Wrestling Forum banner
21 - 40 of 84 Posts
I did off and on.

99 was REALLY bad and by 00, it just felt like a corpse being paraded around Weekend at Bernies style.

In early 01, it took a "back to basics" approach that was better but by then, the damage was already done.
 
I did, but I knew that they were being sold (newsletter subscriber at the time). Also found the storylines pretty blah…everything was in a holding pattern. If you look back on it however you can see WCW was getting its act together and laying the foundation for a new generation. I think that they were at least 18 months from closing the gap however; they had found themselves in the same position as WWF did in 1996.
Russo pretty much killed the entire roster. He made all the top drawing stars look bad and didn't get a single person truly over that was part of the shitty new roster that had. In that group they had a couple of great guys but WCW and Russo didn't really do them any favors.
 
To me it really looked like WCW would challenge the WWE again but it was too little too late. Let me know what you thought of that period though.
They were never going to get it back. They had great talent but talent only does so much. They built a brand that was hugely popular. You turned on the show in 2001, nearly all the popular names and faces associated with that brand were all gone. The same thing happened with WWF for those years following Hogan leaving. Had they dug in like McMahon and worked hard through those struggling times, they maybe could have bounced back but WWF was Vince's livelihood, WCW was just a small part of a bigger corporate entity so they just cut the fat and moved on.
 
Yes I still watched because I thought Scott Steiner and Booker carried the show. There was still some young talent there that I thought increased the quality of the show. Jeff Jarret was really horrible though and whenever they showed him on screen I turned to raw right away. other than that WCW in its dying days was absolute trash.
 
Discussion starter · #31 ·
Russo pretty much killed the entire roster. He made all the top drawing stars look bad and didn't get a single person truly over that was part of the shitty new roster that had. In that group they had a couple of great guys but WCW and Russo didn't really do them any favors.
He pushed Jeff Jarrett as a main eventer too which just cemented WCW as a B show: at the time the WWF had The Rock, Stone Cold & HHH in their main event.

I will never believe that in a million years, Vince wanted to bury WCW which he did.
He did bury WCW (I did a 25 minute YouTube video about it!) He did want to make money though and I think would’ve ran the two shows if he could for that reason.

They were never going to get it back. They had great talent but talent only does so much. They built a brand that was hugely popular. You turned on the show in 2001, nearly all the popular names and faces associated with that brand were all gone. The same thing happened with WWF for those years following Hogan leaving. Had they dug in like McMahon and worked hard through those struggling times, they maybe could have bounced back but WWF was Vince's livelihood, WCW was just a small part of a bigger corporate entity so they just cut the fat and moved on.
I don’t agree, the WWE were inevitably not going to keep up their unsustainable rise (because they didn’t after 2003). WCW still had Goldberg, Sting, Steiner, Luger, Buff Bagwell, Booker T, DDP, Flair and Kevin Nash as well as the up and coming talents I mentioned (they got Jason Jett and Kid Kash from ECW to sign too and there would’ve been more).
 
Vince initially wanted to run it as it’s own entity but the TV deal he had meant he understandably couldn’t run a different wrestling show on a rival network.

His Plan B was therefore going to give Raw to WCW but the bad fan reaction to the Booker T vs Buff Bagwell match allegedly scrapped this plan which was a huge shame. He tried to rush everything which was a big mistake- with patience there could’ve been a scenario where he was getting double PPV money a month.
I will never believe that in a million years, Vince wanted to bury WCW which he did.
Vince Originally Wanted To Keep WCW On TNT
WCW's History With TNT Would Have Helped Keep Brand Going
Image


  • WCW's Association With Turner Broadcasting Made WWE Want To Keep It There
  • AOL/Time Warner Merging Caused New Management To Want WCW Gone From TV
  • Vince Had To Get Creative About How To Use WCW Product Without TV Deal

Bruce Prichard has used his podcast to share many stories about being Vince McMahon’s right-hand man during important times in WWE history. The WCW purchase was something McMahon discussed with Prichard and others before it became official.

Prichard shared that Vince originally wanted to keep running WCW on TNT since that time slot was valuable. However, he grew more hesitant when Turner executives made it clear they were done with WCW. McMahon eventually did make the purchase since WCW had a tremendous library.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sam Coe
Discussion starter · #33 ·
Yes I still watched because I thought Scott Steiner and Booker carried the show. There was still some young talent there that I thought increased the quality of the show. Jeff Jarret was really horrible though and whenever they showed him on screen I turned to raw right away. other than that WCW in its dying days was absolute trash.
Jarrett was rightfully demoted as an upper midcarder when Russo was gone and good riddance. He shouldn’t have been near the main event.

I thought the later stuff with Storm/Awesome/The Natural Born Thrillers & the cruiser weights were great in 2001 too.
 
Jarrett was rightfully demoted as an upper midcarder when Russo was gone and good riddance. He shouldn’t have been near the main event.

I thought the later stuff with Storm/Awesome/The Natural Born Thrillers & the cruiser weights were great in 2001 too.
Was never a fan of Jarret but I did like what he did in TNA. Other than that yes good riddance. Overated wrestler but I admit he was a good Booker for TNA and had a good eye for talent.
 
Discussion starter · #35 ·
Was never a fan of Jarret but I did like what he did in TNA. Other than that yes good riddance. Overated wrestler but I admit he was a good Booker for TNA and had a good eye for talent.
Yeah he was obviously talented but just not a convincing world champion. If you’re not tall you have to be a great technical wrestler, really jacked up or a high flyer and Jarrett was neither of these.
 
I don’t agree, the WWE were inevitably not going to keep up their unsustainable rise (because they didn’t after 2003). WCW still had Goldberg, Sting, Steiner, Luger, Buff Bagwell, Booker T, DDP, Flair and Kevin Nash as well as the up and coming talents I mentioned (they got Jason Jett and Kid Kash from ECW to sign too and there would’ve been more).
WWE hitting its peak popularity does not automatically translate to WCW getting more viewers as an automatic bypoduct. WWF hit their initial popularity wall in 1989-90 and it still took many years of development and lots of branding to get WCW to overtake them in the marketplace.

They weren't doing anything new or exciting with the talent you mentioned and every company has "up and coming talents". That isn't bringing in new audiences. WCW had hit the wall. They had nothing to offer. The kind of people who get excited about "Kid Kash" are the people who are already still watching wrestling after the larger audience went home.
 
I watched it, and enjoyed it. Even though, now, it's looked at as a failure /joke/something for Meltzer and Bischoff to argue about - it was fun to watch because it was Still so different from WWE.. but fun to watch doesn't mean it was "quality".

Actually, my parents were old school (or "frugal") so I didn't have cable. I would get the TAPE from a friend of mind every week..for that and Thunder. I skipped through alot.
 
21 - 40 of 84 Posts