|
|
|
|
|
Submitted by Xan on Saturday, December 24, 2005 at 3:35 PM EST
  Xan: Today I welcome as my opponent the former author of the Main Page column, "Let it Snow." Winter vs Xan was the first X-Change, and we have faced each other the most often. Today, I want to know if he thinks that RAW really needs a new GM. Winter: Good evening everyone. It's great to be back on the main page, and a pleasure to be facing my old adversary Xanman in the X-Change. I certainly feel RAW needs an authority figure of some kind. Whether this would be a general manager, commissioner or president doesn't particularly matter, as whoever they are will only be granted as much power as Vince McMahon chooses to give, but they do play an important role. Without this authority figure, who would make the main events, deal with the hiring and firing and make the decisions when matches end in controversy? The senior referee? I don't think any of us would buy that. What I'd like to see is a neutral general manager who only appears on camera when important actions must be taken, much in the way Jack Tunney and Gorilla Monsoon did during their respective roles as WWF president. The whole 'Evil GM versus top babyface superstar' thing has been way overdone, and probably should have been put to rest about 5 years ago. I don't want to see Dusty Rhodes or whoever gets the job come out every week and screw John Cena, nor do I want to see them beat up announcers or force themselves on women. Just book the matches, deal with whatever needs to be dealt with, and leave it at that. We don't need the general manager to try and become a bigger star than the WWE champion. Do I think this will happen? Hell no. Dusty Rhodes, Shane, or someone else will get the job, single out the top heel/face as the living anti-Christ, and attempt to destory them no matter what the cost, taking up 40 minutes of valuable viewing time in the proccess. And, if that's the road they choose to go down, I don't think there's anybody more suited for the job than Paul Heyman, but in the event that the WWE decide to value wrestling more than soap operas, a mild-mannered general manager with no interest in anything other than seeing wrestling matches run smoothly would be ideal. Xan: Ideal? No, actually, what would be ideal is a wrestling show that actually focused on wrestling, but hey, you can't have everything, right? Until he started what seemed to be a never-ending feud with John Cena, I actually liked the Eric Bischoff character. I liked the way he came into the organization, I actually enjoyed most of his feud with Stephanie--I say most because it's impossible to enjoy Mae Young, Moolah, and Rikishi's stinkface--and I even enjoyed the days where he was kowtowing to Triple H all the time. However, he'd pretty much run his course last year before he reinvented himself. I was really looking forward to the revamping of his character to become the guy that would let the inmates run the asylum, unless there was a match he specifically wanted to see. Unfortunately, though, that character died about a week later--or at least before the 2005 Royal Rumble, so I'm firmly in support of the decision to fire him. I am NOT however, in support of the decision to replace him. While I won't deny that if someone that's potentially as shocking, noteworthy, and controversial as Bischoff was upon his original appointment in 2002 could make for some entertaining television, there are really only two people who fit that bill. One had a DVD released about a month ago and has stated the only thing he'd be interested in returning to WWF television for is an induction into the Hall of Fame; the other has developed his own promotion called "Ring of Glory" that's about to have its first show. With Bret Hart and Vince Russo out of the picture, we've got a plethora of people that would do a horrible job, such as the formerly polka-dotted jackass you mentioned above. Shane McMahon would be okay, and I actually believe he would bring a welcome freshness, as we've seen Shane O'Mac far less than any other McMahon--even to the point where there's a tangible demand for him. But, the truth is that the WWF no longer has a need for a "president", "commissioner", or "general manager." Despite the distaste it gives me, I have to agree with you on one point. It is important for there to be an authority figure that would oversee things such as hiring and firing and match disputes. However, I don't think that we need one around, or even close, to make main events. If Earl Hebner was still around, I might disagree with you that we wouldn't accept the ruling from the head referee, because old school fans like you and me I think would feel very comfortable with him making those kinds of decisions. But, anyway, Tunney and Monsoon normally only showed up when there was a major problem. For instance, Tunney trying to deal with Hogan/Warrior and Monsoon with the aftermath of Royal Rumble '97. They weren't a consistent, because there was no reason for there to be. There isn't now, either, and what's more, they no longer have need of a figurehead. If I have to guess--and I do, since I have no insider knowledge--the reason that