Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
Who Killed WCW?
Eric Bischoff
Hulk Hogan
Vince Russo
Jerusalem
View Results
 
  • Post
  • Reply
go speed racer go
Dec 11, 2006

~wat it do, dough~

Edge & Christian posted:

Because I like going back and piecing these things together,

a bunch of tag team poo poo

It should probably be mandatory for bookers in smaller indy feds to have a photocopy of this post in this exact form glued to the front of whatever they use to storyboard/plot poo poo out for the future.

Then at the bottom of that copy, the following would be written in giant red letters: "DON'T loving DO THIS"

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Pope Corky the IX
Dec 18, 2006


🎵 I'm blue
Yeah I'm a blue Shrek, guy
Step a foot in my swamp
And you're gonna die 🎵

Rusty Shackelford posted:

When exactly was Judy Bagwell a tag champ?

Do you even have to ask?

Only registered members can see post attachments!

Pope Corky the IX fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Mar 31, 2011

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

Nope. Russo was still with the WWF.

Save Russian Jews
Jun 7, 2007

who the fuck is this guy anyway, i can't even see his face

Lipstick Apathy

LividLiquid posted:

Nope. Russo was still with the WWF.

his soul remained.

Paper Jam Dipper
Jul 14, 2007

by XyloJW
I'm not 100 per cent sure, but Judy Bagwell as Tag Champ might have been around the time of Kevin Nash booking. If it wasn't, it was the booking committee that Bischoff ran with Terry Taylor among others.

DangerDummy!
Jul 7, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAcvg-XDFZc

So far as I can tell, this is the culmination of the, what, 18 month long feud between Jericho and Malenko. I know Malenko ends up screwing him over at some point so that Jericho finally ends up dropping the belt for good against Juventud, but I also seem to recall there being some other "Last Chance Match" that had Malenko losing through some kind of confusion in booking, like ring outs were a loss and Malenko didn't know it, or something stupid like that. Am I nuts or did this really happen?

Either way, if they really ended the Jericho-Malenko feud on Nitro, that's just flat-out idiotic. I don't remember there being a PPV ending, and I shelled out 30 bucks a month for those dumb shows back then.

Gavok
Oct 10, 2005

Brock! Oh, man, I'm sorry about your...

...tooth?


DangerDummy! posted:

I know Malenko ends up screwing him over at some point so that Jericho finally ends up dropping the belt for good against Juventud, but I also seem to recall there being some other "Last Chance Match" that had Malenko losing through some kind of confusion in booking, like ring outs were a loss and Malenko didn't know it, or something stupid like that. Am I nuts or did this really happen?

That ring-out thing was from long after the Jericho feud. It was Malenko's last match with the company during a PPV where they had to move around all the matches due to mass injuries. It was a Catch as Catch Can Match against Kidman that he lost.

DangerDummy!
Jul 7, 2009

Gavok posted:

That ring-out thing was from long after the Jericho feud. It was Malenko's last match with the company during a PPV where they had to move around all the matches due to mass injuries. It was a Catch as Catch Can Match against Kidman that he lost.

Huh. I would've sworn it was against Jericho, or that it was at least something very similar. Thanks.

fake edit: Now that I dig a little deeper in the old memory bank, I'm pretty sure you're spot-on. I did not watch very much WCW sober.

Sue Denim
Dec 20, 2009

Perry Normal posted:

It's kind of ridiculous the way they do it too. Matches, interviews with just him are cut completely. But in the most recent one I watched, they were building up to Mongo/Benoit vs. The Faces of Fear, and Mongo/Benoit came to the ramp to watch the Faces beat up High Voltage. Rather than scrap the whole segment, or edit out the parts that showed Benoit watching, they just edited out any time the announcers mentioned him, so there were huge dead spots in the commentary.

Same thing when all the Horsemen came out for an interview once.

Mean Gene: "Please welcome The Four Horsemen! Arn Anderson, Brian Pillman, (noticable pause) and the Nature Boy Ric Flair!"
Yet Benoit is in the background of almost every shot.
I saw a version of Wrestlemania 2000 from on demand I believe that had the Kurt Angle pre and post match promos for his match with Benoit and Jericho on them but with the match taken out.

