Heyman asked Stephanie to step down

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

Ever since that show all you read about is Heyman trying to put Benoit on top

Do you now? I distinctly remember reading at Rajah that it was Michael Hayes that supported Benoit, not Heyman. In fact, I just looked it up and Heyman supported MYSTERIO getting Show's spot. So let's put that myth to rest once and for all, OK?

 

Funny how Heyman didn't book Benoit's most shining hour since his return - the Royal Rumble, nor ever made that match any more important than Lesnar/Show or HHH/Steiner.

 

Let's not get into the issue of Heyman giving away the Rumble rematch for free just because he needs to roll 'em out for Sweeps.

[Guest Y2DAYDAY]

This whole discussion has quite the simple answer. A previous poster said that Heyman wasn't to blame for the Al Wilson stuff, the Big Show push, the Guerreros skits, that was all Kevin Dunn, Brian Gewirtz, and the McMahons. He said Heyman shouldn't take the blame for it because ultimately everything goes through Vince. However, when it came to praising all of the good stuff on Smackdown that Heyman got credited for, no one mentioned that once again, Vince McMahon has the last word on what goes on TV.

 

Quite simply, Vince gets the credit for the good and the bad. Everyone else at this point is an idea person and nothing more when it comes to booking.

[Guest Valcourt]

Regardless of who is writing it, Vince is the one letting the shit go by... If he is actually the final say anymore.

 

Valcourt

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Directed towards Redjed, since I'm posting a storm right now:

 

[[As I've stated before its certainly not out of the question that all of the writers meet in the same group at times in the week to go over both shows...]]

 

So, in other words, Heyman might be responsible for some of the stuff on Raw?

 

[[...(does anyone for certain know how the WWE creative meetings are handled? Thats my point)]]

 

Well, according to Paul (from Off the Reccord) it's a group environment, but he never talks about writing for Raw, that's for sure.

 

According to other sources, Paul is very much involved with Raw, including angles like infamous Katey Vick storyline.

 

[[...and while not all are actually writing everything for both shows, I would suggest that McMahon allows everyone on the creative staff to offer their viewpoints for even the opposing show they work for.]]

 

So, playing Devil's Advocate, of course, some of the "success" Smackdown! has had might not be attributed to Paul?

 

[[but if you don't buy that, its certainly logical that the entire staff works on the actual booking of the ppvs, at least.]]

 

Yep. For example, I seem to remember Steiner debuting at Survivor Series in a very 911/Sandman/New Jack manner, tossing Nowinski and Matt Hardy around like rag dolls.

 

But then, Paul couldn't have had anything to do with that angle, right? He loves Mattitude! It's that dammed Johny Ace who forcing Paul to push *and* mannage A-Train instead of Hardy!

 

Yup.

 

[[i think its absurd to blame injuries on Heyman since once again, we don't know who comes up with match context plans.]]

 

Heyman was credited in 2001 with booking TLC 3, the match in which Chris Benoit suffered the neck injury that put him out for a year. In this case, not only did the match fail to help ratings in the long run, but it didn't help the guys who were put over. Benoit was shelfed, and Jericho was midcarding within a month.

 

Heyman was also credited for the Cage match between Edge and Angle last year. The finish saw Edge do a top rope spear that injurred his shoulder and side-lined him for months as well.

 

[[Most matches are actually planned by the workers themselves, and are just told of a finish. I highly doubt, for example, that Heyman just tells them "Go out there and german each others asses off" or what have you.]]

 

Paul was the one making them carry the weight of the shows every week. He thrust them out there on every show, to the point that the pairings grew meaningless. Not trying to defend the use of stupid decisions in the ring, but what else were they supposed to do to engage the crowd? They weren't popping for much besides the risky high spots, so that's what they did.

 

Very similar, I think, to the Tajiri/Crazy and Awesome/Tanaka pairings. While these matches were first highly praised for the work involved, Paul sent them out there on pay per views on TNN countless times, to the point that fans stopped caring. So, with little other choice to engage the crowds, they resorted to using tables and chairs like many of the lesser-talented wrestlers to garner heat.

 

This is the trend I see (Needless Repetition by the Booker Promotes Wreckless Wrestling by the Worker), and it's why I think Heyman should take responsibility for the injuries.

 

[[benoit has always had that moveset, as well as Angle, so its not like their workrate style had just suddenly changed when Heyman began booking Smackdown. If anything they were just told you do what they want to do and to not be regulated by a filter of a punch-kick-punch style, which I don't see as a bad thing.]]

 

When the German suplex has been reduced to the credibility of a stomp, what can they do? The "top this" spiral began before Benoit's neck injury in 2001, but it reached its lowest point when the SD Six started doing their matches together and more specifically, when Angle and Benoit started their series together, where they would trade suplexes as if they were chops, back and forth, rendering the spot meaningless.

 

Once again, Benoit and Angle were the ones working like maniacs, but it was a bi-product of Heyman's ultra-repetative "toss all the good workers out there weekly" booking style.

 

[[injuries happen, its a part of the business...]]

 

So Benoit's neck injury, Edge's shoulder injury and now neck injury, Kurt's neck injury, and Rey's knees are just "part of the business?"

 

I don't know if you're trying to be naive here, or what, but that's obsurd. Six guys go out there and have long, wearing matches every week (on house shows, as well) and they're bound to hit the wall at some point. That's what's happening here. This isn't what the business is supposed to be like.

 

[[...and Raw has as many injured workers as Smackdown so should we also blame Brian Gerwitz as well? How about blaming Eric Bischoff for every damn injury that happened in WCW?]]

 

Well, since we know Paul's involved with Raw, I don't think it'd be out of the question to suggest that he's pulling for his guys there as well. That includes guys like Van Dam, who's had problems injurring others.

 

[[This discussion is getting borderline ridiculous, I thought I would never see the day that a booker or writer would be put the blame on for injuries. This is EXACTLY what I mean by pure bias.]]

 

Call it whatever you want. I'm taking my knowledge of what happened to ECW and applying it to what is currently happening in the WWE. I'm drawing logical conclusions based on what I know. If you find that to be a type of bias, I really can't do anything to change your mind, can I?

 

Heyman's booking style rellied on Six workers to carry an entire show. They were booked in lots of long matches, and put under an incredible amount of strain. If you combine their Smackdown! dates with house shows and monthly pay per views, it's obvious to see why many of them are now injurred.

 

The booker is responsible for his workers's schedule. Put to much stress on an important worker and you get serious injuries that hurt the entire company. Write now, we're seeing that with Kurt, who was scheduled to be an integral part of Wrestlemania.

 

This isn't fiction. This is an arguement that I'm trying to present in a way to you that gives you the full picture. If I've failed to do that, so be it. You're going to believe what you want to believe.

 

What angers me is that you don't really seem to question my arguements so much as question my character. I'm not making up any of this, and while you may think I'm just passing it on from someone on a different web site, I'm not.

 

But again, think whatever you like.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Directed to bps21:

 

[[However everything in the feud went to shit at Survivor Series when Vince decided to put the strap on Big Show...which is not what Heyman wanted.]]

 

The feud was shit long before that. Looking at their 2001 feud, it lacked any kind of build from match-to-match, each going off in its own world. It didn't flow as a storyline at all, which was made obvious because by the end it was driven by Benoit sticking Angle's medals down his tights. I don't think they even mentioned why the feud started at that point.

 

And of course, once it ended Paul kept it on his speed-dial for "matches I can book when I'm out of ideas." Benoit/Angle in the cage saw them take some of the most proposterous bumps in company history, all on free TV in a match with no build. It was treated as "build-up" for Austin/Benoit/Jericho.

 

Looking at this year's re-incarnation of the feud, no mention was made of their previous matches. They were said to simply "hate" each other, and that was that. This lead to lots of goofy tag matches where they would look like complete fools, having the match won and then screwing themselves out of the win. This went on seemingly forever.

 

By the time they had their Royal Rumble match this year, little mention was even made of them teaming together. No progresion, no continuity, just "send them out there and see what happens."

 

[[Ever since that show all you read about is Heyman trying to put Benoit on top or get himself off screen or whatever. These things just don't seem to have happened.]]

 

That's why he failed to capatalize on the momentum Benoit had in every way possible? If Paul has *always* been pulling for Benoit to be on top, why didn't he push him last year? Paul spent the majority of his booking run tossing Benoit out there in meaningless tags, not to mention using him and Kurt as fodder for the Undertaker. The idea that he was always pulling for Benoit to main event is a joke.

 

[[The feud went to shit at the same time Heyman lost control.]]

 

The fued was always shit. Paul "lossing control" is just another one of his countless attempts to keep himself in the clear. It's business as usual for the Super Genius.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

The Benoit/Angle feud could have been EPIC storyline wise. Have each match build on the previous - not just have each guy reverse moves but see how and why they do it. The Benoit/Angle matches, really, were exhibitions - merely ego-stroking to see how far they could take getting out of each others submissions... not bringing in new submissions, of course, oh no, these two 'technical marvels' could only use their one submission move... even though their opponent always solves it...

[Guest NoSelfWorth]

not bringing in new submissions, of course, oh no, these two 'technical marvels' could only use their one submission move... even though their opponent always solves it...

Angle used a heel hook at the Rumble, and Benoit didn't get out of it.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

Yes, in their last match... Out of like 20... Why didn't this occur to him sooner?

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Again, there's no natural progresion. Every match they had seemed to be dedicated to delivering a specific purpose, not build upon a previous storyline. Their first one was about quick amature-style matwork just to show that they could, the second seemed like an attempt to re-intruce shoot-style submisions into the company (which was pointless because the moves had no credibility with fans and were immediately forgotten anyway), and the third was basically high-spot death with garbage thrown in. The cage match, of course, was the ultimate in ludicrous high spot death. Quite a contrast from match to match, I would say.

