|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
06-12-2020, 08:40 PM | #41 |
Trickster Demon
Posts: 59,750
|
RAW is so lucky
|
06-13-2020, 03:20 AM | #42 |
Feeling Oof-y
Posts: 17,136
|
Lol. That was my thought watching SD.
|
06-13-2020, 01:51 PM | #43 |
RoBOT Reigns
Posts: 9,619
|
It's just like the last time he fired Heyman from creative. Paul comes up with 10 ideas, fights like hell for them, and in the end Vince allows 1 or 2 watered down ones through.
Who the hell would want to work that way? |
06-13-2020, 05:23 PM | #44 | ||
Former TPWW Royalty
Posts: 66,588
|
Both PWI and Post Wrestling had interesting reports about how Heyman was pretty much doomed to fail because of Vince's stubbornness to let things play out and RAW being terrible at growing new viewers ever since the 3 Hour era started.
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
06-13-2020, 05:39 PM | #45 |
Posts: 60,919
|
Heyman's taste in talent is way too bland and internet-heavy to really take hold. Cedric Alexander was never going to stick with a Raw audience. Ricochet is spectacular, but he can't talk which lets him down a lot. The Viking Raiders are cheesy as fuck. There are a lot of swings and misses.
|
06-13-2020, 09:36 PM | #46 |
Trickster Demon
Posts: 59,750
|
The Viking Raiders were not cheesy as fuck until Vince got his hands on them. Everywhere else, including NXT, they were pushed as hard-hitting powerhouses.
|
06-13-2020, 09:39 PM | #47 | |
Trickster Demon
Posts: 59,750
|
What a great quote this is
Quote:
|
|
06-13-2020, 11:41 PM | #48 | |
Former TPWW Royalty
Posts: 66,588
|
Seems another potential reason for Heyman's ouster as lead creative of RAW was due to him having a big falling out moment with AJ Styles recently.
Quote:
|
|
06-14-2020, 01:14 AM | #49 |
Former TPWW Royalty
Posts: 66,588
|
Apparently it wasn't just Heyman that Styles had an issue with backstage on RAW.
Current rumor going around the net is most of the RAW locker room didn't like him and/or kept ridiculing him over some of his political stances on issues and conspiracy-related theories and he couldn't handle the constant banter about it. |
06-14-2020, 01:53 AM | #50 |
3 Dicks Out For Trips
Posts: 29,658
|
AJ is from Georgia so I'm not surprised he buys into whackadoodle conspiracy theories nor am I surprised that he can't take being made fun of over it.
|
06-15-2020, 10:57 AM | #51 |
Spammy Certified
Posts: 46,084
|
|
06-15-2020, 04:18 PM | #52 |
Tongue my Fartbox
Posts: 5,362
|
I'm amazed anyone wants to work for Vince, the guy has clearly lost his marbles, along with being the ultimate control freak it must be an insane place to work on so called "creative".
|
06-16-2020, 03:27 AM | #53 |
Posts: 60,919
|
The thing is, if you want to be known as a wrestler you kind of have to. Nothing else compares as a platform.
|
06-16-2020, 11:45 AM | #54 |
It's a blood match!
Posts: 27,374
|
Paul Heyman was always a reluctant hire. They probably felt like they didn't have a choice. I used to love Paul's shows but his version of Raw was one of the worst ever. On the flip, Raw comes out smoking after Bruce's first show. I can only imagine he will get burned out quick but we shall see. Dave and Bryan are saying WCW 2000 and perhaps rightfully so. Ninja fights are fucking awesome and that big Ninja, Giant Ninja is awesome. I wanna see a colossal tussle with Big Show and Giant Ninja (pronounced Neenja as if one were an early 90's Tony Schavonie).
|
06-16-2020, 12:29 PM | #55 |
Posts: 60,919
|
Of course Dave and Bryan seen WCW 2000. If AEW did the same thing, they’d talk about how brilliant it is AEW found a young prospect who is going to be a huge star and they’ve protected him by putting him under a mask so he can get more experience and work with top guys without damaging his long-term credibility. If Matt Hardy introduced him, it would be hilarious, and if Jericho introduced him, it would be an amazing callback to the Jerichoholic Ninja. That’s their bias towards AEW and against WWE, paid or not. Alvarez said recently that NXT was straight out of dying WCW with Sam Shaw “disappearing.” Has he ever said that about Matt Hardy teleporting? They’ve become unbearable on the subject.
