If Sandman Was Never "Crucified"...

[NSL]

...would ECW still be alive today?

I know there's a lot of "What if" threads, and I'm sure they're worth reading. But, this one came to me while reading The Rise And Fall Of ECW. The night that Sandman was "crucified" outside the ring, in the ECW arena, was the same night that Heyman was trying to woo Kurt Angle to ECW, after he had already turned down Vince, because he thought he was above professional wrestling.

According to both sides, the night was going fine, until Raven, Stevie, and Meanie, pulled the cross out from under the ring, and started tying Sandman to it. They also put a barbwire crown on his head, and then carried him to the back. At that point, Angle threw a fit, and said he would sue if he was ever shown in the video for that part of the show. Heyman promised him he wouldn't, and said he would only appear for his commentary on the Tazz match that night, because if Angle signed, his first feud would've been with Tazz.

If this never happened, and Angle signed with ECW, would we still have the original ECW alive today? Think of all the ramifications. Vince would not have landed Angle, which would have made a lot of feuds not happen. Brock, Rock, Show, Cena, Rey, Booker and others would never have feuded with him, having amazing matches, and pushing themselves to the top. He never would have left for TNA, and given them a big name to market, giving them a wider fanbase.

ECW would have almost assuredly been handed a legit TV deal on a silver platter. The TNN deal, and the pay-per-view company screwing them out of money, was a large part of their downfall. Heyman would not have had to lie to most of his guys, if he actually had the money to pay them regularly, and give them competing salaries, so Bischoff and McMahon couldn't steal them away.

A feud with Tazz would've been gold at that time. They had Jericho, Guerrero, and Malenko all wrestling real matches, and getting the fans primed for the main event. They were also on the verge of bringing in Rey Mysterio, Psychosis, and Juventud, who all could have had great matches with Angle. The arrival of Angle also would've attracted a lot more talent to the company, and would've kept the audience, and the roster, growing.

Bottom line, as much as I love the crucifixion angle, I think ECW would have been a lot better off if it wouldn't have happened.

 

[The Mizard of Oz]

No.

The idea that Kurt Angle alone could have saved ECW is ludicrous to me.

The WWE is still going strong today without Angle. While he is a great performer, he is not Stone Cold, he is not Hulk Hogan, and he is not the Rock. Now if STEVE AUSTIN never left ECW, then today's wrestling landscape would obviously be very different. ECW still probably would have went belly-up, but the WWF would have went with it.

 

[NSL]

No.

Gee thanks for your great response.

The idea that Kurt Angle alone could have saved ECW is ludicrous to me.

Good thing it's only you.

He wouldn't have single-handedly saved ECW, but he would've gave it some credibility in the mainstream, allowing ECW to afford more talent, and to keep the talent they had, as well as getting the TV deal in '96, instead of '99/'00. Styles said himself, that ECW needed to be on TV then, not when they finally ended up there.

Also, with Angle in ECW, he wouldn't have been in WWE, or worse, WCW. The names he pushed to the top, may not have made it without their time against him.

The WWE is still going strong today without Angle. While he is a great performer, he is not Stone Cold, he is not Hulk Hogan, and he is not the Rock. Now if STEVE AUSTIN never left ECW, then today's wrestling landscape would obviously be very different. ECW still probably would have went belly-up, but the WWF would have went with it.

I'm sure that they would still be going today if he never got there. I'm not saying WWE was going to crash and burn because ECW got some notoriety. I've said all over in other threads, that WWE, and WCW at the time, are the way they are, because of ECW's influence. WWE would still be a huge name, and still #1. I'm sure WCW would be gone too. But, would we have TNA? Or, would all those guys just be hanging around in ECW? Heyman was the first man to give Rey and Jericho a chance in the states, so don't you think he would've signed AJ Styles, Abyss, or Daniels back in 2003?

I don't think Austin makes a difference in whether or not the company succeeded. He made his character in ECW, and moved on, long before ECW even garnered any real success. They still hadn't hit pay-per view by the time he was gone.

 

[X]

He wouldn't have single-handedly saved ECW, but he would've gave it some credibility in the mainstream, allowing ECW to afford more talent, and to keep the talent they had, as well as getting the TV deal in '96, instead of '99/'00. Styles said himself, that ECW needed to be on TV then, not when they finally ended up there.

That's a whole lot of speculation and that's it. How would Angle have given ECW mainstream credibility? Kurt Angle was never a mainstream wrestler, nor is he now. If Angle joined ECW it really just wouldn't have worked out because of the style of wrestling that ECW presented and the style that Angle became popular with. The whole spoiled-brat Olympic Hero character would never have taken off in ECW. I can't see Angle doing some kind of hard-edged controversial character, can you? It's just not him. Heyman wouldn't have known what to do with him.

I'm also not sure how landing Angle would have led to a TV deal. Angle was a nobody in 1996, and still needed a serious amount of training before being able to step into the ring.

And Joey Styles likes to think ECW could have made it big time if they had gotten the right deal. But it's bullshit. ECW was never going to be mainstream, because their product catered exclusively to a small minority of wrestling fans. When you're consciously trying to alienate a large portion of your potential audience, you aren't going to suceed. Ever.

I'm sure that they would still be going today if he never got there. I'm not saying WWE was going to crash and burn because ECW got some notoriety. I've said all over in other threads, that WWE, and WCW at the time, are the way they are, because of ECW's influence.

ECW definately brought some attitude to the US and was partly responsible for that era. But the WWF did what ECW couldn't, or wasn't willing to, and that was cater to more then just the hipster smarks with their controversial gimmicks/storylines.

[quoteI don't think Austin makes a difference in whether or not the company succeeded. He made his character in ECW, and moved on, long before ECW even garnered any real success. They still hadn't hit pay-per view by the time he was gone.[/QUOTE]

C'mon man, the ECW Austin was almost nothing like Stone Cold. He cursed and that was about it, that was the only similiarity. I mean do you remember that awful haircut?!

The thing with ECW is, despite how much I love it...it just was destined to fail. If Heyman was content with keeping ECW's costs down and doing something along the lines of what ROH does today, then they could have soldiered on possibly, but he was too ambitious. He took an ideological standpoint with his business, instead of looking at the situation realistically. Your average wrestling fan doesn't give a shit about Shane Douglas or Raven. Sad, but true. And as long as he kept booking his shows around guys like this, ECW was never going to be a national promotion.

 

[NSL]

That's a whole lot of speculation and that's it. How would Angle have given ECW mainstream credibility? Kurt Angle was never a mainstream wrestler, nor is he now.

He isn't a mainstream wrestler now? He was huge in WWE, and is now a top guy in the #2 company in the country. I'd say he's pretty mainstream.

If Angle joined ECW it really just wouldn't have worked out because of the style of wrestling that ECW presented and the style that Angle became popular with.

