ECW was Overrated and Minor League

[Mouthy Idiot]

ECW= Extreme Championship Wrestling...... Blah Blah Blah.... The reason I am writing this is because lately I have noticed a trend where people keep looking back at ECW as some serious promotion who actually belongs in the same category of WCW and WWE. I dont get it... I never will. I dont think ECW belongs nowhere near the top. Quite Frankly I think ECW was laughable and amateur. I remember watching ECW when I could find it on some crappy channel late at night , this was pre TNN. I was younger then so I kinda bought into the whole 'Extreme" and "naughty" blood and guts mantra they had. But honestly it was a cheap , useless promotion from the very beginning. If you go back and watch those shows it was so poorly done and tacky. I do remember the intro was kinda cool with the "Hey man nice shot" song by Filter playing and seeing the bad ass highlights. But the talent wasnt there,. the TV production was so cheap and the editing was poorly done. I understand Paul Heyman didnt have the budget to do anything great, but at the same time thats kinda the whole point. ECW was cheap.

When they finally got on PPV of course I ordered a couple of them and ultimately I guess you could say you got a decent deal. It wasnt great but it wasnt any worse than some of the junk ppv's the wcw and wwe were putting out at the time. But with ECW it always felt cheap and low budget and shady and dirty. The talent in ECW was basically a bunch of guys who couldnt make it to the WWF/WWE on their own. They were weekend warriors/ losers with bad bodies who didnt have the talent to make it. There were a few exceptions to the rule. RVD being one of them. The problem with Rob is hes a moron, hes more worried about getting high and worshipping some plant than he is about being a mega superstar making millions. Thats where a guy like John Cena owns Rob... Cena gets it... RVD doesnt. Taz was a badass character but it turns out Taz is apparently a pussy in real life. Too many guys have come out saying Taz is a fake. I believe them. Raven had talent in terms of character and charisma. But hes another guy who couldnt see the bigger picture , he plugged his depressed raven/drug gimmick way 2 hard. Nobody cared after awhile.. get over it you whiny depressed drugger. Shane Douglas was probably the best "WWE" style guy they had. Shane was tall enough and big enough to be the main guy.

The problem with Shane was he pegged himself into a corner by using the F word and any other bad word he could find in his promos to "get over" with those drunk bingo hall crowds. Fake/shooting on Flair and all those boys was a big work to get over. Sabu the king of botching.. A total freak... The Dudleys were 2 fat philadelphia bums who got lucky they made the careers they ultimately did. Tommy Dreamer was boring , chubby and a poor mans Mick Foley. New Jack should be named New Joke.. He couldnt wrestle nobody. He was a bad attitude street thug who did what he wanted because the other guys were scared of him because he probably would cap their ass if they shot on him in the ring. He would get his ass kicked in a fight against RVD a real fight. When he bladed that fat kid that was probably the best thing he ever did in the business. New Joke is a loser and I remember him trying to get into acting when he was on that movie Beyond the Mat.. . I bet hes a tough son of a bitch tho. He took that table bump off the balcony and broke himself up.

And yes I know guys like Jericho and Mysterio and Eddie and Benoit were in ECW but those guys got the hell out of there quick. They knew it was amataeur hour there. I am not a "Heyman Guy" at all. I think Paul Heyman is the most overrated "mind" in the biz.. I am sick of hearing how smart and talented he is. I think his only talent is kissing Brock Lesnars ass. I dont think I have ever seen a grown man kiss another mans ass like he does Brocks. Oh and Paul FYI Brock got his ass kicked by Cain and Alistair. So your love buddy isnt the baddest man alive like you claim. I would be money Kurt Angle in his prime would throw Brock around in a wrestling match like a bitch. Brock is a bully and a front runner he dont like it when you hit back or stand up to him. Bottom line about Heyman.. He is good on the mic. He is a good self promoter and a decent manager in terms of getting heat for his guys but he will always be number 3... He could never beat Vince or Eric, He wouldnt beat them even if he had the same budget.

I heard something about how Vince never even watched ECW one time back in the day, he could care less. They werent even on his radar. The only reason Eric signed and later WWE signed ECW guys was because the business is fan driven and some fans wanted to see those guys in the big show. They were all side show / less talented guys. I know this column is harsh but I stand by what I have said. I do think ECW had a few things that were cool and inventive but in reality , the cold harsh reality it was a second rate promotion. It doesnt belong in the top. So what do you guys think? I know alot of you are ECW fans and probably hate me but just be honest about it. What is stone cold truth? Please if you reply, try to give explanations for why ECW was so great. Dont just say I am a hater or that it was better because those guys were extreme and different. Really try to give a good reason. The matches themselves were always overdone and sometimes rediculous. Kevin Nash made a good point in an interview one time where he said the finishes were not believeable. Wrestling is a work we all know it so in ECW a guy would get hit in the head with 20 chair shots and kick out of the pin. It was overdone and unrealistic.

