Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 29,325
|
Post by Sephiroth on Oct 27, 2013 21:49:03 GMT -5
Yeah, I said it right out. I'm hardly Paul Heyman's biggest fan but I seriously believe if TNA had brought him in back in 2010 instead of Hogan the company would be in far better condition than it is in now. To some extent I don't blame Dixie Carter for not making that final agreement with Heyman, because his asking price was steep; he didn't just want to be the head writer and booker, he wanted part ownership of the company and wanted to be in charge of its financial decisions. But she turned around and gave Hogan and Bischoff virtually that very deal, and what has the result been? I will go even further by pointing out that if Heyman had been TNA's big acquisition in 2010 instead of Hogan the "Monday Night War" fiasco never would have happened. I would also wager that there is a good chance Awesome Kong would have still been with the company-since her dispute with Bubba the Love Sponge also would not have happened.
Heyman has talked before about what he would have done had he been put in charge of TNA-and I find myself hard pressed to argue with a lot of it. He's openly said he would have released most, if not all of the "legends" and made TNA a more youth-centric product. While general logic says that without big name, established stars TNA would not be able to draw, can anyone honesty point out how TNA's ratings and buyrates have done any better with a program focused on legend stars instead of younger ones? Heyman has summed it up perfectly; legends have their place, but they should not be the center of the show. Legends are useful as spokesman, for merchandising and for special appearances-but they should not be the centerpiece of the program, the main event. Heyman also indicated more than once that he viewed the "hardcore" style that worked so well for ECW as being stale, and that fans today want to see a more UFC style product. TNA in 2010, and even still today, has young stars who would be perfectly suited to that kind of program and could put on high flying, daredevil matches or technical displays of athletic ability. I'll even make two guesses: if Scott Steiner had been released in 2010 as Heyman says he would have done, then the lawsuit against TNA would probably not be happening right now. And if Heyman had taken over and made TNA a company centered around young stars and been given reign to recruit who he wanted I think Daniel Bryan may have been in TNA right now instead of WWE.
I even actually find some of Heyman's arguments for what he would have done with TNA financially to be pretty solid. I actually don't think Heyman deserves the bad rap he gets as someone who doesn't know how to manage money; ECW's financial problems weren't just about some bad decisions on his part, it was because they did not have the bank accounts of Vince McMahon or Ted Turner to back them at a time when everything about the wrestling business-including its expenses, were skyrocketing. I'm not completely certain about Heyman's arguments in favor of taking TNA public complete with stock offering, but the idea definitely has its merits. TNA needs to expand its money base in order to go on the road permanently and run more PPV's, and lining up investors is definitely one way of doing that. And TNA in 2010 was a company that might have had a chance of looking like a good buy for possible investors; they were starting to draw ratings that were comparable to WWE-albeit to WWE's third string show. They were lining up sponsors like Stacker 2 and cross promotion like Playboy. They were diversifying their merchandise with their first video game and action figure deals with Jakks. In short, it was a small company that was slowly growing and potentially had a lot to offer, all good arguments to make when you are trying to persuade people to invest.
The one area I am a little skeptical of is the Knockouts. TNAs women's roster was still one of its biggest strengths in 2010, but Heyman has very little experience actually booking women's wrestling. But with that said, the fact that the Knockouts were consistently drawing the highest ratings on their TV shows leads me to think Heyman probably would not have altered the program much, and he might even have gone out of his way to promote them even more for it. Heyman's stated plans, but his own habit of booking a show around its strongest elements while trying to cover the weak spots, make me think he would not have deliberately tampered with what was obviously a working formula as far as the Knockouts were at the time.
Disagree with me if you like, but as I stated at the opening-has TNA really been that much better since turning Heyman down?
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Oct 27, 2013 22:11:31 GMT -5
Here's how I see it:
What are Paul Heymans credentials in charge of a top level company? ECW was a big independent but it wasn't the size of TNA and that failed. He wrote for WWE for about 9 months and booked WWECW for a few months before walking out I believe. At best he's had just over a year experience in charge of a major company and it's story lines. He has no formal business background and although a smart wrestling guy he didn't really do a lot for ECW financially.
Now you look at the guys personality type. He's a known liar, known for screwing people over, ignores phone calls etc. Do you as a business person want someone who is going to lie to you and ignore you having complete control of your company?
