Vince Russo... Overrated or Underrated by IWC?

[Jackal960]

Vince Russo is one of the personas that shaped wrestling, good and bad. He was the mind behind many storylines and had a fair share of controversy in those storylines. In these forums, I have read countless threads against him. Which brings up my question: Does he deserve that much criticism? You might think he should be criticized even more maybe?

I don't have a clue who he is, never met him, and I can only comment from his storylines, and a few backstage incidents that happened. I think he is criticized more than what he deserves by IWC. In that regard, his accomplishments overall is a bit underrated.

He become the Head Writer of WWE in 97. This is the year when Stone Cold become a superstar! Yes, his famous speech was in 96 but I still think his real stardom started in WM 13. This is also the year Rocky Maivia become a heel and joined the Nation of Domination. This is also the year D-X was formed. These 3, without a question, were the biggest names that eventually give WWE the steering wheel in Wrestling Entertainment. If we are still watching WWE today, they might be the main reason behind. I always heard that Vince McMahon was the one who was filtering Russo with his over the top ideas. I am sure that would be the case. However, just a few years before that, McMahon was giving the OK to the Plumbers, Clowns, Mummys and all sorts of abnormal gimmicks as well. Also, after his departure McMahon also gave his OK to all of the controversial ideas that shaped an Era. If you don't have a "smart enough" idea, what is the point of filtering it? Edgy or not, if anyone can come up with one of the ideas, like D-X, Taker-Kane, SCSA-McMahon or the transition of RockyMaivia to the Rock, he deserves to be praised for what he brought. He is also criticized for his Edgy Style Booking. He was always seen as the reason of the adult oriented Era for WWE. However keep in mind he was the head of WWE between early 97- late 99. When I think about most of the "over the top angles" of the Attitude Era, it mainly starts with 2000. Sure, we had Sable and Godfather and Val Venis before 2000, but when I think of girls kissing each other in the ring, taking eachother's bras out and all that sort of extreme angles, a huge chunk of them started with 2000 and continued on the next few years. Strangely enough, Godfather and Val Venis, the gimmicks that were criticized today as being Russo's ideas, continued with their air time, well after Russo left the company.

Then in 2000 he started with WCW. When you think about WCW, when was it's best years? Way before 2000! It's not like WCW was in their prime and Russo stuffed everything up. They actually brought Russo for a reason! WCW was already getting crushed and was sinking. In his time, ratings were not going down for a while and stabilized at least. One of the main incidents happened in that era were Hogan not wanting to job to JJ using his Creative Control. I can't blame Russo for not wanting Hogan to win in year 2000.

I am not writing this because Russo is an angel, he is the mind behind many non-sense bookings as well. I am writing all this because people tend to criticize Russo for too many things. I know he produced too many controversies and made wrong bookings. But sometimes I just think that we are overreacting against him like we do to so many wrestlers/writers. IWC is hard to be pleased, but for just what he brought to WWE when it was running out of business, we should appreciate what he has done as well. In that regard, his accomplishments are a bit underrated by IWC considering what he has done.

 

[d_henderson1810]

I do agree that Vince Russo is far more hated than he should be. I think a lot of this is that I have heard that he is a bit of a prick. So, maybe people who he has made enemies with in the industry, are the ones who criticise him all the time.

Firstly, what Russo is never given credit for is being the head booker and writer during the "Attitude Era" (the benchmark of greatness for IWC "smarks"). Sure, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Mr McMahon did a great job, but their storylines didn't appear on the script pages by themselves. Russo must be given credit for one of the most memorable storylines ever, which people still talk about 13 years later.

Secondly, I found WCW interesting when he was there. Firstly, he had his stint as the "Powers That Be", and you never knew who the PTB would punish in a match this week, or how he would humiliate them. I actually started turning in EVERY WEEK during the "Powers That Be" storyline, as it was more interesting than anything else in WCW at the time.