 

[CeramicDuck]

Your post is wrong on many, many levels and full of completely wrong information and contradiction. ECW wasn't as great as some make it out to be but it was far from as bad as you are saying. I was going to reply with a long winded response but then I saw your user name and realized it would be pointless...

just one reply because I can't help it, as far as the roster not being able to make it to WWE or WCW.... Something like 90% of the roster appeared in WWE, WCW or TNA. so theres that.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

When it comes to ECW being overrated and minor league, I agree when it comes to aspects such as the overall talent of the vast majority of the roster and the greatness some choose to grant to the company. ECW was centered around hardcore wrestling and you don't have to be especially talented to wrestle in hardcore matches. All the proof I ever needed for that was seeing backyard wrestling as it centered around weapons and over the top spots.

That's not to say that ECW doesn't hold a significant place in pro wrestling history. During the late 90s, ECW offered a genuine alternative to the more traditional companies of WWF and WCW. If you wanted something that was genuinely different altogether, then ECW was that something different. A lot of well known guys also got their first real degree of exposure here in the United States in ECW like Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit and Rey Mysterio. You've also got guys who's legacies are forever intertwined with ECW like Rob Van Dam, Raven, Taz, Sabu, Tommy Dreamer, Shane Douglas and The Dudley Boys.

I was into ECW for a while when I first discovered it. I got tired of it before too long because, for the most part, it was just a one trick pony. It seemed that 90% of the matches were these over the top spotfests that revolved around weapons, one dangerous spot after another, no storytelling and wrestlers who had no real character or personality. There were some genuinely talented guys who came out of ECW, some of those names I mentioned, so ECW wasn't a total failure when it came down to offering an innovative alternative to the more mainstream companies. It also generated some stars of its own and gave future stars a platform that helped lead to stardom later down the road.

 

[BaconBits]

I don't think anybody thinks ECW was any kind of legit competition to WCW/WWE at the time. I mean, when WCW/WWE were rolling at their best, ECW was on public access at 3:00 am on a Thurday. It wasn't till after the crescendo to the Monday Night Wars that ECW even ended up on TNN.

That said, yeah, ECW was a lot of garbage, but, at the time, so were RAW and Nitro. Wrestling in general at the time was a non-stop clusterf*ck of spotfests, muddled endings, over the top violence and sex, and shitty characters that had bad stories.

You mentioned that ECW was stupid because guys took 20 chair shots and kicked out of a pin. Mick Foley was thrown of the top of a 30 ft. high cage. Twice. And he finished the match, kicking out along the way. That happened in WWE.

You mentioned that ECW had shitty characters. WCW had Glacier, the KISS Demon and the No Limit soldiers as characters. They also had David Arquette and Vince Russo as champion. WWE had Vinnie Mac as champion.

You didn't like ECW, and that's cool. Just say that. Don't try to flesh it out because you're overrating it yourself, just to tear it down. It was regional promotion that did exceptionally well for a regional promotion, and that's all it was. Wrestling fans get that.

 

[Rooster Smith]

I loved ECW. I feel like they're one of the few promotions to be better than the WWF/E for any sustained period of time.

I'm not saying they kept that honor towards the end or at the beginning but yeah, in the middle? That promotion was something special. It's a shame that we lost its spirt more than anything else.

Not to leave you guys on a sour note though. ICW in Scotland is different, but very much ECWesque. They have a show called Worldwide that can be viewed on their Youtube channel. Awesome.

 

[Sweettre15]

People can say ECW's "overrated"' all they want but remember that a good bit of things that WWF copied to shape their attitude era:

Wrestlers tapping out to submissions became a pro wrestling thing thanks to ECW, the hardcore matches, the Triple threat matches, profanity, sexual frankness, and the popularity of Lucha Libre wrestling in America.

ECW talents/alumnus that succeeded in WWE to varying levels: Al Snow, Taz, Stone Cold, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, Stevie Richards, The Dudley Boys Blue Meanie, Mick Foley, Tajiri, Lita, RVD

Even guys like Christopher Daniels are even relevant today

So It's nowhere near as "low rate" at the OP tries to make it sound IMHO and it deserves the acclaim it gets.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

ECW was important for its time. It caught people's attention despite its "bingo hall" status -- something that WWE always tried to label them with as a negative, yet to me, was part of why it was initially successful. Now, whether or not Taz is a pussy, or Rob Van Dam is a pothead who doesn't "get it" (whatever that means), I don't know. There's a whole heck of a lot of guys who parlayed their time in ECW to greater success, and that speaks to something that the promotion had going for it.

The problem with ECW was that it was ultimately unsustainable. The spot-heavy backyard wrestling antics were bound to implode someday. When the talent raids began in earnest, there was little that ECW could do to maintain interest. I think Heyman is very smart in the sense that he knows what makes for compelling wrestling. I also think he's probably more of a short term thinker. It's tough to say because we never really saw Heyman's next big thing after ECW.

 

[Just Do It]

It all comes down to personal opinion. Was ECW filled with a lot of junk? Yeah. Did it have a lot of awesome content, yeah.

Certain things are undeniable however: look at the careers it either directly launched or had a hand in helping.

 

[braveh]

Definitely overrated. Where was Paul Heyman's genius booking once they got on national Cable tv? Heyman is all talk. He is like a QB who can't perform in the play-offs. When it matters he doesn't know what to do.

I realized that I'm not an ECW-guy at all, after watching Best of uncensored, and Barbed wire city...also watched WWE's Fall and rise documentary.

After watching all of that I realized that my favorite ECW-match of all time was 2 Cold Scorpio Vs Shane Douglas ....that was Before Heyman was in charge. I guess I'm a purist. I like good wrestling in the ring. I don't like sheenanigans. I hate the stories about jumping off balconies, shooting cocain in the locker room, fist fights with fans....the real wrestlers moved on...the pathetic wrestlers stayed with Heyman (RVD is the exception, I respect him)

 

[Sweettre15]

Since some insist on burying Heyman's talent as a booker I feel the need to remind them:

- Paul Heyman's primary skill was being able to accentuate the good qualities of his talent or even his settings and do his best to camouflage the negatives.

- During ECW on TNN, Heyman was more worried about getting them to take him off the air so he could get a better deal so that easily could have played a part in why the quality of his booking wasn't that good during the TNN days .

- If we're going to pretend Heyman could only do "bloods and guts/shock value" then you guys should make sure to remind his work with Smackdown in late 2002. The Smackdown Six angle he did was a big part of why Smackdown was seen as being better than Raw as well as arguably being the best Smackdown had ever been.

So I don't see how Heyman could ever be considered "All talk".

 

[braveh]

Since some insist on burying Heyman's talent as a booker I feel the need to remind them:

- Paul Heyman's primary skill was being able to accentuate the good qualities of his talent or even his settings and do his best to camouflage the negatives.

- During ECW on TNN, Heyman was more worried about getting them to take him off the air so he could get a better deal so that easily could have played a part in why the quality of his booking wasn't that good during the TNN days .

- If we're going to pretend Heyman could only do "bloods and guts/shock value" then you guys should make sure to remind his work with Smackdown in late 2002. The Smackdown Six angle he did was a big part of why Smackdown was seen as being better than Raw as well as arguably being the best Smackdown had ever been.

So I don't see how Heyman could ever be considered "All talk".

I'm appalled. Every bad excuse in the book.

The average yearly rating for Smackdown went from 4.75 in 2000 to 4.05 in 2001 to 3.5 in 2002 (that's from the excel document on this site)

Obviously the jerk who knew how to book his basement show in Philly had no clue how to book a wrestling show on TNN and he had no clue how to book Smackdown. The numbers are there to prove my point.

He was great when he was running his cocain fueled fantasies in Philly but he was worthless as soon as he went national. ECW in 2006 is another example. HE didn't have a clue. Never did, never will.

You are going to back peddle and give me an excuse for every misstake Heyman ever made....but the fact remains:

He was the horrible QB who couldn't perform in the play-offs. Talked a big game, pissed his pants in the play-offs.

 

[MCMG]

I don't think ECW is overrated - I mean, do people actually rate it that highly. It was biggest promotion behind WWE/WCW and had some very talented individuals. The content was edgy but that doesn't make it garbage. It catered to a certain audience and did fairly well doing so.

As for Heyman, he was never had a business mind like Vince and that was his and ECW's biggest problem. If they had someone to work alongside Heyman than things may have worked out differently. As for Heyman himself; he may not have been a lot of things but he could spot talent. Anyone denying that is a moron. Benoit, Jericho, Malenko, Mysterio, Eddie were all brought up in ECW. In recent times it is CM Punk. Above all those names is of course Steve Austin who would may not have been a success if it wasn't for Heyman and ECW.

ECW might not have been near the level of WWE and WCW but it did help develop some incredible talent and provide genuine entertainment to many people.

 

[Sweettre15]

The average yearly rating for Smackdown went from 4.75 in 2000 to 4.05 in 2001 to 3.5 in 2002 (that's from the excel document on this site)

Obviously the jerk who knew how to book his basement show in Philly had no clue how to book a wrestling show on TNN and he had no clue how to book Smackdown. The numbers are there to prove my point.

Ok first off:

1. The Wrestling world had already took a tremendous hit in 2001

2. Are you really going solely on numbers when most will tell you that the Smackdown Six angle constantly stole the show on PPVs and on Smackdown itself as well as showing the talents of Angle, Benoit, Mysterio, Edge, Eddie, and Chavo Guerrero? Hell Heyman even won Best Booker Award from Wrestling Observer that year. This was while Raw was going through some of its worst storylines, whether it was Katie Vick or Any Scott Steiner angle. So trying to use numbers to discredit the QUALITY of someone's work is extremely biased.

 

[braveh]

Ok first off:

1. The Wrestling world had already took a tremendous hit in 2001

2. Are you really going solely on numbers when most will tell you that the Smackdown Six angle constantly stole the show on PPVs and on Smackdown itself as well as showing the talents of Angle, Benoit, Mysterio, Edge, Eddie, and Chavo Guerrero? Hell Heyman even won Best Booker Award from Wrestling Observer that year. This was while Raw was going through some of its worst storylines, whether it was Katie Vick or Any Scott Steiner angle. So trying to use numbers to discredit the QUALITY of someone's work is extremely biased.

He had three great chances to book a national wrestling show on tv. He failed each and every time.
Like I predicted you are going to deflect and give excuses to all of Heyman's failures.

According to you:
TNN - He didn't care fo the cable station
Smackdown - The wrestling business wasn't on top (excuse me nobody remembers those stupid angles, Angle, Edge, Mysterio, they all did better once Heyman was gone)
ECW 2006 - I haven't heard your excuse yet but I'm sure it's something along the lines of "Vince didn't want him to succeed".

I don't think ECW is overrated - I mean, do people actually rate it that highly. It was biggest promotion behind WWE/WCW and had some very talented individuals. The content was edgy but that doesn't make it garbage. It catered to a certain audience and did fairly well doing so.

As for Heyman, he was never had a business mind like Vince and that was his and ECW's biggest problem. If they had someone to work alongside Heyman than things may have worked out differently. As for Heyman himself; he may not have been a lot of things but he could spot talent. Anyone denying that is a moron. Benoit, Jericho, Malenko, Mysterio, Eddie were all brought up in ECW. In recent times it is CM Punk. Above all those names is of course Steve Austin who would may not have been a success if it wasn't for Heyman and ECW.

ECW might not have been near the level of WWE and WCW but it did help develop some incredible talent and provide genuine entertainment to many people.

Dave Meltzer has told the story on multiple occasions on how Heyman almost ruined John Cena's career. Due to Heyman putting the pressure on Vince and the creative team, Cena was brought up too early and debuted on national tv. He was so awful that almost everyone in the WWE wanted to fire him. It was thanks to a few people in the organization, that Cena wasn't let go, he was given a second chance...Heyman almost killed his career. Ask Dave Meltzer. Some genious booker huh?

Did he spot talent? Foley and Austin created their own success and their own gimmicks, RVD and Tazz were not game changers, neither was Raven....if CM Punk turn things around in the next 5 years then ok...I'll give you a point...right now, as great as he has been, has done very little for the business.

 

[Sweettre15]

He had three great chances to book a national wrestling show on tv. He failed each and every time.
Like I predicted you are going to deflect and give excuses to all of Heyman's failures.

According to you:
TNN - He didn't care fo the cable station
Smackdown - The wrestling business wasn't on top (excuse me nobody remembers those stupid angles, Angle, Edge, Mysterio, they all did better once Heyman was gone)

Ok now you just seemed to be trying to use numbers without having your own opinions.

I just read the yearly ratings for Smackdown and it wasn't even that much of a loss...if at all.

Look at the years when Heyman wasn't booking, the ratings went down further in 2004 and so on even when Batista was the top guy.

And remind me whose the "nobody" that remembered the Smackdown Six angle? Just about Anyone watching at the time will tell you how good they thought the angle as well as the string of matches were.

