Who is the worst booker ever?

[Loss]

Cornette also was every bit as much part of the writing team that began the WWF's turnaround as Vince Russo, for what it's worth. He just doesn't go around taking sole credit for it or downplaying every other contributing factor, so it doesn't get mentioned as much. His time has passed now, but to say he's never had success just isn't true.

[The Thread Killer]

Vince Russo published a new blog at RussoBrand.com, where he explains his relationship toward the end of his tenure in TNA and then working with them as a consultant and his contact with Pop TV, which he discussed on a podcast with Disco Inferno. Below is an excerpt from the blog:

I got the idea to freelance for POPTV from a friend who did the same consulting work for USA Network for years. This individual would watch RAW on a weekly basis, send a report to USA with his thoughts, and USA would use that information any way they saw fit. I always thought this was very valuable to USA. Get a third-party with experience to look at RAW, so they could get another perspective different from that of Vince McMahon’s. That relationship seemed like a win-win for both USA and the consultant.

So, it was 18 months prior, that TNA informed me they “no longer wanted to use my consulting services”, because the lie they were perpetrating—and forcing me to tell–about me NOT consulting for them–found its way out of the bag as most lies usually do. At that point—my working relationship with TNA was OFFICIALLY OVER. Meaning, I was free and clear to take my consulting services elsewhere. An entire year and a half had passed before I was in contact with POPTV. And, keep in mind, I only contacted them because I thought my expertise could have been valuable to them—based on the ratings they were pulling in at the time (and still today).

So what happens? In a jokingly manner, upon hearing the news, Disco [inferno] said–sarcastically, “So let me get this straight—you went BEHIND TNA’s back and went to POPTV in an effort to SABOTAGE TNA.” The entire time Glenn was laughing. Less than a handful of hours later—Glenn’s words of sarcasm were used as a SERIOUS HEADLINE on various IWC websites, who—by the way—hate my guts, much having to do with–“How the hell can Vince Russo still be relevant in the wrestling business for 25 years—while we never spent a day working for a legitimate wrestling company”. Honestly—at first I thought it was a joke. Think of the logic of all this. Think of the idea of me selling my services to be PAID by POPTV, with the “real”intention of “Sabotaging” TNA in order for POPTV to DROP THEM—which would mean that I NO LONGER have a job as a paid consultant. Do you see the total insanity in that? From a business standpoint—that notion is absolutely ludicrous.

Some were even going as far as to say—“Vince, you owe Dixie Carter an apology”. Let’s break that down–shall we. I owe an apology to a woman who asked me to lie, then severed our relationship when that lie was exposed, because ONE YEAR AND A HALF LATER I brought my consulting services to a TV Network that was now in the wrestling business? What am I apologizing for? I should have asked Dixie’s permission, to go and consult with POPTV 18 months after she no longer wanted to use me? That is freakin’ absurd. If I’m a consultant for a sports team, say the Mets, the Mets decide that they no longer want my consulting services, 18 months later I go to the Yankees and offer those same services—I have to let the Mets know first? That is absolutely asinine. Then people wonder why I have issues with the IWC.

I never fail to be amazed by Russo's logic. This is even better than his famous "the real reason people hate me is because I'm from New York" rant.

[C.S.]

Seriously, we got to go over this *again* ? In 2016 ? What about *all* the other stint that were disatrous failures, everywhere he went, everytime, for like 15 years ? Seriously...

 

As far as Cornette goes, he sure did good with SMW (in the worst era for drawing, when regional territories where a thing of the past), which was also a super fun promotion.

SMW may have been "fun" but it lost money, ended up shutting down, and wasn't in the least bit influential.

 

At least with ECW, it influenced the entire industry.

 

And as a talent, Corny and the MX drew shitload of money.

Ah, but we're not debating their merits as "talent." It's irrelevant to this particular discussion.

 

Of course Cornette wins by a country mile in this category. Hell, Russo's not even in the race.

 

Very intelligent response!

 

Cornette also was every bit as much part of the writing team that began the WWF's turnaround as Vince Russo, for what it's worth. He just doesn't go around taking sole credit for it or downplaying every other contributing factor, so it doesn't get mentioned as much. His time has passed now, but to say he's never had success just isn't true.

Depending on who you believe (and I won't pretend I was there or know for sure) Cornette fought against most of it and ended up being marginalized. The fact that everyone talks about "Russo and Ferrara" (and to to a lesser extent, "Russo, Ferrara, and Terry Taylor" when discussing this era tells me that Cornette was pretty much bounced out of the picture after a while.

 

I never fail to be amazed by Russo's logic. This is even better than his famous "the real reason people hate me is because I'm from New York" rant.

I'm still scratching my head and trying to figure out what the hell I just read.

 

Er, I guess if there are third-party consulting jobs available, I can understand Russo going after it? Money is money, and you can't fault a guy for trying...or something like that?

 

Does seem really desperate though, which it obviously is.

 

This is a clear cash-grab on Russo's part. Again, man's got to make a living, but it is kinda sad.

[Loss]

You can see Cornette's fingerprints on most of 1997 WWF just as much as Russo's, and we know that things like Hell in a Cell were specifically his ideas. Russo won the power struggle eventually, but they were a tandem at first.

[NintendoLogic]

Cornette was certainly involved in some great things as a part of a booking team (1989 WCW, 1997 WWF), but he's never really had success as the head booker.

[PeteF3]

I don't want to plug my own posts, but in the '97 Yearbook threads I also observed how much tangible influence Cornette had over the product--even as he was being further marginalized and shock value was taking greater precedence over wrestling. The Goldust-Vader feud is just one example: underneath the whacko Artist stuff you had an angle about a cowardly heel faking injuries to avoid taking on a badass babyface.

 

Cornette was also the one who insisted on Undertaker and Kane being kept apart until WrestleMania. Russo wanted Undertaker to immediately fight back by attacking Kane like a week after his debut.

[Loss]

I had a mild altercation with Vince Russo earlier tonight on Twitter and he ended up blocking me. I'm sorry, but he tweeted "People who don't take responsibility for their professional failures eliminate the opportunity to grow, learn and become better from it" and of all people to tweet something like that, that it was coming from him blew my mind in some ways.

[Strummer]

I can remember a shoot where Cornette was going on about how he didn't like something they were doing with Kane while he was on the creative team. So that pinpoints that he was still on the team in late 97/early 98. I think by Summer/Fall 98 he was pretty much done. Maybe when they brought him back to TV to manage the new MX? So Russo could bury him?

[MikeCampbell]

 

I doubt we'll ever see Vince Russo fall back on writing scripts or teaching writing.

 

More like he'll be holding up a sign in front an armory or rec center where some fly by night indy fed is running that says "Will Book Pole Matches For Food"

 

All kidding, and cheap shots, aside. I think you're exactly right, TTK. It's probably why he goes on and on about how much he hates the wrestling business, while still trying to get hired by wrestling companies. It's like the washed up Randy the Ram wrestler, who made huge money and doesn't have jack to show for it now. I know that's not a perfect analogy, and I have no idea what his financial situation is like.

[El-P]

I think by Summer/Fall 98 he was pretty much done. Maybe when they brought him back to TV to manage the new MX? So Russo could bury him?

 

If you believe Russo (?!!), Corny was gone before that, and the whole NWA invasion angle was done so Corny would work with people he would feel confortable with (this has so much "pity fuck" sound to it) while also showing him that this wouldn't work. This is an early exemple of "booking something to fail to demonstrate that it would be a failure". I think by early 98, Corny was gone, although you can see the complete Russoization of the product in Fall of 98 for the next year, until he departed and the product magically much better (not to mention the influx of talent from WCW to fill the awful undercard).

[The Thread Killer]

I had a mild altercation with Vince Russo earlier tonight on Twitter and he ended up blocking me. I'm sorry, but he tweeted "People who don't take responsibility for their professional failures eliminate the opportunity to grow, learn and become better from it" and of all people to tweet something like that, that it was coming from him blew my mind in some ways.

 

I checked that out. It looks like Russo went and deleted the tweets that you re-tweeted which showed clear examples of him not taking responsibilities for his professional failures, (after he blocked you, of course.) The man is hysterical. You pointed out what a hypocrite he was being by saying that, and provided evidence, and he responds by erasing the evidence and blocking you.

[The Thread Killer]

All kidding, and cheap shots, aside. I think you're exactly right, TTK. It's probably why he goes on and on about how much he hates the wrestling business, while still trying to get hired by wrestling companies. It's like the washed up Randy the Ram wrestler, who made huge money and doesn't have jack to show for it now. I know that's not a perfect analogy, and I have no idea what his financial situation is like.

And the thing is, as much as I can't stand the guy and despise what he did to the sport of Professional Wrestling, he has every right to make a living. He has a family to take care of, I respect that. But what has always driven me crazy about him is the total lack of respect he has for the business. He uses wrestling to make money while at the same time bashing it and doing everything he can to ruin it. It's maddening.

[The Thread Killer]

Russo's booking was part (a part - not the whole reason) of one of the most successful money drawing periods in wrestling history, the Attitude Era. Cornette's booking didn't draw anywhere and lost money everywhere.

 

I wouldn't hire either of them at this point, but if you held a gun to my head and forced me to open up an unsuccessful start-up wrestling promotion with one of the two, I'd go with Russo.

 

I actually read Russo's first book, entitled "Forgiven." (I got it for $5 in the bargain bin.) It was a surreal experience. I guess he had written the entire book, which covers his career from the start, up to his departure for WCW. It was a tell all, mean and vindictive, The two main targets in his book were Jim Cornette and Jim Ross. But sometime before the book was scheduled to be published, Russo underwent a religious conversion and he decided to change his ways. So he published the original "angry Russo" manuscript, but alternated it with chapters written by the new "religious Russo" where he emphasized how much he has changed since then. After my reading it, I couldn't understand - if he had truly changed and didn't have the same bitter, vindictive feelings anymore - why he had still published the original manuscript as part of the book, which still had all the anger and bile included?

 

Anyhow, the point is that even in his own book, Russo admits that the booking committee was made up of Vince McMahon, Pat Patterson, Jim Cornette and himself. Pat Patterson retired, leaving just Cornette and the two Vinces. That is who booked WWE for the majority of "The Attitude Era." Even Russo admits it. Now in his book, Russo claims that he finally went to McMahon and gave him an ultimatum that either Russo or Cornette had to be kicked off the committee, and McMahon chose Russo. According to Russo, that is when the true brilliance began. Cornette was off the committe and Russo and Ferarra were in charge.

 

I am not sure exactly how long a period of time it was, but even Russo admits, there was a very limited time period when he had exclusive control over the creative process in WWE. That's not what he told WCW when he went looking for the job there, of course. When he went to Turner he claimed responsibility for writing all of the Attitude Era, which is why they hired him.

 

But fact is, the whole "Russo wrote the Attitude Era" myth has been pretty much debunked by now. Even if Russo himself hadn't admitted that he worked with McMahon, Patterson and Cornette for a large chunk of that time, his work in WCW proves it's not true. We got to see what "free reign" Vince Russo looked like in WCW from November 1999 - January 2000. The attitude era never looked anything like that.

 

Like I said before, I can't stand Jim Cornette. I think he's a close minded, stubborn, ignorant, overly opinionated loudmouth with antiquated thinking who has no respect for people with ideas other than his, and an ego that parallels and in some ways far surpasses Vince Russo's. He himself has said some absolutely ridiculous things over the past few years, and I think if he ever got a chance to book a promotion he would sink it quickly with out of date Southern Fried Rasslin.

 

But when it comes to Vince Russo, he's not wrong.

 

[SomethingSavage]

From every account I've heard, it seems like Russo and Ferrara became THE team the night after King of the Ring '98.

 

The Fed was clearly still riding the tidal wave of Austin's popularity - and the money printing machine known as the McMahon feud - for quite awhile longer. And I believe a strong case can be made that their TV was incredibly engaging and entertaining on a week-to-week basis... all the way up until Survivor Series '98.

 

But yeah. I don't think you even have to look closely to notice SOME similarities between WWF '99 and Russo's WCW.

 

And honestly, if WWF 1999 is what a filtered and polished Russo product looks like - then jumping baby Jesus, I'll gladly pass on giving THAT shit another shot.

 

Russo's failed miserably time and time again ever since. There were a COUPLE of brief, fleeting moments in TNA where they seemed to have *something* going for them. But it's practically impossible to separate when and where Russo was there, involved, covertly consulting, sitting at home on his couch, or whateverthefuck. So no credit to him on any of that stuff.

 

Besides, the things we DO know he's responsible for in TNA are atrocious. Those early shows - and later with the one-hour Impact format - are all absolute garbage.

 

Honest to God, I'd rather crab-walk and crawl on my hands & knees through a dozen dirty dumpster fires than review some of that Russo-booked television. It's THAT awful.

[The Chief]

On a somewhat related topic, what is the exact time line of Pat Patterson in the WWF as a booker? I can think of at least 3 instances when he stepped down/retired/etc but I don't think I've ever heard of one happening in 1998.

[SomethingSavage]

To be fair to Russo - I think he has some creative and intriguing ideas. But they all seem to work best in broad strokes. I don't think he has enough awareness or even common courtesy to respect real life issues. It's ironic, too - because he claims that McMahon's lack of respect for his family life is what led to Russo leaving in the first place.

In any case, I look at things like Russo's "rebooking" of the Invasion angle with Kayfabe Commentaries, and I honestly think it blows Cornette's version out of the water. It's packed with potential and "big time" shock & awe moments. Plus, underneath all that, it actually follows continuity, presents parallels and callbacks to the original nWo angle, and some other REALLY neat stuff.

 

Simultaneously, I get the impression that he never considers the limits or abilities of the performers themselves. It's easy to understand why this guy would look at Jeff Jarrett and see his version of Triple H, or why he would see Booker T circa 2000 as the next Rock, or whatever. It's like he just figures - "Hey, bro. If I can put it on paper, if I can dream it up, if I can fantasize it to life, then it works." And it just doesn't.

 

Plus, he constantly bitches & moans about the budget in TNA. It's another telltale sign that the guy doesn't understand how or why there's a need to sometimes work around actual real world issues like costs, contracts, or other logistics.

 

And beyond all that - the usual defense you hear for Russo is that he gave EVERYBODY something to do. Uck. I mean, I'm all for mid-card programs and even opening matches with something at stake, but the general idea of giving EVERYONE an angle is overrated. It diminishes the meaningful stuff up top and dilutes things in the long run.

 

Besides, if giving EVERYBODY something to do means I've got to get shit like Terri Runnels having a miscarriage, Headbanger Mosh beating his girlfriend backstage and jogging down to the ring in boxer briefs, or whateverthefuck each week - then I'd much rather watch less people have less things to do, please & thanks.

[El-P]

To be fair to Russo - I think he has some creative and intriguing ideas.

 

Except he really doesn't. It struck me when I was doing the WCW Highway to Hell, how few actual ideas Russo had, and that the narrative of him being really creative was another myth. He has a few ideas which are always the same : shoot-promos / abuse of women / self-reference to glory years of WWF / pilling up gimmick matches. He's never wrote any good, creative, compelling angle and always resort to the same shit. And when he showed up in TNA, it was back to the same stuff yet again, no matter who he's working with. He's really not much of a creative guy at all.

 

In any case, I look at things like Russo's "rebooking" of the Invasion angle with Kayfabe Commentaries, and I honestly think it blows Cornette's version out of the water. It's packed with potential and "big time" shock & awe moments. Plus, underneath all that, it actually follows continuity, presents parallels and callbacks to the original nWo angle, and some other REALLY neat stuff.

 

The premise was better than Corny's, who stuck in the 80's in a bad way. But there's a point where Sean asks him : "But who's the babyface and ho's a heel ?" to which Russo answers "It doesn't matter.", and it's exactly at this point you realize that this guy just doesn't get it at all and that it would be shit.

 

The most glorious WWF Vince Russo feud that illustrates this exact point (among other things like his amazing misoginy) is Dustin Runnels/Goldust vs Val Venis. The characters all go seemingly from heel to faces to heel to faces from week to week with the only really purely negative traits being put on Terri's back during the whole feud (she's basically called a whore by babyface announcers for flirting with a porn star while forgetting that she was dumped and humiliated on TV by Runnels months before, while Venis is portrayed as the crowd pleasing babyface until he's not really anymore when Goldust comes back, Terri being humiliated by everyone at the end and portrayed like a manipulating slut for faking a miscarriage, then turning somewhat "babyface" by going all "female empowerment" in a faction called PMS… )

[SomethingSavage]

Hey. You won't get much argument out of me about any of that.

 

The "creative ideas" comment was aimed more toward the McMahon-Austin feud of '98 and, as mentioned, his proposed idea of the WCW invasion angle - specifically, the layered nod & tribute to the original nWo angle more so than anything else.

 

Of course, one of those relies on pure fantasy and the benefit of having a magic wand to wave around to get guys like Hogan, Hall, and Nash to come in right away. So there's also that.

But, if I had to give Russo credit for anything, I wouldn't mind tossing him a little praise for some of the more outrageous, outlandish, yet memorable moments of the Attitude Era. Was he SOLELY responsible? Doubtful. But no way do I believe that McMahon cooked up some of those ideas either. The beer bath, the monster truck, the mock funeral, and plenty of the Austin stunts - which drove week to week TV for awhile there - was probably Russo's actual only strong suit. The thought of, "What is Stone Cold gonna do THIS week?" was very much a drawing card for viewers during that time.

Conversely, almost none of that stuff is as important if it doesn't involve THOSE specific characters. Everything is elevated by the individuals and their performances. That's something I don't think Russo ever grasped either. Transplanting the same traits onto other guys doesn't automatically get it done.

 

You're mostly on point with the other stuff, too - ESPECIALLY the line about Russo dismissing Sean's concerns about the face/heel dynamic, crowd confusion, etc.

 

It's sort of what I was alluding to when I said that you ALWAYS leave with the impression that Russo doesn't have any concern or respect for the performers themselves. He doesn't recognize weaknesses, strengths, or anything else. I mean, sure. It's easy for him to lay claim to the success of great talkers like Foley, Austin, and Rocky in retrospect. But EVERYTHING is easier in hindsight. Besides, at the end of the day, it's plain to see that he doesn't know the difference between what a Dwayne Johnson can pull off and what a Booker T Huffman can pull off. He doesn't see the dividing line between a Triple H - like him or not - and casting a fucking heel Jeff Jarrett as a destroyer of worlds.

 

As you said, he just doesn't get it. And that's kind of what I meant to point out in a roundabout way before. With Russo, there's a HUGE lack of awareness for so many things. What MAY begin as a small spark of an intriguing idea will quickly be swept up in a bunch of bullshit, because he just runs with it - with no attention paid to the performers, the perspective of the fans, etc.

 

Your reference to the, "It doesn't matter" line is a good one. But there were others in that interview alone. He also gleefully proposed the idea of SWERVING people with another Goldberg turn. Or was it a Sting turn? Maybe both..?

So, of course, underneath a thin layer of promise lies the usual Russo garbage that you'll likely ALWAYS get served up anytime he's given the chance to write anything.

[Loss]

His general ideas around pushing young guys and making the presentation seem hip are right, but the details of his execution are just completely bonkers.

[C.S.]

I actually read Russo's first book, entitled "Forgiven." (I got it for $5 in the bargain bin.) It was a surreal experience. I guess he had written the entire book, which covers his career from the start, up to his departure for WCW. It was a tell all, mean and vindictive, The two main targets in his book were Jim Cornette and Jim Ross. But sometime before the book was scheduled to be published, Russo underwent a religious conversion and he decided to change his ways. So he published the original "angry Russo" manuscript, but alternated it with chapters written by the new "religious Russo" where he emphasized how much he has changed since then. After my reading it, I couldn't understand - if he had truly changed and didn't have the same bitter, vindictive feelings anymore - why he had still published the original manuscript as part of the book, which still had all the anger and bile included?

 

I read the book years ago too, and I may be wrong because it's been so long, but I got the distinct impression that much of the "uncensored" stuff was still considerably neutered, with only a few remnants remaining.

 

And beyond all that - the usual defense you hear for Russo is that he gave EVERYBODY something to do. Uck. I mean, I'm all for mid-card programs and even opening matches with something at stake, but the general idea of giving EVERYONE an angle is overrated. It diminishes the meaningful stuff up top and dilutes things in the long run.

 

Besides, if giving EVERYBODY something to do means I've got to get shit like Terri Runnels having a miscarriage, Headbanger Mosh beating his girlfriend backstage and jogging down to the ring in boxer briefs, or whateverthefuck each week - then I'd much rather watch less people have less things to do, please & thanks.

 

This is the one talking point I'll defend Russo on to the ends of the earth.

 

Giving EVERYONE something to do is simply sound booking and getting the most value out of the ENTIRE roster - things that are sorely lacking today.

 

This approach to booking does NOT mean that Gangrel is on equal footing with Stone Cold. That was never the case.

 

Everyone was more over and the fans had a reason to care about all of the characters, but the cream still rose to the top - Austin, Rock, etc.

 

Just to use one of many examples of two comparable wrestlers push-wise, D-Lo Brown was over in a way Curtis Axel has never been.

 

The premise was better than Corny's, who stuck in the 80's in a bad way. But there's a point where Sean asks him : "But who's the babyface and ho's a heel ?" to which Russo answers "It doesn't matter.", and it's exactly at this point you realize that this guy just doesn't get it at all and that it would be shit.

 

Except, he was rebooking the Attitude Era, where the edict from Vince McMahon himself was that the era of the good guy and bad guy was passe - it was all about shades of grey. That was the philosophy of the time, and for that short period, even though it went against conventional wisdom, it worked. In retrospect, there were way too many face and heel turns.

 

It's sort of what I was alluding to when I said that you ALWAYS leave with the impression that Russo doesn't have any concern or respect for the performers themselves. He doesn't recognize weaknesses, strengths, or anything else. I mean, sure. It's easy for him to lay claim to the success of great talkers like Foley, Austin, and Rocky in retrospect. But EVERYTHING is easier in hindsight. Besides, at the end of the day, it's plain to see that he doesn't know the difference between what a Dwayne Johnson can pull off and what a Booker T Huffman can pull off. He doesn't see the dividing line between a Triple H - like him or not - and casting a fucking heel Jeff Jarrett as a destroyer of worlds.

 

I think Russo (hopefully) has to know deep that down that Booker wasn't Rock and Jarrett wasn't Triple H, but when he was in WCW, they were (in his mind) the best he had to work with, so I see nothing wrong with him promoting them, hyping them up, and trying to get the most out of them.

[Loss]

Vince never believed that. He's always said it, but he's never believed it. What shade of grey did Mr. McMahon have? Why didn't guys the fans liked regularly team with guys the fans didn't like?

[C.S.]

Vince never believed that. He's always said it, but he's never believed it. What shade of grey did Mr. McMahon have? Why didn't guys the fans liked regularly team with guys the fans didn't like?

 

Just going by what he said in this speech.

 

 

I am not a mind reader and have no idea what he actually believed and didn't believe.

[Loss]

It's evident in how he booked. You don't have to read his mind -- just look at the television.

[fakeplastictrees]

One thing I will give Russo credit for is the fact that he was always able to take quiet midgets and give them an actual template to work from. Sonjay Dutt, Jay Lethal, and Petey Williams are just some of the guys who benefited from Russo's initial involvement. The same can be said with TAFKAPI, some of the ridiculousness of Lance Storm's WCW run, etc. A lot of these things had good starting elements, but they were never really built upon in a meaningful way.

[El-P]

Except, he was rebooking the Attitude Era, where the edict from Vince McMahon himself was that the era of the good guy and bad guy was passe - it was all about shades of grey. That was the philosophy of the time, and for that short period, even though it went against conventional wisdom, it worked.

 

Complete bullshit. Mr. McMahon was a complete heel. Austin was a complete babyface (he saved Stephy from evil Taker, for fuck's sake). Mick Foley was total babyface. The Rock was total heel, then total babyface. DX were total babyfaces, the Nation were total heels. Taker was a babyface for the longest time, then turned heel. Every act that was really over on top was either heel of faces. You can go on and on. There was no actual "shades of grey". However, in the undercard, there was some confusion (as illustrated by the Venis vs Goldust feud), but it was irrelevant when you had the hottest act in 20 years on top, which were the biggest babyface in Austin feuding with the biggest heel McMahon basically.