TNA and WWE's EPIC Faliures from Paul Heyman's Blog

[MattitudeV2]

When it comes to a young talent initiative, both World Wrestling Entertainment and TNA Wrestling have their collective heads shoved up their respective asses.

 

 

It amazes me that in an industry starving for young talent, there is still no system in place designed to capitalize on the new styles and young performers that are out there, and --even more importantly-- unseen by a national(and, especially in WWE's case, a global) audience.

 

A really talented lap dancer has a better chance of being discovered and recruited into professional wrestling than a decorated athlete who is trying to decide between WWE/TNA and UFC/MMA.

 

While I applaud Vince McMahon and company's decision to launch the careers of several new superstars on the Tuesday night SyFy program, WWE still faces the daunting task of figuring out where to find the next generation of either athletes to be trained or performers to be groomed for the main roster.

 

The "recruitment" process in both WWE and TNA is not just lacking, it's non-existent. In WWE, "they" wait for "you" to chase the opportunity of working for the dominant market leader in sports entertainment.

 

In other words, if you don't call them, they won't call you.

 

Just a few years ago, Jim Ross would send memo after memo to Vince and Stephanie (and even to Executive Producer Kevin Dunn) practically begging the company to devote more time, effort, and resources to an active recruitment process, much like the NFL, NBA, and Major League Baseball.

 

"If we don't address this problem now," JR once said in a passionate pitch on Air McMahon, "we're going to pay a heavy price for ignoring the situation in 5 years."

 

By the way, that was about ... oh... 5 years ago.

 

This is not an indictment of JR's successor in the Talent Relations department, John Laurainaitis. His hands are tied. His department is under the direction of Stephanie McMahon-LeVesque, and despite the fact the Chairman understands"new, unique, different," Vince has screwed up when it comes to the matter of finding and developing new styles and the superstars who will define those new ways of presenting the age old product.

 

As for TNA, what can I write here that hasn't already been said, over and over and over and over and over again?

 

TNA has spent more time promoting the fact their ring is six-sided, and advertising the anti-climatic debuts of former WWE color commentators than they have invested in the discovery of exciting new superstars who can capture the public's attention. TNA-branded (an oxymoron if there every was one) headliner Samoa Joe turns heel so he can be the subservient second banana to former WWE main eventer Kurt Angle on TNA's television

show. Then, Joe does nothing to make the audience hate him. Nothing to make the audience view him with contempt. Nothing to make the audience have disdain for his character. Nothing to make the TNA fan base want to pay to see him get his ass kicked, his face smashed, his shoulders pinned to the mat.

 

For crying out loud, didn't anyone in pro wrestling learn from Brock Lesnar at UFC 100?

 

To make matters even worse, TNA had Taz(z?) on deck, ready to debut, and now there was no reason to anticipate the contributions the former ECW Champion and superb Smackdown commentator could make to TNA, because he was the non-mysterious mystery man, coming in to advise someone that just gave up his fan base to be Kurt Angle's newest bitch on television.

 

Maybe Joe will move in with Jeff Jarrett and people will be more interested in THAT than in anything happening on TNA television or pay per views.

 

Can you imagine what the Return On Investment for TNA would have been if the company spent that kind of energy and imagination (or lack thereof) on a new talent that had never been exposed to their national cable audience? Where's the next top guy going to come from? What's the next new style to be implemented? How many times has this been said and written, ad naseum, until WWE and TNA wake up and realize the "first time clashes" between those in the top tier is wearing thin because fewer and fewer talents are in the mix to even have the opportunity to be moved up to the main events?

 

Here's a perfect example of the arrogance shown by both WWE and TNA.

 

Dragon Gate USA debuts tomorrow in Philadelphia at the world's most famous converted bingo hall. I wrote about this in THE UK SUN on April 15th. The Dragon Gate promotion, which features a mix of Japanese strong style wrestling, high flying lucha libre, and even a dash of WWE crowd psychology, is a youth-oriented, high energy, exhilarating product that can boast of almost 100% consumer satisfaction. heir shows, simply stated, are blow-away, and the paying audiences love the product.

