411 Fact or Fiction 05.03.07: ECW Title, HBK, RVD, More

Posted by Ashish on 05.03.2007

It's week ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY SIX of Fact or Fiction with Brad Garoon, Scott Slimmer, and whether SpikeTV should give Impact another hour...

Welcome back to another week of 411 Fact or Fiction: Wrestling Edition! This week, two 411 Wrestling vets, Scott Slimmer and Brad Garoon, debate it out!

One more thing. Remember the Copter Game and the other fun little flash games that used to be on 411? Well they are back. I've put together a little flash games site for 411 readers. The games are all free, the site loads quick, has no pop ups, nothing. So if you're bored at work or whatever, check out TigerFlashGames.com.

Let's get to it!


1. Vince McMahon put the ECW Title on himself for egotistical reasons.

Scott Slimmer: FACT. Vince McMahon is a shrewd and possibly brilliant businessman, but he's also proven himself on multiple occasions to be petty and vindictive. Six years ago he bought WCW and ECW and effectively monopolized the American wrestling industry. That in and of itself would have been enough of a victory for most sane businessmen, but Vince McMahon needed more. He did all he could during the "Invasion" angle to kill WCW once and for all, but the problem there was the WCW was already dead. The last three years of WCW has been so convoluted and unspectacular that there effectively was no WCW for Vince to destroy. Sure, Vince had fun making everyone from Diamond Dallas Page to Scott Steiner to Goldberg look like fools, but WCW really died before Vince ever got his hands on it. That wasn't the case with ECW. Sure, Paul Heyman may have inadvertently run the company into the ground, but the spirit of ECW continued to flourish. ECW wrestlers could be seen on WWE programming every week. Crowds all over the world continued the ECW chants. In 2005, WWE's best pay-per-view of the year was ECW: One Night Stand, and the sequel in 2006 wasn't far behind. The legacy of ECW was alive and well, and unfortunately Vince McMahon just couldn't accept that. So he brought ECW back and essentially made it into a developmental brand. There may be some legitimate business strategy behind introducing new talent using an established brand name, but Vince also spread his venomous revenge liberally. We know Vince can put on a good ECW pay-per-view; he proved as much at One Night Stand 2005 and 2006. So why was ECW: December to Dismember booked into oblivion? We know Paul Heyman has a brilliant mind for the business and is gold in the microphone, so why was he dismissed from the brand? And why would Vince McMahon feel the need to book himself as the ECW World Heavyweight Champion? WWE claims that ECW is a developmental brand, but do you ever expect to see Vince McMahon holding the OVW Heavyweight Championship? The simple fact of the matter is that Vince McMahon needed to kill the legacy of ECW just to stroke his own ego. Congratulations, jackass. Mission accomplished.

Brad Garoon: FACT. I agree with some of what Scott has to say but I think there are other factors at play. I think a lot of this issue has to do with RVD and his contract running out. Vince doesn't view ECW as a brand as legitimate as Raw or Smackdown, so he feels he can play around with it as a way of contract negotiations. It wouldn't surprise me if Vince took the belt off of Lashley and put it on himself as a way of bribing RVD into an angle where he's the savior of ECW by taking the belt away from the worst champion it has ever had. Or I could be thinking too much about it and Vince could just think ECW is a big enough joke that he can play with it like a toy. Either way it's not a good thing and his ego is definitely involved. Putting the belt on Umaga would have plenty of people moaning that a WWE caricature was the champion, but at least it would have been a real wrestler holding the gold.

Score: 1 for 1


2. The Great Khali should be nowhere near the RAW main event scene.

Scott Slimmer: FACT. The fact that The Great Khali is anywhere near the RAW main event scene is a perfect example of how frustrating it is to be a WWE fan. The RAW main event scene had seeming entered an exciting new stage with an ever-improving champion and three credible, compelling challengers. There's life left in a Cena / Michaels feud, and Edge and Randy Orton would be waiting in the wings after that. In addition, if Michaels were to win the championship from Cena, then he could have some great matches with Edge, Orton, and eventually Cena again. There are enough possibilities with just those four guys to easily carry RAW through WrestleMania 24, and those possibilities only grow once Triple H returns to the active roster in a few months. There's no reason to interject anyone else into the RAW main event scene, and that is especially true of The Great Khali. Any title match Khali would be involved in would almost certainly be of a lower quality that the possible matches I've already named. Khali may be an impressive physical specimen, but he's an absolute disaster in the ring. Some may say that the fact that Umaga surprised everyone with his impressive performances against John Cena at New Year's Revolution and The Royal Rumble means that Khali may be able to do the same, and I suppose I can't actually guarantee that won't happen. However, if I were a betting man, I'd sure as hell bet the farm, the wife, and the dog on the championship match or matches involving Khali sucking harder than a thirsty crack whore. RAW's main event scene is stronger that it's been in quite some time, and it would be a shame to see that potential wasted on The Great Khali.

