|
Post by SirLucas on Dec 1, 2017 21:41:46 GMT -5
Is there justification for the way the Invasion angle transpired from merely a business perspective? Forget the actual matches or who went over and who lost to whom. The biggest criticism is that Vince did not acquire enough top names from WCW to truly make it work. As we know WWE signed mostly mid to lower card guys and they had to shift talent from the WWE side to the Alliance side to balance it out. The top guys like Goldberg, Hogan, Sting and Nash were all sitting at home, riding out the remainder of their million dollar contracts for another year or two.
From a practical standpoint, it would have been completely illogical for Vince to just throw out as much money as necessary for these top guys to relinquish their guaranteed paid. WWE is foremost a business, and businesses has budgets to work within. So if Vince just made money no object until the top WCW talent gave in, what would it do for his own top guys like Austin, Rock and Taker and their contracts? Would Vince had to have had increased their salary as well? All for what? one angle? Yes, it was a dream angle, but I don't think in any way Vince was going to just piss away money aimlessly and make careless business decisions just for one angle.
Again, one of the biggest misconceptions about that angle is that Vince could have eventually bought out as many WCW stars as he wanted to make the Invasion angle work. But what ended up happening is everyone eventually came over from WCW once their contracts expired, so Vince didn't have to overpay.
Did the angle suck without a lot of top guys? Yes. Was the way WWE handled WCW contract from a business perspective the best way of doing so? Absolutely!
|
|
Shark
Hank Scorpio
The world's only Samurai Ninja Pirate
Posts: 7,045
|
Post by Shark on Dec 1, 2017 23:59:38 GMT -5
Something I think that gets overlooked is that Vince had just lost a fair amount of money on the XFL, so spending millions on some of those big names, not quoting anything but it could have been close to $10 million, might not have been easy to do. Plus, a lot of those guys had toxic attitudes at the time. Hogan, Hall, Nash were going to likely be coming in with a lot of creative demands. Hogan was suing Time Warner as well over the whole Russo shoot, so maybe accepting a contract buy out would have effected that. Scott Steiner, I believe, was injured and he did not have a very good reputation at that point. Goldberg probably didn't want anything to do with wrestling at that point (he didn't even show up until 2003). Wanting the names to appear and actually getting them aren't always so easy. Plus, why would some of these guys who were making 2-3 million because of those contracts want to accept a buyout and get less money?
|
|
|
Post by SirLucas on Dec 2, 2017 0:25:58 GMT -5
Exactly, theoretically Vince is rich to where can spend any dollar amount to sign anybody he wanted at any time. But if he was to just piss away millions to buy out these contracts, just so all these dream matches can be rushed, he would significantly offset the pay scale of his current roster.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 0:57:05 GMT -5
I think the Invasion was doomed to fail from the start. WWF could've done a better job with it, certainly. They had no idea what they had with guys like Booker T and DDP. At the same time, the expectations set by the very notion of WWF absorbing WCW was so large that I don't think there was any getting out of it unscathed.
I think the best thing they could've done given the circumstances was to not have Shane undercut Vince's WCW purchase, and have the story revolve around how the WCW roster assimilates to the WWF locker room - which ones get bullied? Which ones fit right in? Which ones are the big trouble makers? They could then eventually phase in the bigger stars once they had access to them. They could even have went the hostile takeover route once they acquired enough big names down the line. I don't think wrestling ever thrives when they have mass hostile takeover angles. Once things get too busy it starts to become a jumbled mess, but if they were gonna do it I think they should've been patient and got comfortable with which WCW guys could be depended on, though that's a lot easier to say in hindsight.
|
|
|
Post by SirLucas on Dec 2, 2017 1:23:21 GMT -5
Another problem I noticed was one night when Booker T was walking to the ring, Jr said something to the notion of, "He may be WCW champion. But he ain't no Sting, he ain't no Flair."
