Skip to main content

Tony Schiavone question

Reading that review for Eric Bischoff's book where Eric got promoted over Tony Schiavone and got to be head booker of WCW, I just want to know what the fate of WCW would have been if Schiavonewas given that gig instead? Did he have a good mind for the business or would WCW continue having the same fate where they would get more in debt as the years rolled on.

I think if Tony got the job, WCW would still be around today in roughly the same position TNA is -- the second-rate promotion still chugging along and using the guys WWE can't or won't use.  Bischoff's thing was taking the big chance of going on Monday nights, and while it was spectacularly successful for a while, he also racked up big losses and of course made them a product that AOL/TW didn't want to support any longer.  I'm sure Tony would have just kind of done the same stuff as Jim Ross and the other previous bookers, and wouldn't have gone after Hogan, and we would have just kind of run with Sting and Luger and Flair and the usual guys for years and years.  I'm sure they wouldn't have come anywhere near WWE, but they likely wouldn't have lost nearly enough to justify killing them, either.  

However, Tony probably would have joined the rotating crew of fired Executive VPs like everyone else, and maybe Bischoff would have got the job after all?  

Comments

  1. I don't know that I can agree with that sentiment, for the simple fact that not all of 1993 can be pinned on Bischoff. Sure, he deserves a good deal of credit for nearly sinking the promotion in his first year at the helm, but he's also the creative force that largely propelled WCW from black hole to a profitable brand for a time. Without his energy, WCW would have been stuck on the treadmill as a money loser through the period when it was profitable in reality. When the merger takes place, you may see WCW jettisoned as a dead brand much sooner than it actually took place.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Didn't Time Warner wash its hands of wrestling in 2001 more or less because it was just wrestling, regardless of what kind of shape WCW was in or its image?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think e forget that Ted Turner wanted WCW to be the #1 promotion. Vince always tells the story about getting a call from Turner saying that he's "in the rasslin' business" now. Turner didn't merge with TW until 96 or so, so he was all in with Eric and probably encouraged his ambitious over spending to get Hogan and his cronies and go after the WWF with a head to head live show. That's probably part of the reason that Bisch got the job in the first place, he's an excellent sales man.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The questions of the fate of WCW in this alternate universe only has one possible and logical answer:


    It would live on as the greatest promotion in the history of our sport, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah but if they're not a company that's losing 68 million dollars in 2000, they're a valuable TV property to SOMEONE.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yeah, but like it's noted above, at that point wrestling was still a valuable loss leader and WCW still had a solid syndication deal going even without Turner. They could survive for YEARS with the old WWF model of house shows promoted by syndicated TV. It's not until the modern TV "rights fees" era that they would need a sugar daddy ala Spike TV or self-sustaining model ala WWE.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I know it's the "in" thing to bash Bischoff, but the plain and simple truth is that Bischoff not only did not single-handedly kill WCW, he probably staved off its execution by several years. (You definitely can't blame Bischoff for anything creatively after September '99, because even when Bischoff came back several months later, the Russo idiocy had ruined anything that could have ever been salvaged). Professional wrestling does not mesh well with a corporate environment, and two large mergers (TBS into Time-Warner, then Time-Warner into a grossly-inflated AOL) inside of four years didn't help. Neither did a network exec with an obvious disdain for "low brow" programming who made it his goal to ax WCW by any means possible, even though it was still earning respectable ratings by any standard.

    So if you want to play the "what if" game over Schiavone getting the WCW Exec VP, you throw out WCW ever scoring Hogan, making WCW a viable destination to two certain hot free agents just out of the WWF, putting them with Hogan in starting the nWo, turning a strong profit for four consecutive years (when it previously had never made a dime after JCP was sold to TBS), and sparking the biggest boom in the history of the business. Without that, WCW would have been dead and gone a lot sooner than 2001.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Better question I think is; what would have happened if Jim Ross had won the job? Aside from a likely big Steve Williams push.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Tony shove Arnie
    Arnie get mad

    ReplyDelete
  10. Someone would be making an important point in a meeting and Tony would suddenly yell "AND WEEEEE'RE OUT OF TIME FOLKS" and end it there, leaving nothing resolved.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wasn't Tony a big supporter of the Hollywood Blondes? Gotta wonder if he would have allowed Austin to develop and grow into the Main Eventer he was destined to be. And don't forget about Terra Ryzing that was being showcased on WorldWide.