Brad Garoon: FACT. Can't argue with anything said there. Khali is death to any match he's in. On his best day his matches are almost watchable. The only glimmer of hope is that the last time Khali came to Raw and attacked Cena it didn't actually lead to a feud. The problem here is that his path of destruction went through the entire show and I don't think they invested all that time in him for no reason. If they are planning on doing a Khali/Cena title match at Judgment Day I can't see where Orton, Edge and Michaels fit into the bill. Something tells me (and maybe I'm just being a blind optimist) that this Khali thing will run its course before the PPV and we'll get HBK vs Cena like we all want.

Score: 2 for 2


3. Shawn Michaels deserves one final WWE Title run.

Scott Slimmer: FACT. Shawn Michaels has been my favorite wrester of all time for more than a decade, but over the course of the last four months I've seriously started to consider the possibility that he may also be the greatest wrester of all time. I know that must sound like heresy to some members of the IWC who will forever hold Ric Flair, Bret Hart, and Chris Benoit in a class by themselves, but I think at this point Michaels has more than earned his place in the discussion. The first reason that I'm now tempted to put Michaels at the top of the list is because he actually can wrestle any style of match with credibility. He may not be the best at any single style of match, but I don't know of anyone who combines them all as well as Michaels. He's wrestled technical marvels with Bret Hart and Kurt Angle. He epitomized the big man / small man match against Diesel and The Undertaker. He's put on classic hardcore brawls with Mankind and Triple H. And he laid the foundation for every high flyer of the past decade against Razor Ramon. The second reason that I'm now tempted to put Michaels at the top of the list is because I honestly can't think of a single wrestler, past or present, with whom Michaels couldn't have at least a three star match. Can you picture Ric Flair having a good match with Ian Rotten? Can you picture Bret Hart having a good match with Mark Henry? I actually can picture Michaels having a good match with both of those guys as well as any other wrester you could imagine, which brings us back to the question at hand. Given the fact that I'm now beginning to view Shawn Michaels as the greatest wrester of all time, I absolutely believe that he deserves one final WWE Title run. In fact, not only does Michaels deserve a title run, but it would actually be a great booking decision all the way around. Michaels has always had the ability to perform at his best when booked in big matches, and a run with the title would give him a number of big matches in which to shine. In addition, it wouldn't hurt John Cena to spend some time away from the belt, because he's proven himself to be just as compelling as the challenger as he is as the champion. Finally, if Vince McMahon is indeed hell bent on letting The Great Khali challenge for the WWE Title, then there's no one better for him to feud with the Shawn Michaels. We've seen Michaels orchestrate some spectacular carry jobs in the past, and I seriously believe that he could find a way to make a championship match with Khali at least entertaining. WWE has possibly the greatest wrestler of all time once again at the peak of his game. Shawn Michaels deserves one final WWE Title run, and the WWE fans deserve to see it happen.

Brad Garoon: FACT. Aside from the fact that I bet on Cena in a WrestleMania pool I was dying for Michaels to win the belt on April 1st. Since his return a few years ago he's become the consistent performer that I don't think any of us thought he could be. His last title run left plenty to be desired and a fresh one could lead to great main event matches with the likes of Edge, Orton, HHH, Kennedy, Umaga or anyone else they want to throw at him (with the exception of Khali of course). If the Undertaker can come back healthy they could even do one final match between the two geezers. There are infinite possibilities in a babyface title run for HBK right now. The best part of the prospect is that when his run comes to an end he can put over someone like Kennedy, Punk or Umaga huge on his way out. The more I think about it the more I think it'd be crazy not to transition the belt off of Cena onto him ASAP.

Score: 3 for 3


---SWITCH!!!---


4. With The Undertaker injured, WWE's best option is to move Shawn Michaels to Smackdown and put the World Title on him.

Brad Garoon: FICTION. Shawn's feud with Cena still has plenty of steam left in it, and there are plenty of other options for Smackdown. The one they seem to be going with, putting the belt back on Batista, is not the correct move either. You have Ken Kennedy and his MITB shot that could be cashed in. There's no time like when a champion gets injured to put the belt on someone new. The Edge/Orton feud isn't going to go anywhere due to Orton's shaky status in the company, so moving Edge to Smackdown would work as well. Hell, I'd give Umaga the title and have HIM feud with Batista before I'd move HBK away from the hot feud with Cena. There are plenty of heels who should get this run before we get saddled with another babyface champion on Smackdown.

Scott Slimmer: FICTION. I think I've already made it quite clear that I believe Shawn Michaels deserves a championship run, but I completely agree with Brad that is shouldn't happen on Smackdown. Michaels simply has too much going for him on Raw that would be wasted by panicking and sending him to Smackdown. First, as Brad said, there's still life left in the Michaels / Cena feud. Hell, I for one would feel cheated if three months of a great feud was simply tossed out the window in order to send Michaels to Smackdown. I want this feud to go the distance, and that may even include Michaels winning the WWE Championship. Second, there are a number of interesting possibilities for Michaels when Triple H eventually returns to the active roster in a couple of months. Either one of them could turn heel at the drop of the hat, and a potential feud between them only becomes more interesting if Michaels is holding the WWE Championship at the time. Smackdown still has plenty of stars of its own to make the World Heavyweight Championship interesting for quite some time. It looks like The Undertaker is going to drop the title to Batista in the near future, but after that the possibilities are wide open. Mr. Kennedy has already said that he'll be cashing in his Money in the Bank opportunity at WrestleMania 24, but I think it would be really fun to see him win the World Heavyweight Championship before that and then still have an insurance policy in place in case he loses the title before the big show. It would also be easy enough to have Chris Benoit drop the United States Championship to MVP and then go on to win the World Heavyweight Championship for the second time. And I know this last one is going to sound insane, but I truly believe Smackdown's best bet may be to finally grow a pair and give Matt Hardy a run with the belt. Sure, Matt might fall flat on his face, but he might also rise to the occasion. Either way, it's a risk that I absolutely believe is worth taking.

