ECW ONS pulled from Hammerstein

Mr.Nice Guy

From PWinsider:

WWE has announced that its third annual ECW One Night Stand pay-per-view will be moved from the Hammerstein Ballroom in New York City (the location of the previous two events) to the Veterans Memorial Arena in Jacksonville, Florida.

The date has also been moved from June 10th to June 3rd.

I guess they copped on to the fact that they would face a mighty backlash from the ECW die-hards.

A shame cos I was looking forward to seeing the old fans sh*t all over guys like Striker and Burke.

Charlie

Pity indeed, I am going to be in NYC all summer and would have loved to taste some of that old ECW environment.

Stalfos

That's a shame alrite. But WWE couldn't afford to let casual fans see what ECW really means to the old fans. I'll hope they go back to pittsburgh at least although i dont think many old ECW fans would go to it.

I also wonder how many tickets woulda been sold for the event. Although it is a small place.

Fozzy

I didn't think that many old ECW fans would have bothered their arses to give Vince money just so they could spend 3 hours booing (with cheers for the old ECW guys and Punk of course). They must have copped on by now that they're never going to see that version of ECW again, so I think they'd have been in the minority at the Hammerstein. Safe booking by WWE though

zarks420

Why am I not surprised that this would happen. The last time they were there with Big Show vs Batista for the ECW title the true wrestling fans let those jackoffs know how they felt about them. The WWE is afraid of the reality that true wrestling fans do not like their product of pure bull@#$% sports entertainment garbage that Vince Mcmahon is the antichrist to Pro Wrestling. They don't have the balls to face the fans of the Hammerstein Ballroom. Lashley would get booed out of the F$%#ing building to the airport out of New York. A wwe wrestler or Vince Mcmahon would get a ECW title match of course leaving RVD SANDMAN TOMMY DREAMER SABU and BALLS MAHONEY in some bull@#$% matchup!! Grow some hair on your balls wwe and change your mind about attended the Hammerstein Ballroom. Jacksonville Florida for ECW ONS???!!!! dont figure!

Cactus Col

It's not even ecw one night stand, it's wwe one night stand.

oneofakind32

There ya go!

To add insult to injury they put Lashley on the poster

JohnMc1

I hope the old ECW fans make the trip just to screw with WWE

Fozzy

They wouldn't be screwing with them, they'd be giving WWE their money. If anyone is genuinely pissed off about WWE "ruining" ECW's name, then they should go and support promotions who they like, not give WWE their money

de5p0i1er

There starting to kill ECW bit by bit and change it into WWE lite.

Fozzy

WWE didn't kill ECW! ECW's been dead for 6 years, this is just another show that WWE made and Vince thinks highly enough of the ECW name to try make some money off of it

ShawnRaven

Fozzy wrote:

WWE didn't kill ECW! ECW's been dead for 6 years, this is just another show that WWE made and Vince thinks highly enough of the ECW name to try make some money off of it

He's right. Vince didn't kill ECW. In fact, he saved it numerous times from 99-01 by financing it and digging Heyman out of several financial holes. Heyman killed the promotion by not being able to balance his books to save his damn life. A genius for the business, he may be, but that doesn't make him an effective businessman.

And if people are sick of WWECW, then do something about it, forget about online petitions, forget about TRYING to be keyboard warriors and do something about it and hit Vince where it hurts, his pockets. Don't order the PPVs, don't buy the DVDs and stop watching the programming, watch ROH or TNA if you want something outside of WWE.

That way everyone wins, including Vince cos he's so much money!
In other words... DEAL WITH IT!

VR!

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

He's right. Vince didn't kill ECW. In fact, he saved it numerous times from 99-01 by financing it and digging Heyman out of several financial holes. Heyman killed the promotion by not being able to balance his books to save his damn life. A genius for the business, he may be, but that doesn't make him an effective businessman.

Yeah Vince was a real hero raiding the company of its talent.

Vince135792003

I don't think he's a hero but I don't blame him either for taking talent or for the talent wanting to try to make it somewhere else.

If he didn't do it WCW would have, so its just really business and happens in pretty much everything with ultimately the big guys always getting who/what they want.

ShawnRaven

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Yeah Vince was a real hero raiding the company of its talent.

How do you figure that? Vince was PAYING Heyman, also they did exchanges as well so that guys would get different exposure to different enviornments, RVD and Sandman in WWE, Al Snow and Jerry Lawler in ECW.

Also if you want to pass the blame, how about Heyman, who had he paid his workers in the first place, they wouldn't have felt the need to move. Say you're working in HMV, and they're not paying you, then Virgin or Game come along and say, yeah we'll give you the same job, potentially less hours and we want to pay you for your work too. What would you do? Let's be realistic here!

Also throw Bischoff into the equation, in fact, it's not a case of if Vince didn't do it, Bischoff would have done, he did it before Vince, only difference was Bischoff didn't finance ECW afterwards, he took the talent and said **** you. Again, something that wouldn't have happened if Heyman wasn't paying em with bouncing cheques.

Welcome to real life, where everyone has bills to pay and so on and so forth. Too bad Heyman and his ECW fans don't understand this living in their parents basement at aged 40+!

VR!

Ph3n0m

Even Foley in his book said something along the lines that both Bischoff and McMahon were hated by the ECW fans for "poaching" talent - but the fans atleast respected McMahon (for some reason or another)

ShawnRaven

Exactly! Vince gave something back to the company during that time, while Bischoff just said "screw you!", a reason why Heyman still hates him to this very day. I still maintain had Vince not bailed Heyman out on the numerous times that he did, ECW would have gone under a lot sooner than it did.

So enough already with the Vince killed ECW crap.
VR!

Brow

I think its unfair to blame Vince and Bischoff. The wrestlers had a choice to make. Sure some werent getting paid but they got their break there and would be unknowns had it not been for the exposure ECW gave them. A lot had families to support so needed to take the money, Ive no problem with that. But its when stunts like Awesome throwing the belt in the trash in WCW or when Fonzy was planning to jump without telling anyone that annoys me.

Ph3n0m

Brow wrote:

I think its unfair to blame Vince and Bischoff. The wrestlers had a choice to make. Sure some werent getting paid but they got their break there and would be unknowns had it not been for the exposure ECW gave them. A lot had families to support so needed to take the money, Ive no problem with that. But its when stunts like Awesome throwing the belt in the trash in WCW or when Fonzy was planning to jump without telling anyone that annoys me.

