Kudos to Emil for a gallant effort in defending a universally panned show, but I don't see the comparisons of Mabel to the ECW talent named holding up at all (though Emil's point about fans accepting this if it took place in the Arena with Joey Styles putting it over is a fair one, even if I think he exaggerates a bit). Chad Austin, Donn E. Allen, the weirdo Dudleys, Big Val...all jobbers or comedy figures. 911 wasn't, but as Bix said, he didn't really wrestle--he was essentially a team mascot. Mabel was being pushed as a nominative main eventer. I'm as down on ECW and its trained seal fans as just about anyone, but in the end my response to Emil's point is..."Well, that's how wrestling works." It's not really about "giving the fans what they want to see," it's about making fans want to see what you're giving them. At this point in the '90s Heyman was more successful in that regard than the objective failure that King of the Ring was.
I think if Nelson Frazier had come along in 1983, he'd have been a sensation--a near Andre-sized guy who could actually move and sell. But until he went over Adam Bomb in the qualifier the previous month, he was a tag guy. Or, when Mo was out in '94, a mid-card singles guy putting over the likes of King Kong Bundy and Jeff Jarrett. Throw in his attire and his name, which I maintain is possibly the worst in the history of wrestling when you factor in what they wanted him to be, and this push was death from the start.
I'm with Bix on the booking of Sid--the idea of booking Sid as a Honky Tonk Man-type coward was dumb on its surface.