Skip to main content

Random Questions

Good Morning Mr. Keith, just some random questions I have as this winter has me exploring a lot of shows on the network:

The Network is indeed great.  ALL HAIL THE NETWORK!

1.  Did Eddie Guerrero have the ear/back/support of someone with a lot of clout?  Or was it just out of respect of the family name, because, sure, he wasn't given world titles, but in the early days of Nitro and into the NWO, he sure got a lot of TV wrestling  time to show his skills, and quite a bit of offense on Ric Flair in numerous matches.

It was the name and he really worked hard to impress people, which gave him a lot of support backstage. Especially his showing at When Worlds Collide, which basically was the catalyst for the whole luchador invasion in the first place.  People really loved the guy. 

2. I don't hear much about, if at all, these days Creative Control in big names contracts.  I know WWE is smart enough not to let happen what WCW happen, and we're past the days of an HBK or an HHH not putting someone over when having a championship , but say, is John Cena just booked that way, and just goes with it?  Even in the overkill of Cena/Orton, i Never heard any stories of "them" being the reason they are on top so much, its just the way the writers keep putting them there.

Oh yeah, those days ended with Montreal.  Vince is never going to allow that kind of control in a contract again, and I don’t even think he lets guys have agents anymore.  And yes, John Cena just kind of goes with it, although he turns down a LOT of crap, apparently.  Which makes me wonder what the stuff we DON’T see would be.   

3. What made them not pull the trigger on Luger going over Yoko at SS93?  And if it was that they just decided it'd be better with Yoko keeping the belt, what was their next plans?  Taker didn't get it, and I don't imagine Bret Hart winning it back being planned that far in advance

The plan was to stretch out Luger’s win until Wrestlemania, but of course by the time they got there it was too late.  It just goes to show the value of pulling the trigger at the right time. Summerslam absolutely would have been the right time. 

4.  Tatanka:  The man had his undefeated streak, got some ppv wins, and they seemed to keep him strong at times, but there was never a payoff with any title, wtf was the point before the Corporation heel turn?

Well the problem was that Tatanka was really green, so there was only so far you could go with him.  I think he was doing fine before the heel turn, actually.  He was a guy who booked strongly and had a name and fans liked, but wasn’t a threat to the World title.  You always need guys like that in the midcard.  The heel turn was a total fucking disaster of course. 

Comments

  1. Gotta agree with the Tatanka stance. He was a really, really solid babyface. That heel turn just cut his legs off. And then proceeded to decapitate him.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe Hogan had creative control (to a degree) in his 2005 WWE contract (hence the issues with Summerslam and Michaels)

    ReplyDelete
  3. How awesome would it be if Cena was turning down good stuff and that's why so much of his material sucks?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tatanka was the worst.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 5. When are you reviewing Starrcade 1983?
    6. When are you reviewing Starrcade 1984?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "proceeded to *scalp him."

    ReplyDelete
  7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTNfPdqxuC8

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tatanka was the Miz's first opponent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a3iKyFFmWQ

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well obviously Hogan is a special case.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Lex Express.....HOW THEY HATED HIM!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think extending Luger's run was necessarily a bad idea, it's just Vince has never known how to book a face from underneath. WWE is a strong face territory. They've only ever known how to book a face if he's champ: face runs wild, encounters big fat/muscled heels, gets beaten down, wins. Rinse, lather, repeat.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If WWF ran monthly PPVs in 93, undefeated Tatanka would have been a good choice to headline against Yoko at one of the B-PPVs.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Even more confusing was that when it was obvious Tatanka's heel run was bombing, why didn't they just turn him face again.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Much as we slam Vince for such huge control, the running theme of guys from WCW is that the main reason that company failed was they didn't have one single guy to say "here's the way it goes, don't go against it" and that led to the chaos that collapsed it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. They should have shown Luger littering out of the window of the Lex Express, and the trash lands at Tatanka's feet. Single tear.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Would be, but the writing for everyone else confirms that is 100% not the case.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Vince's main problems are his taste and his stubbornness. Being a guy with the final word is fine.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Those early Starcades are hard to get through. You have like one or two Classic matches and a lot of crap. 85 was pretty good. The next good one was 88.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Yeah but he's reviewed some pretty crappy shows. It's kind of fascinating to see the first ever Starrcade just start with some guys in the ring.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Rey Mysterio in ECW is what was the catalyst for WCW's luchadore invasion, not When Worlds Collide.

    ReplyDelete
  21. My friend actually called him at home back in 2004 to review them. True story. Lol

    ReplyDelete
  22. YES. Having one guy who says yes or no is the right way to book a company. You just need that guy to be willing to put his personal desires aside or at least measure them against the desires of the other trusted parties in the company equally.

    ReplyDelete
  23. As well as a bunch of 95/96 In Your Houses. Tired of having to go to 411 or Inside Pulse for 13+ year old reviews.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Two things affected Eddy's early WCW push: they took some fan or focus group poll or another that said that Guerrero was their most likable star, and he somehow became one of the most over guys at Center Stage, to the point where they swapped Sting out of the show-closing "please stay the whole way through" dark match and started booking Eddy in that slot instead.

    ReplyDelete
  25. sad but true!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Tatanka probably should have went over HBK at Wrestlemania IX, even if it was for a short, fluky, transitional champion reign. He was pretty over at that point and people were buying him as IC Champion material.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This is the greatest post ever.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Still hate those cheap IC title match DQ/Countouts at Manias IV, VII & IX.

    ReplyDelete
  29. What ever possessed WWE to bring back Tatanka a decade later?

    ReplyDelete
  30. he was supposed to go over but shawn buried him.and told vince he had a bad attitude and shouldnt be champ so vince didnt do it.which is funny because of shawns attitude and what not

    ReplyDelete
  31. i always thought if tatanka came around in the mid 80s he would have been really big.he had something special to him.plus with all the gimick heels they had he could have been big

    ReplyDelete
  32. The Amazing GamecockFebruary 21, 2015 at 8:08 PM

    Is there a case in another company or industry where they often waste their best talents on a consistent basis even if they are beneficial to their company.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hmmm. Looks like they originally brought him back for a one time thing in the Eugene Invitational.

    ReplyDelete
  34. lmao can someone make that picture

    ReplyDelete
  35. They had that - it just happened to be Hulk Hogan. If, say Sullivan were the guy who made the final call WCW could have been in better shape.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You'd think while asking a question about a top guy using creative control to not drop a title you could reference Bret Hart, who used creative control to drop a title. But, you know, fucking Clique!!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment