Of course taste is subjective. I'd prefer if WWE treated ECW like the Attitude era. Then I think it would go over.
But it's not a matter of taste to say that the matches were generally too over-the-top to be realistic, which is ironic considering we equate hardcore with more realistic. And so, watching this, and watching the fan reaction, I think, 'Okay here's a federation that's primarily about the brutality. Not for me.' It's the part about it being primarily about brutality that's in question as a fact. You're saying it wasn't. I'm saying if it wasn't then what set it apart to such a degree and why did it turn me off and make me (and so many others) think that that was its focus?
(Maybe it's all in how you like your porn: hardcore in-your-face wham bam thank you ma'am. Or the softcore story-and-tease.)
You're still just talking about an opinion. How was ECW more over-the-top than WWE?
ECW featured Tommy Dreamer feuding with Raven because the two guys just hated each other their entire lives. Tommy was the popular kid in school, and Raven was the outcast. It was a story that reflected a lot of people's lives, and a lot of people got into it, as a result.
WWE at the time featured an outlandish "Heartbreak Kid" Shawn Michaels, an apparently walking deadman in the Undertaker, and King Mabel. It wasn't even the cartoon-style show that kids enjoyed anymore. It was a goofy circus.
The E noticed they were losing fans and stars to WCW, so they took notes from ECW and were successful because of it.
The outrageous, "hardcore" matches you're talking about were only a part of the original ECW. They also introduced the northeast to lucha libre and Japanese wrestlers like Rey Mysterio, Psicosis, Super Crazy, and others (can't think of some Japanese names right now). Plus they were the first to feature Chris Benoit, Dean Malenko, Perry Saturn, and Eddie Guerrero. And those men didn't get over with flames tables or babwire baseball bats. All of them got over with pure wrestling. ECW just got stigma'ed as being "hardcore" so they ran with it, but they never stopped featuring great wrestling.
If you think men lasting longer in the ring than they should means wrestling for over 5 minutes, that's fine. But a large number of fans, wrestlers, and promoters will disagree. Matches regularly lasted over half an hour before Vince and Co. became the center of the wrestling world.
So again, if it's not your personal preference, that's fine. But I think you're making unwarranted claims about ECW that simply aren't true. Along with being innovative, they also featured great wrestling and intriguing storylines.
To even suggest that this...THING...on Sci Fi even compares is outrageous. But that, of course, is just my opinion.