It may be unfair, but thats what the fans felt and back then there were non more volatile or passionate then ECW fans

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

How do you figure that? Vince was PAYING Heyman, also they did exchanges as well so that guys would get different exposure to different enviornments, RVD and Sandman in WWE, Al Snow and Jerry Lawler in ECW.

Also if you want to pass the blame, how about Heyman, who had he paid his workers in the first place, they wouldn't have felt the need to move. Say you're working in HMV, and they're not paying you, then Virgin or Game come along and say, yeah we'll give you the same job, potentially less hours and we want to pay you for your work too. What would you do? Let's be realistic here!

Also throw Bischoff into the equation, in fact, it's not a case of if Vince didn't do it, Bischoff would have done, he did it before Vince, only difference was Bischoff didn't finance ECW afterwards, he took the talent and said **** you. Again, something that wouldn't have happened if Heyman wasn't paying em with bouncing cheques.

Welcome to real life, where everyone has bills to pay and so on and so forth. Too bad Heyman and his ECW fans don't understand this living in their parents basement at aged 40+!

VR!

Wow talk about revisionist BS. Vince McMahon and the WWE totally ripped off everything ECW came up with. What they called the 'Attitude era' was stuff Heyman and ECW had come up with. Take a look at Heyman's promo to Vince the week before Survivor Series 2001 to hear a glimpse of Heyman's real thoughts on Vince McMahon.

The reason Vince got involved with Heyman was not because he was some benevolent soul as you seem to think but because he was getting his arse whooped by WCW and he NEEDED ECW. Likewise, ECW NEEDED national exposure which is what they got from the WWE.

And I advise you to go back and take a look at ECW One Night Stand and the crowd chants during the opening bout - "f*ck you Vince". Yeah they really admire McMahon don't they? And remember Funk refusing to do the first One Night Stand and choosing instead to do Hardcore Homecoming?

Cut out the 'Vince killed ECW crap' you say. I say cut out the 'Vince kept ECW afloat crap'. Pure bullsh*t.

ShawnRaven

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Wow talk about revisionist BS. Vince McMahon and the WWE totally ripped off everything ECW came up with. What they called the 'Attitude era' was stuff Heyman and ECW had come up with. Take a look at Heyman's promo to Vince the week before Survivor Series 2001 to hear a glimpse of Heyman's real thoughts on Vince McMahon.

I'll agree, to a certain extent that had ECW's ideas not been around for Vince to build on, WWE would have certainly gone down the crapper. But if you're stupid enough to believe that worked shoot the week before Survivor Series 2001 was Heymans real thoughts, then you're living in a fantasy world. Heyman and Vince had orchestrated that for weeks.

The reason Vince got involved with Heyman was not because he was some benevolent soul as you seem to think but because he was getting his arse whooped by WCW and he NEEDED ECW. Likewise, ECW NEEDED national exposure which is what they got from the WWE.

Not strictly true, by the time 99 came around, WWE didn't need anyone. WCW had made enough mistakes for WWE to come back around. WWE could have botched many an angle and it was still better than half the **** WCW was churning out by the time 99 rolled out. And RAW in 99 was still pretty bad, Undertaker v Boss man hell in the cell and bad Russo Storylines were so bad, they caused Ken Shamrock to quit the promotion. So as bad as WWE were doing, they were still actually doing better than WCW at the time. So WWE didn't need ECW for as long as you'd like to believe, and thats when ECW would have been at their peak.

And I advise you to go back and take a look at ECW One Night Stand and the crowd chants during the opening bout - "f*ck you Vince". Yeah they really admire McMahon don't they? And remember Funk refusing to do the first One Night Stand and choosing instead to do Hardcore Homecoming?

They can scream **** you Vince, the fact at the matter is Vince got all their money, so you think Vince gives a **** about that? As for Funk, well which did better numbers? ONS or HH?

Cut out the 'Vince killed ECW crap' you say. I say cut out the 'Vince kept ECW afloat crap'. Pure bullsh*t.

Facts speak for themselves, and i would advise you to watch Rise and Fall of ECW where both parties practically admit it towards the end.

VR!

Vince135792003

validreasoning! wrote:

Facts speak for themselves, and i would advise you to watch Rise and Fall of ECW where both parties practically admit it towards the end.

I don't want to get involved in this. I'd actually side with you in not blaming Vince in anything he done at the time. He did what what was required.

However who produced the Rise and Fall dvd? The WWE. Be it intentional or not, it won't be 100% objective like all of the WWE dvd's (which I still enjoy). There'll always be a slant and spin put on facts.

ShawnRaven

Thats my point, in this case they didn't! It would be hard to skimp on facts on a 3 hour documentary! And Heyman said it himself that it was run on a shoestring budget from the getgo and that he admitted that Vince helped him out, as did Vince.

But thats not like it was national security or anything. Vince was funding Heyman from 97-2001 before eventually putting Heyman out of financial misery in 2001.

VR!

Vince135792003

validreasoning! wrote:

Thats my point, in this case they didn't! It would be hard to skimp on facts on a 3 hour documentary

When the party involved (WWE) is producing a documentary in which they were involved with the subject (ECW) to a greater or less degree at times, there will always be an inherent bias to some extent.

Just from my time time studying, we were always thought to look at stuff like that and I've found that theres few things in life that doesn't have a slant on them. And I think that documentary while very very good should not be seen as the objective Bible on ECW.

Fozzy

You can't blame McMahon for signing some guys from ECW. I don't think ECW ever really struggled because of it, they were always able to make new stars, even up to the very end

Vince wasn't getting "his arse whooped by WCW" in 2001, yet he was owed quite a bit of money when ECW went bankrupt. He was helping them out in some way at least

I would say that a lot of people would have found out about ECW through the ECW wrestlers who were signed by WWE. I remember when the Dudley Boys came to WWE and they were promoted as having gone through flaming tables and stuff like that. I already knew about ECW at the time, but I can remember a couple of people asking me if I knew where all these flaming tables were. They found out about WWE through ECW. I'm sure Mick Foley introduced a fair amount of people to it too once he made it big in WWE

If you're looking for someone to point the finger at and say "they killed ECW", then you can only really blame TNN. They assured ECW that they had a spot on tv, but then they went and gave it to WWE instead. Again, you can't blame WWE in this situation. They need tv more than anything else, and TNN was a big step down for them at the time

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

I'll agree, to a certain extent that had ECW's ideas not been around for Vince to build on, WWE would have certainly gone down the crapper. But if you're stupid enough to believe that worked shoot the week before Survivor Series 2001 was Heymans real thoughts, then you're living in a fantasy world. Heyman and Vince had orchestrated that for weeks.

