TNA Creative Management - Past and Future

[Shadow of Darkness]

Hell Yeah...

Well passing a decade, TNA showed some amazing moments, some amazing storylines, some amazing angles, mostly amazing wrestling. But to be honest what's main driving force of a wrestling show in this decade is its storylines. TNA in 2012 was hilarious according to ratings. It was great as wrestling show. It was quite cool, but creatively it sucked, and you can see its effect on ratings. In 2013 TNA made a bright start with the so-called "RETURN" but again creative messed up and currently the ratings are again in a slump form. I know there are plenty of Russo haters in this forums, but frankly speaking I am not a fan of this guy, but he was instrumental in putting some strong weekly ratings to TNA. Prichard started well, but he is not the man to write episodic TV storylines. He can give you some good ideas, but he cant create a great creative product every week. Thats where he sucks. Lagana has done nothing good to his name. Plenty of IWC stated that he was great choice for TNA as a creative but he has done nothing significant since he came to TNA. Reports says that 2012 was voted the best year in TNA by Internet discussions on several websites. But the strange thing is its the year, when TNA had just 1.01 average rating, lowest since 2006. TNA lost an average of 13% of it's Nelson ratings number in 2012. And more amazing... Prichard's team's highest impact rating in 2012 was a 1.15 rating.
So, that proves the failure of Prichard as a Creative head.
That's why I put a question to all you so-called great Internet Wrestling experts!

Should TNA bring Vince Russo back, but keeping the focus of the company in building their own stars?

Point should be noted, Russo has been greatly successful only when you give the chance to work with youngsters. He has been great in building young wrestlers with new gimmick.

Or, Should TNA go with this current Team?

Or, Should TNA go with a completely new creative team, of young guys with Matt Conway and Dave Lagana, by having Bischoff as the filter or Creative Advicer?

Or, Seeing the increasing power of Bischoff backstage, Should TNA let him bring his own team of creative, just like he brought during WCW Nitro days. (When he was in charge.)

So, who's is your choice?

Hell Yeah...

 

[nbkush]

fire Prichard, Biscoff, and Hogan...even though he might not officially be on creative he definitly has input and a strong presence. Pay Paul Heyman whatever he wants and let him have complete control of the company in every aspect except for payroll.

 

[LayCold]

I think they need Vince Russo because he can bring something to your storyline, he is so creative, he can give some segment that will totally change the intensity. I'm sure that with Ace's and Eight, he would have bring some BRILLIANT idea.
However, I like the direction they have now, they work hard to give a real sense to all the storyline so I will go with the current creative team but they can do something really better... Maybe they should have someone who just look the show and brought some ideas. For exemple, during the last impact, Velvet beat Gail Kim clean. Well, maybe the Creative Team didn't see it because they don't remember but as a watcher, I was like " Damn ".
Last year, Velvet won the title but Gail Kim took it from her. If she beat Gail with the help of the rope or with Tessmacher who screw Gail, it would have been better. You could build a great feud for Slammiversary with the fighting champion, Velvet Sky and have Gail Kim as a great worker who beat Velvet Sky and all the rivalry could be built around the fact that Gail is better than Velvet and that Velvet always need help to beat her.

 

[Rayne]

Nope, and to come up with that answer, I don't even have to look at what he's done in professional wrestling.

First, let's exclude the obvious. Vince Russo will not come back and result in an immediate, drastic, and lasting increase in televisions. I'm not saying that he couldn't do it eventually (nor am I stating that he could), I'm merely saying that the man is not a magic silver bullet. If he was, he'd be hired on the spot, because people just don't find silver bullets laying around for them.

So we're left with Vince Russo as an ordinary man, capabilities at his job left unstated. However, he left TNA fairly recently. Egos are involved in any professional setting- it's the rare and blessed one where they aren't- but I'm hard pressed to find a more ego-dependent business than professional wrestling. Hiring back Vince Russo would require someone with a lot of pride at stake to say "I made a mistake". (Well, they'd say "we", but you get the point.) Is Vince Russo worth that kind of ass-kissing, to the person who'd have to do the ass-kissing?

The oldest story in professional wrestling is someone not making it because they didn't know when to stand firm and when to grovel; people tend to do entirely too much of one, and not enough of the other. (Goes both ways- Dave says hi, John Morrison.) Even if TNA wanted him back, would they want him back enough to take the ego hit, every day, of seeing him around with his knowledge that "they know I was right"?

