LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Heyman is guilty of repetetive matches and overbooking, but I somehow don't get the feeling he's behind some of the bigger blunders. Those smell of Steph to me.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Smackdown has been a lot more watchable since he's been writing. And what do you mean losing more ratings than RAW? I thought Smackdown has been holding steady while RAW has been plummeting? How do you know these things aren't Steph's fault? What do you mean by watchable? Other than Misterio, Edge, Eddy, Chavo, Angle, and Benoit, I don't see any real advantage. Both have had their attocious angles and neither has gotten any kind of lie-way in the ratings. Compared to how both shows ranked in at last year's sweeps period, Raw's ratings have dropped less than Smackdown's. Steph's fault? Who was the "head writer" for the show all this time? Who always gets the praise for the good angles and never the bad? Who always puts himself over as the savior of wreslting as his show stagnates?
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Fine then let's get someone else in here to write Smackdown......but who?
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 The ratings are so up and down because one week we have Rey/Edge against Los Guerreros..or Benoit/Angle.. ..and the next month we get Undertaker/Show/Albert/DeMott/Jones.. From more or less wrestling-oriented to hoss-oriented. Go figure.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 As far as I can tell, Paul still writes for Smackdown. Just because he's now a "consultant" doesn't mean his influence is gone. I don't see how Paul being "demoted" affects anything at all, considering he's been writing for both Raw and Smackdown! for a while now.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 The ratings are so up and down because one week we have Rey/Edge against Los Guerreros..or Benoit/Angle.. ..and the next month we get Undertaker/Show/Albert/DeMott/Jones.. From more or less wrestling-oriented to hoss-oriented. Go figure. As I remember, none of the "wrestling-related" stuff Paul did managed to score anything in the ratings. Hell, the biggest increase in ratings came from the HLA stuff. Benoit/Angle and Los Guererros/Edge & Rey didn't do much at all to draw fans in, and I think it's pretty obvious why. Paul sent them out there time and time again without booking any of the matches to mean something. Why would people tune in to see the same combinations of guys over and over again in throw-away matches? The "Smackdown Six" are just like Awesome/Tanaka, just like Tajiri/Crazy, and just like Lynn/Van Dam. They're rolled out there when Paul can't think of anything better to fill up the show.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I'd ask the same thing about Austin/Rock (Gee, who's winning that one..?)..but that's gonna ME Wrestlemania.
Guest jester Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I'm not an advocate of Paul Heyman, but saying that he books himself to look good compariable to people like Stephanie and Vince is ludicrous. Heyman gets smacked around, acts cowardly, acts like a degenerate, and generally does not look positive. When was the last time an angle was written to make Stephanie look weak or outsmarted? The last time I remember was the 3MW thing, but of course she got hers back. They make a point of showing every wrestler on the show kissing her ass. And Vince just booked himself into a major match at Wrestlemania. If we're talking self-indulgent booking, Heyman is a rank amateur next to the McMahons.
Guest NoSelfWorth Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Even when he was head writer, everything Paul presented still had to go through Stephanie, and then to Vince. In the end, everything is Vince's call, with the appropiate amount of influence from HGH, Underseller, and other McMahon asskissers and yes men. And as for Observer awards, for the last time, Dave did not decide them. The readers did. If you don't like the winners, blame the people who voted for them.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Actually, I'm VERY suprised Bischoff hasn't been fired/humilliated at the expense of Steph yet. Of course, that's how the brand split will end.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Heyman is guilty of repetetive matches and overbooking, but I somehow don't get the feeling he's behind some of the bigger blunders. Those smell of Steph to me. So everything good is Heyman's idea. And everything bad is Steph's idea. That seems to be the general consensus. Heyman booked the Smackdown! 6 matches into the ground in only two months time as he blew all the matches too quickly. He would give them all this time on free TV but the matches would suffer on PPV (see the 3-way at SurS) which is when the customer pays $30 to see them. Heyman has done nothing for Smackdown's ratings and the fact that the guy booked it so he has managed the last three WWE champions is a bit absurd
Guest jester Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Actually, I'm VERY suprised Bischoff hasn't been fired/humilliated at the expense of Steph yet. Of course, that's how the brand split will end. Me too actually. When Vince looked to redo the Kiss My Ass thing, I thought "Oh here we go. This is for 'he beats the big guy with three superkicks' Eric."