    Of course, the Horsemen legacy would have been protected and possibly continued in a positive manner..

    And you've gotta think that even if he had never signed Hogan, Schiavone would have still gone after guys like Eddie, Benoit, Jericho, Malenko, and other greats from that era.

    Personally (hindsight being what it is and all), I would love to have seen what Schiavone could have done with WCW.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kellner wasn't nutty about wrestling but regardless, you can't just shut down a profitable business on a whim, your shareholders would shit. If WCW was healthy he couldn't have justified axing it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is there anyone who wouldn't have missed the nWo if WCW would have stayed the smaller TNA like promotion?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Actually, that happens all the time. Beverly Hillbillies and Green Acres were two of the highest rated shows going. But the network they were on didn't want to be the hick network. So they cancelled them.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Not necessarily.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Nope. Once the merger happened, wcw was dead no matter who was in charge.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Clearly the job should of went to Jim Ross. Ross has a fantastic eye for talent as demonstrated during his run as WWE EVP of Talent Relations. I also don't see Ross taking shit from Hogan (or any talent) the way Bischoff did. I'm not sure what eras of WCW /JCP Ross did book for, but I would be curious to find out. The only area I'm not sure Ross would have done as well as Bischoff is in the marketing and TV department, Eric is clearly more interested in producing television shows that JR.

    ReplyDelete
  18. If they were a profitable company at the time of the merger that's a very hard argument to make. WCW was hemorrhaging money and was locked into these albatross wrestler contracts. No one in their right mind would ax a profitable highly rated television program.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Profitable tv shows actually get cancelled all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  20. It would have probably became the UWF.

    ReplyDelete
  21. TV shows also don't make money touring the US and pushing merchandise.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Just to point out that WCW was still drawing fairly high cable ratings even up to it's end.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Then the question would be, if WCW stayed where it was would WWF remain where they were? Would we still be watching 1 Hour RAWs taped on one night leading to an In Your House PPV?

    ReplyDelete
  24. I don't think two examples from decades ago qualifies as "all the time." What else you got?

    I mean, you could be right; I have no idea. But again, y'know...two examples from like 40 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Without tv, they were dead.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This happened over ten years ago.

    When a new regime takes over, there's going to be turnover. Wrestling didn't fit the image they wanted for the channel. Didn't matter how profitable they were. Do you think the Esquire channel is going to keep broadcasting all of g4's programming?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Legitimate question. It was Bischoff increasing the amount of WCW pay-per-views that caused the WWF to increase their ppv's. Maybe Tony would have kept WCW at 6 ppv's and WWF wouldn't have felt the need to keep up. Or maybe they would have tested anyway as a way to increase revenue. It just might have not happened in 1995.


    I do think that we would have seen some degree of the Attitude Era occur because ECW would have still gotten really popular and if you don't have Bischoff poaching ECW's talent, ECW might have been more successful.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Thanks Big Kev

    ReplyDelete
  29. I believe Ross booked a little bit during the post-Flair era. In fact, I feel like Scott mentioned that Ross was booking in his review of Great American Bash '91.

    ReplyDelete
  30. No prob, Guy That Doesn't Know What He's Talking About.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I would be willing to bet that if WCW was profitable and had some notice they would have no problem getting on another station. I even remember F/X being thrown around towards the end.

    ReplyDelete
  32. You'd be willing to bet on a completely hypothetical situation that nobody will ever know the answer to? Well that's pretty conclusive.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This has turned into a dick measuring contest.

    ReplyDelete
  34. G4's audience is almost non-existent. Even at its height, the only shows that attracted marginal ratings were X-Play and Attack of the Show. The network has been in a constant state of flux since it first became G4. The idea of being a gamer's network doesn't sell because gamers devote most of their time to playing games and not watching TV. So that isn't a great example.

