RD and everyone else...thoughts on ECW DVD

[AJ]

I was just wondering what RD's and everyone else's thoughts are about the ECW DVD and ECW in general. Also how come CZW, 3PW and the other indie's are in business, whilst ECW was part of the big 3 and went bankrupt. Obviously this was down to poor financial management by Heyman but how come a successful company in the past like ECW was, which helped start the Attitude era in my opinion and WCW took most of their top talent away and failed to use them correctly, ie not giving Eddie Guerrero et al the time to move from mid card to main event status with the exception of Benoit.

Have always wondered what everyone's views are on this and way's Heyman could have prevented the decline of in my opinion, one of the best wrestling promotions of all time.

Also do you think the WWE did justice to ECW with the DVD and that they neglected to mention that they took most of their concepts and basically fine tuned them to work for the Attitude era.

Interested on your thoughts RD and everyone else here too, espically ECW fans.

[rustydhodes]

It's an authoritative - but far from DEFINITIVE - account of ECW.

It's faults:

Ignoring Tod Gordon.

Gordon started Eastern Championship Wrestling after the Tri State Wrestling Alliance folded. Most of the ECW "locker room" (there was no such thing in the Viking Hall - it was simply a bathroom) came from there, like Tommy Dreamer and The Tazmaniac (Tazz) and The Sandman.

The DVD basically glances over the important years of 1993 and 1994 - where it basically went from upstart to respected indy. While it acknowledges Shane Douglas and Terry Funk's contributions to building up Eastern (and boy - did they, alongside people like Joey Styles, Rockin' Rebel, J. T. Smith, Jason - The World's Most Handsome Man, Chad Austin and Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka - the FIRST - champion in the fed), it IGNORES pretty much every angle and personality (bookers like Eddie Gilbert - the unsung hero of ECW booking, and Kevin Sullivan) who laid the ground work for the years to come.

These people - whom Gordon cobbled together - MADE ECW. They started the fire and got it burning larger and brighter so that the breaktrhough (everything post "The Night The Line Was Crossed") could happen.

It's criminal that they are ignored. I mean - Joey Styles WAS the voice of ECW. He was there LONGER than F'n Tommy Dreamer, man. He was also part of it AFTER Dreamer sold his ass to the WWF. Check any of those post-bankruptcy Pioneer DVD compilations with (then) new Joey wraparounds. Ignoring Tod and Joey is inexcusable, and most definitely a CONSCIOUS DECISION.

Then there's the fact the DVD does NOT interview 90% of the superstars. In fact, it's mostly Heyman, Dreamer, Buh Buh, D-Von, Ron Buffone, and Tazz, with pinches of Stevie Richards and Chris Jericho (who wasn't there very long), two minutes of: Rey Mysterio, Jr., Rob Van Damn, Eddie Gurrero, Dawn Marie, Lance Storm and Mick Foley, and NO Tajiri and Lita (who were there during the fed's other crucial years: 1999-2001 - when ECW went national and then collapsed) or Rosey (who was there with THREE MINUTE WARNING).

So, you get a lot of Tommy Dreamer and Heyman putting the pieces together.

It's almost like a condensed version of ECW history, with more KAYFABE thrown in (i. e. the "mole" - which was Tod Gordon and Tod was always up front about the WCW contact and Heyman knew it - but it's STILL being kayfabed as a "betrayal").

Then there's the blatant igoring of Francine and her contributions to the ECW (Which far exceeded ANYTHING in terms of length of tiem and fan interest than Beaulah mcGuillicuty EVER did - but hey, Francine never f***ed Tommy Dreamer and she did suffer the ire of Beaulah's tantrums, so she's ignored). She's given NOTHING in the doc - and that alone should be proof that Tommy Dreamer & the WWE are going to reinvent ECW history (like how 90% of their PPV is going to feature more temporary workers from ECW, as opposed to people who started with the fed and made their bread and butter there).

It's not a bad disc, but some things are over-inflated with their significance (the one-show lesbain kiss between Kimona Wannalaya and Beaulah that was a blip in ECW history - as opposed to Kimmona's striptease during one show) because Tommy wants to look like THE MAN and keep his skanky, retired wife painted as some "icon" she never was (then again, neither was he) while others are ignored (their first video game, their final PPV - how they were outring in areas they couldn't reach before in the end).

