Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Aug 9, 2013 8:26:51 GMT -5
Bischoff did good and bad in WCW. Lateral move, at best. Now the real question.....what will Jason Hervey's role be? Because those two are close enough that I think they even take bubble baths together going over ideas for a new reality show starring David Faustino where he has to raise a kid that isn't his. Well, he still has been the sort of backstage camera interviewer. Well he's due for a promotion now.
|
|
Banecat
Don Corleone
Speak of the devil and he shall appear
Posts: 1,455
|
Post by Banecat on Aug 9, 2013 8:36:24 GMT -5
I feel this video fits the topic at hand. Give Bischoff 3-6 months in charge. If he sucks I'll be here talking about how much it sucks with you and admitting I was wrong. Bischoff completely owns this guy. All you armchair bookers should take a note.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2013 9:08:17 GMT -5
I feel this video fits the topic at hand. Give Bischoff 3-6 months in charge. If he sucks I'll be here talking about how much it sucks with you and admitting I was wrong. Bischoff completely owns this guy. All you armchair bookers should take a note. Hahah, I've heard this "interview" before and Bischoff's level of craftsmanship in the amount of BS he drops here is second to none. "Ratings are actually HIGHER now, but I'm not at liberty to say how...." HAH!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2013 9:46:05 GMT -5
The funny thing about the "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" line is that Bischoff took over WCW when they were in worse shape than TNA is now, and he turned that franchise into the #1 wrestling promotion in the world within a few years. Everyone remembers the fall, but no one remembers (or wants to remember) the climb. I'm not suggesting that Bischoff will do a good job in this role, but what got him in trouble in WCW was the unlimited bank account. Once revenue started to dip, the enormous guaranteed contracts crippled that company. As long as TNA is working within their means as best they can, I doubt Bischoff can do anything that mirrors WCW even if he wanted to (i.e. signing Batista). While the unlimited bank account definitely hurt Bischoff in WCW, he had no control over the guys and let Hogan, Nash, and others pretty much do whatever they wanted at the expense of the overall product. He did a good job for a while but ultimately showed his limitations when the nWo and Goldberg finally ran out of gas IMO. I'm not denying that the inmates ran the asylum in WCW, as that has been documented by the talent themselves, but Bischoff's main problem in WCW was the huge salaries given to talent. If Bischoff handled money better, WCW would not have lost as much money as they did. When WWF/E had budget problems, they cut talent and lowered their production costs. WCW never did that. I don't know if Bischoff's role in TNA even deals with the finances of the company, but either way, they are not in the position of spending big money due to the added expense of taking Impact on the road, so Bischoff's biggest weakness is already negated. Ultimately, I don't think much is going to change from what we are seeing now. As far as Bischoff creatively, he is being undersold. He was innovative for a time. By his own admission, in 1996, he wanted to do the opposite of what the WWF was doing. He went for a more reality based program when the WWF was still in their cartoony phase. He brought in talent from other parts of the world (i.e. Cruisweights). He put "smaller" talent like Jericho, Guerrero, Rey, etc, on TV at a time when Vince wouldn't have touched those guys with a ten foot pole. He took talent from the WWF and made them bigger stars and bigger assets than they were when he acquired them. He jump started the late-90's boom with the nWo angle. He did quite a bit to improve WCW creatively. He did some bad as well, but that's par for the course. The reason they went out of business had very little to do with Bischoff's booking. And if anyone wants to say that Bischoff's biggest success came from ripping an idea off from Japan, who was the evil corrupt promoter on TV first, Bischoff in 1996 or McMahon in 1997 (the Memphis angle does not count as if YouTube never existed, no one other than a small percentage of people in Memphis would have even known about that)? Why did Vince start up a Lightweight Division in 1997 behind a Japanese talent that no one in America knew about? Why did Vince suddenly get obsessed with "Gang Warz" a year after the nWo became the hottest act in wrestling? Why did Vince have his stables doing parodies on live TV a year after the nWo's Horseman skit? Why were "lines being blurred" as far as faces and heels after the nWo angle forced that change in WCW a year earlier? Why did the WWF increase Raw's length and eventually go live every week (a format they still use today)? The list goes on. You want to talk about ripping ideas off, no one did it better than Vince.
|
|
DragonMasterP
King Koopa
I'd change my avatar, but beardless Luke Harper is too funny.
Posts: 12,020
|
Post by DragonMasterP on Aug 9, 2013 9:48:05 GMT -5
"We understand that Daniel Bryan, who once wrestled as Bryan Danielson in the indies, is going to win their world title! Ha! That'll put some butts in the seats!" Can "butts in seats" really make any difference when Impact doesn't directly compete with any WWE show the way that RAW and Nitro did? No, but still.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 9, 2013 10:30:51 GMT -5
Here's the thing about trying to project what Bischoff would do as head of creative in 2013: we really can't draw from a lot of past experiences to say for certain, because the circumstances here are completely different.
Mid-90's WCW existed in a completely different wrestling universe from where we are today: post-Hulkamania WWF wasn't so monolithic, WCW was backed by the Turner empire, the Internet was not the presence it is today, etc. etc. Plus wrestling was still fresh off the 1980's-early 90's boom that revolved around the cable TV explosion, so the wrestling landscape was still littered with guys who fans would know, recognize, and might tune in to see. Talent would bounce between WCW, WWF, even ECW, recognizable talent, and you could actually pull something off by taking that talent and doing something unique with it...of course we also saw what could happen if companies like WCW executed that poorly at times, but still, that was the mindset of the time.
TNA is in such a different situation that trying to compare the two is pretty fruitless. Its pockets aren't nearly as deep as Turner's, it's decided to, as said before, "streamline" the roster to keep costs in a good place while it tries to establish itself as a touring company, and the wrestling landscape is one in which there's basically nobody who could be brought around as a "game changer"; that simply don't exist anymore. We forget a lot of the time that a lot of the late 90's boom was still built on guys who were around during the Hulkamania era, and, well...those guys are really old now.
What's my point? Just that I don't think there's any real way to guess how this will god. Frankly, I'm inclined to believe the news blurb: it won't change a lot concerning the current direction TNA is headed.
|
|
|
Post by JTG Fan on Aug 9, 2013 11:36:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Aug 9, 2013 13:09:45 GMT -5
Bischoff completely owns this guy. All you armchair bookers should take a note. Hahah, I've heard this "interview" before and Bischoff's level of craftsmanship in the amount of BS he drops here is second to none. "Ratings are actually HIGHER now, but I'm not at liberty to say how...." HAH! It's real easy to school an uninformed person who is a step away from a Cageside Seats blog rant on a podcast heard by 5 people. Bischoff won't be able to use that political double speak with someone who is knowledgeable and does research like Meltzer, Keller, and Scherer.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Aug 9, 2013 13:34:48 GMT -5
I think the WWF's problem with talent recruitment in the mid 90s wasn't so much an inability to scour Japan and Mexico for talent, it was that they were locked in with partnerships with groups like the USWA and SMW. Let's be honest, those promotions existed in a weird alternate universe where those type of guys could get over. It was the awkward time where somewhere like the USWA was still an independent company but was more or less a farm system for the WWF. And let's not kid ourselves here...Brian Christopher (amusing as he was on Memphis TV) just wasn't in the same realm with Eddie Guerrero or Chris Benoit.
As far as Bischoff goes, WCW eventually did cut costs but it happened after Bischoff was gone. The money paid to talent wasn't so much the problem, although it didn't help. The big problem was that WCW's business massively tanked between Jan. 1999 and Jan. 2000. They went from drawing a 1.1 buyrate at SuperBrawl in 1999 to doing like a .15 buyrate for SuperBrawl 2000. Honestly I don't think someone could set out to destroy a company and succeed better than that.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Aug 9, 2013 13:35:01 GMT -5
The question, of course, being who? Most of the guys people name are either not in a position to do that or seem more like pipe dreams than actual alternatives. Someone with a different vision? Which, in this case, doesn't necessarily have to be someone from the wrestling business, but someone who has showrunning experience, someone who has developed complex narratives involving several characters who interact and undergo change over time, and someone who has a particular story worth telling. Wrestling is wrestling, yes, but wrestling is also television the majority of the time. Maybe someone from outside the business can head creative, whereas the wrestling people function as the nuts and bolts of getting stories from point A to B and B to C (the agents, in other words. Sure, that works great until this board criticizes that guy and, by way of association, TNA for bringing in somebody who doesn't have a "passion" for wrestling. This would, of course, lead posters to become nostalgic for the TNA of today, which has happened before (think to how the board went from having nothing but hate and vitriol for Don West to loving him and wanting him back years after he left) because it was "fine the way it was and there wasn't any need to change anything". Names that come to mind: David Fury, David Shore, David Chase, Paul Dini, Alan Ball, etc. Start writing television and pay-per-views into season blocs, even when wrestling storylines are typically both dynamic (always changing) and inert (never starting from scratch or stopping on a dime but always occurring in the middle) at once. Build to important shows on TV to then build to pay-per-view (like a season finale). And so on. It always seems like people in the wrestling business treat wrestling like it's fundamentally different from all other forms of narrative television. Barring the fact that conflict occurs in a shared space through physical combat as determined by a set of rather arbitrary rules, what exactly is the difference? Instead of bookers complaining that now they have television in their wrestling, why not make wrestling get into television? Treat the show and the talent and the angles as seriously as any other showrunner on television would and see what happens. Once again, this would be criticized by the board by "fixing what wasn't broken", despite the fact that the product, by popular opinion 'round these parts, is ALWAYS broken. The move would be criticized by the company by trying to make wrestling more than what it is, and the move to make it more traditional TV like would be seen as desperate and a sign that the company is definitely about to fold. For what it's worth, I actually like your idea of freshening up the industry a bit, but the move would be crapped on by some posters here, pretty much just like everything else the company has done since '07.
|
|
|
Post by TK The Friendly Robot on Aug 9, 2013 13:41:27 GMT -5
I think the WWF's problem with talent recruitment in the mid 90s wasn't so much an inability to scour Japan and Mexico for talent, it was that they were locked in with partnerships with groups like the USWA and SMW. Let's be honest, those promotions existed in a weird alternate universe where those type of guys could get over. It was the awkward time where somewhere like the USWA was still an independent company but was more or less a farm system for the WWF. And let's not kid ourselves here...Brian Christopher (amusing as he was on Memphis TV) just wasn't in the same realm with Eddie Guerrero or Chris Benoit. As far as Bischoff goes, WCW eventually did cut costs but it happened after Bischoff was gone. The money paid to talent wasn't so much the problem, although it didn't help. The big problem was that WCW's business massively tanked between Jan. 1999 and Jan. 2000. They went from drawing a 1.1 buyrate at SuperBrawl in 1999 to doing like a .15 buyrate for SuperBrawl 2000. Honestly I don't think someone could set out to destroy a company and succeed better than that. Quoting Jan 1999 to Jan 2000 as exact dates (I know they're not but still) means that people are implying that Bishcoff killed WCW in the 4 months he was around in that time period. Isn't that a little ludicrous for wrestling fans in general to make? He was brought back in the April to an already dying WCW and was relieved of his duties in the September of 1999...how could he have done so much damage in that period? He couldn't.
|
|
Hawk Hart
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sold his organs.
The Best There Is, the Best There Was, and the Best That There Ever Will Be
Posts: 15,296
|
Post by Hawk Hart on Aug 9, 2013 13:45:13 GMT -5
If nothing else, my FAN legacy is introducing that gif to these boards and I'm proud of that.
|
|
Madagascar Fred
El Dandy
TAFKA roidzilla and SUFFERIN' SUCCOTASH SON!
