WWE PPV'S SUCK....BIASED AS HELL

Im not talking about wrestlemania, royal rumble ppvs... Im talkin the normal month to month specials. I just saw the MOnday night wars ppv. That shit was SO BIASED towards Vince, and WWF bieng good guys, and Eric bieng a lowlife badguy with WCW...and even when they interviewed Eric, he portrayed himself like a prick.



So its basicly focusing in on the 3 year war between the two companies, and it interviews different wrestlers from the current WWE roster who used to be in WCW. Well all the wrestlers they interviewed badmouthed, Eric and WCW. So the PPV goes on focusing on how RAW was winning, and dominating first year...and it focused on this for a good 30 minutes of the PPV. Then in the matter of 2 sentences it talks about how Hall and Nash went to WCW, and WCW won the ratings for almost 2 years straight. They focused on WCW winning for about a total of 2-3 minutes (TOPS)...and most of the focus was on how it was apparently a "cheap" business move to offer more money to wrestlers than VINCE, and how I guess its cheating... so again they focused on how Eric was bieng unfair to Vince...


What about how VINCE drove every other organization out of business in the 80s? I guess its all good when your on top, but if someone else plays the same way its "CHEAP."


IMO, the ppv made Vince look like a big time whiner, and a biased ass motherfucker towards himself... And they didnt even interview Hogan, or Nash, or Hall or anyone who wasnt on the WWE roster today... so all the wrestlers interviewed were going on and on about how Vince was a genius, and WWE is great, and WCW and Eric were cheaters with Ted's money....lol. what a joke.

History is written by the winners.

Yah but when Vince was getting his ass kicked by Eric for all those weeks, the faithful still thought of Eric as a bastard.

LOL @ Vinnie's public ego stroking. he won, and still has to rub it
in.

Ya but VINCE was doing that to ALL the small competitors in the 80s. He stole Hogan, Hacksaw Jim Duggan, Demolition, Big john stud.... he stole everybody from NWA, and other smaller organizations in the 80s, and it was fine when he did it. Those smaller organizations couldnt compete with the money, and marketing that the WWF had, so Vince won... he got the bigger wrestlers because he could afford them, then as soon as the table is turned, and Eric did the same thing to vince, it was considered unfair business, and lowdown?


WHat bullshit. The only thing I didnt agree with on Erics part was giving away the results on Nitro, about raw...and downplaying Mic Foleys first title win. Other than that everything that happened to Vince during the wars, Vince did to every smaller competitor

Were you even watching that? They didn't portray Eric as the bad guy for using Turner's checkbook to steal talent, especially if you ever read wrestling magazines from back then, that trash on him for doing so. The only thing that they made him look like a bad guy for was the underhanded shit such as giving away results beforehand. And he wasn't trying to portray himself that way, he REALLY doesn't think of it as unethical. He didn't have a problem with it then, why would he now?

The Raw vs. Nitro DVD is pretty unbiased, especially coming from one of the companies. If it was biased, then they wouldn't include clips of the wrestlers saying that it was scary for those 83 weeks, because they weren't sure whether or not the WWF would shut down.

i was a wwf fan first, then a wrestling fan second. WCW was always the enemy, period.

U guys are brainwashed by Vince... THis is a business. Vince had his daddies check book when he was taking over WWF. He used all his dads money to buy those wrestlers from AWA, and Japan, and smaller organizations. He crushed his opponents, and organzations all over the country, because they couldnt financially compete with Vince's dads checkbook. How is using your daddies checkbook to sign wrestlers, any different from Eric using Ted's checkbook? And if ur only argument is a "family" argument, than u have no argument.


And if u saw the ppv and think it was unbiased, youre crazy. It would be unbiased if they interviewed wrestlers from WCW (at the time of the wars) who were NOT currently signed to the WWE. Every wrestler and person they interviewed (with exception of MENE GENE) was currently signed to the WWE roster. Not one of the wresters talked about the shitty booking, storylines, or gimmick wrestlers of WWF at the time of the wars. WWF killed themselves with the gimmick wrestlers like HOG, AND PIG, and all those blue collar worker/wrester Duke Dumpster Drosey... there was a dime a dozen shitty ass gimmicks, angles, and story lines during the time that WWF was losing the war. And they didnt focus on ANY OF THAT. They just talked about it for 2 minutes, losing, and talking about how Eric was underhanded.