 

Benoit and Angle's matches are filled with such stupid work that I wonder how anyone can consider them good. They bust out dangerous All Japan spots and drop each other on their heads with Germans countless times, while the audience knows full well that none of those moves are going to get the win. And then they take the two moves that have a possibility of getting the win (their respective submisions) and flush those down the toilet by putting them on each other at the same time.

 

Again, two good wrestlers shouldn't have to resort to this kind of nonsensical, dangerous work. Maybe if their matches were booked as a series, they could have developed themes from match to match instead of just starting from scratch every time with another stupid idea in mind.

 

Like RRR said, had they introduced the "Ankle Lock + Leg Lock" move at the begining of the feud, it could have been used as Angle's last-ditch submision to defeat guys like Benoit who had found ways to counter his regular Ankle Lock. It could have been used as the obstacle which Benoit had to overcome in defeating Kurt.

 

But no, instead they use it *after* they've exausted all the pointless matwork sequences, pointless submision sequences, and pointless head-dropping sequences they could muster.

 

It's really sad to see someone like Benoit, who used to be the smartest worker in North America, degenerate into a bump machine with no regard for himself.

[Guest RedJed]

Like RRR said, had they introduced the "Ankle Lock + Leg Lock" move at the begining of the feud, it could have been used as Angle's last-ditch submision to defeat guys like Benoit who had found ways to counter his regular Ankle Lock. It could have been used as the obstacle which Benoit had to overcome in defeating Kurt.

I thought it made sense to introduce that move at the Rumble since the regular finishers were continuously countered before in matches and basically neither man could be made to submit to them by that point in the feud. So its logical that a new and different submission is added into the folds, how is that NOT progression? Plus who's to say that that same finish at the Rumble wouldn't have been used in a future match with those two (as of their last SD match, it seemed clear by commentary that the feud hadn't met its blowoff yet) Also was a fresh and creative finish which you don't see alot in WWE these days.

 

So lets say that finisher was used early in the Benoit-Angle series.........then what would be a creative finish for the Rumble if Benoit could have found a way to counter the move? Bringing in yet ANOTHER finishing submission finish would be rehashing an already previous concept for the series.

[Guest RedJed]

What angers me is that you don't really seem to question my arguements so much as question my character.

What I question IS the logic in your arguments, and you seem to look deeply into things that aren't even happening or aren't even there. I fail to miss where you are basing alot of these instances you mention from the days of ECW and into the current day WWE. You(and others) continue to assume Paul had full control of the book, not in just Smackdown but on Raw. Tha fact is that none of us will know who really deserves the credit or praise for anything......this even goes to even back in days of Russo in the WWF.......the argument has always been as well who was the real mind behind that era, was it Russo, Ferrara, Vince, or a combination of them all, or something else? The company is so chunk full of politics (whether you refuse to believe that or not) that its hard to gauge if alot of the statements you and others have made are valid or true (EX: the whole Heyman writes Raw too thing). Your reasoning to me is failing to give me a "full picture" of everything, instead its actually doing the opposite since Heyman can apparently do NOTHING right, and is the cause of EVERYTHING wrong in WWE. You're doing the exact same thing you are critisizing others (like Meltzer and Keller) for. As I've mentioned as well, Meltzer and Co. have certainly been critical of Pauls work before and on many occasions, but you refuse to accept that. Same with the fact that the numbers shown that Smackdown progressed better in the June thru January months than Raw did to say the least. The numbers dont lie! Comparing sweeps ratings from Feb 2002 to Feb 2003 is just fine for comparing just THOSE TWO MONTHS but we're talking about the entire run here, not just two months. This kind of "selective reasoning" is what I'm referring to.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

How many matches have Benoit and Angle had against each other? How many times did they counter eachothers holds before they discovered that it was useless to try to put it on them? How long did it take for the two best 'technical' wrestlers in the company to realize that maybe they should try different things? I find it very hard to believe that they had this epiphany in the last match of their feud. A feud that really had been going on for about a year. The fact that Benoit hit Angle with 9 German suplexes in a match that wasn't the blowoff just proves the ineptness of the booking. First a match should be WON with a german suplex. Then Angle/Benoit should counter it in the next match because he LEARNED from the previous match and get the win with a reversal. Then maybe you can hook up the 3 in a row. What they did in their matches was completely useless. By the time their feud was over the German suplex had as much worth as a bodyslam.

 

Then there is the submissions. Win one match with one submission. It gets countered the next time. It gets improved upon the time after that. It's called evolution. What Benoit and Angle did was not evolve - they just did more of it. They did more reversals, they did more suplexes, they did more ankle locks and crossfaces... but they didn't improve upon them until the very last match where they wore everything out.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

[[i thought it made sense to introduce that move at the Rumble since the regular finishers were continuously countered before in matches and basically neither man could be made to submit to them by that point in the feud. So its logical that a new and different submission is added into the folds, how is that NOT progression?]]

 

Well, for one, the submision wasn't new or different. It was really just the same thing accept with a hold on the legs so that it's hard to escape. As was previously pointed out, why didn't Kurt think of doing that before?