Then he came back, running the "Millionaires Club" v "The New Bloods" feud. He also built new superstars, not the same over-40 WWF main-eventers all the time. He pushed Kidman, he promoted Jeff Jarrett, and Booker T went from one half of a tag-team to "5 time..5 time WCW Champion" because of Russo.

Also, he is criticized over the David Arquette thing. I didn't like it either, but he is completely right in his reasoning. Mainstream media don't care about wrestling, but put a title on a movie star, and they take notice. Why blame Russo for exploiting this, when we should blame the media for not talking positively about wrestling the rest of the time? It was desperate, but it worked in getting mainstream press.

 

[GameOver]

is this a serious thread?
what do you think.
Whenever people talk crap about writing in WWF/WCW/TNA one name comes up as the head writer. Vince Russo, whether it's justified or not he's been lumped as one of the biggest issue in wrestling since the mid 90's

Personally i can see some stuff that was done under his watch that worked but more often if was rediculous, he's alot like Bischoff in his approach though he doesn't agree with Bischoff's ideas. they both are after 1 thing. Shock value, doesn't matter how crap it is aslong as it gets a reaction either way.

Russo was in WCW in 1999 and again in 2000 he quit twice . both due to "creative" issues with the management and suffered a concussion with the help of Goldberg, gee that's 2 people he did that too ;P
WCW was long dead by this point so there wasn't much he could do
he returned to WWE in 2002 b4 quickly leaving because he wasn't the head honcho
2002 he headed to TNA where he's stayed. TNA writing is awfull most of the time, but who really knows if it's him or not, but he is there so he has to should some of the responsibility.

I'd say he's not highly overrated but certainly overrated and too much of a headfark to have around and wonder how long he'll stay with TNA with Bischoff there who in interviews he has stated he has no trust or faith in and the main reason he never stayed in WCW for more then a few months each time.

 

[TheGreatLegend]

Vince Russo was the who started pushing "young" talent and he was one of the reasons for the "Attitude Era".Vince Russo did many things to which we talk about to this day.So yeah Vince Russo accomplishments are underrated within IWC.He did more positive than negative.

 

[rocksuperstarkaos]

I agree with Skinsley, Vince Russo has more bad ideas then good ones, if you read some of the quotes some of the wrestlers back then say about Russo this wouldn't even be a thread. Basically the consensus is, if Vince Russo didn't have Vince McMahon to filter his ideas, WWE would be dead right now.

 

[Jackal960]

I agree with Skinsley, Vince Russo has more bad ideas then good ones, if you read some of the quotes some of the wrestlers back then say about Russo this wouldn't even be a thread.

Today we still have "active" threads about wrestlers who are unhappy with their tenure at WWE, the way they are booked, how unfair they were against the wrestler and so on. Honestly, if I were the head writer of WWE some wrestlers will complain about me too. There will always be unhappy people with the bookings

Basically the consensus is, if Vince Russo didn't have Vince McMahon to filter his ideas, WWE would be dead right now.

The consensus of who? IWC. That's what this thread is about. I am not saying he was an angel but I think he is criticezed heavily, way much more than he deserves. And with filtering, McMahon was the one who give OK to the dumbest gimmicks ever in 94-96. Also he gave the OK to the edgy storylines like Katie Vick and Mae Young's birth. So where is the filter in that? We are claiming McMahon filtered storylines that we never saw, never surfaced? We are so sure about them but we have no idea about those storylines. We just ASSUME they would be bad. I am happy to be wrong, i am just bored to listen the same thing again and again

 

[jmt225]

It's a cop out of an answer, but I'd have to say it goes both ways. Russo's detractors underrate him, while his followers overrate him. There's no in-between with Vince Russo.

That said, I'll always give Russo credit for pushing guys like Booker T, Lance Storm, Kidman, 3 Count, and the women in WCW. Also, he made guys like D-Lo, Val Venus, Marc Mero, Sable and plenty of others while in the WWF. He was a big factor as to why the WWF's mid-card was so awesome at one point.