The TV Title was all about "real" wrestling. It featured guys like Jericho, Scorpio, Benoit, and Guerrero, and Heyman wanted Angle to come in, and be a star there. He wanted him to show that hardcore wrestling doesn't mean chairs and barbwire, but hardcore in the passion the wrestlers had for the business. He would have been a success there, just like RVD or Shane were with the TV Title.

The whole spoiled-brat Olympic Hero character would never have taken off in ECW.

With the fans ECW had, I think it would have made him a classic heel. Tazz was about to be pushed as a face, and these two could have had a hell of a feud over this. The fans would've appreciated his background, but hated his attitude, and he would've been just as good a heel as he was when he was in WWE, or when he first arrived in TNA.

I can't see Angle doing some kind of hard-edged controversial character, can you? It's just not him. Heyman wouldn't have known what to do with him.

He didn't want to do anything with him. He wanted him to come in, and be a wrestler. He wanted to show that there was more than just blood and guts to the show, and by showcasing the athleticism, he would've gotten a bit more respect for the company. In the book, it states that Heyman was great as a booker, because he knew how to hide his guy's weaknesses. He was able to make them the best at what they could do. It would've been the same with Angle.

I'm also not sure how landing Angle would have led to a TV deal. Angle was a nobody in 1996, and still needed a serious amount of training before being able to step into the ring.

I wouldn't say he was a nobody. He was on the Wheaties box, just won the gold, and had a bunch of other medals and awards to his name. I'm not saying he was surpassing MJ for movie deals, but at least he was known. Part of the reason they didn't get a TV deal back in '96, was because all the networks saw "extreme" and *****ed out, thinking it was more than it was, and didn't respect it as a wrestling organization. Having a gold medalist wrestler changes that view.

And Joey Styles likes to think ECW could have made it big time if they had gotten the right deal. But it's bullshit. ECW was never going to be mainstream, because their product catered exclusively to a small minority of wrestling fans. When you're consciously trying to alienate a large portion of your potential audience, you aren't going to suceed. Ever.

ECW was great, because it wasn't mainstream. So, even if they never got to be "mainstream", at least they'd have the chance to show what they had, an possibly make the mainstream come to them. They weren't trying to alienate anyone either. They bought in the luchadors and Canadians, so that they could showcase wrestling on the monthly shows, and not just be a show dedicated to fans who like seeing guys bleed to death.

ECW definately brought some attitude to the US and was partly responsible for that era. But the WWF did what ECW couldn't, or wasn't willing to, and that was cater to more then just the hipster smarks with their controversial gimmicks/storylines.

It seems like you're implying that WWE didn't have controversial gimmicks and storylines, so if I'm wrong, then don't mind this enxt part:

WWE had it's fair share. Look at the Katie Vick angle. Or, the Kane v. Taker angle. Or, the Steph kidnapping. Or, The Artist Formerly Known As Goldust. It definitely had it's fair share of "out there" gimmicks to attract new fans, since it was getting killed by WCW, who was taking the top talent away from ECW, like Jericho, Rey, Public Enemy, Benoit, Guerrero, Raven, and so many others.

C'mon man, the ECW Austin was almost nothing like Stone Cold. He cursed and that was about it, that was the only similiarity. I mean do you remember that awful haircut?!

From Austin's very first ECW promo, until the day he left, he was building towards the Stone Cold gimmick. He came in as a badass, cussing out anyone and everyone, and it all carried over to WWE. The leather vest, the beer drinking, and everything else, didn't come until later, but how much of that could he have done in ECW, and still gotten over? Sandman was already there beating everyone, and getting drunk at ringside.

The thing with ECW is, despite how much I love it...it just was destined to fail. If Heyman was content with keeping ECW's costs down and doing something along the lines of what ROH does today, then they could have soldiered on possibly, but he was too ambitious.

I was with you until "ambitious". How is that a bad thing? And, it's not like he rushed anything. It was 7 years later that he finally got a TV deal! It was way too late at that point, as the talent was mostly gone, and the gimmicks and storylines had already been stolen away. The crucifixion was the beginning of the end for ECW, and then WWE stole it on more than one occasion. They used it with Steph on the cross, and they hung Bossman from the cage.

He took an ideological standpoint with his business, instead of looking at the situation realistically. Your average wrestling fan doesn't give a shit about Shane Douglas or Raven. Sad, but true. And as long as he kept booking his shows around guys like this, ECW was never going to be a national promotion.

As much as I hate the argument about backstage power, you have a point here. Raven was involved in a lot of angles, because he booked almost all of his stuff. His storylines at first, were greatness. The angles with Sandman and Dreamer made ECW what it was, and carried it for a long time. But, he ran his course. As far as Douglas, he needed to be the center of the show. He was "The Franchise", and not just in name. By throwing down the NWA belt, he became the figurehead for the company. By throwing down Pitbull #1 by his halo, he became the line that everyone else would have to cross. He made the TV Title important before RVD ever wore a jockstrap in the arena, and he made the ECW Title.

 

[The Mizard of Oz]

Gee thanks for your great response.

I answered your question below. You even quoted it and responded to it. Nice attempt at being a smartass, though.

Good thing it's only you.

He wouldn't have single-handedly saved ECW,

Oh, I guess it's NOT only me.

but he would've gave it some credibility in the mainstream, allowing ECW to afford more talent, and to keep the talent they had, as well as getting the TV deal in '96, instead of '99/'00. Styles said himself, that ECW needed to be on TV then, not when they finally ended up there.

Why? Who the fuck was Kurt Angle before he joined the WWF? Yeah, I can see that all over the mainstream media: "Olympic Gold medalist Kurt Angle signs with cult wrestling promotion based out of Pennsylvania". Entertainment Tonight and Sportscenter would have ate that shit up.

Also, with Angle in ECW, he wouldn't have been in WWE, or worse, WCW. The names he pushed to the top, may not have made it without their time against him.

Maybe...maybe not. But I don't think Rey Mysterio getting put over has anything to do with the survival of ECW.

I'm sure that they would still be going today if he never got there. I'm not saying WWE was going to crash and burn because ECW got some notoriety. I've said all over in other threads, that WWE, and WCW at the time, are the way they are, because of ECW's influence. WWE would still be a huge name, and still #1. I'm sure WCW would be gone too. But, would we have TNA? Or, would all those guys just be hanging around in ECW? Heyman was the first man to give Rey and Jericho a chance in the states, so don't you think he would've signed AJ Styles, Abyss, or Daniels back in 2003?

That's assuming that Kurt Angle would have saved ECW. I'm saying that there is no chance in Hell that would have ever happened. But, to play along, yes, there probably would be a TNA, just a radically different version of it. TNA is Jeff Jarrett's baby, and I honestly can't see Jarrett going to ECW. So, he would have probably started TNA regardless of whether ECW was still around or not.

I don't think Austin makes a difference in whether or not the company succeeded. He made his character in ECW, and moved on, long before ECW even garnered any real success. They still hadn't hit pay-per view by the time he was gone.

