In Light of Randy Orton(A change I'd make to the wellness policy)
 

Do it like baseball does: Make it public.

Sure, Wrestling is more pseudosport than a real sport, but it would serve the same purpose as it does in baseball. Sure WWE makes you work without salary, but who's to say someone wouldn't half-ass it as a result? The way baseball does it, not only are you suspended without pay, but your name is released to the public. The purpose in baseball is to expose and embarass the people doing drugs of any kind and I think WWE should go the same route.

Thoughts?

Uh............they sorta already due.

And this would stop them from half-assing it?

I thought they already did announced it...

I'm not being clear. The purpose of revealing it would be the obvious embarassment in the eyes of the public in a business that is very reliant on public opinion. Also, when it comes out that so and so is a steroid user or drug user, it kind of limits your future emplyoment opportunities.

The point isn't to stop half assing really, though that would be nice. The point is more to stop the use, its merely a matter of time before some congressman who should be worried more about lowering my taxes decides to target wrestling as somethig that "gives kids the wrong idea"

Make the 'sport' clean itself up before an outside source does it

They do, but I'm saying that they said said person failed the wellness program because of..whatever, like in baseball where they identify what steroids said person was taking

Meh, the way wrestling fans work, I don't think most of them would care about steroid use. It's already widely speculated about most pro wrestlers that have even the hint of muscular development.

And you mean to tell me that if the WWE stated that Randy Orton was on steroids, live on the air...then released him, TNA wouldn't be trying to sign him the very next morning?

You couldn't really do that though. While I get that embarassing the worker may hurt his stock in terms of the business, it also hurts the company. Wrestling, which as you stated, is very reliant on public opinion, and it's public opinion is already down, you start to release names each week of wrestlers who fail the drug test, the opinion goes down further. On one hand, WWE is doing right and docking pay, but in the same token, it's detrimental as the company still let's them work and pull in a salary.

In short, I guess what I'm saying, and Randy Orton is the perfect example is that WWE doesn't release people for drug use. Randy has failed twice now right? So they announce twice that he's failed, announce twice they dock his pay for 30 days, and yet continue to let him be a very large figure on their show. That hurts public opinion.

ah

Yeah. The thing is, would it actually be that big of a loss. To the IWC, perhaps. to the average fan, they probably wouldn't miss him.

I think naming and shaming only works on the off chance of shaming.

WWE is only bullshitting with their wellness policy. It was only implemented because of the backlash for Eddie G. death. Vince's policy is a joke, it has no power, it is the equal to Teddy Long on smackdown. It is just there to give the illusion of power, but actually has non. Vince has know about his star's drug usage since he took over the WWF from his dad, and has not cared one bit.

Better yet, if you are going to create a drug policy, create a real one, not this "if you mess up, we will tell people, but continue to pay you an assload of money and let you build your star power". WWE is full of bullshit, but its all we have for now.

Like other wrestling companies throughout history have had such strict drug polilcies.

WCW had an awesome drug policy. Free bag of coke with every ticket.

Its not about other wrestling companies, its about WWE. focus. Other wrestling companies were not publicly traded companies that openly announced a Drug Policy that was supposed to be the be all end all of policies. If they did not want to test and punish their superstars, they should not have announced the policy.

So them having a policy and not enforcing it the way they initially decided they would makes them worse off than a company that has no such policy in place at all? As for other companies and it not being about other companies, what else could you really have been inferring when you used the verbage "WWE is full of bullshit, but its all we have for now."?

Exactly what it says, WWE is all we have for now in the form of a solid wrestling show. They are full of bull and bad decisions, but they are still the best wrestling show on national TV. TNA is not competition, YET, and they have not created a drug policy. And my point is that if you are not serious about a drug policy, then don't publicly impliment it. No one was pressuring them to create this policy or they would boycott the product. It was an attempt by the WWE to show that wrestler deaths are not their fault, and that there would be a zero tolerance for drug abuse. Obviously, that is not the case.

Is it really that wrong to want a drug policy that works, regardless of who else is doing what?

That much isn't wrong. Sans the shot taken about how the WWE is "all we have", I really had nothing against the entire point. It's like people that have problems with the WWE feel the need to auto-glorify every single competitive organization to the WWE out there, past and present, and in the case of drug testing and use, I'm sorry, but no professional wrestling company in America has done what I would personally deem a remarkable job.

Of course, it IS all we have

Pretty sure everybody knows that Jeff Hardy was a meth addict and he still has a job...