And no Heyman isn't fail since he didn't plummet the ratings like you want people to believe he did:

Ratings of 2002 Smackdown:

01/03/02 3.8
01/10/02 4.0
01/17/02 4.0
01/24/02 4.2
01/31/02 3.9
02/07/02 4.1
02/15/02 3.9
02/21/02 4.5
02/28/02 3.7
03/07/02 3.4
03/14/02 4.0
03/21/02 4.3
03/28/02 3.7
04/04/02 4.1
04/11/02 3.5
04/18/02 3.8
04/25/02 3.4
05/02/02 2.9
05/09/02 3.6
05/16/02 3.6
05/23/02 3.6
05/30/02 3.3
06/06/02 3.3
06/13/02 3.6
06/20/02 3.1
06/27/02 3.3
07/04/02 2.0
07/11/02 3.3
07/18/02 3.4
07/25/02 3.3
08/01/02 3.1
08/08/02 2.7
08/15/02 3.5
08/22/02 3.6
08/29/02 3.1
09/05/02 3.2
09/12/02 3.7
09/19/02 3.5
09/26/02 3.6
10/03/02 3.6
10/10/02 3.6
10/17/02 3.4
10/24/02 3.7
10/31/02 3.3
11/07/02 3.6
11/14/02 3.6
11/21/02 3.5
11/28/02 2.7
12/05/02 3.4
12/12/02 3.2
12/19/02 3.3
12/26/02 3.4

Smackdown from 2004-now would be lucky to even get those kind of ratings at all.

 

[braveh]

Ok now you just seemed to be trying to use numbers without having your own opinions.

I just read the yearly ratings for Smackdown and it wasn't even that much of a loss...if at all.

Look at the years when Heyman wasn't booking, the ratings went down further in 2004 and so on even when Batista was the top guy.

And remind me whose the "nobody" that remembered the Smackdown Six angle? Just about Anyone watching at the time will tell you how good they thought the angle as well as the string of matches were.

And no Heyman isn't fail since he didn't plummet the ratings like you want people to believe he did:

Ratings of 2002 Smackdown:

01/03/02 3.8
01/10/02 4.0
01/17/02 4.0
01/24/02 4.2
01/31/02 3.9
02/07/02 4.1
02/15/02 3.9
02/21/02 4.5
02/28/02 3.7
03/07/02 3.4
03/14/02 4.0
03/21/02 4.3
03/28/02 3.7
04/04/02 4.1
04/11/02 3.5
04/18/02 3.8
04/25/02 3.4
05/02/02 2.9
05/09/02 3.6
05/16/02 3.6
05/23/02 3.6
05/30/02 3.3
06/06/02 3.3
06/13/02 3.6
06/20/02 3.1
06/27/02 3.3
07/04/02 2.0
07/11/02 3.3
07/18/02 3.4
07/25/02 3.3
08/01/02 3.1
08/08/02 2.7
08/15/02 3.5
08/22/02 3.6
08/29/02 3.1
09/05/02 3.2
09/12/02 3.7
09/19/02 3.5
09/26/02 3.6
10/03/02 3.6
10/10/02 3.6
10/17/02 3.4
10/24/02 3.7
10/31/02 3.3
11/07/02 3.6
11/14/02 3.6
11/21/02 3.5
11/28/02 2.7
12/05/02 3.4
12/12/02 3.2
12/19/02 3.3
12/26/02 3.4

Smackdown from 2004-now would be lucky to even get those kind of ratings at all.

Oh this is tiresome. You are cherrypicking with your little talking points to defend this horrible booker.

His numbers when he was in charge of Smackdown..they're horrible. It's history, it's fact.

Look at Raw ratings, they went up in 2005 and 2006. THAT IS WHAT A GOOD BOOKER CAN ACCOMPLISH.

Heyman is not all that. He never cut it as a booker outside his little freak show in Philly. Ask Dave Meltzer.

And again you want to overlook the sheer amount of failures in career. The TNN show, Smackdown, ECW in 2006, almost killing John Cena, all his shady dealings in the original ECW, the failure of "his" stars in the major promotions: Raven, RVD, Tazz...they all failed in the major promotions. They were Heyman creations and they didn't cut it.

 

[Sweettre15]

You are cherrypicking with your little talking points to defend this horrible booker.

Again, are you talking from a quality standpoint aka your subjective enjoyment or solely based on numbers? The ratings were far from "terrible" unless you're logic is that only 4.0 and up ratings are considered good.

Look at Raw ratings, they went up in 2005 and 2006. THAT IS WHAT A GOOD BOOKER CAN ACCOMPLISH.

