SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611 
|
Post by SOR on Oct 29, 2013 19:34:26 GMT -5
I never understood the "TNA is going to get 1.1 anyway!" argument. You think people won't tune out if TNA puts in shit talent that they hate? ...Honestly? I really do believe that in my heart of hearts. I don't what is going on in these people's lives but I truly believe that, no matter the occasion, there are at least a million people that will give up their Thursday night to watch TNA. These people have been through several highs and the lowest of lows. Whether it be out of actual enjoyment or just to mock it, I couldn't tell ya. Obviously, this is all hypothetical and it's not like there is an effective way to prove it but that's my two cents. Well there's definitely fans of the former WWE guys that tune in. I became a fan in 2005 because I recognized and liked Jeff Jarrett. I'm sure the same happened with a lot of other fans as that number grew with guys like Angle, Booker T, Christian etc etc |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2013 20:17:47 GMT -5
I find it amazing that people discredit Bischoff, despite the fact that he built the biggest wrestling promotion in the world in 1996-97 and created the storyline that pretty much started the late-90's boom, yet Heyman is considered a mastermind despite ECW being the Jerry Springer of pro wrestling for a few years (with WWF helping them out). Bischoff has/had his faults, there is no question about that, but what was Heyman's contribution to wrestling? The Attitude Era (if you want to credit Heyman's ECW vision as a launching pad for it) was just as large a part of the decline of pro wrestling in the 2000's than it was for the rise in popularity in the late-90's. Watch Bischoff's WCW in 1996-97 and Heyman's ECW (pick his best two years), and see which one looks dated in 2013. Hint: It's not Bischoff's. I know people like to point to Smackdown where Heyman had the same six guys wrestle 500 times in a span of a few months, but where exactly is the evidence of Heyman's genius? What has he done to make people believe he would have turned TNA into anything more than what it is now or what it was in 2009? Maybe I'm missing something. For every one that is amazed how Bischoff can be discredited, there is someone equally baffled how his many shortcomings and his huge shortcoming (WCW) get overlooked by these people. He's had 3 years and then some to do something in TNA. How much longer does he need? Heyman sank a company just as quickly as Bischoff did, except without the two year high that Bischoff had in 1996-97. Why is Heyman considered the genius between the two? Bischoff gave talent too much money, and Heyman didn't always pay the talent. Bischoff took over a WCW that was probably on par with TNA today and turned it into the #1 wrestling promotion in the world, while Heyman catered to a niche market by doing basically the equivalent of backyard wrestling (mixed in with some actual wrestling). Bischoff "stole" WWF stars, but yet at the peak of WCW's rise, the characters those stars portrayed were vastly different from what they did upon leaving the WWF (Hogan was Hollywood, Nash/Hall/Syxx were basically themselves, Luger was the Total Package/not a patriot, Savage was an active wrestler again, etc) so adaptability was clearly something Bischoff had an eye for, and that was one of Heyman's strengths as well. You can say Bischoff failed in TNA, and maybe he did (I'm not even sure what his ideas were his to begin with), but why would Heyman have been better? History is probably going to be kinder to Bischoff from a business standpoint than Heyman, even with the epic fall of WCW. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2013 20:41:24 GMT -5
Nothing to add, just wanted to say this a great thread and you're all making great arguments. Awesome read.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Cokehead del Knife Fight on Nov 1, 2013 5:31:36 GMT -5
For every one that is amazed how Bischoff can be discredited, there is someone equally baffled how his many shortcomings and his huge shortcoming (WCW) get overlooked by these people. He's had 3 years and then some to do something in TNA. How much longer does he need? Heyman sank a company just as quickly as Bischoff did, except without the two year high that Bischoff had in 1996-97. Why is Heyman considered the genius between the two? Bischoff gave talent too much money, and Heyman didn't always pay the talent. Bischoff took over a WCW that was probably on par with TNA today and turned it into the #1 wrestling promotion in the world, while Heyman catered to a niche market by doing basically the equivalent of backyard wrestling (mixed in with some actual wrestling). Bischoff "stole" WWF stars, but yet at the peak of WCW's rise, the characters those stars portrayed were vastly different from what they did upon leaving the WWF (Hogan was Hollywood, Nash/Hall/Syxx were basically themselves, Luger was the Total Package/not a patriot, Savage was an active wrestler again, etc) so adaptability was clearly something Bischoff had an eye for, and that was one of Heyman's strengths as well. You can say Bischoff failed in TNA, and maybe he did (I'm not even sure what his ideas were his to begin with), but why would Heyman have been better? History is probably going to be kinder to Bischoff from a business standpoint than Heyman, even with the epic fall of WCW. FACT: Bischoff lost more money in 1999 than ECW lost in their entire lifetime. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Nov 1, 2013 10:47:09 GMT -5
Heyman sank a company just as quickly as Bischoff did, except without the two year high that Bischoff had in 1996-97. Why is Heyman considered the genius between the two? Bischoff gave talent too much money, and Heyman didn't always pay the talent. Bischoff took over a WCW that was probably on par with TNA today and turned it into the #1 wrestling promotion in the world, while Heyman catered to a niche market by doing basically the equivalent of backyard wrestling (mixed in with some actual wrestling). Bischoff "stole" WWF stars, but yet at the peak of WCW's rise, the characters those stars portrayed were vastly different from what they did upon leaving the WWF (Hogan was Hollywood, Nash/Hall/Syxx were basically themselves, Luger was the Total Package/not a patriot, Savage was an active wrestler again, etc) so adaptability was clearly something Bischoff had an eye for, and that was one of Heyman's strengths as well. You can say Bischoff failed in TNA, and maybe he did (I'm not even sure what his ideas were his to begin with), but why would Heyman have been better? History is probably going to be kinder to Bischoff from a business standpoint than Heyman, even with the epic fall of WCW. FACT: Bischoff lost more money in 1999 than ECW lost in their entire lifetime. And Jay Z makes more money as a rapper than Atmosphere. One headed a company bank rolled by a billionaire and had set up multiple TV shows nationally on a leading cable network. The other was self run, mostly regional TV and a year nationally, and was basically touring the East Coast. Not similar. |
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Nov 1, 2013 12:45:12 GMT -5
]And Jay Z makes more money as a rapper than Atmosphere. One headed a company bank rolled by a billionaire and had set up multiple TV shows nationally on a leading cable network. The other was self run, mostly regional TV and a year nationally, and was basically touring the East Coast. Not similar. But that's also the benefit that Heyman had as well- he had less money, and as a result he also had to work harder with his own booking to get what it did get in the '90s. A big failing of Bischoff wasn't just the money he lost [he had a billionaire backing him and multiple cable shows, so using the money behind him as one of WCW's advantages was reasonable), but also how he lost all this despite 1997-98 WCW having one of the best rosters ever assembled: You wanted established '80s stars, current '90s stars, the stars who'd lead the business into the 21st century, the best technical wrestling, the best high-flying- WCW had it all, and they blew it. By contrast? Heyman needed to do a legendary smoke and mirrors job to get ECW to the heights he had. When he had WCW big stars [Jericho/Rey/Radicalz], all of them were short-term guys who used ECW as their springboard to get to WCW [which really established them into the stars- all of those names being 'ECW' was far less important on their resume as their WCW runs]. Of the people who can truly be considered ECW Homegrowns, only one person- Rob Van Dam- went on to be a genuine top star in the business. There were a couple decent midcarders from WCW like Raven, and Tommy Dreamer did get one ECW Title reign as the lifetime achievement award in 2009, but for the most part, RVD ECW Original who went on to become a major player in the sport- which means what Heyman had to do in booking to MAKE the ECW roster seem like major players had a far higher degree of difficulty than Bischoff. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Nov 1, 2013 13:16:39 GMT -5
]And Jay Z makes more money as a rapper than Atmosphere. One headed a company bank rolled by a billionaire and had set up multiple TV shows nationally on a leading cable network. The other was self run, mostly regional TV and a year nationally, and was basically touring the East Coast. Not similar. But that's also the benefit that Heyman had as well- he had less money, and as a result he also had to work harder with his own booking to get what it did get in the '90s. A big failing of Bischoff wasn't just the money he lost [he had a billionaire backing him and multiple cable shows, so using the money behind him as one of WCW's advantages was reasonable), but also how he lost all this despite 1997-98 WCW having one of the best rosters ever assembled: You wanted established '80s stars, current '90s stars, the stars who'd lead the business into the 21st century, the best technical wrestling, the best high-flying- WCW had it all, and they blew it. By contrast? Heyman needed to do a legendary smoke and mirrors job to get ECW to the heights he had. When he had WCW big stars [Jericho/Rey/Radicalz], all of them were short-term guys who used ECW as their springboard to get to WCW [which really established them into the stars- all of those names being 'ECW' was far less important on their resume as their WCW runs]. Of the people who can truly be considered ECW Homegrowns, only one person- Rob Van Dam- went on to be a genuine top star in the business. There were a couple decent midcarders from WCW like Raven, and Tommy Dreamer did get one ECW Title reign as the lifetime achievement award in 2009, but for the most part, RVD ECW Original who went on to become a major player in the sport- which means what Heyman had to do in booking to MAKE the ECW roster seem like major players had a far higher degree of difficulty than Bischoff. Omitting the actual build with Bischoff and WCW when he took over and all the talent they established. And considering, while WCW was devalued heavily at the end, as we know, ECW went bankrupt and had 8 times as much debt as assets at death. Not exactly a game changing business plan there. |
|
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 Nov 2, 2013 21:56:52 GMT -5
