Vince McMahon - Reallly a "Genius"?

[jdw]

Oh... Jerry is back with more nonsense. I can see from his first silly spot of comparing a Backlund-Valentine house show match that didn't air on the syndicated tv with an Angle that aired on the syndicated television that it's going to take a long post to sift through all the delusional nonsense. It's 9, time to go home and eat... be back sometime over the weekend. Give you some time to maybe thing through some of that, Jerry.

 

John

 

"When I was playing the character."

-Tugg Speedman

[BrickHithouse]

Red Flag Narcissistic Behaviors

 

So what are narcissistic behaviors? What should you be on the lookout for? The bottom line is that no matter what level of behavior they exhibit, jdw can still be detrimental to your health and well being, both physically and emotionally.

 

The following is a list of Red Flag narcissistic behaviors. These may help you to gain a clearer understanding of how a narcissist acts.

 

Extreme infatuation with oneself, self-centered, expects to be recognized as superior

 

Sees himself as special and should only have to affiliate with others of a similar stature

 

Demonstrates a constant need for admiration or approval

 

Exaggerates personal achievements while minimizing those of others

 

Is convinced that he/she is unique

 

Often criticizes and/or puts others down

 

Assumes himself to be more knowledgeable than those around him

 

May harass or stalk you

 

Quick to anger or feel insulted or slighted

 

Denies he/she has issues to work on & sees himself/herself as nearly perfect

 

Nothing is ever his/her fault

 

Rarely treats anyone with respect or kindness

 

Always wants to be in control

 

His/her need for attention, time, and space matter – yours do not

 

Has difficulty putting himself/herself in another's shoes

 

Rarely recognizes the accomplishments or abilities of others

 

Doesn't appear to have a conscience

 

Does not take criticism well and becomes defensive easily

 

Rarely expresses appreciation of others

 

Is easily hurt and insulted

 

Considers most others in the world idiots

 

Wins most arguments through the use of rationalizing his/her behavior

 

Has a hard time accepting the opinions or ideas of others

 

Always has to win any argument

 

Is often envious of others, or thinks others envy him/her

 

Rarely can understand another's point of view

 

Leaves others feeling as though they need to walk on eggshells around him

 

Hates to be thought of as ordinary or average

 

Is desperate to have the biggest house, car, bank account, or title

 

Often leaves you feeling guilty, drained, fearful, exhausted, just plain stupid, and most of all, wondering how you got there

[Ricky Jackson]

This guy?

 

[BrickHithouse]

smaller.

 

much, much smaller.

[NintendoLogic]

As entertaining as the next chapter in the eternal Jerry/jdw feud is shaping up to be, I'd like to jump in to dispute the notion that Vince created a nationwide wrestling boom out of whole cloth. Promotions all over the country were doing huge business in the 80s even before Vince went national. I think it'd be more accurate to say that he captured an audience that was already receptive to wrestling and turned them on to his vision of wrestling. Sure, he created new fans. But so did Crockett and World Class and Memphis and Mid-South.

[Matt D]

What he created was more marketable to the mainstream than what they were creating though. I don't think you could have a Ric Flair and the Four Horsemen cartoon. Or Jim Duggan vs the Russians cereal. I'd love to see Bill Watts on MTV in 1985 though.

[thebrainfollower]

JDW vs. Jerry Von Kramer at WM 30. With the ghosts of Gordon Solie and Gorilla Monsoon on the mic. Jesse Ventura training JVK in humorous montages beforehand. I'd pay money to see it.

[Log]

Gotta have a long sit down interview with JVK conducted by Sean Mooney.

[ohtani's jacket]

Forget Mooney, I want to see Vince staring lovingly into Parv's eyes and thank him for Jerry-mania.

 

[flyonthewall2983]

As entertaining as the next chapter in the eternal Jerry/jdw feud is shaping up to be, I'd like to jump in to dispute the notion that Vince created a nationwide wrestling boom out of whole cloth. Promotions all over the country were doing huge business in the 80s even before Vince went national. I think it'd be more accurate to say that he captured an audience that was already receptive to wrestling and turned them on to his vision of wrestling. Sure, he created new fans. But so did Crockett and World Class and Memphis and Mid-South.

And to bring this around to my original point, he had New York City while the other guys couldn't claim to have as much stroke in Chicago or Los Angeles, the two runners-up to NYC as major American cities (or unofficial capitals if you like). If Vince, Sr. was the big cheese in a place like Albuquerque, New Mexico or Des Moines, Iowa and someone else ran NYC, we'd be talking about that someone else right now.

[JerryvonKramer]

Just because there is luck and contingency, it does not mean that Vince was only lucky or that his success was only contingent.

 

For every success story there has ever been you can point to a luck factor and a set of variables that needed to be in place.

 

Think of how lucky Eric Bischoff was. He could sign any wrestler in the world. He eventually had every single marquee star under contract. The company that owned WCW owned the TV station. And he still fucked it all up.

 

It doesn't change anything that Vince could only have done the what he did because he was in New York: you play the hand you're dealt and make the best of it.

 

Remember the first part of Karl Marx's maxim:

 

Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.

There's nothing inevitable about the success that Vince had. Imagine if Vince Sr hadn't have died and stayed on through the 1980s and 1990s somehow. What happens then?

 

The circumstances are simply that: a set of circumstances. Vince is the differentiator.

[JerryvonKramer]

Because there is a risk of you know who returning to this thread, I have to write this out in logical form to mitigate against any prospect of having my words twisted or misrepresented. With such characters around, this is unfortunately a necessary measure.

 

Argument against "he was just lucky"

 

Premise 1: Advantages alone do not diminish the achievements of successful people, because they need to be realised

Premise 2: Advantages by themselves mean nothing until they are realised; and there is nothing inevitable in their realisation.

Conclusion 1: Therefore, you measure success not by the advantages, but by what a person does to press and realise those advantages

 

Premise 3: The advantage of being located in New York alone does not diminish the achivements of Vince, because he needed to realise those advantages

Premise 4: Being in New York alone meant nothing until Vince used it as a competitive advantage; and there is nothing inevitable about the fact that he used it to such advantage -- and even if there was, there is nothing inevitable about the success that followed that

Conclusion 2: Therefore, we measure the success of Vince not by the advantages he enjoyed from being located in New York, but by what he did to leverage that into the success he enjoyed.

 

-----------------

 

Addendum:

There's nothing inevitable about any of the creative moves I've outlined in this thread. Nothing inevitable about Wrestlemania as a concept. About so many of the things Vince did. Try imagining the company being run by Vince Sr into the 1990s and tell me what happens.

[jdw]

Alright... let's see where we were...

 

I made an argument for how WWF changed wrestling here. The "one" major innovation was going national? Are you fucking serious?

Alright... let's take a look at this...

 

1. He turned wrestling into entertainment that competed not with sports, but with other TV shows by making it more about the CHARACTERS and STORIES than about the action in the ring.

That's why The Destroyer wrestled a Bear in the 60s. Because bears took the field NFL games, played outfield in Major League Baseball, played for Matt Busby in the 60s, etc. Right...

 

As far as characters and stories, that went back before Vince even promoted the business.

 

Wrestling was entertainment back to the 20s. Don't be stupid and think otherwise.

Pathetic attempt at a knockdown strawman argument that misses the fundamental through line of my argument. For a guy who is so clever, you seem to have tunnel vision when reading what other people say.

 

I'll pull out the through line for you.

Okay...

 

 

the change between his vision and what his dad was putting out is night and day. What's the difference:

 

- Bob Backlund putting Greg Valentine in a headlock for 10 minutes = change of channel for casual viewer or "Can we please watch something else now?" from the wife.

- Cyndi Lauper telling Albano to stick it on Piper's Pit = ooh this is interesting for casual viewer or a wife who is as invested in the storyline as you might be.

We're talking about innovation relative to the rest of pro wrestling, so let's think about this for a moment.

 

A. Apples & Oranges

 

The first one is a House Show match, not TV. Backlund and Valentine never had a TV match while Backlund was champ, certainly not one with a 10 minute headlock.

 

The second one is an angle to draw fans to shows.

 

B. Not Innovative

 

You may come back and try to say that the innovation is using an "entertainer" in angles. That wasn't innovative in 1984. We know this because of:

 

 

Which was kind of famous. It also was hardly the first time people cross over from non-wrestling into wrestling angles / storylines.

 

C. It wasn't successful

 

The Lauper vs Albano angle bombed. Badly. The advance at MSG for it was so bad that they had to add Hogan to the card very late to try to get the crowd up, and even that didn't work because there wasn't enough time to sell it.

 

01/23/84 (26,292): Hogan vs Shiek

02/20/84 (26,092): Hogan vs Orndorff

03/25/84 (26,092): Backlund vs Valentine / Piper & Schultz vs Andre & Snuka

04/23/84 (22,091): Backlund vs Valentine / Sheik vs Slaughter

05/21/84 (25,000): Hogan vs Schultz / Slaughter vs Sheik

06/16/84 (26,092): Slaughter vs Sheik

07/23/84 (15,000): Richter (w/ Lauper) vs Moolah (w/ Lou Albano) / late added Hogan vs Valentine

 

Those higher number include overflow over into the Felt Forum.

 

Vince didn't innovate here. He wasn't even terribly successful with this one.

 

 

Is that "genius"? It's certainly something that few other promoters had had the vision to do. He changed the demographic from just men or sports fan to "the whole family".

Wrestling's fan base had rarely been "just men" or "sports fans". Go on a board where fans started watching pro wrestling in the 70s or earlier and ask them when they became a fan. The majority will say they started when they were kids. Watch old tapes in the 70s and early 80s and you'll see kids there and also women.

 

Frankly the sport never drew massive amounts of women, even acts like the R'n'R Express or the Von Erichs. They drew more women that some acts, but it's never been a case that 50% or even 33% of the crowd are women... unless we talk about All Japan Womens.

 

Vince didn't innovate here. He simply tried to get *more* kids in. It would be like saying Vince Sr was innovative by making Pedro champ to draw PR fans. No, that wasn't innovative: promoters had long been working to draw ethnic fans. In turn, promoters always had been working to draw kids.

 

Watch the Von Erich vs Freebirds feud in 1983. You'll see kids and women in the crowd.

 

 

You can rag on Moonsoon as much as you like as a play-by-play guy, but thinking mainstream, think of successful show formats, think of people who don't like wrestling being converted into fans.

?

 

Gorilla was a former pro wrestler who became an announcer. This isn't innovative. In fact, there really was nothing innovative about Gorilla's pbp work. He was, for better or worse, just another pro wrestling announcer. You liked him. People in Memphis liked Lance Russell.

 

 

Vince's "genius" lies partly in being able to get guys over before they've even put a foot in the ring. His grand innovation is in thinking about the product as a TV show first, traditional wrestling logic that says "a guy gets over through wins" takes a backseat.

The Masked Marvel was over before he set foot in the ring.

 

That was 1915.

 

Getting guys over before they set foot in a territory was pretty common back in the olden days. New guys would be scheduled to come into town. They'd get a lot of run in the local papers. Sometimes they would get shot straight to the main events. Sometimes they would get booked against the local "pass through" guy, which at could be a semifinal on the card and actually drawing on a level if the guy got a push.

 

On the other hand...

 

Very few people in the WWF came in and got pushes without working squashes. In fact... none. Other than Hogan, but he'd been in the WWF before and...

 

Wait, check that... even Hogan worked TV before getting his Title Shot:

 

WWF @ Allentown, PA - Agricultural Hall - January 3, 1984

Championship Wrestling taping:

1/7/84 - included the announcement that Hulk Hogan & Bob Backlund would face Mr. Fuji & Tiger Chung Lee the following week:

Bob Backlund (w/ Hulk Hogan) defeated Samula (w/ Afa, Sika, & Capt. Lou Albano) via disqualification at 4:34 when the Samoans and Albano attacked Backlund as he applied the Crossface Chicken Wing to his opponent; the bout was to have been Backlund and his mystery partner against the Samoans but Albano refused to the match, instead making it a one-on-one encounter; early in the match, the Samoans tried double teaming Backlund, with Backlund then going backstage and returning with Hogan; after the contest, Hogan and Backlund cleared the ring of the four other men; moments later, Gene Okerlund conducted an interview with Backlund & Hogan in which Backlund said Hogan had changed his ways, with Hogan then thanking Backlund and the fans for bringing him back to the WWF (Hulk Still Rules)

1/14/84:

Hulk Hogan & Bob Backlund defeated Mr. Fuji & Tiger Chung Lee at 4:12 when Hogan pinned Lee with the legdrop

 

Which was before this:

 

WWF @ New York City, NY - Madison Square Garden - January 23, 1984 (26,292 which included 4,000 at Felt Forum)

Hulk Hogan (sub. for Bob Backlund) pinned WWF World Champion the Iron Sheik (w/ Freddie Blassie) at 5:40 with the legdrop to win the title after ramming the champion back-first against the turnbuckle to escape the Camel Clutch

 

So even Hogan was on TV doing squashes.

 

Did Vince use vignettes like the Million Dollar Man stuff? Sure. But prior to Vince people would use out of town video, or taped interviews by the Champ sent in to pimp up a match that was coming into town to defend the title.

 

Simple fact is that wrestlers were gotten over in a variety of ways before wrestling. Nothing terribly innovative from Vince here. He just did it very well.

 

 

He understood that get over with a mainstream audience EVERY wrestler needed their own identity.

 

Vince took wrestling from being an underground carny "sport" to something mainstream credibility.

Wrestling was mainstream after the war... and in the 20s... and in the 10s.

 

But the word "credibility"? Wrestling had no more credibility under Vince that it did before him. It was fake entertainment before, and fake entertainment after.

 

 

I've tried to make it real simple for your semi-autistic brain. How in the hell can you read that and pull "oh what about wrestling bears" out of your arse? Well? How is a wrestling bear anything to do with the argument I've laid out?

You were wrong on every point you made. That was the case when you originally posted it, and I thought it a waste of time to respond to because half the people would think I was simply kicking you in the balls again while the other half would be wondering how you could be wrong yet again on Every Theory You Come Up With.

 

My argument is that he used these elements to popularise something that was marginal, and not in the mainstream media.

What we were talking about that you dragged this over here to question was my comment that Vince "innovation" was Going National. So what you've dragged over are a bunch of things that are either not innovative or simply wrong.

 

Vince used Hulk Hogan to popularize pro wrestling. That wasn't innovative.

 

Vince used Television to popularize pro wrestling. That wasn't innovative.

 

Vince used the media to popularize pro wrestling. That wasn't innovative.

 

Seriously... I know you're going to try to think it was, but I've got a slew of New York Times and Chicago Tribune articles at home from the days before there was Radio and Television that show promoters were *always* trying to use the mainstream media to popularize pro wrestling. It went out of fashion as the 30s went on, and then after WWII is came back into fashion with television, then it went out of fashion, then it came back. Vince using the mainstream media to popularize pro wrestling is as innovative as one piece swim suits coming back.

 

 

You've turned it into "he injected entertainment into wrestling"

No... you've failed to bring Innovation to a discussion about Innovation.

 

Some classic jdw bullshit shifting of the goalposts to try to win an argument.

No... it's classic Jerry to not have a clue about what the comment was about and try to drift it over onto something else... and on top of it being wrong about everything. Either of them would be pretty funny, but doing the double time and again is rip roaring funny.

 

If I was marking your post as a paper,

If you were a teacher marking posts and grading in this fashion, I'd have little problem getting your thrown off the faculty for being a shitty teacher.

 

 

You haven't understood the argument. You haven't responded to the argument on its own terms. I'm told you have legal training. Objection your honour: Irrelevant or immaterial.

I didn't change the goalposts, Jerry. You did. I made a statement in this post:

 

http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?show...21042&st=26

 

I'm not terribly sold that the 80s WWF altered the way wrestling was made. It took advantage of changing technologies, though hardly the only company to do so and frankly beaten to it by a few. It just did it better, and figured out stuff that slipped by others. The one major innovation of the WWF was going National, which isn't really relevant to Movies because they've always been national.

You went batshit over it in the next post:

 

I made an argument for how WWF changed wrestling here. The "one" major innovation was going national? Are you fucking serious?

Which I responded to, and then again when you followed up with more nonsense further down the thread.

 

You question the WWF altering the way "wrestling was made" and that it's one major innovation was going national. You then tossed out a prior post of yours that gave no evidence of Vince changing how pro wrestling was made nor any innovations. Your examples, at their very best, were what I said they were: "did it better" than others.

 

I've been consistent through the whole discussion on the WWF's innovations in the 80s. You're the one who has gone off into la-la-land.

 

 

You also seem to be fundamentally incapable of drawing a distinction between on the one hand, "who did it first", and on the other "who made it big with the idea". I talked about David Bowie and Lou Reed. We can think of countless examples in history of guys taking other people's ideas and making it big.

And you seem incapable of seeing my comment "did it better" and taking existing tech, etc. You do it so often that I use to think it was willfull ignorance, but now just chalk it up to ignorance period.

 

 

But so what? Innovation is not invention.

No shit. But Jerry... you're not even offering up any examples of Novel Ideas of Vince.

 

So he had Lauper. Big fucking deal. Jerry Lawler did Kaufman before that, including getting it onto a national TV show that broadcast out of Vince's backyard. He used it to draw a pretty damn good amount of money, working a feud that he was still able to go back to years later.

 

Vince worked Lauper. It bombed. He then tried to work the Freebirds into it. That bombed as the Birds got run out of town. He went back to it with his top heel in the company as the only way to get heat on it: Piper. That was of little impact to the point that Piper slid over to Hogan for Mania while Lauper slid back down to the Womens Title.

 

Vince didn't even do Lauper better than Lawler relative to the market size (i.e. the National WWF vs the Local Memphis).

 

I could pick apart every one of your "innovation" examples like that. Good lord, you dragged Monsoon over here and there wasn't a thing innovative about him.

 

The problem is that you know very little about pro wrestling, despite your claim that you've gotten several degrees in it. So when you see something that New To Jerry, you start thinking it's New To Pro Wrestling. And you end up being terribly wrong.

 

 

Vince was not an inventor, he was an innovator. He also made it big.

Vince made it big by getting Hogan and going National. He went National in two key ways: going into open territories (like California) and attacking the second largest promotion in the country, the AWA. The key thing in attacking the AWA? Stealing their #1 babyface and making him the WWF's champion.

 

The innovation in all that is Going National. Even the going to war with the AWA isn't super innovative: any number of people stole territories from others, like Jarrett & Lawler taking Memphis, and Watts over times cutting out McGuirk. Vince did it better, but even then his key methods weren't terribly unique (stealing talent, running house shows, and running his TV in the market).

 

So... heh.

 

 

This is not about All Japan Wrestling or how many people that house show in 1988 drew, it's about creativity -- something I've yet to see any evidence at all that you have an iota of understanding about.

It's actually about more than creativity.

 

JKR was "creative" when she wrote the early Harry Potter books. She wasn't very innovative in them. They were wildly successful.

 

Wild success doesn't mean someone is innovative.

 

 

Corrected, though you're not self reflective enough to see it in yourself.

 

Or perhaps better stated with:

 

 

Tugg Speedman: In a weird way I had to sort of just free myself up to believe that is was ok to be stupid or dumb.

Kirk Lazarus: To be a moron.

Tugg Speedman: Yeah!

Kirk Lazarus: To be moronical.

Tugg Speedman: Exactly, to be a moron.

Kirk Lazarus: An imbecile.

Tugg Speedman: Yeah!

Kirk Lazarus: Like the dumbest mother fucker that ever lived.

Tugg Speedman: [pause] When I was playing the character.

What is this meant to be?

It's rather self evident.

 

Anyway, back to the topic:

 

There are elements of this discussion you haven't addressed.

Okay... and let's see if they have anything at all to do with My Point that you went batshit over.

 

 

A key part of my argument is wrestling "before and after" Vince. Your claim is that the only innovation is going national. I think that's demonstrably untrue, and patent nonsense.

No...

 

My claim was:

 

I'm not terribly sold that the 80s WWF altered the way wrestling was made. It took advantage of changing technologies, though hardly the only company to do so and frankly beaten to it by a few. It just did it better, and figured out stuff that slipped by others. The one major innovation of the WWF was going National, which isn't really relevant to Movies because they've always been national.

Setting aside all your other goofiness, When does "one major" become "only"?

 

You don't read so well, do you?

 

 

Your argument rests on saying "oh but there was national TV before ... DEMONT NETWORK" "Oh but there was entertainment before ... WRESTLING BEARS" "Let's just look at the facts ... FACTS"

My response to you one of your batshit points was here, which you see to have forgotten:

 

http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?show...t&p=5563783

 

 

How about we also look at the product, and what was actually presented on TV. I pointed to Vince Sr's product. We can also look at the way guys like Sam Muchnick presented wrestling.

Sam presented his wrestling his way. Which I might add, I don't think any of us have watch a heck of a lot of the week-to-week television and promoting he did when he ran St Louis. I'm not sure I'd hold it up as an example.

 

I can't really understand the point of view that says "there was not a seismic shift in the way wrestling was presented between the 70s and the 80s". It's so obvious that there was a massive change that goes beyond simply "going national". It's more than simply "there was entertainment".

Wrestling was always Entertainment:

 

"I am merely a purveyor of entertainment." The bland inscrutable Curley replies when someone asks him if his dodge is on the square. In all the years I’ve known him, I’ve never heard him say his pitch was a phoney, nor have I heard him claim it was the Mc Coy. And I’ve never bothered to inquire, since I know what the response would be. It is like asking someone, "Do you still beat your mother-in-law? Answer "yes" or "no".

 

Probably half the folk who attend the Curley carnivals are hep to the hooligans who entertain them. The other 50 per cent of the spectators - the foreign born, the confirmed rassling addicts and such - are equally certain they are witnessing the genuine article. That has been the secret of Curley’s success. He satisfies the scoffers and the believers too. He has made rassling a state of mind. It is everyone to his own opinion and nobody gets hurt - including the athletes.

THE DETROIT FREE PRESS, April 27, 1936 by Jack Miley

 

That's one of the greatest promoters of all time making that naked admission. Hell, that's not only before Vince was born, but before my Mother was even born... and she's 77 later this year.

 

As far as wrestling getting "more entertainment" after Vince, I posted the Lawler-Kaufman thingy above. You're going to call that isolated. How about this one:

 

http://www.wwe.com/videos/jimmy-garvin-and...1-1983-26059348

 

There's a whole lotta Garvin vs David stuff involving Sunshine before that, just in case you think that Savage & Elizabeth innovated anything.

 

 

I have to ask you: why are you so against giving credit in this area?

Because you have no grasp of pro wrestling's long history of being Entertainment. Again, this guy says hello:

 

 

 

What's the big problem with admitting that Vince McMahon changed some of the wrestling paradigms of the previous generation?

He did: he went National.

 

I mean anyone with an ounce of sense can see it, why can't you?

Perhaps you can offer us some actual Facts like you said you would, and we can look them over to see if they carry as much weight as the "Facts" that you've offered up so far which turned out to be not very factual.

 

 

Is that really what you're saying? That because there were entertaining elements in wrestling before Vince, we can't credit Vince with anything but going national?

I credit Vince with a lot. I'm the one who said he's the greatest pro wrestling promoter in US history. I could list two dozen things that I'd give him credit for without breaking a sweat. I just don't think there are many things that would be "innovative" other than Going National.

 

 

Has it ever occurred to you that the change in direction and the massive success are somehow linked?

Oh of course a "change in direction" was directly linked. Stealing Hogan from Verne to replace Backlund was a change in direction that was one of the two most important things to success. The other was expanding beyond his large, profitable and safe territory and going National to target primarily (i) open territories, (ii) Verne's large territory, and then (iii) other key markets was a very important change in direction.

 

 

That things like the merchandising and the boom in gates are somehow linked?

Of course merch is related to more people going to the WWF's National Shows than their Regional Shows, and the company being Successful. Kind of hard to sell merch if your product isn't successful. How much Pacific Rim merch was sold this year relative to Iron Man stuff? It's not that Iron Man was innovative this year: it was just really successful.

 

 

That the family-friendly entertainment-heavy product and 90,000+ at Wrestlemania 3 are somehow linked?

Wrestling was family friendly before Vince. Bruno vs Larry set record business in 1980. Flair vs Race did massive business up and down the coast at Starcade 1983. Flair vs Kerry did huge business in the first half of 1984.

 

Wrestlemania 3 drew 90K because Hogan vs Andre was built up as the biggest match in history in a match put on by the then most successful promotion in history featuring the greatest draw in pro wrestling history at his peak.

 

Family shit? Eh. It was a pro wrestling match that drew a ton of people.

 

 

Well?

You're still batting about .000 here. Perhaps that's a sports analogy that goes over your head. It's a Clean Sheet, Jerry... and you're on the short end.

 

 

There's something known as a "stickiness" factor. You are one of those guys who sits there with his fingers in his ears just shouting "Ah but Hogan, ah but Hogan" over and over again. You attribute the success to 1. Vince had Hogan, 2. Vince went national.

Some you're admitting that I'm giving Vince credit. Good...

 

 

Maybe you just lack the imagination or the necessary understanding of social phenomena to see that it has to be more than just those two factors. Hogan is the product, "going National" is the strategic business move.

Good, glad we can agree on that. Other than the imagination thing.

 

But there is more required. Marketing. Packaging. And this is the key:

Okay.

 

I believe I talked about the key marketing and packaging elements in a prior post.

 

TV tapings and the equiv of syndication? Existed before the WWF.

 

Closed circuit and it's successor PPV? Closed circuit existed in pro wrestling before Wrestlemania, and PPV existed in boxing and was just waiting for someone to use it in wrestling. The required what boxing was: National business.

 

National TV on a Network? Oh my god... that existed in the 40s and 50s!

 

Split rosters? JCP was doing it before Vince, as were other promotions. To a degree, the WWWF was doing a little of it before Vince, and probably a lot more than we're aware of if we had the results.

 

Characters?

And pointed to George.

 

Vince's key marketing and character things weren't innovative. They just worked on existing things in pro wrestling. He just did them well.

 

 

- Getting people who don't watch wrestling and have never watched wrestling invested in the product.

Wrestling has always had a turnover in fan base. It's always losing people, retaining people, and adding new. There isn't anything different here.

 

My barber can talk about Blasie and Tolos and Mascaras. He then faded out of wrestling. He then can talk about Hogan and Macho. He then faded out of wrestling. He can talk about Stone Cold and the Rock. He then faded out of wrestling. He can now talk about Cena.

 

You act as if every WWF fan of the 80s started watching the WWF in January 1984 or some point after that. Not the case.

 

 

- How do you get KIDS talking about wrestling in the playground?

Talk to older fans whose fandom goes back to being kids. They'll tell you they talked about pro wrestling before Vince took over. They did it with their local territories. This is nothing more than your imagination running wild.

 

 

- And this one is particularly special: How do you get people who've never even seen a show, to come to the show?

It's kind of hard to go to a show without watching a show since it's Television that tells you when it's on. There are always people going to their first show. Has been the case since pro wrestling was invented. And promoters have used newspapers, radio, tv, personal appearances, advertising and local promotion to get people to come out.

 

 

That's the area in which Vince left the competition dead.

Vince left the competition dead for a lot of reasons. The biggest was having Hogan (for whom there was no competition), taking open territories (where there was no competition), and attacking Verne with Verne's old #1 (who Verne was too stupid to make his champ).

 

 

I think your picture isn't fully fleshed out. It's an overly functional view of how things went down. It lacks nuance. It doesn't tell the full story because your approach in looking at the figures alone -- THE FACTS -- is one dimensional.

*laugh*

 

 

I question your methodolgy.

Given how shitty your methodology has been in various threads, that's a good thing.

 

 

I question your ability to see the difference between the way something like Dory Funk Jr. vs. Jack Brisco was booked, and who it played to, and the way something like Wrestlemania 3 was built, and who that played to.

I question whether I used Funk-Brisco as an example.

 

On the other hand, there is a rather obvious similarity on how they were built:

 

Dory had the belt, and Jack wanted it.

 

Hogan had the belt, and Andre wanted it.

 

That was the very specific angle, and why Heenan's talk worked for Andre: why hadn't he gotten a title shot, and why not just ask for one?

 

The build to Wrestlemania 3 for the match that sold is was very simple, and really little more than old school wrestling that an Entertainment Angle.

 

 

I think you underestimate the shift and growth in demographic. It's not just numbers. It's not just taking territory, and stealing talent and fans. It's making new fans.

California was a dead region where two territories recently died.

 

The WWF didn't promote in California.

 

Then the WWF promoted in California.

 

25M potential new fans.

 

I could do that for every new state that the WWF went to. *Everyone* was a potential New Fan to the WWF. That number of New Fans blows away the potential of New Fans that Vince could have gotten out of his Existing Territory, pretending for a moment that Vince was trading in 100% Old Fans for 100% New Fans in his Existing Territory.

 

Really, Jerry... an massive amount of it was demographics.

 

 

It's turning people onto the show who'd never in a million years would have watched Backlund and co.

Which is little different that turning fans onto Pedro who didn't watch Bruno. Turning people onto Bruno who didn't watch Rocca or Rogers. Or Rocca turning out fans in New York when the area had been dead since the 30s.

 

Or Gorgeous George and Leone turning people onto going to wrestling when they hadn't gone to see the others.

 

Lawler and Fargo were huge in Memphis. It doesn't mean that Memphis was always huge. They turned out fans who hadn't been going or watching.

 

This has happened time and again in pro wrestling. Hell, we saw it in WCW when their ratings and house show business went through the roof after sucking for close to a decade.

 

Vince and the WWF were hardly the only folks to do this.

 

 

But I seriously question your ability to see that because you seem to process things in a systemised and mechanistic way. It's a flaw in your thinking. Overly functional, hung up on numbers to the point where it blinds you to things that are patently obvious.

The flaw in your thinking is that you can't see beyond the Shinny that has your attention. You see Vince and the 80s, and can't comprehend Gorgeous George and the post war wrestling boom. That's one example, but that is the case with every "fact" you bring up: you can't seen beyond that Shinny to see if there are other similar examples.

 

That's why you keep saying stupid things.

 

 

This was long. Let me try to sum up this argument neatly and logically. I just want to be absolutely clear that I'm saying. I don't want any movement of the goalposts or smokescreens or strawmen.

 

Argument 1: Vince McMahon changed the way wrestling was presented

Okay...

 

 

Premise 1: There was something about the way wrestling was presented before the 1980s that turned off the mainstream audience

Main stream what?

 

Fans? Local wrestling did being ratings in places like Memphis. Wrestling drew all over the place around the country before 1984. You're basically saying all of those fans are non-mainstream people? I think you'd get some disagreements from people who were fans of those earlies eras.

 

Papers? Media? You can find results in local newspapers all around the country prior to 1984, along with pimping of coming shows. Mid-Atlantic Gateway has a lot of those clippings up from the 70s: it's how we know results.

 

In New York? Well, the Times had them through the 30s. Then they dropped them. The Times didn't carry results for each MSG cards in the 80s after Vince took over.

 

 

Premise 2: In the 1980s, people who didn't watch wrestling were turned onto watching the WWF

In every era, people who didn't watch pro wrestling turned onto watching pro wrestling.

 

Example?

 

I turned onto watching JCP in the 80s before watching the WWF. That's despite being in a "WWF Region" (California).

 

 

Conclusion 1: Therefore, the WWF changed something about the way wrestling was presented to attract these new fans

Conclusion 1: Jerry's Premise 1 & 2 are faulty as usual.

 

 

Premise 3: Although some of these new fans came from going national and invading other territories, it is not the case that the WWF simply took existing wrestling fans from every other region; they created new fans. Many of them were children.

25M California

3M Arizona

3M Colorado

11M Florida

11M Illinois

5M Indiana

3M Iowa

2M Kansas

9M Michigan

4M Minnesota

5M Missouri

1M Nevada

1M New Mexico

10M Ohio

2M Oregon

2M Utah

4M Washington

5M Wisconsin

 

That's 106M people who were potentially "new fans" who didn't go to WWF shows before 1984 because the WWF didn't promote regularly (or at all) in their states. The US population in 1984 was around 235M people. 45% of the country.

 

About half the rest of the country are places that Vince had issues with: JCP's territory (eventually including Georgia), Von Erich Land (Texas), Wattsville and Jarrett-LawlerLand. Above 60M of the remaining 129M.

 

Then there are some states like the Dakotas, Nebraska, Alaska, etc that either the WWF didn't eventually go into, are small, or don't have much of a pot to piss in. Without going back to look at the calculations in the Vince & Hogan vs the World Thread where I took the time to break down what part of NVA that Vince had before expansion, let's say that Vince had a base of 60M in his Existing Territory. Maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less.

 

So you're hanging your hat on Vince finding New Fans in his Existing Territory of 60M as being more important than the 106M All New Fans in the territories he added?

 

Let's get this formula down pat...

 

Existing Fans in 60M - Existing Fans Leaving in 60M = Existing Fans in 60M who Stayed

 

Existing Fans in 60M who Stayed + New Fans in same 60M > 106M Potential New Fans in New Territories

 

Yep... that makes logic...

 

Here's reality:

 

The overwhelming majority of New WWF Fans came from the Added Territories/Regions rather than out of the Original WWF Territory.

 

 

Premise 4: Although Hulk Hogan was integral to attracting these new fans, he was simply the product; as the promoter Vince McMahon was able to package him and the rest of his show in a way that optimised its 'stickiness factor'

We know this isn't true because Vince tried to package other people to draw like Hogan and wasn't able to until Stone Cold took off in 1998.

 

Warrior was simply product. He bombed.

 

Savage was simply product. He drew well as Champ. He didn't draw close to Hogan prior to and after that on even a remotely consistent basis.

 

There are lots of other examples. It's a waste of time to list them. The reality is that Vince Packaging & Presentation = Everyone Draws in the 80s has long been show to be false. Chris posted some recent data on what we all knew.

 

 

Conclusion 2: Therefore, the WWF's success in the 1980s is attributable to more than simply going national and having Hogan

Conclusion 2: Jerry's premises continue to be factually wrong.

 

 

[Modus ponens P1, P2, C3, P3, P4, C2]

 

Argument 2: jdw gives us an incomplete and mistaken view of Vince McMahon's impact on wrestling in the 1980s

Argument 2: Jerry's command of facts and reality are wrong.

 

 

Premise 1: You can't get a handle on fundamental changes in presentation or understand social phenomena by looking at the numbers alone ("the results"); to understand social phenomena truly you need to look at the finer details: not only what ("the product"), but how (how that product is marketed, positioned and sold).

This would help if any of your finer details were correct. When they are all wrong, then it's you who can't get a handle on anything.

 

 

Premise 2: jdw in the "Vince McMahon vs. The World" thread looked at numbers alone

We actually looked at more than numbers, but since you couldn't even get the basic stuff in there right, what the heck.

 

 

Conclusion 2: This gives jdw a one-dimensional view of the story that is blind to the finer details; his methodology produces an incomplete picture

Conclusion 2: Jerry can't count that this is actually Conclusion 3.

 

I mean... that captures the whole discussion right there.

 

Let alone that the two Premise are again wrong.

 

Premise 3: Innovation and invention are not the same thing

Premise 4: jdw denies innovation by pointing to earlier examples, therefore he mistakes innovation for invention

Premise 5: Vince McMahon was an innovator not an inventor

You've yet to give a single factual example of Vince's innovation.

 

In turn, I have given an example of his Major Innovation:

 

He went fucking National.

 

 

Conclusion 2: Therefore, jdw mistakenly denies he was an innovator

Conclusion 2: this is actually Conclusion 4

 

In addition, we have agreed repeatedly prior to this "Conclusion 2.3" that JDW thinks Vince was an Innovator. So it took is this far into the discussion when you drop down to Lying Jerry mode to misrepresent what I said. I had a bet with myself on this...

 

 

So setting aside the Lie, what really is the case is that we disagree on the Innovation:

 

jdw: " The one major innovation of the WWF was going National"

 

Jerry: Vince innovated left and right... but my examples aren't really innovative... well... most of my examples aren't really pointing to anything anyway."

 

 

Conclusion 3: Therefore, jdw gives us an incomplete and mistaken view of Vince McMahon's impact on wrestling in the 1980s

Conclusion 3: this is really Conclusion 5

 

The discussion wasn't about Vince impact on wrestling in the 80s: it was about what I thought was his one major innovation.

 

If you'd like to have a discussion on Vince's impact on wrestling in the 80s, you can run with this:

 

Vince had two major impacts in the 80s: (i) he created a strong national wrestling promotion which in turn (ii) had a contributory effect of every other major promoter at the start of Expansion either being out of the business or with a decayed promotion/territory.

 

He had other impacts, but in terms of the wrestling business, those were the two major ones.

[jdw]

Red Flag Narcissistic Behaviors

That's pretty funny.

[efrim]

sweet jesus

[jdw]

And to bring this around to my original point, he had New York City while the other guys couldn't claim to have as much stroke in Chicago or Los Angeles, the two runners-up to NYC as major American cities (or unofficial capitals if you like). If Vince, Sr. was the big cheese in a place like Albuquerque, New Mexico or Des Moines, Iowa and someone else ran NYC, we'd be talking about that someone else right now.

It's more than that:

 

* Vince had NYC

* Verne had Chicago

* No One had Los Angeles

 

Vince then did this:

 

* kept NYC which

* went to war with Verne over Chicago after stealing Verne's #1 babyface

* took the open Los Angeles

 

So yes, as we talked a ton about in the Vince & Hogan vs The World Thread, Vince had the perfect territory to go national from: NYC, Boston, Philly, DC, Baltimore, Pitt and other quality New England cities/metros. He also had some good timing of so much key area of the country "open" on one level or another, and Hogan sitting out there because Verne didn't grasp what he had or how to cash in on it.

 

Base To Build From + Perfect Tool + Various Easy Opportunities + Right Plan To Attack Tougher Opportunities

 

Right promoter with the right vision with the right wrestler at the right time. Stars aligned.

[jdw]

sweet jesus

I aim to please.

 

John

[jdw]

Because there is a risk of you know who returning to this thread, I have to write this out in logical form to mitigate against any prospect of having my words twisted or misrepresented. With such characters around, this is unfortunately a necessary measure.

Who hell, you're prior "logical form" was so screwed up it would be pointless to spend much time with this. I will give you credit for getting your conclusions numbered correctly.

[JerryvonKramer]

Separate numbering for the two different arguments. A kid of 3 years old could see that. Kind of bears out my point doesn't it that you're so focused on "winning", that your eye is so on "the prize" -- whatever the hell that might be -- that you get this tunnel vision which leads you to make these really petty non-points. Also, I was saying that the action figures drove the gate, not that toy sales were an indication of success. The fact your mind only went that way suggests that you're not really engaging with anything being said, but just trying to score points, as per usual.

 

I'll tell you: I don't care how many people respect your opinion or how many people think mine is a total joke. Couldn't give less of a shit. The shift in the way wrestling looked and was presented in the 1980s is so patently, transparently and completely obvious that it really shouldn't have to be discussed any more than having it pointed out. It's like trying to argue that Elvis didn't change music. The fact you refuse to acknowledge it should be staggering, if it wasn't you.

 

Pointing back to the 1920s or Gorgeous George changes nothing. Your complete inability to distinguish precedent from innovation is laughable in its sheer block-headedness. By the same logic Shakespeare didn't innovate in drama either.

 

But it's just testament to the sort of person you are: one not really worth bothering with. Somewhere in the Bible it says "As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another". Not so with you. You serve only to blunt and mangle, and drain the life out of everything you touch. You've taken plenty of potshots at my intelligence and knowledge and so on, plenty of them. I won't take them from someone with a mind as mundane as yours. I can always gain knowledge, you can never stop being you.

[Matt D]

John,

 

I know you posted on how you don't have time to watch wrestling right now since you are watching so much other stuff, etc. As blisteringly entertaining as this was, I still would have rather seen you watch some stuff you haven't seen before and write about it. Might I suggest the 79-80 Portland that's currently online.

[Johnny Sorrow]

sweet jesus

I aim to please.

 

 

Who?

[Graham Crackers]

jdw vs JerryVonKramer is the kind of feud that could kill a territory.

[thebrainfollower]

Guys HHH called me in tears. He's clearly realized he needs to work on his long winded promos and is using some of the posts in this thread as inspiration.

 

 

But yeah there's arguing a point and there's..........hell you know what I am not kidding. You two should fight in a cage, I think it would be more productive than this.

 

Having said that I think JVK is right about thing. Vince McMahon was an innovator. Just because SOME of these things existed in the freaking 10's and 20's should not discount what a different, new product the presentation of the WWF was to anything wrestling in the US had done in a long long time. If anyone else really can't see that then they are just arguing out of blind hatred or ignorance of the facts.

[evilclown]

I've tried to make it real simple for your semi-autistic brain

As the parent of two kids with autism, please go ahead and fuck off.

[Hollinger.]

Yeah, fuck yourself Parv.