So when Heyman said in the worked shoot that the WWE's attitude era was based upon ECW's storylines, they weren't his real thoughts? When he said to Vince that you took a vicious wrestler like Taz and turned him into a play-by-play announcer, they weren't his real thoughts? If you really don't think he was being honest there then you're the one who's stupid. It is clear as day that he is being very honest and very passionate in that promo. And what do you mean "to a certain extent" WWE would have gone down the crapper without WWE's ideas? OF COURSE they would have. Russo has admitted to being influenced by ECW's edginess.

validreasoning! wrote:

Not strictly true, by the time 99 came around, WWE didn't need anyone. WCW had made enough mistakes for WWE to come back around. WWE could have botched many an angle and it was still better than half the **** WCW was churning out by the time 99 rolled out. And RAW in 99 was still pretty bad, Undertaker v Boss man hell in the cell and bad Russo Storylines were so bad, they caused Ken Shamrock to quit the promotion. So as bad as WWE were doing, they were still actually doing better than WCW at the time. So WWE didn't need ECW for as long as you'd like to believe, and thats when ECW would have been at their peak.

Why start from 99? Go back a bit earlier. Go back to Vince taking Mick Foley and Steve Austin from the company. Two guys who were instrumental in turning around the WWE's fortunes. 1998 was the year when WWE got into their stride and it was built around former ECW guys. And WCW had raided plenty of talent at that time too. If you want to argue that WWE didn't need ECW, try and look at the full picture and not just a part of it which suits your flawed argument.

validreasoning wrote:

They can scream **** you Vince, the fact at the matter is Vince got all their money, so you think Vince gives a **** about that? As for Funk, well which did better numbers? ONS or HH?

You seem to have missed the point. Why don't the ECW fans shower Vince with the glowing praise that you do? Why didn't Funk? Why do they disagree with your version of history? Maybe cos it's bollocks? Could that be it?

validreasoning! wrote:

Facts speak for themselves, and i would advise you to watch Rise and Fall of ECW where both parties practically admit it towards the end.

VR!

Indeed facts do speak for themselves! Have you even seen the DVD though? Heyman says that the only reason ECW went out of business was because the network - TNN - never backed the program, never gave them advertising and never got behind them even though they were TNN's highest rated show. In Heyman's own words:

"That's the only reason. Anyone who says otherwise is either dead wrong or doesn't know what he is talking about."

Incidentally, do you know why TNN cancelled ECW which was their highest rated show? Hmm? It was because they had Raw is War put on their network who they had been negotiating with!

And you then come on here and try to portray Vince McMahon as some sort of hero to ECW? You haven't a clue! ECW was taken off TNN and replaced with WWE!

validreasoning! wrote:

And Heyman said it himself that it was run on a shoestring budget from the getgo and that he admitted that Vince helped him out, as did Vince.

Seriously did you watch the DVD? Vince admitted to raiding ECW talent but said he financed Heyman because, unlike Bischoff, he felt bad about it. It's not like Heyman was getting hand-outs from the kind-hearted Vince McMahon. Seriously go watch the DVD.

Vince135792003 wrote:

I don't want to get involved in this. I'd actually side with you in not blaming Vince in anything he done at the time. He did what what was required.

I'd like to point out that I likewise don't blame Vince for what he did at the time. He had to do what he felt he had to in order to stop WCW. My problem is this revisionist crap about him helping out ECW like he was doing them a favour. In reality he helped put the two companies out of business in order to be the last guy left. It worked.

ShawnRaven

TNN yeah, contributed to a lot of the death of ECW due to the stunt they pulled. Wrestling is crippled without TV exposure, how ECW survived as long as they did with the limited TV is somewhat remarkable.

That said, a lot of ECW's problems still stemmed with Heyman due to his lack of business sense, as i already said before, i won't work for nothing. So why should the likes of Benoit, Malenko or anyone else? I'd have gone to WCW as well in their boots!

Also a lot of ECW guys WENT to Vince (and Bischoff for that matter, in the case of Raven and Stevie Richards), not the other way around, now if people think thats a "talent raid" then they're living in their own **** convincing themselves they smell of roses.

VR!

ShawnRaven

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Why start from 99? Go back a bit earlier. Go back to Vince taking Mick Foley and Steve Austin from the company. Two guys who were instrumental in turning around the WWE's fortunes. 1998 was the year when WWE got into their stride and it was built around former ECW guys. And WCW had raided plenty of talent at that time too. If you want to argue that WWE didn't need ECW, try and look at the full picture and not just a part of it which suits your flawed argument.

First things first, get your facts straight. Vince didn't take those two. They willingly left! Austin was never gonna be a fulltimer with ECW. He was just there to bash Bischoff. Same with Foley, he was already established. And he left on good terms with Heyman afterwards. Vince didn't "raid those". And to call those two former ECW guys when they were both clearly established with WCW, again, you're living in your own ****.

WWE didn't *NEED* ECW, seeing as it was former WCW guys who made it big, regarding Foley and Austin, and you can throw in Taker and HHH while you're at it. I already admitted that they benefited from using ECW ideas as a template. Now if you're looking for blood, look elsewhere!

You seem to have missed the point. Why don't the ECW fans shower Vince with the glowing praise that you do? Why didn't Funk? Why do they disagree with your version of history? Maybe cos it's bollocks? Could that be it?

I thought i hit the nail on the head. Funk isn't exactly a great example either, HH was set up by Raven and Shane Douglas to spite Vince because both guys couldn't get over in his promotion for love no money (actually thats not true, Douglas 1990-1991 run he was quite over, before his ego tripped him up). Sandman and Tommy Dreamer had no problem with it, and they were from ECW from the start. So obviously Vince has done something right. Now if you think thats bollox, fair enough, your opinion. Enjoy watching your ECW fancams of the glory years, because it's the closest you're gonna get to it again.

Indeed facts do speak for themselves! Have you even seen the DVD though? Heyman says that the only reason ECW went out of business was because the network - TNN - never backed the program, never gave them advertising and never got behind them even though they were TNN's highest rated show. In Heyman's own words:

"That's the only reason. Anyone who says otherwise is either dead wrong or doesn't know what he is talking about."

I already acknowledged this in another post. My point is that isn't the only reason. If Heyman was such a great business, how come the Mass Transit incident happened? Why did all his talent go to bigger promotions? Why did his cheques bounce? Wrestling isn't just something on TV, It's a business. The problem with ECW was nobody wanted to play the businessman!

Incidentally, do you know why TNN cancelled ECW which was their highest rated show? Hmm? It was because they had Raw is War put on their network who they had been negotiating with!

And you then come on here and try to portray Vince McMahon as some sort of hero to ECW? You haven't a clue! ECW was taken off TNN and replaced with WWE!

First off, i didn't just come on here, i've been around for quite a while, so enough of the "i've been around longer than you" attitude, it's an internet forum, not a workingmans club. My point was Vince didn't kill ECW, if you're using TNN as an excuse (you've changed your story now!), then that was TNNs decision to replace ECW with WWE. So it's quite clear that you're anti Vince, and it's YOUR argument that is flawed, not mine.

Seriously did you watch the DVD? Vince admitted to raiding ECW talent but said he financed Heyman because, unlike Bischoff, he felt bad about it. It's not like Heyman was getting hand-outs from the kind-hearted Vince McMahon. Seriously go watch the DVD.

For SOME of the talent, yes, but not all of them. Some of the talent came to him... you seem to be ignoring that for some reason. And as i said, Vince financed him before "raiding" the talent, Foley and Austin came over willingly.

I'd like to point out that I likewise don't blame Vince for what he did at the time. He had to do what he felt he had to in order to stop WCW. My problem is this revisionist crap about him helping out ECW like he was doing them a favour. In reality he helped put the two companies out of business in order to be the last guy left. It worked.

Not strictly true, especially in the case of WCW, between Time Warner no longer wanting wrestling on their network, and Bischoff not being able to close the deal in time, and Russo's sticking his oar in PPV's causing lawsuits left right and centre, WCW was a dead donkey long before Vince put the company out of business. As for ECW, we'll have to agree to disagree

VR!

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

First things first, get your facts straight. Vince didn't take those two. They willingly left! Austin was never gonna be a fulltimer with ECW. He was just there to bash Bischoff. Same with Foley, he was already established. And he left on good terms with Heyman afterwards. Vince didn't "raid those". And to call those two former ECW guys when they were both clearly established with WCW, again, you're living in your own ****.

My facts are straight. The guys were acquired by Vince and the WWE from ECW. Of course they willingly left. You can't acquire talent without their consent, but they were taken nonetheless. And of course they were former ECW guys. The Stone Cold character came from the Austin of ECW not the Austin of WCW and the Mick Foley which helped change sports entertainment in the WWE was based on the Cactus Jack of ECW. If you think otherwise you're deluded.

validreasoning! wrote:

WWE didn't *NEED* ECW, seeing as it was former WCW guys who made it big, regarding Foley and Austin, and you can throw in Taker and HHH while you're at it. I already admitted that they benefited from using ECW ideas as a template. Now if you're looking for blood, look elsewhere!

You're really struggling now as you well know. There were ECW chants at WWE buildings when the company was putting out sh*t involving Doink the Clown. Without ECW - and ECW guys like Cactus Jack and Steve Austin - the WWE wouldn't have spawned the attitude era which helped them defeat WCW.

validreasoning! wrote:

I thought i hit the nail on the head. Funk isn't exactly a great example either, HH was set up by Raven and Shane Douglas to spite Vince because both guys couldn't get over in his promotion for love no money (actually thats not true, Douglas 1990-1991 run he was quite over, before his ego tripped him up). Sandman and Tommy Dreamer had no problem with it, and they were from ECW from the start. So obviously Vince has done something right. Now if you think thats bollox, fair enough, your opinion. Enjoy watching your ECW fancams of the glory years, because it's the closest you're gonna get to it again.

Again you failed to tackle the point because you have no answer. Why do ECW fans and guys like Funk and Douglas who you refer to not give Vince credit? Why are all these people wrong, and why are you the only guy right? Or is it the other way around? (yes)

validreasoning! wrote:

I already acknowledged this in another post. My point is that isn't the only reason. If Heyman was such a great business, how come the Mass Transit incident happened? Why did all his talent go to bigger promotions? Why did his cheques bounce? Wrestling isn't just something on TV, It's a business. The problem with ECW was nobody wanted to play the businessman!

Again you fail to address the point and you try and deflect from the issue by attacking Paul Heyman (poorly I might add). You earlier sought to use the Rise and Fall of ECW DVD to back up your argument that Vince helped keep ECW afloat - now you have been forced to acknowledge that the DVD does not in fact support your argument. Heyman says that the company failed due to TNN deciding to get into bed with WWE and Vince!

validreasoning! wrote:

First off, i didn't just come on here, i've been around for quite a while, so enough of the "i've been around longer than you" attitude, it's an internet forum, not a workingmans club.

Eh? I don't have such an attitude, although I will say I use this forum regularly and have never come across you before! You must keep very quiet...

validreasoning! wrote:

My point was Vince didn't kill ECW, if you're using TNN as an excuse (you've changed your story now!), then that was TNNs decision to replace ECW with WWE. So it's quite clear that you're anti Vince, and it's YOUR argument that is flawed, not mine.

Wow you are really struggling now. Your point was that Vince helped keep ECW in business - you have been made to look foolish for taking this view since it has been proven to you that Vince acquired ECW's talent and TNN ditched ECW to jump into bed with his company! Vince DID help kill ECW and you know it.

validreasoning! wrote:

For SOME of the talent, yes, but not all of them. Some of the talent came to him... you seem to be ignoring that for some reason.

Oh ho ho! So finally you acknowledge at long last that Vince raided ECW's talent. Then again I suppose it was hard for you to argue otherwise when the DVD has Vince admitting he raided their talent! LOL!

validreasoning! wrote:

Not strictly true, especially in the case of WCW, between Time Warner no longer wanting wrestling on their network, and Bischoff not being able to close the deal in time, and Russo's sticking his oar in PPV's causing lawsuits left right and centre, WCW was a dead donkey long before Vince put the company out of business.

WCW became a dead donkey due to the popularity of the WWE's attitude era in contrast to the stale, shabby product offered by WCW. WWE turned it around largely due to adapting ECW's style of putting out a risque, cutting-edge show.

validreasoning! wrote:

As for ECW, we'll have to agree to disagree

Agreed.

