The death of WCW book

[Ian Austin]

The Starrcade 1997 debacle, it's assumed that if it was better executed, Sting is over and the bubble doesn't burst. Just four months later, the Nitro strangehold on ratings is over and like you mentioned, Sting is just there. A letdown of a match/angle that was built up for over a year.

The thing there is that, while Sting did become just another main eventer, the ratings were still formidable until March 1999. WCW blew Goldberg AND Sting's chances at being THE GUY, and yet they were still doing fantastically in terms of ratings until after Uncensored. And even then they were doing ratings that'd be comparable to today, except arguably there were fewer people watching TV back then in general.

[WHATAMANOOOVER]

Jan 9, 2011 5:19:16 GMT -5 @truwrestlingfan said:

But a lot of the stuff was a reach and was not really proven accurate. It came off as second rate. One of the worst 15 dollar purchases I have ever made. The dude should have sticked to listing jobbers of the week

What was false?

[lizardking]

One of the little things that bothered me about the book, was they said Goldberg wouldn't speak for over a year after he debuted. But this is cleary wrong as he cut several promos on Mongo just months after his debut.

[Ian Austin]

Jan 9, 2011 13:37:59 GMT -5 lizardking said:

One of the little things that bothered me about the book, was they said Goldberg wouldn't speak for over a year after he debuted. But this is cleary wrong as he cut several promos on Mongo just months after his debut.

It is wrong, but WCW retconned that themselves. His 'first interview' took place in July 1998, according to them. After he won the title.

[Grendel]

Jan 8, 2011 11:52:05 GMT -5 Brain Of F'n J said:

Jan 8, 2011 6:30:09 GMT -5 maxheadroom said:

RD Reynolds is a comedy writer and never stepped foot behind the scenes of WCW. It came off dirtsheety because it was. The guy knows jack about what really happened in WCW.

And I know that's offensive to him, but it's the truth. I've enjoyed the Wrestlecrap site for about 8 years now, but the guy isn't a credible authority on anything.

Yes, he doesn't use verifiable facts, such as ratings or buyrates, and didn't have comments from people in WCW such as Bobby Heenan or John Tenta. Nope, that book has none of that.

Jed Shaffer
~Opinion is one thing, but to invalidate provable facts to say "it's all rumor and opinion" ... I just don't get it.

Exactly. I've read through the book several times, and I think it's a good read. As someone who watched WCW back in the old days through it's demise, I relived a bunch of that while reading the book.

I stuck with watching WCW, but when it started going downhill I wouldn't go out of my way to stay home and catch it when I had a day off from work (working a really messed up schedule). But I still watched it on a fairly regular basis, even after they put the belt on David Arquette to promote a really shitty movie. So I agreed with a lot of his statements about the company and the product they were putting out.

[Clarence "Showstealer" Mason]

You know everyone has a go at RD because he's a "Comedy writer writing a SRS Book" and how it's "Too Dirtsheety and not filled with facts and sources"....You DO realise Bryan Alvarez co-wrote it right?

[Lord Bendtner]

Jan 9, 2011 21:41:35 GMT -5 Clarence "Showstealer" Mason said:

You know everyone has a go at RD because he's a "Comedy writer writing a SRS Book" and how it's "Too Dirtsheety and not filled with facts and sources"....You DO realise Bryan Alvarez co-wrote it right?

What I was going to say. In fact, RD himself admits Bryan wrote the majority of the book.

[thesam07]

I liked it.
Sure, there were some mistakes and some stuff left out. But it's still a good read. And a good "how-to" guide on how to NOT book your promotion.

[wahoowah11]

I liked the book as well and as a lifelong WCW fan it was a good book to read and reminisce about the times growing up watching WCW.

[hollywood]

It was more accurate than The Rise and Fall of WCW.