Paul
Vegeta
Posts: 9,243
|
Post by Paul on Sept 16, 2010 17:45:27 GMT -5
But the 1995 post-steroid trial era showed us that talent isn't interchangable. Remember King Mabel? Ah, but that's outmoded thinking. WWE's conditioned fans now not to react too strongly to any one guy's presence. No one guy in WWE draws tickets anymore. The WWE brand name draws tickets now. As long as that's the case, the body's in the ring don't really matter. John Cena draws more tickets and merch. than anyone else on the roster by a long shot.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 16, 2010 17:50:47 GMT -5
Ah, but that's outmoded thinking. WWE's conditioned fans now not to react too strongly to any one guy's presence. No one guy in WWE draws tickets anymore. The WWE brand name draws tickets now. As long as that's the case, the body's in the ring don't really matter. John Cena draws more tickets and merch. than anyone else on the roster by a long shot. Yes, they have some bonafide stars (a whole 4 of the 79, I'd imagine) who might hurt them if they left, but the vast majority of the roster can be swapped out with someone else. They're no longer relying solely on Hulk Hogan vs. Ultimate Warrior to draw audiences, they're relying on their name. You can sit there and say "well, look at King Mabel" but it doesn't matter, they're at the point where they can put most people in the ME with a little build. The post-steroid era is a large reason why it's done that way, because when the names are bigger than the company, those names leaving hurt a lot more. Now, 90 percent of the roster could be replaced tomorrow and, aside from a few confusing Raws, they'd be no worse for wear.
|
|
|
Post by BoilerRoomBrawler on Sept 16, 2010 19:00:53 GMT -5
First off, I'm not an expert on the whole "employee versus independent contractor" topic. That said, could WWE have an employed roster as well as hire independent contractors on a show by show basis? Could they (or any promotion) potentially save money if they only hire and pay curtain jerkers/dark match workers on a show by show basis, for example?
|
|
Paul
Vegeta
Posts: 9,243
|
Post by Paul on Sept 16, 2010 19:12:24 GMT -5
There won't be 70 wrestlers on the roster if this goes through. Adios brand split.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 16, 2010 19:30:19 GMT -5
First off, I'm not an expert on the whole "employee versus independent contractor" topic. That said, could WWE have an employed roster as well as hire independent contractors on a show by show basis? Could they (or any promotion) potentially save money if they only hire and pay curtain jerkers/dark match workers on a show by show basis, for example? That's likely what would happen. They'd officially hire their top names, then everyone else would likely have some restrictions lifted and become true independent contractors. They might have in their contracts that WWE gets first selection, but if they aren't used, they'd be allowed to go wrestler elsewhere, for example. You'd probably only see a dozen added employees to the company's payroll.
|
|
|
Post by BoilerRoomBrawler on Sept 16, 2010 20:29:49 GMT -5
First off, I'm not an expert on the whole "employee versus independent contractor" topic. That said, could WWE have an employed roster as well as hire independent contractors on a show by show basis? Could they (or any promotion) potentially save money if they only hire and pay curtain jerkers/dark match workers on a show by show basis, for example? That's likely what would happen. They'd officially hire their top names, then everyone else would likely have some restrictions lifted and become true independent contractors. They might have in their contracts that WWE gets first selection, but if they aren't used, they'd be allowed to go wrestler elsewhere, for example. You'd probably only see a dozen added employees to the company's payroll. Okay. Was this ever implemented to any capacity during the territorial days? In any case, I think about that and I see potential in that model nonetheless. I could picture employed workers forming the meat and potatoes of programming and booking while IC's would be the spice of the promotion. Could that be the best of both worlds?