But, Russo needs someone around who has the balls to tell him that some of his ideas suck, and handpick the few good ones that he comes up with, because the ones that are good, are usually very good. In most cases, however, it takes a lot of bad ideas before actually getting a good one, and I think that's why most gimmicks and storylines in WCW and TNA that Russo supposedly came up with has sucked ass. No one tells him no. They just say, "Make this guy," and then step away. At least, that's how I always visioned it. Nothing has made me think otherwise.

 

[One to Remember]

It depends on when and where. In the WWF I think he done good, In TNA i do not know the structure but hes gotta bare some of the blame for it. Its going to tarnish his past work. I hate him because as a WCW and southern guy i felt he played a role in her demise. He did not hit the iceberg but he sure as hell did not get any life boats ready. The only choices he made Ii respected was vacating all the titles, pushing guys like Book and Storm, and the young guys. But he should had fired more people, cut costs and even David Arquette has said him getting the WCW Title was wrong.. he has repeatedly saidhe knew wrestling fans would be upset over it. Give Karl Malone or Rodman the belt. Atleast he was scrappy.

Going back to Vince McMahon's so called golden oversight and filtration, riddle me this, if we were all trapped in the desert would you rather have some merky dirty water to drink or just some fancy filter? Give me a breal McMahon..

 

[shattered dreams]

I'll never understand how this question doesn't have an obvious answer. Even if Russo is slightly below average (and he is likely significantly better than that all things considered) then he would qualify as wildly underrated by the IWC where he is viewed as one of the worst of all. It is really that simple to me and these threads are often a testament to how underrated he really is because people will go out of their way to avoid the obvious just because they would never do something as heinous as utter a positive word about that man.

I'd take this whole Vince filter nonsense more seriously if people had any clue what the timelines surrounding Russo is WCW actually were. Furthermore, since when is the person that is good at reviewing movies more important/better than the director? Russo became a scapegoat for everything that people in wrestling didn't want to acknowledge because he was too good at his job on screen.

 

[Defekt]

Russo is pretty bad. Has he written even one good storyline since the Attitude Era?

The last years of WCW were unbelievably terrible. The storylines of that era are almost void of any redeeming value whatsoever.

TNA has suffered the same fate of illogical, inconsistent, unrealistic booking.

I think Russo gets too much credit for the Attitude era. Yes he had a hand in it, but the WWE didn't skip a beat when Russo left, and has continued to present acclaimed storylines in his absence. If you ask me, Vince was the real mastermind of the attitude era.

Anyway, I don't think Russo is underrated at all. If anything, he's overrated.

 

[RicoLen]

Let me put it like this. If you ever want to see a return to the attitude era, persuade McMahon to hire Russo. Russo, while working for McMahon was gold. Get that combination back and you've got what you need.

Russo is very underrated only due to the fact that Russo is demonized to the Nth degree and everyone hates him for doing everything that's ever happened bad in wrestling.

 

[Psykohurricane55]

In a way i got to give credit to Vince Russo. For a non-wrestlers, he's probably the most hated guy with Wrestling fans.

My personal opinion on Vince russo is pretty simple, he a really talented writer that doesn'T understand the wrestling business. Over the years, the one constant problem Vince had was pacing. Sure during the Attitude Era, you had to go quick and rush every storylines along because it's what the fans of that period demanded. Russo was the head writer during the WWE Attitude Era and while i have to give him credit for the writing, people seem the forget that Vince McMAhon was the guy that had final say with what was making on TV, that'S why Russo was so succesful during that period, because he had somebody to guide the pacing of the show. What has he done since then. The guys had great ideas like the new blood/millionaire'S club feud in WCW but with no pacing and really bad booking decision, that angle feel apart 3 months after it started, just like everything else he wrote since then.

