Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

HHH taking over from Vince on RAW


Hollinger.

Recommended Posts

The pushes of Angle and Jericho in 2000 in which WWF never really capitalized on their momentum happened long before the Lesnar push came along... so I doubt it has anything to do with Lesnar.

 

More to the point, if you are going to push somebody, the smart thing to do is stick with the push in full unless the crowd doesn't respond to it as you expected or something serious really does come up (e.g, a wellness policy violation). Using what happened to Lesnar as a reason not to get behind a guy in full is ridiculous because, as Loss has said, you condition fans to expect the push won't go anywhere and you never have a chance to create a star, plus you send the message to talent that "we don't trust that you won't do what Lesnar did," so why should the talent bother showing commitment if the company isn't willing to put a little faith into the talent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 736
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My guess is they're just using HHH to write Vince back off TV, write CM Punk and Cena back in, and possibly put an end to the mystery GM nonsense (by revealing who it is, not by it being HHH). I'm not buying this idea that he's back to be a regular character and steal everybody's heat, but if he is it would clearly be a terrible move, unless as noted he cuts his hair and changes his character completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, wait, wait...

 

Isn't the WHOLE start/stop push for debuting guys entirely to PREVENT them from leaving?

 

I thought it was reaction to Brock, making sure that new guys didn't get a big head and to see how they did with being in the doghouse before they were trusted with a real push.

 

The idea is that if they have the sort of attitude that makes them think they're bigger than the WWE, they won't get that repush.

 

Ever since guys like Brock and Lashley left, the feeling is they have to depush guys they have plans for to see if they can handle it, so they don't spend all the time/money/effort for nothing. They're so hellbent on proving WWE is bigger than any single person that they seem to actively damage people on purpose to prove their point. Of course it ignores pretty much all of their history when there has always been at least one if not several guys bigger than the company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was also apparently far less hard on the announcing crew, which can also only be a good thing at this point.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

I can't agree with that. The announcing has been absolutely terrible and distracting lately. They need to find a middle ground between the sterile, boring announcing they had for the last few years and the random, unfocused stuff of the last year or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Batista loves him (and always says that on interviews since Triple H actually did make him) and he made it clear it was the PG aspect (very attributable to Vince/marketing).

Putting aside what was reported at the time (which was entirely HHH related), was there anything about Batista's act that was reliant on Attitude era-ish content? Anything at all? I'm not saying he's lying, because he has no clear motivation (besides maybe not rocking the boat too much if he ever wants to go back), but this always kinda rung false to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally, a lot of the bad booking habits WWE developed in the past decade were developed seemingly with the intent of protecting HHH and further entrenching his spot at the top of the in-ring hierarchy. I would think the main hope in a transition of power would be that if HHH has more work to do behind the camera, he'll have less time/energy to spend in front of it (which already seems to be happening), and a lot of devices built to keep him propped up will start to fall by the wayside. Not saying that will happen, and if it does, it won't be overnight. But I think that's the most we can realistically hope for.

 

And as far as how it all effects the Cena/Punk stuff and whether or not WWE is exciting RIGHT NOW...I remind everyone that on Sunday night, practically everyone here was acting like they couldn't fail, while on Monday night, practically everyone here was acting like they couldn't succeed. Has anyone considered that we might just not know yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, from a February issue of the Observer, the annual revenue and P&L of the WWE from 1994-95 on..........especially those 'lean' years of 02-06 ;)

 

[...]

 

This company is a monster and incredibly well run. Even in weak creative years, wrestling profit was always pretty huge. It sure as hell could have been a whole lot more, but in the end, you still have to give credit for keeping the machine as lucrative for as long as they have.

The company has been profitable because it's a financially very well run company. Having largely a monopoly also helps keep it's talent costs down, among other things. The company has always reacted proactively on costs relative to upticks and downticks of revenue. This isn't new: they did it back in the early 90s when cutting back on the number of crews and shows they ran.

