H-Fist
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,485
|
Post by H-Fist on Jan 3, 2009 1:02:55 GMT -5
From Steph's interview: I can think of two off the top of my head. They asked Vince the same and he mentioned a Trips/Orton segment but, claimed that it was ad-lib and not scripted. Might be the same that Steph was thinking. And also, Hijo de Sombrero was also spoken of (I believe by that damn DX) as having shrunk a little bit. and in re pp. 57-58 of Steph's testimony: If all talent were weighed to achieve an average weight of the high-190s, they can hide behind the fact that the referees and divas would be counted in that stat. And also, the Hardy-size guys billed in the 215-235 range are likely closer to 195-215. I remember Rock saying that when he was billed at 275, he had never been over 248 (odd that I remember the number; I think it was Leno)
|
|
KLRA
El Dandy
Halt. I am Reptar.
Posts: 7,591
|
Post by KLRA on Jan 3, 2009 1:07:54 GMT -5
I will say a few things about two of the interviews that I have read so far. The first is that Stephanie is a lot more cordial and open about answering questions. She has no problem navigating through what can be considered loaded questions, and not coming off as confrontational. She came off as she was happy to answer any and every question that they had, and give truthful answers - even when it might not paint the WWE in the greatest light. Steph came off as a great spokeswoman for the company, owning up to mistakes that the WWE has made, and mentioning how they are looking into fixing them.
Vince, on the other hand, came off as a spoiled brat who knew he was guilty. Constantly debating the semantics of questions, acting like a petulant child because he was being forced to answer questions and not promo his way out of them. McDivett I will be honestly shocked if by the end of this investigation he doesn't do something to get himself disbarred. Yes, he's a pitbull of a lawyer, but he was very much playing the part of someone that was trying to protect a guilty client.
I have had to deal with lawyers like McDivett before, and they usually end up doing more harm than good for their clients. Especially in an enviroment like this where WWE is already cast in a bad light.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2009 1:15:23 GMT -5
Some more quotes
Q I'm also interested in your views about whether there are risks within professional wrestling if wrestlers are under the influence of ‐‐ let's start with illegal drugs ‐‐ wrestling in the ring, performing in the ring under the influence of illegal drugs.
Mr. McDevitt. Define what illegal drugs you're referring to, please, so we have a clear record.
Mr. Leviss: I guess illegal performance‐enhancing drugs.
Mr. McDevitt. Well, if you talk to pharmacologists, they'll tell you almost every drug is a performance‐enhancing drug.
Mr. Leviss. I'm not talking to a pharmacologist, am I?
Mr. McDevitt. No, you're but confusing in your questions. If you would ask what drug you're referring to, then he'll answer your question.
Q Well, do you consider or does the company consider being under the influence of steroids as a possible safety issue in the ring?
Vince. I don't know.
Q You don't know whether the company considers that at all?
Mr. McDevitt. He answered your question.
Mr. Leviss. I don't understand your answer.
Mr. McDevitt. You ‐‐ if don't understand his answer, that's not his problem. You ask the questions; he gives the answers.
Mr. Leviss. This is not about problems, Jerry. This is about making sure that I have a clear understanding of his answers to my questions.
Mr. McDevitt. No, it is not about making sure you have a clear understanding about anything. It's about answering the question you ask him. He has answered the question you asked him. If you don't understand, that's your problem.
|
|
|
Post by Cap'n Crud on Jan 3, 2009 5:08:27 GMT -5
Think wrestlers like Batista and Aytch are in deep trouble. If the government really wants to pursue this, we could be right back to where we were in the early 90s with Vince purging the big guys if he can. Uh oh I smell another Rey Mysterio title run just around the bend.
|
|
|
Post by boiledewokthe3rd on Jan 3, 2009 7:01:48 GMT -5
Just read the Vince report, f*** you and your wretched company.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Jan 3, 2009 7:12:50 GMT -5
Apparently McDevitt and Vince learned absolutely nothing from getting hauled before Congress once before. If asked a simple question, such as "what does your company consider a performance enhancing drug" do not say "I don't know" and then have your lawyer go ballistic when the interviewer, on behalf of a Senator, calls bulls*** on the non-answer.
Fact is, they put him under oath, which they very well could if they so chose and he answers one question differently than he did 14 years ago, and it's perjury bigger than hell.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 3, 2009 9:24:14 GMT -5
Think wrestlers like Batista and Aytch are in deep trouble. If the government really wants to pursue this, we could be right back to where we were in the early 90s with Vince purging the big guys if he can. Uh oh I smell another Rey Mysterio title run just around the bend. funny, all things considered And yeah, McDervitt is an alpha dog among alpha dogs and they never look good in transcripts. It's no surprise why Vince hired him.
|
|
sloride
Unicron
Doesn't Suck Up. Or Does She?