As for the youth movement thing, this is always brought up but if you look around for young wrestlers is there really a lot of potential? Most young wrestlers today usually are just good wrestlers and okay promo guys. There are no real stand out on the indies these days meaning Heyman would fire Sting, Steiner, Angle, Team 3.D, Rhino and hell with Heyman's logic Chris Daniels and Lashley would be out the door also. Forced to replace these big stars? AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Bobby Roode, James Storm etc. The same exact people Hogan and Bischoff pushed. You got your youth movement from all these young guys and it did nothing for TNA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2013 22:41:47 GMT -5
Knowing TNA they would have hired him as Chief Financial Adviser.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 29,325
|
Post by Sephiroth on Oct 27, 2013 22:55:02 GMT -5
Here's how I see it: What are Paul Heymans credentials in charge of a top level company? ECW was a big independent but it wasn't the size of TNA and that failed. He wrote for WWE for about 9 months and booked WWECW for a few months before walking out I believe. At best he's had just over a year experience in charge of a major company and it's story lines. He has no formal business background and although a smart wrestling guy he didn't really do a lot for ECW financially. Now you look at the guys personality type. He's a known liar, known for screwing people over, ignores phone calls etc. Do you as a business person want someone who is going to lie to you and ignore you having complete control of your company? As for the youth movement thing, this is always brought up but if you look around for young wrestlers is there really a lot of potential? Most young wrestlers today usually are just good wrestlers and okay promo guys. There are no real stand out on the indies these days meaning Heyman would fire Sting, Steiner, Angle, Team 3.D, Rhino and hell with Heyman's logic Chris Daniels and Lashley would be out the door also. Forced to replace these big stars? AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Bobby Roode, James Storm etc. The same exact people Hogan and Bischoff pushed. You got your youth movement from all these young guys and it did nothing for TNA. It did nothing because it was handled incorrectly. TNA's home grown stars played second fiddle to Hogan and other legends for too long. They needed to be established as every bit the equal of the legends, the new generation rising up to take charge. Instead they were put on the undercard. As for ECW not being as big as TNA; at the time of the promotion's demise they were actually roughly in the same spot as TNA is now, and considering they had started out as an indy fed based purely out of Philly that was pretty impressive growth as a company. And for Heyman's reputation for dishonesty-Hogan and Bischoff are considered honest players?
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Oct 27, 2013 22:59:04 GMT -5
Here's how I see it: What are Paul Heymans credentials in charge of a top level company? ECW was a big independent but it wasn't the size of TNA and that failed. He wrote for WWE for about 9 months and booked WWECW for a few months before walking out I believe. At best he's had just over a year experience in charge of a major company and it's story lines. He has no formal business background and although a smart wrestling guy he didn't really do a lot for ECW financially. Now you look at the guys personality type. He's a known liar, known for screwing people over, ignores phone calls etc. Do you as a business person want someone who is going to lie to you and ignore you having complete control of your company? As for the youth movement thing, this is always brought up but if you look around for young wrestlers is there really a lot of potential? Most young wrestlers today usually are just good wrestlers and okay promo guys. There are no real stand out on the indies these days meaning Heyman would fire Sting, Steiner, Angle, Team 3.D, Rhino and hell with Heyman's logic Chris Daniels and Lashley would be out the door also. Forced to replace these big stars? AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Bobby Roode, James Storm etc. The same exact people Hogan and Bischoff pushed. You got your youth movement from all these young guys and it did nothing for TNA. It did nothing because it was handled incorrectly. TNA's home grown stars played second fiddle to Hogan and other legends for too long. They needed to be established as every bit the equal of the legends, the new generation rising up to take charge. Instead they were put on the undercard. As for ECW not being as big as TNA; at the time of the promotion's demise they were actually roughly in the same spot as TNA is now, and considering they had started out as an indy fed based purely out of Philly that was pretty impressive growth as a company. And for Heyman's reputation for dishonesty-Hogan and Bischoff are considered honest players? So if the young guys were made to look second class to the legends why were guys like Austin Aries, Bobby Roode, Jeff Hardy etc pushed? If you look at the title history the only people over 40 who won the TNA World Heavyweight Title since 2010 are Sting (Twice), Bully Ray and Kurt Angle.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Oct 27, 2013 23:05:40 GMT -5
I loved Heyman's work in ECW. But if I recall, wasn't this around the time where Heyman was openly stating he thought MMA was the future?
|
|
|
Post by Error on Oct 27, 2013 23:32:01 GMT -5
I loved Heyman's work in ECW. But if I recall, wasn't this around the time where Heyman was openly stating he thought MMA was the future? Yeah, Heyman has admitted that he had no desire to get back into wrestling until he started working with Punk on his DVD. He asked for the moon from Dixie figuring she'd turn it down but in the off chance she didn't, she was going to give him enough to reimburse his father for ECW failing and his grandkids set for life.
|
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Oct 27, 2013 23:58:06 GMT -5
His demands were that TNA would have to give him complete control and they would have to pay him so much he couldn't turn them down. He stated he would have brought in Bryan Danielson and made him the top guy and that he would have fired everybody over 40, though he has stated in the past that he is willing to have one legend on a roster, ala Funk in ECW.
|
|
Chuck Conry
Dennis Stamp
zombies DON'T Run
Posts: 3,826
|
Post by Chuck Conry on Oct 28, 2013 0:01:45 GMT -5
I never cared about age in wrestling. I care about 1) if they can go in the ring 2) if they can't do that well is there a logical use for them regardless. If they dont fit either THEN we take them behind the barn. Age isn't always an issue. Look at most big time players age at the time they hit lightening in a bottle in the business.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Oct 28, 2013 0:02:52 GMT -5
His demands were that TNA would have to give him complete control and they would have to pay him so much he couldn't turn them down. He stated he would have brought in Bryan Danielson and made him the top guy and that he would have fired everybody over 40, though he has stated in the past that he is willing to have one legend on a roster, ala Funk in ECW. Danielson never would of become a star in TNA. The television audience isn't big enough.