 

On the revenue side, the company average revenue in FY2003 through FY2006 was roughly -17% off the earlier company peak. That doesn't take into consideration massive increases in the international business (which really wasn't driven by Trip's performing but instead the WWE simply clearing more markets for TV rights and PPV exposure), increases in TV rights from the peak, and increases in average ticket and PPV prices.

 

You know the details in the financials and the business in that period as well as I do, Paul. Attendance and PPV buys in the country were down. Ratings were down. Fans turned away from following the company relative to the peak. WWE Corporate was smart in finding ways to keep those drops from too greatly impacting the bottom line by (i) being extremely smart on costs, and (ii) tapping into new revenue streams.

 

Trip didn't "sustain" the business. He was on top pushing himself down the throats of fans, parts of a Product that lost a chunk of it's US fans. WWE Corporate did a hell of a job sustaining the business, in large part based on what the salad days had built.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like we didn't get a huge swath of Post-Mania releases this year? Am I wrong to think that.

They cut unknowns from developmental.

I remind everyone that on Sunday night, practically everyone here was acting like they couldn't fail, while on Monday night, practically everyone here was acting like they couldn't succeed. Has anyone considered that we might just not know yet?

There was never a lack of pessimism here. At worst, the pessimists weren't posting as much as the optimists.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jacobi did one hell of a defense for HHH here. I don't agree with his conclusions, but he did a finer job of backing them up than practically any other Captain Trips defender that I've ever seen. And to add one more, hasn't it been said that PPVs with Triple H in the main event do tend to draw better business than those without? Not saying there's a direct correlation, there's far too many variables to go drawing conclusions on something as vague as that, but it's another point in Trip's favor.

 

***Wrestling profit was $16,362,000; offset by $35,557,000 through the operation and closing of The World restaurant.

How the hell do you lose 35 million dollars on a restaurant in one year? I know it's Times Square and ergo possibly the highest rent in the entire world, but that still seems excessive.

 

 

Isn't the WHOLE start/stop push for debuting guys entirely to PREVENT them from leaving?

 

I thought it was reaction to Brock, making sure that new guys didn't get a big head and to see how they did with being in the doghouse before they were trusted with a real push.

 

The idea is that if they have the sort of attitude that makes them think they're bigger than the WWE, they won't get that repush.

It's not just Brock, though. Vince has been burned almost every time that he's pushed a new young guy as an unstoppable juggernaut. Hogan, Warrior, Austin, and Brock are the biggest examples, but you could also make arguments for Goldberg, Rock, and Batista. Every single time Vince has thrown the full WWE's weight behind a guy to get him over, they've eventually let him down or betrayed him for one reason or another. Except, ironically, Triple H. (And Undertaker and Cena to an extent, but their cases are more odd exceptions than anything else.) I understand how over time McMahon would come to think that it must be the giant push's fault, and being scared to give it to anyone else again. It's a stupid business philosophy which has resulted in the creative stagnation of the past several years, but I get the motivation behind it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have to ask yourself one question about on-air Authority figure HHH and then you'll know if it will work or not.

 

A heel/face punks out Authority figure HHH on the opening of Raw. Think Austin with the beer truck. How does HHH respond:

 

1. He shows up with a neck brace next week to sell what happened to him.

 

2. He misses a few weeks of television to sell the attack, maybe does a vintage where he talks about it.

 

3. He comes out on the next episode of Raw, pummels them mercilessly then kick, WHAM, PEDIGREE.

 

4. Before that episode of Raw, KICK, WHAM, PEDIGREE.

 

5. This scenario would never happen because no one would dare mess with HHH because he's such a bad ass.

 

6. This scenario would never happen because HHH would outsmart them before they attacked him.

 

7. HHH fights them off and Pedigrees them.

 

8. HHH shows up next week, a little battered but okay and puts the face/heel in a match that is intentionally stacked against them.

 

If you answered with roughly 5 of those answers, it won't work.