The collection of matches on the supplements disc were pretty sorry. Worst Tomm yDreamer & Raven match, a forgetable Sandman encounter, the same damn Austin/Whipwreck/Sandman schtick (Austin was only around ECW for a breif period of time), a so-so Sabu & Too Cold Scorpio match, the kickass (but not the best between the two men) Rob Van Dam & Jerry Lynn match that was on one of the Pioneer discs, Taz Vs. Bam Bam Bigelow (good match), and a couple I'm forgetting -since it's an investment I wish I didn't make.

I'd rather surf through my tape collection from 1993-2001 and let the shows speak for themselves.

If WWE are smart, they'd release a "The Rise & Fall of ECW Volume 2" - and make a long line of subsequent volumes that highlight the best angles/promos/matches from the ENTIRE run. Really. Then - then thy can rectify their convenient presentation of a WWE-approved history.

No Axl Rotten
No Ian Rotten
No Jerry Lynn
No history of the Dudleys
No Tazmaniac
No Funk Vs Sabu Vs. Douglas
No Funk going off on the entire 1993 lockerroom.
No Snuka getting the FIRST belt
Little of Sandman

That's mearly the tip of the iceberg.


I suspect that the WWE will continue to botch things and milk ECW for money until they can get their act together with their own creations (I'd argue and say "abortions") and then bury them again.


I guess you could say I'm not a fan of the DVD.

[CaptainFall]

I found the ECW DVD interesting in as much as it kept my attention for the nearly 3 hours it runs.

I do agree with Rusty Dhodes on a number of aspects with the major failing being the fact they only interviewed wrestlers under WWE contract. Of course this is expected but it means it isn't as definitive as it could have been. Contributions from the likes of Sandman, Francine, Raven and Shane Douglas to name just a few would have been great but obviously this wouldn't be possible under a DVD released by the WWE. The less said about contributions from the likes of Kurt Angle and his comment that besides Tazz, the Dudleys and RVD the roster was pretty much useless, the better.

Another problem was that they kept on hyping up the current WWE wrestlers. Again this is expected but I don't care much for Austin's short stint in ECW or feel that the few occasions of co-promotion with the WWE had to be brought up so many times.

One question that lingers about the whole decline of ECW is that everyone says it's because Heyman was a terrible businessman. This answer is far too simplistic and seems inaccurate. Wasn't Heyman responsible for getting pay-per-views? Wasn't Heyman responsible for getting a weekly show on TNN? Doesn't sound like such a bad businessman to me to do that with such a relatively small company. McMahon and Bischoff both state that Heyman's problem was that he wasn't catering for a national audience. That may be so but he'd already achieved a great deal with the product as it was so there was little point in changing (McMahon does actually acknowledge this). The whole point of ECW was that it was offering an alternative to WWF/WCW so why would it want to look like them? Heyman admitted they didn't have the money to do so why even try to attempt it.

Again I'll say I did enjoy the DVD and I found it informative and entertaining but I do think if it was independently released then it could have been better in terms of its contributions. You get the feeling of WWE looking over your shoulder while you watch it and you're fully aware of their presence which sadly is dentrimental but also inevitable.

[AJ]

Rusty said:

It's an authoritative - but far from DEFINITIVE - account of ECW.

It's faults:

Ignoring Tod Gordon.

Gordon started Eastern Championship Wrestling after the Tri State Wrestling Alliance folded. Most of the ECW "locker room" (there was no such thing in the Viking Hall - it was simply a bathroom) came from there, like Tommy Dreamer and The Tazmaniac (Tazz) and The Sandman.

The DVD basically glances over the important years of 1993 and 1994 - where it basically went from upstart to respected indy. While it acknowledges Shane Douglas and Terry Funk's contributions to building up Eastern (and boy - did they, alongside people like Joey Styles, Rockin' Rebel, J. T. Smith, Jason - The World's Most Handsome Man, Chad Austin and Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka - the FIRST - champion in the fed), it IGNORES pretty much every angle and personality (bookers like Eddie Gilbert - the unsung hero of ECW booking, and Kevin Sullivan) who laid the ground work for the years to come.

These people - whom Gordon cobbled together - MADE ECW. They started the fire and got it burning larger and brighter so that the breaktrhough (everything post "The Night The Line Was Crossed") could happen.

It's criminal that they are ignored. I mean - Joey Styles WAS the voice of ECW. He was there LONGER than F'n Tommy Dreamer, man. He was also part of it AFTER Dreamer sold his ass to the WWF. Check any of those post-bankruptcy Pioneer DVD compilations with (then) new Joey wraparounds. Ignoring Tod and Joey is inexcusable, and most definitely a CONSCIOUS DECISION.

