WWE vs. WCW (2000) (vs. anyone else?)

[Guest JMFabiano524]

Given how the WWE is going down faster than Rena Mero at a sex addicts' convention, I am wondering...do you think it rivals or surpasses the infamous Vince Russo "reign of terror" in 2000 WCW as the worst wrestling promotion ever? As I have mentioned lately, I actually do think that the latter is the case. In fact, if we count WWE as separate from WWF, I'd say it was the worst federation period. There's a reason I don't watch it regularly anymore, folks. Actually a couple...the political "Game," anyone good going nowhere, boneheaded signings, depushes and decisions based on the pettiest and most shallow of reasons, neutering of good workers, and the fact that if there is anything I like, it will usually be shot down.

 

Now I'm not defending the Russo WCW by any means. But someone at the TNA board put it best...while many of his angles and gimmicks were abortions, at least Russo tried to get everyone over. I can name several WWE wrestlers who were used MUCH BETTER in WCW '00. Ex: Booker T as World Champion > Booker T: Triple H's job boy. Team Canada Lance Storm > revolving door gimmick Lance Storm. Maybe that's why I think WWE has passed it as the "worst ever." Hey, even David Arquette was a better athlete than Triple H ;-)

 

So what are your thoughts? Or is there some obscure federation/one I had no regular access to that I am neglecting?

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

WWE.

 

More wasted talent than WCW could shake a stick at.

 

Big names AND talented wreslters...all shot to hell in the name of McMAhon. Vince McMAhon. Stephanie McMahon. Hunter Hearst McMahon.

 

That's right. He'll take her name and combine it with his wrestling name. The sick fuck.

[Guest BoboBrazil]

WWE first half of 2002 was worse than it is now.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

WCW in 2001 was better than WWE.

 

WCW for a 3 week period in the Summer of 2000 was better than the WWE.

[Guest Blue Bacchus]

Maybe WWE 2002 was worse than WCW 2000 but not the current product. WWE 2003 so far has been Incredibly Average.

[Guest Galactic Gigolo]

Call me an idiot (it won't be the first time) but I loved Russo's run once he came back in 2000. Russo took shit, since a lot of the young talent they had were not polished enough to be main eventers, and made it smell nice. He pushed Booker T, Storm, Helms, Jarrett, Steiner (back when he could move), the NBT, Chavo, Elix, etc. And when Johnny Ace was in charge of simply booking hot finishes, the shows got even better.

 

Russo threw a lot of crap out there (The crap with Miss Hancock and David Flair was all over the place) when he was there, but the programs entertained me even when the WWE was throwing out **** matches with Triple H at the top of PPVs.

[Guest Choken One]

You guys are idiots....Do you really think WWE 2002 was bad as AWA in the dying days? Or ECW in 2000 when it was headlining Credible and Sandman?

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

I would rather have ECW in 2000 than WWE in 03. At least I had a sense that they were doing the best with what they got and wanted me as a fan in ECW.

[Guest bravesfan]

At least I had a sense that they were doing the best with what they got

 

With Justin Credible... MAIN EVENTING?!?

 

Seriously, was THAT the best they could do?

[Guest Blue Bacchus]

He wasn't THAT bad.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

I meant on-a-whole.

[Guest Choken One]

Yeah, Seriously...They weren't even trying to save it...Throwing the title on Credible and the TV title on Kid Kash wa gonna make a sudden BOOM of money?

 

At least we get Benoit/Angle in this era...

 

They gave us Credible/Sandman/Rhyno/Lynn as the main event...

 

Hell, I don't even remember who was the champion when it ended... Rhyno?

[Guest Lightning Flik]

At least ECW was TRYING to make things happen with what it had.

 

WWE can't even do that. I mean, WWE really is the federation that has it all wrong but should have everything all right with how they have the stellar lineup, the stellar creativeness, and pushing of new talent.

 

Instead WWE has been about the ol' washed up lineup, the rehashing of creative ideas that are now used so futily is pathetic, and frankly no new talent has been given a decent push other than Brock Lesnar and John Cena (and both are still too green to be where they are at, even I admit this).

 

I mean, is there any reason that WWE is NOT the worst?

[Guest KingOfOldSchool]

In terms of the sheer amount of talent simply being wasted, then I think WWE is worse.

 

They've assembled one of the best rosters the wrestling world has ever seen, and they do nothing with it. While WCW 2000 was doing the best with what they had.

 

As far as angles and storylines go, it's about even. And WCW still their own egomaniac in Russo.

 

Russo gave himself and Arquette the title because he could, and as a big middle finger to the higher-ups which had fired him months before, which is not excusable. While a certain someone else is doing literally the same thing now.

 

Above is why I've thought about giving WWE the edge, because at least Triple H is an actual wrestler. But I still have to say no way.

 

While Russo's stuff was bad, at least it was still entertaining, in my mind (minus Arquette, that is). WWE's bad stuff doesn't even do that much for me.

 

I honestly think WCW in 2k did have a head on it's shoulders though, as a whole, more than WWE does now. WWE has way more yes men right now than WCW did in 2000.

[Guest Galactic Gigolo]

I actually didn't mind the Russo thing. The whole thing was that Russo got the title by accident. He fought Booker T in the Cage Match (and I thought he was a great heel), and Goldberg ran out and speared him straight through the fence-cage. So Russo hit the floor first, so he won the match. The guy never tried to defend it, because he knew he wasn't a wrestler.

[Guest JDMattitudeV1]

The fact is that ECW had a very limited roster to work with, as did the AWA at the end. The WWE has the best roster they have ever had and with the monopoly they currently have they could sign any wrestler they wanted. Although WCW was horrid towards the end at least Russo was trying to elevate new talent in his own twisted way in an attempt to dig WCW out of it's hole. WWE thinks that hosses, nostalgia and lesbian angles are it's way out of it's current slump. I suppose the bottom line is though that WCW, ECW and the AWA died and the WWE hasn't, YET!

[Guest bravesfan]

In terms of wasted talent, yes, the WWE is probably in the worst shape I've seen.

 

But from other aspects, I've seen MUCH worse in other promotions. And the match quality is still head-and-shoulders above most of the ECW and WCW stuff from their dying days (even though it has faded since last fall.)

 

Hell, I've seen worse periods in this same promotion (*cough*1995*cough*). At least in this timeframe, the main event situation hasn't completely ruined an ENTIRE set of of pay-per-views by itself.

Edited May 4, 2003 by bravesfan

[Guest JMFabiano524]

I actually didn't mind the Russo thing. The whole thing was that Russo got the title by accident. He fought Booker T in the Cage Match (and I thought he was a great heel), and Goldberg ran out and speared him straight through the fence-cage. So Russo hit the floor first, so he won the match. The guy never tried to defend it, because he knew he wasn't a wrestler.

Yeah, I always found the bitching and moaning about this to be overrated. Didn't Russo vacate the title on Thunder that same week? If so, at least he never defended it, unlike Arquette, who did so at least once and WON.

[Guest NoSelfWorth]

Yeah, because booking yourself to win the World title, and then not even dropping it in the ring is so good for business.

[Guest Midnight Express83]

Well, pro wrestling is a business. just like show business. Show=wrestling. Small show, BIG BUSINESS. They do what they can for business. Out of all these feds being talked about. Atleast the WWE is still making a profit wrestling wise. Not a large one right now but a profit is still a profit. So they must be doing somethings right to keep a profit.

 

WCW had a profit 3 years in its life. 1996, 1997, and 1998. It was black in 1992 and that is about it. AWA stop making a profit around 1987-1988 and that was the end of them. ECW, had a minor profit for a few years. But Once 1999 hit, it was over for ECW. They didn't have the money for their roster, trips, PPV, and TV shows. They tried making it big time without the big time feel. What they should have done was cut stupid spending(like house shows in middle of nowhere, America). If they kept on the East Coast and stayed in the belt line of New Haven to Richmond, they would still be around. But no, Paul Heyman is a crappy business man.

 

And the product is bad right now, but not THAT bad. I mean come on, it isn't the end of the world that Big Show is being fed to Brock Lesnar. He was champion twice before and the fed didn't die. What would a third do. And Kevin Nash being WWE champion may be bad, but after the first RAW only PPV, things will change BIG Time.

[Guest Galactic Gigolo]

Yeah, because booking yourself to win the World title, and then not even dropping it in the ring is so good for business.

1) If I'm watching a wrestling program to be entertained, I could care less about if it's making money. I found Russo entertaining for the most part in WCW, and the Cage Match was pretty fun.