What a great way to bury the guy as he is walking into the company with the likes of Stone Cold and the Rock!
|
|
|
Post by OVO 40 hunched over like he 80 on Dec 2, 2017 3:17:25 GMT -5
Kevin Nash said it best, the wwe called him and asked if he would forfeit his contract with Turner to work for them for less money. His response was something like this,
"Let me get this right, I can stay at my house smoking weed, or go out on the road bumping every night and traveling for half of what I'm making? Thanks I'll pass."
|
|
repomark
Unicron
For Mash Get Smash
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by repomark on Dec 2, 2017 7:26:31 GMT -5
I think the solution was simple: save it until you have signed all the relevant stars. Had they not pulled the trigger on the angle until 2002 when they had signed the NWO, Flair and Bischoff it would have had a chance to be successful.
The invasion was rushed - and the second it became McMahon v McMahon, and the biggest WWF attitude era star was leading the WCW side, lost all credibility. If the Invasion ppv had been saved, they could have done the whole redemption angle with Austin becoming a face again - allowing them to logically turn him having got the heel turn out of their system rather than the inexplicable “ok he is face again and Angle is a heel” turn they did the night after Survivor Series 01.
Without the whole invasion angle, the initial runs of Booker T and DDP might not have been as hamstrung as well. With better treatment of incoming WCW talent, and holding fire, Sting would have been more likely to join WWF then as well - given the main reason he didn’t as I understand it was the way they booked Booker T initially.
Then when you have the invasion angle finished in 2002, you have an Austin who is no longer devalued as a baby face and maybe doesn’t walk out - and you have the stage set for Goldberg to debut and settle scores with either half of the WWF/WCW divide.
Pure and simple, they only have themselves to blame by rushing it. They can blame the Time Warner contracts all they want, but until they had the right personnel on board they should have not pulled the trigger on the angle.
|
|
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Dec 2, 2017 7:46:12 GMT -5
Some quick ideas I had, funny enough involve keeping one of the primary criticisms of the invasion, too much McMahon. At Mania 17 Shane beat Vince and thought he taught him a lesson, only for Vince to be back on top by the end of the night by finally seducing Austin to his side. The two man power trip is formed giving Vince all he wants. So Shane starts bringing in WCW guys as his guys, faces to fight the evil Vince and his cronies. Booker T and DDP as faces facing heel Austin and Trips could have been great. And Shane was over enough to wash away the WCW stink. Bring in other guys not as invaders but as new hires, heels or faces as is best dictated by their characters. Then in November you have Flair come in, and Bischoff if he can (I dont know about his contract situation). That builds up to the nWo debuting at Mania as the invasion finally starts (I know Flair fought the nWo in WCW but it will have been long enough at that point where it does not matter). Sting can come in at some point if the booking has not turned him off to aid either side. That can all lead up to Goldberg finally debuting to help the WWE finally end the nWo the next year at Mania.
|
|
Mochi Lone Wolf
Fry's dog Seymour
Development through Destruction.
Posts: 24,151
|
Post by Mochi Lone Wolf on Dec 2, 2017 20:10:02 GMT -5
With the benefit of hindsight, I think this is a case where "striking while the iron is hot" was actually the wrong move.
|
|
|
Post by Natural Born Farmer on Dec 2, 2017 20:53:32 GMT -5
With the benefit of hindsight, I think this is a case where "striking while the iron is hot" was actually the wrong move. Exactly. Handling it the way they did was essentially the worst of all possible options. Which is really something when you think about it.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,693
|
Post by fw91 on Dec 2, 2017 21:03:32 GMT -5
Should have waited, imagine if they held off until 2002, with the NWO, Flair, HBK, HHH, Steiner, Bischoff, and Lesnar in the mix.
Thing is, how would the Austin heel turn play out without the invasion?
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Dec 3, 2017 0:20:27 GMT -5
you also have to remember the way the Angle played out was also like Option C.
the Original idea was for Raw to become Nitro.
