[DualShock]

Originally Posted by THE MIGHTY KRANG

I know you worship the ground Russo works on mate, but fucking hell.

Not only WWE 97&99 = WCW 2000, it's also WWE97&99=Russo TNA era.
The whole Attitude Era during Russo was full of shock moments, constantly face and heel turns, swerves, shoot promos, sex, stables, people kayfabe quitting the company, nothing different than WCW 2000. It's not Russo's fault that some fans think that for example supernatural feuds in WWE like Kane vs Undertaker are cool but supernatural feuds in WCW and TNA Sting vs Vampiro or Sting vs Abyss are embarrassing or that the ending of the empty arena match between the Rock and Mankind was cool but a similar ending of a Nitro and Impact main event was pathetic.
A last rites match in 1998 between Kane and Undertaker would be praised still today but the same match on TNA between Sting and Abyss is bashed as typical Russo crappy booking

I posted numerous times here that Russo proved in WCW and TNA only one thing and that's that he was solely responsible for the style, storylines and the whole success of the Attitude Era because the style of the shows looked exactly the same like in the AE. It's not his fault that fans think that Vince McMahon vs Shane McMahon was cool but Ric Flair vs David Flair was boring. It's also not his fault that David was not charismatic as Shane to make the feud look better.

[kopitelewis]

You, sir, are a fucking mentalist.

[DualShock]

Originally Posted by kopitelewis

You, sir, are a fucking mentalist.

And you sir are a hypocrite or have a selective memory. Name me one segment from the AE when Russo was headwriter that looks different or more classy than Russo's WCW and TNA storylines.

[Kiz]

every single one.

[StLSaint_75]

Originally Posted by DualShock

And you sir are a hypocrite or have a selective memory. Name me one segment from the AE when Russo was headwriter that looks different or more classy than Russo's WCW and TNA storylines.

well I agree, but it wasn't at such a rate in WWF as it was elsewhere. Vince McMahon was his filter, and there was much more top tier talent to work with in WWF (at least, guys that would be come ME by 2001) in WCW he was working with a shell of a roster, and in TNA there was leftovers in terms of "drawing ability"

I think the constant heel/face turns and swerves were just too much for me to handle, and I completely lost interest in what WCW was selling. If he had spaced out things, and had some kind of direct, sensible storyline going, I could dig it, but the "everyone needs to be involved in a story" thing just made it way to hard to follow.

[JigsawKrueger]

Originally Posted by DualShock

Not only WWE 97&99 = WCW 2000, it's also WWE97&99=Russo TNA era.
The whole Attitude Era during Russo was full of shock moments, constantly face and heel turns, swerves, shoot promos, sex, stables, people kayfabe quitting the company, nothing different than WCW 2000. It's not Russo's fault that some fans think that for example supernatural feuds in WWE like Kane vs Undertaker are cool but supernatural feuds in WCW and TNA Sting vs Vampiro or Sting vs Abyss are embarrassing or that the ending of the empty arena match between the Rock and Mankind was cool but a similar ending of a Nitro and Impact main event was pathetic.
A last rites match in 1998 between Kane and Undertaker would be praised still today but the same match on TNA between Sting and Abyss is bashed as typical Russo crappy booking

I posted numerous times here that Russo proved in WCW and TNA only one thing and that's that he was solely responsible for the style, storylines and the whole success of the Attitude Era because the style of the shows looked exactly the same like in the AE. It's not his fault that fans think that Vince McMahon vs Shane McMahon was cool but Ric Flair vs David Flair was boring. It's also not his fault that David was not charismatic as Shane to make the feud look better.

I guess you could say it backfired in WCW and TNA, to a lesser extent, in terms of critical reaction, because people expected that kind of outlandish stuff from WWE. WCW had done some crazy shit, such as Robocop, Chamber of Horrors, Oz, The Yeti etc. But it hadn't done much crazy stuff so quickly as it did in 1999 - 2000. Whereas WWE had done it first: The Undertaker's 90's antics, Max Moon, Papa Shango, multiple Doinks for example.

I remember one critical reaction to when Russo and Ferrara took over and the company became very much like WWE's style and direction. The critic said that WCW trying to so blatantly emulate WWF Attitude is like Pepsi attempting to carbon copy Coca Cola to the point the font is the same. It was a bad business decision, which Bill Busch shouldn't have allowed.

[Yosihait]

Originally Posted by 93.20

every single one.

Oh, come on, it was the exact same thing!

I guess you've never watched the Attitude. It was the same thing.

Watch every PPV from the Attitude Era. What's the difference?

[Kiz]

that not all of them are awful

[Big Z]

AE: Stupid somewhat crappy storylines performed by great wrestlers.

WCW: Retarded shitty storylines performed by mediocre and shitty wrestlers.

[SinJackal]

Originally Posted by Hailsabin

yeah, FUCK at that quality when I own it on GOAT VHS. I mark for that match though. Why? I think we all know why.

oh and there is this...



This thread might be pretty haphazard level.

lolz, @ Headliner. I know right? Bischoff turns on Hogan so he goes back to nWo Hollywood Hogan to combat the New Blood. What wonderful logic.

lmao, dude that video is hilarious. Why would they air that and not just make up an excuse for his absence? Like Oh, we just found out Scott Steiner took him out at his hotel room before the show~

That's a total train wreck.