Then there's the fact the DVD does NOT interview 90% of the superstars. In fact, it's mostly Heyman, Dreamer, Buh Buh, D-Von, Ron Buffone, and Tazz, with pinches of Stevie Richards and Chris Jericho (who wasn't there very long), two minutes of: Rey Mysterio, Jr., Rob Van Damn, Eddie Gurrero, Dawn Marie, Lance Storm and Mick Foley, and NO Tajiri and Lita (who were there during the fed's other crucial years: 1999-2001 - when ECW went national and then collapsed) or Rosey (who was there with THREE MINUTE WARNING).

So, you get a lot of Tommy Dreamer and Heyman putting the pieces together.

It's almost like a condensed version of ECW history, with more KAYFABE thrown in (i. e. the "mole" - which was Tod Gordon and Tod was always up front about the WCW contact and Heyman knew it - but it's STILL being kayfabed as a "betrayal").

Then there's the blatant igoring of Francine and her contributions to the ECW (Which far exceeded ANYTHING in terms of length of tiem and fan interest than Beaulah mcGuillicuty EVER did - but hey, Francine never criminey jeezeed Tommy Dreamer and she did suffer the ire of Beaulah's tantrums, so she's ignored). She's given NOTHING in the doc - and that alone should be proof that Tommy Dreamer & the WWE are going to reinvent ECW history (like how 90% of their PPV is going to feature more temporary workers from ECW, as opposed to people who started with the fed and made their bread and butter there).

It's not a bad disc, but some things are over-inflated with their significance (the one-show lesbain kiss between Kimona Wannalaya and Beaulah that was a blip in ECW history - as opposed to Kimmona's striptease during one show) because Tommy wants to look like THE MAN and keep his skanky, retired wife painted as some "icon" she never was (then again, neither was he) while others are ignored (their first video game, their final PPV - how they were outring in areas they couldn't reach before in the end).

The collection of matches on the supplements disc were pretty sorry. Worst Tomm yDreamer & Raven match, a forgetable Sandman encounter, the same damn Austin/Whipwreck/Sandman schtick (Austin was only around ECW for a breif period of time), a so-so Sabu & Too Cold Scorpio match, the kickass (but not the best between the two men) Rob Van Dam & Jerry Lynn match that was on one of the Pioneer discs, Taz Vs. Bam Bam Bigelow (good match), and a couple I'm forgetting -since it's an investment I wish I didn't make.

I'd rather surf through my tape collection from 1993-2001 and let the shows speak for themselves.

If WWE are smart, they'd release a "The Rise & Fall of ECW Volume 2" - and make a long line of subsequent volumes that highlight the best angles/promos/matches from the ENTIRE run. Really. Then - then thy can rectify their convenient presentation of a WWE-approved history.

No Axl Rotten
No Ian Rotten
No Jerry Lynn
No history of the Dudleys
No Tazmaniac
No Funk Vs Sabu Vs. Douglas
No Funk going off on the entire 1993 lockerroom.
No Snuka getting the FIRST belt
Little of Sandman

That's mearly the tip of the iceberg.


I suspect that the WWE will continue to botch things and milk ECW for money until they can get their act together with their own creations (I'd argue and say "abortions") and then bury them again.


I guess you could say I'm not a fan of the DVD.

Great read. I agree they should have shown so much more about Eastern Championship Wrestling and should have included the Funk vs. Sabu vs. Shane Douglas match as a DVD extra too because the match selection for the 2nd disc wasn't very good and could/should have included so much more, but ofcourse space permitting they couldn't fit too much on a disc, but could have put some thought into match selection.

A boxset/collection would be a great idea, because WWE are sitting on hours of footage not only of ECW, but WCW, NWA, AWA and SMW. Why not release these all onto DVD?, but again only a small percentage of WWE's audience (the 'smart marks'/'smarks') would buy them. Also even best of compilations such as best of Sabu, Terry Funk, Cactus Jack, Eliminators, Shane Douglas, Mikey Whipwreck etc. the list goes on where WWE could make a fortune just out of ECW footage alone which I believe is only available from RF Video or circulating amongst collectors.

Lastly to RD and everyone else...What are your thoughts on the PPV and Shane Douglas's show and do you think Shane's is the real reunion show?.