 

And yet, when I spoke with my old assistant Gabe Sapolsky, who is now the go-to guy as the VP of Dragon Gate USA, he told me he hasn't received a single call from anyone in WWE or TNA regarding dropping by the show to scout talent.

 

Broadway producers check out Off-Broadway plays. Talk show talent coordinators scour the comedy clubs for a breakthrough act. Football, baseball, and basketball scouts bribe, cajole, blackmail, coerce, and BS their way into talking with high school players, let alone college hoop stars. Dragon-Gate-StoryBut professional wrestling, ever the closed society, can't be bothered to check out a cutting edge young promotion with a great relationship with its consumer base, and a roster full of innovative stars that understand how to interact with the crowd.

 

Does any of this make sense to you?

 

Dragon Kid, whose work in the ring defines the style of the promotion in the same way Rey Mysterio was the embodiment of a then-modern lucha style when ECW first brought him and Psicosis in to the world of Extreme, is in one of the main events against Masato Yoshino. Look for this match to have the buzz the day after the show.

 

Shingo, a former powerlifter who emerged as Dragon Gate's top star when CIMA was injured in 2008, will wrestle Naruki Doi, who many feel is being positioned as the new top star today. CIMA will team with Susumu Yokosuka against The Young Bucks, who have been building their reputation on both the California and Northeast independent scenes.

 

Then there's Kenn Doane, the former "Kenny Dykstra" and leader of the "Spirit Squad." This 6'2'', 220 pound veteran is crashing solidly into his 23rd or 24th birthday soon. What a has-been. There's no future there, right? I mean, what if he has his head on straight, and is still showing the same promise that had everyone comparing him to Randy Orton when Randy first hit the main roster? Why check out his work, his backstage demeanor, his interaction with the crowd? He only has 15 or 20 years of being a "top guy" to offer WWE and TNA. Neither company needs someone like that, right?

 

Why bother checking out any talent away from the structured "television days," when you know he (or she) is in "best behavior" mode, because that performer is clearly at an audition? Why should anyone see what that performer is like backstage and in the ring ... when he's on his own ... left to his own devices?

 

The time has come for both World Wrestling Entertainment and TNA to stop only worrying about the next pay per view, and how this upcoming week's television show builds to it. A long range, 5 year plan is needed by both companies. How much longer can HHH be counted on to be the Wrestlemania main event? Will Undertaker and Shawn Michaels be able to have another match in 5 years that compares to the all time classic they presented this year? Is TNA counting on Kurt Angle, Sting, and Mick Foley to be the poster boys for the product in the year 2014?

 

If the response to any of the above questions is "NO," then the obvious follow up is "what are you going to do about it?" And that answer, to be blunt, is the most pressing issue facing both WWE and TNA today.

 

Thomas Jefferson was once approached by a member of his staff, who wanted to plant trees in the backyard of the President's residence. The next morning, as legend would have it, Jefferson had everyone out of bed by 4:30 am because "we have to start planting immediately!"

 

When a staffer cried out, "but Mr. President, it will take 100 years for these trees to fully grow," Jefferson shot back "all the more reason we need to start working on this project right this very second."

 

Memo to Vince and Dixie: Start working on this project, now. 2014 is a lot sooner than you think.

[Hyde Hill]

ehm you could have just given the link. I had already read it and was more curious on your thoughts on it.

[FINisher]

Heyman is a genious. And that pretty much points the problem in both promotions: Lack of new stars. TNA seems to be much worse in this one since they just keep licking the veterans behinds all the time. Can you imagina TNA and WWE in 2014?

 

WWE: The Undertaker, HBK, HHH.. Kane are highly likely gone from being active wrestlers. Jericho isn't getting any younger either. Altough, HBK, HHH and Jericho would make great, awesome managers to any young and upcoming star. I've always seen Triple H as a some sort of GM or a convincing manager.