 

2) Russo realized well into his reign in the federation that turning around the federation was not going to be short term. WCW had a loyal core audience of about 2.5 during Russo's stint, and that audience didn't really go away for the most part so Russo realized that he could do things that he felt would get over during that period. And Russo was over as a heel in WCW, and helped get over a lot of guys in the process during his run. Getting the title on himself gave him an excuse to get Booker T over more by putting him in the one-night tournament which resulted in Booker winning the title from Jarrett once again in a pretty good match.

[Guest JMFabiano524]

OK, it's my opinion that anyone who badmouths ECW 2K has read too many Sean Shannon rants. A friend of mine sent me a tape of some TNN matches from the time period, and I would definitely say they weren't a total waste. I agree that the title scene was too dominated by Heyman Blowjob Recipients, but the product was still entertaining. That's more than I can say for now, where things either suck or if they're good, someone's (wonder wHHHo?) bound to complain that they can't work.

[Bored 0]

The last few weeks I've being doing the Nitro and Thunder review on the general wrestling board and when digging up the old results, especially from 2000, I can definently say the WWE is still better than what WCW was that point. Seriously some matches it was a pain in the ass just to figure who the hell won the match because Russo would book matches without referees and have guys count for themselves. There was almost NEVER a match that would not end with a run-in. Also let us not forget David Arquette winning the title, not that anyone has. People who actually think the WWE is worse that what WCW was at that point just aren't thinking straight.

[LooseCannon25 0]

Nothing.........nothing.............no-fuckin-body went out as bad as AWA did with their Turkey challenge, empty arena matches with Col. Debeers and Buck Zhumhoff. Terrible, terrible shit

 

As far as WCW vs. WWE I think WWE is wasting talent even more cause at least WCW started pushing deserving guys like Booker T, Jeff JArrett,.......Nautural Born Thrillers sucked though. New Blood rising sucked ass too.....shit never mind. WCW was much worse

[Guest Mystery Eskimo]

WCW might just be worse, but the WWE is heading in that direction so fast its untrue.

 

No PPV matches for Benoit, no direction for RVD other than Kane's sidekick, one mans ego nullifying an entire roster...

[Guest Retro Rob]

WWE 2003 isn't even THAT bad. I think the worst bit since the 2000 would have to be WWE from Jan-Aug of 2002. That was some of the worst TV and PPV in recent memory.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

Here's the problem for every WWE fan right now - they base everything on how bad it can be rather than how good it can be. Such fucking complacency. For the past 3 years the WWE has been fucking up everything they get their hands on. The Invasion Angle? Fucked up. NWO? Fucked up. Ric Flair? Fucked up. They have the best fucking roster in their history and they are not doing a thing with it. They don't give you, the fan, the best product possible. What does that say about their opinion of you? Huh? They don't think you, the fan, is good enough for their best product. They think you will sit back and get pissed on and stick with it... and you know what? In some ways they are right, because that's exactly what you do. Of course, they lost half their fan base in like 2 years so not everyone is as complacent as most people here, but as long as people are willing to settle for less the WWE will keep on giving you a painfully sub-par product.

 

I stayed through the dark periods in 1995/96 and you know what? That loyalty, my loyalty given to the WWE was completely shit on by Vince McMahon once he got popular again. Everyone who stayed on the boat was pissed on in favour of the new fans He doesn't care for loyalty, what he did to Bret Hart at Survivor Series 97 was the same thing he did to all the fans. Well fuck it, that is not happening again. I got burned once and that's enough, I've stopped watching and I couldn't be happier.

[Guest CanadianChris]

WCW in 2000-01 was watching a company going through its death throes...they couldn't be saved, no matter what happened.

 

For WWE, at least there is still time. They're not terminal yet, but they're sure trying like hell to get there.

[Guest CanadianChris]

OK, it's my opinion that anyone who badmouths ECW 2K has read too many Sean Shannon rants.

One Sean Shannon rant on ECW is too many. They were still halfway decent...the Awesome/Tanaka series proved that.

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

So far this year the WWE is doing better than it did last year so I'm not to worried.

 

WCW had a pretty big freakin roster and most of them were misused so I don't think WWE is that far yet.

 

The question is...if WCW was still under Ted Turner's complete control and not Time Warner's when Russo was booking...would they still be around or have survived longer?