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 [[i'm not an advocate of Paul Heyman, but saying that he books himself to look good compariable to people like Stephanie and Vince is ludicrous.]] Think so? He's on TV just as much, if not more, than both of them. [[Heyman gets smacked around, acts cowardly, acts like a degenerate, and generally does not look positive.]] He manages half the wrestlers on TV. He's portrayed as the mastermind behind every plot. He's portrayed a manipulative genius. [[When was the last time an angle was written to make Stephanie look weak or outsmarted?]] Well, she didn't look that smart when her top star left for Raw last week. Stephanie is a camera-hog, but her and the MchMahon's antics don't justify Paul's. He's just as bad as them, in my book. [[And Vince just booked himself into a major match at Wrestlemania. If we're talking self-indulgent booking, Heyman is a rank amateur next to the McMahons.]] Then why is he the central figuer of the Angle/Brock feud? Why is getting revenge on Paul more important to Brock than beating up Kurt? Why is Paul the one who's gotten the one-up on Brock every time and not Kurt? If you want to call him more subtle, that would be fine, but Paul is a camera-hog in every sense. He appears in all the main angles, and is on the show more than any other character. He's a waste of space.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Ricky: Unlike Steph stealing guys from Raw..(Benoit), Rocky left of his own accord. That way, Steph didn't look bad.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Bischoff stole the UnAmericans, Chris Jericho, Randy Orton and the Hurricane. The UnAmericans and Jericho were stolen by Eric Bischoff
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Bischoff also totally fooled Stephanie during the gay wedding by having Rico turn on her and jump to RAW and having some Samoans beat her up.
Guest CanadianChick Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Steph stole the undisputed champion, that's a pretty big deal. But I don't think that Heyman is that great, but he's better than Gerwitz. On the other hand, Heyman is on TV quite often, and that gets old pretty fast.
Guest jester Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Stephanie was the center focus of a feud in wrestlemania last year, and shortly thereafter COMPETED IN A MATCH for the unified title. As for the talent that Bischoff "stole," was that really treated like a big deal? Remember, Steph grabbed Brock when he was the world champion. That was a big deal. No way Heyman is worse than the McMahons. They've been at it too long too hard. I don't believe he is the wrestling savior that some do, but he's never made Angle clean up dog shit.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 [[Even when he was head writer, everything Paul presented still had to go through Stephanie, and then to Vince. In the end, everything is Vince's call, with the appropiate amount of influence from HGH, Underseller, and other McMahon asskissers and yes men.]] So Heyman never kisses ass, or agrees to anything Vince wants, I take it? And those ass-kissers would be Dunn, Ace, ect al? Notice how those web sites like 1wrestling never blame HHH or the MchMahons for anything that goes wrong? Notice how it's always one of the "yes men" responsible? Again, consider their main source of info in the WWE, and it should be clear to you why Paul isn't picking bigger fish to shift the blame on. [[And as for Observer awards, for the last time, Dave did not decide them. The readers did. If you don't like the winners, blame the people who voted for them.]] And Dave has *no* influence over his readers, right? Considering how often Dave's word is taken as gospel by his readers, I have a hard time buying that "don't blame Dave for the year-end awards" rubbish. He can't have all that responsibility and then get none of the blame. "Ricky: Unlike Steph stealing guys from Raw..(Benoit), Rocky left of his own accord. That way, Steph didn't look bad." I was joking. However, if anyone bothered to think about that (which the WWE never counts on) they'd realize that Steph comes off as pretty stupid for letting Rock go to Raw.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Heyman was set to be the centre focus of Wrestlemania this year. They put Steph in the match as a way to let Triple H get his final revenge over her and send everyone home happy Stephanie did do her fair share of one-upmanship but saying Bischoff never made her look bad is ludicrous.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Wrestling fans never were too bright.