And any of you who say WCW was the enemy, are obviously biased as hell. This is a business. Its competition...if ur taking sides, ur biased.

The idea that Vince's father financed his son's national expansion is ludicrous. Right from the start, Vince had to PURCHASE the business from his father (it wasn't just given to him). From the very moment that he took over, he was severely leveraged financially. The entire national expansion was a huge risk, that was financed from a combination of incoming revenues & loans. In other words, there was no outside benefactor.

Vince succeeded because he took calculated risks that paid off. In the process, he ultimately revamped the whole industry, changing the structure of production, while constricting it through centralization, all to his own benefit. Regardless of how one interprets the results, his path bares absolutely no resemblance to WCW in any way whatsoever. He did, for better or worse, by way of his own effort.

There is a sharp distinction between a profitable company taking risks to expand through borrowing & incoming cash flow, and a non-profitable company like WCW that lives completely off revenue derived from it's parent Corporation by way of subsidies.

For most of it's existence, WCW consistently lost money year after year. It wasn't growing from cash flow, because it's cash flow was negative. It wasn't paying back loans, because they received unremitent subsidies. There was no 'live or die' pressure to turn a profit like Vince faced, until Turner lost the final say.

The corporate welfare of Ted Turner finally came to an end when AOL Time Warner did what Turner should have done YEARS ago...accept the fiduciary responsibility of putting the shareholders first. There was no responsible way to justify the expenses incurred at the time WCW finally closed, and things never would have gotten as far as they did, had WCW been forced to live by the same rules of the marketplace.

Im not taking anything away from Vinces contribution to the pro wrestling business... I think the man obviously has a knack for this, and hes blown it up, possibly to a degree where it wouldnt have been able to be attained without him. The problem is that some of you think that its unfair to offer entertainers more amount of money, than a competitor. Explain to me what the problem of that is?


So was it cheap for Robert Deniro to do such a great schtick as Vito Corleone in Godfather, and then to do another gangster in the comedy flick with Billy Crystal? These are entertainers, and actors, just like wrestlers are....if another entity or company offers a wrestler more money to support himself, and family, so that he can continue to entertain fans, what is the problem?

Anyways Vince should make Stephanie and Shane earn their positions like Vinny did. This would explain why the product is crap now.

"Not one of the wresters talked about the shitty booking, storylines, or gimmick wrestlers of WWF at the time of the wars. WWF killed themselves with the gimmick wrestlers like HOG, AND PIG, and all those blue collar worker/wrester Duke Dumpster Drosey... there was a dime a dozen shitty ass gimmicks, angles, and story lines during the time that WWF was losing the war. And they didnt focus on ANY OF THAT."

True, but they didn't focus on shit like V.K. Wallstreet, the Booty Man, or Loch Ness, either, which were in WCW. Why would they play up either of their mistakes? And they did give credit to Bischoff for bringing in the Cruisers from Japan and Mexico.

Why would they play up either of their mistakes? And they did give credit to Bischoff for bringing in the Cruisers from Japan and Mexico. Thats my point. Im saying it was a biased ass ppv so it sucked. Did you see the smashing machine on Mark kerr? See how it talked about his drug abuse, and steroid abuse, and him crying, and showing his bitch girlfriend, and his downs in life? Thats what made that documentary so fucking good. To talk about the struggles everyone goes through. If WWE would have owned up to their stupid angles, and gimmicks, and talked about their mistakes, the ppv would have been much more realistic, fair, and balanced....rather than just focusing it all on ur pros.And yes they gave Eric a tiny bit of credit for bringing in the cruisers, then they IMMEDIATELY badmouthed him for not doing anything with them.

I love WCW in the heat of those wars and really wish it was still around today-IMO it was a MUCH better show than the WWF at the time and was the last time I was really excited to watch wrestling every week. Now, even though I am a lifelong fan I could give a shit about seeing Raw or Smackdown, which I don't think I've seen in a year at least...having no competition is BAD for business, period.

could someone please explain about the wars? I watched WCW until 93, then went to Uni where we didnt have cable TV. Came back just in time to see Eddie and Benoit etc appear at ringside in the WWF. So missed the entire episode. We arent getting that DVD or PPV in the UK, so cant find out that way. Sorry to be a pain.