BruteSquad_BRODY 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 Pro Wrestling USA and the subsequent Super Clash III PPV. These 2 things are not connected. Super Clash 1 in Sept 85 was the Super Card not a PPV I'm refering to the 1988 PPV (the first and only timet that the AWA got on PPV), which united the AWA with World Class and the Memphis group. I don't completely understand that these three promotions (they already had timeslot with ESPN), with their backs against the wall (in the face of the WWF and the NWA/WCW, who had Ted Turner backing them) didn't work better as a cohesive unit. But then again, egos and politics will always get in the way of good business sense. The talent roster wasn't there to make a dent. The AWA at that point was all way over the hill guys or no name rookies Memphis had little after Lawler And World Class was dead in the water as the fans had given up on the Von Erichs, and Eric Embry wasn't going to cut it as a national star Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TMC1982 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 Pro Wrestling USA and the subsequent Super Clash III PPV. These 2 things are not connected. Super Clash 1 in Sept 85 was the Super Card not a PPV I'm refering to the 1988 PPV (the first and only timet that the AWA got on PPV), which united the AWA with World Class and the Memphis group. I don't completely understand that these three promotions (they already had timeslot with ESPN), with their backs against the wall (in the face of the WWF and the NWA/WCW, who had Ted Turner backing them) didn't work better as a cohesive unit. But then again, egos and politics will always get in the way of good business sense. The talent roster wasn't there to make a dent. The AWA at that point was all way over the hill guys or no name rookies Memphis had little after Lawler And World Class was dead in the water as the fans had given up on the Von Erichs, and Eric Embry wasn't going to cut it as a national star Isn't that sort of why they had to work together in the first place, since they could no longer cut it for themselves!? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BruteSquad_BRODY 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 3 shitty promotion combine to make one shitty promotional effort Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter's Torn Quad 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 Again, dropping the ball on the Invasion would imply there was a ball to drop. I personally don't think there was. People need to realize this was not 1996-98 era WCW here. It was horrible, devalued, can't draw a dime 2001 era WCW. The promotion and its wrestlers were anti draws by that point to the point where no TV network wanted any part of a WCW show. So what if they had in fact brought in Hogan, Hall, Nash, Goldberg, and Steiner earlier than before? They still wouldn't have done much aside from Hogan. Steiner would have still sucked, Goldberg would have still sulked and walked after a year, Nash wouldn't have been healthy, and Hall would have been fired for being drunk anyway. Most of those top WCW stars had been in the WWF anyway, hell the entire basis of the NWO angle was that it was the WWF attacking WCW. There were no "WCW brand names" aside from maybe Goldberg, DDP, and Booker. The distinct WCW brand died off around the time Hogan first came to WCW and made it a rehash of 1980s WWF. Hogan, Hall, Nash, etc were still huge names at the time. Remember the reaction they got during the Hogan nWo vs. Rock feud? And that was a full year later. Your're telling me that if Hogan, Hall, Nash, Goldberg, Sting, Flair, Steiner, Jarret, and DDP all came in at once, as one group, and feuded with Austin, Angle, Undertaker, Rock, Big Show, Foley, Dudley Boys, etc that wouldn't have drawn? Goldberg vs. Undertaker at the time wouldn't draw? How about Austin vs. Flair or Hall/Nash vs. Dudleys? These guys were still huge names and, if put in the right situation, could have drawn huge money. Sure, guys like Hall/Nash wouldn't have lasted long but if they capatilized on them right off the bat they could have drawn. I usually don't agree with you, CubbyBr, but this time you're right on the money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Danville_Wrestling 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 Maybe not the biggest "drop the ball" moment ever, but if Lex Luger won the WWF Championship against Yokozuna at SummerSlam 1993 he could have been a bigger star in the WWF than he ended up being. I still say the booking of that match was one of the more boneheaded things the WWF has ever done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 It was so bad that by Survivor Series it ended up being Rock, Jericho, Kane, Undertaker & Big Show against Austin, Angle, RVD, Booker T & Shane McMahon. Team WCW was being represented by one guy who was actually associated with WCW. Now imagine if instead had it been The Rock, Steve Austin, Undertaker, Kurt Angle & Chris Jericho vs. Ric Flair, Sting, Hulk Hogan, Bill Goldberg & Kevin Nash. That would have been huge. Team WWF would still win in the end (they basically had to for the feud to work), but it would have generated far more interest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter's Torn Quad 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2009 Now imagine if instead had it been The Rock, Steve Austin, Undertaker, Kurt Angle & Chris Jericho vs. Ric Flair, Sting, Hulk Hogan, Bill Goldberg & Kevin Nash. That would have been huge. Team WWF would still win in the end (they basically had to for the feud to work), but it would have generated far more interest. If the WWF had had those names then, providing the booking had been even half decent, Team WCW would have won the match because the feud would still be red hot. You could have even kept it going until Mania, with the idea going in of WCW threatening to kill the WWF at the biggest event of the year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Now imagine if instead had it been The Rock, Steve Austin, Undertaker, Kurt Angle & Chris Jericho vs. Ric Flair, Sting, Hulk Hogan, Bill Goldberg & Kevin Nash. That would have been huge. Team WWF would still win in the end (they basically had to for the feud to work), but it would have generated far more interest. If the WWF had had those names then, providing the booking had been even half decent, Team WCW would have won the match because the feud would still be red hot. You could have even kept it going until Mania, with the idea going in of WCW threatening to kill the WWF at the biggest event of the year. I could see that. I meant that the WWF would eventually win the blowoff, whenever and whatever that might be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Would WWE have drawn enough extra money though to cover the added expense of bringing in all those big names? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob_barron 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Would WWE have drawn enough extra money though to cover the added expense of bringing in all those big names? Look at the buyrate for InVasion, which had none of these names. Now imagine a PPV with those guys and multiple PPVs with those lineups. They'd be on fire. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tully316 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Two Words... Hollywood Blonds Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisMWaters 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Maybe not the biggest "drop the ball" moment ever, but if Lex Luger won the WWF Championship against Yokozuna at SummerSlam 1993 he could have been a bigger star in the WWF than he ended up being. I still say the booking of that match was one of the more boneheaded things the WWF has ever done. Perhaps so. But then we would have lost the moment that ended WrestleMania X, with the faces at the time hoisting Bret onto their shoulders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slickster 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 The plan was always going to be to restart WCW a month or two after Mania. It appears as if the first Vince McMahon-owned WCW TV taping will take place on May 9th in Trenton, New Jersey. Although the taping will occur on May 9th, the show will not air until May 12th, a Saturday, from 11 PM to 1 AM on TNN. There is no further info on what the name of the show will be, or who will be on the show. There are several wrestlers who the WWF may be interested in bringing back to the new WCW. Several wrestlers are currently pondering if Vince McMahon will give them the call to return, or if they will have to go look for work elsewhere. The WWF has currently locked up 20 of the 140 WCW office employees, leaving the other 120 in the wind. The show in Trenton is rumored to possibly feature some WWF superstars as well. One particular name that has been popping up to show up in Trenton was former WWF champion Triple H. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Diamonddust 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 The plan was always going to be to restart WCW a month or two after Mania. It appears as if the first Vince McMahon-owned WCW TV taping will take place on May 9th in Trenton, New Jersey. Although the taping will occur on May 9th, the show will not air until May 12th, a Saturday, from 11 PM to 1 AM on TNN. There is no further info on what the name of the show will be, or who will be on the show. There are several wrestlers who the WWF may be interested in bringing back to the new WCW. Several wrestlers are currently pondering if Vince McMahon will give them the call to return, or if they will have to go look for work elsewhere. The WWF has currently locked up 20 of the 140 WCW office employees, leaving the other 120 in the wind. The show in Trenton is rumored to possibly feature some WWF superstars as well. One particular name that has been popping up to show up in Trenton was former WWF champion Triple H. Starting WCW back up in Trenton probably would have had the same impact as what happened in Tacoma. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrRant 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Tacoma is a horrible wrestling town. They should have done it somewhere else, preferably in a WCW area. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob_barron 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 They were in Atlanta one week later! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CubbyBr 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 usually don't agree with you, CubbyBr, but this time you're right on the money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cabbageboy 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 To comment further on the Invasion....no, I don't think that having Hall, Nash, Hogan, etc. in 2001 would have made a bit of difference. Once again, these guys weren't drawing a dime in WCW post 1999, so why would they suddenly draw? Goldberg vs. The Rock did a good buyrate at Backlash 2003, a 1.1. The irony of it is that Goldberg by that point wasn't sabotaged by being involved with the tainted WCW brand name, so he was free to simply be on the WWE roster. Oh, and the WM in 2002 that did have Hogan, Hall, Nash, and Flair involved did a 1.60 buyrate, considerably down from the 2.18 in 2001. The point of all this is that no one wanted to see anything WCW related by 2001-02. Vince quickly realized that people had no use for an NWO Hogan, so he turned him back into his old WWF persona and drew more money with him over the 2002-06 period on and off. It didn't matter who the WCW side had on their roster for the Invasion, because at the end of the day the company was out of business and Vince wasn't remotely going to let a bankrupt company beat his WWF juggernaut. Why would he? Much like Crockett should have done with the UWF, I think Vince should have just let WCW crash and burn. Once they had no TV no one would bother buying them and Vince could buy the library for peanuts, then pick and choose who he wanted from the WCW roster without worrying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Didn't the Invasion PPV do like 750,000 buys? That's really good for a PPV built around DDP and Booker T. as invaders. How many more buys could they have realistically gotten by bringing in the big guns? Those were the days when hitting a million buys would have been the absolute max. Given the contracts that Hogan, Hall, Nash, Flair and Goldberg were on, I just don't think it would have been feasible to bring them in. You are talking upwards of maybe $10 million in contracts for what? 250,000 buys? That doesn't pencil out. The argument is that the Invasion would have had more legs with WCW stars. I don't buy it. Booking killed the invasion storyline more than anything, and I don't see that being any different with a bunch of primadonnas backstage. You have to remember that the biggest selling point was essentially seeing WCW stars fight the WWF. That novelty wears off once you see these guys on television week after week. Eventually they brought in those guys and they usually popped one big buyrate before fading back into the pack. I can't see that being different if you brought them all in at once. You have to consider the law of diminishing marginal returns when talking about the invasion. Each additional star added would have brought just a few more extra buys. I just don't see it as a financially feasible, even though it's what I (and most of you) really wanted to see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Much like Crockett should have done with the UWF, I think Vince should have just let WCW crash and burn. Once they had no TV no one would bother buying them and Vince could buy the library for peanuts, then pick and choose who he wanted from the WCW roster without worrying. Isn't that exactly what happened? Bischoff tried to negotiate a sale at $600 million one year prior; Vince bought it for $2.5 million. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Much like Crockett should have done with the UWF, I think Vince should have just let WCW crash and burn. Once they had no TV no one would bother buying them and Vince could buy the library for peanuts, then pick and choose who he wanted from the WCW roster without worrying. Isn't that exactly what happened? Bischoff tried to negotiate a sale at $600 million one year prior; Vince bought it for $2.5 million. Yeah. WCW lost tv and thus Bischoff's group fell through. Vince bought WCW and about 22-24 of the talent contracts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob_barron 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Didn't the Invasion PPV do like 750,000 buys? That's really good for a PPV built around DDP and Booker T. as invaders. How many more buys could they have realistically gotten by bringing in the big guns? Those were the days when hitting a million buys would have been the absolute max. I believe that's one of the top buyrates ever, and that's for a show as awfully booked as that one. Now imagine a show with WCW guys people cared about. Given the contracts that Hogan, Hall, Nash, Flair and Goldberg were on, I just don't think it would have been feasible to bring them in. You are talking upwards of maybe $10 million in contracts for what? 250,000 buys? That doesn't pencil out. But it wouldn't just be for one show. There's tons of different match combinations you can do with those guys for years, and if booked correctly, a storyline like that could last 1-2 years, and when it's done you can still try to ride the momentum off of that. The argument is that the Invasion would have had more legs with WCW stars. I don't buy it. Booking killed the invasion storyline more than anything, and