 

If they wanted a progressive storyline ending with the modified version being introduced, they could have started by making the Ankle Lock itself appear affective. Instead, the move was always a) countered or b) not painfull enough to get the submision. It could be argued that their feud was never driven by submisions to begin with, since neither of their holds had much credibility against one another.

 

[[Plus who's to say that that same finish at the Rumble wouldn't have been used in a future match with those two (as of their last SD match, it seemed clear by commentary that the feud hadn't met its blowoff yet)]]

 

Always a possibility, but with Kurt out for a long time and the way their RR match came off, it seems like they won't mix up for a while. If they do, two guesses as to whether they refference history together or not.

 

[[...Also was a fresh and creative finish which you don't see alot in WWE these days.]]

 

The problem with the WWE's "fresh" and creative finishes is that they never tend to have any long term affect. Kurt used a triangle choke to make the UT submit last year, and he hasn't used the move since. Actually, UT has addopted as a finish, ironically. The WWE seems to have a bizarre fasination with shoot-style submisions, but never bothers to get them over to the point that they're perceived as effective by the fans.

 

[[so lets say that finisher was used early in the Benoit-Angle series.........then what would be a creative finish for the Rumble if Benoit could have found a way to counter the move?]]

 

Well, Benoit wouldn't neccesarily have to counter it. The driving story could "Can Benoit counter the move?" Benoit could spend the entire match trying to out-wrestle Kurt (as he had been able to do before) and avoid the move, only for Kurt to prevail and put him over as the better man once and for all. It's not "fresh" as you would call it, but I think it makes sense in the context of a series-type feud and would make Kurt look better coming out of the match.

 

[[What I question IS the logic in your arguments, and you seem to look deeply into things that aren't even happening or aren't even there.]]

 

So the ratings are fine and no one is injurred, then?

 

[[i fail to miss where you are basing alot of these instances you mention from the days of ECW and into the current day WWE. You(and others) continue to assume Paul had full control of the book, not in just Smackdown but on Raw.]]

 

Well, according to the news sites, he was the chief/head/top writer for Smackdown, correct? The idea I find insulting is that Paul is Captain of the Smackdown! Love Boat whenever a critically-acclaimed Benoit/Angle/Guererros/Edge/Misterio match occurs, but as soon as things go to shit Paul has "lost control" and can do nothing to steer his beloved ship to safety thanks to the Evil Pirates of Black Beard Kevin Dunn or One-Eyed Johny Ace.

 

....er...yeah

 

As for Raw, I think Paul does have influence over the show. I don't think he's the only guy in charge, far from it, but I see things on the show every so often that firmly believe are influenced by him. HLA, TLC 4, the continued use of hardcore matches, the "role them out there" nature of the women's division, it just bares a striking resemblance to Paul's booking style in ECW. No one is assuming Paul writes everything that happens on Raw, but I do think he holds influence over the show, definitely.

 

[[Tha fact is that none of us will know who really deserves the credit or praise for anything......this even goes to even back in days of Russo in the WWF.......the argument has always been as well who was the real mind behind that era, was it Russo, Ferrara, Vince, or a combination of them all, or something else?]]

 

Well, in Russo's case, it was pretty obvious looking at his WCW (and now TNA) run what parts of the WWF's peak in the ninties were his doing, and how valid his claims to being a good booker are. Russo has helped kill one company already, and he's going to chalk up another soon enough. His case is easy to examen because there is other evidence to examen.

 

[[The company is so chunk full of politics (whether you refuse to believe that or not) that its hard to gauge if alot of the statements you and others have made are valid or true (EX: the whole Heyman writes Raw too thing).]]

 

You previously stated that you think it's possible that Heyman has always had something to do with Raw, correct? I don't see where your arguement with my view point is here. Not only do I suspect his influence on Raw quite often, but I've seen evidence that it's true.

 

[[Your reasoning to me is failing to give me a "full picture" of everything, instead its actually doing the opposite since Heyman can apparently do NOTHING right, and is the cause of EVERYTHING wrong in WWE.]]

 

Heyman is hardly the cause of everything wrong in the WWE. If you want to take something I say and find falt in it, go right on ahead, but there's no need to make things up.

 

Heyman is part of the problem. He is far from the only thing wrong with the WWE right now. The stupidity of WWE Creative (i.e. everyone who writes for TV, including, but not limited to Heyman) astounds me more and more every time I watch one of the shows.

 

What seperates Heyman from the othersis that he manages to convince everyone that he's part of the sollution, not the problem. Instead of offering up ideas for how Raw and Smackdown! can improve, the major news sites say "give Heyman more control" and leave it at that. It over-simplifies the issue in the readers's minds because it convinces them that all the problems in the WWE can be solved by handing more control to Paul.

 

 

[[You're doing the exact same thing you are critisizing others (like Meltzer and Keller) for.]]

 

I'm hardly over-simplifying the issue, or at least I'm not trying to. My intent isn't to present Heyman as the source of all problems WWE-related. My intent is to get people to wake up and stop buying the proposterous excuses and cop-outs offered by many web sites that support him. These web sites include 1wrestling, the Torch, and the Observer.