[AJ]

CaptainFall said:

I found the ECW DVD interesting in as much as it kept my attention for the nearly 3 hours it runs.

I do agree with Rusty Dhodes on a number of aspects with the major failing being the fact they only interviewed wrestlers under WWE contract. Of course this is expected but it means it isn't as definitive as it could have been. Contributions from the likes of Sandman, Francine, Raven and Shane Douglas to name just a few would have been great but obviously this wouldn't be possible under a DVD released by the WWE. The less said about contributions from the likes of Kurt Angle and his comment that besides Tazz, the Dudleys and RVD the roster was pretty much useless, the better.

Another problem was that they kept on hyping up the current WWE wrestlers. Again this is expected but I don't care much for Austin's short stint in ECW or feel that the few occasions of co-promotion with the WWE had to be brought up so many times.

One question that lingers about the whole decline of ECW is that everyone says it's because Heyman was a terrible businessman. This answer is far too simplistic and seems inaccurate. Wasn't Heyman responsible for getting pay-per-views? Wasn't Heyman responsible for getting a weekly show on TNN? Doesn't sound like such a bad businessman to me to do that with such a relatively small company. McMahon and Bischoff both state that Heyman's problem was that he wasn't catering for a national audience. That may be so but he'd already achieved a great deal with the product as it was so there was little point in changing (McMahon does actually acknowledge this). The whole point of ECW was that it was offering an alternative to WWF/WCW so why would it want to look like them? Heyman admitted they didn't have the money to do so why even try to attempt it.

Again I'll say I did enjoy the DVD and I found it informative and entertaining but I do think if it was independently released then it could have been better in terms of its contributions. You get the feeling of WWE looking over your shoulder while you watch it and you're fully aware of their presence which sadly is dentrimental but also inevitable.

Another good read. Paul Heyman did a great job for ECW IMO, and the presumption he's a bad businessman is in regards to managing finances, as you've seen on the DVD most of the wrestlers didn't get paid for a time. I think bringing in people like Tanaka, Super Crazy, Tajiri, Hayabusa, Shinzaki, Gedo, Jado etc. was good for business but may have cost alot for booking them and also for travel expenses and other misc costs.

ECW also helped create stars and give people like Foley and Austin a place to kick-start their careers and get them over. WCW really was a thorn in ECW's side though and taking their talent and underutilising them must have been really bad for Heyman and for the wrestlers themselves. Perfect example is Mikey Whipwreck who was way over with the ECW fans but was a glorified jobber for WCW, same with The Sandman who was renamed Hardcore Hak.

WWE exploiting ECW could mean that if the PPV is poor and is not a success this could tarnish ECW's image so hopefully everyone involded with the McMahon produced show should let someone like Heyman be put in charge and spend some of Vince's millions on putting on a great show which highlights all the good points of ECW.

[nutbunnies]

NO Tajiri and Lita (who were there during the fed's other crucial years: 1999-2001 - when ECW went national and then collapsed) or Rosey (who was there with THREE MINUTE WARNING).

Alright, a couple of flaws in your plan:

1) Tajiri barely speaks any English.
2) Lita is incredibly boring, and wasn't even a mini blip on the ECW radar.
3) Nobody remembers Rosey in ECW.

[rdreynolds]

I actually really enjoyed the ECW DVD. It wasn't definitive, but it really captured the feel of the promotion. I give it a big thumbs up.

RD

[AJ]

rdreynolds said:

I actually really enjoyed the ECW DVD. It wasn't definitive, but it really captured the feel of the promotion. I give it a big thumbs up.

RD

I enjoyed the DVD too but as I've mentioned would have liked to have seen early ECW (when it was Eastern Championship Wrestling) covered in much more detail.

Are there any plans for you to write a book about ECW as I'm sure that it would be a great read.

[The Masked Jobber]

One of my favorite christmas presemnts i got last year...

I love the dvd and felt depressed towards the end. I still like watching the matches on the second dvd with the alternate commentary. Pictular Cole and Tazz commentating on the taz vs bam bam match. Hell I also enjoyed tommy Dreamer and coach doing the dreamer vs Raven match.

It was much better than heyman and RVD on the RVD dvd. As I felt, heyman was out of place asking RVD question when it would be better suited as someone new to ecw like a michael cole or josh matthews asking RVd about ECW. But then again.. RVD was a bit bland on commentary.