If people are going to complain about fairness, or business logic, you're welcome to, but that doesn't necessarily change anything. It's not fair; the best person for a job (not making a statement about Russo, remember!) often loses out to someone who played soccer with the bosses' son. It's not logical; that same soccer playing kid can't perform as well as the best person for that job. But it happens, all the time.

I'm not saying egos forever bar someone from employment at a place; people get over shit. But it's way too soon for that, and TNA is by no means in any kind of panic-buying phase.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Vince Russo is someone that does get unfairly blamed for causing the downfall of WCW. Did he contribute? Yes, at least as far as the quality of WCW in the last few years of its existence. However, Russo is also someone that's unfairly hailed as a genius.

When it comes to TNA in 2012, I have to disagree with the OP thinking that TNA sucked creatively. In 2012, TNA made big strides forward to fix a good deal of major problems plaguing the company that Russo either never tackled or was the cause of. After Russo was gone, TNA FINALLY stopped going back to the tired nWo themed factor wars/power struggle storyline that they'd done year after year as the main focus of the company. TNA also stopped producing lame, 3 minute gimmick matches that were a near constant feature on TNA television each week. It was also only after Russo left that TNA stopped, for the most part, making the older wrestlers the center of attention in the company. No longer were the young guys jobbing out to the older veterans so the company could be built around them. After Russo left, TNA finally began to shed the image that they were a haven for "WWE Rejects" and we saw the elevation of some wrestlers to the forefront of the company like Bobby Roode and Austin Aries. New concepts such as Gut Check were introduced and the Bound For Glory Series.

TNA still has problems, every wrestling company does and always will to some degree. For instance, TNA really has no viable mid-card title scene and their tag team picture, which was arguably their crown jewel at one time, is pretty much in the dumpster. Some of the concepts haven't worked out as brightly as they possibly could have, some angles & feuds have flopped as have some wrestlers. But, as I said, that happens in every wrestling company.

It's also true that TNA had a pretty hard year in 2012 as far as ratings go. When a company goes through a transitional period, such as changing timeslots, going live almost every week & pushing new stars, ratings often do lag. In 2013 thus far, TNA has been doing far better. Most of their shows this year have drawn in the neighborhood of 1.35-1.55 million viewers, which is significantly up compared to many shows last year. That's not to say that, as I alluded to earlier, that TNA hasn't put on some crappy shows or had some lousy angles take place and that's contributed to a ratings decline last year I'm sure.

All in all, however, I think TNA has been a FAR, FAR better company without Vince Russo at the creative helm.

 

[mlp420]

fire Prichard, Biscoff, and Hogan...even though he might not officially be on creative he definitly has input and a strong presence. Pay Paul Heyman whatever he wants and let him have complete control of the company in every aspect except for payroll.

Paul Heyman gave internet fans the product that most wanted, but that doesn't mean he's a good option for a company that has NO DESIRE to serve that audience. Look around the indy scene, Heyman's style of booking isn't exactly hard to replicate. If TNA wanted to go that route, they could without him. They don't want to do it and that's a good thing. TNA has far too many resources to settle for that audience.

 

[Papa Pillman]

Jack-Hammer already pretty much nailed it as far as the company's transition, as well as its product improvements since Russo was shown the door.

Also, aside from ratings, we have no evidence to evaluate to attempt to deduce exactly how much less or more successful the company has been in the last year and a half. For all we know, things like live show attendance, merchandise sales, PPV buys, etc. could all have shown an improvement. There has also been reports of improved lockerroom morale.

With only ratings available to make a comparison, we really can't get a clear picture. I'm not downplaying the importance of ratings, but it is a fact that television ratings as a whole are down significantly versus a couple of years ago. The increased popularity of things like Hulu, Roku, etc. has even forced Nielsen to start to evolve a new system of rating evaluation. The pro wrestling and MMA world are two of the major parties that have suffered from the decline in traditional Nielsen-trackable ratings. It is unfair to crucify Pritchard and company on the grounds of ratings alone. Honestly maintaining 87% of their 2011 audience in 2012 may actually be able to be looked at as a success, many long-running shows have shown a much steeper decline.

 

[nbkush]

Paul Heyman gave internet fans the product that most wanted, but that doesn't mean he's a good option for a company that has NO DESIRE to serve that audience. Look around the indy scene, Heyman's style of booking isn't exactly hard to replicate. If TNA wanted to go that route, they could without him. They don't want to do it and that's a good thing. TNA has far too many resources to settle for that audience.