Russo doesn't deserve all that negative attention because been a writer for a wrestling company is hard work. But he does deserve some of it for the fact that he not able to understand that rushing stuff along doesn'T work anymore and that fans want to believe that wrestling is a real competition and that winning championship matters.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Some people here have said that Vince Russo was only good under Vince McMahon's watch. If Vince McMahon is so good at knowing what is good and what is rubbish, then how come some much garbage has appeared onscreen since Russo left?

I have just watched the "Michael Cole Challenge" segment on "Raw". What a pile of excrement. Are you telling me that this is more intelligent than something Vince Russo would do? This is only being done as another petty-pot shot at J.R. It doesn't move any current storyline forward, so is not necessary. It doesn't sell buys to "Survivor Series" on Sunday!

Also under Vince's watch, we had things like the fake Donald Trump and fake Rosie O'Donnell match, and Dr Heinie. Was Vince Russo secretly writing for WWE at this time, or was it someone else?

My point is, the Vince McMahon you credit with keeping Vince Russo in line is the same one who hired TV comedy and soap-opera writers to write "Raw" and "Smackdown", and have some segments exist for the sole purpose of comedy or making someone look bad, rather than advancing a storyline.

At least Russo has some knowledge of the wrestling industry. He used to be a wrestling magazine writer, so he would have some "feel" for how things run. Maybe writing for TV is different than writing a magazine column, and he is limited to that.

But I would rather have writers who have some working knowledge, however limited, about the wrestling industry itself. Today's WWE writers freely admit to knowing nothing about wrestling, but are writing for "sports-entertainment".

These are the same people who write the corny lines that John Cena says on the show each week.

So, what would you rather have? Vince Russo writing for WWF/E during the "Attitude Era", or today's soapie writers writing for WWE during the "PG" Era?

 

[Defekt]

Some people here have said that Vince Russo was only good under Vince McMahon's watch. If Vince McMahon is so good at knowing what is good and what is rubbish, then how come some much garbage has appeared onscreen since Russo left?

Alot of garbage appeared during the attitude era as well. Nobody is perfect, including McMahon.

I have just watched the "Michael Cole Challenge" segment on "Raw". What a pile of excrement. Are you telling me that this is more intelligent than something Vince Russo would do? This is only being done as another petty-pot shot at J.R. It doesn't move any current storyline forward, so is not necessary. It doesn't sell buys to "Survivor Series" on Sunday!

How many tickets did "Oklahoma" sell? That character was way more than another JR pot shot. The segment was exactly as stupid as something Russo would book. Russo once booked Buff Bagwell to have purposely bad matches. How did that create buys?

Also under Vince's watch, we had things like the fake Donald Trump and fake Rosie O'Donnell match, and Dr Heinie. Was Vince Russo secretly writing for WWE at this time, or was it someone else?

No one is saying the WWE hasn't had stupid storylines. They do them all the time. But they've also had many good ones. Cena vs The Nexus, CM Punk is leaving, etc.

It's easy to pick out bad storylines in any promotion. Russo once booked a "viagra on a pole match." My point is, where are Russo's good storylines outside of the Attitude era? I honestly can't think of one.

And not to nitpic, but I'd say the Trump vs Rosie match was done to get nationwide media attention, which the WWE achieved.

My point is, the Vince McMahon you credit with keeping Vince Russo in line is the same one who hired TV comedy and soap-opera writers to write "Raw" and "Smackdown", and have some segments exist for the sole purpose of comedy or making someone look bad, rather than advancing a storyline.

That may be true, but WWE storylines have been consistently better than Russo era WCW or Russo era TNA storylines. The poor booking of TNA is what turns most people off the promotion.

And I don't think hiring Hollywood writers is necessarily a bad thing. It's ultimately in Vince's hands as to what makes it on TV. It's better he surround himself with creative people who might takes things in a new direction than let a dinosaur like Ole Anderson write all the shows.

 

[d_henderson1810]

My point is that the argument that the "Attitude Era" was good because Vince kept Russo on a leash doesn't wash, if the current product is not that good. Vince Russo isn't in WWE now, so why the bad storylines?