But Spike didn't want WCW, they paid for WWF Monday Night Raw and that's what they wanted not the "Loser" brand.
I think they tried the same with Smackdown and got a similar response from UPN.
I think there was another plan following that but them running with it originally was to keep WCW fresh while they relaunched it rather than the WCW Fans tuning out entirely (Which well they did anyway but still)
That said I don't think there was an optimal way for the Invasion to play out... for one thing every "rebook the Invasion" shoot I have seen have somehow been worse than what we got.
|
|
|
Post by Natural Born Farmer on Dec 3, 2017 1:37:36 GMT -5
you also have to remember the way the Angle played out was also like Option C. the Original idea was for Raw to become Nitro. But Spike didn't want WCW, they paid for WWF Monday Night Raw and that's what they wanted not the "Loser" brand. I think they tried the same with Smackdown and got a similar response from UPN. I think there was another plan following that but them running with it originally was to keep WCW fresh while they relaunched it rather than the WCW Fans tuning out entirely (Which well they did anyway but still) That said I don't think there was an optimal way for the Invasion to play out... for one thing every "rebook the Invasion" shoot I have seen have somehow been worse than what we got. Integrate the guys who did come over as regular roster members and gear storylines about them finding their footing. Wait for the big guns contracts to expire and sign them, saving the proper invasion angle for when the star power was there to sell it. Doesn’t sound that tough to me. Only problem was the perception that they had to give it up right away.
|
|
|
Post by BlackoutCreature on Dec 3, 2017 1:56:49 GMT -5
There was always this belief that they had to give WCW a two hour show so that it could be portrayed as an equal to the WWF. I never agreed with that. WCW's name value at that point was mud and needed to be rebuilt from the ground up and the roster they had was no where near large enough to support a two hour show.
What I always felt they should have done was give WCW Sunday Night Heat. Use it to reintroduce the guys they got from the buyout, while at the same time mixing in a couple of high profile signees, like Rob Van Dam, and a couple of developmental guys, like Randy Orton. Keep the show completely internal with its own angles, feuds and storylines that have nothing to do with the WWF. Let all this stew for about six months then do your invasion angle.
|
|
|
Post by -Lithium- on Dec 3, 2017 6:09:49 GMT -5
Kevin Nash said it best, the wwe called him and asked if he would forfeit his contract with Turner to work for them for less money. His response was something like this, "Let me get this right, I can stay at my house smoking weed, or go out on the road bumping every night and traveling for half of what I'm making? Thanks I'll pass." "...its f***in' fake man. Quit being such a mark. You go out on the road all ya want, I'll stay here and drink wine and appreciate fine art. It's f***in' business." (Sorry, I can't resist a chance to do Lapsed Kevin Nash.)
|
|
|
Post by kingofthings on Dec 3, 2017 8:46:27 GMT -5
To echo a lot of what has been said already here, the willingness to jump straight in to it is basically what damaged it.
I'd still have had the McMahon feud with the "Shane buying WCW" angle but in the months after Mania have the WCW stars getting more and more frustrated at how he wasn't doing enough for them. That reaches a tipping point and Bischoff and/or NWO appear to lead a far more widespread attack with the 'second wave' of stars, completely turning on Shane. ECW should have never been a part of it.