I don't know how you can compare anything in the current indy scence that is even close to Heyman's booking and overall contribution to wrestling. Besides ECW, Smackdown was great when he was the driving creative force and OVW with him in control was better than anything NXT has produced. Dont even try and put ROH ior any other indy in the same league as what Paul Heyman has done in wrestling.

 

[Weems2k]

fire Prichard, Biscoff, and Hogan...even though he might not officially be on creative he definitly has input and a strong presence. Pay Paul Heyman whatever he wants and let him have complete control of the company in every aspect except for payroll.

This is a classic IWC Fock Knob comment. Why are you so addicted to sucking on fat Heyman's cock so much? His so called "plan" a couple years back would have killed TNA.

I would love to see IWC Jiveturkey's like these try to book a show for a month, and watch that train wreck. They would get run after a week.

 

[nbkush]

This is a classic IWC Fock Knob comment. Why are you so addicted to sucking on fat Heyman's cock so much? His so called "plan" a couple years back would have killed TNA.

I would love to see IWC Jiveturkey's like these try to book a show for a month, and watch that train wreck. They would get run after a week.

he's plan would have eliminated Hogan and his BS and would have focussed on home grownl talent and producing new stars. I've been watching wrestling long before there was an IWC so try coming up with an original thought of your own

 

[Weems2k]

he's plan would have eliminated Hogan and his BS and would have focussed on home grownl talent and producing new stars. I've been watching wrestling long before there was an IWC so try coming up with an original thought of your own

Right.....Because bringing that overrated Dean Malenko wannabe Danny Bryan, and have him squash every one of the home grown talent is so much better than what Hogan, and Co. are doing. Again I ask, why the cock sucking of Heyman so much, and the hate for Hogan?

And by the way, I've never once claimed to be a genius booker. I know for a fact I could never do it. Sure I may have a couple ideas, but nothing to keep a storyline going for a year plus. You lunkhead.

 

[scomvp316]

I would not want Russo back because its just plain idiotic to change storylines from week to week based off of ratings. There are some instances where some storylines are just not connecting and you must have a quick way out of that story in a 2-3 week time frame. There is no doubt from a creative standpoint Heyman is the easiest choice. The one area EB has the advantage is his positive working relationships with networks and growing the product in international markets.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

he's plan would have eliminated Hogan and his BS and would have focussed on home grownl talent and producing new stars. I've been watching wrestling long before there was an IWC so try coming up with an original thought of your own

Wrong. His plan would have "lopped the heads off" of anyone over the age of 40, which would have included Kurt Angle, Sting, Kevin Nash (at the time) and a slew of other extremely valuable veterans. Vets get a shit rap on sites like this, because smart fans think that what they care to see matters in the bigger picture, but to a company like TNA—in a lot of ways still in it's infancy—those veterans are iconic names and faces that the company can use to bolster it's image, and it's historical value.

He then said he would have hired Bryan Danielson and had him "eat through" the entire roster, having everyone tap out to him. How, exactly, is that a "good" thing for TNA? Bury your entire roster to a guy who probably fails to meet the minimum heigh requirements for roller coasters nation wide? Worse yet – bury everyone to him? Every one? He's just gonna ransack the roster and crush Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Bobby Roode, James Storm and more?

I don't care how long you've been watching wrestling for. Hiring Heyman to "take over" the company would have been a monstrous disaster the company would have spent years trying to make up for afterward.

 

[nbkush]

Wrong. His plan would have "lopped the heads off" of anyone over the age of 40, which would have included Kurt Angle, Sting, Kevin Nash (at the time) and a slew of other extremely valuable veterans. Vets get a shit rap on sites like this, because smart fans think that what they care to see matters in the bigger picture, but to a company like TNA—in a lot of ways still in it's infancy—those veterans are iconic names and faces that the company can use to bolster it's image, and it's historical value.

He then said he would have hired Bryan Danielson and had him "eat through" the entire roster, having everyone tap out to him. How, exactly, is that a "good" thing for TNA? Bury your entire roster to a guy who probably fails to meet the minimum heigh requirements for roller coasters nation wide? Worse yet – bury everyone to him? Every one? He's just gonna ransack the roster and crush Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Bobby Roode, James Storm and more?