Monsoon and Tunney were used is because Vince McMahon was the WWF's play-by-play guy and wanted to be seen in that light--not as the owner, and not as an authority figure. Of course, there were those out there that knew he ran the company--especially after the steroid trial--but, I believe he was hiding that fact from the general populace, which makes sense as his announce style has always been pretty much that of the average fan. Now, though, I don't see any reason why he can't publicly be the guy that makes all the big decisions and proclaims the major announcements. Do you? Winter: Vince McMahon? You want to see Vince McMahon become the main authority figure of the RAW brand? It's for reasons such as this I voiced my concerns over your promotion to the main page. As for Shane, while it's true there is slight interest from various fans about bringing him back as a main character, cast your mind back to 2003. Back then there was a similar demand for Shane to return, and what happened? He booked himself in a 4 month feud with Kane, in the process desoying the credibility Kane had recently built up as an unstoppable monster, and by the time Survivor Series 2003 rolled around, everyone wanted to see him gone from RAW. Well, everyone but you that is. What was the title of your column the week of Survivor Series? "Putting the X in Wrsetling: Why Xan loves Shane"? But anyway, back to Vince. Now I'll be the first to admit that from 1997 to 1999, Vince was arguably the best character in the WWF. He was the cowardly, politically correct, smiling business man who wanted everyone to become what he considered the ideal employee, the man that would kiss babies and hug grandparents, yet his plans were always foiled by bad ass characters such as Steve Austin and The Rock. Fast forward to 2005, and suddenly Vince McMahon is the bad ass. He's not a coward any longer, oh no, he's the guy that lays down the law, and if anyone has a problem with that he'll challenge them to a match and kick their ass. Politcally correct? In 2005 that couldn't be further from the truth. Whether it's harassing women or making fun of a guy with one leg, Vince just couldn't give a damn who he offends. And also worth a mention is Vince's transformation from a guy who had to buy his mistressess to one who the women can't stop falling for. In recent years I believe we've seen Trish, Torrie, Stacey, Candice, Sable and probably one or two others fall in love with Vince 'Irresistable' McMahon. Why do I bring up these examples? Simple; Vince McMahon is desperate to become the number one guy within the company whenever he's on screen. We saw it when he won the WWF title. We saw it when he recorded victories over the likes of Triple H and The Undertaker. We saw it again when he based the entire WrestleMania 16 main event around his family. And no doubt, if he becomes a permanent on screen fixture in the near future, we'll see it again. Only now he'll face John Cena in the PPV main event. Now he'll defeat Shelton Benjamin and Shawn Michaels, regardless of how unrealistic such results would be. And now we'll have to watch Ashley, Mickie James, and any other diva fall hopelessly in love with him. As a slack-jawed hillbilly, that may appeal to you and your kind Xan, but to me and others of my ilk, I think we'd rather see the wrestlers dominate the show, not a 66 year old egomanic. Xan: Look, Icy One, if I didn't know that your incurable, terminal case of frostbite hadn't already affected your brain, I'd take offense at that last comment. Actually, it's pretty easy to dismiss your entire argument on these grounds, but I've never been one to take the easy route--except when it comes to your girlfriend(it's not like I have a choice there). Damn, I can't believe I said that. I actually took a below the belt shot, and at someone who demanded, nay, begged for the Powers That Be to make my ascension to this spot happen; no matter what he says. What an asshole I am! Getting back on point, though, I'm not saying that Vince McMahon should be on screen 20-30 minutes per show like the current GMs are, I'm simply saying that he should be the authority figure for the brands when they need a ruling every so often. In effect, I see him in the old role as the "president" of the company, much like Jack Tunney and Gorilla Monsoon were, except I see no reason for him to not go by what he is, which is the Chairman. It's time for the WWF to go back to basics, and for them the basics are actually having the wrestlers present the angles, do the promos, and wrestle the matches. The only differences between what I'm suggesting now and what occurred back in the 80's and most of the '90s would be no figureheads and that Vince wouldn't be an announcer anymore. I don't see where you got the idea that I wanted Vince to dominate the show, and while we're on that topic, I'm not talking about him just being the boss of RAW. I believe he should be the only authority figure for both shows. Would this hurt the supposed individuality of each brand? Of course it would, but it's not like each brand promoting the other when they were supposedly "at war" didn't already do that. If there's really someone out there that doesn't think the two WWF shows are connected, I'd like you to stand up--for dramatic reasons only--and slap your damned self in the face. If that doesn't wake you up to reality, go jump into an electrified pool. And take your children with you. It's probably too late for them already. There I go digressing again. You really do bring out the best in me, Winter. In any case, as I said nothing about McMahon becoming "a permanent on screen fixture", I have to think that somewhere deep inside you're secretly joyful about that idea. You want Vince and his family to grace us with their presence. Why, I can't imagine, because that really would be older and staler than a new best of 7 series between Chris Benoit and Booker T. By the way, of course Xan loves Shane. After all, that *is* my real first name, and Kane's credibility was destroyed the moment he removed his mask. You know it, I know it, and Glen Jacobs knows it. Winter: So that "Xan loves Shane" column was all about you loving yourself? I suppose now that I think about it that does make a lot of sense. You were a huge fan of Billy, Chuck and Rico after all, and all you seem to do these days is talk about The Dicks. Dick this and Dick that, it's neverending, but hey, this is 2005 and everyone's free to live whichever lifestyle they choose. And just one last word on your idea for Vince McMahon to be head of both shows, that's right up there with your idea of having Triple H face Wesley Snipes in a 'stake in the heart' main event at WrestleMania. Moving on, you think Kane lost his credibility the moment he lost his mask?? Nonsense; Kane regained his credibility after dropping the mask. From 2002 up until he removed the mask in mid 2003, Kane was nothing more than a joke, a comedy character who'd occasionally get a title match that no one in their right believed he'd actually win. He was teaming up with The Hurricane, doing impressions of Hulk Hogan and having sex with dead girls. It was time for a change and you know it. Now granted, any remaining credibility the Kane story had went out of the window as soon as it was made clear his face had never actually been burned in the fire, but what we got was a whole new character. He was unstable, he thought the fans were mocking him, he destroyed everyone that even so much as glanced in his direction, he was the monster we all wanted to see. Well, until he began a feud with the boss' son, and would you believe it, struggled to defeat him on 3 seperate occasions. Only a McMahon would possibly book themselves in a feud with the most frightening superstar on the roster and believe that they'd actually have a chance of passing the match off as anything other than a squash. Shane wanted to look good, and he achieved it, while Kane had spent 3 months feuding with a non-wrestler and once that was over found himself getting rolled over against The Undertaker at WrestleMania. Now I believe that Kane is popular enough to get back into the main event scene as a genuine title challenger. I know he's already booked for the main event of New Year's Revolution, but that counts for very little when Chris Masters and Carlito are in the same match. If Kane went back to being that monster, being that animal that didn't need friends or tag team partners and didn't pander to the crowd, then we may have a superstar on our hands. Until then all we have is a midcard specialist who feels priveleged to lay down for John Cena every 8 months. Oh, I noticed you referred to the Benoit/Booker T feud as stale? Seeing as you're the guy who described your dream match as Snitsky and Tomko v Michael Cole and Goldust, I shouldn't be that surprised, but I thought even you'd be able to recognise great wrestling when it's handed to you on a plate. This best of 7 series is the hottest, freshest thing on WWE TV right now, and I look on in great anticipation to the remaining matches. You have Booker T, a guy who despite his obvious talents has been held down all his career, versus Benoit, the greatest pure wrestler since The Dynamite Kid hung up the boots. Maybe when you're done raving about the junior division and Josh Matthews' new hairstyle you'll be able to appreciate the fine matches Booker and Benoit continually put on for us. Until then stick to your 'bring back the stinkface' petition. Xan: Oh, that's right, I forgot. You're one of those people that either got brainwashed into believing--or actually do believe--that Booker T has talent. You're probably also one of the guys that is rallying for Edge to become WWF Champion in the next few months, and think Jeff Jarrett is the greatest thing that could ever happen to the NWA World Title. I won't dispute that Chris Benoit's the best wrestler in the world. You, yourself, have read that from me many times over, but that doesn't mean he should be bogged down in a feud with the poster boy for career mediocrity: Booker T; especially one that lasts 7 matches. If you want to see these two go in a series like that, I suggest going on Ebay and finding someone selling that WCW series for $800 or $900, as apparently it would mean a lot to you. Me? I prefer not to live in the past, and that's exactly where