ShawnRaven

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

My facts are straight. The guys were acquired by Vince and the WWE from ECW. Of course they willingly left. You can't acquire talent without their consent, but they were taken nonetheless. And of course they were former ECW guys. The Stone Cold character came from the Austin of ECW not the Austin of WCW and the Mick Foley which helped change sports entertainment in the WWE was based on the Cactus Jack of ECW. If you think otherwise you're deluded.

Woooow wooow wooow big fella, How the **** can you say Austin's character was from ECW? You telling me Heyman can sue Austin for being himself under the premise of ECW owning the character? Knowing Heyman he probably got his parents to try and file the damn lawsuit! Saying Stone Cold's character was ECW is bollox, and you know it! And Cactus Jack was doing the psychotic bumping in Japan AND in WCW before ECW, so again, you're crediting the wrong guy. I don't think it's me who's deluded.

You're really struggling now as you well know. There were ECW chants at WWE buildings when the company was putting out sh*t involving Doink the Clown. Without ECW - and ECW guys like Cactus Jack and Steve Austin - the WWE wouldn't have spawned the attitude era which helped them defeat WCW.

I'm not struggling. AND FOR THE THIRD TIME, I have acknowledged that WWE took a lot of ideas from ECW, simply because it was there. My point was WWE would have survived anyway. It was only a matter of time before WCW would screw it up anyway, and given who had control of the damn company (most of the talent), you can't deny that. Stop putting ECW up on a damn pedestol. And Cactus Jack and Steve Austin are NOT, repeat NOT ECW guys as they had been established before ECW. Jesus, you're a tough nut to crack!

Again you failed to tackle the point because you have no answer. Why do ECW fans and guys like Funk and Douglas who you refer to not give Vince credit? Why are all these people wrong, and why are you the only guy right? Or is it the other way around? (yes)

I'm gonna ask this once and once only, stop ramming words into my mouth. I'm not the only guy with this opinion. You can ask a stackload of people in the business, outside observers as well as open minded fans alike and they'll tell you the same thing. It's not just my opinion, it's truth. The only ones who will all be so happy to pin the blame on Vince are "diehard ECW fans" who never forgave him for buying out the company (that owed stacks as it was) and putting it out of it's misery!

I have no answer for Funk, for Douglas, he hates Vince with a passion, plain and simple, it has bugger all to do with ECW and everything to do his hatred for Vince, and given his treatment with WWE in 95 with Hall and Michaels, i can agree with him, but he handled it the wrong way, burnt his bridges and screwed himself over for life with him, or any prospects there.

And don't give me this loyalty bull**** with Funk, it didn't stop Funk from leaving ECW and going back to WWE in 98, nor did it stop Funk from making a TV appearance less than a year after Hardcore Homecoming! It's a business, and depending on their contracts, they can go wherever they please or wherever offers most money. Funk didn't have long term contracts with neither ECW or WWE (especially the latter as he probably wasn't getting paid!). Wrestlers will go wherever's convenient. Funk obviously didn't have THAT much of a gripe with Vince over HH cos he crawled back, didn't he?

ECW fans, in general do not get me started on, these are the guys who were practically told back nearly two years ago that it'll never be the same as it's WWE produced, who are STILL bitching about it. OF COURSE IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE SAME! Vince calls the shots, it's his property now and he can do whatever the hell he likes with it. Now i admit i'm no ECW fun, BUT if someone acquires something with it, it's theres to do whatever they want with it. If you don't like it, don't watch it. It's that simple. I don't bother with RAW and SD anymore, i watch the older stuff, for the same reasons. It's not enjoyable.

Again you fail to address the point and you try and deflect from the issue by attacking Paul Heyman (poorly I might add). You earlier sought to use the Rise and Fall of ECW DVD to back up your argument that Vince helped keep ECW afloat - now you have been forced to acknowledge that the DVD does not in fact support your argument. Heyman says that the company failed due to TNN deciding to get into bed with WWE and Vince!

Aaaand again you fail to acknowledge (this is going around in circles), that the TNN deal wasn't the only thing that killed ECW, bad business management was a prime cause of it as well. And i said from the very beginning that Heyman had a great mind for the business, and still does. But he's a **** businessman, and he practically admitted that at the end of Rise and Fall where he says he got knocked off, he'll dust himself off and get back on again. Vince helped keep ECW afloat by bailing Heyman out of his debts several times. ANY professional wrestling fan knows this, and again, those who deny it are living in their own piss.

Eh? I don't have such an attitude, although I will say I use this forum regularly and have never come across you before! You must keep very quiet...

I used another alias before 2004 (April or May i think) then took up this one. The discussion declined at an alarming rate so i preferred to read as there was **** all to post against, happy?

Wow you are really struggling now. Your point was that Vince helped keep ECW in business - you have been made to look foolish for taking this view since it has been proven to you that Vince acquired ECW's talent and TNN ditched ECW to jump into bed with his company! Vince DID help kill ECW and you know it.

You love repeating yourself don't you? Don't join the debate society when you go to college, but you might make a good solicitor, or maybe a politician. I've already answered this one. And for the final time, that was TNN's decision. Vince acquired his talent, but Bischoff acquired an equal amount of Heymans talent too, but i don't see you crying "Bischoff killed ECW!"

More points you're conveniently avoiding too.

Oh ho ho! So finally you acknowledge at long last that Vince raided ECW's talent. Then again I suppose it was hard for you to argue otherwise when the DVD has Vince admitting he raided their talent! LOL!

No, i was quoting you. Most of the ECW talent came to Vince, again, because they weren't getting paid or didn't want to be stuck in the dead end promotion that ECW was in. And AGAIN, that's not a "raid", that's business.

WCW became a dead donkey due to the popularity of the WWE's attitude era in contrast to the stale, shabby product offered by WCW. WWE turned it around largely due to adapting ECW's style of putting out a risque, cutting-edge show.

Yeah true, but that didn't stop WCW crippling WWE's ratings for the first two years of the attitude era, so obviously WCW was doing something right at the time. From 95-99 Bischoff had Vince ****ting in his shoes and on the verge of bankrupcy (ESPECIALLY in 1995 when Kevin Nash tanked the ratings to a mere 0.3 at one of the last In Your House PPV's he headlined!), By 1997, WCW had NWO and Cruisers while Vince had Bret v Shawn for the 50millionth time. WCW kept using the same formula one too many times and made so many mistakes that viewers lost interest. Even Bischoff admits that! So again, ECW may have influenced the attitude era, but i strongly disagree that it can be FULLY credited for WWE's success.

