (and yes, they did waste Goldberg).
You aren't really making any points in your favor here, just stating what you like. Which is, like, cool and all, except that you said "despite what you think" (referring to me, obviously). So, disregarding my opinion is fine and dandy, but I'm not allowed to dismiss your markdom? Especially when I'm coming in with facts that you can't even get right in the thread title? Sorry, you lose this one.
Oddly enough, didn't the ratings free fall start around the time of the InVasion and then the nWo crap angles? Go check the numbers. It's ok, I'll wait...
...see? Alright then. Despite what YOU think, crowd pops are not a be all end all measure for whether something is working or not.
Also, who said anything about all returns are bad ideas?
Tsk, tsk, getting a little hot under the collar are we? You don't have to repeat what happened in the angle, I saw it too. Just repeating the promo doesn't prove that it makes sense (which, again, I said nothing about) or that it was a success (which I did mention something about).
First of all, clearly you have thought about this for way too long that you are beginning to make sense out of nothing. Second of all, I never said anything about the WWEnWo angle not making sense, simply that it sucked and was quickly swept under the rug. Finally, you still aren't really making any argument here to counter my own. You are simply stating opinion (which is fine, but isn't really doing anything) and claiming that your opinion alone should be taken as concrete and irrefutable fact.
Aw, that same old tired and played out last trick; blame the IWC. Yes, it's the IWC. It's always the IWC. There, there, don't you cry your little eyes out over it.
Wait, did you actually make any points here with your first bullet? No? Oh dear, this is gonna take me a while, isn't it?
Wrong. The WCW nWo angle actually had a break before it's revival as nWo 2000, so there's one hole in your logic. Secondly, you were the one to bring up and count TNA's cheap knock off before me, so there's that. Thirdly, nWo Japan was at one point sanctioned by WCW I believe, so like it or not it counts. Even taking out the few I haven't covered here, you're still wrong.
Smell that? That's what being proven wrong by fact feels like. Maybe you should try being right sometime.
When Nash last appeared in the WWE before his appearance at the Rumble, he was doing so as Kevin Nash. You have and make no point with this. Whoopidy doo, he was Diesel for all of a few minutes back in January, and now he's Nash again, the name he's gone by for the majority of the latter years of his career. And please, if you want to talk about people doing things that make them look stupid, let's add feeling the need to label everything as an "era" right at the top. "The Reality Era"? Lulz. You really do have too much time on your hands.
Soooo....no, you still aren't making any points. The "outsider" angle worked for the first nWo angle because most fans didn't know any better and really thought there was some sort of invasion going on. That simply won't work at all in this day and age (for fuck's sake, it's didn't work a few years after that anyway). So you're use of the term "outsider" is simplistic and weak. And really, you think McMahon should script a shitty angle just to stick it to Bischoff? Again, you really think McMahon should shift focus from building new stars and cementing existing ones to focus on washed up has been's who can't even pass simple physicals just to rib Bischoff? That's it; you are absolutely 100% fucking ******ed. Hell, why doesn't McDonald's start selling a hamburger made out of cat shit and call it the "Whooper", just to fuck with Burger King?
Actually, I can. He can muster up a decent promo once in awhile, period. And really, if you want to watch drama without that pesky wrestling stuff, go watch some soap operas. The name of the game is selling PPV's, and no one's going to buy a PPV just because Scott Hall might cattle prod someone or cut a shitty promo. You are either a total mark for the past or you are just flat out bad at fantasy booking. Explain to me how you think this will make money.
So then why did you bring it up as reason for Vince McMahon to care about anything Bischoff or TNA is doing now? You were the one to go there. Not my fault that, like everything else you are posting, that you have no leg to stand on.
Yes, McMahon is SOOO good at holding off the pay day.
That's why Punk was only gone two weeks instead of two months.
Um....wow. I'm not going to touch this with a 19 foot stick. You are one sad lonely little mark.
Care to try that all again in English? You know what else would be a shocker? Ted Turner being the GM. BOOM.
Really though, I criticize you for having shallow outdated ideas for the storyline. It's not that it's the nWo; it's that you are stuck in the same booking mindset that sank companies in the past. "Let's shock 'em! What'll make them really surprised!? ARRR, MUST HAVE SHOCK VALUE, THE RATINGS WILL SPIKE!!!!". Guess what, chump? It's not about ratings, and hasn't been for a long long time. It's about PPV buys. It's about merch. And both of those things will make more money in the long run if the company is focused on stars who will be there for a long time, not by focusing on washed up losers from the past who will be there for months at best. How long before Nash tears a quad again? He looked like he could barely climb the ring steps on Monday night, let alone carry an angle.
You really are bad at this booking thing.
Stop being a dipshit and trying to force me into saying good things about something when I don't believe them. The nWo wasn't all that good. In fact, from the first night of Hall's "You want a war" speech to the end of WCW, it was more shit than it was anything good. For fuck's sake, even the original run grew bloated and directionless before the Wolfpac split. Face the music, son, the past isn't a perfect as you remember it. Of course, it's much easier for you to blame the IWC-boogeymen. Fact of the matter is this: any group which featured Konnan as a member sucked balls.
Again, you are losing your grasp on the English language here. That is, of course, assuming you ever had one. Furthermore, I love that your reasoning for wanting the nWo (a WWE property) to come back is that it will somehow bring Sting (a TNA contracted individual) in. Nevermind things like no-compete clauses, you've got this one ALL figured out.
No, you don't. And Nash, Hall, Waltman, and even Sting hardly count as the stars of today. The stars of today are Cena, Orton, and loosely Mysterio. The next generation are Punk and Miz. And, I'm sorry, I thought we were watching wrestling. Nash was very big about this same attitude you have right now. He also felt that you NEED the old guys to work right. That's how he booked WCW into oblivion (which is fact and is well documented if you'd like to challenge that).
What is with you and this "sticking it to Bischoff" thing? NOBODY CARES, least of all McMahon. Also, for the last time WWE ALREADY TRIED MAKING THE nWo WORK FOR THEM BEFORE AND IT DIDN'T WORK! How fucking dumb can you be?
Rocky returns, talks smack to Cena, and all of a sudden those IWC boogeymen you cry about were all up in their panties about how Rock just owned Cena and how stars of today just can't hold a candle to him (never mind how played out Rock sounds in 2011, that's not the point). You seem to think that stars need to go over stars of the past to work, and you're wrong. Stone Cold didn't need to go over some old star from forever ago when he got over; the difference between him and Bret Hart was nowhere near the difference between someone like Miz and someone like Sting. Rock didn't need to go over anyone like that; Rock got over at his peak by going against a heel just as new as he was: HHH. You see, you can talk all you want about how much sense you think you are making, while I'm here stating facts and making argument based in logic, not fantasy.
Yes, this is a board where opinions can be discussed. But it is also a place for debates. While you are free to have opinions, I am likewise free to tell you that you are wrong and that your ideas are childish at best. You can either refute my claims with fact or you can stick your fingers in your ears and repeat yourself over and over and over again. Take your pick.
Wow, you really are a douche bag.
) plus as much as i want him to leave Vickie...i don't wanna see him turn face
