Saving WCW in October 1999

[Liam O'Rourke]

Yeh, but part of that problem was going to the wrong guys at the wrong times. Steiner could have got to that true top guy level had they put him there sooner. They waited until most the key names and all the real momentum was gone to put new guys on top, and by then it was too late.

[Dr.PeterVenkman]

Not listened to the podcast yet but any argument of 'push young lads, phase out the old boys' ignores the legal thing of Hogan having control of pretty much everything until 2001

 

It's all well and good saying do this and that but when your biggest star is saying fuck off to everything you propose you're a bit fucked

[Liam O'Rourke]

Agreed, but Hogan went out for a while in October anyway until the end of the year, and his deal was up in late 2000, so its not completely unreasonable to propose him being phased out of the scene over the course of that period in some form, even if that cant realistically entail him putting people clean in the middle...

[tiger_rick]

I listened to it last night, thought it was a good discussion. There were some good contributions from outside but I was chuckling along with the repeated "new nWo" suggestions. We're all Russo inside, aren't we?

 

You read my bit about Goldberg and then responded with the idea of Steiner as champ and Goldberg chasing him but holding off the title match which I think is a fantastic idea. The only problem I have with it was that Goldberg was constantly being held back a while throughout the whole Russo to the death period. They were always building Goldberg but always took one step forward and two back. At that point in time, I think WCW fans wanted a hero to get behind and someone they identified with as being the embodiment of WCW. So that's why I'd deliver the Goldberg run they wanted right away. No false dawns, no screw jobs, just a massive, heroic babyface champion and a long line of challengers.

 

Scott Steiner would definitely be the guy to take the belt of him though, you were right on that.

 

Couple of things I found a bit hindsighty in the discussion. Firstly the talk of a brand split. No-one would have done a brand split in 1999. I know Bischoff had that idea originally but one nWo PPV had absolutely killed that debate.

 

Secondly, the Cruiserweight title. More to the point, the discussion of getting rid of it so Cruisers weren't pigeon holed by weight. Again, I don't thin kthat was anyone's train of thought in 1999. Or for years afterwards. No-one was planning to protect Rey or Kidman for an eventual World Title run. So I think anyone back then would have kept that belt and binned the worthless TV Title. I think it was Carl who was on that side of the argument. He was right.

 

Really good show again. Stop saying "ass" though, Liam. Who do you think you are, fucking Paige?

[HeavyT]

I honestly don't think it really could have been salvaged because of the contracts the top guys had. The elevation of Steiner, Booker, Jarrett, Benoit etc. to the main event earler along with Goldberg as the big unstoppable babyface champion would be the most realistic way of saving the show, at least creatively.

 

It sound's terrible that a show that pulled in such good ratings (even if it was dysmal compared to the 36 months previous) couldn't find another television deal.

[PowerButchi]

According to Eric Bischoff, FX actually wanted Nitro in 01, so I'm not sure why he didn't make WCW an offer like WWF made for 2 or 3 million and take Nitro to FX and drop Thunder as it was damaged goods from pretty much day one.

[unfitfinlay]

According to Eric Bischoff, FX actually wanted Nitro in 01, so I'm not sure why he didn't make WCW an offer like WWF made for 2 or 3 million and take Nitro to FX and drop Thunder as it was damaged goods from pretty much day one.

 

He probably didn't know just how little Time Warner were willing to accept for it. It's not like he was spending his own money either. He'd have had to go back to his backers to convince them that there was still a deal to be made but the WWF deal was done in a matter of days.

 

I've always shrugged off the conspiracy theories around the sale but, the more I read about it the more rotten it seems. Fusient were willing to pay $48 Million, with $5 Million up front AND take over the $15 Million of guaranteed contracts that meant people got paid to stay at home. I get that they hated wrestling but why not just do the deal and THEN cancel it? You might have to wait a bit, depending on the terms of the sale, but it's surely better than the deal they ended up doing.

 

I didn't realise that Jerry Jarrett tried to buy it either.

[Liam O'Rourke]

I listened to it last night, thought it was a good discussion. There were some good contributions from outside but I was chuckling along with the repeated "new nWo" suggestions. We're all Russo inside, aren't we?

 

You read my bit about Goldberg and then responded with the idea of Steiner as champ and Goldberg chasing him but holding off the title match which I think is a fantastic idea. The only problem I have with it was that Goldberg was constantly being held back a while throughout the whole Russo to the death period. They were always building Goldberg but always took one step forward and two back. At that point in time, I think WCW fans wanted a hero to get behind and someone they identified with as being the embodiment of WCW. So that's why I'd deliver the Goldberg run they wanted right away. No false dawns, no screw jobs, just a massive, heroic babyface champion and a long line of challengers.

 

Scott Steiner would definitely be the guy to take the belt of him though, you were right on that.

 

Couple of things I found a bit hindsighty in the discussion. Firstly the talk of a brand split. No-one would have done a brand split in 1999. I know Bischoff had that idea originally but one nWo PPV had absolutely killed that debate.

 

Secondly, the Cruiserweight title. More to the point, the discussion of getting rid of it so Cruisers weren't pigeon holed by weight. Again, I don't thin kthat was anyone's train of thought in 1999. Or for years afterwards. No-one was planning to protect Rey or Kidman for an eventual World Title run. So I think anyone back then would have kept that belt and binned the worthless TV Title. I think it was Carl who was on that side of the argument. He was right.

 

Really good show again. Stop saying "ass" though, Liam. Who do you think you are, fucking Paige?

 

 

As for ass, I blame years of American television indoctrination and force of habit. I'll work on it...;-)

 

Point taken on Goldberg though, most definitely - all through 1999 they'd cooled him off so much that on paper the build back up approach is right, but realistically it may well have been the right option to just outright do it, build around him to establish this is what WCW is all about, My counter question, as you mentioned his challengers would take you through to mid-2000, would be who you have in mind to eventually take it, or would it be a matter of see what clicks during that time and book accordingly?

 

Yeh, the brand split is pretty unrealistic, but was an interesting listener suggestion and was worth consideration, even if we eventually dismissed it. TV Title/Cruiser Title "which one do you remove" was a pretty interesting debate, I hadn't really thought about dropping a title before we did the show. Kieran won me over with dropping the Cruiserweight title with the "smaller roster/TV is less restrictive" debate, but the TV belt certainly felt more irrelevant at the time, not a doubt about it.

 

Thanks for the feedback man, really appreciate it.