The Greatest Entertainer to have ever Lived
Posts: 3,196
|
Post by sloride on Jan 3, 2009 10:03:38 GMT -5
To be honest I'm more in shock about how high TNA's was. And if you take out the Knockouts, as there has been no talk of a female ever failing a test, then it works out that 58% of TNAs male roster were on something. And they were warned that they would be tested which is even more shocking. Criticise WWE and Vince all you want but at least they have a Wellness Policy and punish talent for failing a test and making their name public.
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Jan 3, 2009 11:25:08 GMT -5
dear god, Even I felt convinced by Mcmahon's Final speech in his interview "A Whoa, whoa, whoa. You haven't asked me okay. Again, what I would like to state here is that this company puts smiles on people's faces all over the world. We do it in a responsible manner. We're a public company on the New York Stock Exchange. We have lots of fun, by the way, doing what we do. It's a wonderful company. It entertains millions of people. I'm very proud of our company. I'm very proud of the wellness policies through the years that we put into place, very proud of everything that we've done to make this a safer environment and to enhance the performance of all around performrs and to create a better product, which we do every conceivable day, try to create a better product. I feel as though that this has been a complete witch hunt, and I feel as though despite what you said earlier, I think there is no question in my mind. Hopefully when the public reads this report they will keep in mind, and as best as possible I will remind them as well, not that it will matter, and as the media goes they're only going to want to print what they want to print. But I will state once again that when the chairman of this whole thing, Waxman, determines without any testimony here today that this wellness program is full of crap, my words not his, that's what he means, then we can only expect you guys, the minions who work for him, may only expect then that you write some sort of report that substantiates his point of view. And again I find it irresponsible for a Congressman to state something like that prior to all of this testimony, totally irresponsible. So for the record, I am certain that whatever it is, despite all the wonderful things that we've done, that no one else in the history of this business has ever done, despite all of that, you're here to in some way attack us, when in fact the Wellness Policy is a very good policy, it's one that has evolved and will continue to evolve regardless of what you guys have to say. It didn't take an act of Congress, didn't take Waxman, didn't take the media, didn't take anybody along those lines to tell us what we should do from a responsible standpoint. We've had three of these programs that we put into place voluntarily. We're concerned where our performers are concerned and good business people, by the way, and want to do good business. It didn't take any of that crap like baseball or anything else. No one had to tell us what to do. We did what we did because it was the right thing to do for our business. So there are so many other really good things which we'll try to give you in terms of information you don't have that are positves. All of this has been an attack on the company, all of this has been extraordinarily negative today. Almost every bit of it has been let's try and getcha and it's been negative, negative, negative. So again I'm not expecting anything, nor should the public expect anything other than some sort of scathing report from your committee chaired by the guy who alreay prejudged us, Waxman. We can't expect anything, nor can the public expect anything other than something that's rotten coming out of this committee. And I want to say that for the record. And that's all I've got to say. Have a nice day." Man Vince should really run for office somewhere. The guy is a classic politician trying to point the finger at the media.
|
|
Lara
Don Corleone
IS A SWEETHEART
Posts: 1,292
|
Post by Lara on Jan 3, 2009 11:40:24 GMT -5
I've only read through Vince and Steph's so far, but Steph did a far, far better job at deflecting the tough questions. She was careful to chatter away quite the thing about the whole background of WWE and came over as very helpful and forthcoming, and so they took her answers to the tough questions a lot more gracefully that they took Vince's. She did a great damage limitation job there.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 3, 2009 11:44:21 GMT -5
Short, very shortened review with main bullet points...