As I said in my first post, whether or not Austin stayed in ECW did not matter for ECW, it mattered for the WWF. Had he stayed in ECW, it's arguable that the only company around today would be WCW.

 

[Hyorinmaru]

I'm also not sure how landing Angle would have led to a TV deal. Angle was a nobody in 1996, and still needed a serious amount of training before being able to step into the ring.

Hold on a second, Angle was a nobody in 1996? The year he won a gold medal, you're joking right? To have a gold medal winning athlete in your promotion lends you a lot of credibility. I'm not saying they would have landed a TV deal right then but it would have happened a lot sooner than it did and the landscape of Pro wrestling would be different.

As for the training Angle would have most certainly gotten it before stepping into the ring

 

[NSL]

I answered your question below. You even quoted it and responded to it. Nice attempt at being a smartass, though.

Your rebuttal wasn't much better, but whatever...

Oh, I guess it's NOT only me.

It was for your post...

Why? Who the fuck was Kurt Angle before he joined the WWF? Yeah, I can see that all over the mainstream media: "Olympic Gold medalist Kurt Angle signs with cult wrestling promotion based out of Pennsylvania". Entertainment Tonight and Sportscenter would have ate that shit up.

In case you didn't notice, ESPN is fucking huge, and everyone watches it. So, having it appear on there, and through things like ET, would've done great things for the company, and would've been just right for ECW, to appear on smaller "news" shows, than to pop up on Good Morning America, or 20/20.

Maybe...maybe not. But I don't think Rey Mysterio getting put over has anything to do with the survival of ECW.

I'm just saying that the guys that Angle helped put over, are the guys that are carrying WWE now, and helped carry WWE then. Without Angle, who would Lesnar have had any good matches against? How about Booker T? Or, Cena?

That's assuming that Kurt Angle would have saved ECW. I'm saying that there is no chance in Hell that would have ever happened. But, to play along, yes, there probably would be a TNA, just a radically different version of it. TNA is Jeff Jarrett's baby, and I honestly can't see Jarrett going to ECW. So, he would have probably started TNA regardless of whether ECW was still around or not.

Jarrett is a fucking waste, but that's for a different thread. TNA would have started, because of Jarrett, but it wouldn't have gone far, without guys like Lynn and Raven carrying it through it's early days. I also stated how guys like Daniels and Styles could have been snatched up by ECW, so TNA would essentially have guys that are struggling in ROH now, and who knows where they would have been.

As I said in my first post, whether or not Austin stayed in ECW did not matter for ECW, it mattered for the WWF. Had he stayed in ECW, it's arguable that the only company around today would be WCW.

I still think that the WWE would have outlasted WCW. The Rock was still bigger than anything WCW had going for it at the end, and Vince could've brought back Michaels, and he had HHH on the rise. Austin was big for WWE, but he wasn't the only man carrying that ship through troubled waters.

 

[X]

He isn't a mainstream wrestler now

By mainstream, I mean pop culture mainstream. Not main event wrestler, I'm talking about your Hogan's, your Austin's, your Rocky's. Angle isn't one of those kind of guys who can instantly add credibility and prestige to your company.

He was huge in WWE, and is now a top guy in the #2 company in the country. I'd say he's pretty mainstream.

I wouldn't exactly say he was huge in WWE. During his last days there he was anything but. But still, I meant mainstream like Rock or Hogan or Austin.

The TV Title was all about "real" wrestling. It featured guys like Jericho, Scorpio, Benoit, and Guerrero, and Heyman wanted Angle to come in, and be a star there. He wanted him to show that hardcore wrestling doesn't mean chairs and barbwire, but hardcore in the passion the wrestlers had for the business. He would have been a success there, just like RVD or Shane were with the TV Title.

I was actually referring more to the actual storylines of ECW then I was the in-ring action. Angle's Olympic Hero gimmick wouldn't have gone over in ECW, and considering Angle didn't really hit his technical stride in-ring until well after his '99 debut, the fans probably wouldn't have bought into it either.

With the fans ECW had, I think it would have made him a classic heel. Tazz was about to be pushed as a face, and these two could have had a hell of a feud over this. The fans would've appreciated his background, but hated his attitude, and he would've been just as good a heel as he was when he was in WWE, or when he first arrived in TNA.

If Angle had the Olympic Hero goofball gimmick in ECW, and feuded with Taz, it would not have worked. Think about it; on one hand you've got Taz, who is the biggest badass in ECW history. On the other, you have a rookie still cutting his teeth with a goofball gimmick. Who the hell would buy into believing for even a moment that Angle would win that feud?

I think you're giving Angle too much credit in the beginning. Angle didn't start having quality matches until the year 2000, after ECW had died. It's not like just because he would be signed to ECW he'd somehow be the current technical master that he is now in 1996. It doesn't work like that, amateur wrestling is obscenely different from pro wrestling.

He didn't want to do anything with him. He wanted him to come in, and be a wrestler. He wanted to show that there was more than just blood and guts to the show, and by showcasing the athleticism, he would've gotten a bit more respect for the company.

A) Heyman already had a slew of in-ring technicians with great athletiscism. ECW was just as much about in-ring wrestling as it was about trashy hardcore wrestling for a while there. Didn't achieve any newfound respect for the company when Dean Malenko and Eddie Guerrero were having a 2 out of 3 falls masterpiece.

B) The only people this great in-ring athleticism and wrestling would create newfound respect for would be smarks. The audience that ECW was already catering to.

C) Angle couldn't wrestle for jack-shit in 1996.

In the book, it states that Heyman was great as a booker, because he knew how to hide his guy's weaknesses. He was able to make them the best at what they could do. It would've been the same with Angle.

Angle was a good booker from a creative standpoint, but from an actual wrestling business (and it is a business after all) point of view, he was shit.

I wouldn't say he was a nobody. He was on the Wheaties box, just won the gold, and had a bunch of other medals and awards to his name. I'm not saying he was surpassing MJ for movie deals, but at least he was known.

Olympic Gold Medalists (unless they win a dozen of them like Michael Phelps) are always quickly forgotten about. 99% of Americans wouldn't be able to name you a single American Gold Medalist outside of Michael Phelps last year, if ever.

Part of the reason they didn't get a TV deal back in '96, was because all the networks saw "extreme" and *****ed out, thinking it was more than it was, and didn't respect it as a wrestling organization. Having a gold medalist wrestler changes that view.

I highly doubt anyone was going to come running with a TV deal because ECW signed Kurt Angle. In fact, that's pretty outlandish.

ECW was great, because it wasn't mainstream. So, even if they never got to be "mainstream", at least they'd have the chance to show what they had, an possibly make the mainstream come to them. They weren't trying to alienate anyone either. They bought in the luchadors and Canadians, so that they could showcase wrestling on the monthly shows, and not just be a show dedicated to fans who like seeing guys bleed to death.

They most certainly were trying to alienate people, their whole shtick was that they were Anti-WWF/WCW, and Anti-Mainstream. You can't deny that ECW was hardcore-ly elitist, their fans prided themselves on being "better" wrestling fans then your average WWF/WCW fan.