I don't understand why you just wouldn't take out the promos too if your going to take out the match.

A shame too from my perspective, I really want to see that match again from memory it was fantastic. It was a two falls triple threat match with the first fall for the European title and the second for the Intercontinental title with Angle losing both belts he was holding them at the time without being pinned in either fall in a match he was booked in involuntarily without consent by his mentor Bob Backlund.

Angle had such an amazing rookie year in 2000, it's amazing how well he adapted to the WWE.

Perry Normal
Jul 23, 2010

Humans disgust me. Vile creatures.

Sue Denim posted:

I saw a version of Wrestlemania 2000 from on demand I believe that had the Kurt Angle pre and post match promos for his match with Benoit and Jericho on them but with the match taken out.

I don't understand why you just wouldn't take out the promos too if your going to take out the match.

A shame too from my perspective, I really want to see that match again from memory it was fantastic. It was a two falls triple threat match with the first fall for the European title and the second for the Intercontinental title with Angle losing both belts he was holding them at the time without being pinned in either fall in a match he was booked in involuntarily without consent by his mentor Bob Backlund.

Angle had such an amazing rookie year in 2000, it's amazing how well he adapted to the WWE.

Yeah, I love that match too. Here, enjoy - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xca7pr_chris-jericho-vs-chris-benoit-vs-ku_sport

Sue Denim
Dec 20, 2009
You are fantastic.

prozakk2010
Feb 8, 2003

Edge & Christian posted:


Slamboree 1998 - Sting & The Giant d. The Outsiders for the belts after Scott Hall turns on Kevin Nash and hits him with the belt


I'm pretty sure that I have repressed this memory of Scott Hall turing on Kevin Nash. I watched this youtube video from the Nitro the night after the PPV but it never actually explains why Hall turned on Nash. Is this the angle that eventually lead to the NWO Wolfpack?

flashy_mcflash
Feb 7, 2011

prozakk2010 posted:

I'm pretty sure that I have repressed this memory of Scott Hall turing on Kevin Nash. I watched this youtube video from the Nitro the night after the PPV but it never actually explains why Hall turned on Nash. Is this the angle that eventually lead to the NWO Wolfpack?

I think both Hall and Nash started the Wolfpac and it was earlier than this.

CubanMissile
Apr 22, 2003

Of Hulks and Spider-Men
God, WCW brings back some good memories. I was never a wrestling fan before or after, but in 97 I was hooked. My buddies and I would watch Nitro every Monday and then switch off throwing parties for each month's PPV. I was a junior in high school and every male in the class was into it. Even the girls would show up to watch because it was the only way they would have guys to hang out with on important event days. I knew I had a problem when the surname on my fake ID was "Nash". I was a little sad when the company went to poo poo, so I tried to replace it with WWF, but all I really say there was beer chugging and dudes make suck it gestures at their crotches. It all seemed pretty lowbrow and lacked the whimsy and drama WCW had. WCW vs. nWo on N64 was a pretty big deal to us as well.

Rarity
Oct 21, 2010

~*4 LIFE*~

CubanMissile posted:

It all seemed pretty lowbrow and lacked the whimsy and drama WCW had. WCW vs. nWo on N64 was a pretty big deal to us as well.

I will answer that with my kazoo.

flashy_mcflash
Feb 7, 2011

What I found particularly highbrow and whimsical was Mike Awesome's 'Fat Chick Thrilla' gimmick.

Giedroyc
Feb 18, 2001

Can't post for 2,400,000 hours!
I'm just trying to imagine a rowdy group watching Nitro 97 really.

"Quiet down girls, Lee Marshall's doing his road report."
"Lee! Lee! Lee! Lee!"

Akileese
Feb 6, 2005

The first two times they lost the tag titles at PPVs, their opponents were stripped the very next loving night and they were given the belts back. The crazy thing? This happened BACK TO BACK MONTHS!

You can do that once throughout the life of a title reign but nope! Back to back PPVs! More proof that their PPVs just continually built up free TV.

Paper Jam Dipper
Jul 14, 2007

by XyloJW

flashy_mcflash posted:

What I found particularly highbrow and whimsical was Mike Awesome's 'Fat Chick Thrilla' gimmick.