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,355
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Sept 16, 2010 20:37:40 GMT -5
First off, I'm not an expert on the whole "employee versus independent contractor" topic. That said, could WWE have an employed roster as well as hire independent contractors on a show by show basis? Could they (or any promotion) potentially save money if they only hire and pay curtain jerkers/dark match workers on a show by show basis, for example? Actually, I think that is exactly what TNA does in order to save money. I think that Jarrett, Hogan, and maybe a couple of others are true employees while the rest are true independent contractors.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 16, 2010 21:07:35 GMT -5
That's likely what would happen. They'd officially hire their top names, then everyone else would likely have some restrictions lifted and become true independent contractors. They might have in their contracts that WWE gets first selection, but if they aren't used, they'd be allowed to go wrestler elsewhere, for example. You'd probably only see a dozen added employees to the company's payroll. Okay. Was this ever implemented to any capacity during the territorial days? In any case, I think about that and I see potential in that model nonetheless. I could picture employed workers forming the meat and potatoes of programming and booking while IC's would be the spice of the promotion. Could that be the best of both worlds? Perhaps, but you'd probably be far less likely to see people benefit that much while still under the rules of IC's, because they'd become more wary about the risk of someone pulling a Madusa on them.
|
|
|
Post by BoilerRoomBrawler on Sept 16, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
First off, I'm not an expert on the whole "employee versus independent contractor" topic. That said, could WWE have an employed roster as well as hire independent contractors on a show by show basis? Could they (or any promotion) potentially save money if they only hire and pay curtain jerkers/dark match workers on a show by show basis, for example? Actually, I think that is exactly what TNA does in order to save money. I think that Jarrett, Hogan, and maybe a couple of others are true employees while the rest are true independent contractors. I wondered that too.
|
|
|
Post by BoilerRoomBrawler on Sept 16, 2010 21:11:12 GMT -5
Okay. Was this ever implemented to any capacity during the territorial days? In any case, I think about that and I see potential in that model nonetheless. I could picture employed workers forming the meat and potatoes of programming and booking while IC's would be the spice of the promotion. Could that be the best of both worlds? Perhaps, but you'd probably be far less likely to see people benefit that much while still under the rules of IC's, because they'd become more wary about the risk of someone pulling a Madusa on them. True. The safest method would be to probably not give belts to IC's in those conditions. OTOH, that would be hard to pull off in the internet age because IC vs. employment status would be a dead giveaway.
|
|
|
Post by Alex Shelley on Sept 16, 2010 21:24:46 GMT -5
Ooooh, I hadn't even thought about belts. That would be a tricky situation. I'm wondering if there would be some sort of legal way to prevent that from happening without really obviously spoiling everything by having "Cody Rhodes has been bumped from IC to employee status!" and then a week later putting a belt on him.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,355
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Sept 16, 2010 21:36:36 GMT -5
Perhaps, but you'd probably be far less likely to see people benefit that much while still under the rules of IC's, because they'd become more wary about the risk of someone pulling a Madusa on them. True. The safest method would be to probably not give belts to IC's in those conditions. OTOH, that would be hard to pull off in the internet age because IC vs. employment status would be a dead giveaway. Hell, they could just do the old deposit system where the where the champions either paid a sizable deposit (which was worth it to the workers since it meant that they could make a sizable amount more money as champion) or considering that we are talking about the WWE, they can withhold PPV revenue for a period of months that would be forfeit if the worker screws them over by disrespecting the title in some way (which would be quite a lot of money that they might be out of).
|
|
|
Post by Sero on Sept 16, 2010 21:53:56 GMT -5
I thought some judge ruled that titles are not allowed to be taken to other companies like that. If not, Death of WCW lied to me.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 16, 2010 22:00:09 GMT -5
I didn't say it solely as a champ taking a physical title elsewhere, it's also a matter of having top talent and champions randomly showing up on TNA and not being available for WWE shows. I don't know how much of a risk they'd take with IC's if they can't control outside shows. I don't see them giving ME pushes to guys who might suddenly appear on TNA, especially after the back and forth they had in the Monday Night Wars.
|
|
|
Post by BoilerRoomBrawler on Sept 17, 2010 2:13:06 GMT -5
True. The safest method would be to probably not give belts to IC's in those conditions. OTOH, that would be hard to pull off in the internet age because IC vs. employment status would be a dead giveaway. Hell, they could just do the old deposit system where the where the champions either paid a sizable deposit (which was worth it to the workers since it meant that they could make a sizable amount more money as champion) or considering that we are talking about the WWE, they can withhold PPV revenue for a period of months that would be forfeit if the worker screws them over by disrespecting the title in some way (which would be quite a lot of money that they might be out of). Ooh, good point...