I don't care how long you've been watching wrestling for. Hiring Heyman to "take over" the company would have been a monstrous disaster the company would have spent years trying to make up for afterward.

You're wrong and your facts show it......he would have kept one vet, Angle, ala Terry funk in ECW and would have kept Sting as a special attraction ala Undertaker in WWE...not sure where you get this Danielson B.S. ...sounds to me like your the smark....and while I'm a fan of Austin Aires he's not exactly a 6'8" monster. History has proved Heymans masterful abilty to book. He took scraps in ECW and made them natinal stars with compelling storylines....His time as creative for Smackdown was best that brand has ever been...and he did much better during his time developing talent in OVW than what has been produced from Deep South/FCW/NXT.....the proof is in the pudding

 

[It's Damn Real!]

You're wrong and your facts show it......he would have kept one vet, Angle, ala Terry funk in ECW and would have kept Sting as a special attraction ala Undertaker in WWE...not sure where you get this Danielson B.S. ...sounds to me like your the smark....and while I'm a fan of Austin Aires he's not exactly a 6'8" monster. History has proved Heymans masterful abilty to book. He took scraps in ECW and made them natinal stars with compelling storylines....His time as creative for Smackdown was best that brand has ever been...and he did much better during his time developing talent in OVW than what has been produced from Deep South/FCW/NXT.....the proof is in the pudding

My facts show that I'm wrong? You either can't read or don't understand what the word fact means.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=127621

"They're not ready for me," Heyman said. "They're not there yet." Heyman also stated that TNA wrestlers who were over 40 years old would not be happy if he went to work for the company. "If you're over 40, I'd chop your f---ing head off," said Heyman.

Guess who that would have "chopped the fucking head off" of? 61-year old Fortune front-running Ric Flair, 42-year old Kurt Angle, 51-year old Kevin Nash, 51-year old Sting, 43-year old Jeff Jarrett, 45-year old Mick Foley, 46-year old Raven and 40-year old Rob Van Dam, who I believe was TNA Champion at the time.

Oh, and here's the "proof in the pudding" about Danielson:

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=173010

In the middle of all the TNA/Heyman talks, Bryan Danielson was fired by WWE last June. After Bryan called me, I immediately called Heyman and in just a little while Paul had a brilliant plan to make Bryan a star in TNA. It was a four parter:

1) Have Bryan debut a new submission and tap out EVERYONE in under a minute.

2) At the same time introduce a new, huge monster with a new high impact move and have him beat everyone quickly. I'm thinking Goldberg meets 911 here.

3) After 3-6 months, have Bryan and the monster collide and have Bryan tap him out in under a minute. This puts over the submission and Bryan like a million bucks. Have Bryan continue tapping people out. After a year or so, Bryan cuts a promo saying "I've tapped out everyone in this company..."

4) This all leads to Kurt Angle, after one year, coming out and confronting Bryan saying that he never tapped him out and that TNA is Angle's company. Bryan vs. Angle is on! Tell me that wouldn't sell some PPVs with that build up.

Now's your turn. He "would have kept one vet, Angle, ala Terry funk in ECW and would have kept Sting as a special attraction ala Undertaker in WWE", eh? Prove it.

And please, spare me the rhetoric. Paul Heyman never made a single "national star" in ECW. Not one. He made regional stars, who were also recognized, perhaps, overseas in Japan. It wasn't until after ECW went under that the likes of RVD, Tommy Dreamer, Taz and others really made their marks in the industry as "national stars" when they joined up with WWE.

 

[LayCold]

A brilliant idea ? I never saw the ECW but it looks like a terrible idea on the paper for me. So, first, you ruin the monster and what do Bryan do in the next 9/ months if he already beat the most dangerous guy ? That looks stupid but with a good booking, I guess it could work

 

[Weems2k]

You're wrong and your facts show it......he would have kept one vet, Angle, ala Terry funk in ECW and would have kept Sting as a special attraction ala Undertaker in WWE...not sure where you get this Danielson B.S. ...sounds to me like your the smark....and while I'm a fan of Austin Aires he's not exactly a 6'8" monster. History has proved Heymans masterful abilty to book. He took scraps in ECW and made them natinal stars with compelling storylines....His time as creative for Smackdown was best that brand has ever been...and he did much better during his time developing talent in OVW than what has been produced from Deep South/FCW/NXT.....the proof is in the pudding

Listen nbkush, or should I say Darren (yeah I know who you are). You really need to get some fresh air, and to keep your head out of Fat Heyman's arse. You obviously can't even read facts. Fat Bald Heyman is nothing but the voice of how 99% of IWC knobs think wrestling should be booked. And this "plan" is a complete hypocrite of what all IWC knobs say. "keep pushing young guys" "get rid of Hogan" "get rid of Bischoff". "Danny Bryan is a God among men". Really, how does making this Dean Malenko wannabe squash everyone on the Impact roster make any sense? Any entertainment? Hell, how does it put any credibility to all the TNA Originals that were there since the beginning? And who's this suppose monster that gets to job to Danny? Like it or not, all the 40+ year olds that Fat Heyman would "chop off" still draw, and can put a decent match on if booked right. If Heyman had any business sense, ECW would still be going today.

 

[mlp420]

Paul Heyman's fatal flaw for me is his fascination with incorporating MMA into pro wrestling. That's the last thing I want to see. I'd rather anybody run TNA than him if that's where he thinks wrestling should be going foward, and I mean ANYBODY. His plans to run Daniel Bryan through the TNA roster was most ridiculous angle I've ever heard of. The fact that Bryan's gotten over so well in the WWE without even winning a whole lot, let alone destroying the whole roster, makes that idea seem even worse in retrospect.

 

[nbkush]

My facts show that I'm wrong? You either can't read or don't understand what the word fact means.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=127621



Guess who that would have "chopped the fucking head off" of? 61-year old Fortune front-running Ric Flair, 42-year old Kurt Angle, 51-year old Kevin Nash, 51-year old Sting, 43-year old Jeff Jarrett, 45-year old Mick Foley, 46-year old Raven and 40-year old Rob Van Dam, who I believe was TNA Champion at the time.

Oh, and here's the "proof in the pudding" about Danielson:

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=173010



Now's your turn. He "would have kept one vet, Angle, ala Terry funk in ECW and would have kept Sting as a special attraction ala Undertaker in WWE", eh? Prove it.

And please, spare me the rhetoric. Paul Heyman never made a single "national star" in ECW. Not one. He made regional stars, who were also recognized, perhaps, overseas in Japan. It wasn't until after ECW went under that the likes of RVD, Tommy Dreamer, Taz and others really made their marks in the industry as "national stars" when they joined up with WWE.

you're a jack ass if you're quoting something posted in a forum as a legitimate news piece and not as a rumor...those detailed plans were never mentioned by Heyman nor were they reported and confirmed by any sites or Dave Meltzer

as far as Heyman's actually qoute I couldn't agree more with his sentiment

I never said Heyman was a good business man, but anybody that has been watching wrestling for the past 25 years can't deny his creative ablity and overall contribution to wrestling. He has a track-record...look it it up instead of criticizing him based on something that never actually came to fruition

 

[King Patrick Star]

I think TNA should bring Vince Russo back, and keep the focus of the company in building their own Stars. I also think TNA should go with this current team. I also think TNA should go with a completely new creative team of young guys with Matt Conway and Dave Lagana, by having Eric Bischoff as the filter or creative advisor. I also think TNA should let Eric Bischoff bring his own team of creative just like he brought during the WCW Nitro days. So my answer is E, all of the above. Let me explain.

I think TNA needs more airtime. I think TNA should keep the current team for Impact, but also create a new show, Xplosion, and let Russo run that show. I think a third show, similar to Main Event / SuperStars should be where a completely new creative team of young guys should go, just for the experience. The person who should oversee all of this is Eric Bischoff. Oh, and bring back ReAction and let Wayne Arnold run that, please and thank you!!

 

[nbkush]

as far as Heyman not making national wrestling stars with the original ECW...wrong again...ECW had a ntionally released video game featuring wrestling stars produced by Paul Heyman...if his ECW was regional then i would like to know of all these other regional or indy promotions that have a video game or have secured TV rights to a major cable network

 

[ABMorales787]

as far as Heyman not making national wrestling stars with the original ECW...wrong again...ECW had a ntionally released video game featuring wrestling stars produced by Paul Heyman...if his ECW was regional then i would like to know of all these other regional or indy promotions that have a video game or have secured TV rights to a major cable network

Yup. And lost money because of it. I just love it when people sing Heyman's praises. ECW is considered a cultural revolution for wrestling but it died in under 8 years under Paul Heyman. People call him a creative genius but fail to recognize that his management also sunk ECW dead.

Eric Bischoff could and has done more for the TNA product than Paul Heyman could ever really do. Hell, Russo has more success than Heyman in the booking account. Not even Paul's time on Smackdown was that good with the only success we can talk about being the "Smackdown Six".

Russo wasn't best but he proved he was at least good enough to keep TNA strong through his tenures. As for the future, it seems Prichard is doing a good job with the current team by having their stories drawn out before executing them. Though their pacing can use some work.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

you're a jack ass if you're quoting something posted in a forum as a legitimate news piece and not as a rumor...those detailed plans were never mentioned by Heyman nor were they reported and confirmed by any sites or Dave Meltzer

as far as Heyman's actually qoute I couldn't agree more with his sentiment

I never said Heyman was a good business man, but anybody that has been watching wrestling for the past 25 years can't deny his creative ablity and overall contribution to wrestling. He has a track-record...look it it up instead of criticizing him based on something that never actually came to fruition

All this tells me is that you refused to actually vet any of the links I provided, because had you done so, you'd have seen that they referenced other sites that reported those news stories. The Danielson story broke from Gabe Sapolsky's Facebook page, where he wrote about it, and the chopping the heads of 40-year olds bit was derived directly from an interview with Heyman from the MMA Hour on MMAFighting.com from August of 2010.

And if you like, I could just as soon criticize him on what did happen — the collapse of ECW.

 

[scomvp316]

I will admit I am a Heyman guy. As much positive he was to ECW he was also the reason of the demise of that promotion. Heyman as a creative guy is almost untouchable but that doesn't mean everything he does is great. The biggest problem Heyman has is he is three times more paranoid than VKM and thats not a good thing. When he was in charge of SD those were some of the best years after the buyout of WCW. If Heyman was to channel what worked in ECW/SD/MMA he could be hugely successful. However if its the old Heyman with no upper tier management overseeing him than TNA would suffer the same fate of ECW because by the time Dixie would try to fix some of the problems it would be way too late. Heyman should not be anywhere near day to day business decisions and he should of some sort of power of the talent working there but not the majority decision of talent

 

[nbkush]

Yup. And lost money because of it. I just love it when people sing Heyman's praises. ECW is considered a cultural revolution for wrestling but it died in under 8 years under Paul Heyman. People call him a creative genius but fail to recognize that his management also sunk ECW dead.

Eric Bischoff could and has done more for the TNA product than Paul Heyman could ever really do. Hell, Russo has more success than Heyman in the booking account. Not even Paul's time on Smackdown was that good with the only success we can talk about being the "Smackdown Six".

Russo wasn't best but he proved he was at least good enough to keep TNA strong through his tenures. As for the future, it seems Prichard is doing a good job with the current team by having their stories drawn out before executing them. Though their pacing can use some work.

how do you lose money when you license a product to a video game company and network and get paid....just b/c it wasn't enough to save ECW @ that point doesn't mean they were money losing ventures...if anything the money they got from fom securing such contracts kept ECW on life support ....The point being is that with both things considered Heyman did create national wrestling stars in ECW... I'll sing the praise of WCCW too and the booking of Gary Hart..how long did that last?. so i'm not sure what your point is that ECW was around for 8 years...I believe that is about the same time The Beatles were around...hmm... I'm a fan of Russo's and always have been, but he can't hold Heyman's jock....and Heyman's creative infulence on Smackdown was so refreshing compared to what was going on @ Raw @ the time

All this tells me is that you refused to actually vet any of the links I provided, because had you done so, you'd have seen that they referenced other sites that reported those news stories. The Danielson story broke from Gabe Sapolsky's Facebook page, where he wrote about it, and the chopping the heads of 40-year olds bit was derived directly from an interview with Heyman from the MMA Hour on MMAFighting.com from August of 2010.

And if you like, I could just as soon criticize him on what did happen — the collapse of ECW.

I remember when this so-called 'story' broke...in the coming days and weeks it went no where as far as credibilty or substance....it was vetted then...your quote of Heymans of something he actually said I agree with.....do I think he would have axed Hogan, Nash, Flair, Jarrett?..hell yeah and for good reason...do I think he would have instituted a mandatory 40 yr and under roster?...absolutly not....the collapse of ECW was pure finances, but we are not debating he business savvy but rather his creative ability