WCW wrestlers acquired by old WWF in 2001

[Fökai 0]

Basically, I don't think the McMahons can successfully do an interpromtional war type angle because they want too much control and won't let anyone but their guys over. That's not to say they don't do other angles and feuds well because they aren't the top promotion in the world without some measures of success, but the very nature of the McMahon's wouldn't allow for the Invasion to be successful IMO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's why I mentioned Hall, Nash and Hogan.

 

He has faith in them to resurrect a money angle, despite the fact that he hates all three. At that time, all three had some sort of pull in the company even though they were working for the competition for over half a decade. An invasion led by the nWo succeeds if Hall is kept out of the ring, and Nash is prepared to work.

 

However, the death knell for the actual ECW/WCW unification was Stephanie being announced as the storyline owner of ECW. Whatever ECW mutant fanbase that was interested quickly tuned out because none of them were buying into Steph as ECW's owner.

 

The Invasion didn't need the ECW fans to succeed. Anyway, like I said, the Invasion would've been done correctly if ECW is kept on the backburner and only hinted at, keeping the ECW fans they do have tuning in interested in seeing what Van Dam, Dreamer or Tazz will do next.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Basically, I don't think the McMahons can successfully do an interpromtional war type angle because they want too much control and won't let anyone but their guys over. That's not to say they don't do other angles and feuds well because they aren't the top promotion in the world without some measures of success, but the very nature of the McMahon's wouldn't allow for the Invasion to be successful IMO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's why I mentioned Hall, Nash and Hogan.

 

He has faith in them to resurrect a money angle, despite the fact that he hates all three. At that time, all three had some sort of pull in the company even though they were working for the competition for over half a decade.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In his mind, Vince created all three, so he'd be ok with booking them super strong.

[Guest MikeSC]

WWF was far closer in terms of competitive balance with WCW at the time than WCW was with WWF at the time of Invasion.

 

It'd be like griping that Vince "dropped the ball" if he tried an AWA invasion in 1989.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a very good point.

 

Here is a question. If WWE had brought in the big names (Goldberg, Hogan, Steiner, Flair, Sting, whoever) do you still think they would've booked the squash that they did?

I think it'd have been MORE of a squash, to be honest. Vince didn't have any resentment towards the guys he signed. And I also imagine they would have caused headaches backstage.

 

And when people saw how bad guys like Sting actually were (he was pretty horrible post-1996), they'd have blamed the WWE for making him look bad,

 

I doubt those guys would have generated any increased revenue (they didn't in WCW) and would've generated much more expenses. It would have been really bad business to do it.

 

Fans would pop for one big show (Invasion). They won't continue to show up for numerous shows afterwards.

 

Think of it this way: ECW One Night Stand drew a decent buyrate. Do you honestly think if they had a show the next month the number wouldn't have dropped like a rock?

Or was WCW's rep so far gone that it wouldn't have mattered who lead the Invasion, it would've tanked?  From what I gather, you (and for the most part others) say that the Alliance side had nothing to offer, therefore we get what we got. (which still doesn't seem right to me) However, if the guys who were identified more closely with WCW were brought in from the start, do you think they would've done business differently? I don't think they would.

I doubt they would have --- but nobody in WCW had market value. WWE was wise to try and focus on young guys who were only around for the last year or so as they were the least tarnished by the brush of WCW.

 

The Invasion produced fun matches (and the PPV's in the brief Invasion angle were all excellent shows) because most of the WCW guys they brought in, for the most part, were decent enough to not stink up the joint in the ring --- well, Bagwell excluded.

 

They clearly were grooming Booker to the be the top face in WCW and a major player and it just didn't work. Would it have been better if they used their marquee match-up for WCW, Booker v DDP? Arguably, but I wouldn't expect so.

 

There was some utter loathing for WCW. WWE fans hated them because they were WCW. WCW fans hated a lot of them because of how bad WCW became at the end.

I'm absolutely positive that a charge led by either Goldberg or the Outsiders and Hogan would've changed the minds of every fan out there. If the writers booked the nWo to AID the Invasion stable against the WWE, I think we know how it would've played out differently.

Gotta disagree on this one. The nWo name was dragged through the mud in a major way long before the Invasion started. I doubt WWE was too keen on Hall considering his problems and without him, people would have complained. I disagree also because when they were later used, no difference was made. GB didn't improve business. The nWo didn't improve it. Hogan didn't improve it. Steiner sure as heck didn't.

 

PERSONALLY, I would have booked WCW to win the SSeries ME and have Vince spend the next year trying to get the WWF back in shape to defeat WCW. But, that would have likely done poor business as, again, not many of the WCW guys showed any ability --- and still have not done so --- to actually carry a program on their backs and make fans care.

And I find the statement that Vince handled the Invasion as well it could have been to be one of the most stupid and idiotic things I've ever heard.

You have a promotion headed by guys who helped bring about the greatest collapse in the history of the industry. You have a company who had no real fanbase and absolutely no connection to the fans. You have a company whose ME guys were, outside of Booker, absolutely terrible in the ring and atrocious draws.

 

WWE could have made fans buy them as big threats --- WITHOUT massive WWF involvement, mind you --- how?

 

Again, they WANTED them to be faces (Booker didn't attack faces. He attacked McMahon and Austin). The fans shat on that idea rather quickly.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Think of it this way: ECW One Night Stand drew a decent buyrate. Do you honestly think if they had a show the next month the number wouldn't have dropped like a rock

 

Dropped? Yes

Like a rock? No.

 

On topic, I could see Vince being more inclined to bury guys like Hogan or Goldberg, than say, Booker or Eddie.

 

I mean, every time he and Bischoff are on screen together now, it's a pretty big ego trip by Vince.

[Guest MikeSC]

Think of it this way: ECW One Night Stand drew a decent buyrate. Do you honestly think if they had a show the next month the number wouldn't have dropped like a rock

 

Dropped? Yes

Like a rock? No.

 

On topic, I could see Vince being more inclined to bury guys like Hogan or Goldberg, than say, Booker or Eddie.

 

I mean, every time he and Bischoff are on screen together now, it's a pretty big ego trip by Vince.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, as one of the few who openly hated ONS, I'll say this:

 

If they had a second show, the buyrate would've dropped by more than 50%.

[Placebo Effect 0]

They could've at least done something with Skipper, or play off of the popularity of Mike Sanders.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sanders, just like he was in TNA, was bitchy and wanted to stop wrestling to become either a commentator or a full-time mouthpiece. WWE dropped him, and then TNA promptly brought him in, dumping him after they had him randomly job out to Hacksaw.

[Guest MikeSC]

And Sanders wasn't that good on the mic. Being able to talk a little in a company where nobody could actually cut a promo doesn't make one a good promo man.

 

He cut HHH promos, without the potential for entertainment value.

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

the burying of guys like DDP certainly didn't help.

[BUTT 0]

He cut HHH promos, without the potential for entertainment value.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In other words, HHH promos.

[Guest MikeSC]

HHH can occasionally cut one that is unintentionally amusing. He can occasionally even pull off a clever line (of course, the other 19 minutes and 48 seconds tend to make it all a wash).

 

Sanders was just...ugh.

[Black Lushus 0]

HHH cuts intense promos for about the first 5 or so minutes...it's the droning on and on that kills...his worse promo ever has to be the "sitting in the middle of the ring" promo prior to WM21...