Yeah Nevermind that that Raw in those years had HHH, Shawn Michaels, Chris Jericho, Ric Flair, Kurt Angle part time involvement from Mick Foley and Stone Cold Steve Austin

A red hot John Cena, a red hot Batista before he moved to Smackdown, Edge with a newfound amount of heel heat......All on one show. Regardless of the booking quality or lack thereof in some parts, that was pretty much a recipe for success because ALL of those guys were either Veteran fan favorites or at the right place at the right time.

Smackdown at the time were building up talents with little to no veterans on the show.

As for your other points, No one ever said Heyman had the best business ethics or was a good accountant but merely a strong creative mind.

- Regarding ECW on Syfy, Heyman's control was limited at best and not only that notice that ECW One Night Stand 2005 was financially successful when Heyman had a strong amount of creative control over it.

- As for RVD and Tazz, it wasn't like they were incapable of getting over in WWF/E because they did and RVD is still an over act in WWE just because he wasn't "The one" doesn't mean he failed and correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Tazz's injuries play a part in his "failing"?

- Now I can't comment on the Cena thing because I wouldn't know if it was true or not but I remember his debut against Kurt Angle making him look good on TV.

- As for Raven, in all fairness, no one in the other companies really got his character. WCW ruined it with their backstory that just made it seem like he was a spoiled emo and WWF just ruined his gimmick flat out.

Not to mention, it doesn't change the fact that Heyman also created an environment that showed the potential of Guerrero, Benoit, Rey Mysterio, Chris Jericho, Al Snow, Mick Foley, Steve Austin, Stevie Richards, And Lita to show their potential in some way or form that lead to them ending up in WWE and WCW. Notice not all of them may have made it to the main event or whatever but "not in the main event" doesn't automatically equal failure IMO.

Not only that but Heyman mentored Gabe Sapolsky whom gave ROH their best booked years in a time when their roster was the most stacked.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

Dave Meltzer has told the story on multiple occasions on how Heyman almost ruined John Cena's career. Due to Heyman putting the pressure on Vince and the creative team, Cena was brought up too early and debuted on national tv. He was so awful that almost everyone in the WWE wanted to fire him. It was thanks to a few people in the organization, that Cena wasn't let go, he was given a second chance...Heyman almost killed his career. Ask Dave Meltzer. Some genious booker huh?

Unless you can cite an article or interview where Meltzer says this, I'm gonna call this one BS.

Did he spot talent? Foley and Austin created their own success and their own gimmicks, RVD and Tazz were not game changers, neither was Raven....if CM Punk turn things around in the next 5 years then ok...I'll give you a point...right now, as great as he has been, has done very little for the business.

Who cares if they were game changers or not? You're saying it was a worthless promotion that had little to nothing to offer other than cocaine fueled bloodbaths. And yet that same promotion churned out a steady stream of long lasting players who went on to do well. Now you're moving the goalposts on the argument and looking for "game changers".

Benoit, Malenko, Jericho, Guerrero, Mysterio, The Dudley Boys, Rhino, Perry Saturn, Kid Kash, Tommy Dreamer, Psychosis...there's a good list of guys who got a big boost from ECW. Again, I'm not going to say Heyman was a genius. He rode a wave for a few years and when shit got real, it came crashing down. But I think some credit IS due.

 

[DDevine]

I'm not a HUGE fan of ECW. But I do have to give them props for their contributions. To me, the OP considers "being a superstar" to be the ultimate goal of all wrestlers. They give off the idea that only those who have a muscular build can be believable competitors (the whole RVD<Cena thing). ECW was the alternative to mainstream. In the Rise and Fall dvd, Heyman says it best. He says that WWE and WCW were like the Guns N Roses and Motley Crue of wrestling. And then, all of a sudden, ECW, the Nirvana, the Pearl Jam, comes in out of nowhere. Wrestling, like music, has many flavors, many different niches. Heyman played to the ones he knew he could get. He showed us that our opinion mattered. That's the extent of the ECW phenomenon. They gave fans that wanted an alternative, an alternative. He didn't give us characters, he gave us people with the volume turned up. He gave us these people that we could identify with. Maybe one person would identify with Taz, maybe someone else with RVD, and maybe there was some lonely teen off in their room, hating the world for seemingly ignoring them, that identified with Raven. To fully appreciate ECW, you had to look at it in more of a psychological or philisophical way.

WWE had Repoman. WCW had Glacier (though in my youth, I liked Glacier, I thought his karate was kinda cool). ECW had Taz, who was a small guy compared to most wrestlers, but he had explosive moves that hid that fact. Nobody cared that Taz was shorter than Sabu, they cared that he was angry, they cared that he was angry about something he couldn't help (like many people), and that he was taking that anger out on others. They cared that he was going from being someone who didn't "measure up" to what others thought he should be, to a threat to everyone. RVD represented the potheads, so to speak. He represented the people who wanted an escape because everyone said they wouldn't amount to anything. Yet here he was, doing what he liked to do, and being good at it. Raven represented the emo/goth population, the ones who felt outcast from the rest of society. Raven was someone who took all that angst and anxiety, and turned it into violence. He struck out at all those who by association were the "oppressors". He was a hero to a group that believed all their heroes were dead. Tommy Dreamer, Mikey Whipwreck, a slew of others, represented the everyman, the underdog. No matter how much they were beaten, ho bloody they got, they kept coming back, they never gave up. They were precursors to John Cena, in a way.

As for the unbelievability, you gotta look at it this way. Nobody mentions the "other guys" WCW tried it, and it failed when WWE started doing something right. WWE never mentioned WCW in it's show. ECW only mentioned the other guys when they were making fun of them, and even then it was more the wrestlers than the company. So, their focus is on the fans. And to the casual fan that doesn't try to remember that wrestling is fake, who's going to look tougher: the guy who gets put out by a leg drop or a sleeper hold, or the guy who can take all this damage, be busted open, and still find the strength to kick out at 2? And to the non-casual fan, the smark, who knows that wrestling is fake, they are exploiting the fact that we know a chair shot doesn't do the damage it's "supposed" to do.

Now whether or not Heyman was responsible for success or not is an opinionated matter. He was responsible for creating an environment in which these ideas were possible. He knew his audience, he knew what they wanted, and he gave it to them. His problems were not in creativity, but in the fact that the people he catered to were not the ones that would bring in the big money. Also, he didn't have the ability to politic as well as say Vince or Eric. He didn't have the big name to draw in the people. He had the home grown stars that really only appealed to the people who already knew him. And the production values were on par with that.

In closing, Heyman wasn't necessarily a genius, just really lucky, and smarter than the average walrus. ECW wasn't the great Lancelot to the King Arthurs, but it was the Lady of the Lake. ECW wasn't the Elvis, or the Michael Jackson, or even the Tupac. They were the Nirvana, they pushed the mold, and bent it out of shape, and were gone just as quickly as they got there (a la Kurt Cobain). Then, later on they tried to remix it, and bring it back up (looking at the post-mortem Nirvana songs where they edited in clips of Kurt), and it just wasn't the same, because it didn't have the same feel, or the same luck.

 

[The Boss]

I was into ECW for a while when I first discovered it. I got tired of it before too long because, for the most part, it was just a one trick pony. It seemed that 90% of the matches were these over the top spotfests that revolved around weapons, one dangerous spot after another, no storytelling and wrestlers who had no real character or personality. There were some genuinely talented guys who came out of ECW, some of those names I mentioned, so ECW wasn't a total failure when it came down to offering an innovative alternative to the more mainstream companies. It also generated some stars of its own and gave future stars a platform that helped lead to stardom later down the road.

That's pretty much my thoughts on ECW. It was a cool alternative at first because it was so different. But it got stale VERY quickly because it never built to anything. They tried to start every feud at the climax and just do it over and over. The problem is that it left no room for any progression. And all of that pointless cussing made them sound like a bunch of sixth graders trying to ask tough. With only a few exceptions all the stars that where in ECW made their names before or after their ECW stint so they more or less just past through ECW.

I agree with the original post. ECW was/is over rated.

 

[HAYDEN WYCKED]

I someone who did enjoy the product who traveled to see it for yrs an looked at it for what it was worth, never seen it as a 1 or 2 but as a whole different thing.not clean and pretty with deep pockets to make it that way.it was gritty a working mans hard nosed wrestling promotion with some crazy off the wall bs.ECW had its place in the biz they made the other two companies take notice,who cares about ratings if you never attended a show you'll never know the energy that was in the place.yea paul was this paul was that and drugs and sex and violence.the place was always packed?iam sorry TV did it no justice and the PPV's sucked even for me but the live shows amazing and you could talk and see the wrestlers being themselves.that you will never see in todays WWE with out paying $100 "jmo"
being old enough to of gone to Allentown P.A and to a few place in nj back in the day to see a wwwf show and there was like maybe 100 peps there.PLEASE the"W" wasnt always pyrotech's and pretty peps.folks who live in the NOW wrestling have no idea of the pre Wrestlemania era of the "W" it wasnt pretty.they use to do armories and high schools just a territory promotion.i remember going to a show at elizabeth high school in nj.the main event was Dusty Rhodes vs Ivan Koloff in a chain match.NICE MATCH good blood fighting all over the school.the rest of the card had Tony Garea,Dino Bravo,Dominic Denucci,Johnny Rodz.Jose Estrada,The Samoans and a group of others.
i guess what iam saying why hate on ECW everyone starts in the same place at the bottom with shady BS and so on.Its wrestling its not your life or death thing to worry about just be a fan..
one thing iam glad about as a older fan i got to witness and see alot of good and bad territory wrestling.the IWC would of killed the past and theres been a lot of shady owners and still are..........HW