 

TNA: The whole MEM, basicly. Nash, Steiner, Booker T, Angle, Sting.. Even just in a year or two. Then what? Back to Joe, Daniels, Styles, Beer Money.. Altough they have lost their identity and momentum and it'll take a god damn long time for TNA to forget the travesty that happened whenTNA signed every ex-WWE star.

 

I wish that Heyman would come back to wrestling. I've read that he won't "ever" but.. I can dream can I.

[MattitudeV2]

ehm you could have just given the link. I had already read it and was more curious on your thoughts on it.

 

Well,... I definitley argee with him look at how lackadazical both WWE and TNA developmental department

 

Let's at guys that could be stars in the WWE who are not their now

 

Mistico- High flying young talent he is only 26 (eight years younger than Mysterio) also (4 years older than Evan Bourne)

 

Kenny Doane-Young but still a solidfied veteran at 23 years old, he has been compared to Orton^ if pleased could be a great find

 

Takeshi Morishima-Solid performer could become a great Monster if given right push.

 

Naomichi Marafuji-A Great Wrestling Talent and could help Yoshi Tatsu or put TNA over with the Japanese Audience.

[Remianen]

Yeah, I saw this and he's very right. If Ken Doane winds up being a top guy for DGUSA, his price is going WAY up if only because he'll have more options (like working DG and other promotions in Japan).

 

WWE's problem is, they don't really have too many people not already in the main event that fit the body type they're best known for. Sure, you have Jack Swagger.....but then what? Everyone else is either a "little guy" or similarly too old or brittle to be counted on regularly (like Batista, who is both old and brittle).

 

TNA is just hopeless. I can't help but imagine their creative meetings start and end with everyone standing and shouting, "WCW is dead! LONG LIVE WCW!". The saddest part is that they actually have great young talent on the roster. They just misuse it all constantly.

 

But, I think it's unfair comparing them to organized sports leagues and their scouting techniques. While it might sound great to have that kind of system in place, the problem is turnover. Pro sports have TONS of it every single year. So they have to be able to replenish their ranks constantly. Wrestling promotions don't tend to have that kind of turnover. With so many workers seemingly firmly entrenched in their spots (Taker, Michaels, especially Triple H), the turnover isn't nearly on the same level. You wind up having to release someone and then have him headline and fully blossom somewhere else (hi Christian!). Then you bring him back and he's still stuck against that glass ceiling due to lack of roster turnover.

 

Great article though. Here's the link: http://heymanhustle.craveonline.com/blogs/21208-paul-heyman-wwe-and-tna-fail-the-future

[The Final Countdown]

Even just in a year or two. Then what? Back to Joe, Daniels, Styles, Beer Money..

Daniels turns 38 at the end of this year. He's not exactly a "next generation" kind of guy. But yeah, both promotions are in dire need of some fresh blood at the top of the card. TNA especially.

[The Shape]

You mention Christian...for me it's insane WWE haven't pushed him higher than they have, he's hugely over. The problem is the gulf between the superstars like Cena and Triple H and everyone else; nobody on mid/uppermid card can convincingly even get anywhere near them. They tried to get Kennedy to that level numerous times and it somehow didn't work, Lashley burned them, they've lost a lot of talent but even guys like MVP...they don't seem to have any idea how to get them to the top.

 

Which is where for me one of the main problems, booking wise, comes in. Money in the bank. Sure it's provided some great moments and really helped elevate edge in particular, but right now it seems like it's the ONLY way they can think of to help somebody take that step up. Why book feuds for midcarders at mania when you can just toss eight of them in there? Then whichever one wins will get his shot and maybe he'll stick, but more likely he just won't be given the time.

 

Furthermore in the midcard there's a huge lack of characters...more and more people are just being portrayed like...normal guys who are professional wrestlers. They can entertain, but there's nothing about their role that is entertaining. It's just all so badly done. Heyman is of course right but even with the talent WWE and TNA have they should be able to create tons of new stars, but they won't. Raw doesn't even book midcarders in matches with main eventers, it's the same old **** week after week.