You say that you would rather have "creative" people write the shows than have someone like Ole Anderson do it. At least Ole Anderson is in the business. A lot of these writers don't know anything about building a feud for example. "Raw" this week should have been all about "Survivor Series". I assume that PPV buys are still important to WWE. So, couldn't the "Michael Cole Challenge" have been better used by spending more time promoting Cena-Rock v Miz-Truth, Punk v Del Rio, or maybe even Dolph Ziggler v Zack Ryder? I know a lot of people on these boards would like to see more air-time for Ziggler and Ryder, and at least having them has some point to it, since they have a match Sunday. But unless Michael Cole v Jim Ross is going to be added to the card (I hope not), then it is a waste of ten minutes that could be used for someone else. A wrestling writer would have known that. A TV writer wouldn't. But it doesn't matter, since they are writing "sports-entertainment" , not "wrestling".

I would love to see someone like Paul Heyman as a wrestling writer. Few would be better at telling a story than him (remember his Dreamer-Raven feud in ECW)? But he probably won't work for Vince again. BTW, did you know that Heyman wrote the entire "December To Dismember" PPV? But Vince trashed it, and got others to re-write it. As a result, D2D was one of the worst bought PPV's ever. So, that is how the magical hand of Vince McMahon was in knowing quality material.

If Russo is so bad, then how was the Austin v McMahon feud so good? Are "Stone Cold" and Vince that good at acting ( I know people here *********e about Austin, but he isn't a chance of being an Oscar nominee anytime soon). So, unless Austin and Vince penned the whole thing themselves, then Vince Russo produced a quality storyline, and you and all the haters just have to accept that fact.

 

[TheGreatLegend]

My point is that the argument that the "Attitude Era" was good because Vince kept Russo on a leash doesn't wash, if the current product is not that good. Vince Russo isn't in WWE now, so why the bad storylines?

You say that you would rather have "creative" people write the shows than have someone like Ole Anderson do it. At least Ole Anderson is in the business. A lot of these writers don't know anything about building a feud for example. "Raw" this week should have been all about "Survivor Series". I assume that PPV buys are still important to WWE. So, couldn't the "Michael Cole Challenge" have been better used by spending more time promoting Cena-Rock v Miz-Truth, Punk v Del Rio, or maybe even Dolph Ziggler v Zack Ryder? I know a lot of people on these boards would like to see more air-time for Ziggler and Ryder, and at least having them has some point to it, since they have a match Sunday. But unless Michael Cole v Jim Ross is going to be added to the card (I hope not), then it is a waste of ten minutes that could be used for someone else. A wrestling writer would have known that. A TV writer wouldn't. But it doesn't matter, since they are writing "sports-entertainment" , not "wrestling".

I would love to see someone like Paul Heyman as a wrestling writer. Few would be better at telling a story than him (remember his Dreamer-Raven feud in ECW)? But he probably won't work for Vince again. BTW, did you know that Heyman wrote the entire "December To Dismember" PPV? But Vince trashed it, and got others to re-write it. As a result, D2D was one of the worst bought PPV's ever. So, that is how the magical hand of Vince McMahon was in knowing quality material.

If Russo is so bad, then how was the Austin v McMahon feud so good? Are "Stone Cold" and Vince that good at acting ( I know people here *********e about Austin, but he isn't a chance of being an Oscar nominee anytime soon). So, unless Austin and Vince penned the whole thing themselves, then Vince Russo produced a quality storyline, and you and all the haters just have to accept that fact.

Completely agreed with you.Couldn't have said it better myself.People always bash Vince Russo for everything good or bad.But looking at WWE now How are these "Hollywood" writers doing any good ? WWE writing is so poor and storylines make no sense either.No consistency,no long-term thinking.The shows are just filled and more than half of it makes no sense.

 

[Lockard23]

Vince Russo is vastly overrated, mostly by himself. Despite his success during the Atttitude Era, he believed his own hype and helped kill WCW as a result. From what I read, he isn't doing TNA any favors either.