|
|
|
Post by disorganisedchaos v:2 on Dec 3, 2017 8:59:45 GMT -5
Should have waited, imagine if they held off until 2002, with the NWO, Flair, HBK, HHH, Steiner, Bischoff, and Lesnar in the mix. Thing is, how would the Austin heel turn play out without the invasion? There's no telling that Benoit or HHH would've suffered injuries during the summer of 2001 meaning the Benoit/Austin feud may have continued with perhaps CB turning on Jericho. HHH could turn on Austin for Summerslam. I know people hate the heel turn, but there were plenty of options for Austin and the main event as a whole. (And Angle would likely still step up as the main challenger, post 9/11... in fact, there would be no reason to turn Angle after the program ended, leaving him as potential top babyface alongside Rock leading into the new WCW invasion)
|
|
|
Post by angelofapocalypse on Dec 3, 2017 14:01:33 GMT -5
There was always this belief that they had to give WCW a two hour show so that it could be portrayed as an equal to the WWF. I never agreed with that. WCW's name value at that point was mud and needed to be rebuilt from the ground up and the roster they had was no where near large enough to support a two hour show. What I always felt they should have done was give WCW Sunday Night Heat. Use it to reintroduce the guys they got from the buyout, while at the same time mixing in a couple of high profile signees, like Rob Van Dam, and a couple of developmental guys, like Randy Orton. Keep the show completely internal with its own angles, feuds and storylines that have nothing to do with the WWF. Let all this stew for about six months then do your invasion angle. Point on in the first paragraph. During the buyout, there were no plans for WCW, shows/televised programing to say. I remember during the buyout in March/April of 2001 and someone foolishly said "WCW are gonna get their own show"..."and we're not gonna take it anymore"(cheesy Bif Naked version) as a storyline introduction coming in the WWF, whatever. I was like "There's no f***ing way Vince is ever going to give his rival competitor their own show." It's true that WCW's value and name was damaged over the last few years before they belly up. That was due to the absurd booking. It kind of makes sense that Vince knew that WCW, therefore, couldn't be "salvaged."
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,423
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 3, 2017 16:15:17 GMT -5
Some quick ideas I had, funny enough involve keeping one of the primary criticisms of the invasion, too much McMahon. At Mania 17 Shane beat Vince and thought he taught him a lesson, only for Vince to be back on top by the end of the night by finally seducing Austin to his side. The two man power trip is formed giving Vince all he wants. So Shane starts bringing in WCW guys as his guys, faces to fight the evil Vince and his cronies. Booker T and DDP as faces facing heel Austin and Trips could have been great. And Shane was over enough to wash away the WCW stink. Bring in other guys not as invaders but as new hires, heels or faces as is best dictated by their characters. Then in November you have Flair come in, and Bischoff if he can (I dont know about his contract situation). That builds up to the nWo debuting at Mania as the invasion finally starts (I know Flair fought the nWo in WCW but it will have been long enough at that point where it does not matter). Sting can come in at some point if the booking has not turned him off to aid either side. That can all lead up to Goldberg finally debuting to help the WWE finally end the nWo the next year at Mania. I'd go for a variation on that. Starting at summer, the WCW guys come in with nothing being said. Then during the Royal Rumble, the ring is packed with say, 12 guys, 2 main eventers, say Austin and Rock when number 30 comes out... Hulk Hogan, he walks down the ramp to a massive pop, comes down to the ring, poses, stares down Austin/Rock, taking long enough for the other 10 guys to recover and get to their feet, in such a way they're surrounding all 3. Then another song hits, Eric Bischoff comes out smiling, and suddenly commentary notices the other 10 guys are Lance Storm, Sean O'Haire etc. they do a gang beatdown on Rock/Austin, 5 each picking them up and tossing them before going over the ropes so Hogan wins, Eric gets in the ring and they hug, a few WWE guys run down to no success, not even getting in the ring as Hogan poses more. Next night on RAW, Vince comes out saying everyone involved was fired, and the match was invalid, but Hogan comes on the titantron, backed by everyone else pointing out his iron clad contract for Wrestlemania, and how they're rich enough to pay off the production people to get on the air, Vince kicked him out in 93, drove WCW out of business, now he's coming back to take the title for revenge, and WCW is back. From there, you can have this invading force, split people off into individual feuds etc. As long as you had 1 key main eventer to build it around, you could wait out the other contracts.
|
|
|
Post by Natural Born Farmer on Dec 3, 2017 17:25:46 GMT -5
ECW should have never been a part of it. Formation of that faction was one of the few bright spots of the angle. It was DOA when Stephanie became the leader but it didn’t have to be that way.
|
|