this feud belongs. Originally, I was of the opinion that Kane losing his mask would be a cool and glorious thing, but you're wrong that it's his feud with Shane McMahon that kept him from truly becoming a main event monster. Like it or not, Shane's the one guy that can come in for a few months at a time, bump his ass off, and put someone over huge. His one victory in the series had nothing to do with him being a McMahon, but rather had to do with the fact that he's a believable wrestler, and it made sense for him to win at least one--hell, they were all gimmick matches where everything goes. Jesus, you'd think you've never seen the guy perform. I'll take Shane McMahon in the ring over at least half of the WWF roster, and maybe more, including BOTH of the current show champions. He's solid on the mic, outstanding in the ring, and has made Test, Angle, Big Show, *and* Kane all look like a million bucks, so it's not his fault the Kane push failed. The Kane push failed because in order to succeed in the WWF, you have to have "the look". Without his mask, he doesn't have it. Even someone of your ilk--that's the word you used, I believe--who still plays with Barbie Dolls, Lite Brite, and hula hoops--should have been able to figure that out. Even without the look he may have succeeded if the writers had really run with the whole psychological "he believes he's scarred but he's really not" thing, but of course, they took their usual cowardly way out. The only way Mr. Jacobs is going to get another major title push is if his face becomes once again severely injured and he has to re-don the cowl. Winter: So now you dislike Booker T as well? Why can't I say that comes as a shock to me? Far from being brainwashed into becoming a Booker fan, I appreciate the man for being one of the most gifted individuals in the WWE and one who has a natural connection with the fans not seen since the days of Bruno Sammartino. Now granted, in recent years Booker has done next to nothing in the WWE, but don't let that fool you into thinking he isn't a worthy main event wrestler. I know you're one of those people that actually believes that when a wrestler loses a match he isn't as good as his opponent, but that isn't the case. Booker could be the biggest star in North America if the WWE gave him the ball and let him run with it. Let's not forget, Booker T was a member of the greatest tag team in WCW history; he single handedly restored prestige to the US and TV titles, and last but not least this was the man that made Scott Steiner look like Jushin Thunder Liger in his prime, in the process bringing glory back to the WCW title. It's a shame you and your fellow conservatives don't give him a chance, but then I guess he doesn't have the boyish good looks you like your champions to have. I can't believe you actually wrote Shane McMahon is "outstanding in the ring". That alone is surely enough to convice the two remaining readers who believed you to be a credible main page columnist to think otherwise. Now I'll admit, I have enjoyed Shane McMahon matches in the past, in particular his street fight against Kurt Angle at the 2001 King of the Ring, but let's keep it real, the only thing Shane McMahon is good for is taking bumps. That can mean flying through a glass wall or falling from 50 feet in the air against Steve Blackman, but when it comes to anything else Shane plain sucks, and worst of all, he isn't believable. Shane McMahon is the son of the boss. He isn't a wrestler, he just some rich guy from Conneticut, yet we the fans are supposed to believe that this guy can hold his own against the Big Show, Kane, Kurt Angle etc?? Give me a break! This is exactly why bringing back Shane wouldn't be a good idea. If he were only to face believable opponents such as Spanky or one of the losers from the mini division, then fair enough, but we all know that won't happen. As soon as Shane becomes a regular on screen character once again he'll get his old man to book him against the likes of Bobby Lashley, Chris Masters and Ken Kennedy, and what's more he'll expect to the win those matches. And I also wouldn't be suprised if he held a few titles when he comes back too, and he'll probably ruin those the same way he ruined the European and hardcore titles. If there were to be a new head of authority on WWE television, then no one would be better suited than Paul Heyman. He's proven he's a success at the role whilst Smackdown GM, he won't book himself against the top guys in the company and, what's more, he's a person that everyone in the locker room respects. Not because he's a member of the McMahon family but because he's a wrestling genuis. That's what I want to see, that's what the people want to see and that's what should and would happen if anyone at Republic Wrestling Entertainment had any brains. But unfortunately they'll probably go with your line of thinking and go with whatever appeals to the redneck in the front row (and the one writing the wrestling column), which basically means more unrealistic matches, more over the top storylines and more members of the McMahon family screwing everybody over. But hey, I guess that the kind of rasslin' people like YOU want to see. Xan: I have a TON of respect for Paul Heyman, Winter, and let there be no doubt in anyone's mind that I would watch any damned thing he promoted or booked, because he's earned that and he's shown that he's more than capable of delivering exciting wrestling action, but because he's also an excellent, explosive character he's the kind of person that should NOT be the new head of authority for the WWF. See, if that were the case, it would mean the president/gm/commissioner/whatever would have a lot of screen time, and as I thought we already agreed, that shouldn't be the case. More time should be devoted for the wrestlers, remember? Which is why Vince McMahon acting ONLY AS THE OWNER, and not as a character makes the most sense. Now, whether or not he'd be able to contain himself to that position is another question, but it's not exactly one you raised, now is it? Duh. Booker T certainly does NOT have " a natural connection with the fans not seen since the days of Bruno Sammartino." While I will certainly entertain arguments that he has some talent, I'm not going to listen to you completely over-exaggerate his charisma. Let's me see if I can think of some wrestlers who have what you described. Oh yeah, I can, here they are: Mick Foley, Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Steve Austin, Rob Van Dam, Eddie Guerrero, Rey Mysterio. I could go on, but there's no reason to. My point is clear. Booker T never has and never will belong on this list. Nor does he belong on the list of great world champions(he, like Steiner and Jarrett was only one by default) or even men currently eligible to be main eventers. His talent is far overstated by the majority of the IWC. Since you believe this is not the case, you probably also believe his idiotic claims that his irritating wife is beautiful. Must have been a poor crop, indeed, the year she won Miss Black America. I think I've made it clear the last several weeks in my column that the WWF is NOT providing the kind of wrestling that I want to see. Instead, they are showing an incredibly high level of complacency, which is something that I don't understand. Yes, they are the dominant wrestling promotion. Yes, they have killed off all of their major competition, and TNA always seems to be in danger of failing to survive. However, isn't it the nature of people with supposedly competitive personalities--like I always believed Vinnie Mac had--to always try to do their very best? It's obvious that his current product is far from the best he's capable of doing. And, on that note, I'd like to thank you for your participation in this quite civilized discussion, my frosty comrade, and wish you a Merry Christmas. And, don't worry, for your birthday on Tuesday I'll be sending you a nice, life-size poster of your dream woman Sharmell to hang on your ceiling, along with a copy of "The very best of RAW on USA for 2005". That should use up about 12 seconds of your time, so watch for it, and don't celebrate too hard. Chris writes: I read your column and I couldn't agree more. The WWE (why do you call it the WWF?) is not even trying anymore. But I guess in Vince's eyes, John Cena is more over with the fans because of his mic skills. It seems like wrestlers ith mic skills can't carry a match and the ones with poor mic skills can carry a match. On top of that, the wwe is hiring writers without wrestling knowledge. All types of crap is going on. Batista is injured and should of dropped the title to Chris Benoit berfore his injury gets even more damaged. The cw division isn't getitng the chance to act like cruiseweights and so forth. I'm trying to watch TNA lately, it's pretty good I guess. The only thing wrong is that every single wrestler does a suicide dive every 10 seconds. I have been following Vince McMahon's wrestling organization for more than half my life, and it will always be the WWF to me. If, once they lost what just may be the most frivolous lawsuit in history, the organization had gone back to its original name--World Wide Wrestling Federation(or WWWF)--I would have found that much easier to stomach and probably could have adapted that name into my vocabulary. But, the fact is that I'm old school about nearly everything. Always have been, so I'm not going to quit calling the organization that got me into the habit of being a wrestling fan by it's actual name just because some stupid court said they have to change. In an age where people can sue for burning themselves with coffe and where burglars can sue homeowners for injuring themselves breaking in, I find that any decision by any court has to be submitted to in depth scrutiny. Justin writes: I feel your pain, dude. I haven’t watched a full episode of RAW or Smackdown in months, and judging from all the reports and reviews, I’m clearly not missing anything. 