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Sept 17, 2010 12:03:14 GMT -5
I didn't say it solely as a champ taking a physical title elsewhere, it's also a matter of having top talent and champions randomly showing up on TNA and not being available for WWE shows. I don't know how much of a risk they'd take with IC's if they can't control outside shows. I don't see them giving ME pushes to guys who might suddenly appear on TNA, especially after the back and forth they had in the Monday Night Wars. Why would someone with a ME push want to go to TNA? That'd be far more of a problem for TNA than it would be for WWE. In both cases though, it'd be a hell of a bridge to burn. You'd have to be Carlito unhappy to do that.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 17, 2010 13:32:19 GMT -5
I didn't say it solely as a champ taking a physical title elsewhere, it's also a matter of having top talent and champions randomly showing up on TNA and not being available for WWE shows. I don't know how much of a risk they'd take with IC's if they can't control outside shows. I don't see them giving ME pushes to guys who might suddenly appear on TNA, especially after the back and forth they had in the Monday Night Wars. Why would someone with a ME push want to go to TNA? That'd be far more of a problem for TNA than it would be for WWE. In both cases though, it'd be a hell of a bridge to burn. You'd have to be Carlito unhappy to do that. A quick payday? You show up for a quick match at a taping, then go off to do your WWE duties. If they were true IC's, WWE couldn't prevent that, and while it might harm their relationship, it's still enough to make someone wary about what they entrust their contractors to do. It all depends on how the contracts would be structured, and even then IC's have at least some rights in regards of their schedule and jobs worked, and that'd make me wary of how much of a push I'd be willing to give them before either scaling back or making them full employees.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Sept 17, 2010 13:38:26 GMT -5
ROH did something like the "combo" model presented here. They signed a group of their top talent to contracts that outlined a few things, gave them health benefits, etc., but the rest of the roster operated like full independent contractors.
If it came to that with WWE, I assume that's what they'd do.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Sept 17, 2010 15:01:48 GMT -5
Why would someone with a ME push want to go to TNA? That'd be far more of a problem for TNA than it would be for WWE. In both cases though, it'd be a hell of a bridge to burn. You'd have to be Carlito unhappy to do that. A quick payday? You show up for a quick match at a taping, then go off to do your WWE duties. If they were true IC's, WWE couldn't prevent that, and while it might harm their relationship, it's still enough to make someone wary about what they entrust their contractors to do. It all depends on how the contracts would be structured, and even then IC's have at least some rights in regards of their schedule and jobs worked, and that'd make me wary of how much of a push I'd be willing to give them before either scaling back or making them full employees. But you wouldn't though, because there would be no duties to go back to. The idea that if this happened you'd have John Morrison appearing on Raw Monday and Johnny Hennigan appearing on Impact on Thursday is ridiculous. I could see maybe workers being allowed to work independant dates when not being used by the WWE. However, why is this being put forward as a good thing? If the WWE gives it's workers time off, does anyone seriously think any of them bar the very well paid will just sit at home? No. They've got families to feed and so they'll be off working independant dates. People act like the only reason these people spend 300 days a year (or whatever) on the road because Vince is forcing them too. No, it's because wrestlings all they can do and they need to make a living. If it's not a WWE House show, it'll be RoH or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 17, 2010 15:43:46 GMT -5
Bridges rarely stay burned in wrestling. As long as they think they can make a profit off a guy, they'd bring them back. All it'd take is for one guy whose annoyed at the company to appear in ways they don't want them too and you'd likely see the ramifications against all of the IC's on the roster, if that'd be the route they take.
|
|