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Oct 28, 2013 0:18:04 GMT -5
His demands were that TNA would have to give him complete control and they would have to pay him so much he couldn't turn them down. He stated he would have brought in Bryan Danielson and made him the top guy and that he would have fired everybody over 40, though he has stated in the past that he is willing to have one legend on a roster, ala Funk in ECW. Danielson never would of become a star in TNA. The television audience isn't big enough. Well, a star in TNA standards, I would assume.
|
|
Glitch
Grimlock
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,787
|
Post by Glitch on Oct 28, 2013 0:30:12 GMT -5
Not sure how exactly Tna would have turned out with him at the helm, but at least we know he wouldn't have made himself the center of the show. And we certainty wouldn't have seen his family members given the spotlight.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo Is Broken on Oct 28, 2013 0:31:04 GMT -5
TNA should have brought in Mike Adamle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2013 1:01:15 GMT -5
Hogan has zero experience running a successful company and CLEARLY has equal appeal to a larger fanbase.
Heyman probably wouldn't have only done marginally better.
And we wouldn't have the terribly embarrassing moments from Hogan's run in TNA so...
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 29,325
|
Post by Sephiroth on Oct 28, 2013 7:52:58 GMT -5
Hogan has zero experience running a successful company and CLEARLY has equal appeal to a larger fanbase. Heyman probably wouldn't have only done marginally better. And we wouldn't have the terribly embarrassing moments from Hogan's run in TNA so... Heyman has proven talent as a writer and booker. Hogan doesn't. My belief is that Heyman would have been more helpful toward TNA becoming a more unique product and an actual alternative to WWE rather than WCW lite, which is exactly what Hogan and Bischoff have made it. Heyman showed little interest in getting back into wrestling at the time, but he more than once said he felt TNA had a very talented roster that he would enjoy working with. Hogan proceeded to simply bring in all his old buddies and his daughter for a few paychecks to no benefit whatsoever to the product overall.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Oct 28, 2013 8:02:41 GMT -5
Heyman asked for the moon on a stick because he was never genuinely interested in going there, he was just using TNA to keep his name fresh in the minds of wrestling fans and to make sure he continues to be thought of as a wrestling messiah figure, which worked given how people to this day insist he was the savior of TNA and that it's the Carter's fault he didn't end up there when they offered him everything but complete control.
Had they signed Heyman, they would have faced issues the moment Spike asked them to start hyping Bellator. Heyman wanted the final say on everything and he's notorious for not playing nicely with Television companies, TNN/Spike in particular so chances are they would have ended up as bleeped as they are now, for a whole different set of reasons. His insistence on his vision being more important than the things that keep a wrestling company alive cost ECW dearly, they alienated TNN and made the product toxic which put off other networks. People can claim TNN only ever wanted WWF programming all they like, but at the end of the day the stream of jabs toward the network is what guaranteed no other TV network wanted them once that deal ended as you don't bite the hand that feeds you, even if it does belong to a jerk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2013 10:28:04 GMT -5
Heyman wasn't the answer.
TNA needs a complete overhaul backstage.
One guy managing the same inept people wont turn things around no matter how good he is. Especially when they can go to the Mark owner and get their crappy ideas pushed past you.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Oct 28, 2013 10:41:28 GMT -5
I agree with Dysco.
I think if Paul Heyman played nicely with TNN from the get go you'd of had ECW last for at least another year. At least.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Oct 28, 2013 11:05:16 GMT -5
I really find it funny how people always forget that free will exists. Heyman was offed it before, and said no. Russo even asked him.
And you know what? Even if they did, it wouldn't matter.
1.) People would still hate it. It's been done before. No one liked Jarrett until he left. No one liked D'Amore until he left. No one liked most of the writing team at all, until they left and someone else filled in. He would have been just another disappointment until someone else took over, and everyone started talking about how awesome the run with Heyman was. and if not...
2) The hype over Heyman was so big, no way would Heyman have lived up to it. It was going on for years and no way it would live up to what the fans would have expected it. And I'm pretty sure he knew it.
Finally, the real secret to his ECW success, and it's apparent when you read the books and watch the DVDs, he didn't do jack s*** with writing. He just let people go out there and do s***. Raven, Sandman, Shane, Foley, etc, weren't given roles to basically do what they wanted. The ECW Arena crowd did more to build characters than Heyman did (Dreamer, Whipwreck). Heyman doesn't really plan for s***, mostly cause his plans seemed to always get tossed out over something, like a no show or incident. He pretty much flew by the seat of his pants.
|
|
Juice
El Dandy
Wrong? Oh he can tell ya about being wrong.
I'm the one who raised you from perdition.
Posts: 8,172
|
Post by Juice on Oct 28, 2013 13:05:03 GMT -5
But Heyman wouldn't have been in WWE again making magic, Danielson wouldn't be the most over guy in wrestling today. Things worked ut great for everyone not in TNA by having Bich and Hogan instead.
|
|