Bruce will probably burn out. The weird hope is that he’s such a Vince sycophant and has earned enough “Brucie gets it” points, that if he sits down Vince and really stresses that this thing needs to go back to two hours and they can make up the content difference to USA other ways, then maybe Vince will take it onboard? I mean, everyone there probably already knows. I think Heyman was very deliberate. Vince chose two guys that had run everything before. With the XFL likely to take Vince away (at the time), it made sense to put two guys that had run shows before there, as opposed to just former creative heads or whatever. But Heyman and Vince were inevitably going to clash over vision. |
06-16-2020, 05:43 PM | #56 |
Former TPWW Royalty
Posts: 66,588
|
at the possibility WWE would ever consider the idea of giving up tens of millions of dollars by getting rid of RAW's third hour.
Investors would kill Vince if that happened. SD's 2 hours long and its been barely any good since the switch to FOX and Prichard leading things there. |
06-16-2020, 06:02 PM | #57 |
Shelly Martinez = Ratings
Posts: 23,508
|
As a fan, I'd prefer a two-hour weekly show. The third hour kinda makes PPVs seem less special and/or like an extended episode of TV.
I get why they keep it, but as someone who has no financial stake in the company I've never been a fan of three-hour RAW as a regular thing. |
06-16-2020, 06:03 PM | #58 | |
Posts: 60,919
|
Quote:
Investors don’t care about whether there is a third hour there or not. They care about WWE’s bottom-line. The biggest reason to do it would be to improve other metrics. Live attendance, merchandising, Network subscriptions, etc. If you make more long-term fans over time and make more than the money you’d lose (which may not even be an unnecessary step should you even just move the third hour to Peacock or something), then it’s probably worth it. Get someone other than Meltzer to think for you. |
|
06-16-2020, 06:06 PM | #59 | |
Posts: 60,919
|
Quote:
It might be too late to get much back from a change, but it wouldn’t be any worse. If there’s a way to talk USA around to launching different original content (even a Saturday morning studio show...or late night more adult show), there’s definite value in making the move. I think the most obvious idea is to do a unique show for Peacock. Take the hit with USA and drive up numbers on Raw and NXT. Then have a separate entity that exists on streaming services to try and make yourself valuable there. |
|
06-16-2020, 06:20 PM | #60 | |
Former TPWW Royalty
Posts: 66,588
|
Quote:
If it was as easy as dropping the 3rd hour and making up the money difference elsewhere, USA and WWE would have done that by now. Instead neither wants to for ratings and money reasons. Investors care a lot about that third hour since under the old tv deal, it was bringing in around the same to more per year than what WWE is currently getting from their NXT tv deal. Now, it dwarfs what they were getting before from it. Nice to assume all I do is listen to Meltzer you utter wank of a poster. |
|
06-16-2020, 07:52 PM | #61 | |
Posts: 60,919
|
Quote:
As I've already said, ironing out required viewing hours could increase the value of not only Raw, but NXT, as well as potentially redirecting content to other platforms that have value to NBC Universal. It could increase the value of the NXT deal as well as a potential Peacock deal or create another hour outside that 10pm slot or two where WWE content boosts the overall standing of USA, even if it means taking a hit on Monday night. Investors care about the bottom-line. Fuck, I can basically repeat everything I said. If Vince worked out something where the $265 million per year deal stayed in place, but they could redirect the third hour or could somehow guarantee better ratings for both Raw and NXT so USA can charge more for ad space, then investors aren't going to give one flying fuck that Raw goes down from three hours to two hours. They probably wouldn't even care if Raw took a $65 million per year hit if they found another way to recoup it -- announcing international shows, a new show, effective cost-cutting, etc. Especially if it all occurred at the same time and meant they were making more of a profit than ever before. |
|