Guest treble charged Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Bischoff stealing HHH was one of the main stories at Vengeance and on the Raw before. The UnAmericans jumped when they were the tag champs, and Jericho interfered in the main event on Raw, laying out Ric Flair. Even Hurricane jumping was made to be somewhat of a big deal, as he won the tag belts with Kane that night.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 But..with the exception of HHH..none of the guys Bischoff stole were major players. Unlike Brock (the reigning champion) and Benoit (an upper midcarder on the rise) all Eric got were minor guys.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 He got the tag champions and Chris Jericho. I wouldn't call him a minor guy.
Guest Raven_Effect01 Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 They put Steph in the match as a way to let Triple H get his final revenge over her and send everyone home happy Who was the Undisputed Champion? Steph? No. Lucy? No. It was Jericho, but he had to be Steph's errand boy, and thus the feud centered around Stephanie and HHH's boring arguments that wasted valuable TV time. Wrestling over a title should be about Champion vs. Challenger(which obviously didn't SEEM to happen at Wrestlemania thanks to HHH and Steph), not the chickenshit Champion's "business partner" vs. Challenger.
Guest RavishingRickRudo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Anything that reminds you of a scene from a movie or is blatently stolen from a movie or soap you can generally pin on Steph.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 [[stephanie was the center focus of a feud in wrestlemania last year, and shortly thereafter COMPETED IN A MATCH for the unified title.]] Heyman was the central focus of Brock/Angle, which would be a WM fued if Kurt hadn't gotten injurred. As for Steph getting a shot at the title, it's not too late for Paul to start training. His matches with Cornette weren't that bad. [[No way Heyman is worse than the McMahons. They've been at it too long too hard. I don't believe he is the wrestling savior that some do, but he's never made Angle clean up dog shit.]] He made Big Show and Kurt look like the dummest morrons ever in that whole fiasco where he was managing them both while they fueded. He was also the first one to make Kendrick look like a complete doofus, too. Paul is never called into question for the stupid things that appear on his show, even if they involve his character. It's always someone else's fault, be it Dunn, Ace, Gerwitz, whoever. Paul's always got an excuse, and while Meltzer and Keller aren't his voice-box like Schemer, they're willing to believe his bullshit in many cases.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I'm talking about the 3-way where HHH was champion. I hated that feud as much anyone. It seemed like the last week they seemd to know where to go but then had to do that stupid stuff with the dog.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 He made Big Show and Kurt look like the dummest morrons ever in that whole fiasco where he was managing them both while they fueded. I never got how it was- Paul: Big Show- I cost you the title. Angle- I caused you to get hurt and be on crutches. Big Show: That's okay. Angle: That's okay.
Guest Raven_Effect01 Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I'm talking about the 3-way where HHH was champion. Oh, that? OK. But there was no logical reasoning behind that match happening other than to get Steph off TV(which didn't last long as her camera-hogging ass came back several months later when it was "promised" that she would never be back on TV again). Now, onto another subject... Paul is never called into question for the stupid things that appear on his show, even if they involve his character. It's always someone else's fault, be it Dunn, Ace, Gerwitz, whoever. Paul's always got an excuse, and while Meltzer and Keller aren't his voice-box like Schemer, they're willing to believe his bullshit in many cases. Well I'd really like to know who YOU want in charge to write Raw or Smackdown... 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. Ace: Wanted Albert to get Matt Hardy's push, and actually thinks Matt still gets cheered. 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. Any McMahon being in charge of writing? Ha! Shane creams himself over Test, Steph's a lame soap opera writer, and Vince is senile.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now