-They have about ten writers. -Scripts are constantly being changed up until and on the day of the show. -Steph now oversees John Laurainitis' positive because he 'need some management.' -Vince/Linda are Vince and Linda at work, Mom and Dad at home. -They are in the midst of capitalizing on the following that ECW had and changing its image/product to clean it up. -Vince has never taken the mindset of appealing to a certain demographic - says they appeal to 'cross-section of Americana.' -Only issue of someone not wanting to switch brands was with Michaels (name not specifically stated, though) because Tuesday was his day of worship. -No financial difference in appearing on one show over the other. -They want everyone to be a main-eventer because it means more money to all of them. -Calls Hogan a terrible wrestler, but an incredible psychologist and an incredible charismatic person. -Does not know of a situation where every move had to be or could be scripted during a match. -Talent relations gave Benoit four months off after he said he was having a very difficult time and needed time off for home. -Main eventers can make $150,000 to $200,000 for a PPV (I'm guessing, the reported stated she said "150-" and "200-." -Main-eventers can make up to a $1,00,000 for a WrestleMania. -Standard splits to the worker are 25% for licensing, 10% for merchandise, and 10% for -WWE merchandise. Vince made the contracts this way because he wanted the workers to be part of the revenue stream and be treated fairly as possible when Vince was buying up smaller promotions and invading the rosters for national expansion. -Typical contract is from three to five years. If they want to keep a three year contracted talent employed, they usually start negotiating two years into the deal. -They have someone in development that they are huge on and Steph says he has amazing charisma but just isn't ring ready to be called up. -Agents always meet with talents after televised matches to explain what worked and what didn't. -When suspended talent could still work TV and house shows, they'd get a $200 per day salary. -They are hoping MVP will be a main-eventer. -She doesn't agree that the stars of today are more "muscular" (in general terms) than wrestlers during the 1980s. -Average weight of workers on the roster was in the high 100s. -Chris Benoit tragedy made WWE staff look at how they could be treating the workers better - things like financial planning, health insurance, which a little over 60% of the workers have. -They have seminars for the workers, including 'exit strategies' including life-skills type seminars for when they are done in the WWE. -Only Steph and John L have a say in who gets brought up from developmental, not Vince. -They don't hire guys they think are on steroids. Doesn't give a specific name, bit says they brought someone in recently but didn't hire them based on a positive test. -Says she has never heard or experienced creative/agents/etc telling any worker they needed to be bigger to be signed or called up to the main roster. -Benoit was supposed to be ECW champion, but "didn't show up at the pay-per-view because he was dead." -Says workers might be more prone to concussions because if their line of work, says Chris Nowinski had multiple concussions so they no longer wanted him to work in the ring. -Are looking to do proactive impact testing for concussions or for workers that may be prone to concussions.
|
|
KLRA
El Dandy
Halt. I am Reptar.
Posts: 7,591
|
Post by KLRA on Jan 3, 2009 11:50:11 GMT -5
Like I said before, Steph came off 20 thousand times better than Vince did. Vince needed EVERYTHING spelled out for him, with McDevitt objecting to EVERYTHING, while Steph just rolled with the punches.
|
|
Lara
Don Corleone
IS A SWEETHEART
Posts: 1,292
|
Post by Lara on Jan 3, 2009 12:17:56 GMT -5
Like I said before, Steph came off 20 thousand times better than Vince did. Vince needed EVERYTHING spelled out for him, with McDevitt objecting to EVERYTHING, while Steph just rolled with the punches. Yup, totally. Vince came across as completely hostile and defensive, and sad to say, presented himself as someone who had something to hide. Steph seemed much more... natural in her responses. McDevitt clearly didn't feel the need to cover her back so much, either.
|
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Jan 3, 2009 12:19:29 GMT -5
I haven't read the Stephanie interview yet, but I absolutely cannot believe just how confrontational Vince and his lawyers were over even the most basic procedural questions. It's just stunning.
My interpretation of the interview...........Vince came off as confrontational and DEFINITELY had a lot to hide. His answers (when he wasn't arguing) came off as "spin", and his answers were misleading at best and outright lies at worst. You can tell that they're paranoid about what was said in these interviews coming back and biting them in the ass later. I hope Vince's lawyers explained to him that if he's caught lying, it's not just "a little bad press". There's serious legal charges for lying under oath.
That being said......I'm surprised nobody asked the question of what HHH's status in the company is due to his marriage to Stephanie. Is he still an independent contractor or an employee? Knowing that outright employees are not subject to the wellness policy, it becomes a very important distinction.
I didn't know that it was against Conn. law to drug test the employees. It adds a new twist to the whole "independent contractor vs. employee" lawsuit that's currently going on, since it heavily implies that if the court determines that they're employees, wellness testing would apparently come to a grinding halt.
I'm also kinda surprised that Vince hasn't exploited this loophole to shield some people from drug testing. Something along the lines of "all main event talent are given employee contracts for X period of time" or something along those lines. Though that would probably make covering up a wrestler's steroid use too obvious.
I just can't get over how confrontational Vince was -- and most of the time, needlessly. I was waiting for him to ask what the definition of "is" is.
|
|
|
Post by parder on Jan 3, 2009 12:21:09 GMT -5
Of course these interviews with Vince and Steph were conducted in late 2007, so their attitude to MVP might well have changed since then. Although it's starting to look like something might come out of this losing streak angle with MVP as a face.