But that's also the benefit that Heyman had as well- he had less money, and as a result he also had to work harder with his own booking to get what it did get in the '90s. A big failing of Bischoff wasn't just the money he lost [he had a billionaire backing him and multiple cable shows, so using the money behind him as one of WCW's advantages was reasonable), but also how he lost all this despite 1997-98 WCW having one of the best rosters ever assembled: You wanted established '80s stars, current '90s stars, the stars who'd lead the business into the 21st century, the best technical wrestling, the best high-flying- WCW had it all, and they blew it. By contrast? Heyman needed to do a legendary smoke and mirrors job to get ECW to the heights he had. When he had WCW big stars [Jericho/Rey/Radicalz], all of them were short-term guys who used ECW as their springboard to get to WCW [which really established them into the stars- all of those names being 'ECW' was far less important on their resume as their WCW runs]. Of the people who can truly be considered ECW Homegrowns, only one person- Rob Van Dam- went on to be a genuine top star in the business. There were a couple decent midcarders from WCW like Raven, and Tommy Dreamer did get one ECW Title reign as the lifetime achievement award in 2009, but for the most part, RVD ECW Original who went on to become a major player in the sport- which means what Heyman had to do in booking to MAKE the ECW roster seem like major players had a far higher degree of difficulty than Bischoff. Omitting the actual build with Bischoff and WCW when he took over and all the talent they established. And considering, while WCW was devalued heavily at the end, as we know, ECW went bankrupt and had 8 times as much debt as assets at death. Not exactly a game changing business plan there. Doesn't change the fact that Heyman took a small indie company and built it all the way up to getting a tv deal. Bischoff took an already existing national company and used somebody else millions to build it. I really doubt Bischoff could do the same as Heyman. And of course Heyman had a good post ecw career, while post wcw bischoff poisoned everything he touched. |
|
|
|
Post by evilone on Nov 3, 2013 11:06:37 GMT -5
TNA doesn't need Bisch, Hogan, Heyman or even Vince. They need someone outside of the wrestling who has a vision how to tweak the product and get it on todays date on calendar.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 29,325
|
Post by Sephiroth on Nov 3, 2013 23:20:00 GMT -5
So Bischoff is a genius because WCW had a great two year run during his time. Not to be mean spirited, but so what? The NWA and AWA had great run that lasted far longer than two years, and well before Bischoff even entered the wrestling business. Yet they ended up out of business too by making mistakes-many of which Bischoff himself would make, and on a far grander scale. And that terrific two year run ended up being followed by a crash that made the slow deaths of the NWA and AWA look like nothing by comparison. And Bischoff somehow managed to make enough screw ups that one of the biggest and wealthiest media empires in the world finally decided they had enough. How does just two years make up for all that? Bischoff had a couple of great ideas and that was it.
|
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Nov 4, 2013 10:36:12 GMT -5
Bischoff was out of power by mid-'99 anyway, so he can hardly be the person we solely blame for all the money lost that year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Nov 4, 2013 13:14:27 GMT -5
Bischoff was out of power by mid-'99 anyway, so he can hardly be the person we solely blame for all the money lost that year. he isn't solely to blame, but he is to blame for creating a framework where the product was un-bookable. hell, his "throw money at a problem until it goes away" strategy was what brought Vince Russo in in the first place. |
|
Welfare Willis
Crow T. Robot
Pornomancer
555-BONE
FDIC Bonsured
Game Center CX Kacho on!
Posts: 44,259
|
Post by Welfare Willis on Nov 4, 2013 13:29:46 GMT -5
You know it's not often I agree with Mike C. and SOR, but in this case they're right regarding if Heyman was in charge. Heyman's a talented guy, but I don't think he could have righted the ship. Plus, as mentioned, Heyman's notorious relationship with networks would have come into play sooner or later.
Heyman had the best shot, but I still think there are some external and internal factors that would have worked against Heyman.
|
|
|
|
Post by joeiscool on Nov 4, 2013 14:09:09 GMT -5
also it has to be said... Ecw's rise to fame wasn't really about booking. Some ppv matches had 0 build. Like sometimes they weren't even advertised on the card. Two wrestlers would have a brawl, a ref would come out and count a pin. No entrances, no bell, not even a real slot for them.
The tag team matches were quite boring. You'd be watching a 12 min brawl with 4 guys, not really knowing what was happening, then finally someone hits a finisher.
Ecw on tnn wasn't really good. It had no flow sometimes there wouldn't even be any wrestling.
Ecw however was a brand that was in the right place at the right time. They blew up at the height of everything being extreme, and also the height of this idea that people should support things that aren't mainstream.
I'm not sure if ecw started now it would be as accepted as it was.
The next big thing in wrestling isn't going to be a booking style, but an idea, that really that really mirrors our society. WWE kinda had that in cena, and cm punk, but their current booking style I don't think rings true to non wrestling fans. TNA might have it in tna 24.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hawkfield no1 NZ poster on Nov 4, 2013 20:24:23 GMT -5
If Heyman was put in charge of TNA would he have been the savior of TNA that some fanboys were making him out to be.... No.
But still he couldn't of done any worse than Bischoff has done.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Cokehead del Knife Fight on Nov 4, 2013 20:30:31 GMT -5
Bischoff was out of power by mid-'99 anyway, so he can hardly be the person we solely blame for all the money lost that year. Bischoff was the moron that created a wrestler based on KISS. In 1999. Who also bought in the No Limit Soldiers which drew absolutely zero money. |
|