[The Two]

The one thing I'll say for TNA, is that I'm pretty sure in the next few months they're going to turn Matt Morgan into a megastar. The guy is full of potential, and the fact WWE ever let a guy with his look and ability get away is mind-boggling.

 

Seriously though, I'm predicting Morgan going over Angle at BFG.

[Moderndaywarrior]

TNA at times,seems to me alomst like "The Death of WCW: A Live Re-Enactment"....doing pretty much almost the same exact things WCW did in their dying days,with almost darn near the exact same people doing them too.

 

Overall though,it's probably the end result of going national in the way Vince did.WWE's booking really hasn't changed THAT much.....if we go all the way back to the 60's you have Bruno Sammartino...big guy,good look and for years it was "Everyone loves Bruno! Oh no,it's a really mean,tough bad guy,we're not sure our hero can beat him!".....come ahead 20 years and you have Hogan....big guy,good look...."Everyone loves The Hulkster!Oh no,it's a really mean,tough bad guy,we're not sure our hero can beat him!"....20 more years you have Cena,I'm sure you get the point by now.

 

WCW was similar but went the "heel" route.....going back to the MACW days and Buddy Rogers to Harley Race to Ric Flair to Hulk Hogan...the big deal was "Oh my,that champ is such an arrogant loudmouth cheater,everyone wants to see him get beat up!Yay,here comes a really tough good guy,I'll bet he can beat the champ and shut him up!" Heck,even Bischoff's "genius" idea of The N.W.O was mostly just an updated Four Horseman.

 

The difference (and why it worked years ago but not now) is national exposure: In "The Old Days",except for a few supremely talented folks,most guys just "toured the territories".....You'd have Ivan Koloff show up and threaten Bruno,after Bruno won the big match,Ivan would disappear(usually off to Georgia for Jim Barnett or the Carolinas for Jim Crockett,Sr.) for a while;the WWWF fans weren't seeing him work those promotions because they were outside their "territory"...so they'd forget all about Koloff...then 6 months or a year later ol' Ivan would show up again to threaten Bruno,the fans would be like "Oh yeah,I remember this guy,he almost won before,this time he's even tougher!"....WCW/MACW did the same only it would be a face like Wahoo McDaniel.Since fans werent' familiar with guys who worked outside their area,each new wrestler was kind of like a blank slate.....the guy who did nothing but lose all the time in Georgia could be the next big thing in Texas,because most fans didn't know that he was previously just a "jobber in georgia"

 

Now,with every guy being plastered on TV over the whole country once a week,people know who they are and what they were doing,making it nearly impossible to "re-invent" someone.Remember when Paul Roma was a Horseman?It was terrible,but one of the big reasons why.....because just weeks before becoming a member of "the most elite organization in sports" the whole country had spent years seeing Roma,for the most part, get beat by pretty much anyone and everyone in the WWF.....instantly turning his "membership" into a joke,and consequently making The Four Horsemen look weak("The best WCW can manage is WWF rejects"....sound familiar?).Had this been done when only a select few people in their fanbase knew who Roma was and his history,it probably would have gone over much better than it did.

 

Not enough young talent? I agree,both promotions have fallen into the old "We'll just bring someone in everyone already knows and use him" trap,with a good dose of "We're the only game in town" syndrome.Again,in "the old days" top talent would leave when they got stale or whatever,and often it would leave a gap in the roster,promoters back then weren't always able to just call in some guy from two territories over and run with it.They would often just look at their current talent and who they could "make" into their next top guy......many times it worked great and turned out new talent(Dusty Rhodes,Magnum T.A.,JYD),many times it didn't (Scott Casey,Outback Jack,Tom McGee),but at least people were getting a shot and if nothing else it kept the talent pool fresh,as compared to now when much of wrestling has gotten to the point of "Been there,done that" from fans.

 

Even during the era of The Monday Night Wars and a combined 10 or so hours of WWF/WCW programming a week,this "old fashioned" approach still worked for ECW....nearly every "modern" fan remembers the original ECW as being good....a big reason why.....For the large portion,they brought in many guys fans pretty much had never heard of before(or had little to no name value and hence weren't remembered) and knew nothing about,molded them into what they wanted the audience's perception of them to be,then let them work(maybe a little TOO much,as the constant hardcore stuff hurt wrestling in the long run,IMO).

[Hive]

I'm sure we can all agree that Heyman has some good points. Still, it's easy for someone who ran his promotion into the grounds - after never really having turned over a sizeable profit - to tell the big guys how to run their company...

 

Do I think WWE and TNA puts out a product worth watching? No. WWE is lame, silly, childish and stale as hell. TNA is confusing and trying to emulate the worst parts of WCW.

 

But would I find them more interesting if they brought in a bunch of new people with barbed wire and baseball bats and had them blade in every match? No, not really.

[Self]

I'm sure we can all agree that Heyman has some good points. Still, it's easy for someone who ran his promotion into the grounds - after never really having turned over a sizeable profit - to tell the big guys how to run their company...

 

Do I think WWE and TNA puts out a product worth watching? No. WWE is lame, silly, childish and stale as hell. TNA is confusing and trying to emulate the worst parts of WCW.

 

But would I find them more interesting if they brought in a bunch of new people with barbed wire and baseball bats and had them blade in every match? No, not really.

 

You killed your argument with that last bit. Clearly you don't understand what ECW was, which is a shame because early on you had a fair point. It's easy to be a backseat driver, or an armchair booker, and insult what the big promotions are doing. Fact is, they're turning a profit, and that's what matters at the end of the day. ECW died because of money.

 

In other news, I spent most of my day watching episode after episode of ROH on HDnet. Awesome time. When I watched the first half-dozen episodes, I got bored fast, but I dunno, maybe it was just the recent selection. Black/Danielson Part 3 was better than most Smackdown matches. Steen, Generico & Kenta vs American Wolves & Chris Hero was sick by the end. Lots of "OH!" moments, which is what I remember most from ECW.

 

Plus, new guys I don't really know. Yesterday, I couldn't pick Kenta out of a line-up. Now I'd pay to go see him kick someone's face in. ROH works for me.

 

P.S. Dragon Gate USA has me excited. I know nothing about the matches, and will definitely steer clear of spoilers, but it sounds pretty cool.

[Bigpapa42]

Its kind of odd that I enjoy complaining about something I still turn around and dedicate my time to watching... But both companies have issues right now. I've said that before (somewhere).... but WWE is aimed at kids now. Its not the only issue I have with them, but its a big one. I understand it, I accept it, I just don't like it. TNA, I believe, is aimed at a demographic like me... but apparently the TNA booking team think I have an IQ in the single digits.

 

TNA has most of the future of the promotion already in TNA. Yet what are they doing? This Main Event Mafia storyline is the perfect opportunity to build new stars and put the next generation at the top. Its been running for nearly a year now and how many workers has it elevated? Zero. None. No one, to me, is clearly well above where they were in the past. Great work, there.

[Hive]

You killed your argument with that last bit. Clearly you don't understand what ECW was, which is a shame because early on you had a fair point. It's easy to be a backseat driver, or an armchair booker, and insult what the big promotions are doing. Fact is, they're turning a profit, and that's what matters at the end of the day. ECW died because of money.

 

I think my final point was fair, though exaggerated for effect: Heyman doesn't know what the mainstream audience wants. Never did. Sure, he could make a lot of old ECW-fans veeery happy if he took over WWE or TNA - but would either company be more mainstream succesful with him at the helm? Doubtful.

 

It's funny to me that it's always failed promoters like Heyman and Cornette who raise their voices to tell WWE and TNA what they're doing wrong... wrestling is a business - and businesses need to make money.

[Remianen]

I'm sure we can all agree that Heyman has some good points. Still, it's easy for someone who ran his promotion into the grounds - after never really having turned over a sizeable profit - to tell the big guys how to run their company...

 

Do I think WWE and TNA puts out a product worth watching? No. WWE is lame, silly, childish and stale as hell. TNA is confusing and trying to emulate the worst parts of WCW.

 

But would I find them more interesting if they brought in a bunch of new people with barbed wire and baseball bats and had them blade in every match? No, not really.

 

Hive, just so you know, as Self pointed out, you started out well but then ended your post with fail.

 

Apparently, you haven't a clue as to what ECW was. Every match wasn't a hardcore overbooked spotfest. In fact, most of them weren't. But you watch four matches and think the entire promotion is based on that.

 

Lemme ask you a question. How would the wrestling landscape look today if Paul Heyman had a benefactor who was willing to eat years of multimillion dollar losses before the company even stood a chance of breaking even? Don't act like TNA has never been in financial trouble. If not for Dixie, they would've gone under years and years ago (before Spike ever entered the picture since WWE was still there). Heyman did what he could with what he had and excelled at it. He did it so well, his bigger competitors ripped him off and copied most of what he was doing in that bingo hall. Can you say TNA is doing the same thing? I can't. Two of the biggest stars in WWE history got their opportunity to show what they could do if given the chance....in ECW. Would Vince really have let Steve Austin or Mick Foley shoot like Paul did? Or would he have saddled them with lame gimmicks (like he did anyway, see The Ringmaster & Dude Love) and wasted their talent, like he's done so many times before?

 

Out of everyone in the industry, Paul Heyman probably has the most respect and creative capital because he innovated, he rarely duplicated. Some of wrestling's best characters of the last 20 years came from him, either directly or by proxy (i.e. him giving workers a chance to really develop their ideas). You can knock him for ECW's demise all you want, but it is extremely rare for a person to succeed their first time out. Most of the US's most prominent businesses (and their founders) are testament to that. Hell, ask Alexander Graham Bell or Thomas Edison (or look them up). You have to take chances that most people aren't willing to take. Real easy to collect a paycheck making someone else rich, far harder to make it happen yourself. Heyman took chances, he was probably one of the first truly successful creative entrepreneurs in the industry (along with early Vince after he took over from Jess). Not everyone turns out like Google did.

 

Edit: What? Do you think the Attitude era's concepts were Vince's brainchildren?

[shamelessposer]

I think my final point was fair, though exaggerated for effect: Heyman doesn't know what the mainstream audience wants. Never did. Sure, he could make a lot of old ECW-fans veeery happy if he took over WWE or TNA - but would either company be more mainstream succesful with him at the helm? Doubtful.

 

Are you denying that a company needs to slowly introduce newer and younger talent, so that they might be able to have more than two people in their main event under the age of forty? Heyman's point has nothing to do with the "barbed wire and baseball bats" you mentioned in an attempt to dismiss the opinion of someone who knows better than you. It's valid criticism that's applicable to any business on the planet.

 

It's funny to me that it's always failed promoters like Heyman and Cornette who raise their voices to tell WWE and TNA what they're doing wrong... wrestling is a business - and businesses need to make money.

 

Heyman and Cornette view the wrestling business from two entirely different points of view. They can't stand to be in the same room as one another. And yet the one consistent message between the two is "push the new guys!" There is a reason for this.

 

By the way, Smackdown under Heyman's booking was pulling higher ratings than Raw was at that time, despite Raw being on a network reached by more homes. John Cena and CM Punk were each considered "Heyman projects" early in their WWE tenures. I'd say that Heyman does have some idea what the mainstream wants.

[Stennick]

By the way, Smackdown under Heyman's booking was pulling higher ratings than Raw was at that time, despite Raw being on a network reached by more homes. John Cena and CM Punk were each considered "Heyman projects" early in their WWE tenures.

 

 

For the record UPN was considered a major network thus reaching WAY more homes than Spike did. The ratings for network and cable are not the same.

[shamelessposer]

For the record UPN was considered a major network thus reaching WAY more homes than Spike did. The ratings for network and cable are not the same.

 

UPN had major gaps in its coverage throughout the country. I believe Spike was actually capable of reaching more homes in 2002.

[Hive]

Hive, just so you know, as Self pointed out, you started out well but then ended your post with fail.

 

Apparently, you haven't a clue as to what ECW was. Every match wasn't a hardcore overbooked spotfest. In fact, most of them weren't. But you watch four matches and think the entire promotion is based on that.

 

Lemme ask you a question. How would the wrestling landscape look today if Paul Heyman had a benefactor who was willing to eat years of multimillion dollar losses before the company even stood a chance of breaking even? Don't act like TNA has never been in financial trouble. If not for Dixie, they would've gone under years and years ago (before Spike ever entered the picture since WWE was still there). Heyman did what he could with what he had and excelled at it. He did it so well, his bigger competitors ripped him off and copied most of what he was doing in that bingo hall. Can you say TNA is doing the same thing? I can't. Two of the biggest stars in WWE history got their opportunity to show what they could do if given the chance....in ECW. Would Vince really have let Steve Austin or Mick Foley shoot like Paul did? Or would he have saddled them with lame gimmicks (like he did anyway, see The Ringmaster & Dude Love) and wasted their talent, like he's done so many times before?

 

Out of everyone in the industry, Paul Heyman probably has the most respect and creative capital because he innovated, he rarely duplicated. Some of wrestling's best characters of the last 20 years came from him, either directly or by proxy (i.e. him giving workers a chance to really develop their ideas). You can knock him for ECW's demise all you want, but it is extremely rare for a person to succeed their first time out. Most of the US's most prominent businesses (and their founders) are testament to that. Hell, ask Alexander Graham Bell or Thomas Edison (or look them up). You have to take chances that most people aren't willing to take. Real easy to collect a paycheck making someone else rich, far harder to make it happen yourself. Heyman took chances, he was probably one of the first truly successful creative entrepreneurs in the industry (along with early Vince after he took over from Jess). Not everyone turns out like Google did.

 

Edit: What? Do you think the Attitude era's concepts were Vince's brainchildren?

 

Hey, it's not because I'm Vince's biggest fan and hate Heyman or anything. And whether I get ECW (the old one's) product right or not is besides the point. What *is* the point is that Heyman's product cathered to a fairly small portion of the wrestling fans of USA and never would have achieved mainstream success even if it had run till today. I'm not disputing that Heyman was good at finding new, fresh people and giving them a chance, giving them their breakthrough. But obviously, that ability alone does not a successful company make.

 

Make Heyman head of talent recruitment but keep him away from the overall running of a promotion...

[Stennick]

It was estimated in 2003 that UPN was viewable by 85.98% of all households, reaching 91,689,290 houses in the United States. UPN had approximately 143 full-power owned-and-operated or primary affiliate stations in the U.S. and another 65 stations aired some UPN programming as secondary affiliates.

 

After a bit of research is shows UPN was available in 03 in essentially 86 percent of houses. The only number I could find for Spike T.V is that it just recently reached 100 million homes. I can pretty much bet that in 2002 it was nearly exactly the same amount of homes as UPN at the time.

 

So for arguments sake lets say they reached the same amount of homes. I could find one possibly two cases of SD beating RAW in all of 2002 and 2003 with them basically reaching the same amount of homes.

 

So although SD didn't lose any viewers they didn't gain any during Heyman's assumed booking from about what Sept or Oct of 02 into sometime in 03 possibly?

[Hive]

Are you denying that a company needs to slowly introduce newer and younger talent, so that they might be able to have more than two people in their main event under the age of forty?

 

No. I never denied the sense in claim. And I apologize to all you Heyman fanboys who are offended because I dare to challenge his holyness... but I'm just trying to point out that if running a successfull wrestling promotion was all about elevating younger talent and that success could be achieved if only they listened to Heyman - then how come that recipe did not work wonders for his own company? I'm saying that there's probably more to running a national promotion than just the obvious, and that Heyman in all fairness doesn't know what it takes to run a such. There may be bigger concerns that he's not aware of.