Your views are somewhat interesting, but if you can actually do a bit of reading about what actually happened around the time (and i'm not trying to be condescending here) as opposed to what bitter bastards like Raven and Shane Douglas would say at interviews. You'll find the story isn't quite as black and white as you're putting it.

VR!

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

Woooow wooow wooow big fella, How the **** can you say Austin's character was from ECW? You telling me Heyman can sue Austin for being himself under the premise of ECW owning the character? Knowing Heyman he probably got his parents to try and file the damn lawsuit! Saying Stone Cold's character was ECW is bollox, and you know it!

Um, I never said any of that. Pay attention, mate. What I said was:

The Stone Cold character came from the Austin of ECW not the Austin of WCW

Do you dispute that? Was the Stone Cold of the WWE closer to the Austin of ECW or WCW? Obviously it's the former.

validreasoning! wrote:

And Cactus Jack was doing the psychotic bumping in Japan AND in WCW before ECW, so again, you're crediting the wrong guy.

I'm not. The WWE came for him after his stint in ECW! Wow you're really struggling now, man!

validreasoning! wrote:

I don't think it's me who's deluded.

Then see above.

validreasoning! wrote:

I'm not struggling. AND FOR THE THIRD TIME, I have acknowledged that WWE took a lot of ideas from ECW, simply because it was there.

You ARE struggling and what do you mean they took the ideas "simply because it was there"?

validreasoning! wrote:

My point was WWE would have survived anyway. It was only a matter of time before WCW would screw it up anyway, and given who had control of the damn company (most of the talent), you can't deny that.

And you say you're not struggling? LOL. WWE survived because they EVOLVED their ideas based upon the ideas that were being used at the time in Extreme Championship Wrestling. WCW's demise was based upon a number of factors including a failure to evolve their mindset as WWE did. To say WCW would have screwed up anyway is BS! They beat Raw over 80 weeks in a row. How was it only a matter of time before they screwed up? Can you imagine telling that to Vince at the time?

validreasoning! wrote:

Stop putting ECW up on a damn pedestol.

I'm giving them the credit they deserve. Stop putting them down unfairly.

validreasoning! wrote:

And Cactus Jack and Steve Austin are NOT, repeat NOT ECW guys as they had been established before ECW.

They were not "established" in terms of what their characters were to become. Having national exposure does not equate to being "established".

validreasoning! wrote:

I'm gonna ask this once and once only, stop ramming words into my mouth. I'm not the only guy with this opinion. You can ask a stackload of people in the business, outside observers as well as open minded fans alike and they'll tell you the same thing. It's not just my opinion, it's truth.

Sorry but I've never heard anyone else argue that Vince helped keep ECW afloat. It's a quite absurd suggestion in light of the FACTS. Vince took talent from the company and took their spot on TNN. FACT!

validreasoning! wrote:

The only ones who will all be so happy to pin the blame on Vince are "diehard ECW fans" who never forgave him for buying out the company (that owed stacks as it was) and putting it out of it's misery!

That's a cop-out if ever I heard one. I'm not a diehard ECW fan. I simply acknowledge the facts which are that Vince did everything in his power to be the last guy left. You're the one putting a spin on history not me.

validreasoning! wrote:

And don't give me this loyalty bull**** with Funk, it didn't stop Funk from leaving ECW and going back to WWE in 98, nor did it stop Funk from making a TV appearance less than a year after Hardcore Homecoming! It's a business, and depending on their contracts, they can go wherever they please or wherever offers most money. Funk didn't have long term contracts with neither ECW or WWE (especially the latter as he probably wasn't getting paid!). Wrestlers will go wherever's convenient. Funk obviously didn't have THAT much of a gripe with Vince over HH cos he crawled back, didn't he?

Actually I don't think Funk crawled back I think Vince came crawling the year before and, to his credit, gave ECW fans a great day. Seeing this, Funk decided to give the ECW fans a great day out too and accept what was reported to be a fine pay-out by Vince. Indeed you're right - it is a business. I'm the one arguing that. You're the one arguing Vince is some sort of one-man charity handing out gifts to all and sundry!

validreasoning! wrote:

ECW fans, in general do not get me started on, these are the guys who were practically told back nearly two years ago that it'll never be the same as it's WWE produced, who are STILL bitching about it. OF COURSE IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE SAME! Vince calls the shots, it's his property now and he can do whatever the hell he likes with it. Now i admit i'm no ECW fun, BUT if someone acquires something with it, it's theres to do whatever they want with it. If you don't like it, don't watch it. It's that simple. I don't bother with RAW and SD anymore, i watch the older stuff, for the same reasons. It's not enjoyable.

That works both ways. ECW fans were led to believe that it would resemble the old ECW and they did a good job of laying the groundwork at One Night Stand 2 by giving RVD the belt. The fans tuned in and they were getting ratings of 2.0 and above. However, as you say, Vince calls the shots and he did things his way - and hence the rating dropped dramatically as the ECW fans deserted it!

validreasoning! wrote:

Aaaand again you fail to acknowledge (this is going around in circles), that the TNN deal wasn't the only thing that killed ECW, bad business management was a prime cause of it as well.

Wrong, the main issue here is whether or not Vince helped or hindered ECW's fight for survival. I have proven quite conclusively that Vince hindered ECW more than he helped them and you are the one refusing to acknowledge that.

validreasoning! wrote:

And i said from the very beginning that Heyman had a great mind for the business, and still does. But he's a **** businessman, and he practically admitted that at the end of Rise and Fall where he says he got knocked off, he'll dust himself off and get back on again. Vince helped keep ECW afloat by bailing Heyman out of his debts several times. ANY professional wrestling fan knows this, and again, those who deny it are living in their own piss.

No, those who deny it know what they're talking about. Prove to me that ECW would have gone under without Vince's financial pay-outs. Do you know the figures? Why was this not mentioned in the DVD that WWE produced? Woudn't they put that little nugget in there? How Vince saved ECW? And how come Vince didn't help pay the bills for ECW in 2001 when it really did need some help? Hmm? You see when you put your nonsensical ramblings up against a little thing called logic, they don't tend to do to well do they?

validreasoning! wrote:

I used another alias before 2004 (April or May i think) then took up this one. The discussion declined at an alarming rate so i preferred to read as there was **** all to post against, happy?