Score: 4 for 4


5. If you were SpikeTV, you would not give TNA Impact a second hour.

Brad Garoon: FACT. TNA is awful. Straight up and flat out awful. They don't know how to properly fill an hour of TV, let alone their three hour PPVs and a potential second hour of TV a week. The angles are horrendous and with dream matches being given away for free on TV anyway I don't understand why TNA even thinks they need a second hour. ECW runs a 60 minute show that is more streamlined than TNA has ever been. TNA may be delivering ratings that Spike is happy with now, but given that they can barely keep it together with what they have I don't think giving TNA more to deal with is a move Spike should feel comfortable with. Some will argue that the X-Division will be given more time to flesh out angles if there is more TV time overall. To that I say look at the angles that will be fleshed out. Does anyone really want to see twenty minutes a week of Sonjay Dutt and Shark Boy doing the same old thing. Jay Lethal will be cool no matter how much TV time he gets, and I guarantee you another hour a week won't equal a bigger push for him.

Scott Slimmer: FICTION. First of all, I'd like to point out that I'm not the one who called TNA "straight up and flat out awful." Sure, I may have been thinking it, but I definitely didn't say it. Please send all scathing hate mail to [e-mail] . Anyway, I agree that TNA has its fair share of problems. However, I think those problems are actually just the natural growing pains of a company on the rise. SpikeTV has proven on numerous occasions that it is committed to helping TNA grow, and giving Impact a second hour is the next natural step in that growth. We've already seen TNA branching out into house shows, running pay-per-views outside of Orlando, and considering distancing themselves from the NWA. Those are all positive signs of growth, and there's no way that SpikeTV can ignore them. I would be highly surprised if a two hour Impact didn't draw at least the same rating as the one hour version, and I also believe that the ratings might actually increase. Maybe I'm giving TNA too much credit here, but I think they would be able to use the second hour productively by developing angles at a slower, more natural pace and showcasing their amazing in-ring product. WWE has dramatically improved the quality of it's televised in-ring product as of late, and TNA would more than be able to keep pace if given the opportunity. Hey, don't get me wrong. Maybe I'm too much of an optimist. Maybe I'm too much of a risk taker. Hell, I'm the guy who thinks it's a good idea to put the World Heavyweight Championship on Matt Hardy. But I say give TNA a chance to run with the ball and let them succeed or failure on their own merits.


Score: 4 for 5


6. Rob Van Dam will end up signing a new deal with WWE before his current one expires.

Brad Garoon: FACT. I say this with much trepidation. RVD is a money maker and will do so whether he stays in WWE, goes to TNA or just chills on the indies. He'd be a big draw in places like ROH and PWG. I know WWE doesn't want to see those T-Shirt sales go to TNA, so I'm sure they'll do whatever they can to keep him. On the other hand they just jobbed him out to Umaga so maybe they think the writing is on the wall. Either way, RVD will do fine for himself wherever he goes.

Scott Slimmer: FICTION. As much as it pains me to say it, at this point Rob Van Dam has no reason to stay in WWE and every reason to go to TNA. First, WWE has decimated the spirit and legacy of ECW. I firmly believe that Van Dam would have happily stayed in an ECW funded by WWE and run by Paul Heyman, but there's just nothing left for him in whatever this is that ECW has become. Second, Van Dam has to be upset that WWE has put limits on his work both in and out of the ring for the better part of the last six years. I'm sure he'd love the opportunity to cut loose in the ring and cut of few more worked shoot promos along the way. Third, there are pseudo dream matches aplenty for Van Dam in TNA. RVD / AJ Styles? Money. RVD / Christopher Daniels? Yes please. Hell, even RVD / Kurt Angle could be a great match based on what we saw last year in ECW. However, I think the one thing that may seal the deal is a subtle move that TNA has made over the course of the last six months to lure Van Dam away from WWE. Who does Rob Van Dam consistently name as his all-time favorite opponent? And who has been working for TNA for years but only recently begun wrestling on a semi-regular basis again? Jerry F'N Lynn, that's who. Call it a conspiracy theory if you want, but I believe that TNA is prepping Jerry Lynn for a feud with Rob Van Dam, and I can totally get on board with that. Van Dam / Lynn in ECW may be my favorite series of matches of all time, and I have to believe they've got at least one or two more classics left in them. So will RVD sign a new deal with WWE? Not unless he's smokin' something mighty powerful. Oh, wait… Is it too late to say FACT?

Score: 4 for 6


These two finish 4 for 6! Join us next week for more Fact or Fiction!