I don't see that being any different with a bunch of primadonnas backstage. You have to remember that the biggest selling point was essentially seeing WCW stars fight the WWF. That novelty wears off once you see these guys on television week after week. The InVasion, the one angle you can't screw up, lasted only from May to November. I think with guys like the nWo, Flair and Goldberg, there was less of a chance of the nonsense that you got in the actual invasion, with Stone Cold Steve Austin leading WCW and ECW. If you book it correctly and put on exciting matches, people will still want to see it once the novelty wears off. Eventually they brought in those guys and they usually popped one big buyrate before fading back into the pack. I can't see that being different if you brought them all in at once. You have to consider the law of diminishing marginal returns when talking about the invasion. Each additional star added would have brought just a few more extra buys. I just don't see it as a financially feasible, even though it's what I (and most of you) really wanted to see. What ended up happening wasn't financially feasible past the one show, where they conned people into thinking WCW v. WWF was actually going to mean something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 How about WWE eschewing Hogan/Warrior II at Wrestlemania VII in favor of Hogan/Slaughter? Could Hogan/Warrior II have drawn a big enough crowd to justify the LA Coliseum? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TMC1982 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Would WWE have drawn enough extra money though to cover the added expense of bringing in all those big names? And most ironically, Ric Flair, who was pretty much the living embodiment of WCW going back to its NWA/Jim Crockett days, shows up on "RAW" the very night after the angle ended! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 How about WWE eschewing Hogan/Warrior II at Wrestlemania VII in favor of Hogan/Slaughter? Could Hogan/Warrior II have drawn a big enough crowd to justify the LA Coliseum? I don't think so. The most likely scenario is Warrior turning heel and the whole "friend turns on Hogan" schtick was really overplayed at that point. Going face/face again would have been equally challenging, especially when the entire crowd knew that Hogan was getting the belt back. I guess maybe it could have worked with proper booking, and it was probably the plan in the spring of '90, but there were viable reasons why that wasn't on the table by the time Mania VII came around. Doesn't mean that what they ended up with was better, though. In hindsight, everything looks better than what we got. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 I don't think so. The most likely scenario is Warrior turning heel and the whole "friend turns on Hogan" schtick was really overplayed at that point. Going face/face again would have been equally challenging, especially when the entire crowd knew that Hogan was getting the belt back. I guess maybe it could have worked with proper booking, and it was probably the plan in the spring of '90, but there were viable reasons why that wasn't on the table by the time Mania VII came around. WWE really hadn't run a friend turns on Hogan angle since Savage in '89, had they? Besides, when Bruno was champion they did it all the time and hardly ever faced a backlash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slickster 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Well, I'd imagine the fan base had changed from the Bruno era to the Hogan era. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 I don't think so. The most likely scenario is Warrior turning heel and the whole "friend turns on Hogan" schtick was really overplayed at that point. Going face/face again would have been equally challenging, especially when the entire crowd knew that Hogan was getting the belt back. I guess maybe it could have worked with proper booking, and it was probably the plan in the spring of '90, but there were viable reasons why that wasn't on the table by the time Mania VII came around. WWE really hadn't run a friend turns on Hogan angle since Savage in '89, had they? Besides, when Bruno was champion they did it all the time and hardly ever faced a backlash. When did they do the Fred Ottman turn? Wasn't that in late 1990 or early 1991? Not sure if that counts as a Hogan turn or not. Regardless, copying the Savage angle just two years later with Warrior in his place seems a little lazy. It might have worked, but I don't see it being a match that could draw 100,000. Not in 1991 after the Golden Era had basically ended. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Tugboat was Summer '91, he turned on the Bushwackers during a six-man tag. Regardless of the storylines, Hogan and Warrior were the biggest stars of the promotion. It was the match I think most casual fans wanted to see. If the entire crowd would've known Hogan was winning, what of Hogan/Slaughter? Everyone knew Hogan was taking the title there as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PILLS! PILLS! PILLS! 0 Report post Posted February 5, 2009 Was Warrior willing to return the favor to Hogan? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