 

The problem I see here is that if HHH is a face, you'll have a heel like Punk. HHH will get behind every face and stack the deck in their favor and the face will ultimately fail. Rinse, repeat until HHH has to come out of retirement and ultimately beat the heel. Similar way in reverse to the face. I have no faith that this won't happen. I can see everyone under him looking impotent until HHH saves the day. I have roughly a decade of television to back that theory up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Batista loves him (and always says that on interviews since Triple H actually did make him) and he made it clear it was the PG aspect (very attributable to Vince/marketing).

Putting aside what was reported at the time (which was entirely HHH related), was there anything about Batista's act that was reliant on Attitude era-ish content? Anything at all? I'm not saying he's lying, because he has no clear motivation (besides maybe not rocking the boat too much if he ever wants to go back), but this always kinda rung false to me.

 

 

On his really good appearance on Observer live, he went into hating the fact that blood and certain kinds of violence were eliminated because it didn't make you feel like guys were 'going to battle' for you. He then used his Hell in a Cell vs Triple H as a comp to the more recent ones and flat out said his was superior due to those factors and limiting them really detracts from the product. It's one of the best interviews Dave and Bryan have done with a bigger star and worth checking out.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WWF NY was a tax write-off because all the money they invested was now worth zero. Or something like that.

 

They probably also realized all expenses related to ending their lease, accelerating the depreciation on all assets of the building etc as well and took the hit on that and everything in a particular quarter.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have to ask yourself one question about on-air Authority figure HHH and then you'll know if it will work or not.

 

A heel/face punks out Authority figure HHH on the opening of Raw. Think Austin with the beer truck. How does HHH respond:

 

1. He shows up with a neck brace next week to sell what happened to him.

 

2. He misses a few weeks of television to sell the attack, maybe does a vintage where he talks about it.

Anyone see Trip doing this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgbQYAdtYUc

 

Then two weeks later, rather than the pedigree, stooges this far:

 

 

It's not just that Vince was willing to let Stone Cold kick the shit out of him in the hospital, or that he was willing to piss his own pants... it's _how_ Vince sells for all that. Look at Vince in that second one "crying" though all of Austin's build up to put over how scared he is. Even if Trip were willing to piss in his pants, does anyone think Trip is going to be able to pull off the acting to sell the whole thing?

 

That's always been Trip's weakness as a character: his acting sucks. He'll hit his lines, the might be okay lines... but his deliver lacks the wrestling fake "believablity" factor that connects with fans to sell stuff like Stone Cold, Rock, Foley and Mr. McMahon at their best. Trip's comedy, yelling and anger have always seemed forced.

 

So even if he's not hitting the Pedigee, he's just not going to be able to pull of the full ranges of the role.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also that Vince was just an old announcer to the fans. HHH for years was a dominant wrestler. So he can't really clown like that for guys.

 

That segment Monday was weird after watching a laptop run rough shod over everyone. This was like watching Wile Coyote go thru physical therapy after falling off a cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also that Vince was just an old announcer to the fans. HHH for years was a dominant wrestler. So he can't really clown like that for guys.

Except that WWE GM's typically stooge. The non-stooge ones don't seem to have a lot of longevity with WWE Creative. They seem to only know how to write ones that make life tough on the faces and that the face has to overcome.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to point out that:

 

(1) Vince McMahon is an infinitely better TV personality than HHH.

 

(2) HHH is being put in a strong position way more than Vince ever was. Has he been involved in a single segment yet that didn't end with him getting the last word and his music playing? He has also gotten to call Punk overrated and make fun of Truth's gimmick. I wouldn't call either of those things burials. But I would point out that if HHH is assuming the Vince role, those aren't things Vince would have ever done. Vince's role was never to assert his authority as much as it was to have it challenged constantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that was my earlier stated concern: Trip isn't as good as Vince, and he'd never allow himself to be put in positions like Vince. Someone else jumped in with a good hypothetical of Trip Being Trip as an authority figure.

 

Of course this could all be setting up Trip to turn into a stooging authority figure...

 

"Keep hope alive."

 

:)

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...