Another account? Don't let any mods find out about that?

validreasoning! wrote:

You love repeating yourself don't you? Don't join the debate society when you go to college, but you might make a good solicitor, or maybe a politician. I've already answered this one. And for the final time, that was TNN's decision. Vince acquired his talent, but Bischoff acquired an equal amount of Heymans talent too, but i don't see you crying "Bischoff killed ECW!"

I don't cry "Bischoff killed ECW" because the issue here that divides you and I so strongly is not what killed ECW, but whether or not Vince McMahon contributed to the death of ECW. Since you can't keep up with the debate you might want to avoid the debating societies yourself! You'd make a good spin doctor though I reckon...

validreasoning! wrote:

Most of the ECW talent came to Vince, again, because they weren't getting paid or didn't want to be stuck in the dead end promotion that ECW was in. And AGAIN, that's not a "raid", that's business.

What a "raid" is, is Vince looking at ECW talent and picking out who he's going to acquire. WHICH HE DID. And Vince has admitted to this. You're the one in denial about it.

validreasoning! wrote:

Yeah true, but that didn't stop WCW crippling WWE's ratings for the first two years of the attitude era, so obviously WCW was doing something right at the time.

Indeed - which is why the WWE knew they needed to change. Keep up lad!

validreaosoning! wrote:

From 95-99 Bischoff had Vince ****ting in his shoes and on the verge of bankrupcy (ESPECIALLY in 1995 when Kevin Nash tanked the ratings to a mere 0.3 at one of the last In Your House PPV's he headlined!),

Hold on for a second, the WWE were "sh*tting in their shoes" and "on the verge of bankruptcy" in 1998? And in 1999? Really? Are you kidding me? Bwahahaha! Thanks for the laugh.

validreasoning! wrote:

By 1997, WCW had NWO and Cruisers while Vince had Bret v Shawn for the 50millionth time. WCW kept using the same formula one too many times and made so many mistakes that viewers lost interest. Even Bischoff admits that! So again, ECW may have influenced the attitude era, but i strongly disagree that it can be FULLY credited for WWE's success.

Again you can't bring yourself to give credit to ECW - "ECW may have influenced the attitude era" when you know full well they did. Of course WCW made mistakes but it's no use WCW making mistakes and WWE not capitalising on them. The thing is, they DID capitalise on their mistakes by utilising the attitude that ECW were cultivating across the East Coast of America.

validreasoning! wrote:

Your views are somewhat interesting, but if you can actually do a bit of reading about what actually happened around the time (and i'm not trying to be condescending here) as opposed to what bitter bastards like Raven and Shane Douglas would say at interviews. You'll find the story isn't quite as black and white as you're putting it.

That might sound a bit more convincing if you hadn't earlier advised me to watch the Rise and Fall of ECW DVD (which I already have done) before proceeding to get pretty much everything said in the DVD wrong!

Seriously man, I know the WWE likes to put their own spin on history. For example, 'Vince helped ECW', 'Vince loved Bret and the Hart family', 'Vince beat Ted Turner' etc. but you need to realise that when battles are over, the victors tend to put their own slant on history. That is why we must look at things objectively. Clearly you can't do so as you appear to be hostile to ECW fans and Paul Heyman and ECW in general. Hey, you're entitled to your opinions. You are NOT entitled however to regard these very questionable beliefs as objective truths. Particularly when, to most people, they come across as total bollocks of the highest order.

ShawnRaven

Ok screw this, you're obviously gonna believe everything set in your mind, and you're entitled to this despite the fact that the facts are there and you even own a piece of the damn evidence! So lets cut to the chace here!

Do you dispute that? Was the Stone Cold of the WWE closer to the Austin of ECW or WCW? Obviously it's the former.

Go watch some Hollywood Blonds stuff then come back to me

Sorry but I've never heard anyone else argue that Vince helped keep ECW afloat. It's a quite absurd suggestion in light of the FACTS. Vince took talent from the company and took their spot on TNN. FACT!

Well again, considering Vinces bailouts were mentioned by Vince and Heyman on the DVD, i'd say thats a damn good start... next!

That's a cop-out if ever I heard one. I'm not a diehard ECW fan. I simply acknowledge the facts which are that Vince did everything in his power to be the last guy left. You're the one putting a spin on history not me.

Again, i'm going on Rise and Fall and several shoot interviews, whats your source that proved otherwise? Heymans worked shoot in 2001? His promo against TNN in 2000? Don't make me laugh.

You're the one arguing Vince is some sort of one-man charity handing out gifts to all and sundry!

No, i'm saying Vince bailed Heyman out on several occasions, and given by sources listed, i'm not the only one. So quit being a dick

Wrong, the main issue here is whether or not Vince helped or hindered ECW's fight for survival. I have proven quite conclusively that Vince hindered ECW more than he helped them and you are the one refusing to acknowledge that.

If you call being bailed out of your debts, or tried to be a hiderance, then i'd hate to see what you'd consider a help!

No, those who deny it know what they're talking about. Prove to me that ECW would have gone under without Vince's financial pay-outs. Do you know the figures? Why was this not mentioned in the DVD that WWE produced? Woudn't they put that little nugget in there?

They did! And as i said, it has been said on several shoot interviews by those who were there. You have the internet and a web browser, look it up.

Another account? Don't let any mods find out about that?

I already did, not that it's hardly the issue here? Next!

I don't cry "Bischoff killed ECW" because the issue here that divides you and I so strongly is not what killed ECW, but whether or not Vince McMahon contributed to the death of ECW.

Re read your original post, then come back to me

What a "raid" is, is Vince looking at ECW talent and picking out who he's going to acquire. WHICH HE DID. And Vince has admitted to this. You're the one in denial about it.

Again, going in circles, a lot of that talent came to him. The talent picked him, not the other way around! Jesus, you're a stubborn bollox

Indeed - which is why the WWE knew they needed to change. Keep up lad!

WWE was never the same for any more than 3 years, go through all the older PPVs from 85 to present day and you'll see this.

Hold on for a second, the WWE were "sh*tting in their shoes" and "on the verge of bankruptcy" in 1998? And in 1999? Really? Are you kidding me? Bwahahaha! Thanks for the laugh.

Oh forget it, seriously, you have the maturity of a 12 year old secondary school kid, you clearly didn't do any research on any of this and quite frankly your repetitive stale points on this issue are a clear indication you're biased towards ECW and that they did nothing wrong at all. If ECW did nothing wrong, they'd still be in business, much like the NWA in general.

