A 2000 WCW Nitro Review

[sabataged]

I couldn't help but laugh my ass off after reading this and comparing a lot of it to TNA.

 

http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/video_reviews/126280/Dark-Pegasus-Video-Review:-WCW-Monday-Nitro-(04-10-00).htm

[Hive]

Impact wasn't as bad as that in any sense.

 

Btw, what was that JJ Dillon reference?

[tristram]

I only read half way, but frankly, I didn't think it was as bad as the report made out. The only insider reference I didn't get was JJ Dillon (although I hate inside references as a general rule). The rest was fine. The writer going on about the old guys showing up late... well that was precisely the point from what I'm reading and remembering, its a reflection of their characters attitudes. I read a few of these reviews on all the promotions, inevitably only the 'net favourites of the day get the high ratings, and the rest is deplored. And usually we're told how it was so much better 5 years ago and how great the Under 22's all are and how its a tragedy how they're all booked. You'd think some of these 'net writers are asking for Ali-Foreman in the ring and Clarke Gable and Vivien Leigh from Gone with the Wind in entertainment skills.

 

The things I didn't like about that show and that era of WCW:

 

* The continued shoot references from the bookers, wrestlers and commentators which kinda undersold the value of the matches at all. Indeed, the references made by Hudson in this are silly. Commentators are there to add spice, information, believability, not tell fans that something they're watching just isn't real, which essentially the allowance of shoot material says is the case.

 

* Vince Russo's over the topness. Don't mind the passion, telling people what he sets out to do, but some times some of his comments had you thinking again, that this was so not real and it was just political manipulation. Pro wrasslin is supposed to have the ability to suspend your disbelief and draw you in. To remove that suspense and just show you its a hoax destroys the stigma in my eyes.

 

* The WHC merry-go-round. No value in the belt already, but then emphatically destroyed by Arquette and Russo.

 

* Poor production values.

 

Otherwise, there was some sweet stuff in this era for those who pick through it. Team Canada, Diamond Dallas Kanyon, Kanyon Cutter's everywhere etc.

[jwt13]

I really dont agree with this guy but he has some points. I did like WCW in the dieing days and while Russo was booking he is not the reason WCW is died he had hits and misses but who doesnt WCW started dieing a little before Russo came in I like the storyline were Flair Steiner and Animal were together with Jarrett and ended Goldberg at SIN that was the best in the last days of WCW when Steiner was WCW Champion

[Anderz]

i thought some of WCW 2000 was some of my favourite WCW...

 

I dont care if it was awful and everyone else thought it was awful.. I still enjoyed it.. I enjoyed Vampiro vs Sting.. Team Canada.. Steiner... Kanyon's turn.. the Thrillers.. Kidman beating Hogan.. I enjoyed loads of stuff..

 

ill admit that when compared to what the WWF was putting out at the same time, the WWF was miles better.. but that isnt the point..

[lazorbeak]

I only read half way, but frankly, I didn't think it was as bad as the report made out. The only insider reference I didn't get was JJ Dillon (although I hate inside references as a general rule). The rest was fine. The writer going on about the old guys showing up late... well that was precisely the point from what I'm reading and remembering, its a reflection of their characters attitudes.

 

Yeah, but the New Blood was a heel stable, wasn't it? I mean, nobody was cheering for Russo or Bischoff or Jarrett, so does that make the millionaire's club faces? If they're faces, why are they coming off like such idiots? Give the audience SOMEONE to cheer, you know? I mean, they want to cheer Hogan, Flair, Sting, and the rest because they know who those guys are and they care about them. So the whole "these guys have been holding everyone down" thing fails in two ways. First, it exposes the business for absolutely no reason: marks are supposed to think main eventers win because they are the best, and saying they're only there because they have all the power undermines everything audiences had been watching. Second, you've got the millionaire's club basically acting like heels, showing up late, acting like idiots, and generally proving the heels right. So at that point, the audience is basically just left to cheer the guys who they know.