They have since quietly added concussions as an aspect of the Wellness Policy, so she was right about that.
In the part of the interview about CM Punk, she neglected to mention that he won the ECW Title off John Morrison, who was just about to be suspended as a member of the Signature Pharmacy ring. But this was probably accelerating what they were going to do with Punk anyway, and she might have genuinely forgotten.
With Vince, he just doesn't seem to realise he can't promo his way out of real world problems. Paul Heyman once said that Vince thrives on confrontation, and that's definitely the approach he took to this interview.
|
|
H-Fist
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,485
|
Post by H-Fist on Jan 3, 2009 12:47:51 GMT -5
The difference between Vince and Steph is PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY. Say it with me now. Steph has plausible deniability because no one has associated her with this stuff in the past. She may have heard through the grapevine of X or Y, but also like can use the "so many job titles" to keep her head in the sand on the issue.
Vince, on the other hand, blew his wad in the early 90s with that steroid fiasco. And Congress' interviewers, through ignorance, fail to realize that it is the midcard guys like Benoit and Eddie who "need" the steroids and other performance enhancers to reach a decent size. The big guys, obviously, use PEDs to increase muscle mass. But the average size guys who bulk up with PEDs might only go from 195 to 220, and not appear to be "muscular" on TV because they are not, relative to a bigger, taller guy.
|
|
Lara
Don Corleone
IS A SWEETHEART
Posts: 1,292
|
Post by Lara on Jan 3, 2009 12:56:38 GMT -5
The difference between Vince and Steph is PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY. Say it with me now. Steph has plausible deniability because no one has associated her with this stuff in the past. She may have heard through the grapevine of X or Y, but also like can use the "so many job titles" to keep her head in the sand on the issue. So, should/is WWE's priority in this round of investigations be to keep Steph clean - maintain her plausibility - given that she's essentially Vince's successor? Do/should they put their efforts into keeping her distant from these issues so that when she takes the reins of the company, she continues to have that plausibility and can just point to a line of refinements of the Wellness Policy and shrug her shoulders? (I don't see how they can, not long term; but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't pursue that strategy.)
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Jan 3, 2009 13:00:05 GMT -5
I would like to see an update interview just for the potential laughs.
Q: So Jeff Hardy is one of your main champions and one of your most heavily promoted stars. However he has been fired from your company before due to drug isssues correct?
A: Yes, but he had since cleaned up his act so we rehired him.
Q: But he has failed drug tests two more times since coming back, correct?
A: Yes, but he's managed to stay clean for about 8 months now.
Q: Why are you promoting an individual with a long past of drug problems?
A: Well like I said he's been clean for months now.
Q: But if you guys are really hard pressed on making this Wellness program work, why are you continually pushing a guy who can't stay clean? Doesn't that set a bad example to the other workers?
A: Well Hardy is a really popular entertainer, we can't deny what the fans want to see.
Q: So are you saying the only way the fans could watch Jeff Hardy is if he is your World Champion?
A: No, uh I'm saying that someone as popular as him should not be denied a run as our champion.
Q: But he's violated a policy numerous times that you say that is working and has helped out the entertainers. Isn't that saying that even if you're caught violating our policies, we'll still give you title runs and marque matches?
A: We don't give them those kind of matches right away, they have to work for them.
Q: It only took him about 3 months or so before he got in the title picture, isn't that kind of quick?
A: Why are you trying to scrutinize us?!?!
|
|
|
Post by Widow's Peak on Jan 3, 2009 14:11:12 GMT -5
Like I said before, Steph came off 20 thousand times better than Vince did. Vince needed EVERYTHING spelled out for him, with McDevitt objecting to EVERYTHING, while Steph just rolled with the punches. Yup, totally. Vince came across as completely hostile and defensive, and sad to say, presented himself as someone who had something to hide. Steph seemed much more... natural in her responses. McDevitt clearly didn't feel the need to cover her back so much, either. For all the flack that Steph gets (and a lot of it is well-deserved), she at the very least seems like someone who has a clue. Some parts of the Vince interview were just painful to read. The scariest part of it was this blurb from Waxman's letter: So assuming this is true, how many other guys have failed multiple times and are being let off with a warning. When the only people being actually punished are mid-carders or people dumb enough to take social drugs, it really makes the whole program look like a joke.
|
|
|
Post by Back to being Cenanuff on Jan 3, 2009 14:18:45 GMT -5
I doubt anything's going to come of this. Most of the stuff Congress does is hold committees, hearings, and investigations. They're not serious about doing nothing until they appoint a Blue Ribbon commission.
|
|