Interesting Article on the financial situation in wwe

Hey Scott, I don't know if you've seen this yet but its an interesting read about the damage all of WWE's extra projects have done to the WWE's cash flow. The basic premise is that the reality shows, movie ventures, the network etc have used almost literally all of WWE's on hand cash without bringing anything as far profit back in. This is going to cause the WWE to suspend paying dividends on their stock for very soon. That's extremely significant because the absolute largest draw that stock has is its consistent divided payout. Without that who is going to want that stock? It will be far less valuable. People love to bring up how booking decisions won't hurt the stock price, but not having cash to pay dividends because you wasted it all on bad ventures (not saying the network but certainly the film studio and if divas really is a cost as the analyst here says…wow) is going to hurt it badly.
Here's the link: Thanks
​A lot of it seems to veer towards the obvious (you mean the movie and TV division WASN'T a great idea?) but I didn't realize that Total Divas was such a money sink. ​

Sporting News: TNA’s Interesting Times

Figured I should bang this one out ASAP before anything else crazy happens tonight. I imagine I'll need to write something up when the Network numbers are released on Friday as well, but one crisis at a time.  Apologies for any errors in the timelines or major omissions and such, it's late and I wanted to make sure I hit the big points while the iron was hot.

Interesting Rumble stat

Hey Scott,

Just wanted to throw an interesting Rumble stat at you for blog discussion. I'm a huge Rumble fan, and was thoroughly entertained (for one reason or another) by this year's show. And on a side note, I love Daniel Bryan and would have loved to see him be a surprise entrant and win it, but let's be honest, you had to have your head up your rear end to not see Batista winning that thing. Everyone hooting and hollering about it in the aftermath and expecting it were setting themselves up for disappointment.

Anyway, throughout many of the years in the Rumble, the winner would often hold at least one, if not both sometimes of the Rumble "honors" as I like to call them – one being the longest-lasting guy in the ring and the other having the most eliminations. However, this year's Rumble marked the 8th straight year now that the winner held neither. Do you think that's their new strategy for booking a Rumble? The thought process being you can push 3 different guys in the match by having 1 win, 1 last the longest and 1 have the most eliminations? And don't you think that kind of lessens the impact made by the winner? I mean, I would like the winner at times to go the distance like Benoit or Mysterio, or toss out a bunch of guys like Stone Cold or the Hulkster. Eight years is quite the streak. Your thoughts? Thanks!

So they're 50/50 booking the Rumbles now even is what you're saying?  I'm not particularly surprised.  Pushing everyone = Pushing no one.  

Interesting links about NWA Championship




> Hello Scott


> I was surfing the interweb, and found these pages(you may have seen 'em as the

> one is over a year old). I find this interesting. It doesn't look like anyone

> has added to the guy's site. I remember seeing something from c.1979 with

> Hogan(!) with the belt. Maybe you or some of the Doom Buggers can find stuff

> like this?







Super cool!

Rather odd, but interesting fan footage from WM 12

So, here’s some odd obsessed fan taking video camera footage of loads of the WWF guys at a hotel, then at a charity baseball game, and then before they enter some sort of function (he even catches VKM!).

Freaky bits include – the filmer dressing as HBK and filming himself in the mirror, and also spying on HBK/Vader working out in the gym. (See, I told you it was odd. You all know what you’re getting yourself in for).

But, in all seriousness, it’s a cool watch, even if it’s just to see Trips and Ahmed Johnson (who looks like an utter monster at this point) pissing around during a Q&A. And Tammy during her DISGUSTINGLY hot phase. Man, she loves it.

Also, look out for Lawler and Hennig having a seriously off day…

(Credit goes to Inside the Ropes on Facebook)

Another interesting note on Luger vs Flair

Hey Scott,
Don't know if you've ever heard anything about this, but according to, Lex was supposed to go Flair clean for the title at a house show in Chicago, Illinois on March 23, 1990, which was only a few weeks after "Wrestlewar 90". A film crew had been flown in for the change.
If Sting was indeed pegged to beat Flair the whole time, than this kind of throws a wrench into that plan. If Luger wins the title here, does he turn heel again so soon after turning face and they do Luger- Sting at the Bash 90? Or would Sting have went over Flair in a revenge match without a title on the line and maybe they do Luger- Sting at that years Starrcade?

NWA @ Chicago, IL – UIC Pavilion – March 23, 1990 (6,500)
A film crew, as well as Lance Russell, Chris Cruise, and Dennis Brent were flown to the city to tape what was scheduled to be NWA World Champion Ric Flair losing the title to NWA US Champion Lex Luger; the title change didn't take place because Flair wasn't given ample notice, which was part of his contract; Flair agreed to the title change but only in return for a contract release, which Jim Herd refused; Pro Wrestling Illustrated's Bill Apter was also on hand
Mike Rotunda pinned Cactus Jack; after the bout, Cactus was taken to the hospital for having been tied in the ring ropes too long during the match
Norman pinned Kevin Sullivan
Ricky Morton & Robert Gibson defeated Jimmy Garvin & Steve Casey (sub. for Michael Hayes)
NWA US Tag Team Champions Brian Pillman & Tom Zenk defeated Bobby Eaton & Stan Lane
NWA Tag Team Champions Rick & Scott Steiner defeated NWA TV Champion Arn Anderson & Ole Anderson
The Road Warriors defeated Doom
NWA World Champion Ric Flair pinned NWA US Champion Lex Luger at 20:13 after Ole Anderson interfered and hit Luger with Woman's high heel shoe

They were doing the stupid high heel shoe finish even back then?  Huh.  
I know that once Sting was out they were basically trying to get Flair to drop the title to Luger on a weekly basis.  They endgame was likely always going to be Sting v. Luger with Flair out of the picture, and I imagine they would have had Luger turn heel once he won the title to pull it off.  

Making Cena interesting

Love your work blah-blah-blah. Anyway…
My wife is a huge John Cena fan.   I fall under the spell of Punk, Bryan and Beth Phoenix of the world. When Cena comes on these days I wince. As a result my wife asked how I would make Cena interesting again without changing the core character.
Challenge accepted.

John Cena is not going to turn heel. No matter who much the IWC, perhaps Cena himself, and the fans who boo him each and every week would like it – he is the cash cow that keeps giving.
The question is how can the WWE get it so he is, I daresay, more tolerable to anyone over the age of 13. Well, here are a few ideas.
1. Be vulnerable. Stop burying people – ADR, Big Show and Miz all were victims of Cena not letting them be a legitimate threat. He couldn’t even sell ADR as being rich, never mind a worthy opponent. If Cena is going to be hero then the hero must seem threatened – not overcome numerical odds but actually be threatened. The only people who have threatened Cena are Brock and CM Punk. Even The Rock wasn’t that big a threat since it was known Duane was going back to Hollywood. Speaking of Duane.

The vulnerability is HUGE.  One of the reasons that Rock got over so big as a babyface back in 99 and 2000 is that the odds were stacked against him and he occasionally got the shit kicked out of him and lost.  Yeah, he won the Rumble in 2000, but it was taken away from him and then he got screwed over against Big Show and then at Wrestlemania, before finally having his big triumph against HHH at Backlash.  For a while, you were actually left wondering if they were ever going to give him the big win.  Not with Cena.  

2. Emotional investment. Let it get personal. What was interesting with The Rock was everything did get personal. We knew Cena was staying, that the legacy mattered, and low-and-behold interesting confrontations abound. Kane was the opposite. Kane tried to get Cena to embrace the hate or admit getting booed bothered him. Cena didn’t react. Ever. If Cena doesn’t get emotionally attached then why should I?

The emotional detachment is fine, but then they need to stop booking him in storylines where he has to show emotion.  World title feuds are fine, because it’s all business and all about the money, but ironic detached Cena cracking jokes is surefire death for any other type of feud.  

3. Be the better man. Lose. Be wrong. Admit you messed up. Big Show made a great point about Cena just laughing it up when Big Show got fired. Cena replies that Big Show would have been hired back and somehow is segues into Big Show being a sell out Um, what? If Cena admits he was wrong then he comes off as a better role model and is a lot more sympathetic when the Big Show decks him anyway, well at least it is interesting. See: Ryder, Zach for additional examples.

See, the Ryder thing had such potential to freshen up Cena by letting him do tag matches with Zach on top and give him the rub, then he could be UPSET that someone was going after his partner, then his partner could turn on him or a million different things, and they just dropped them all.  And the better man thing is something that bugs me about Sheamus, too.  Like when he bumped into Big Johnny and had to be forced into a fake apology on Smackdown — just APOLOGIZE.  You’re the fucking GOOD GUY.  Just say “Sorry, didn’t mean to bump into you” and then if Ace escalates from there, HE’S the one who looks like a jackass, not Sheamus.  

Sorry, got sidetracked there.  

4. Raise the stakes. Go after the belt. There is a weird belief that titles are meaningless. Cena’s most brilliant feud was with Punk over the WWE belt yet he hasn’t challenged since. Even The Rock mentioned challenging for the belt at Wrestlemania. Do others need the belt more? No. A title holding John Cena could elevate more people if the challenges are done in such a manner where Cena cares and there is the possibility that losing has consequences. It has built in drama since there is a prize at stake.

I’ve said before and I’ll continue saying:  If Cena is the top guy, he should be the champion.  Either the WWE title or the World title, whichever one, but he needs a belt because the John Cena Championship of the World is clearly more important than either physical belt right now and they need to change that.  Clearly Punk is the #2 guy, so he should have the #2 belt for his midcard feuds.  I’m not saying that to trash Punk (although he is a pretty huge ratings liability at this point), but having the big belt on a guy they won’t push as the top guy is doing no favors for that title.  Cena should chase the belt for a few PPVs while putting over how much it means to him, win it at Summerslam in the big feelgood moment, and Brock can DESTROY him to take it away and give him another prize to chase. 

Let us not say this is all John Cena. There are writers and Vince McMahon, yet Cena is so close to sometimes being a character people could love instead of being someone where I  wince when I hear his music play.

Indeed.  But then I feel the same way about Kane.