It was disappointing to see the initial results of the ECW product, but they were predictable. It was understandable that, given the reigns of a product of which he never followed, Vince McMahon would deliver a letdown full of basic mistakes. What magic could he possibly work when his own products’ formula is suffering dearly, with Smackdown in particular need of professional resuscitation?
The result was nothing short of abysmal. Met with the challenge of creating a new brand and a cadre of stars to give it structure, WWE proved itself vastly unprepared to get ECW off the ground. Instead, like a Wright brothers prototype airplane, the new ECW brand puttered with a mediocre, sloppy pay per view before crashing and burning two nights later with a WCW Thunder-level showing on the Sci Fi Channel.
It was most tragic of all for Vince McMahon, who is badly in need vindication. Even for a man worth millions, an ego as large as that of the genetic jackhammer needs constant stroking. I will not question that he is committed to the success of ECW. “It is terrifying for Vince to imagine ECW failing,” said a WWE employee speaking to the Pro Wrestling Torch anonymously. “He failed at football, but that’s excusable because he’s known for his wrestling genius. Failing at a wrestling project is not an option. That’s why ECW will be profitable, one way or another, eventually.”
The second week of television gave hope, not only to Vince, but to his forgiving constituency that never would have given up so soon, but still felt betrayed and dejected. The internet wrestling fans were up in arms with the surplus venom they have stored up for every time Vince stumbles. How could anyone forget that Vince’s greatest successes have come when he has adapted to the changing climate? His proverbial genius emanates from his stubbornness, his headstrong persistence; but it only works when armed with a good idea upon which to execute, and he does not come up with most of them. WWE is a promotional tool more than it is anything else, and the heart and soul of it is the dogged showman. And it is the machinery through which ideas and talent that come from other places have become expediently branded, professionally packaged, and sold by popular demand.
So it was no surprise to see the artistic signature of Paul Heyman on the second show, emerging—playbook in hand—from the dark like Orson Wells, ready to resume his natural role as ECW’s deus ex machina and supreme leader. Generally, I trust Vince’s ability to step back and allow good ideas to flourish and manage them well enough to preserve the wholesale potential of the product. He did it expertly with Vince Russo, and at other times, but has failed in the last several years because of the influences of the incompetent, overpaid yes-men (and Triple H, who deserves his own category) that have formed his inner circle.
Still, I have problems with the basic concept, even as WWE continues investing significant resources in adding a third touring brand. The standard of success that WWE and wrestling analysts are impressing on ECW is whether or not the company can make a profit. “We definitely believe ECW can be as big of a brand as RAW or SmackDown,” said CEO Linda McMahon on the investor’s conference call earlier this month, stressing the importance of using the ECW video library that WWE purchased during the bankruptcy proceedings for that company. WWE’s public position is that the ECW project merely leverages what WWE already has to create additional revenue streams. Therefore, the costs, estimated in the low millions, are a small price to pay for long-term profitability.
In the mean time, Paul Heyman, the creative director for and face of the new project, has said in a recent interview that he is free to, without financial limitations, create the best and most entertaining wrestling product that he can. In an interview with the Miami Herald, he said that his main goals are the creative product, creating new stars, and looking to the future as opposed to the past.
In the coming weeks, he has an uphill battle to wage. ECW is crucially in need of a stronger creative product, underpinned by a better sense of identity as a brand of WWE that also is critical of that product, and an angle that will get people talking and make a new star.
In my column last week, I addressed a few reasons why the ECW project is a bad move for WWE to make. To restate the thesis briefly: with no indications—financial or otherwise—that there is greater interest in the WWE product (in terms of larger ratings, increased PPV buys, or live events attendance), it is not a responsible business decision to expand it, overstretching human and monetary resources, even when a possible additional profit is feasible. Instead, WWE should be increasing the quality of the two current products, creating a creative environment that encourages new ideas and scholarship, and working to maintain current fans while targeting new and relapsed fans.
Profits are not an indicator that meets the standard that a third brand should be held to, because they do not solve the problems of the first two brands, which have grown stale. In my book, ECW can only be considered a success if—and here’s where Paul Heyman comes in—creatively they can stimulate both fan interest and broader, systemic change within WWE.
RAW and SmackDown need the help because the time for a product judged by its merit and the passion it engenders from wrestling fans has come; and the time for a product that ignores fresh ideas and celebrates the incompetence of people who do not understand or appreciate the business has long gone. If WWE cannot realize that it must grow into an organization that accepts new ideas based on their merit and values the study of what makes a wrestling product work, then it is doomed to live as a mediocre niche product, constantly at conflict with its biggest and most generous benefactor—the dedicated, hardcore fan.
