KB Answers Wrestling Questions | Page 861 | WrestleZone Forums

KB Answers Wrestling Questions

So I was reading your latest review of a Nitro from '99 and this came to mind: Do you think there's any truth to the allegations that Bischoff deliberately tanked WCW in the latter half of '98 into '99 in order to devalue the company so he could try to buy WCW himself from Time Warner on the cheap? I saw a reference to this in Reynolds and Alvarez's book. I'm inclined to doubt it myself but then again nothing surprises me anymore in wrestling.
 
Watching the go home show to Mania 13 and after the main event match we get Bret shoving Vince and going on a cursing tirade.

Was that the first time Vince was assaulted by a WWE wrestler on camera?
Was the cursing part of the script or did Bret go off script?
 
So I was reading your latest review of a Nitro from '99 and this came to mind: Do you think there's any truth to the allegations that Bischoff deliberately tanked WCW in the latter half of '98 into '99 in order to devalue the company so he could try to buy WCW himself from Time Warner on the cheap? I saw a reference to this in Reynolds and Alvarez's book. I'm inclined to doubt it myself but then again nothing surprises me anymore in wrestling.

I don't buy that, no. It was still too big at that point.

Watching the go home show to Mania 13 and after the main event match we get Bret shoving Vince and going on a cursing tirade.

Was that the first time Vince was assaulted by a WWE wrestler on camera?
Was the cursing part of the script or did Bret go off script?

No. He took a chair shot (unintentional) back in 1991.

Scripted.
 
I don't buy that, no. It was still too big at that point.

Yeah, I think it mostly comes out of people watching WCW during that period and thinking "There's no way somebody could be THIS incompetent.....It's gotta be intentional." Never underestimate the power of incompetence on an unlimited budget.....
 
Can anyone else really be the top guy while John Cena is still around? I'm talking specifically about Roman Reigns and the supposed plans for him to be the next generation's top babyface.
 
Can anyone else really be the top guy while John Cena is still around? I'm talking specifically about Roman Reigns and the supposed plans for him to be the next generation's top babyface.

Yeah. Cena's career is likely winding down due to age and injuries. It's not that far of a stretch.

Jim Ross: "Vince McMahon is the Walt Disney of wrestling."

Agree? Disagree?

I'll buy that.
 
Regarding the Bushwackers:

How were they so over?

How are they still alive?
 
Regarding the Bushwackers:

How were they so over?

How are they still alive?

The arm wacking. It's easy to get into and people love that kind of stuff.

THe energy off licking my face at a house show.

Who was in the WWE's Memphis Pro Wrestling Class of '99. You know, besides Angle, Steve Bradley, Droz, Tensai, etc..

THat's about it. The Island Boyz who became 3 Minute Warning as well.
 
Thoughts on pro athletes from other sports who come into wrestling, a la Mojo Rawley and Shawne Merriman? Is it good for the business due to the publicity that comes with it?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYtpIoxB6Qc

Thoughts on Heyman's explanation of ECW's collapse and In-Demand's mistakes? Also, according to him, TNA has lost at most 90 million dollars since they've been run by Panda Energy according to discussions when he was negotiating to come in and what books he had a look at. Thoughts on that?

I didn't have time to listen to the whole thing. Care to give me a summary?

The 90 million dollar loss wouldn't surprise me given some of their business practices.

Thoughts on pro athletes from other sports who come into wrestling, a la Mojo Rawley and Shawne Merriman? Is it good for the business due to the publicity that comes with it?

It depends on if they're other sports athletes trying to wrestler or wrestlers who used to play other sports if that makes sense. It also depends on what level they were at. A guy like Rawley who didn't have a ton of success in the NFL but has it on his resume is fine but a guy like Merriman who was a star is going to have a lot more to overcome.
 
People are telling me they can't see Lesnar getting the title because that'd mean having to appear on a lot more RAWs than normal, but then I always come up with the answer to that question: Heyman. Heyman's far better at getting heat for Brock than Brock ever was by himself, and with Heyman going out doing his thing there's no real need for Brock to come in every RAW and they can save him for the big dates.

Agree/Disagree?
 
I didn't have time to listen to the whole thing. Care to give me a summary?

Basically, Austin asked Heyman about how they'd gone under when the impression had been that ECW was in a really good place in regards to merchandise, fan following, etc... Heyman revealed that 2000 had actually been their most profitable year ever, what with drawing several thousand fans in attendance in places near Toronto, Detroit itself, Chicago, in Texas, etc...

He also went on to explain that ECW basically entered a chokepoint (where the deal can go off the rails, basically/get choked out, etc...) because they were being denied money by In-Demand owed to them (2.8 million dollars), keep paying his wrestlers, run the television shows (which cost 10 mil apparently), promote any video game, PPV, licenses, t-shirts, etc... while TNN/Viacom brought on the WWF to replace them after ECW proved wrestling could be a ratings draw for them.

