What is it with the IWC and revisionist history?

[The Elemental O]

Seriously, I've been going through pro wrestling related topics online and almost everybody seems to love pushing the inaccurate statements as facts just to push an agenda or to justify their bias.

For example Kevin Nash not being a draw argument, I mean true Diesel as champion wasn't the big success WWF was hoping for but Nash was a major draw in WCW during the Monday Night Wars especially during the whole Wolfpac vs Hollywood feud and the ratings and viewership during that feud were huge (though those would drop to a huge decline after the Fingerpoke of Doom). And even during his WWF champion reign his house shows attendance was big.

On the other side, there are people who are still pushing the whole Daniel Bryan was a failure agenda, for example one guy on Twitter who goes by the name nWoWolpactv (who's been getting a lot exposure because of his attempts to get a accurate ratings and viewership statistics for WWE) has been going around trying to prove how Bryan was a failure in ratings, merchandise and draw in general using the recent reign as champion during his heel run, ignoring that between late 2013 to early 2014, Bryan was pretty popular with his segments being one of the more higher ratings during 2013 and 2014 and his merchandise being the 2nd best selling behind John Cena's but outselling merchandise of WWE stars like Randy Orton, Batista and Brock Lesnar. Ratings during the YES! movement vs the Authority tended to be the highest rated segment of RAW in the lead up to Wrestlemania 30 with the post WM episode of RAW getting a 3.70 ratings with the Bryan/HHH segment being among the highest rated (some sources claim even higher than the post Streak destruction Brock Lesnar segment). When I brought this to Wolfpac's attention instead of responding he blocked me.

How about during the whole Super Cena phase, the IWC went as far as lying that John Cena was never popular with the IWC community before being pushed as the face of the company.

Or that while Roman Reigns didn't get ratings above 2.90 when he was the focal point, they still ignored that his merchandise once topped the bestselling merchandise charts and the Wrestlemania's he headlined were major success with Wrestlemania 32 where he and HHH headlined the show is officially the biggest drawing Wrestlemania in history.

So why is the promotion of such revisionist nonsense so prevalent with the online wrestling fandom?

 

[moonwolf]

Seriously, I've been going through pro wrestling related topics online and almost everybody seems to love pushing the inaccurate statements as facts just to push an agenda or to justify their bias.

For example Kevin Nash not being a draw argument, I mean true Diesel as champion wasn't the big success WWF was hoping for but Nash was a major draw in WCW during the Monday Night Wars especially during the whole Wolfpac vs Hollywood feud and the ratings and viewership during that feud were huge (though those would drop to a huge decline after the Fingerpoke of Doom). And even during his WWF champion reign his house shows attendance was big.

On the other side, there are people who are still pushing the whole Daniel Bryan was a failure agenda, for example one guy on Twitter who goes by the name nWoWolpactv (who's been getting a lot exposure because of his attempts to get a accurate ratings and viewership statistics for WWE) has been going around trying to prove how Bryan was a failure in ratings, merchandise and draw in general using the recent reign as champion during his heel run, ignoring that between late 2013 to early 2014, Bryan was pretty popular with his segments being one of the more higher ratings during 2013 and 2014 and his merchandise being the 2nd best selling behind John Cena's but outselling merchandise of WWE stars like Randy Orton, Batista and Brock Lesnar. Ratings during the YES! movement vs the Authority tended to be the highest rated segment of RAW in the lead up to Wrestlemania 30 with the post WM episode of RAW getting a 3.70 ratings with the Bryan/HHH segment being among the highest rated (some sources claim even higher than the post Streak destruction Brock Lesnar segment). When I brought this to Wolfpac's attention instead of responding he blocked me.

How about during the whole Super Cena phase, the IWC went as far as lying that John Cena was never popular with the IWC community before being pushed as the face of the company.

Or that while Roman Reigns didn't get ratings above 2.90 when he was the focal point, they still ignored that his merchandise once topped the bestselling merchandise charts and the Wrestlemania's he headlined were major success with Wrestlemania 32 where he and HHH headlined the show is officially the biggest drawing Wrestlemania in history.

So why is people within the wrestling fanbase waste time promoting this revisionist nonsense so prevalent?

@Frank23 why did u block this guy?

 

[The Elemental O]

@Frank23 why did u block this guy?

I just noticed that too, why did that happen?

 

[Sakurabaism]

The stats regarding Nash is true, Eddie is actually the lowest drawing champ. Cena is also true, marks were mad that The Nexus got buried badly but it's not like they're a good stable anyway. Reigns however, has a lot of variables that contributes to his merch selling power. To condense things up, the WWE machine is entirely behind him from the start, it'll be silly if he wasn't a top mover after all that push that he has got. As a comparison, AJ sold as much as Reigns in 2017 so Imagine if Vince put everything on the basket for AJ just like he did for Roman.

 

[The Elemental O]

The stats regarding Nash is true, Eddie is actually the lowest drawing champ. Cena is also true, marks were mad that The Nexus got buried badly but it's not like they're a good stable anyway. Reigns however, has a lot of variables that contributes to his merch selling power. To condense things up, the WWE machine is entirely behind him from the start, it'll be silly if he wasn't a top mover after all that push that he has got. As a comparison, AJ sold as much as Reigns in 2017 so Imagine if Vince put everything on the basket for AJ just like he did for Roman.

I didn't take that into consideration, thanks for reply.

 

[D.R.H.]

Why should the IWC be any different than any other WC? Revisionist history is the hip new thing on the interwebz.

 

[deezy]

Revisionist history should only be done by the winners.

IWC the furthest thing from that.

Hulk Hogan slammed Andre the Giant infront of 936252838261 screaming hulkamaniacs in the silverdome brothers.

 

[The Elemental O]

Why should the IWC be any different than any other WC? Revisionist history is the hip new thing on the interwebz.

 

[r-harper-1]

What a load of crap ....

 

[Joker Jiujitsu]

There's a lot of revisionist history in wrestling anyway.

Austin 3:16 supposedly being an overnight situation after KOTR 1996 even though Austin was still a midcard heel until the lead-up to his Mania match against Bret in 97.

WCW only being successful because of ex-WWF talent, even though plenty of wrestlers jumped the other way, and WCW homegrown talents like Sting, the Steiners, DDP, Luger, Giant, Harlem Heat, Rey Mysterio Jr, Goldberg and so many others were big stars. Plus WCW innovated a lot of creative camera angles, had plenty of great matches, and took a more serious approach that helped them gain a lot of fans and viewers.

 

[RandyCouture>U]

Stone cold was a geek who turned face and Bret vice versa at mania 13. No Austin was pretty much a face and Bret was already almost all heel. Sure the match solidified it. Still one of my all-time favorite matches.

Hogan got Austin fired from WCW. When I first got into the iwc almost twenty years ago, it was always flair brought up. Steiner even references this in one of his nitro shoot promos.

WCW wasn't a viable company in 2000-2001. They might not have been what they were but look at the numbers. Pretty sure there ratings and attendance aren't to far off of wwe's current ratings.

 

[Gambit MMA]

Stone cold was a geek who turned face and Bret vice versa at mania 13. No Austin was pretty much a face and Bret was already almost all heel. Sure the match solidified it. Still one of my all-time favorite matches.

Hogan got Austin fired from WCW. When I first got into the iwc almost twenty years ago, it was always flair brought up. Steiner even references this in one of his nitro shoot promos.

WCW wasn't a viable company in 2000-2001. They might not have been what they were but look at the numbers. Pretty sure there ratings and attendance aren't to far off of wwe's current ratings.

I read someone say WCW was still drawing in the 2.0s or high 1s for their ratings, where as wrestling now is in the gutter drawing 0.2 rating

 

[Based God]

WCW wasn't a viable company in 2000-2001. They might not have been what they were but look at the numbers. Pretty sure there ratings and attendance aren't to far off of wwe's current ratings.

I've seen this one hundreds of times over the years. Which is funny.

WCW was definitely viable still, that's why Bischoff had investors lined up willing to pay AOL Time Warner a ton of money plus take on all of those massive contracts. WCW just got fucked over by Brad Siegel tanking the deal and selling to WWF for next to nothing instead.

 

[SocraticMethod]

There's a lot of revisionist history in wrestling anyway.

Austin 3:16 supposedly being an overnight situation after KOTR 1996 even though Austin was still a midcard heel until the lead-up to his Mania match against Bret in 97.

WCW only being successful because of ex-WWF talent, even though plenty of wrestlers jumped the other way, and WCW homegrown talents like Sting, the Steiners, DDP, Luger, Giant, Harlem Heat, Rey Mysterio Jr, Goldberg and so many others were big stars. Plus WCW innovated a lot of creative camera angles, had plenty of great matches, and took a more serious approach that helped them gain a lot of fans and viewers.

The lead-up to Austin's Survivor Series match with Bret was when he really advanced up the card, which was in the fall of 1996. He was starting to get traction with the crowd after the Austin 3:16 promo, but it didn't really translate to his push. SummerSlam 1996 was my first PPV and I was cheering like crazy for Austin ... who beat Yoko in the Free For All when Yoko went for the Bonzai Drop but the ropes broke. Lulz.

 

[Kforcer]

There's a lot of revisionist history in wrestling anyway.

Austin 3:16 supposedly being an overnight situation after KOTR 1996 even though Austin was still a midcard heel until the lead-up to his Mania match against Bret in 97.

Mid-card heels don't win the Royal Rumble, though. Unless you consider that part of the lead-up, which in a sense it was, I guess. But all through '97 he was a main eventer; he was in matches with all the biggest names, Michaels, Undertaker, Hart...and shown to be one of their peers.