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

ECW is overrated by a lot of people today. Personally, I put prime ROH over prime ECW as far as quality. ECW is a lot like the movie Citizen Kane. If you don't know, Citizen Kane introduced a ton of new film techniques and had a unique story for the time. It's often cited as the greatest movie of all time because of it. Personally, it's not THAT good but I respect it as a revolution.

 

[#tamale]

ECW isn't overrated. It's polarizing. It was influential to what WWE and WCW would do next. ECW introduced the other two companies to the lucha libre style, hardcore wrestling, technical wrestling, future wrestling stars, more creative input by talent, a sense of unpredictability, enhanced fan interaction, etc. These are positives that were used by the WWE/WCW to upgrade their shows.

The negatives...well, reliance on overbooking, harmful workers, extreme violence, and the list can go and on. Looking back to what ECW did from PPVs to TV, the quality of the shows ranged from mediocre to average with the occasional good show. The truth is once ECW lost Rey, Jericho, Eddie, Benoit, they couldn't replace what they did. Once they had guys who could replace them (RVD, Taz, Rhyno), they didn't place them in a position to be the face of the company instead relying on Shane Douglas and Justin Credible.

ECW as a business was unexceptional, but you can't deny the influence they had on WWE/WCW which helped introduce the mainstream audience to a wider array of wrestling and superstars.

 

[Matty~!]

Was ECW Over rated? Hell f'n Yes

Was it basically a a glorified independent? Hell F'n Yes

Did I love it? Hell F'n Yes!

Who in the blue hell cares about what the promoter was like, or what the talent did in their spare time? Because at the end of the day whether it was the most talented guys on the roster or the least talented guy on the roster, they bled, sweathed and breathed ECW while they worked for the promotion.

It has it issues like any wrestling promotion, twelve years on they become exacerbated by myth, popular legend and the winners always writing the history book, in this case WWE.

I could reel off a load of retorts to the amount of ill informed opinions that scour the last 3 pages of this thread from various people. However it would be a waste of breath because you either weren't a fan back in the day, forming your opinion on hearsay, not to mention the unique circumstances ECW thrived under for most of its existence . Or you were someone back in the day and it's not your cup of tea, fair enough.

I would say for anyone interested on actually finding out what ECW was all about...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Turning-Tables-Extreme-Championship-Wrestling/dp/1905363788

The above book is an excellent catalogue of the biggest talking points in company history from an excellent freelance writer, who attended shows during its heyday and watched it's demise in the following years.

Final word..... End of the day Heyman lost around about $7 million in a little over 7 years. Compared to WCW shedding $80 million in one solitary year, not to mention the bucket loads TNA has shed in its 10 years. So for all his 'issues' he must of been doing something better than the people who had control of WCW or have control of TNA. Simply because twelve years on that little glorified independent from Philadelphia, PA is still talked about more passionately, which ever side of the fence you fall, than any other promotion ever I would say.

 

[Stinger]

First off, I want to say that I believe Benoit left ECW when he realized that Heyman wasn't able to (or was procrastinating) get him the proper paperwork needed for him to work in the United States. Benoit said that he was told by someone at customs something like "we know who we are, we know what you're doing, and one day you're going to get caught here and you won't be allowed back in the country for a long time." So Benoit told Heyman he didn't do that anymore, so he left for WCW.

Anyhow, I believe the "dirty, underground, shady" feeling was part of the appeal of ECW.

Now personally, I wasn't someone who watched ECW religiously, but I did watch it on occasion in 2000 when it was on TNN. While I did feel it was a distant third behind the WWF and WCW, I do feel that it was still a nice alternative to the big two promotions. While there were plenty of guys in ECW who wouldn't have cut it in the big two promotions, but there were guys such as Rob Van Dam and Taz would would have and did ultimately fit in nicely.

Ultimately, I think what's going on with ECW is that fans are looking back on it now and finding it more appealing than the product that is available nowadays. Personally, I'd rather watch old ECW highlights right now than most of what's on nowadays, but I'd prefer to watch WCW and the WWF from 1998-2001 instead.