2005 was just like 1995 in that it was arguably the creative low point for the decade. We have once again reached the point where everything about the product is stale, and even the new stars they’re trying to push aren’t even remotely interesting. But of course the few young guys who do deserve the spotlight couldn’t buy a high-profile match. The thing that makes me the sickest right now about WWE is the senseless burial of Shelton Benjamin. Here’s a guy who could and should be WWE Champion in a year or two. But no, we’ll job him out to Snitsky, Trevor Murdoch, Carlito, hell let’s have him lose to Torrie Wilson while we’re at it. What possible reason could WWE have for not pushing Shelton? Did he rape Vince’s grandmother or something? Meanwhile the overwhelmingly mediocre Carlito, Masters, Orton, JBL, Cena, and Batista are all being ruthlessly shoved up everyone’s ass. And I just don’t care anymore. Even the guys I like have grown stale because they have nothing new to do. Not their fault, but there’s only so many times I can get excited about Kurt Angle vs. Shawn Michaels when there’s no reason or drama behind it. Vince is once again so completely out of touch with the fans and desperately wishes it was six years ago, just like in 1995 when Diesel was pushed as the Hulk Hogan of the 90s. Now John Cena has been forcefed the role of Steve Austin for the new millennium. And as long as Mr. and Mrs. Stephanie McMahon have a stranglehold on the creative department, when the right guy does come along to be THE GUY, I don’t think WWE will even recognize it. Let’s hope TNA recognizes soon that Samoa Joe is THE GUY. Excellent comments, Justin. I believe TNA already realizes that Samoa Joe is THE GUY. I believe his ascension is going to mirror AJ Styles' in the sense that he's going to dominate the X Division first and then move up to the heavyweight division. Hopefully he won't be removed from the top in favor of Jeff Jarrett like Styles was and his push won't get fazed out the way Chris Harris' did. I still believe Harris has major main eventer material, so we'll see how well TNA handles their people in the coming year or so. If they don't do that well from here on out, they may not have much more future than that. Shelton Benjamin is probably my favorite right now, and it's sickening the way he's been depushed. I will never understand the decision to job him to Carlito and then send him spiralling downhill after the months of Jim Ross calling him a proud champion and saying his goal is to be the greatest Intercontinental Champion of all time. It's horrendous the way the organization follows through on it's talented workers. Matt Hardy, Tajiri, Helms, Benjamin, Chavo, James Gibson, Frankie Kazarian...they've all been victims of horrible mismanagement. As far as THE GUY in the WWF, I'll go out on a limb and say he's already there. It's either Shelton Benjamin or Ken Kennedy, and I think it's a coinflip as to which one is going to be better. Good thing they're on opposite shows, huh? Peg had this to say: Hey there! I just wanted to thank you for sharing your feelings in the latest edition of your column entitled "The Northern Star--Lock and Load." I really enjoyed it, especially what you had to say about the WWE. I've been wondering why I'm not excited about viewing any WWE shows for some time, and you were able to put my feelings into words. As you stated in this particular column, it is a combination of many things that has made the WWE product mediocre including the storylines, the mis-management of time for shows, the focus on average wrestlers with average talent as well as many matches that are shown on television. Personally, if I can't watch an episode of RAW or Smackdown, I really don't feel like I missed anything great (I've been proven correct each time I read the show's recap posted online). And when I do bother to tune in, I usually wind up doing something else because there isn't enough to keep me interested. There's nothing making me want to attend an event, order a pay-per-view, or buy merchandise. And it goes without saying that this is bad for the WWE because they are not making money from longtime, casual, or potential fans who share this view. Oops-- just realized that I'm rambling. I'll close by saying that I do look forward to your next column, and keep up the good work! Peace, Meh...I kind of want to see New Year's Revolution, but only because I'm a sucker for the Elimination Chamber, and my brother always get the big 4 PPVs, but maybe it's time for that to change. Like my buddy, Big Casino said, saying I'm watching out of habit is the wrong message and like telling Vince that I'll watch whatever shit he puts on(and pay for it) just because. He's right, I may just have to break the string. As far as missing shows, I hated last week's RAW--those tribute to the troops shows are always just stupid propaganda--and I forgot to tape last week's Smackdown but didn't really care, because I knew they'd just be hyping a PPV I didn't want to see anyway. The WWF is doing nothing to make me(and apparently you) give a shit about their shows, and that's just plain stupid business. That will conclude today's voyage on The Northern Star. Please send any feedback for me to XanManX@hotmail.com, with the words "Northern Star" or "feedback" in the subject line. If, for some unGodly reason you want to leave feedback to Winter, he can be reached by clicking here. Merry Christams, everyone. The Northern Star will rise again. Until then, Long days, pleasant nights
|
|