 

 

Seriously, guys like Vince Russo DRASTICALLY overestimate the number of smarks in the audience. The truth is, most people want to believe it's "real," and the whole "work" and "shoot," insider call-outs and all the rest aimed purely at the 17 year old smark will never turn a profit. I mean yes, I got the Hogan bald-spot joke and the call-out to JJ Dillon (only because I read Mankind's book), and EWR told me Shane Douglas hates Ric Flair, so I "got" all of their little inside references, but I also never paid for a WCW pay per view in my life. I am a terrible demographic to market.

 

Russo and Bischoff somehow assumed the majority of their audience was "smart" and that they had to sell them some sort of super-convoluted post-modern wrestlecrap in order to keep the fans' attention, but even if they were right, there's two big problems with marketing to smarks:

1) Smarks are FAR more critical of every aspect of the show. Casual fans are the fans there for the race, Smarks are just there for the crashes.

2. Smarks don't spend any money! If you're internet savvy enough to know how much Douglas hates Flair and to know who Kevin Sullivan even is or why he and Benoit don't get along, did they really think you were going to open up your wallet and order a PPV at your freaking house?

 

I remember when Benoit and Jericho started feuding, thinking "man it'd be cool if they references their history in WCW." But looking back, why would WWE do that? They built their own feud that actually made sense based on what we saw on TV every week, and it was entertaining. Making a reference only a 1998 WCW fan would get 3 years later only benefits that super minority of fans that 1) get it and 2) care.

 

If TNA wants to ever be more a 2nd rate smark-factory, they need to explain what the hell they are talking about: just re-starting a 12 year old storyline from another promotion(!) without sufficient explanation for why its happening is basically selling directly to the people who will be critical of it and won't spend money to buy it.

[tristram]

You're right in what you say. I agree with that part of it. As I said, I don't like the 'shoot' comments or the inside comments because they devalue the ability to suspend belief. How can you suspend the belief when you're openly saying this is all a hoax and its all manipulated? To my way of thinking, you're supposed to be in that arena, or watching that show, with the ability to get drawn in. Eric Bischoff says on 'Monday Night Wars' that they did a market research project in which they found people wanted the ability to be shocked. I don't mind that, you don't want to be bored. But to me, you can only be truly shocked if you have some ability to suspend the belief. You can cut down the veil of secrecy and for two hours a week be drawn into it. Wrestling is an entertainment, much like say for instance a book is. But you'd never read Dickens, or Christie, or Steinbeck, or Verne, or Brown, or Lewis, or Twain, and have them openly come out and tell you not to believe, or imply you shouldn't believe in their tale because what they're righted really isn't real. So I agree with you, that to me is Russo's massive let down. The internet should be a promoter's dream to hook interactivity in, rather than shoulder people out who don't drill down for the extreme knowledge of the business.

[NWO4until01]

just on this whole russo shoot thing... here is the number one reason why russo is an absolute moron in my opinion.

 

sometime during 2000 (I think) buff bagwell had a match vs psychosis and came out and did an apparent shoot match where he wasnt his usual self, no-selling all of psychosis' hits and eventually falling on his knees and pointing to the back of his head for psychosis to kick and 1-2-3, basically telling the world its all fake. buff then proceeds to hammer russo on the mic about being forced to lose to hacks like psychosis. in steps jeff jarrett - who I think was making his first return/appearance (correct me if I'm wrong) in wcw - and hits him over the head with the cardboardy-easy-to-break guitar and bagwell is out cold! so at what point are we suddenly meant to switch from shoot mode to non-shoot? he's not selling moves the whole match and then jarrett's paper guitar puts him out cold? its as if we needed a batman-style "kapow" on the screen as jarrett struck buff to tell us we're back into regular mode. what on earth was russo thinking booking such rubbish!

 

its worth noting I'd long switched off by this stage of wcw's demise, I saw that match on youtube. I was gone shortly after the terrible 'powers that be' storyline commenced. but my opinion is that russo escapes a lot of criticism for the death of wcw with the 'the other problems were bigger' argument. yeah wcw was struggling, but he stepped in and dragged it down to life support. a better booker wouldve meant better ratings and the product could have survived the warner/aol deal and hopped networks.

[tristram]

Basically what you describe there does one of two things only - alienate half the fans (the 'net for wrestling use was certainly not as 'in' as it is now), and secondly, sell Psicosis to be a moron. I'm pretty sure from memory Buff says something like "Did I do a good enough job?" to the camera. Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.