Do a small bit of growing up, learn not to be a sarcastic ****, watch more interviews with people who were actually in the business rather then claiming your opinion as fact. If you even search around for Vince and Heymans working relationship from that time period, the facts will come spewing out.

I'm out on this one, here, have the last word, you've earned it after this.
VR!

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

Go watch some Hollywood Blonds stuff then come back to me

You can be very condescending. I've watched plenty of the Hollywood Blonds' stuff. I don't think the Austin that had flickering lights in his boots was akin to the Stone Cold in WWE and if you think he was, you're crazy!

validreasoning! wrote:

Well again, considering Vinces bailouts were mentioned by Vince and Heyman on the DVD, i'd say thats a damn good start... next!

Bailouts? What was mentioned was Vince giving Heyman money because he felt bad about raiding his talent. Vince is a very shrewd businessman and he doesn't hand out lump sums like a one-man charity.

validreasoning! wrote:

Again, i'm going on Rise and Fall and several shoot interviews, whats your source that proved otherwise? Heymans worked shoot in 2001? His promo against TNN in 2000? Don't make me laugh.

You're going on information that was NOT on the Rise and Fall DVD. In fact, it seems to have been invented by yourself. I am going on the words of McMahon and Heyman.

validreasoning! wrote:

No, i'm saying Vince bailed Heyman out on several occasions, and given by sources listed, i'm not the only one. So quit being a dick

(sigh) You have not listed any sources though. Vince did not give out money out of the kindness of his heart, he did it because he felt bad about taking Heyman's talent. Payback in other words.

validreasoning! wrote:

If you call being bailed out of your debts, or tried to be a hiderance, then i'd hate to see what you'd consider a help!

If Vince wanted to help ECW why didn't he help them when they faced bankruptcy in 2001? For the last time Vince gave Heyman money because he felt bad about acquiring ECW's talent!

validreasoning! wrote:

They did! And as i said, it has been said on several shoot interviews by those who were there. You have the internet and a web browser, look it up.

LOL. So now you want ME to find your argument for you?

validreasoning! wrote:

Again, going in circles, a lot of that talent came to him. The talent picked him, not the other way around! Jesus, you're a stubborn bollox

If the talent had picked him, (leaving aside how absurd it sounds for talent to decide to pick McMahon and WWE), why weren't they in WWE when they left WCW?

validreasoning! wrote:

WWE was never the same for any more than 3 years, go through all the older PPVs from 85 to present day and you'll see this.

Again you make no sense and I am well up to speed on WWE PPVs.

validreasoning! wrote:

Oh forget it, seriously, you have the maturity of a 12 year old secondary school kid, you clearly didn't do any research on any of this and quite frankly your repetitive stale points on this issue are a clear indication you're biased towards ECW and that they did nothing wrong at all. If ECW did nothing wrong, they'd still be in business, much like the NWA in general.

Haha, I was wondering how you'd back up your ridiculous claim that the WWE faced bankruptcy in 1998 and 1999! I assume you did a bit of reading since then and realised how absurd that sounded.

validreasoning! wrote:

Do a small bit of growing up, learn not to be a sarcastic ****, watch more interviews with people who were actually in the business rather then claiming your opinion as fact. If you even search around for Vince and Heymans working relationship from that time period, the facts will come spewing out.

I'm out on this one, here, have the last word, you've earned it after this.
VR!

Well I'm not going to be so petty as to resort to name-calling, what I would suggest is that you try and find some objective material on this part of wrestling history and not believe the WWE propaganda. I think ECW deserve way more credit than you are prepared to give them.

Vince135792003

I should get one of you two to write my essays for me! Word count might be an issue though.

Minto

Good God almighty, thats one hell of a slobberknocker goin' on there. You guys are whipping each other like a pair of government mules.

As far as my two cents go, Austin's WWE character came directly from himself and although I havn't watched any of his stuff from ECW, I would assume some of Stone Cold's character was influenced by his ECW run. Also, in his autobiography, if memory serves me correctly, he says it came from his ex-wife telling him to drink his tea, before it becomes "Stone Cold". Come to think of it, it may just be his name that came from his ex.

Fozzy

Austin's character did come from himself. He was given a sort of free-reign in ECW to be what he wanted, and being himself like that was what he was best at. I don't think ECW losing stars to WWE and WCW ever really hurt them that much. Their peak years were around 1998/99, which were peak years for wrestling in general, and their downfall was in 2001, which was a dip in popularity for wrestling in general. I think ECW suffered from the lack of interest in wrestling, rather than them causing it. ECW owed $9million or so when they went bankrupt, Vince had no reason to bail them out then. I can't see how anyone can blame WWE for agreeing to a tv deal with TNN. No top network would have them at the time. It's TNN's fault that they dropped ECW in favour of Raw, not Vince's

ShawnRaven

I do give ECW credit, i just dont put em on a pedestol like most ECW fans do. And most of the people whos opinion i agree with are usually ex ECW staff who also don't like Vince, it's all to do with shoot interviews and not WWE produced stuff (as i've said again, but as stated, i'm tired of repeating myself),

But the people who have posted after us seem to agree that Vince didn't kill WWE or send it down the pan, something you seem to be so adimant on believing.

Whatever man, your opinion is yours, mine is mine. Agreeing to disagree is the only way to sort this out, but damn, a good discussion if anything and probably one of the better threads here for a while

VR!

Mr.Nice Guy

validreasoning! wrote:

I do give ECW credit, i just dont put em on a pedestol like most ECW fans do. And most of the people whos opinion i agree with are usually ex ECW staff who also don't like Vince, it's all to do with shoot interviews and not WWE produced stuff (as i've said again, but as stated, i'm tired of repeating myself),

But the people who have posted after us seem to agree that Vince didn't kill WWE or send it down the pan, something you seem to be so adimant on believing.

Whatever man, your opinion is yours, mine is mine. Agreeing to disagree is the only way to sort this out, but damn, a good discussion if anything and probably one of the better threads here for a while

VR!

I don't believe Vince is the sole reason for ECW going down the pan as I think there were a number of factors, but Vince McMahon was a big factor in my opinion.

As you say though we have a different slant on the issue. I liked the discussion too however. I like debating with guys who are as passionate about wrestling as I am. :cool:

ShawnRaven

Amen to that! Heres to many more to come.
Good luck on the mods position btw

VR!