 

[[As I've mentioned as well, Meltzer and Co. have certainly been critical of Pauls work before and on many occasions, but you refuse to accept that.]]

 

I'm not denying that Meltzer has been critical of Paul before. In general, however, I feel Meltzer spins his audience in favor of Paul, by first, telling them Paul only writes for Smackdown! and second portraying Smackdown! as the superior show, both in quality and comercial success.

 

I have said this all before, and I'm starting to feel like a broken reccord with all this repetition. I don't mean to be rude, but if we're going to discuss this, let's discuss it based on what I've said.

 

[[same with the fact that the numbers shown that Smackdown progressed better in the June thru January months than Raw did to say the least. The numbers dont lie!]]

 

I'm not denying those numbers. I'm saying they don't reflect the overall year-long progress of the shows that the sweeps do.

 

[[Comparing sweeps ratings from Feb 2002 to Feb 2003 is just fine for comparing just THOSE TWO MONTHS but we're talking about the entire run here, not just two months.]]

 

February 2002-February 2003 is the full run. Sweeps is an important period for ratings because the networks evuluate their shows's progress. In a year, as I understand it, Raw fell less than Smackdown! The main reason I brought this up was not to critisize Heyman's booking (if he writes for both shows, it would be pointless to attack him based on one show doing better than the other) but to attack many people's view point that Smackdown! has improved as a TV show. I'm constantly hearing (not just from the Usual Suspects, but from everyone on this board, almost) that Smackdown! has gotten better, Raw is the shits, blah blah blah. My point was to show them that relative to last year, Raw has taken less damage in ratings than supposedly-successfull Smackdown!

 

The reason I brought it up to begin with was because the WON readers (partially under Dave's influence) gave Paul booker of the year for Smackdown! I don't think the show or Paul deserve any praise for last year.

[Guest RedJed]

Ummm I never said Heyman had anything to do with Raw, not sure where you got that from. There was a point where I was trying to explain why perhaps he's had run-ins with Gerwitz, thats all.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

"As I've stated before its certainly not out of the question that all of the writers meet in the same group at times in the week to go over both shows (does anyone for certain know how the WWE creative meetings are handled? Thats my point), and while not all are actually writing everything for both shows, I would suggest that McMahon allows everyone on the creative staff to offer their viewpoints for even the opposing show they work for." -- RedJed, page five of this thread.

 

"You previously stated that you think it's possible that Heyman has always had something to do with Raw, correct? I don't see where your arguement with my view point is here. Not only do I suspect his influence on Raw quite often, but I've seen evidence that it's true." -- Ricky, thinking he had heard RedJed correctly.

 

Yeah, that's where I got it from.

 

Have any thoughts on anything else I said, or are we going to chalk this up as another "Ricky posts a lot of stuff and most people chose to ignore it" thread?

[Guest bob_barron]

If it makes you feel better- I completely agree with you Ricky

[Guest RedJed]

"As I've stated before its certainly not out of the question that all of the writers meet in the same group at times in the week to go over both shows (does anyone for certain know how the WWE creative meetings are handled? Thats my point), and while not all are actually writing everything for both shows, I would suggest that McMahon allows everyone on the creative staff to offer their viewpoints for even the opposing show they work for." -- RedJed, page five of this thread.

 

"You previously stated that you think it's possible that Heyman has always had something to do with Raw, correct? I don't see where your arguement with my view point is here. Not only do I suspect his influence on Raw quite often, but I've seen evidence that it's true." -- Ricky, thinking he had heard RedJed correctly.

 

Yeah, that's where I got it from.

 

Have any thoughts on anything else I said, or are we going to chalk this up as another "Ricky posts a lot of stuff and most people chose to ignore it" thread?

As you should have seen, you misunderstood what I said. I never in there said or agreed with you that Heyman writes Raw, as you suggest.

 

Believe me, I'm not ignoring everything you're saying, I just don't feel like rebutting to every single sentance you say just because it's getting monotonous repeating things from my viewpoint. It's like going in a circle. Even when I posted the numbers of Raw and Smackdown in comparison instead it just immeditately turned to A feb v. Feb comparison instead. I understand that Sweeps is important, but you have to take a look at the entire ratings analysis if you are to make a fair and non-judgmental comparison of the two brands. Lets say hypothetically that Smackdown from June to like then end of the yeah skyrocketed to say the 6s, while Raw dropped to the 1s or something. Now lets say that in Jan or by Feb Sweeps, that both evened out somewhat and they both went back to about the mid 3s (as they are now). So you're telling me that still means that Smackdown did worse in the numbers than Raw? I'm just trying to make you see how just basing Feb to Feb is an innacurate gauge of how the shows have faired since what have you, since the split or writing changes or whatever. Plus many people just liked Smackdown more than Raw because of reasons I have already said, if you dissagree so be it.......but don't expect to change anyone's mind on something they have formed an opinion on if they enjoyed a show or not based on past episodes. Everyone has different tastes, and believe it or not they didn't just enjoy Smackdown because they knew Heyman was writing it, or whatever other basis for a bias towards the show you have figured every person that liked what Smackdown was turned into at the time.