Posts: 8,784
|
Post by Madagascar Fred on Aug 9, 2013 14:09:09 GMT -5
lolTNA!
but a good way to save costs (knowing Dixie she probably doubled his salary)
|
|
|
Post by AnActualBear on Aug 9, 2013 14:12:54 GMT -5
I think the WWF's problem with talent recruitment in the mid 90s wasn't so much an inability to scour Japan and Mexico for talent, it was that they were locked in with partnerships with groups like the USWA and SMW. Let's be honest, those promotions existed in a weird alternate universe where those type of guys could get over. It was the awkward time where somewhere like the USWA was still an independent company but was more or less a farm system for the WWF. And let's not kid ourselves here...Brian Christopher (amusing as he was on Memphis TV) just wasn't in the same realm with Eddie Guerrero or Chris Benoit. As far as Bischoff goes, WCW eventually did cut costs but it happened after Bischoff was gone. The money paid to talent wasn't so much the problem, although it didn't help. The big problem was that WCW's business massively tanked between Jan. 1999 and Jan. 2000. They went from drawing a 1.1 buyrate at SuperBrawl in 1999 to doing like a .15 buyrate for SuperBrawl 2000. Honestly I don't think someone could set out to destroy a company and succeed better than that. Quoting Jan 1999 to Jan 2000 as exact dates (I know they're not but still) means that people are implying that Bishcoff killed WCW in the 4 months he was around in that time period. Isn't that a little ludicrous for wrestling fans in general to make? He was brought back in the April to an already dying WCW and was relieved of his duties in the September of 1999...how could he have done so much damage in that period? He couldn't. What are you talking about? Bischoff was head of creative until September of 1999, then he was brought back in April 2000 with Russo.
|
|
|
Post by TK The Friendly Robot on Aug 9, 2013 16:33:40 GMT -5
Quoting Jan 1999 to Jan 2000 as exact dates (I know they're not but still) means that people are implying that Bishcoff killed WCW in the 4 months he was around in that time period. Isn't that a little ludicrous for wrestling fans in general to make? He was brought back in the April to an already dying WCW and was relieved of his duties in the September of 1999...how could he have done so much damage in that period? He couldn't. What are you talking about? Bischoff was head of creative until September of 1999, then he was brought back in April 2000 with Russo. He was on Hiatus from Mid-February to April in 1999 because he was burnt out, so yeah it was technically 6 and a half months out of the year 1999 he was out. This doesn't change the fact that things started going to shit after Bischoff took a step back and not before hand. WCW was already too far gone when they brought him back in 2000 for any man to fix in the short amount of time WCW had left before AOL pulled the plug on them. It still means that Easy E, while I believe had a hand in the death of WCW is really not deserving of the over sized chunk of blame which is being handed to him by people in the IWC. Everyone at some point or another did something to WCW which caused it to bleed out and that's a fact.
|
|
RIHT
Hank Scorpio
Wanted a title with "YOU'RE WELCOME!" Close enough.
Hey-yo.
Posts: 5,897
|
Post by RIHT on Aug 9, 2013 18:27:04 GMT -5
damn you TNA
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Aug 9, 2013 19:36:31 GMT -5
Eh, no real surprise. Honestly the way they do evil factions every year, he might as well been already.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Aug 9, 2013 19:46:02 GMT -5
1. A successful run in WWE where he didn't hold any power and was just an on-screen talent. Discounting whatever he's been doing in TNA, he hasn't been in creative control of a wrestling company in 13 years. 2. Impact is TNA's biggest revenue source and ratings have gotten worse since he and Hogan joined the company on average, per year. That is not good. 3. WCW 1995 was good? Are you on crack? 4. And I can go even further back than January and see boredom with this angle, frustration with this angle and wanting this angle to die. 5. So? Do you honestly think Kevin Nash of all people went and sought out Master P? Hell no. It was all Bischoff. No one is saying to never have any celebrity involvement ever. But Master P has to go down as one of the worst celebrity/wrestling crossovers ever. He attracted no new fans, lost the company money, and didn't help ratings (ratings may have even went down). 6. Of course you like the Aces and Eights angle. You work for TNA. 7. Fired = removed from his position. He was fired from one role, given another. And where did I ever say he was worhtless? I think you'll find I defended him on the first page, long before you attached yourself to Bischoff's right nut. Did you just honestly accuse SOR of working for TNA? Does SOR work for TNA? Honestly though if you're accusing the people who defend TNA on here of being plants from TNA that's just ridiculous. The guy is clearly trolling and trying to bait me. If I worked for TNA I wouldn't be here. I'd be working. Bischoff completely owns this guy. All you armchair bookers should take a note. Hahah, I've heard this "interview" before and Bischoff's level of craftsmanship in the amount of BS he drops here is second to none. "Ratings are actually HIGHER now, but I'm not at liberty to say how...." HAH! He could of been talking about anything. Target demographics etc. People on the internet most of the time just focus on the final number but the 18-30 male demographic may of gone up in the ratings you just don't know and we will never know. Regardless, What we do know is TNA has grown in the 3 years that Hulk and Eric have been there. Maybe not final ratings wise but attendance wise it has. TNA must be doing something right if more people are inclined to come out to see the matches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2013 19:55:41 GMT -5
Did you just honestly accuse SOR of working for TNA? Does SOR work for TNA? Honestly though if you're accusing the people who defend TNA on here of being plants from TNA that's just ridiculous. The guy is clearly trolling and trying to bait me. If I worked for TNA I wouldn't be here. I'd be working. Hahah, I've heard this "interview" before and Bischoff's level of craftsmanship in the amount of BS he drops here is second to none. "Ratings are actually HIGHER now, but I'm not at liberty to say how...." HAH! He could of been talking about anything. Target demographics etc. People on the internet most of the time just focus on the final number but the 18-30 male demographic may of gone up in the ratings you just don't know and we will never know. Regardless, What we do know is TNA has grown in the 3 years that Hulk and Eric have been there. Maybe not final ratings wise but attendance wise it has. TNA must be doing something right if more people are inclined to come out to see the matches. Someone posted actual numbers here a few weeks ago debunking the whole theory that attendance is up by any real margin. The only thing they are doing differently really is touring, which is basically something they could do w or w/o Hogan and Bosch? Do they help? Maybe, but maybe they're bringing out nostalgic fans who want to see Hogan, but could care less about impact which means nothing to TNA. Let's say attendance is up and it is because people are coming out to see Hogan - hypothetically. OK. Now, prove that Hogan fans want to actually watch iMPACT for reasons other than Hogan and you might have something. The ratings and PPV buys say they don't. There's a big disconnect in the audience TNA needs and the one they're targeting, because the ones they're targeting aren't interested in impact or PPVs.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Aug 9, 2013 20:05:07 GMT -5
The guy is clearly trolling and trying to bait me. If I worked for TNA I wouldn't be here. I'd be working. He could of been talking about anything. Target demographics etc. People on the internet most of the time just focus on the final number but the 18-30 male demographic may of gone up in the ratings you just don't know and we will never know. Regardless, What we do know is TNA has grown in the 3 years that Hulk and Eric have been there. Maybe not final ratings wise but attendance wise it has. TNA must be doing something right if more people are inclined to come out to see the matches. Someone posted actual numbers here a few weeks ago debunking the whole theory that attendance is up by any real margin. The only thing they are doing differently really is touring, which is basically something they could do w or w/o Hogan and Bosch? Do they help? Maybe, but maybe they're bringing out nostalgic fans who want to see Hogan, but could care less about impact which means nothing to TNA. Let's say attendance is up and it is because people are coming out to see Hogan - hypothetically. OK. Now, prove that Hogan fans want to actually watch iMPACT for reasons other than Hogan and you might have something. The ratings and PPV buys say they don't. There's a big disconnect in the audience TNA needs and the one they're targeting, because the ones they're targeting aren't interested in impact or PPVs. I'd be interested in seeing the actual numbers that show that TNA regularly drawing 3000-5000 for TV is actually less then the 950 they drew before at the Impact Zone And no, they couldn't tour without Hulk. Hulk is what is getting the TNA name out there, he's the one getting in the local media and the newspapers. An AJ Styles or Austin Aries does not have the ability to get on local TV, Local Radio, Local News in every city across the United States. Hulk Hogan does. Every body tunes in for something. You tune in for great wrestling but another poster in this thread might tune in for Hulk. Someone might tune in because they like the TNA Product as a whole. Someone might like the Knockouts. It doesn't matter why people tune in as long as they do. Who knows, A nostalgia fan may turn up for Hulk or watch for Hulk and get hooked on the product as a whole.
|
|