    ReplyDelete
  35. And you're clearly unarmed.

    ReplyDelete
  36. It's a great example.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Your_Favourite_AssholeJuly 29, 2013 at 10:20 AM

    jr definitely booked during 92. great american bash 92 is his handiwork.


    its also by and large one of the most boring ppv's around. not bad in he traditional sense. just boooooooring.


    aside from one of the tag matches later in the show and the title match b/w sting/vader

    ReplyDelete
  38. Wait, there were other shows on G4 besides AOTS and X-Play?

    ReplyDelete
  39. They might have kept the division as an asset and helped shop it to another network for a cut of profits though. If it was raking in a lot of money, they'd have to do something with it. If WCW had been in WWF's shoes at that point there is no way it'd be sold and killed off.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Speaking of G4, when is it supposed to turn into "Esquire" again?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Similar to George Costanza leaving rooms on a high note.

    ReplyDelete
  42. While true, that could be attributed to the time period when wrestling was white hot. What they were airing was pretty awful, and you'd have to think by 2002, those ratings would have been a lot lower.


    I recently watched a Vince interview with Bob Costas from either 2002 or 2003 where he said ratings were down about 30 percent. The boom was on its way out, so people definitely would have been tuning out of WCW in greater numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Fact is, WCW could have gone under long before but Turner insisted on keeping it on as he was a mark at heart. Tony might have done better but think Scott's right, he might not have lasted long with the revolving door of execs there. But do know a lot of WCW fans who say the day Hogan signed was when the true spirit of WCW died early as they morph into the very cartoon world they were always the opposite of with Hogan and his cronies pushed.
    Bischoff got lucky with the NWO taking off but that convinced him that it would last forever and the fans wanted it, pushing it for years when WCW had slews of guys who could have been elevated like Jericho and Benoit. Tony would have avoided that and I think most of us agree we'd have preferred a smaller WCW still around rather than it collapsing like they did.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Turner wanted someone to kick Vince's ass, that's why Bischoff got the job.

    ReplyDelete
  45. But a lot of ECW's appeal came from fatigue of all the stupid shit that was going on with WWF and WCW in 1994-5.

    ReplyDelete
  46. The old boys club bankrupted Jim Crockett, they would've done the same thing with WCW. Flair would've remained head booker and superstar and chased all the young talent out like Foley, Austin etc, WCW would never boom and just disappear like the AWA.


    People hate on Bischoff/Hogan et al but at least they made WCW #1 even if cost a lot of money.


    Flair, Dusty and those guys just stole money and never made WCW relevant and they had their opportunity for a long time.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yup. And the WWF would still have had all the stupid shit going on and who's to say that a Schiavone-led WCW wouldn't have still sucked, albeit without the names like Hogan and Luger.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Case in point: "Heroes".

    ReplyDelete
  49. The MGM Channel perhaps? If you stop and think about it, MGM and WCW had a lot in common (once great legacies that turned into money pits, inept executives always being the ones in charge and a brief glimmer of hope (in MGM's case, their brief mid-90's resurgence thanks mainly to reviving the James Bond franchise and a lucrative TV deal with Showtime. In WCW's case, obviously the four strong years they had from 1995-1998) that was usually followed by a return to mediocrity thanks to corporate incompetence).

    ReplyDelete
  50. It does beg the question though of why did AOL Time Warner sell WCW to the WWF at a bargain basement price when Jerry Jarrett had $50 million dollars lined up to buy the company and AOL Time Warner didn't even bother to take his offer? An extra $47.5 million dollars is not exactly chump change worth turning down, even for a large corporation.
    But then again, AOL Time Warner is the same company that shut down CNN/SI even though ESPN would have very likely been willing to buy the channel if they had just put the channel up for sale and they also shut down CNN/FN against Ted Turner's wishes, even though Rupert Murdoch admitted to Ted years later that he would have paid at least $800 million for the channel if only AOL Time Warner had bothered to put the channel up for sale instead of just shutting it down for no reason.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment