Why does Vince Russo get the blame..?

[rockmysock01]

Ive been reading alot of old threads on here, and for some reason Vince Russo seems to get most of the blame for WCW's demise.

My Question is..Why?

WCW had been losing the ratings war for a good 18 months before Russo even got there. And when he arrived..the ratings for WCW started going up.
Alot of people point to the clusterf*ck that was the Bash at the Beach 2000, but i think Russo is the fucking man for standing up to Hulk Hogan and firing him. How dare Hogan think he is bigger than wrestling.
It was the likes of Hogan and Nash ect. with their big egos and backstage politics that were causing the downfall of WCW. Russo could see this, so he tried to do something about it. Obviously it didnt work..but at least he had the balls to try.

 

[NIGuy]

Russo didn't stand up to Hogan I believe, in my opinion it was the other way around... Russo went behind Hulks back and changed the way Jarrett/Hogan was meant to finish and ordered Jarrett to lie down at the start... Russo just acted like a spoilt brat not getting his way

Hogan refused to do this and IMO Hogan then did a shoot on Russo there and then... Russo then fired Hogan publically... Now Hogan was also in the wrong with his ego getting in the way of dropping the title to Jarrett but Russo's actions there where a death nail in WCW just like the fingerpoke of doom (I hold each as bad as the other) also arranged by Russo I believe.

Don't forget Russo was also responsible for David Arquette as world champion so that makes if I am correct 3 completely horrendous decisions and therefor Russo is responsible for WCWs demise (at least a big part off it.

People often say but Russo was successful in WWE and was responsible for the attitude era, they forget he had Vince to go through with ALL his ideas so he would have not be able to pull the crap he pulled in WCW as there he had a free reign to do so as he pleased.

 

[rockmysock01]

Russo didn't stand up to Hogan I believe, in my opinion it was the other way around... Russo went behind Hulks back and changed the way Jarrett/Hogan was meant to finish and ordered Jarrett to lie down at the start... Russo just acted like a spoilt brat not getting his way

Sorry but you are wrong.
Russo originally booked it for Hogan to lose to Jarrett..but Hogan acted like a spoilt brat and, instead of doing what was best for the company, he invoked his creative control clause and refused to lie down 4 Jarrett. Thats why Russo did what he did.
Imagine all the wrestlers over the years, when Hogan was up and coming/making his name, who wouldnt have wanted to lie down for Hogan.
But ya know what? they fucking went out there and did their job, and did what the Head Booker told them to do. because thats how PROFESSIONAL wrestling works.
Thats the beauty of it. Vince Russo was the head booker, so Hogan should have done what he was told.
The exact same thing happened at Starrcade '97 when Hogan was meant to lose cleanly to Sting. but his ego got the better of him and we ended up with the clusterfuck finish with Bret Hart instead. many people point to that moment as the beginning of the end for WCW.

-Russo had nothing to do with the fingerpoke of doom..that was almost a year before he got to WCW.

-Yeah i agree..David Arquette as champ was pretty bad. but desperate times call for desperate measures. He did it to get WCW some much needed publicity..almost exactly like what WWE is doing now with the Guest Host angle on Raw.

 

[NIGuy]

I feel Russo and Hogan could maybe have been as bad as each other then. Sorry I stand corrected on some of my points. Hogan is a pre-Madonna who has to get things his way and have final say over his matches yes and is one of the reasons I no longer have any respect for Hogan but Russo publicly firing Hogan on TV was kinda a bad move I feel and should have been handled privately.

Russo though when coming to WCW must have felt like a caged animal freed for the first time being able to do whatever he wanted without answering to anyone.

I do respectfully disagree about it being almost exactly the same as Raw guest hosts, there is a big difference between giving a flavor of the month actor promoting a wrestling movie the most prestigious prize in wrestling and having a person guest host an episode of Raw.

 

[samboisdead]

Well you just proved that nothing you say is worth a grain of salt anyway. First off like it or not hogan is bigger than wrestling. Second even though it didnt happen like you think Hogan put russo in his place, to be happy that a piece of shit like Russo put Hogan in his place. Hogan built this buisness like it or not. Hogan also payed his dues unlike Russo. Do most of you guys even no that Hogan got his leg broke while breaking into the buisness and still wanted it bad enough to come back? Russo has done nothing for the wrestling buisness. People act like he was the only writer during the attitude era. It has been said many times that half the stuff that happened like Austin 3:16, The Rock was the wrestlers doing he just listened to the wrestlers and let them have input on the writing unlike most writers. Also I am pretty sure that Vince and co did alot more of the writing than Russo. If Russo had single handedly wrote the attitude era like so many people think Vince wouldnt have let him go. Also you guys give writers to much credit. He wasnt a booker in WWE someone else did the bookings and he just came up with storylines to go along with the matches. Russo has rode a couple of good years of success which I think he wasnt all that responsible for to a ton of big pay checks. I would have loved to see Hogan give him the big boot for real but Hogan was to professional to do something like that. I dont really blame Russo for the death of WCW. That is the front office of AOL/Turners fault. They had a new boss like every few months out their. I think Russo gets blamed though because while the show was pretty bad when he got their it was unwatchable after he arrived. The only reason rating went up is because people were tuning in to see a train wreck.

 

[Slyfox696]

Wow, so much information being ignorantly thrown out there.

First, NONE of you actually know Hulk Hogan, so calling him a piece of shit is completely laughable. I think all of you are pieces of shit for talking about someone you don't know. Hogan did more charity work in 5 years of his big run than most wrestlers do in an entire career. Even Bret Hart, a man who does not like Hogan, admits that Hogan is a very great man for all the good things he has done for people.

Second of all, what happened in 2000 was nothing like what you all say. The common belief is that Hogan and Russo both agreed to a worked shoot, including having Jarrett lie down for Hogan, and Hogan doing a worked shoot on Russo. However, as Hogan left and heard what Russo was saying about him, things that Hogan never agreed to have said about him, then Hogan got pissed and quit working. What happened in 2000 was a worked shoot gone awry.


Finally, to actually answer the question of this thread, Russo gets the blame because most people are idiots. Eric Bischoff actually got fired from WCW, because WCW was doing so poorly. He hot-shotted titles, was the one responsible for the celebrity involvement, and oversaw the major downfall of WCW. Whether or not you want to blame Bischoff or the higher-ups, the fact of the matter is that Russo wasn't even there when WCW went down the drain.

WCW was already dead when Russo got there...Russo just nailed shut the coffin.

 

[Blade]

Vince Russo was the booker when WCW was (arguably) at it's worst. WCW was already well on it's way down by the time Russo got in there between all the crap that had already happened. Everyone knows the "crap" I'm referring to, I'm not gonna list it all out yet again.

People didn't realise how screwed WCW was until Russo turned up there. So naturally, Russo took all the backlash that came with the promotion going down. Naturally, none of the other WCW talent or bookers defended Russo at the time because he made an easy scapegoat. Nobody wanted to take the blame for what was happening to WCW and Russo was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. That, along with the problems with Hogan and such, made Russo seem like the bad guy.

The fans wanted someone to blame for their favourite promotion going under. Not only was Russo the easiest target, but he was one of the top bookers in WWF. So they went after him.

 

[only1soe]

I know I stopped watching WCW when Arquette won the world title. Wrestling is something I have watched since I was a little kid in the very early 1980s. It just really disrespected all the time many of us put into watching this form of entertainment. Totally understand Russo's reasoning behind it but it was a horrible decision which made a loyal WCW fan switch it off for good.

Also can remember when that pay per view came up with Arquette in the cage. I can remember hoping Arquette would get crippled in the match.

 

[TheChampionOfTheWorld]

WCW was already in decline by the time Russo there. But instead of pull WCW out of the fire he pour gas on the fire. He was not as good as he was hyped up to be. He put the World Title on himself, seriously really!

The main problem he had was he didn't have a list of proven main eventers. Instead of using guys like Goldberg, Page, Sting, and Hogan to help build up some new guys (Jarrett, Booker T, Scott Steiner) Russo just went ahead and booked his new guys. While now Booker T & Scott Steiner are the veterans used to put over new guys, they weren't big draws when they started. Russo couldn't coexist with the established guy, for what reason I'm not sure.

The whole Hogan-Russo Bash at the Beach 2000 incident, while we know that Russo wanted Jarrett to get over Hogan and he wanted nothing to do with it. I am not sure if he had a problem losing or if it was the way he was suppose to lose. Either way Russo should have known their was an issue prior to an event, you can't book a World Title match and then not deliver, Hogan-Jarrett is a much bigger draw than Booker T-Jarrett. Who would really buy a PPV to see Booker T-Jarrett, I am sure a few, but more people would buy Hogan-Jarrett. I think a lot of buy who bought the PPV felt robbed, they were deprived of a match they wanted to see and given a match that their was no hype.

 

[danny]

because he's a piece of shit that's why........ thinking he's was going to be the savoir of wcw, WELL SURPRISE SURPRISE DIDN'T WORK OUT THAT WAY DID IT. wcw went under due to bad management plain and simple, not because of hulk, i get so sick and tired of hearing snot nose punks like rock socks and others alway's blaming hulk for things that happen in wrestling oh! this superstar didn't get a break, because of hulk, he's such a pre-madonna, he's this he's that.......... JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY ABOUT HULK!!! HE'S A FUCKING ICON!!

 

[CuddleBuns84]

Overall neither Bischoff or Russo are really to blame for the fall of WCW. The merger that AOL time warner pushed crazy ideas. It put both Russo and Eric in a corner in which they tried everything to make something happen. In hope that a Stone Cold or a Rock would happen. They tried Bikini contest, sex appeal, Goldberg heel turn, you name it, they tried it. They didn't have the time to get anything done, so the end came quickly. The Hogan russo bash at the beach ordeal was planned. Hogan was to get a nice paycheck, and stay at home. The main thing to blame, is Ted Turner. He didn't spread out the power, and put it all on one person.

 

[Jack Tunney's Ghost]

I think Jim Ross put it best on the Rise and Fall of WCW DVD when he said that there was more expected of Russo than what he was able to deliver.

It's been already said, but, Russo was brought in to "SAVE" WCW... which means that yes, WCW was already in trouble by the time he got there. By definition, no one is every brought in to "save" a flourishing company. And while WCW didn't promote Russo as the man to "save" them at the time, they didn't exactly deny it either.

There was a lot of resentment in WCW and WWF against Russo for a number of reasons. WCW types figured he was there as a stooge from WWF to destroy WCW, others were worried about their own pushes under "the new booker" and then there were a LOT of old schoolers left over from the old NWA days who loathed Russo's booking philosophy ("the championship belt means NOTHING!") and "crash-TV" style. Over in the WWF, there were those who didn't appreciate him jumping ship while other never warmed up to his booking philosophy.

Russo had a number of enemies in both companies and easily became the figure head as the demise of WCW. He didn't save the company he was sent in to rescue. He didn't perform the miracle that was expected of him and so the resentment against him grew even more.

Russo is not a great booker. He's actually a pretty bad booker. But, he did bring great ideas to the WWF's Attitude era. But, he was working with Vince McMahon... and together they made a great combination of bookers. Russo was over the top and McMahon kept his ideas in check. It worked perfectly for the time. It's too bad that combination will never happen again.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Russo doesn't deserve all the blame, but he deserves some of it no matter what anyone else might want to think. WCW was in rough shape by the time Russo signed with the company, but just about everything he did only made things all that much worse.

Ultimately, the AOL/Time Warner merger is what killed WCW. Nitro was still averaging around a 2.4 when Vince bought the company, but hardly anything in WCW had any quality left to it. Add onto that the fact that the suits at AOL/Time Warner didn't really want WCW to begin with. They kind of had the "wrestling is just low class, low brow entertainment" kind of attitude that many of Turner's own excecutives had about the company in the late 80s and early 90s.

Russo also had some really stupid ideas as booker and he didn't have anybody to filter them through. He didn't have anybody say "No, we're not going to do that", like did when he worked for the WWF. Anything he did there had to be approved by Vince McMahon first and, while Russo did have great ideas in the WWF, it makes you wonder how many fuck ups Russo pitched to Vince. Russo just basically took whatever he felt was good enough and it was put on the air and quality took a sharp decline. Between late October 1999 up until WCW was sold, the WCW WHC changed hands 22 times and the title was vacted 7 times and other titles were treated similarly.

Overall, Vince Russo was a bad booker in WCW. He did help bring about a sharp decline in the quality of the company and it's product, but there's plenty of blame to go around with corporate excecutes and wrestlers themselves that had bad ideas that Russo himself liked and agreed with. Ultimately, however, since he was head booker and really didn't have anybody at the time in the company telling him what he could or couldn't do, on the surface, it does really look like most of the blame falls squarely on him. It's not really fair, but it is what it is.

 

[rockmysock01]

Good comments guys..and i agree with most of whats been said.
As for Hogan, im not bashing him. I know hes an icon and i respect what hes done for the business. But that doesnt give him a free pass 2 do anything. If Hogan came out, unzipped his pants and took a shit in the middle of the ring, alot of fans would still cheer for him. Thats how ridiculous it seems sometimes.
And you would have to be blind not to see that he was one of the main reasons for WCW's downfall.
Listen to Russo's speech at Bash at the Beach. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7apq6_vince-russo-fires-hulk-hogan-bash-a_sport

He says 'From day one that ive been here in WCW, ive done nothing but deal with the bullshit of the politics behind that curtain'.
That pretty much says it all..and you can hear the immense frustration in his voice.
No wonder Russo couldnt do a good job with all the crap that he had to put up with.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

Hogan wanted what's best for his character/brand, and what's best for the company. But his character/brand is going to come first, and how can you blame him? Given the nature of the wrestling business, and what he personally did for the wrestling business (without Hogan, wrestling would not be nearly as profitable today as it is), and the very nature of the wrestling business (these guys are independent contractors that are used until they serve no further value, and than are dumped on their asses), Hogan did the right thing. Russo wanted to put the title on Jeff "I couldn't draw fans at a Jarrett family reunion" Jarrett. The company is going down the tubes, and not only do you want to take the title off of your biggest draw, you're giving it to one of the worst draws you could, a guy who is a Main Eventer not because of anything he did, but because you (Russo) have unilaterally decided it?

Hogan wanted to keep making money, and that wasn't happening if he just jobs to Jarrett. And a Booker T-Jarrett feud is certainly not going to save the company, especially at the time. Hogan knew that losing to Jarrett would only damage his character/brand, and would do nothing for business. Either the title needed to be on a real main event talent (Hogan, Goldberg, Sting, etc.), or there needed to be a huge story to draw interest (the plan they went with, the "worked shoot" that went awry).

It may be professional wrestling, but in Hogan's PROFESSIONAL contract, he was given control of his character. Russo knew that, and he tried to make it happen anyway. You know something, history tells us that, usually, the thing that's best for Hogan's character is typically pretty awesome for the company Hogan happens to be performing for.

 

[mr.davidson]

Dude U said it all

AMEN!!!!

Hulk Hogan knows whats good 4 the bussiness.... he is always bang on in his decisions and knows whats best 4 the bussiness.........

Alot of you wrestling fans are just jealous of hogans greatness.... everyone needs 2 realize if the promoter decides to give him control over his Persona thats there problem..... Remember he is HULK HOGAN and 2 be honest usally his decsions are valid he knows exactly whats good 4 the bussiness and also what is good for the company that he is working for, when he is working for them.

2 Decisions I will always agree with that Hogan has Made. 1 was what he did with WCW and Vince Russo

and 2. when he didnt job for HBK.... Best decison he has ever made.

 

[rockmysock01]

2 Decisions I will always agree with that Hogan has Made. 1 was what he did with WCW and Vince Russo

and 2. when he didnt job for HBK.... Best decison he has ever made.

But dude..your forgetting one thing. Hogan is old and past his prime. I know he was good in his day, but that was in the '80's.
How can an old guy beating young up and comers be good for business?
It wasnt, and thats why WCW folded.

It would be like now if Triple H, Ric Flair and Shawn Michaels were all top dogs and they won every match, hogged all the spotlight and never put anyone over (not far from the truth actually..but at least DX are putting over legacy and Flair is retired and out of the spotlight.)
Thats exactly what happened in WCW.

How can u say Hogan made great decisions and always does whats best for business, when he was the top guy in WCW and it crashed and burned?
Your comments are laughable.

As for Hogan vs Michaels..that was one of the funniest things ive ever seen.lol
Good on Shawn for over-selling.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

Hogan put over the Rock. Hogan didn't put over HBK. HBK isn't an up and comer, he's a made man. No reason for HBK to win that match. Maybe he should have put Orton over, but the way they set the feud up (attacking Hogan's daughter, etc.) fans would have hated it if Orton won. That's the whole point of bringing Hogan in, people want to see him win. Hogan's last match will either be him beating a heel, or putting over another face in a face vs. face match, maybe a guy like Cena or HHH.