The plan was to jump to the USA Network in response, but one of the head guys refused to having another wrestling company on if it wasn't the top company and consequently rebranded the show. There was a chance for a show on Fox Sports, but they wanted a 30 minute daily show that would have been unfeasible both financially and production-wise especially when Fox Sports wasn't willing to pay enough to keep the company afloat, and of course TNT/TBS wasn't going to replace WCW for ECW when they were selling off WCW as it was.

The In-Demand guys refused to give him the money because they figured if he couldn't get another tv show then he was going to go bankrupt, and that they could afford to pay pennies on the dollar if he did and they'd pay him out if he didn't. Most of his allies in the company were on the way out or outranked by the guy who'd ordered it (and had done it to another guy mentioned who sued and settled), so he was fucked because he didn't have the money to fight it.

He also pointed out how stupid it was, as the collapse of WCW, ECW and several other groups involved with In Demand saw Vince basically able to dictate his terms at gun point and saw more companies join In Demand because they were out of PPV content from ECW/WCW, and it would have helped negotiation wise with UFC, boxing later. They'd also actually ordered seven PPVs for 2001, while still screwing them over on the 2.8 mil.

So 7 million dollars in debt of which 4 million was to his own family, cutting it down to 3 million, which was roughly what he was owed from In Demand. He argues he could have kept the company going past 2001, drawing on rising indie stars like Bryan, Punk, Cabana, Hero, etc... as his next generation of stars while still keeping on guys like RVD, etc... and maybe more negotiating strength in regards to a Fox Network show.
 
People are telling me they can't see Lesnar getting the title because that'd mean having to appear on a lot more RAWs than normal, but then I always come up with the answer to that question: Heyman. Heyman's far better at getting heat for Brock than Brock ever was by himself, and with Heyman going out doing his thing there's no real need for Brock to come in every RAW and they can save him for the big dates.

Agree/Disagree?

He's getting the title. They'll figure the rest out. He has to at this point.

Basically, Austin asked Heyman about how they'd gone under when the impression had been that ECW was in a really good place in regards to merchandise, fan following, etc... Heyman revealed that 2000 had actually been their most profitable year ever, what with drawing several thousand fans in attendance in places near Toronto, Detroit itself, Chicago, in Texas, etc...

He also went on to explain that ECW basically entered a chokepoint (where the deal can go off the rails, basically/get choked out, etc...) because they were being denied money by In-Demand owed to them (2.8 million dollars), keep paying his wrestlers, run the television shows (which cost 10 mil apparently), promote any video game, PPV, licenses, t-shirts, etc... while TNN/Viacom brought on the WWF to replace them after ECW proved wrestling could be a ratings draw for them.

The plan was to jump to the USA Network in response, but one of the head guys refused to having another wrestling company on if it wasn't the top company and consequently rebranded the show. There was a chance for a show on Fox Sports, but they wanted a 30 minute daily show that would have been unfeasible both financially and production-wise especially when Fox Sports wasn't willing to pay enough to keep the company afloat, and of course TNT/TBS wasn't going to replace WCW for ECW when they were selling off WCW as it was.

The In-Demand guys refused to give him the money because they figured if he couldn't get another tv show then he was going to go bankrupt, and that they could afford to pay pennies on the dollar if he did and they'd pay him out if he didn't. Most of his allies in the company were on the way out or outranked by the guy who'd ordered it (and had done it to another guy mentioned who sued and settled), so he was fucked because he didn't have the money to fight it.

He also pointed out how stupid it was, as the collapse of WCW, ECW and several other groups involved with In Demand saw Vince basically able to dictate his terms at gun point and saw more companies join In Demand because they were out of PPV content from ECW/WCW, and it would have helped negotiation wise with UFC, boxing later. They'd also actually ordered seven PPVs for 2001, while still screwing them over on the 2.8 mil.

So 7 million dollars in debt of which 4 million was to his own family, cutting it down to 3 million, which was roughly what he was owed from In Demand. He argues he could have kept the company going past 2001, drawing on rising indie stars like Bryan, Punk, Cabana, Hero, etc... as his next generation of stars while still keeping on guys like RVD, etc... and maybe more negotiating strength in regards to a Fox Network show.

Don't buy it. I can accept that he was making more of a profit in 2001, but how long was that In Demand money going to keep them going? Without TV and with WWF just crushing everyone, there was no way ECW was going to survive long term. Those last shows are just DREADFUL as Heyman burned out. At the end of the day, he wasn't going to be able to pay to keep those guys because the WWF could easily outspend him. I believe what he's saying about the debt because I have no way to prove him wrong, but I don't buy that it was staying around. Not with him losing so many stars so fast.
 
Not bad though I'm not sure how we get to Bray vs. HHH.

Probably by giving in to the urge to turn the Wyatts face like I was pondering a few days ago. I'm not sure putting them in a feud with Jericho is going to get the crowd booing them either. While the IWC salivates over Jericho the live audiences are a different story.....
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top