[Guest Tim Cooke]

God Damnit. Go away for a few days and you miss some good old fashion Heyman bashing.

 

Heyman was given GOLD when they introduced the tag titles on to smackdown. How many bookers get the oppurtunity to develop a NEW, FRESH division with a NEW Belt?

 

Tag Team wrestling is easier to get over then singles wrestling. Tag Team wrestling has *out drawn* singles headliners before.

 

But Heyman couldn't be bothered to develop something special.

 

----------------------------

 

Benoit v Angle.

 

The Royal Rumble match was an excellent match for the WEEEEEEEEEEE.

 

But over the weekend, I watched both Austin/Benoit matches from RAW and Smackdown of 2001 and while neither had a large storyline going into them, both delivered on more levels than Angle/Benoit did.

 

More crowd heat, more storylines in the match (Benoit playing a major underdog to Austin's heel monster character, etc). It produced something really awesome by using the fundmanetal basics of pro wrestling and doing them well.

 

I LOVE BENOIT, but recently, he has really turned into a worker who is relying more on stunts than smartness it seems. For every build of the sharpshooter genius piece of work from him, you get annoying multiple german suplexes.

 

Tim

[Guest RickyChosyu]

[[As you should have seen, you misunderstood what I said. I never in there said or agreed with you that Heyman writes Raw, as you suggest.]]

 

You said you thought he might be involved, and provides imput, which, to me, at least, is carny for "he writes for the show." Maybe I'm just jumping to conclusions.

 

[[Even when I posted the numbers of Raw and Smackdown in comparison instead it just immeditately turned to A feb v. Feb comparison instead. I understand that Sweeps is important, but you have to take a look at the entire ratings analysis if you are to make a fair and non-judgmental comparison of the two brands.]]

 

Agreed there. The main purpose of my posting that was to show that Smackdown! isn't reaching the success and/or stability that Meltzer and others seem to convey.

 

[[Lets say hypothetically that Smackdown from June to like then end of the yeah skyrocketed to say the 6s, while Raw dropped to the 1s or something. Now lets say that in Jan or by Feb Sweeps, that both evened out somewhat and they both went back to about the mid 3s (as they are now). So you're telling me that still means that Smackdown did worse in the numbers than Raw?]]

 

Not trying to be stubborn, but overall, wouldn't the answer to your question be "yes?" If Smackdown! couldn't hold those higher-numbers it was getting (which doesn't suprise me, since HLA 2.0 was responsible for a lot of them) what good did they do?

 

Week-to-week analysis is deffinitely a good thing, but I'm not sure your numbers portray Smackdown as the better show. When looking at them, you have to consider "what produced these ratings" and "did they show any long-term important to company?"

 

Not trying to say you're wrong, just that you need to look deeper than just what the numbers were and inspect the cause behind them.

 

[[Everyone has different tastes, and believe it or not they didn't just enjoy Smackdown because they knew Heyman was writing it, or whatever other basis for a bias towards the show you have figured every person that liked what Smackdown was turned into at the time.]]

 

I think most people's enjoyment of Smackdown! came from Paul tossing the best wrestlers in the company together in matches on a weekly basis. I kept hearing "we haven't had this many good matches on a consistent basis in years" and weather they were right about the quality or not, I think those matches hurt the show. They did nothing for the participants involved except wear down their bodies. When it came to pushing those guys against Brock or Taker, they always jobbed hard, so it's not like they were gaining credibility in the eyes of the fans. The matches didn't build upon each other or develope a specific storyline to them. It was just "hey, these guys can all work, let's stick them in lengthy matches against each!" and nothing more.

 

Too bad when they finally got around to pushing some of these guys, they were too banged up to go anywhere.

[Guest RedJed]

Benoit v Angle.

 

The Royal Rumble match was an excellent match for the WEEEEEEEEEEE.

 

But over the weekend, I watched both Austin/Benoit matches from RAW and Smackdown of 2001 and while neither had a large storyline going into them, both delivered on more levels than Angle/Benoit did.

 

More crowd heat, more storylines in the match (Benoit playing a major underdog to Austin's heel monster character, etc). It produced something really awesome by using the fundmanetal basics of pro wrestling and doing them well.

I agree about that match him and Austin had on Smackdown in 2001 (I think it was even from Edmonton). That was one of my favorite matches of that year and was definately better than Angle-Benoit at the Rumble, hell ANY Benoit-Angle match.

[Guest Tim Cooke]

"I think most people's enjoyment of Smackdown! came from Paul tossing the best wrestlers in the company together in matches on a weekly basis."

 

Those people need to be asked the following question today:

 

Do ANY of those matches stand out as memorable today?

 

Nope.

 

So Edge's neck injury and Angle's neck injury all came from those "memorable" Smackdown matches.

 

A smarter plan would have been making Smackdown a tag team haven with Angle/Brock as the lone singles feud.

 

Look at the tag teams you can have:

 

Guerreros (who were always made to be 3rd behind Benoit/Angle and Rey/Edge even when they had the tag titles)

 

Benoit/Noble

 

Edge/Rey

 

Hardy/Moore

 

Kidman/Spanky

 

The list can go on and on. You give each team some character. Divide them up into Faces/Heels. Give them some worthwhile storylines and PUSH them. Keep the TV stuff short with more interviews/character development/angles going down so matchup's don't get stale right away.

 

Tag Team wrestling is SO FUCKING EASY.

 

Then again, the WEE has NEVER been known to have good tag team wrestling.

 

Tim

[Guest RedJed]

Just a quick clarification on what I meant by the whole booking team thing.......well I'll be best by using an example here.

 

Ok there is the thing that Gerwitz and Heyman "dont get along" or have "clashed" behind the scenes. Alot of you have immediately drawn the conclusion that how else could they not be getting along if Heyman isn't also writing Raw?

 

Take my statement about the booking meeting perhaps being joined for brands at times and people from the opposite brand being allowed by McMahon to offer how they feel about the other brands particular storyline, etc. Its just to offer an opinion, not change it. I could easily see Heyman in his brash openness about things flat out rip on some of Gerwitz's ideas when he presents them in a meeting. This is coming from a booker who, like him or not, has the most experience in the WWE of all creative in writing and booking an actual wrestling show compared to a SE type driven show (even if you hated ECW, you have to admit the emphasis was more on the in ring action than compared to outside storylines and whatnot). Theres a difference there, and thats where I could see Heyman saying shit to Gerwitz about this (and perhaps Gerwitz as well for Heyman's ideas). There are two majorly different styles of writing that Heyman and Gerwitz believe in, if you ask me. Its not that they are changing each others ideas though or anything of that effect though really. I guess thats what I meant by my original statement.

 

I've always wondered that if Heyman was ever a part of Raw booking, why one of the sources wouldn't have commented on this to Keller or Dave or whoever. Sooner or later this would have been revealed by someone. Plus just the fact that officially there has never been word of Heyman writing Raw should say something too......again, especially from an official sense, why they would not want to list Heyman as part of Raw if he ever was makes no sense to me.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

[[Ok there is the thing that Gerwitz and Heyman "dont get along" or have "clashed" behind the scenes. Alot of you have immediately drawn the conclusion that how else could they not be getting along if Heyman isn't also writing Raw?]]

 

That conclusion isn't taken from Gerwitz and Heyman fighting. A staffer at tOA has a contact within WWE management that leaked him information stating that Heyman was in attendence at Raw booking meatings, despite Meltzer, Keller, and Scherer assuring as that he is not. The fact that Gerwitz and Heyman were getting into arguements merely supported the idea that Heyman was writing for both shows.

 

[[Take my statement about the booking meeting perhaps being joined for brands at times and people from the opposite brand being allowed by McMahon to offer how they feel about the other brands particular storyline, etc. Its just to offer an opinion, not change it. I could easily see Heyman in his brash openness about things flat out rip on some of Gerwitz's ideas when he presents them in a meeting. This is coming from a booker who, like him or not, has the most experience in the WWE of all creative in writing and booking an actual wrestling show compared to a SE type driven show (even if you hated ECW, you have to admit the emphasis was more on the in ring action than compared to outside storylines and whatnot).]]

 

It depends what you mean by "actual wrestling." Johny Ace was a road agent for WCW for some time, as I remember, and Bruce Prichard has a significant run in mid-ninties WWF, I think. So saying that Heyman has more experience in wrestling than anyone else in creative is a bit of a leap for me.

 

[[i've always wondered that if Heyman was ever a part of Raw booking, why one of the sources wouldn't have commented on this to Keller or Dave or whoever. Sooner or later this would have been revealed by someone.]]

 

It has puzzled me quite a bit, too. But then, is it not possible that Heyman is being protected by their other sources? Maybe Ross, for example, doesn't want to stir up problems with Paul again, (to help his job security, perhaps) and is chosing not to reveal that he writes on Raw?

 

[[Plus just the fact that officially there has never been word of Heyman writing Raw should say something too......again, especially from an official sense, why they would not want to list Heyman as part of Raw if he ever was makes no sense to me.]]

 

Maybe they're attempting to maintain the idea that the two shows are being booked entirely seperate so that the split seems more believable to fans? Just a possibility.

[Guest Johnny Blaze]

I think part of the reason a lot of the Angle/Benoit matches didn't have the deeper psych we look for and expect from someone like Benoit is because (and this is only a thought, i don't have much evidence to back this up) Angle isn't as good at it. I've been watching a lot of the Benoit/Austin/Angle matches from '01 and '02 and the difference between when Benoit and Austin work together and when Angle works with either of them is startling.

 

The repetition of dangerous moves and such could be related to he fact that Angle was trained in an environment where the more times you pop the crowd, the better, so his matches reflect that. He looks for the same big spots over and over because they work. Guys like Benoit, who may want to put more deep psych into a match, still have to work around the style their opponent works, which means letting him use his big spots too, even if they can be risky moves, like the german suplex reversal spot. Benoit used to use it sparingly and it popped the crowd huge, so Angle lifted it for a match and the crowd popped huge then too, so he worked it into his regular moveset.

 

We (the IWC) have been treating Angle as if he is already at the same level as someone like Benoit or Austin, but I think, in reality, he's a notch below them, workrate-wise. This isn't to say that he can't or won't improve, but i think we expect too much out of someone who has only been a pro for 3 years. He's constantly improving, and maybe when he and all the other injured guys get back, they'll ease up on all the neck-breaking spots and start trying to use psychology instead.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

The reason it didn't have good psych is because they were going for 'can you top this' which is a poor excuse for psychology because it's purely masturabatory wrestling. "We reversed eachothers moves 5 times on Thursday, on Sunday let's try for 7"

[Guest RickyChosyu]

[[i think part of the reason a lot of the Angle/Benoit matches didn't have the deeper psych we look for and expect from someone like Benoit is because (and this is only a thought, i don't have much evidence to back this up) Angle isn't as good at it. I've been watching a lot of the Benoit/Austin/Angle matches from '01 and '02 and the difference between when Benoit and Austin work together and when Angle works with either of them is startling.]]

 

*nod*

 

I don't think Kurt ever learned how to work smart. His mathces were always filled with lots of cute counters and blistering finishes, but building to that was something he never quite understood. Benoit and Austin were probably two of what I considered the smartest wrestlers in the states.

 

Sadly enough, they were the two that started the "Count the Germans" insanity, but aside from that black eye, their matches are worked smartly with basic stuff that connects the crowd easilly.

 

[[The repetition of dangerous moves and such could be related to he fact that Angle was trained in an environment where the more times you pop the crowd, the better, so his matches reflect that.]]

 

Yeah, that's probably why Benoit works the way he does. It still doesn't reflect well on a guy who could real in spotty workers to smart matches once upon a time.

 

[[He looks for the same big spots over and over because they work. Guys like Benoit, who may want to put more deep psych into a match, still have to work around the style their opponent works, which means letting him use his big spots too, even if they can be risky moves, like the german suplex reversal spot.]]

 

Benoit didn't have to go along with that if he didn't want to. It became a token spot of their matches, which means Benoit thought it would be a good idea himself.

 

It's neccesarily even deep psych but minimalist psych that Benoit was known for. He brought intensity and athletisism to the table like everyone else, but he could use things sparingly and make them connect with the crowd far better than most others. He didn't have to avoid the dangerous spots with Kurt, he just needed to make those spots meaningfull so it didn't degenerate into "Top This" which it did.

 

This, to me, says that Benoit either doesn't know how to work that minimalist style anymore or choses not to in exchange for destroying his body and the credibility of what he does.

 

[[We (the IWC) have been treating Angle as if he is already at the same level as someone like Benoit or Austin, but I think, in reality, he's a notch below them, workrate-wise.]]

 

In reality, they're all a notch-below what they used to be. Benoit and Austin started the desolving of the German as credible move, after all.

 

Even in their lesser states, they're both still well above Kurt, I agree.

 

[[This isn't to say that he can't or won't improve, but i think we expect too much out of someone who has only been a pro for 3 years. He's constantly improving, and maybe when he and all the other injured guys get back, they'll ease up on all the neck-breaking spots and start trying to use psychology instead.]]

 

Doubtfull. Kurt has no reason to alter his style unless the neck stuff becomes a real problem for him, but just look at Benoit and Austin. Two guys who went through serious neck injuries still had no probelm giving and taking countless dangerous suplexes. Why should Kurt be any different? His company certainly won't change him, that's for sure.

[Guest Brian]

"Don't forget me Ricky. I tell Dave and Wade stuff too."

 

- The biggest mouth on the smallest man in wrestling

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Shut up, Taz.

 

Damn midgets!

[Guest Johnny Blaze]

Benoit didn't have to go along with that if he didn't want to. It became a token spot of their matches, which means Benoit thought it would be a good idea himself.

 

It's neccesarily even deep psych but minimalist psych that Benoit was known for. He brought intensity and athletisism to the table like everyone else, but he could use things sparingly and make them connect with the crowd far better than most others. He didn't have to avoid the dangerous spots with Kurt, he just needed to make those spots meaningfull so it didn't degenerate into "Top This" which it did.

 

This, to me, says that Benoit either doesn't know how to work that minimalist style anymore or choses not to in exchange for destroying his body and the credibility of what he does.

 

Agreed, Benoit didn't have to go along with it, he decided to use that spot. However, I think its a pretty bold statement to say that he can't work that style anymore, as he still does use his "minimalist psych" in matches, just not always with Kurt. I think it's much more likely that he chose not to (and this is only speculation) because he wants to get over. Benoit has been in the business for something like 15 years now, and he still hasn't quite made it to the main event. He's probably much more willing now to adapt his style in order to finally get to the top. Basically, he's trying to work "WWE style" so that he can get his run with the strap before he finally has to bow out for good, and I can't say I blame him.

 

Or maybe I just don't wanna believe Our Lord and Savior has lost a step.

[Guest Brian]

"We'll just credit it to a number of sources, and not just the man in orange."