Their product was a niche product though NSL. By definition it appealed to only a limited amount of people.

It seems like you're implying that WWE didn't have controversial gimmicks and storylines, so if I'm wrong, then don't mind this enxt part:

Not at all, I was saying that WWF expanded past just the controversial gimmicks and catered to your average wrestling fans still with the old-school tried and true standard wrestling feuds. They didn't just relegate themselves to one niche.

From Austin's very first ECW promo, until the day he left, he was building towards the Stone Cold gimmick. He came in as a badass, cussing out anyone and everyone, and it all carried over to WWE. The leather vest, the beer drinking, and everything else, didn't come until later, but how much of that could he have done in ECW, and still gotten over? Sandman was already there beating everyone, and getting drunk at ringside.

I agree it started there, but that's only because the Stone Cold gimmick is really just who Steve is in real life. It's really a lack of a gimmick if you think about it.

I was with you until "ambitious". How is that a bad thing? And, it's not like he rushed anything.

It's a bad thing when you overestimate your product and the demand for it. That's just simple business 101 right there. Heyman thought he could compete with WCW/WWF, when in truth he really couldn't.

It was 7 years later that he finally got a TV deal! It was way too late at that point, as the talent was mostly gone, and the gimmicks and storylines had already been stolen away. The crucifixion was the beginning of the end for ECW, and then WWE stole it on more than one occasion. They used it with Steph on the cross, and they hung Bossman from the cage.

Seven years? When did 7 years become such a long time? That's relatively fast considering how long it took some of the old territories/promotions to land regional TV deals, let alone national.

And yeah, of course WWF stole a bunch of ideas from ECW. Everyone did.

As much as I hate the argument about backstage power, you have a point here. Raven was involved in a lot of angles, because he booked almost all of his stuff. His storylines at first, were greatness. The angles with Sandman and Dreamer made ECW what it was, and carried it for a long time. But, he ran his course. As far as Douglas, he needed to be the center of the show. He was "The Franchise", and not just in name. By throwing down the NWA belt, he became the figurehead for the company. By throwing down Pitbull #1 by his halo, he became the line that everyone else would have to cross. He made the TV Title important before RVD ever wore a jockstrap in the arena, and he made the ECW Title.

Hey don't get me wrong man, I fucking love Raven and his feud with Tommy Dreamer in ECW is one of my all time favorites. But realistically a Raven-Dreamer feud isn't going to draw millions of PPV buys, it's just not going to happen.

Hold on a second, Angle was a nobody in 1996? The year he won a gold medal, you're joking right?

Clearly you must be. Wrestling Gold Medalists are one rung below 80's children stars when it comes to fame, you ask anyone on the street to name you even one American wrestling gold medalist, and they'll look at you with a blank stare and say "What?". Stop overrating Angle's fame.

To have a gold medal winning athlete in your promotion lends you a lot of credibility.

To who? Smarks? You really think 9/10 wrestling fans give a fuck about amateur wrestling awards? They don't. TV networks don't give a shit either, the Olympics ratings have been steadily decreasing for years.

I'm not saying they would have landed a TV deal right then but it would have happened a lot sooner than it did and the landscape of Pro wrestling would be different.

No, it really wouldn't. Olympic medalists don't exactly bring up dollar signs in the eyes of TV executives.

You guys are way overrating Angle's importance to the wrestling business. Is he an amazing wrestler? For sure, one of the best of his generation. But he's not the big ratings-grabber you apparently think he is. TNA hasn't exactly become huge since Angle was signed, they're pretty much in the same position they were before he signed (only now with even more washed up "talent" and a whole new hour to showcase them in).

 

[NSL]

By mainstream, I mean pop culture mainstream. Not main event wrestler, I'm talking about your Hogan's, your Austin's, your Rocky's. Angle isn't one of those kind of guys who can instantly add credibility and prestige to your company.

I agree. Angle was never a guy like that, that was going to appear in movies, music videos, and have his own cartoon. But, in 1996, who was? Bret Hart? He had the charisma of a peanut, although he was a great wrestler. Hulk Hogan was still the man, and he was the one making all the big time deals then.

I wouldn't exactly say he was huge in WWE. During his last days there he was anything but. But still, I meant mainstream like Rock or Hogan or Austin.

Angle's problem with not getting huge in WWE, is because if the brand split in my opinion. He got big when there was more titles than main eventers, and way too much talent, and the shows were crowded. He was still on the top of the card though, and was still one of their best performers.

I was actually referring more to the actual storylines of ECW then I was the in-ring action. Angle's Olympic Hero gimmick wouldn't have gone over in ECW, and considering Angle didn't really hit his technical stride in-ring until well after his '99 debut, the fans probably wouldn't have bought into it either.

We'll have to agree to dis-agree here, because I would have liked it if they did it.

If Angle had the Olympic Hero goofball gimmick in ECW, and feuded with Taz, it would not have worked. Think about it; on one hand you've got Taz, who is the biggest badass in ECW history. On the other, you have a rookie still cutting his teeth with a goofball gimmick. Who the hell would buy into believing for even a moment that Angle would win that feud?

They tried getting Taz to fight guys like Johnny Smith...Who was a bum. Everyone from ECW will tell you that. Angle, even without professional training, was twice the wrestler he ever was, and with a little bit of training, could have made that feud work. And, Angle wouldn't have won that feud, I'm sure. Taz was about to be pushed as one of the main guys in ECW, but he still could've put Angle over, setting him up for feuds with guys like RVD, Jerry Lynn, Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, and any of the tag teams that were there at the time.

I think you're giving Angle too much credit in the beginning.

I'll have to admit now, that I didn't really watch WWE following the brand split, so I only have really early Kurt Angle, and really late WWE Angle, to go off of. Maybe he wasn't the wrestling icon I remember him as, but he was enough to go over in ECW. Also, had he signed in 96, by the time '99 would have rolled around, he'd be at the top of his game, and making the mainstream media markets. He would have been their Austin or Rock.

Angle didn't start having quality matches until the year 2000, after ECW had died. It's not like just because he would be signed to ECW he'd somehow be the current technical master that he is now in 1996. It doesn't work like that, amateur wrestling is obscenely different from pro wrestling.

I know there's a big difference, but while he was training, he could have just as easily done some on the job training. Him and Taz could have had a passable pro wrestling match, based on amateur wrestling holds and moves. I know that couldn't have lasted forever, but it would have worked for a show or two. By then, almost 3 months have passed, and he's have some real training, and could expand his matches. He could also have been in tag matches, to hide his weaknesses.

A) Heyman already had a slew of in-ring technicians with great athletiscism. ECW was just as much about in-ring wrestling as it was about trashy hardcore wrestling for a while there. Didn't achieve any newfound respect for the company when Dean Malenko and Eddie Guerrero were having a 2 out of 3 falls masterpiece.

