Who is the worst booker ever?

[sek69]

To be fair (and I can't believe I'm saying that in regards to Russo) is that the eventual pitfall of all bookers is falling in the trap of "this worked really well once, so let's never deviate from it". It's just that most bookers have a longer period of good stuff to counterbalance and/or negate the bad.

[Loss]

There's also knowing something worked, and understanding why something worked. And that's not something unique to Russo, but it definitely applies to him.

[BrianB]

To be fair (and I can't believe I'm saying that in regards to Russo) is that the eventual pitfall of all bookers is falling in the trap of "this worked really well once, so let's never deviate from it". It's just that most bookers have a longer period of good stuff to counterbalance and/or negate the bad.

 

What he did in WCW was very recognizable as him. But the extent and degree was also not what happened in the WWF. So, it's a bit generous to even extend him that label, in addition to what Loss said.

[Loss]

We saw it so many times, not just with Russo, but with others. The NWO reunions never worked because each time one was tried, it was presented as another angle on the show. The whole reason it worked originally was partially because of the star power, yes, but that alone isn't what gave it heft. It was the attack on wrestling fan sensibilities and the feel that they could strike at any moment. It was that they were treated as a renegade pseudo-promotion that went after faces and heels alike -- creating unlikely alliances to oppose them -- rather than a stable. It's the type of thing that only *could* work once, because you do it and then once the people involved become institutions in the company, it's time to move on to something else. That same principle also applies to so many other ideas that were repeated to diminishing returns -- this belief that the original success was simply driven by star power. It's awfully reductive.

[El-P]

"Evil owner" angle anyone ? 18 years straight of recycling.

[Stiva]

"Evil owner" angle anyone ? 18 years straight of recycling.

 

I can't remember who said it but the greatest quote about WWE TV I've ever heard is that it turned from a wrestling show to a show ABOUT someone running a wrestling show post Austin-McMahon

[Death From Above]

I think it's almost become a total inevitability that the people in power want to make themselves the star. Evil Owner made it more obvious because it's where you see that shift from only applying to active wrestlers to (theoretical) non-wrestling talent. But it's not really a concept that was new with Evil Owner.

 

Dusty Rhodes is the booker? Dusty is the star! Bill Dundee is the booker? Bill Dundee is the star! Kevin Nash is the booker? Kevin Nash is the star? Vince McMahon is the booker? Vince McMahon (and every other relative they can find) is the star! Eric Bischoff is the booker? Eric Bischoff is the star (put himself over Flair on a Starrcade)! Even good bookers did it, mostly. Riki Choshu is the booker? Riki Choshu wins a 5-on-1 handicap match as his farewell! Bill Watts is the booker? Once every few months, Bill Watts is the star! Paul Heyman owns ECW? Paul Heyman made himself the star to the point that 20 years later there are still people that actually think he was some kind of genius in ECW they got worked so hard.

 

Evil boss shit is only part of what is now a continuous cycle that goes back about as far as we can go, just expressing what we've seen both from wrestling and non-wrestling talent.

 

I loathe to praise Triple H at all, but *theoretically* his character transitioning from full time wrestler INTO evil boss could have been interesting. It certainly hasn't been. But it theoretically could have been. At least it was a fresh take.

 

I can't even say Evil Boss is totally played out and can't work because Dario Cueto is right there. But there's a definite lack of variety with it in the current climate when you only have so many relevant companies and the power in the hands of Those Same People as it will be until they die.

[Death From Above]

I also agree the nWo rehashes totally missed the point of the nWo. It was like watching a band that got fans by being genuinely different, but then fuck, a few years and 4 albums later they realized they could sell you t-shirts. Time for a reunion tour. Which is fine for your most hardcore fans, I don't begrudge it. But it's not interesting to anyone else.

 

Sweet, sweet t-shirt money. Who can say no?

 

It's a very difficult, and dangerous game, to try and force nostalgia to be hip. Hell, look at Hollywood and their Fist of a Thousand Reboots. There is no exact science to what will stick and what won't.

[Dooley]

All the criticisms of Russo are valid, but to see what influence Russo had on the WWF product one needs to go back and watch the TV in 95-96. With a few exceptions, it was ridiculously dated and stale. Russo pretty much forced Vince into being contemporary and trying new things.

[Grimmas]

All the criticisms of Russo are valid, but to see what influence Russo had on the WWF product one needs to go back and watch the TV in 95-96. With a few exceptions, it was ridiculously dated and stale. Russo pretty much forced Vince into being contemporary and trying new things.

Vince was going to try something to change things up. 99 TV was the worst, so that is Russo with his most power and most influence.

 

I really doubt Russo had anything to do with Hart Foundation-Austin, which was the real turn around in creative. Austin-McMahon was mostly Austin and McMahon.

 

New stars were coming in like Edge, Test, and Val Venis, who may had got more over if they didn't have shitty gimmicks.

 

If Vince Russo stayed in a video game store, WWF still would had turned it around and become the biggest company because they had Austin and The Rock. Vince was also desperate and was going to change things up. I don't see how Russo is anything special in the WWF turn around.

 

Just look at any time he had control (WWF in 99, WCW in 99-2000, TNA) and it's complete and utter shit.

[Dooley]

Vince was going to try something to change things up.

 

Based on what?

 

Again, watch the TV. Russo got a bigger part in creative right around March '97 if I'm not mistaken. The TV from '97 is light years ahead of where it was a year prior.

 

Val Venis got over solely BECAUSE of his gimmick.

 

Just look at any time he had control (WWF in 99, WCW in 99-2000, TNA) and it's complete and utter shit.

 

No argument there. But that's not the point I'm making.

[Grimmas]

 

Vince was going to try something to change things up.

 

Based on what?

 

Again, watch the TV. Russo got a bigger part in creative right around March '97 if I'm not mistaken. The TV from '97 is light years ahead of where it was a year prior.

 

Val Venis got over solely BECAUSE of his gimmick.

 

Just look at any time he had control (WWF in 99, WCW in 99-2000, TNA) and it's complete and utter shit.

 

No argument there. But that's not the point I'm making.

 

Based on what? Based on the fact he was losing and tried something by going with Russo. If Russo wasn't around he would had tried something different.

 

Val was over in Mexico and Puerto Rico with being a porn star.

[goc]

I think perhaps the biggest thing you can give Russo credit for in turning things around for the WWF is that he helped convince Vince to not just ignore the Screwjob on TV which then led to Vince becoming the biggest heel of the Attitude Era.

[Dooley]

 

 

Vince was going to try something to change things up.

 

Based on what?

 

Again, watch the TV. Russo got a bigger part in creative right around March '97 if I'm not mistaken. The TV from '97 is light years ahead of where it was a year prior.

 

Val Venis got over solely BECAUSE of his gimmick.

 

Just look at any time he had control (WWF in 99, WCW in 99-2000, TNA) and it's complete and utter shit.

 

No argument there. But that's not the point I'm making.

 

Based on what? Based on the fact he was losing and tried something by going with Russo. If Russo wasn't around he would had tried something different.

 

Val was over in Mexico and Puerto Rico with being a porn star.

 

 

It seems like a pretty big leap to say that WWF would have gotten better without doing what they actually did just because you think Vince would have "tried something".

 

Plenty of guys have gotten over in Mexico but fallen on their face in the States. Are you really putting forth the argument that the reason Sean Morley was over wasn't because of the Val Venis character?

 

I'm not comfortable that I'm coming off as a "Russo defender" here, but come on. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Grimmas]

 

 

 

Vince was going to try something to change things up.

 

Based on what?

 

Again, watch the TV. Russo got a bigger part in creative right around March '97 if I'm not mistaken. The TV from '97 is light years ahead of where it was a year prior.

 

Val Venis got over solely BECAUSE of his gimmick.

 

Just look at any time he had control (WWF in 99, WCW in 99-2000, TNA) and it's complete and utter shit.

 

No argument there. But that's not the point I'm making.

 

Based on what? Based on the fact he was losing and tried something by going with Russo. If Russo wasn't around he would had tried something different.

 

Val was over in Mexico and Puerto Rico with being a porn star.

 

 

It seems like a pretty big leap to say that WWF would have gotten better without doing what they actually did just because you think Vince would have "tried something".

 

Plenty of guys have gotten over in Mexico but fallen on their face in the States. Are you really putting forth the argument that the reason Sean Morley was over wasn't because of the Val Venis character?

 

I'm not comfortable that I'm coming off as a "Russo defender" here, but come on. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

So with Austin and The Rock the WWF would had still failed without Russo. You believe that?

 

Morley got over in the porn character, I'm not going to pretend he couldn't had got over in other characters as well. He was over because he was pushed.

[Loss]

I think Russo was fine as A Voice rather than The Voice. He and Cornette pulled between opposite extremes with Vince to referee, and that's how we got 1997, which had a lot of great highlights.

[sek69]

Calling him the worst seems wrong, but Verne Gagne booked the AWA around him and his friends for 20+ years and ran it into the ground by not changing with the times. The only time they didn't seem like a second tier promotion is when they were lucky enough to have Hogan around when Rocky III came out.

[Dooley]

 

 

So with Austin and The Rock the WWF would had still failed without Russo. You believe that?

 

The Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia weren't doing so hot, were they?

 

That's my point. Russo's rise to power coincides with WWF pushing edgier and more contemporary characters. Or are you still wistful for the days of The Goon and TL Hopper? I think you're forgetting how stale and dated most of the WWF felt in 95-96.

 

 

 

I think Russo was fine as A Voice rather than The Voice. He and Cornette pulled between opposite extremes with Vince to referee, and that's how we got 1997, which had a lot of great highlights.

 

This seems like a fair assessment, although I find Cornette to be wildly overrated as a booker by his supporters.

[SomethingSavage]

Corny may be overrated, but Charles makes a valid point. The peaks of '97 seemed to stem from a balancing act between both Corny's strongest traits and Russo's own ideas.

 

I realize that maybe the program hasn't aged all that well, but the Kane and Taker feud was a REALLY big deal at the time. And part of that charm came from keeping them separate - something Russo never would have done without Corny fighting to keep them apart in order to allow the anticipation to build.

Plus the Kane debut is something that still stands out as a milestone. It's memorable to this day. And that was all Cornette - pitching & proposing something he'd seen done a decade earlier in Tennessee or whateverthefuck. Further proof that a blend of the styles CAN and will work.

 

Elements of the Hart Foundation angle have to be credited to Cornette. There's no way I'd ever be convinced that some of that stuff wasn't influenced by his ideas.

 

As noted, the Vader-Goldust rivalry at the end of the year is another random example of Cornette still sticking around and contributing. Was it a ratings-winner? Nah. Not at all. But it was still a fun part of the card for a couple of months.

 

Conversely, I enjoyed the Pillman and Goldust program from a few months before. And THAT (to be fair) felt like total unfiltered Russo writing. But it was still fun enough in its own time and place.

 

I guess I'm just rambling, but it's all to simply say that I agree with Loss. Russo's got a proven track record of being genuinely terrible when left unleashed, but he definitely contributed *something* for awhile there as part of a point/counterpoint system.

[goc]

Calling him the worst seems wrong, but Verne Gagne booked the AWA around him and his friends for 20+ years and ran it into the ground by not changing with the times. The only time they didn't seem like a second tier promotion is when they were lucky enough to have Hogan around when Rocky III came out.

I don't think any of these statements are really true when you scrutinize them. The fans in the AWA territory loved Crusher, Bruiser, Mad Dog etc. so why dump those guys when they were still drawing?

 

AWA was a successful territory long before Hogan. It still had some successes after Hogan left. The "didn't change with the times" thing is something people usually seem to make based on talent but the AWA pushed young talent after Hogan left. Verne made Rick Martel his champ, he made The Road Warriors one of his top acts, pushed Curt Hennig really hard and brought in a young hot team like The Fabulous Ones to challenge The Road Warriors. He also turned Jerry Blackwell babyface and gave him a big push that was drawing money. It's not like Blackwell was your typical top babyface act. It was a pretty creative, out of the box idea for a guy who gets crap for being stuck in the past. Unfortunately Blackwell's health was failing by that point so AWA lost one of their last big drawing acts. There was only so much AWA could do to bring in promising young talent when the WWF was always going to be able to swoop in and steal them. Not to mention how WWF was trying to steal away AWA's arenas and timeslots.

 

The fact that the AWA died has far more to do with WWF playing dirty against them than it does with Verne being "an old man who refused to change." Not saying Verne didn't make mistakes because he did. Stuff like trying to force Hansen to drop the belt which led to Hansen leaving and then just handing the belt to Bockwinkel, not great decisions. But he was also limited in what good young talent he could get to actually stick around.

[Loss]

 

 

 

 

I think Russo was fine as A Voice rather than The Voice. He and Cornette pulled between opposite extremes with Vince to referee, and that's how we got 1997, which had a lot of great highlights.

 

This seems like a fair assessment, although I find Cornette to be wildly overrated as a booker by his supporters.

 

 

I've come to agree with this. More than anything, he was a guy with good tastes in what angles to copy from Mid South, Memphis and JCP. And hey, that will carry a guy pretty far. I think he's also really effective at diagnosing problems in wrestling, maybe more so than anyone. He's just not at all a guy with good solutions. I look at Bill Watts the same way in 1992 WCW -- correct about problems facing wrestling, but prescribing the wrong medicine to fix it.

[Petey]

That would explain stuff like Steve Austin beating up Santa Claus and the DX Christmas show with the original Fingerpoke of Doom.

 

Wait, Cornette did commentary on those, so I'm not sure it would.

Cornette was still around on TV a bit but I meant in terms of his influence on the booking/creative team.

[The Thread Killer]

Since this thread is pretty much the de facto Vince Russo thread here at PWO - I know we have this thread too but I think the Worst Booker thread is better - I wanted to share the newest gem I read today about Russo online. I was going to say it was a new low for him, but when you have a body of work like his, that's a very tough call.

 

Vince Russo is at it again. The outspoken and controversial former wrestling booker fired off at “marks” and the “dirt sheet” crowd on the latest episode of his podcast, claiming that if they like certain wrestlers as much as they do than they must be gay or at least somewhere beyond exclusively heterosexual on the Kinsey Scale.

 

In the episode, titled “Vince Breaks Out New Show-Castrating The Marks & Their Dirt Sheets,” Russo takes shots at the writers of a couple of major major wrestling sites, insulting their appearances. “They all look like losers,” he said. “They all look like marks.”

 

Russo claimed he has no problem with the gay community, saying, “Bro, whatever floats your boat. Who cares. Its not up to me to judge you. I’ve worked with gay wrestlers, I could care less. With that being said, I’m looking at these kind of individuals and I’m looking at reactions to other men. That’s what we’re talking about here. The way they react to Kevin Owens, the way they react to Sami Zayn, the way they react to Samoa Joe and Finn Balor. Their reactions to other men. I just watched the Giants game, I’m not wacking myself off when Buster Posey comes to the plate. I’m not taking it out and playing with it. And I love Buster Posey, but I love in the sense that he’s on my team and I want them to win. But I don’t start chanting ‘This is Awesome’ when he steps up to the plate. Its not a normal reaction for men to react to other men in that way. It’s not a normal reaction.”

 

Russo added, “So I have come to the conclusion if you are part of the NXT crowd, the people who were in Orlando, the ‘This is Awesome’ crowd, you fall in three categories. Its this simple, bro. You’re either A) homosexual. Okay, you like men. For you to react this way, you have to like men. B ) You’re either no homosexual but have homosexual tendencies. Or C) You’re in the closet. Its that simple bro, because men do not react to other men that way. It’s not a normal function. Bro, I had someone tweet me after I made a tweet that Finn Balor has to hit the gym. Bro, I literally had a guy send me a picture of Finn Balor with his shirt off. Bro, you are probably a homosexual. If you are searching the internet for pictures of Finn Balor without his shirt on, and taking his time to send it to me, you fall in one of these categories.”

 

(Courtesy Jeremy Thomas)

I wish there would be some kind of backlash against him for this, but I fear there won't be. And I know he's just trolling for attention at this point, but still I would love to see somebody call him out for his nonsense. Aside from Jim Cornette.

[goc]

What kind of a backlash can Russo even suffer at this point? He has a podcast that probably a very small amount of people listen to and the people that DO listen to it regularly are probably fans of the shit he said on that podcast.

 

I listened to the podcast by the way and some (not a lot) of the criticisms he made about the way people were covering wrestling on the podcast clips he used were valid. But he's so fucking stupid he continued to go back to that "these guys are gay bro" talking point that none of that is ever going to get talked about because of how moronic everything else he said was. The most ironically funny thing about the podcast though was him continuing to shit on indie groups & guys getting jobs working for indies WHEN HE'S THE BOOKER OF A TINY INDIE IN COLORADO

[The Thread Killer]

Hang on a minute...what possible issue would he have with guys working for indies? How else are they supposed to break into the business, if he doesn't like indies and he doesn't like NXT? (Or maybe he doesn't mind NXT, but if you really like it, that means you're gay, bro.)