 

Seriously, while one can argue that many of the WWE and TNA frontmen are raging morons (Russo comes to mind) - they can't all be. They can't all be ignorant to the fact that the business needs new blood. So why aren't they just mega pushing people like AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Jack Swagger et all - if it's that easy?

[The Masked Orange]

No. I never denied the sense in claim. And I apologize to all you Heyman fanboys who are offended because I dare to challenge his holyness... but I'm just trying to point out that if running a successfull wrestling promotion was all about elevating younger talent and that success could be achieved if only they listened to Heyman - then how come that recipe did not work wonders for his own company? I'm saying that there's probably more to running a national promotion than just the obvious, and that Heyman in all fairness doesn't know what it takes to run a such. There may be bigger concerns that he's not aware of.

 

Seriously, while one can argue that many of the WWE and TNA frontmen are raging morons (Russo comes to mind) - they can't all be. They can't all be ignorant to the fact that the business needs new blood. So why aren't they just mega pushing people like AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Jack Swagger et all - if it's that easy?

 

Too many flawed statements... Must refrain from lecture...

[shamelessposer]

No. I never denied the sense in claim. And I apologize to all you Heyman fanboys who are offended because I dare to challenge his holyness... but I'm just trying to point out that if running a successfull wrestling promotion was all about elevating younger talent and that success could be achieved if only they listened to Heyman - then how come that recipe did not work wonders for his own company? I'm saying that there's probably more to running a national promotion than just the obvious, and that Heyman in all fairness doesn't know what it takes to run a such. There may be bigger concerns that he's not aware of.

 

"Yes, Heyman is right... but HEYMAN FANBOY WHARRGARBL!"

[Hyde Hill]

Ok first of all that Heyman fanboy holiness line goes way too far.

 

Heyman is a good booker and has a sharp mind when it comes too booking a show. Just keep him away from handling money and he gives a good and exciting product.

 

The failure financially of ECW had many reasons but one was not the quality of the booking. The catering too a too small segment statement is straight from Vince's mouth on the rise and fall of ecw docu. The ratings ECW got in its limited t.v. run where fine by all accounts and if the deal would have been honoured and would have lasted longer ECW would have had a good chance of remaining viable.

 

Heyman is great at elevating new workers and turning them into superstars and recognising which workers have that potential. Lesnar/Punk/Cena are most recent examples. In this blog he never states that it is all about elevating youngsters but he is looking long term that if you do not do it enough or in a timely fassion you will pay the price.

 

If Heyman had the chance now and wanted to do so and has good financial backing and someone with financial expertise to handle that size of things he would pretty much be gaurenteed to be succesfull even if it would never get to a level of the E he could make it a profitable niche product.

 

Heyman is far from perfect and he has his flaws but he has one of the sharpest minds in the bussiness that is actually from the bussiness. Him and Cornette would actually make a perfect booking team as they balance eachother out they just need a third guy in the middle to mediate.

 

And please Orange lecture hehe as I am sure I have held back and missed a couple of points.

[The Masked Orange]

And please Orange lecture hehe as I am sure I have held back and missed a couple of points.

 

It's a bad habit I'm trying to cut out

 

But what I will say is that what Heyman said in the article, and why Hive doesn't care about his opinoin (The Financial crumble of ECW) have nearly nothing in common.

 

The booking of a company doesn't equal Financial success. If the Booking God was given ECW from when Heyman started having trouble, he'd of had to of asked for an extension for the rent on Booking Heaven. Let's put it that way.

[Eisen-verse]

This is a personal view of mine, however, if TNA really wants to get serious about putting together a great show filled with good characters, edgier storylines (Which they try), and doing something that lands in your face....

 

Give a large large contract to Paul Heyman and give him a heavy amount of control. Sure, he ran ECW into the ground... However, from a creative stand-point, he understands wrestling at its best.

 

If he were to be signed tomorrow, and given a large amount of control over creative, then I would become a devoted TNA fan in a matter of a few shows.