WCW: Should Vince have killed it?

[MCMGfoLife]

I've been thinking about this for a while. I still to this day always loved the idea, not so much the outcome, of the Invasion story. I loved the idea of seeing the biggest promotions in the world taking on one another, even though WCW and ECW were under WWF ownership.

However, the more I think of it, the more I think Vince should have killed Smackdown! and used the timeslot for WCW. I know it wouldn't be the same, and I really didn't even watch WCW at the time, but the first few weeks before the Invasion storyline, Raw was an hour of WWF and an hour of WCW back to back, and they even created a new WCW logo for, seemingly, no reason. I would have liked to see the company running still, just with Vince signing the checks and see what happens, and then have the two "companies" feud that way.

So what do you guys think?

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

That's not the worst idea I've ever heard, but I think it would have been better if WCW's biggest stars had made the jump.

Say if Sting, Goldberg, Steiner et al had come over, if WCW had 'taken over' Smackdown and claimed it as their own, then this could have prolonged the feud for a lot longer and led to the big feuds we really wanted to see at that time. As well as that, the younger WCW guys could have had an opportunity to cement their standing, as one thing I get disappointed about with the Invasion was that, speaking personally, I didn't know who a lot of these younger WCW folk like Stasiak were but they looked impressive. So to sum up, giving young wrestlers the time and opportunity to grow in confidence and develop their character could have stood WWE in good stead. Hindsight is wonderful, but if WWE HAD taken that chance then it's interesting to consider what the Main Even picture nowadays would look like.

 

[Devlin]

The fact is, all the big stars like Goldberg, Sting, Steiner, Nash, etc, had contracts directly with AOL-Time Warner, not actually with WCW (similar to the deal Hogan has now with Panda Energy instead of TNA directly), if they would have had contracts with WCW directly, I think things would have turned out differently.

Think about it, they had guaranteed big money contracts from AOL-Time Warner & didn't have to do anything after the company was sold. Joining WWE would have caused those contracts to be terminated & they would be venturing into the unknown, they had no idea if WCW was going to survive, how many (if any) WCW stars would be kept & how long for. They did what was right by them, but by the end of it, the "Invasion" suffered & WCW died pretty quickly (If I recall, the original plan was to keep WCW around as a separate brand, but a WCW match on RAW between Buff Bagwell & Booker T messed that up, along with the facts that the WWE audience had essentially been trained to see WCW as the enemy & no TV network wanted WCW on their station as they had been losing money in the end, which I find amusing since this was now a WWE brand, not a Turner run company).

When push came to shove, WCW would not have survived as a separate brand, the only decent names they had to main event were DDP & Booker T. Other then that they had no one of note that could help carry the brand.

 

[pessimism101]

While it might sound nice to keep WCW around as its own brand, do I need to remind you how Vince treated ECW? And if that's what he does with a company that was of little threat to him, imagine how WWE's version of WCW would be treated. Some things are better left alone and not only should WCW have been killed, but it should remain dead.

 

[GIMH]

I read somewhere that Vince originally planned to have WCW on a Monday...Nitro...and Smackdown on a Thursday. Basically the brand split, but under WWF and WCW brand names. However, networks were dead against the WCW name appearing on them, and also didn't trust Vince with anything non-WWF. So, we got the Invasion instead.

Of course, this may not true but I think it might have been the Death of WCW book that I read it in

 

[DexVendetta88]

Early on the Invasion angle, the WWE initially wanted to make WCW a separate entity. Originally the WWE wanted to give WCW the old Thursday night SmackDown slot while the WWE kept Raw which in fact was the original idea for the brand extension after the purchase of WCW. They initially tested the concept by giving WCW air-time on Raw. As we all know, this ended in failure due to the low rating Raw received that night when WCW's portion of the show came on the air, and the reaction in the arena that night wasn't all that great either. However, staying on topic here I think Vince wanted to give WCW one last fighting chance before his creative team took over thus burying the WCW name once and for all at the end of the Invasion angle at Survivor Series 2001. If the guys who were signed by AOL/Time Warner (i.e. Goldberg, Steiner, Hogan, Hall, Nash) we're present during the Invasion angle not only it would've brought some real credibility to the Invasion angle, but the WCW name would've probably survived a lot longer than planned.

 

[CuddleBuns84]

The idea of having WCW have it's own TV show was on the shelf. In fact, Vince had an entire office and staff dedicated to the new product. However, the horrible reaction to Booker T and Buff Baggwell, and the commentators killed that idea. Not also that, but they had to trim the fat of WCW. Most of the young talent, and veteran talent really weren't behind the idea. They were just there because no one had the money to pay them.

However WWE still did the brand split, and both shows have their own titles. Just the name of the brands is Raw and Smackdown. I think that's a better move then bringing the WCW name back, because WCW died with a rep of crappy management.

 

[gtajoker01]

Maybe. but if he would of kept wcw around wouldnt he water it down just like he did with ecw?. but i would like to see them release more wcw ppv's

 

[twiztid jay]

they should have just let shane mcmahon own it and keep it as wcw, vince vs. shane and let wcw run regulary, they would still have competition, and vince would have just banked off wcw and wwf(e). instead of trying to jam them all into one company.


jay..

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I'll try my best to resuscitate this thread.

Yes, Vince should have killed WCW when he bought it, instead of doing the disappointing Invasion story that failed miserably. The whole concept of that Invasion wouldn't work because no big names were there. It was WCW's mid-card being fed to the WWE stars. In Vince's own way, he killed it, but not the way it should have.

All Vince should have done was simply buy the company, let Nitro do it's final show with no WWE interference and then move on from there. Of course, his ego is too much to hold back and he had to embarrass WCW and it's cohorts. Do I blame him? Not really. Because WCW was trying to put the WWE under. So WCW got what it had coming to them.

But yea, Vince should have just bought WCW's assets and be done with it. Or if you do the story, at least he should have paid the bigger names to stay along for the time being. Alas, he didn't. And in some cases couldn't. (Goldberg/Sting).

 

[Shocky]

With WCW and the recent WWECW attempt, it proves one thing, Vince McMahon doesn't give a shit about the business unless he created it. Vince bought WCW and he buried it, because he could. There was no way in hell that the WWE would elevate WCW up to it's level. It was never going to happen in this lifetime or the next.

The inVasion angle was ego driven by McMahon. It didn't matter that the fans thought WCW and the WWF were on the same level, McMahon won the war, so he was going to do with it as he pleased.

It's a shame that it's going to take ten years for the WWE to properly treat WCW. It seems silly that you own an asset that made a shit load of money in it's hayday, only to bury it because you could. The WCW Starrcade DVD opened the door to a semi-fair portrayal of the company, but the damage might be too far done to properly restore it to what it should be.


Do I think Vince should have killed it, no? It just seems silly.

 

[shattered dreams]

Bischoff has said if the shoe was on the other foot he would have kept the two because of how great the interpromotional feuds could have been. It is a point that is hard to argue with IMO, However, it really was not quite that simple as people have mentioned with contract situations.