I still use that nickname to rib a friend of mine. He wears it with pride.

Astro7x
Aug 4, 2004
Thinks It's All Real

Akileese posted:

The first two times they lost the tag titles at PPVs, their opponents were stripped the very next loving night and they were given the belts back. The crazy thing? This happened BACK TO BACK MONTHS!

You can do that once throughout the life of a title reign but nope! Back to back PPVs! More proof that their PPVs just continually built up free TV.

Like I said above, I never realized just how much WCW stripped people of titles.

And seriously, what is the point of stripping a title from somebody only for them to get it back an earn another official title reign?

algebra testes
Mar 5, 2011


Lipstick Apathy
Back in 91 Dave Meltzer was talking about lovely booking and bait and switch tactics with WCW and it seemed to perpetuate forever in the company. Obviously it's so you can keep building to another title match without having to put over new talent and angles. It's lazy booking. It is all good and fine if you just watched Flair/Steamboat two out of three falls with Steamboat winning in the fifty ninth minute and pulling a dusty on that finish because the guys put on a wrestling clinic and the fans would go home happy. You got your money's worth. And you know what, after such a close match you would pay to watch another.

But after Starrcade 97 you have robbed the fans who paid to see Hogan get whupped. And then after you reinstate Hogan and you gotta pay more money to watch Sting win again. It's cheap heat building in a company that isn't equipped to deal with people loosing. It's also ego and politics. WCW never understood how to book people after big angles, good companies can do that. ROH is equipped for people loosing because Eddie Edwards can go out tomorrow and loose and it is all okay. Arguably Hollywood Hulk Hogan can't.


But WCW never understood that.

Paper Jam Dipper
Jul 14, 2007

by XyloJW

LordPants posted:

But WCW never understood that.

To this day, nobody knows for sure (as far as I know) if the referee didn't count fast because he was told to by Hogan or just because.

Flight Bisque
Feb 23, 2008

There is, surprisingly, always hope.

Lone Rogue posted:

To this day, nobody knows for sure (as far as I know) if the referee didn't count fast because he was told to by Hogan or just because.

Well to be fair, Nick Patrick doesn't even remember that match, or what Starrcade is, or who Bret Hart is, or so the legend goes...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z67MdfabhhI&feature=player_detailpage#t=284s

Nut Bunnies
May 24, 2005

Fun Shoe
I can't see any possibility other than Hogan meddling. I doubt Nick Patrick would forget to do a fast count in the biggest match in the WCW history.

HHH is really smart, because he realized what Hogan's mistake was: He NEVER lost. Losing occasionally is fine, especially on PPV, which is what HHH does. That means he gets his comeuppance once in awhile. He loses at a high profile show like WM, and almost never loses or looks weak on free TV, shows which are watched by exponentially more people.

Suben
Jul 1, 2007

In 1985 Dr. Strange makes a rap album.
After going back and reading the OP, I got to the bit about them doing Goldberg vs. Hogan for the title on Nitro. That stirred up some really vague memories of a WCW wrestler (for the life of me I can't remember who; Malenko's the name I keep coming up with though) giving an interview to a local radio station here in the Central Florida area that Monday and outright saying, paraphrasing of course, "Yeah, watch Nitro because tonight we're gonna have Goldberg beat Hogan for the title." Not in an "I'm a face, he's a face and he's up against the top heel so I hope he's gonna win." way but in a straight up "this is what's been booked" way.

Astro7x
Aug 4, 2004
Thinks It's All Real
I don't get why so many people complain that they gave away Hogan/Goldberg for free on NItro. Never in my life have I called a company stupid for giving me something for free... it could have been built better, yes, but I think that aspect of it was sort of cool in the sense that it made you want to tune in each week because anything could happen.

Rusty Shackelford
Feb 7, 2005

Astro7x posted:

I don't get why so many people complain that they gave away Hogan/Goldberg for free on NItro. Never in my life have I called a company stupid for giving me something for free... it could have been built better, yes, but I think that aspect of it was sort of cool in the sense that it made you want to tune in each week because anything could happen.

Because it was one of those matches that could have turned the whole direction of the company around. Instead, the most over guy on the roster took on the biggest heel in a match on free tv with 4 days build.

Can you imagine what would have happened had those two had a match on PPV with a proper build?

Paper Jam Dipper
Jul 14, 2007

by XyloJW

Astro7x posted:

I don't get why so many people complain that they gave away Hogan/Goldberg for free on NItro. Never in my life have I called a company stupid for giving me something for free... it could have been built better, yes, but I think that aspect of it was sort of cool in the sense that it made you want to tune in each week because anything could happen.

If they wanted Hogan to drop the belt on a Nitro where more people would be watching than ever before, then have Savage or Sting or DDP or Kevin Nash beat him for the belt. Hogan purposely did this switch because he knew the Warrior was coming in and felt that would be the bigger program and it was okay to drop the belt. He knew his Warrior/Hogan program would overshadow the World's Heavyweight Championship. It was all smart politics.

I'm not saying Hogan should have kept the title the entire time, but you could have sold more Starrcade's with Hogan as Champ versus Goldberg. Instead there was no Hogan at all for Starrcade and he returned the week after to do the big fingerpoke of doom.

Think if the WWE gave us Rock vs. Cena on Raw instead of a PPV.

Sue Denim
Dec 20, 2009

Astro7x posted:

I don't get why so many people complain that they gave away Hogan/Goldberg for free on NItro. Never in my life have I called a company stupid for giving me something for free... it could have been built better, yes, but I think that aspect of it was sort of cool in the sense that it made you want to tune in each week because anything could happen.
Yeah, I can see why people think it's not the smartest move, but some people seem genuinely angry about things like this. It's amazing how some wrestling fans (I don't mean anyone here necessarily) become annoyed and berate a company for giving them something that's great to appreciate as a fan.

This is probably a bad example because it had really detrimental effects for the company, but I never understand fans who look down on WWE when they give a great match away for free on TV every once in a while, it always makes me feel a little appreciated as a fan and makes me feel good about the company.

A good example would be the Miz Vs Morrison falls count anywhere match on the first Raw this year, I do think Jo-Mo and Miz really could have used a main event Rumble spot for that match to strengthen their careers, but the chances of WWE being willing to take a chance on that match as the headlining PPV title match is slim. As a fan I really appreciated having a nice surprise of such a good match on Raw, especially sicne it happens so seldom these days and some fans should jut learn to appreciate these things rather than analysing them from a business perspective in a way that will never have any practical application.

Sue Denim fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Apr 1, 2011

Zack_Gochuck
Jan 4, 2007

Stupid Wrestling People

Lone Rogue posted:

Think if the WWE gave us Rock vs. Cena on Raw instead of a PPV.

I think it's a little different because The Rock is not a regular member of the roster, like both Hogan and Goldberg were. It'd be more like giving the Undertaker vs. John Cena for the world title away on RAW for free.

MassRafTer
May 26, 2001

BAEST MODE!!!

Astro7x posted:

I don't get why so many people complain that they gave away Hogan/Goldberg for free on NItro. Never in my life have I called a company stupid for giving me something for free... it could have been built better, yes, but I think that aspect of it was sort of cool in the sense that it made you want to tune in each week because anything could happen.

There is a difference between mocking stupidity and complaining. Looking back it didn't make anyone tune in each week and thus was yet another stupid thing WCW did. They put a match on TV and ensured they could NEVER do it again due to Hogan's ego and they did it with four days build.

bobkatt013
Oct 8, 2006

You’re telling me Peter Parker is ...... Spider-man!?

MassRayPer posted:

There is a difference between mocking stupidity and complaining. Looking back it didn't make anyone tune in each week and thus was yet another stupid thing WCW did. They put a match on TV and ensured they could NEVER do it again due to Hogan's ego and they did it with four days build.

Wasn't it originally a non-title match, and only announced as title earlier that day?

Suben
Jul 1, 2007

In 1985 Dr. Strange makes a rap album.

Magic_Ceiling_Fan posted:

I think it's a little different because The Rock is not a regular member of the roster, like both Hogan and Goldberg were. It'd be more like giving the Undertaker vs. John Cena for the world title away on RAW for free.

Or doing a champion vs. champion match as an hour one main event with no heat whatsoever.

MassRafTer
May 26, 2001

BAEST MODE!!!

bobkatt013 posted:

Wasn't it originally a non-title match, and only announced as title earlier that day?

Originally it was going to be a non-title dark match when Hogan found out the advance for the Georgia Dome show was so huge. He wanted to figure out a way to headline it and take credit for the gate in front of the Turner execs who would be there. So he proposed a non-title dark match with Goldberg. It was then changed to a title match on the Thunder before that Nitro.

Astro7x
Aug 4, 2004
Thinks It's All Real
The only build was JJ Dillon coming out on Thunrder and announcing it. According to Goldberg that was the first he heard of the title shot too.

oldfan
Jul 22, 2007

"Mathewson pitched against Cincinnati yesterday. Another way of putting it is that Cincinnati lost a game of baseball."

Sue Denim posted:

:words:

Companies essentially never build to and peak for television so when a big match is given away for free it's almost always with a subpar story and just generally not as important as it should be. Also commercial breaks and time are usually major issues.

STAC Goat
Mar 12, 2008

Watching you sleep.

Butt first, let's
check the feeds.

Its a matter of looking at the bigger picture. These mistakes are rarely unique one time things. They're almost always sympathetic of a larger problem. People didn't like Morrison/Miz on RAW because it would have been better for everyone involved to do it on PPV, that could have built both men up and given something new on PPV. This speaks directly to people's main problem with WWE that they're unwilling to take any chances and thus run out the same tired stuff every time right down to a WM built largely on Attitude Era stars, announcers, and Snooki.

People didn't like Goldberg/Hogan because it spoke directly to WCW's poor decision making and focus on winning the ratings war each week at the sacrifice of the real matters. WCW was so focused on getting pyrrhic victories that they consistently cost themselves money, backed themselves into corners, and eventually built their own downfall.

Bottom line, people want on some level for WCW and TNA to be good and strive. People want for WWE to be good and Morrison and Miz to be legitimate and bankable stars. They could lose themselves in the one moment and forget the consequences but sticking your head in the sand is harder than it sounds. They can't ignore what it means in the big picture.

TomWaitsForNoMan
May 28, 2003

By Any Means Necessary

STAC Goat posted:

Its a matter of looking at the bigger picture. These mistakes are rarely unique one time things. They're almost always sympathetic of a larger problem. People didn't like Morrison/Miz on RAW because it would have been better for everyone involved to do it on PPV, that could have built both men up and given something new on PPV. This speaks directly to people's main problem with WWE that they're unwilling to take any chances and thus run out the same tired stuff every time right down to a WM built largely on Attitude Era stars, announcers, and Snooki.

People didn't like Goldberg/Hogan because it spoke directly to WCW's poor decision making and focus on winning the ratings war each week at the sacrifice of the real matters. WCW was so focused on getting pyrrhic victories that they consistently cost themselves money, backed themselves into corners, and eventually built their own downfall.

Bottom line, people want on some level for WCW and TNA to be good and strive. People want for WWE to be good and Morrison and Miz to be legitimate and bankable stars. They could lose themselves in the one moment and forget the consequences but sticking your head in the sand is harder than it sounds. They can't ignore what it means in the big picture.

Exactly. If WCW hadn't done all that stupid poo poo they might still be around, and Vince might not have gotten so delusional that he's killing wrestling

MassRafTer
May 26, 2001

BAEST MODE!!!
You know what, I will complain about Goldberg vs Hogan on free TV. Hot shotting that angle made for bad TV the next few months. Goldberg went from having US title level feuds for the US title to US title level feuds for the World title. It made for bad TV and made the title look so secondary to the Hogan vs celebrities sagas.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

CVagts
Oct 19, 2009
If you're about to trash Bill Goldberg vs. Al Greene then get the gently caress out of here.

Thinking back on it, wow, you're right. Goldberg was second banana to Hogan up through Halloween Havoc. He won the title right before the Rodman/Malone match, then he fought Jay Leno, then the Warrior program. After that, Nash got the book (I think) and they started Nash/Goldberg.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply