Heyman asked Stephanie to step down

[Guest RickyChosyu]

[[Well I'd really like to know who YOU want in charge to write Raw or Smackdown...]]

 

If you're asking me to name another booker who could take the company in the right direction, I honestly don't know of one. I know what I think they could be doing to make things better, but I'm not sure there is anyone who can make those things happen, if you catch my drift.

 

[[Dunn: In support of the Dawn Marie/Al Wilson angle from not too long ago, has demanded for matches to be 3 minutes too short, and also suggested the infamous Necrophilia angle.]]

 

So Heyman was not in support of it? Again, who was the official "head-writer" of the show, again?

 

As for Necrophilia, Paul was just as active at those booking meetings as Dunn, Gerwitz, or any of his other scape goats. Most people aren't willing to accept this, but Paul has been writing for both Raw and Smackdown! for a while now.

 

[[Ace: Wanted Albert to get Matt Hardy's push, and actually thinks Matt still gets cheered.]]

 

So I guess Paul was thinking of all those big plans he had for Matt when he jobbed him to Lesnar, Taker, Big Show, ect? Paul burried Matt from the begining, so the idea that he wanted to push Matt to the moon until Ace "cut his legs off" is ridiculous.

 

[[Gewirtz/Gerwitz/whatever: Only knows how to write Edge & Christian material(and possibly the Goldust/Booker T skits). Other than that, just watch any Raw episode from the past few months to see his bad writing. He was also in support of the Necrophilia angle, along with McMahon and Dunn.]]

 

Again, Paul is just as active at the Raw booking meets as Vince, Dunn, and Gerwitz. Remember the news story where the two got into a confrontation? Why would Paul be arguing with "the head-writer of Raw" if he only writes for Smackdown?

 

[[Any McMahon being in charge of writing? Ha! Shane creams himself over Test, Steph's a lame soap opera writer, and Vince is senile.]]

 

Shane is the smartest MchMahon, at the moment. He doesn't get exposed on TV (except for that horrible appearance a few weeks back), and he gets a nice cushy, nondiscript job in Hollywood relating to something no one really knows about.

 

Again, I'm not trying to put over any of the other guys on Creative as worthy contributors, but going through great lengths to say that Paul is against every bad idea and pushes for every good idea is ridiculous. I see no signs of "genius" anywhere on Smackdown! including the much-heralded tag matches that served no purpose. Also, considering that Paul writes for Raw, trying to convince me of his genius based on one show being better than the other is equally-ridiculous.

 

Not trying to put Paul on a pedastle above the rest of the Gang of Idiots, just pointing out how everyone around here seems to have the blinders on when it comes to discussing him as a booker.

[Guest geniusMoment]

I didn't say my opinion was the correct one its just a gut reaction, how I would feel. I would just be happy if I found out they died.

As for why I still watch, thats simple I enjoy wrestling. I am not going to deprive myself of something just to get at the McMahons, like my one ticket matters to their bottom line anyway.

If they would both die I feel one of two things would happen: 1. WWE would prosper 2. WWE would fold and a new promotion would emerge.

I still watch because I still get enjoyment out of the programs, just not as much as I used to. Its not like I stay awake at night and wish death upon them. I would just be happy if I woke up one morning and heard the oh so tragic news.

[Guest RedJed]

How about Meltzer, who gave Paul "booker of the year" for Smackdown in 2002, even though it dropped more in the ratings than Raw?

Check your facts before you go off saying things like that.

 

Meltzer doesn't pick out the awards himself, man. That should be obvious.

 

And Smackdown didn't drop in the ratings more than Raw, if you want me to give you a full month by month breakdown of it, so be it.

 

You guys are equally as blurred by pure Heyman hate (without logic other than you "hear" things from a source at TOA, which is all you can base your arguments from) than some are for praising him for everything. You're basing everything off like the WWE creative situation is a cut and dry issue, which should be obvious that its not.

 

If you want people who are for Heyman to open their eyes, then you can't be so biased yourself.

[Guest Brian]

Or we can just forget everything that anyone's said and look at what's happened. Doesn't speak well for Heyman.

 

Matt does get cheered, at least on house shows. He plays a face some matches.

[Guest NoCalMike]

The question that even all of us smarks will never know is where does the writers/bookers/head bookers control run out and Vince McMahon's begins. Who is to say what Heyman/Gerwitz/Dunn etc....would do if they REALLY had control of the storylines. If any of us think it is anyone but VINCE MCMAHON's vision being portrayed out there then they are kidding themselves dearly. The only reason I give Heyman a leg up on credit is due to his extensive wrestling business backround over someone like Gerwitz who has been merely a soap opera writer. That is not to say Heyman is god, or the sole saivor.

[Guest bob_barron]

You guys realise that this is the same Paul Heyman who ran a company into the ground right?

[Guest treble charged]

Yeah. I'll give Heyman credit, without him, we probably wouldn't have gotten so many great matches on SmackDown late last year, but people tend to forget that his company went out of business. If he was as great as some make him out to be, ECW would be the #1 promotion in the world right now and Vince would be working for him.

[Guest bob_barron]

On Heyman- the great matches were great but the guy was doing Edge v. Benoit and Angle v. Eddy for no reason some weeks.

 

He could've booked a whole year's worth of stuff using the Smackdown! 6 and outsiders like Brock, Matt, Taker and the cruisers like Noble/Kidman/Tajiri.

[Guest geniusMoment]

It was bad business decisions that cost ECW. ECW just didn't have enough revenue behind it. If they had revenue they would have been able to keep some of their bigger stars and could have prospered. The credible title reign was never supposed to happen. They were planing on running a sheiks army vs. RVD and Tanaka angle. Awesome, SABU and a soon turned Bill Alphonso were going to be going against RVD in a summer feud culminating in a RVD-Awesome world title match.

Here is what happened:

Lynn broke his ankle

RVD broke his leg

Sabu left

Awesome left

Spike tore up his knee

Tanaka had to go back to Japan as FMW was having serious problems

Raven who they counted on turned out to be a drunken waste

Super Crazy had visa problems and couldn't work

ECW just had shitty luck in its final year along with a crap station that gave them a crap timeslot and no promotion

[Guest treble charged]

Thing is, Heyman never really made an attempt to make ECW bigger than it was. The audience was definitely there, as at points they were drawing higher buyrates than WCW, but Heyman was content to keep running shows in a bingo hall.

[Guest geniusMoment]

Heyman didn't have the money to expand. He was losing it by the ton in 2000. He was so far in debt he couldn't afford to properly promote shows in big arenas.

Don't get me wrong he had tons of flaws but his product was good enough to prosper in my opinion.

[Guest RedJed]

Thing is, Heyman never really made an attempt to make ECW bigger than it was.  The audience was definitely there, as at points they were drawing higher buyrates than WCW, but Heyman was content to keep running shows in a bingo hall.

Read the shoot interview transcript with Tod Gordon on this site to understand why it was that way......they were in financial trouble years before they went under. Heyman was a horrible businessman, plain and simple. He had no fucking idea how to handle finances. Comparing a booking ability and overall businessman ability are two different things. For example Vince is a great businessman........but as a writer he lacks anything, especially in the last few years. Anyway point is saying Heyman is worthless as a writer because ECW is no longer around doesn't even make sense.

 

Oh and by the way he ended up doing shows all over the country by 2000, so to say he never made an attempt makes no sense. That attempt along with getting the boot from TNN though seemed to be the nail in the coffin for the company, however. The finances really started to get out of hand once the attempt to go national was made.

 

"The question that even all of us smarks will never know is where does the writers/bookers/head bookers control run out and Vince McMahon's begins. Who is to say what Heyman/Gerwitz/Dunn etc....would do if they REALLY had control of the storylines. If any of us think it is anyone but VINCE MCMAHON's vision being portrayed out there then they are kidding themselves dearly. The only reason I give Heyman a leg up on credit is due to his extensive wrestling business backround over someone like Gerwitz who has been merely a soap opera writer. That is not to say Heyman is god, or the sole saivor. "

 

Exactly, thats why it gets old for people either for or against the Heyman fight acting like they know all the answers and "real" inside information about it. You have a political atmosphere in the company larger than ever before as well, which makes it harder than ever to judge who wrote this, who didn't push this guy, who stepped in where, etc, etc. All I have done to form my judgment on the Heyman era of Smackdown is judging the entertainment value of the show then and more often than not, I thought the shows flowed well, angles made sense, things were told in the ring instead of in crazh TV segments all over the place, characters were given more of a backbone and weren't so bland, and it generally gave me the feel of an actual wrestling program for once, not just a waste of two hours time.

[Guest treble charged]

Thing is, Heyman never really made an attempt to make ECW bigger than it was.  The audience was definitely there, as at points they were drawing higher buyrates than WCW, but Heyman was content to keep running shows in a bingo hall.

Read the shoot interview transcript with Tod Gordon on this site to understand why it was that way......they were in financial trouble years before they went under. Heyman was a horrible businessman, plain and simple. He had no fucking idea how to handle finances. Comparing a booking ability and overall businessman ability are two different things. For example Vince is a great businessman........but as a writer he lacks anything, especially in the last few years. Anyway point is saying Heyman is worthless as a writer because ECW is no longer around doesn't even make sense.

If Heyman were a tremendous booker then ECW on TNN would have broken the 1.5 barrier on the Nielsen scale eventually. Sure, he was hampered by poor finances, but a great product would have gotten more people watching it, and then brought in more money, which would have allowed them to expand and would have earned them even more money beyond that.

 

The current WWE is a perfect example of this. When the product was better a few years ago, they were bringing in record amounts of money, but now, when the product isn't as good as it was, revenues are down, even to the point where they're losing money (granted, not from the wrestling standpoint of things, but from poor business decisions).

 

There is a direct corollation between the product you put out and the money you bring in.

[Guest RedJed]

Thing is, Heyman never really made an attempt to make ECW bigger than it was.  The audience was definitely there, as at points they were drawing higher buyrates than WCW, but Heyman was content to keep running shows in a bingo hall.

Read the shoot interview transcript with Tod Gordon on this site to understand why it was that way......they were in financial trouble years before they went under. Heyman was a horrible businessman, plain and simple. He had no fucking idea how to handle finances. Comparing a booking ability and overall businessman ability are two different things. For example Vince is a great businessman........but as a writer he lacks anything, especially in the last few years. Anyway point is saying Heyman is worthless as a writer because ECW is no longer around doesn't even make sense.

If Heyman were a tremendous booker then ECW on TNN would have broken the 1.5 barrier on the Nielsen scale eventually. Sure, he was hampered by poor finances, but a great product would have gotten more people watching it, and then brought in more money, which would have allowed them to expand and would have earned them even more money beyond that.

 

The current WWE is a perfect example of this. When the product was better a few years ago, they were bringing in record amounts of money, but now, when the product isn't as good as it was, revenues are down, even to the point where they're losing money (granted, not from the wrestling standpoint of things, but from poor business decisions).

 

There is a direct corollation between the product you put out and the money you bring in.

You aren't getting it, they DID expand thanks to the TNN deal (attendance picked up all over the place, etc), and THEY WERE MAKING MORE MONEY THAN BEFORE. They were making a decent chunk of change from the TNN deal so they went out and did the national circuit. But that was ultimately their demise because they were already fucked before that with the finances. Wouldn't nearly have been as hard of a hit if Heyman would have had one fucking clue how to handle the company finances.

 

I'm not quite understanding your point, did you expect ECW in one year on TNN (was it even that?) to just skyrocket to the top? Hell even when WCW started the NWO, nothing substantial as far as the company really starting to gain momentum didn't happen until into 97, 6 or 7 months after the entire angle started. If ECW would have been on TNN for, say, 3 years.......then I think we could get a more fair conclusion from that run, but in less than a years time, in which at least half of that was the company concentrated on the WWE deal, its hard to really judge what could have been and what wasn't, etc.

 

Would have ECW done better if the writing would have picked up during the TNN run? Maybe. Would have the writing picked up if Heyman would have hired outside help with the finances? Maybe. Would have the company increased revenue if they would have had more money to throw around with in the first place for better advertising and promotion? Maybe. Theres a LOT of what ifs when it comes to building a successful company, point being.

 

Of course quality writing has to do with increased revenue, I never said that wasn't the case. But you can be the best goddamn booker ever and if the right business desicions aren't done, you won't go far. Look at the UWF when ran by Bill Watts. Great booking, but went nowhere.

[Guest treble charged]

I don't see how they did expand, though. Sure, he ran shows in different markets and in slightly larger buildings, but he always clinged to the bingo hall, which just screamed 'third rate indy promotion' to most casual fans, coupled with ECW's low production values (by WWF standards, at least).

 

My point is, Heyman had a national TV deal (yes, he did get dicked around by TNN), yet still did nothing with it. If his product had been compelling enough, more people would have watched it.

 

In hindsight, he probably should have stayed in the north east, but then he should have ran shows in larger buildings and pumped some cash into the production side of things.

[Guest Brian]

Wasn't Paul supposedly so damn ballsy that he got his own content on the air?

[Guest GameCop]

I wouldn't be surprised if Heyman is gone in no time.

[Guest humongous2002]

WCW died b/c of the politics and ATM Eric wasting all that money.

ECW died b/c of bad financial management by Paul E.

WWE will died b/c of stupidity, there are a small amount of people within that company that wants to see the WWE succeed instead of looking for themselves but instead of getting rewarded they get demoted or fired just b/c they are obviously concern with the WWE's problems.

Vince brags all the time that it was him that killed WCW, which is not true(wcw killed itself) but he is the one that's going to kill WWE for not having a set of balls anymore.

[Guest Brian]

First of all, I doubt anything was said, because it looks pretty hypocritical and is just taking heat away from his job performance.

 

"angles made sense,"

 

Like Heyman jobbing out one client to put the title on another. Like putting the title on Show. Like Al Wilson. Like putting the cruiser title on Kidman.

 

"things were told in the ring instead of in crazh TV segments all over the place,"

 

I'm guessing you're talking about the SmackDown six.

 

"characters were given more of a backbone and weren't so bland,"

 

That's pretty subjective, because albert and Show were pushed without much and pretty much for anyone who got a new personality, there was no intention of giving them a long-term push.

 

"and it generally gave me the feel of an actual wrestling program for once,"

 

At the expense of three of the better workers getting injured.

 

"not just a waste of two hours time."

 

Only wasted the hour and a half there wasn't a match involving the SmackDown six on the air.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

Sept 9th 2000 - ECW comes to Canada. 5000 fans in a sold out arena.

 

Paul knows what wrestling fans want but I don't quite think he knows what wrestling fans need.

[Guest JMA]

I, for one, don't care about Paul's motives. I'm just glad someone told WWE the truth for once.

[Guest Brian]

That Paul shouldn't have been booking SmackDown when he was the main feature of the show for the last seven months? Paul has the balls to say that. What a guy.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

In reality:

 

Paul: Hey Steph, you're looking great today.

 

Steph: Thank's Paul. Is that cake?

 

Paul: Why yes it is, would you like to have this cake and eat it?

 

Steph: Why thank you paul! How very nice of you...

 

Paul: Always willing to help.

 

*the next day*

 

Paul: So here I am backstage and Steph walks by and wants to change something on the show. I'm like, "No Steph, you can't do that, the fan's deserve better." and she's like "Paul, I'm a McMahon, I know what the fans want and deserve." and I am like "Bitch, you're a McMahon so you only know what YOU want." and she's like "and what is THAT supposed to mean" and so I finally said it, "You want yourself and your family and your fucking fiancee on Television all the time! It completely ruins the show and the fans HATE IT! When I ran ECW I never put myself on Television because I knew the temptation to put myself over the talent so I just didn't do it. You, on the other hand, mrs hollywood, try to have your cake and eat it too - and that creates a conflict of interest."

 

Dave: You didn't!

 

Paul: Oh, I did baby. I'm tired of all that shit. I see Gerwitz kissing ass, I see Ace jocking for position, I see all these writers only telling Vince and his daughter what they want to hear and I just can't take it any more. I couldn't. I spoke my mind and now look...

 

Dave: You poor soul.

 

*the next day*

 

Dave: So in conclusion, we have Paul Heyman - a man who fights for what is right and good and holy in this world of professional wrestling getting demoted because of that fight... All the while everyone else, from Gerwitz to Ace are trying to manipulate and further their own agendas. I for one am glad to say that there ARE some people in this world who stands up for good."

 

WON Reader: WOW! Paul Heyman ROCKS!

[Guest JMA]

WON Reader: WOW! Paul Heyman ROCKS!

Damn right.

[Guest geniusMoment]

The difference is Paul ran is own damn promotion and put basically never put himself over on camera. If he had that big of an ego he could have put himself over at every turn.

When Paul came to then WWF he said he didn't want to be an on air talent. Its WWE that said they wanted him on air.

[Guest Brian]

Probably because Heyman was too busy trying to run the whole show by himself. Finances, promos, booking, and scripting.

 

Because Paul the booker was apart of every main event angle for the past seven months he's been head of the booking team. He's managed guys on the side like Albert and Team Angle. He worked with Hardy and Moore backstage. Damn those McMahons~!

[Guest bob_barron]

I, for one, don't care about Paul's motives. I'm just glad someone told WWE the truth for once.

Yea- he has a lot of guts telling Eddy Guerrero to do his dirty work.

 

A smrter booker wouldn't have killed the SD! 6 in two months. Heyman did

[Guest geniusMoment]

Nope Paul didn't put himself over even when Gordon was handling the finances and business decisions.

[Guest El Psycho Diablo]

About the cruiser title: I don't really blame Heyman. Kidman's just their ideal cruiser. A tall white guy who wrestles safe (read: dull), has no character to speak of, and only uses one "dangerous" move.

 

He's a cruiser hoss.

[Guest Brian]

Knoble's whole reign was handled poorly and Kidman's wasn't handled too well.