justtxyank Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 But like I said it's not like the WWE hasn't protected people for worse offenses, or protected people that didn't make sense, even on a financial level, for them to protect. Who have the protected who had as much prior baggage and as little financial impact as Juvi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Who have the protected who had as much prior baggage and as little financial impact as Juvi? I meant it as a broader point. For example, remember when Scott Hall and Kevin Nash left the WWF? They still had some Wrestlemania bonus that the WWE could have given to them. However, this AFTER they told Vince they were going to jump to WCW. Guess what? Vince gave them their bonuses anyway. They weren't going to make Vince money anymore, and they were jumping to the WCW, so what financial sense is there? Also, do you recall that Vince gave money to Paul Heyman? For what? What did WWE stand to gain? Point is, WWE has protected people, even when it didn't make financial sense, and when it didn't necessarily benefit them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justtxyank Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 I meant it as a broader point. For example, remember when Scott Hall and Kevin Nash left the WWF? They still had some Wrestlemania bonus that the WWE could have given to them. However, this AFTER they told Vince they were going to jump to WCW. Guess what? Vince gave them their bonuses anyway. They weren't going to make Vince money anymore, and they were jumping to the WCW, so what financial sense is there? Also, do you recall that Vince gave money to Paul Heyman? For what? What did WWE stand to gain? Point is, WWE has protected people, even when it didn't make financial sense, and when it didn't necessarily benefit them. Two of the biggest stars in the business at the time being given contractual bonuses on their way out seems odd to you? Of course it makes financial sense. The last thing Vince wanted to do was do bad business by guys. On top of it, Nash and McMahon NEVER had a bad working relationship. They've been good friends which is why I laugh when people said Nash coming back recently was all about Triple H bringing back his boys. McMahon loves Nash and told him when he left he could always come back and have a job for life. That was good business because he believed in Nash's value to the company. He gave money to Paul Heyman and ECW because he saw business sense in keeping the small promotion active, running shows and building workers. It didn't hurt that they offered a lot of competition to WCW. None of these is even closely related to Juvi. A better example for you would be that they protected JBL for years despite him apparently assaulting people backstage, or Randy Orton sexually harassing divas. Problem though: they sold tickets for Vince. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steesh07 Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 When is Karma due to return? Anyone have any ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 When Scott Hall gave his notice to leave WWF, wouldn't you know they just happened to find a reason to suspend him for six-weeks, which took him off Wrestlemania XII, so he didn't get anything for that. Vince giving them their PPV money wasn't done out of anything other than because it was money they were owed. It wasn't like he had any legal basis to not pay them PPV money for shows they'd already worked on. Sure, he could have found a way to delay paying them or kicked up a fuss, but he didn't have much choice in the matter, so painting it as anything other than a contractually bound obligation is misleading. As for Vince 'giving money' to ECW, that was about $1500 a week to Heyman as a consultant and whilst a nice gesture, ECW being without that money wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference in the end. The argument that WWE have helped people out financially when they didn't have to, and had nothing to gain out of it, is true, but those examples are very bad ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 You see, I'm not too sure it was contractually guaranteed. Someone has implied (I forget who) that it was more of a "bonus" more than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 'Someone' doesn't know what they're talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 'Someone' doesn't know what they're talking about. I double checked.... Jim Cornette? He didn't outright say it, though, I think he suggest that they shouldn't be given, or at least question whether the bonuses shouldn't have been given. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantabulous Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 You work a show for WWE, you get paid. The amount might be questioned and whether you were 'deserving' of getting paid might be questioned, but you still get paid at the end of day regardless of whether people think you deserve it or not or if they think you got too much or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 You work a show for WWE, you get paid. The amount might be questioned and whether you were 'deserving' of getting paid might be questioned, but you still get paid at the end of day regardless of whether people think you deserve it or not or if they think you got too much or not. That's not the point here, though. I don't really care that Hall or Nash got paid, (even if Cornette does). The point is, the WWE has done financially inexplicable things before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Century Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 That's not the point here, though. I don't really care that Hall or Nash got paid, (even if Cornette does). The point is, the WWE has done financially inexplicable things before. Yes, but other than those examples, I can't think of any other times where WWE has done things that financially don't make sense. And like someone said before, those aren't really good examples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Yes, but other than those examples, I can't think of any other times where WWE has done things that financially don't make sense. And like someone said before, those aren't really good examples. Maybe you can't think of any examples, but someone else can. Also, it's "your opinion" that they aren't really good examples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Century Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Maybe you can't think of any examples, but someone else can. Also, it's "your opinion" that they aren't really good examples. True, true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djthefunkchris Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Maybe you can't think of any examples, but someone else can. Also, it's "your opinion" that they aren't really good examples. You did all that just to get a totally different point accross! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Yes, but other than those examples, I can't think of any other times where WWE has done things that financially don't make sense. And like someone said before, those aren't really good examples. Well there was the WBF, the XFL, and WWE Films (Not WWE Home Video but the actual company that puts out all of those crappy John Cena movies. Now granted I do not know if they actually make money at WWE Films, I just have to believe that given the quality of said films they probably do not make much of a profit off of it.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 I know I'm probably alone in this, but I really hope it's awhile before Undertaker comes back. I've been so sick of him for years. Not dealing with his boring promos and long ass entrance this year has been awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basmat01 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Yes, but other than those examples, I can't think of any other times where WWE has done things that financially don't make sense. And like someone said before, those aren't really good examples. WWE does pay for the rehab of ALL former talent regardless of who it is and thats something they dont have to do. I hear Scott Hall has run up a pretty high bill. http://corporate.wwe.com/news/rehabilitation/summary.jsp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurningHamster Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Random thing that is annoying me lately. Challengers are meant to come out first, champs second. WWE seems to be doing the babyfaces second thing whether they are champs or not ... but not even being that consistent with it. WTF?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Wolf Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 WWE does pay for the rehab of ALL former talent regardless of who it is and thats something they dont have to do. I hear Scott Hall has run up a pretty high bill. http://corporate.wwe.com/news/rehabilitation/summary.jsp This isn't inexplicable this is positive PR. They don't have to do something they apparently are doing out of the kindness of their hearts to counteract a problem long though rampant in the wrestling world. Now they get to say hey look we know there's a problem and we care we're gonna try and help out whatever way we can. So basically the money they pay for these rehab sessions is positive PR for their company, far from inexplicable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Random thing that is annoying me lately. Challengers are meant to come out first, champs second. WWE seems to be doing the babyfaces second thing whether they are champs or not ... but not even being that consistent with it. WTF?? Glad I'm not the only person that this bothers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampulator Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 I agree-It's good form to have come out after the heels, except when title holder vs. challenger. In that case, regardless of push or alignment, title holder always goes out last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killagy Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Randy Orton Suffers Back Injury At SmackDown Tapings Bad break for Orton, he's expected to miss WrestleMania. Wonder how badly the creative team is going to react to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakerNGN74 Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Random thing that is annoying me lately. Challengers are meant to come out first, champs second. WWE seems to be doing the babyfaces second thing whether they are champs or not ... but not even being that consistent with it. WTF?? Yeah it bothers me too and its really minor so it shouldnt but it does because I grew up in 90's and back then champions always came out last no matter if they were a face or a heel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldStingberg Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Randy Orton Suffers Back Injury At SmackDown Tapings Bad break for Orton, he's expected to miss WrestleMania. Wonder how badly the creative team is going to react to this. Orton, Christian, Henry, Del Rio, Mysterio, and Sin Cara are all injured right now. It's probably good news for Sheamus, though. I imagine he'll feud with Barrett now, which is certainly better than repeatedly squashing Jinder Mahal and doing bits with Hornswoggle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tha Black Phenom Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Yeah it bothers me too and its really minor so it shouldnt but it does because I grew up in 90's and back then champions always came out last no matter if they were a face or a heel. There were still some moments where they did differently, though.. if I remember, Rock came out first in his WM15 match against Austin. So overall I'm really not bothered by this aspect anymore. Though it would be nice to have the heel champ come out last more often. Time to pull the trigger on Sheamus, can't believe how long that guy's been floating around in the middle for. I swear, it's been like over three PPVs this year where he stepped in for an impromptu PPV match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.