Skip to main content

Paul Heyman Question

Hey Scott,

Why was Paul Heyman fired from WCW? I'm watching some WCW from 1991 and 1992, he's gold as always, as a manager and as a commentator. It couldn't have been finances, no way he was making more money to jump to ECW at that point. Was this just another picture of WCW letting go of talent?

He was fired because Bill Watts hated his guts and refused to pay whatever amount of money for a manager, and basically wanted to bust him down to commentator's salary again.  Heyman tells the whole story in one of the famous ECW fanfest shoot interviews that he does, I think the one from Cyberslam 96 if I'm not mistaken.  Bill's side of it from his shoot interview is that he liked Paul but just hated working with him so damn much.  

I don't think Watts actually fired him if we're being totally technical about the whole thing, I think that he just busted his balls and moved him down the card until Heyman quit, but the gist is the same.  

Comments

  1. Say what you will about Watts, the guy knew how to spot talent so I'm sure he'd have liked to keep Heyman around but I could also see how back then he was a nightmare to work with.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I heard an interview with Cornette where he said Flair didn't like Paul either, which wouldn't have helped. But Cornette may be filtering that through his own dislike of Heyman.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cornette and others have always claimed that heyman used to cash in his company paid first class airline tickets and fly cheap but keep the difference for himself. Eventually he started overbooking flights and just kept all the money. Watts got word of this and told Paul he was already overpaid as a manager and wanted him gone. Idk...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Flair was gone from WCW around the time Heyman quit but I did listen to a Cornette interview where he said Flair did outright fire Paul back in 1989 but his lawyers got him back in the company.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That must be what I am thinking of. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Heyman's the greatest.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Way to beat that Jewish stereotype Paul

    ReplyDelete
  8. Amsterdam_Adam_CurryOctober 23, 2013 at 10:56 PM

    I remember seeing that in that DVDVR sleaze thread list, which makes me think it's less than accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Heyaman is a afyuckin gneius bit ut a bunch of oslfd shcoool dotguhter n fredcknecks slike corehbat and watttttgs xdontr knwo what dti fdot with a genuia klike thakrth. Cornettwea ain't bout shit cvhifgtyuhmaorte yo heymna

    ReplyDelete
  10. BoD Moderator, ladies and gentlemen.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Be glad you weren't here back when this was a regular thing (unless you were, in which case be glad he gave us a break).

    ReplyDelete
  12. YankeesHoganTripleHFanOctober 24, 2013 at 6:33 AM

    I have to say, the top rope thing drove me nuts but other then that Watts produced some damm good television for that period in 92.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pretty sure this is a cry for help.

    ReplyDelete
  14. He was also an ornery old bull and I could absolutely just see him being like "nope, not worth the pain in the ass" after about a week of interacting with Heyman.

    ReplyDelete
  15. He did.....until everybody got sick of his son being shoved down everybody's throat.....who can forget Erik Watts putting the STF on Arn Anderson (I say that again - Arn Anderson!?!?!?!) in a gas station parking lot. Really?

    ReplyDelete
  16. He had some good, some bad. He completely mishandled the Steiners-Gordy/Williams feud.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The story may or may not be bullshit, but misusing company funds was the official reason for Paul getting fired. Watts was basically trying to force him to quit, though.

    ReplyDelete
  18. There's no getting around Erik, but by the time Watts got let go he was showing signs of figuring things out as far as talent. Compare who he was pushing in the middle of 1992 with who he brought in at the beginning of '93: Benoit, Scorpio, RVD, and Regal. Plus he had the balls to push Cactus Jack as a babyface, which was an incredibly bold move at the time. I know morale under Watts was pretty bad, but I think it's a tragedy he didn't get time to keep things going in '93.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I agree, but all of his talent would have jumped ship the first chance they got....i also agree with a few of his principles like making house shows exciting, athletic champions, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Stubborn southerner versus NY loudmouth! Put 50lbs of muscle on Paul and book it!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Watts was a disaster. As a kid, I absolutely HATED stuff like the off-the-top-rope rule and filling a prominent PPV (Beach Blast) with NON-TITLE matches! I don't get the love for that period, outside some admittedly excellent work from guys like Sting, Vader and Cactus, and the "bonus for the best match" thing.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This is sad. He's great sober though.

    ReplyDelete
  23. That was a badass segment though

    ReplyDelete
  24. What the hell was the point of those 2 matches at beach blast being non title? Was it explained beforehand?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think it's an act personally. Just another in a long line of unfunny from him.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't remember it being explained except for a flimsy "this goes beyond the title!" argument. It was a dumb move, especially for Steamboat-Rude. Sting and Cactus at least had been engaged in a blood feud for months and were engaging in an unsanctioned match.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Think? No one writes like this when they're drunk. This dummy's just doing an impression of that terrible Drunk Uncle bit from SNL.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment