The State of Pro Wrestling, Bischoff vs. Cornette

[adembroski]

Read an interesting back-and-forth through a fan between Cornette and Bischoff, and Cornette's points are interesting.

I'll start by saying Cornette is an arrogant, self-important asshole. But then, most of the wrestling industry is, so I can let that go. His views on what wrestling is (ie Sports Entertainment) vs. what it should be (Professional Wrestling) and what it needs to be to remain successful are poignant and he has a lot of respect for history.

This fan asked Bischoff a few questions and Bischoff made the point that there were few draws left in wrestling, and in fact only Cena really qualifies under his definition. The fan then went to Cornette and got a reply from him... here's what was interesting.

Cornette did not disagree. The fan's premise was that there are still draws all over the industry... Cornette said no, there aren't, and in fact, that Bischoff was pretty on the money. The trouble, however, was that Bischoff didn't acknowledge that he (plus Russo, Farrerra, McMahon, and their ilk) are the reason there are no draws.

This is a fan letter to Jim that touched on some snide comments made on Eric Bischoff's FB page and the responses.

Hey Jim had a question I thought I'd throw at you. This was prompted by a discussion that was happening on Eric Bischoff's facebook page today where he was asking "who are these alleged young guys that draw money?" and then went on to say that hardly any of the guys mentioned count because he thinks your only a draw if you sell out major arenas/set records on PPV/do millions in merchandise and crossover to mainstream culture. He also said that besides Rock/Goldberg nobody's done it without 8 years in the business, and its very clear he meant 8 years in a company the size of WWE.

Bischoff's response when people named ROH talent was to quote directly...

Bischoff: Interesting resonses.Clearly the majority of people here have NO IDEA what drawing money is. ROH is not making money on TV, PPV or arena shows. Its a backyard vanity project for marks. No disrespect to the talent who are working hard, but NUMBERS DONT LIE, THEY DONT HAVE OPINIONS AND THEY DON'T HAVE AGENDAS.

(Fan to Jim) Now personally I thought this was too narrow a definition and posted a few reasons I thought why and a few other things I thought should be considered such as talent that helps a regional company expand the number of cities they can work in and make money. He only responded to one of these comments and I thought I'd share it with you, though it has nothing to do with drawing, he ignored that:

Graham- "So with nobody setting PPV records, only WWE selling out major arenas and only Cena having any mainstream media impact, does that make him the only draw in wrestling? and if your basing it only on major arenas and PPV does that mean you can only know if you draw or not if you main event in the WWE? This definition is just to narrow!"

Bischoff- "Controversy IMO social media has become the fly paper for the most vocal and the smallest percentage of fans. Most of the people who are the most active are losers/uneducated miscreants whose only validation of self comes from readng their own comments. 90% of the viewing audience have a completely differect pov (based on REAL research)."

Graham- "Well as charming as it is for you to call me a loser I'm not posting to read myself, I'm posting in hopes of responses that will increase my understanding. I want to understand how this standard can be right, it seems counter-intuitive, I have no problem with the fact I might be wrong, but if I am I need someone else to explain to me why I am, and this is a venue I may learn that."

So my question to you is what I was trying to understand from him: How do you define a draw, and can you use a definition that only one company in the US can even achieve? And if you want to hurl a few insults at Eric while your at it thats fine by me

Thanks,
Graham

A response from JC:

Graham,

Traditionally, a guy who "draws money" means a guy who, when you have put him in main events or important programs, sells more tickets (or PPV buys these days) than other people who have been in a same/similar spot, and has done this not just once or twice but on a consistent basis. There used to be dozens and dozens of top guys who "drew money" in the territory days. Now, there are a few, and they ARE all in WWE. The problem is, as Bischoff either doesn't want to admit or is too clueless to know, is that the way people like him have changed the business is the reason, not lack of talent on the young guy's parts. In the territory days, the promoters didn't care WHO drew as long as someone did, they would push anyone they thought could draw, all their businesses were reasonably healthy, and they hadn't exposed everything/given people such bad booking and silly shit so that when angles were shot, they actually increased business. Now, these young guys are seldom put in the spot to draw to begin with because the "stars" have guaranteed contracts, and if you're paying someone main event money you keep them in the main event, so few get the CHANCE to prove they can draw money (It happens some in WWE, and rarely in TNA)--it doesn't apply in TNA to begin with as some of the biggest draws of the past 20 years work/have worked there and still haven't sold tickets/PPV's/increased ratings, because the booking and company structure itself is incompetant. Does that mean those guys "can't draw" because the company they work for has lost tens of millions and still doesn't make a profit of any real size? Also, since it's been 10 years since anyone in pro wrestling drew BIG money, not because of the talent but because of the shitty booking and poorly run companies, as well as the fact that WWE and TNA have made angles/big matches mostly meaningless by doing them too often, badly, and telling people they're all phony to begin with, someone has to be blamed--are these companies going to blame themselves, or their children or families, or "writers"? No--they blame the talent. Companies like ROH struggle because WWE and TNA have made LESS people, not MORE, interested in wrestling.

He also shows his ignorance of his current residence in a glass house--if ROH is a "backyard vanity project for marks", what is TNA, since TNA has lost tens of millions MORE than ROH has lost in the exact same time in business, doesn't that mean that ROH is behind WWE but ahead of TNA? Do we grade by gross revenue or total profit? WWE has created an environment where WWE draws as a show, like the Harlem Globetrotters or Holiday on Ice, and the stars on a particular card mean less than they ever have. To truly have guys in the business who "draw money" again, we would have to pitch out the dreck like Bischoff and others who don't respect or understand wrestling, who think they are Emmy award winning "real" TV producers, ditch the comedy writers like Russo and Stephanie McMahon's comic reading college kids, and push wrestlers who win, lose and chase championships. People will watch what wrestling is now on TV for free, and a few hundred thousand might buy the PPV's, but ticket sales for wrestling will NEVER approach what they once were without taking those steps. That is why all the guys today who are actually draws, who sell live event tickets and PPV's in big numbers, almost all work for Dana White, the most successful pro wrestling promoter in the world. He just calls it UFC. Bischoff sees no similarity bewtween MMA/UFC and pro wrestling, which is why he is doomed to be a guy that was successful for 2 years out of a 20 year career. BTW, what other executive in any company actively dislikes, disagrees with, ignores and insults the 10% of people who are most dedicated to/spend the most money on their product or service? All of his "crossover to mainstream culture" bullshit is because people like him, Hogan, McMahon, Russo, etc are all embarassed to admit they are in the wrestling business (and the business hates to admit it has them) and they all want to be "real" stars--only the Rock has done that, but I wish all I named would leave our business to try!

This is just my offhand impression of this nitwit's comments, but I think you're wasting time trying to quiz Eric Bischoff on anything other than a good hair dye, a nice tanbed, a well-fitting set of dentures and the current price of a 3 way at the Gold Club. Feel free to repost any/all of this if you want.

Jim Cornette

I think Cornette is really good at laying it out there regarding the state of pro wrestling.

Another quote from his blog that I think is huge;

Will pro wrestling as it used to be ever return? Yes it will, only it will be called UFC, and it will happen whenever the two top stars get together on their own and agree to work a two out of three series of "business matches" to make money, just as Frank Gotch and George Hackenschmidt, the two top wrestlers in the world, did in 1908 and started this whole thing.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Bischoff labeling ROH "a vanity project for marks" while working for TNA is fucking priceless.

Its amazing to me that none of the real power brokers in wrestling realise that the UFC has given people exactly what wrestling used to give them. The formula is simple and never changes...two engaging personalities don't like each other, and they will fight to settle it. Toss in a shiny gold belt, and its even more engaging.

People like Bischoff and McMahon know deep down that they are in the same exact business as UFC, but will never admit it for one simple reason - they would be admitting that Dana White is kicking their ass.

Gus Johnson: Frank, why do guys like Bobby Lashley have success in pro wretling and MMA?
Frank Shamrock: Because it's the same thing.

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

I think what Cornette has to say is pretty spot on.

[EmpireWF]

It's no secret the pro wrestling audience has shrunk over the past ten years. Some were pissed off WCW fans who never transitioned over to WWE in 2001 (or just apathetic WCW fans). Some stopped watching wrestling at some point over the following years because of what it turned into (lack of one thing or another). Some stopped watching because of the emergence of MMA.

And don't get me started on the PPV business in pro wrestling....which besides 2-3 shows from WWE a year is stagnant as ever.

Unfortunately, how long can TNA continue losing as much money as they are? At some point you have to think Bob Carter is going to get pissed the fuck off at his daughter throwing so much down the drain and say enough is enough. Then what happens? WWE is not going to sign 15 guys and bring them in. They may cherry pick some (after bringing back guys like Flair, Nash, Foley, Angle, etc.) but back to the indy's the majority go.

Supposedly, ROH is in not much better shape as far as making money goes.



They always say the business is cyclical and I recall reading/hearing somewhere (probably F4W) that every boom of the past 60 years has had to do with some innovation in television. The 1950s/Gorgeous George was the beginning of TV in this country....the 1980s with Vince taking WWF national and getting Mr. T involved....the 1990s with the Monday Night Wars expanding the audience and eventually after Tyson's involvement, WWE launched into the stratosphere.

Point being, what's left to be done? It seems like it will take a new innovation or direction from TV/etc. to get hot again...in the current structure that WWE is in...don't count on it in the next ten years.

[Warner2BruceTD]

It is, and always will be, about stars. And you need tv to create stars.

TUF made Chuck Liddell, and to a lesser extent Couture, Tito, etc, into bigger stars than ever, and UFC exploded. Lesnar's star power took it to another level. But now you can see signs of UFC struggling to make new stars as well, since the power of TUF is leveling off.

Wrestling hasn't created a true star in many years. Austin happened by accident, and they got lucky with The Rock having bloodlines and falling into their laps. WCW created Goldberg. It will happen again, the question is when?

I agree that nobody in the WWE is a good draw right now. They draw collectively. Not a single person could jump to TNA and make a difference. Maybe Cena, but I'm not even convinced he could either.

[adembroski]

Bah, I basically said what he said...nevermind.