[tamuthetongantiger]

I liked the DVD and man, all of your comments here have been great to read. People have asked about Heyman as a business man. I kind of buy his explanation -- they got a TV deal, but it wasn't a good one. They had to spend too much money to meet the production standards that the network demanded and the network did little for them in terms of advertising the show or, I gather, sharing revenues from ads sold. So, the TV deal was a money-loser for the company.

Problem was, the TV deal gave them enough clout to license their characters and brand, to do magazines, video games, etc. and those had long term potential to make good money. I mean, just check out the WWE's annual report -- WWE makes so much money from licensing fees, or partnerships with book publishers and the like that it just can't be ignored. No TV, you don't get that.

Heyman was in a catch-22 situation. Drop the money-losing TV, he loses all the potential licensing profits in the future. What he really needed was a better TV deal, one where he was either given support to produce at the quality demanded, or where he was either paid more or given a share of advertising. However, it's pretty hard to demand such things when you're not proven as a successful, national show. One of the great things about cable is that there are so many channels that lots of shows can get on the air. But, remember, cable channels make money by making the producers take all the financial risk of making a show.

Now, that's not necessarily mismanagement... it's just not being able to succeed through a very tough situation. By the time Vinnie Mac went for a national, prime time program, he already had a track record of very successful pay per views and for drawing ratings by pre-empting Saturday Night Live 4 times a year during most of the 1980s. So, Vince was able to start off with a better deal than Heyman got. WCW, of course, could get whatever deal Ted Turner wanted it to get. Heyman just didn't have those advantages.

[AJ]

TamutheTonganTiger said:

I liked the DVD and man, all of your comments here have been great to read. People have asked about Heyman as a business man. I kind of buy his explanation -- they got a TV deal, but it wasn't a good one. They had to spend too much money to meet the production standards that the network demanded and the network did little for them in terms of advertising the show or, I gather, sharing revenues from ads sold. So, the TV deal was a money-loser for the company.

Problem was, the TV deal gave them enough clout to license their characters and brand, to do magazines, video games, etc. and those had long term potential to make good money. I mean, just check out the WWE's annual report -- WWE makes so much money from licensing fees, or partnerships with book publishers and the like that it just can't be ignored. No TV, you don't get that.

Heyman was in a catch-22 situation. Drop the money-losing TV, he loses all the potential licensing profits in the future. What he really needed was a better TV deal, one where he was either given support to produce at the quality demanded, or where he was either paid more or given a share of advertising. However, it's pretty hard to demand such things when you're not proven as a successful, national show. One of the great things about cable is that there are so many channels that lots of shows can get on the air. But, remember, cable channels make money by making the producers take all the financial risk of making a show.

Now, that's not necessarily mismanagement... it's just not being able to succeed through a very tough situation. By the time Vinnie Mac went for a national, prime time program, he already had a track record of very successful pay per views and for drawing ratings by pre-empting Saturday Night Live 4 times a year during most of the 1980s. So, Vince was able to start off with a better deal than Heyman got. WCW, of course, could get whatever deal Ted Turner wanted it to get. Heyman just didn't have those advantages.

Another great read. Heyman's 'shoot' promo about TNN, do you think this a smart business idea?. ECW was one company which if it was edited, it would lose it's uniqueness which helped make it great.

[rustydhodes]

Nut said:

Alright, a couple of flaws in your plan:

Um, not flaws at all. In fact - they're genius.

1) Tajiri barely speaks any English.

Not true.

Regardless, subtitles? Over dub? That's nitpicking and a copout from a legit answer.

He was left out because of shoddy work. He was in ECW LONGER than Chris Jericho. His signifigance was larger. There's no excuse for not interviewing him.

NONE.

2) Lita is incredibly boring, and wasn't even a mini blip on the ECW radar.

Again - you're wrong.

It was her most significant work because it was the biggest exposure she EVER HAD.

Without ECW, Amy Dumas would be doing indy work and stripping to pay the bills - if she even kept up with the wrestling.

3) Nobody remembers Rosey in ECW.

One more voice added to disrupt the Tommy Dreamer revisionism. How would it have hurt?

So, my flawless suggestions remain sterling.

Class dismissed.

[rustydhodes]

Lex said:

It was much better than heyman and RVD on the RVD dvd. As I felt, heyman was out of place asking RVD question when it would be better suited as someone new to ecw like a michael cole or josh matthews asking RVd about ECW. But then again.. RVD was a bit bland on commentary.

Odder still: RVD sued Heyman big time for like 50-70 grand owed from his time in ECW.

I believe his lawsuit -coupled with others - and the loss of the TNN show and Paul's sh@tty money management skills - helped to bring ECW down the gutter.

There's a lot of strange stuff behind the ECW that doesn't get talked about. For example: Tod Gordon being legally unable to disclose the business arangement he made with Heyman when he sold/signed over the ECW to him.

I also suspect the reason a lot of outside talent were not contacted for the DVD was both at the urging of Heyman and Tommy Dreamer.

Jerry Lynn has few - if any - nice things to say about Heyman. I think I read somewhere that Lynn was oved 10's of thousands of dollars in back pay.

New Jack wants to kill him for the same reason, I believe.

Joey Styles also said a few things about Paul's unscrupulous behavior backstage.

I think Paul Heyman is the Jesus Christ of professional wrestling, but he is human - and f'd up just like any of us could (now the question is would we have f'd up as bad as he did) and I think it's fair to know the darker side and to treat ECW honestly.

I've gone off on a tangent, but the Heyman-RVD conversations made me think about the irony of it all.

[Creamstick]

According to the Raven & Sandman ROH Shoot (hilarious, by the way - pick it up immediately), Sandman was told that WCW couldn't use the Sandman name, so he had to pick another - on the spot, he just said seeing as how everybody calls me Hak, why don't I just be Hak? So they said Ok, you're Hardcore Hak.

Just like Terry Funk getting the dad-gum fool idea that he should be Chainsaw Charlie, it proves that crappy bookers have nothing on the foolish minds of the wrestlers themselves.

[EvilMasterBetty, Esq.]

Let me start out by saying I thoroughly enjoyed this DVD. It was a great trip down memory lame.

As for some of the issues other people brought up.

1) There wasn't enough on the DVD - Granted, they definately left out some big names and some big events. However, the documentary aleady ran roughly 3 and a half hours, and over 90% of what is on there should be included. So, in order to include more, the documentary starts moving towards 5-6 hours long, and even that might not be enough. I understand that you would be willing to buy a 6+ hour documentary on ECW, but the casual fan would not. Yes, ECW had casual fans that might not buy a DVD that long.

2) No Eastern Championship Wrestling - While it would have been nice to get some history on the company, the fact is when most fans hear ECW, they think Extreme Championship Wrestling, not Eastern. They made the decision to focus on the history of Extreme, not Eastern. This again goes back to the time issue. They wanted to get as much in as they could.

3) No outside interviews - Vince almost never brings in guys who are still active and have no part in the WWE. While some interviews could be overlooked, others are inexcusable. I understand that maybe they couldn't bring in Raven, who was under contract with TNA at the time, but there was no reason to not bring in Tod Gordon. He was co-owner of the company until around '95 I belive and should have been included. Just remember that Vince does not like to give too many props to those who do not work for him.

Maybe you would have done the DVD differently, which is fine. Yours may be awsome as well, but that does not mean that this one was bad either. It just focused on the company from a different angle than you would have.

While I agree with many of your points, I just wanted to give reasons why they could not do some of the things that you are saying. Hopefully, sometime down the road, they release a Volume 2 that covers more.

[Creamstick]

Apparently, at the Hardcore Homecoming show there will be a Rise-and-Fall type DVD on sale, done by Tod Gordon, Shane Douglas, Sandman, Raven et al. who weren't involved in the WWE one.

[EvilMasterBetty, Esq.]

the only problem with that one is they can't have any actual footage on it, since Vince ownes the ECW library. Not to say that it won't be interesting. It will definately be worth it.

[seedey]

Calm down people.
Yes the ECW dvd has small problems, but there very small. The basic fact is that its very hard to describe any wrestling organisation on a three hour DVD.
Thye people who talk on the dvd are from the WWE, mostly due to problems.
Some such as Raven hate the WWE(so do I).
Some might look for a contract.
And of course, Heyman owes a lot of $ a probualy
pi%$%d of a lot of people.

Its still the best wrestling dvd there is.
The reason why the matches are'nt that great is maybe due to the fact that a best ECW matched DVD is going to be shortly relased.

Along with a Ultimate Warrior DVD allegidly, YES!!

So that my 2cents
Heres my 50 cent,
ency me, Im raps mvp
new york (im not from there)

[seedey]

Sorry theres a problem
What i was meant to say was
'The people who talk on the DVD are from the WWE'

ECW ECW ECW