It may not have gotten them any newfound respect, but it helped them catch the eye of the big boys. Because of these matches that were going on, WCW and WWE started to sign talent away, and that's one of the problems Heyman had, keeping his talent locked up.

B) The only people this great in-ring athleticism and wrestling would create newfound respect for would be smarks. The audience that ECW was already catering to.

Then slap me around, and call me a smark. I loved it, and couldn't help but want more of it.

C) Angle couldn't wrestle for jack-shit in 1996.

He won a gold medal, didn't he? I know you mean "pro wrestle", not "amateur wrestle", but you left the question kind of vague.

Angle was a good booker from a creative standpoint, but from an actual wrestling business (and it is a business after all) point of view, he was shit.

I hope you mean Heyman, and yes, you're right. From the beginning, he climbed the ladder so quickly because of his ability to create, and help others create. As a businessman, he was shit. see? We agree more than we disagree.

Olympic Gold Medalists (unless they win a dozen of them like Michael Phelps) are always quickly forgotten about. 99% of Americans wouldn't be able to name you a single American Gold Medalist outside of Michael Phelps last year, if ever.

That's because the Olympics weren't in the USA next year. In 1996, they were. Remember Kerri Strugg? The hot little gymnat Dominique Moceanu? Yeah, they were all in 1996. So was the Dream Team.

I highly doubt anyone was going to come running with a TV deal because ECW signed Kurt Angle. In fact, that's pretty outlandish.

Outlandish, yes. But, with Philly and NY being two pretty large markets, there is bound to be one channel that would have came in and offered them something, just for the chance to be "that channel that offered ECW a huge contract". It may not have been ESPN, FOX, or NBC, but it could have been the local channel 13 crap, and Heyman would have taken it.

They most certainly were trying to alienate people, their whole shtick was that they were Anti-WWF/WCW, and Anti-Mainstream. You can't deny that ECW was hardcore-ly elitist, their fans prided themselves on being "better" wrestling fans then your average WWF/WCW fan.

I am better than the average WWF/WCW fan, didn't you know that? But, seriously, I know they prided on being anti-WWF, and anti-WCW, but I don't think they'd be alienating their fans, by trying tos how some actual wrestling. Even when the TV Title matches were based on wrestling (take Malenko v. Scorpio for example), the extreme rules came into play, just not to the level they did for matches that involved guys like Sabu or the Dudleys. It would be wrestling like on WCW, or WWF, but different, and because it would be different, and in front of 2000 fans, not 15000 fans, it would be loved even more by the "hardcore elitist" fans, as you call us.

Their product was a niche product though NSL. By definition it appealed to only a limited amount of people.

And, I'm trying to say that signing Angle may have changed that. If they could have featured some more wrestling, than they would have gotten the TV deal, and then who knows what could've happened. If that works, they get a bigger TV deal, and get to PPV a full year early. If Angle skyrockets to the top, they get bigger names from Mexico, Japan, and Canada. It's all up for "what if".

Not at all, I was saying that WWF expanded past just the controversial gimmicks and catered to your average wrestling fans still with the old-school tried and true standard wrestling feuds. They didn't just relegate themselves to one niche.

Vince used the controversial gimmicks to cater to that niche, so that he could have all the fans. He's a greedy prick, and although he hated ECW, and everything they did, he knew that they had a good thing, and he grabbed it while he could, for all he could.

I agree it started there, but that's only because the Stone Cold gimmick is really just who Steve is in real life. It's really a lack of a gimmick if you think about it.

That's the brilliance behind ECW. Most of the best names, were all really just "playing" themselves. And, it worked!

It's a bad thing when you overestimate your product and the demand for it. That's just simple business 101 right there. Heyman thought he could compete with WCW/WWF, when in truth he really couldn't.

He needed to oversell it, so that he could try and get on TV to compete with those guys. Sure, he may not have been able to overtake them, but he at least could have stuck around, and been a bigger version of the current ROH product. He'd be #3, or maybe even #2 over TNA, but he still wouldn't be a national entity like WCW was.

Seven years? When did 7 years become such a long time? That's relatively fast considering how long it took some of the old territories/promotions to land regional TV deals, let alone national.

TNA has been around roughly 7 years, right? WNBA for about the same. 7 years ago, I graduated high school (holy fuck, I'm old)...

And, yes it was fast compared to others, but that was when there wasn't 100 channels available for shows, or an internet, or 500 regional wrestling magazines to get your guys in.

And yeah, of course WWF stole a bunch of ideas from ECW. Everyone did.

At least someone else admits it.

Hey don't get me wrong man, I fucking love Raven and his feud with Tommy Dreamer in ECW is one of my all time favorites. But realistically a Raven-Dreamer feud isn't going to draw millions of PPV buys, it's just not going to happen.

I'm glad we're at least arguing over whether Angle would have worked, and not if ECW was "a real boy" or just a joke...I'm sick of those arguments. If Raven and Dreamer were given WWF kind of money, and the TV time a 2 hour weekly show could afford them, it would draw millions of pay-per-view buys. Look at everything Raven did in TNA. It drew for them, and they weren't nearly as big as ECW at that point.

Clearly you must be. Wrestling Gold Medalists are one rung below 80's children stars when it comes to fame, you ask anyone on the street to name you even one American wrestling gold medalist, and they'll look at you with a blank stare and say "What?". Stop overrating Angle's fame.

These days, yes, this is true. But, in 1996, when the Olympics were in Atlanta, and this was just months after that, people knew who Angle was. His connection to legit athletics would have gotten them coverage on ESPN at least, and who knows where it could have gone from there.

To who? Smarks? You really think 9/10 wrestling fans give a fuck about amateur wrestling awards? They don't. TV networks don't give a shit either, the Olympics ratings have been steadily decreasing for years.

Because the Olympics suck now. and, they should care about real wrestling awards. I'd say Jeff Hardy is a great performer, but a wrestler he is not. Angle is a wrestler first, performer second. I see the difference, maybe not everyone else sees it that way though...

No, it really wouldn't. Olympic medalists don't exactly bring up dollar signs in the eyes of TV executives.

Back then, it might have. Like I've said before, the Olympics were still fresh in our minds, and they would have eaten up the idea of a real medalist going into "professional wrestling".

You guys are way overrating Angle's importance to the wrestling business. Is he an amazing wrestler? For sure, one of the best of his generation. But he's not the big ratings-grabber you apparently think he is. TNA hasn't exactly become huge since Angle was signed, they're pretty much in the same position they were before he signed (only now with even more washed up "talent" and a whole new hour to showcase them in).

TNA hasn't been huge since Angle signed, because of everything else they have going on around him. His stuff with Joe and Styles was great. As soon as they saddled him with Frank Trigg, and then the MEM, he was done. No one can live with a failed angle from years ago.

 

[LynchCats]

"Professional Wrestling" fans more often than not don't give two shits about a wrestler's amateur background. If you asked someone on the street to name a famous American amateur wrestler, chances are they'd name someone like Rulon Gardner, Dan Gable or Cael Sanderson before they named Kurt Angle. Angle's name is NOT mainstream, nor will it ever be mainstream.

 

[Miko]

Yeah I dont think it would've made a tremendous difference, after all WWE did more for Kurt Angle than he did for WWE. If he went to ECW he'd have been a cult hero like all of the other top ECW stars, fuck, he was a top guy in WWE and he's still only really a cult hero. A more successful Jericho if you will, nothing wrong with that, just how it is.

So history would've probably have ran it's course, with the main difference being Angle being one of the invaders of WWF on ECW's team, he'd have done well for himself, RVD did after all, but he'd probably not be a four or five time WWE champ, he'd probably be a TNA mainstay still though. ECW would've died just the same.

 

[The Mizard of Oz]

Your rebuttal wasn't much better, but whatever...

Well, it disagreed with your asinine theory, which of course, no one that has posted in this thread agrees with, so it must have some merit to it.

It was for your post...

That doesn't even make sense.

In case you didn't notice, ESPN is fucking huge, and everyone watches it. So, having it appear on there, and through things like ET, would've done great things for the company, and would've been just right for ECW, to appear on smaller "news" shows, than to pop up on Good Morning America, or 20/20.

I see your sarcasm detection meter has malfunctioned.

I'm just saying that the guys that Angle helped put over, are the guys that are carrying WWE now, and helped carry WWE then. Without Angle, who would Lesnar have had any good matches against? How about Booker T? Or, Cena?

Interesting that you say guys that Angle put over are "carrying the WWE now", then you proceed to name three guys, two of which are no longer with the company.

Jarrett is a fucking waste, but that's for a different thread. TNA would have started, because of Jarrett, but it wouldn't have gone far, without guys like Lynn and Raven carrying it through it's early days. I also stated how guys like Daniels and Styles could have been snatched up by ECW, so TNA would essentially have guys that are struggling in ROH now, and who knows where they would have been.

Yes, things would be different. I just can't buy into your hypothetical scenario, though. One man was not going to save ECW. I don't care if Paul E. signed Jesus Christ to a contract in 1996. J.C. would have jumped to one of the big two a couple years later, because one wrestler was not going to make ECW enough money to retain all their stars.

I still think that the WWE would have outlasted WCW. The Rock was still bigger than anything WCW had going for it at the end, and Vince could've brought back Michaels, and he had HHH on the rise. Austin was big for WWE, but he wasn't the only man carrying that ship through troubled waters.

Without Austin? Austin is what got the WWF back in the game. The Rock didn't become big until a full year after Austin exploded, and chances are, without Stone Cold, the Rock NEVER would have gotten as big as he did. You talked about people that feuded with Angle and how he helped their careers...feuding with Austin is what turned the Rock into a megastar. Without Austin, the WWF would have been hard-pressed to survive losing Bret Hart to WCW. The only main eventers they'd have had left would have been Michaels and the Undertaker, and four months after Survivor Series, Michaels was on the shelf for four years. I doubt the WWF would have pulled even in the ratings wars with Ken Shamrock as the WWF champion, rather than Steve Austin.

 

[Cheech 72]

The main thing to this thread to remember is that Paul Heyman was not a businessman. Even if he had Angle back then it wouldn't matter because the company would of still gone bankrupt because he didn't have the money WWE and WCW had. Also crucifixation angle or not, no one would buy the extreme product. That's why if Heyman had a wrestling organization now, talent or not he would fail unless he had the money and the right people for the job to run a wrestling company. He is one hell of a writer though, and a genius but couldn't run a wrestling company alone.

 

[Mitchguy]

Angle would not have saved ECW. His stay would have likely been along the lines of Paul Varlenes, brought in to help get Taz over and then would have left. Angle really didn't have much if any pro wrestling training then and the ECW fans would have eaten him alive.

Angle may be one of the greatest wrestlers to come along in the past few decades, but his impact to the big picture of pro wrestling is fairly minor. There are basically only a small handful of guys whose presence or absence would have changed the business landscape in such a dramatic way. As mentioned, if it were Austin, that would be different.

If Angle wasn't there, the name on the program for his matches would have been different, some of the feuds would have been different, but ECW would still be dead.

Besides, I think if the crucifixion had never happened, Angle would have likely ended up in WWE later on anyway since I can't see him becoming an ECW regular, or his stay being very lengthy. No one man could have saved that company.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

...would ECW still be alive today?

This incident didn't make a difference or not between whether ECW would be alive today or not. But I'll elaborate as we go.

I know there's a lot of "What if" threads, and I'm sure they're worth reading. But, this one came to me while reading The Rise And Fall Of ECW. The night that Sandman was "crucified" outside the ring, in the ECW arena, was the same night that Heyman was trying to woo Kurt Angle to ECW, after he had already turned down Vince, because he thought he was above professional wrestling.

According to both sides, the night was going fine, until Raven, Stevie, and Meanie, pulled the cross out from under the ring, and started tying Sandman to it. They also put a barbwire crown on his head, and then carried him to the back. At that point, Angle threw a fit, and said he would sue if he was ever shown in the video for that part of the show. Heyman promised him he wouldn't, and said he would only appear for his commentary on the Tazz match that night, because if Angle signed, his first feud would've been with Tazz.

If Angle would have joined ECW, I really don't think that things would have changed that much as far as ECW is concerned. First off, Angle made no guarantees to Paul that he was even going to sign with ECW to begin with. And more than likely, I really couldn't have seen him signing with Heyman. I highly doubt Heyman could have offered Angle the kind of money that Angle was looking for, to begin with.

However, for the sake of argument, let's say he did sign with Heyman. I have no doubt in my mind that Angle would have bolted for WWE as soon as his contract with ECW would have been up, where he could have made a Hell of a lot more money.

If this never happened, and Angle signed with ECW, would we still have the original ECW alive today? Think of all the ramifications.

I don't think there would have been many, to be frank.

Vince would not have landed Angle, which would have made a lot of feuds not happen.

What guarantees are there that Vince still would "not" have landed Angle, for starters, IF that Crucifixion angle didn't take place? I think it's highly conceivable that Angle would have still went to WWE regardless, simply because as stated, I don't think Heyman could have offered Angle the kind of money he was looking for.

Brock, Rock, Show, Cena, Rey, Booker and others would never have feuded with him, having amazing matches, and pushing themselves to the top.

As far as IF Angle did sign with Paul, as stated I think he would have went to WWE at the first opportunity he got. So, I think most of those feuds you referenced below would likely still have happened anyway. Not that I think Angle would have signed with Paul, even if the crucifixion angle didn't occur, but if he did, it probably wouldn't have been for more than a year.

He never would have left for TNA, and given them a big name to market, giving them a wider fanbase.

What you seem to be doing is coming to the conclusion that Angle would have stayed with Paul Heyman for eternity IF the Crucifixion angle wouldn't have occurred. I am having difficulty why you think he still would have stayed with ECW, regardless. Someone of Angle's stature wouldn't stay with ECW simply for the fact that I know Angle would demand more money than what Paul could afford to pay him AND for the fact that he probably would be upset at wrestling in the ECW environment with the type of fans they typically drew.

My instinct tells me that Angle really had no idea at all about the type of wrestling ECW even was, until he actually showed up. I really don't think that this type of wrestling, or its rather vicious fanbase, would truly appeal to him. After he saw the crucifixion angle take place, that was pretty much the straw that broke the camel's back for him. Obviously, that is only my speculation, but that pretty much is all this thread is, anyway.

ECW would have almost assuredly been handed a legit TV deal on a silver platter.

This, you probably have a point on, as their chances of getting a better deal would definitely have increased IF they could have somehow managed to secure Angle. Again though, I just don't think that would have transpired, regardless of whether the crucifixion angle took place or not.

The TNN deal, and the pay-per-view company screwing them out of money, was a large part of their downfall. Heyman would not have had to lie to most of his guys, if he actually had the money to pay them regularly, and give them competing salaries, so Bischoff and McMahon couldn't steal them away.

Believe it or not, I have a feeling that Angle really wouldn't have drawn that well on ECW. He would have increased the number of buys by some, but probably not that much, in the big picture ... even with a better TV deal and better exposure.

When he first went to TNA, he didn't increase their PPV buys all that much, if at all.

A feud with Tazz would've been gold at that time. They had Jericho, Guerrero, and Malenko all wrestling real matches, and getting the fans primed for the main event. They were also on the verge of bringing in Rey Mysterio, Psychosis, and Juventud, who all could have had great matches with Angle. The arrival of Angle also would've attracted a lot more talent to the company, and would've kept the audience, and the roster, growing.

Bottom line, as much as I love the crucifixion angle, I think ECW would have been a lot better off if it wouldn't have happened.

Maybe. But ECW would have still gone out of business, regardless. As admitted, Heyman just wasn't a very good businessman. He belongs running a Creative Department, where his true talents lay, as opposed to fully running a company.

 

[NSL]

To everyone saying Angle would have gone to WWE back then anyway, you're forgetting some facts. When he was visiting with Heyman, he had already turned down a WWE offer, and wasn't interested in professional wrestling, but ECW was enough to make him consider signing. He liked ECW, and liked the direction Heyman was taking it. He liked the passion the guys had for it, and that was what made him look into signing. The night he was there, and the crucifixion happened, he was pissed, not because he didn't like the wrestling, but because they just crucified someone at ringside.

I still think that if they didn't string Sandman up on a cross, he would have signed, and had the same passion everyone else, which was enough for them to stay for less money. They only started jumping ship at the end, because Heyman couldn't get the money to pay them.

That would've been countered by having Angle, and getting the TV deals to provide the money...

 

[Mitchguy]

Colour me confused, but I still fail to see the connection between 1996 Kurt Angle and a ECW being saved. Let's say for the sake of discussion the crucifixion didn't happen and Kurt stuck around for a while. Even if that led to a better tv deal, it wouldn't matter if they couldn't deliver the ratings.

See, the main problem with this alternate reality being constructed is that it relies on a specific chain of events to occur where there is a significant chance things would have gone differently. Not to speak for everybody else because others may have other reasons for disagreeing, but the major problem for me is the OP's absolute certainty of this alternate reality.

Let's look at all of the variables that could derail this alternate history.

-Following the crucifixion not happening, Kurt stays in ECW for an extended time. This one could have easily gone either way. ECW had a history of people swooping in for a cup of coffee only to leave a month or so later. Part of the reason for this leads into the second variable.

-Kurt is accepted by the ECW fans and becomes an important part of the show. Now the ECW fans were known to be brutal on bad matches and there is absolutely no guarantee that Kurt would have been embraced by them. Again, this could have gone either way.

-Kurt leads ECW to a better tv deal and more mainstream acceptance. Now, this is 1996-2000 Kurt Angle we're talking about. A man who had no tv exposure. Who wasn't properly trained as a pro wrestler at the time. Assuming that the first two variables are true, this one could still have gone either way. It's made to sound like tv executives would have been throwing money at ECW if they had just gotten Kurt Angle. Or that ECW would have attracted more mainstream attention because an Olympic gold medalist was on the show. ECW got saddled with a lousy tv deal because they were in no position to negotiate. As a previous poster has mentioned, although people like Raven and Shane Douglas had some television exposure, they wouldn't be recognizable to a tv executive in a pitch meeting. The reason TNA got the sweet Spike deal that they currently have is because a) they are backed by a financially secure corporation and can provide top quality production value and b) they had name talent with national exposure on their roster that they could point to and the Spike executives would recognize. To the non hardcore(I mean in terms of dedication, not style preference) wrestling audience, ECW wrestlers were unknown. My point in all of this is that the addition of Kurt Angle to ECW could not concievably have persuaded tv executives to give ECW a better deal. The only way that would have happened is if Kurt had gone to WWE or WCW(previous to it's closing of course) and gained some national exposure and then come back. And if that were the case, it's entirely possible that Kurt would have just stayed in the big two and we would have a whole new set of possibilities to deal with. He could have likely been just another person bailing off of the ship. And that leads to the next variable.

-If all of the above came true, the people who left would not have. They told the story of the Dudley Boys asking for a one dollar raise and Paul refused because he coulnd't afford to compete with Vince. Taz recieved an offer from the WWE and he accepted it. I fail to see how the presense of Kurt Angle would have changed Paul Heyman as businessman.

See, this is the problem with presenting a "What If" scenario and then defending it as a fact. And I'm not trying to be combative on this, I'm just trying to point out why some have trouble following the progression the OP has laid out. In order to get to this moment, right now, billions upon billions of events have had to occur, all of which had variable outcomes. (That's likely a low estimate, but you get the idea.) The chain of events in this example are dependent on choices, motivations, personalities, etc. Not to mention dependent on the outcomes of other events. In this particular example, if at any point in the progression of this alternate history, the variable went the other way, the outcome would have been different. Suppose Kurt decided to stay in ECW and then let's say he got in a car accident driving to an ECW show for example and couldn't wrestle anymore. ECW would still be dead and his WWE career wouldn't have happened.

Is there a possibility that things could have happened the way the OP says? Sure. I mean, in order to get to the moment we're all in right now no matter where we are, a chain of billions of events, all with different possible outcomes had to have lined up just perfectly. Certainly there is a possibility that all of the events would have lined up perfectly and Kurt Angle would have saved ECW.

However, that chance, when considered against all of the different variables(of which I've just merely scratched the surface here) is microscopically small compared to the chances that things would have gone a completely different way. Probability is on the side of those who disagree here. Now, if I were to present what I think would have happened, I would be in the very same boat and probability would be against me being right just on the basis of the sheer number of possibilities. It would merely be an excercise in creating fiction using real people, places, and things. Logical progression can only take you so far because the world is unpredictable.

Our perception of the way things "would have gone" is always altered by our knowledge of history. We know Kurt Angle as a great wrestler with a lot of charisma so the faulty assumption here is that the 1996-2000 versions of all of us would know this as well and would react the same way, making him a star. This is the central flaw in the OP's arguement.

And that's why I disagree with it.

Now, that's enough existential philosophy for today class. I want you to read chapters 2-5 for next week.

 

[Hacksaw Highway]

I thought Kurt said he thought ECW was an amateur wrestling promotion, and had no idea what it really was. Maybe I heard wrong. Mitchguy is right though, people are forgetting Kurt had no pro wrestling training and was not a draw at the time. It's impossible to say wheter or not he'd evolve to be as good as he is today, but it's hihgly unlikely. ECW wouldn't have been saved by an inexperienced, unproven rookie basically.

 

[RVDgurl]

Bottom line, as much as I love the crucifixion angle, I think ECW would have been a lot better off if it wouldn't have happened.

I think this is the first time I've ever disagreed with you! I don't think the ramifications of the crucifixion are anywhere near the magnitude that you've outlined. I don't think Kurt Angle would've made that much of an impact in ECW- in fact, I don't think he would've lasted in ECW. If Angle would've signed- and there is no guarantee that he would've signed with ECW- I think he would've ended up in the WWE within months anyway.

Personally, I think the crucifixion of the Sandman was one of the most brilliant storylines they ever did. I get that some people were offended and that's cool- but I think it generated alot of buzz about the company. I think that even the people that were offended wanted to know what ECW was all about. This particular angle may have helped ECW more than it hurt.

It was a innovative idea, and if you think about it, the WWE did a watered down version when the Undertaker crucified Steve Austin. Being edgy and damn near offensive was what wrestling was going for during that time.

 

[NSL]

I think this is the first time I've ever disagreed with you!

In fact, we don't disagree. I was just presenting an interesting What If...I do believe that it would have helped ECW to survive a little longer, if not for good, but I think ECW is better to look back on with the crucifixion, instead of without it.

I don't think the ramifications of the crucifixion are anywhere near the magnitude that you've outlined. I don't think Kurt Angle would've made that much of an impact in ECW- in fact, I don't think he would've lasted in ECW. If Angle would've signed- and there is no guarantee that he would've signed with ECW- I think he would've ended up in the WWE within months anyway.

I think he would've made an impact, because he was everything the fans loved about the Canadians and Mexicans, except he was American. Heyman would have been able to book him well, and even if he left after a few months, he would have changed the booking of the other wrestlers...Maybe enough to keep them around. I'm sure you're with me, in agreeing with Sandman, that the apology was a bunch of shit. The fans probably loved it more than hated it, and all it did was cut Raven's balls off, and may have pissed off more fans than it pleased. Basically, the apology had more ramifications than the crucifixion itself.

Personally, I think the crucifixion of the Sandman was one of the most brilliant storylines they ever did. I get that some people were offended and that's cool- but I think it generated alot of buzz about the company. I think that even the people that were offended wanted to know what ECW was all about. This particular angle may have helped ECW more than it hurt.

Yeah, you said it better than I did. I loved that angle. I actually ran into someone that was there that night, and they said most of the fans loved it. I guess it just proves that ECW really was aimed at a hardcore fanbase...*sigh*...

It was a innovative idea, and if you think about it, the WWE did a watered down version when the Undertaker crucified Steve Austin. Being edgy and damn near offensive was what wrestling was going for during that time.

Wrestling wasn't going for "edgy and offensive", Heyman was. Vince and Eric knew they needed to dip into it, in order to keep their own product relevant in the big markets of Philly and NY, so they stole the moves, angles, ideas, and even the talent, away from Paul. On the Forever Hardcore DVD, they even talk about getting pissed when they saw their ideas on Monday Nights. Styles eluded to it a lot during commentary, and even Cyrus did.

 

[RVDgurl]

I'm sure you're with me, in agreeing with Sandman, that the apology was a bunch of shit. The fans probably loved it more than hated it, and all it did was cut Raven's balls off, and may have pissed off more fans than it pleased. Basically, the apology had more ramifications than the crucifixion itself.

Fucking right the apology was bullshit! There was absolutely no sincerity in Raven's voice and his body language showed that he obviously annoyed at having to make such a speech. Not to mention that he did confirm that it was all bullshit on the Forever Hardcore DVD.

Wrestling wasn't going for "edgy and offensive", Heyman was. Vince and Eric knew they needed to dip into it, in order to keep their own product relevant in the big markets of Philly and NY, so they stole the moves, angles, ideas, and even the talent, away from Paul. On the Forever Hardcore DVD, they even talk about getting pissed when they saw their ideas on Monday Nights. Styles eluded to it a lot during commentary, and even Cyrus did.

Absolutely. Heyman had edgy down to a science and it was getting over big time. Of course Bichoff and McMahon were going to piggy-back off of that success. Those guys had a great knack for taking Heyman's ideas and watering it down just enough to get over with the mainstream wrestling fans (the crucifixion of Austin being the prime example). And McMahon and Bichoff both had much deeper pockets that Heyman so it wasn't too hard to sway alot of the guys to jump ship. As much as I hated it, it was smart business by both WWE and WCW.

 

[NSL]

Fucking right the apology was bullshit! There was absolutely no sincerity in Raven's voice and his body language showed that he obviously annoyed at having to make such a speech. Not to mention that he did confirm that it was all bullshit on the Forever Hardcore DVD.

That's one of my favorite wrestling DVDs ever, and I'd tell anyone who enjoys wrestling to watch it. Even if you just watch the 10 minutes with Terry Funk, where he talks about going to Hardcore Homecoming, instead of signing the big money deal with Vince. His emotion carries through, and you can feel your heart wrench.

In hindsight, the apology probably did do a lot more damage than the angle itself, but I can see why Heyman was trying to grasp at keeping Angle around. It may not have meant big money right away, but it could've changed the flow of a lot of things, and altered the future of the company.

Absolutely. Heyman had edgy down to a science and it was getting over big time. Of course Bichoff and McMahon were going to piggy-back off of that success. Those guys had a great knack for taking Heyman's ideas and watering it down just enough to get over with the mainstream wrestling fans (the crucifixion of Austin being the prime example). And McMahon and Bichoff both had much deeper pockets that Heyman so it wasn't too hard to sway alot of the guys to jump ship. As much as I hated it, it was smart business by both WWE and WCW.

Good business? Yes. Does it make them assholes? Yes. But, people loved the product, and that's apparent in the fact that since the Attitude Era, ratings and sales have slowly gone downhill. I'd like to give ECW some credit, and say that it is because there's no outsiders for Vince to steal ideas from. He's had a few good ones on his own, but without that thorn in his side, there's no motivation, and nothing fresh for him. I'd like to say TNA could be that in the future, but who knows with the crap they're running out every Thursday...