Vince Russo: Archangel Or Antichrist?

What do you think of Vince Russo?

John Corrigan: He’s entertaining and makes me laugh a lot. As polarizing as he is, he’s also inspiring. He went from a fan like you and me to highly influential figure in the industry in record time.

Juan Bautista: He is someone who, at one point in time, could contribute, but since then, he has infected every company he has touched. Say what you want to say about the decline of WCW, Russo definitely sped up its death. He also ruined TNA. It was the roster with the most depth: a thriving women’s division, tag team division and X division. The heavyweight title scene had Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, AJ Styles and others on the rise. With Russo as head creative, it all went to shit. The Spike TV deal was ruined and everything was compromised.

Matthew Smith: He was a driving force in the Attitude Era, and then like Vince McMahon now, he didn’t know when to let go of creative control.

David Gibb: Vince Russo was a “disrupter” before the term had been coined. He was an agent of chaos within wrestling who fundamentally changed the way fans and bookers perceive roster stratification and storytelling, especially with regard to pace.

Steven Jackson: I find Vince Russo incredibly annoying. His voice irritates me and his personality really gets on my nerves. He reminds me a lot of Simon Cowell, another man I am not able to take for too long as well.

Jack Goodwillie: I don’t really hate Vince Russo. I have always taken the side of Jim Cornette, which I’ll elaborate on down the page, and there are several corroborated stories of Russo’s behind-the-scenes buffoonery, particularly in TNA. I wouldn’t hire him today if given the chance, but he has a place in wrestling history as his writing style heavily influenced the current WWE product, as formulaic as it has become.

Does he get the credit he deserves for the Attitude Era?

Corrigan: Yes, but only from everyone outside WWE. It would have been classy for Vince McMahon to acknowledge Russo’s contributions on any of the numerous Attitude Era tributes that WWE has produced over the past 20 years.

Bautista: He does deserve some credit, but not all. There are producers, directors and the wrestlers that make everything click. If one of these factors didn’t click, then the Attitude Era wouldn’t have been as hot as it was.

Smith: He gets the proper amount of credit. If we ever get confirmation on McMahon sending him to WCW to destroy it from within, well, then the man is a living legend.

Chad Gelfand: Russo does get his proper due. He helped come up with a lot of memorable characters for people all over the card and he created some iconic segments as well. However, people are also right in pointing out all of the awful, nonsensical segments and angles of the Attitude Era that haven’t aged well.

Gibb: Yes. He gets the right amount of credit, which is to say people acknowledge he wrote the TV and had an influence on Vince McMahon’s overall creative process.

Jackson: Vince Russo does get the credit he deserves for the Attitude Era. He did help usher in the edgier product for the WWF during the mid-to-late-1990s and really helped to push a lot of stars who were doing very little at the time. What Russo rarely gets credit for is his ability to make sure there were compelling feuds throughout a two-hour broadcast, something that is very lost in WWE today.

Goodwillie: He does. It’s no coincidence that the talent under the WWF’s roof at the time was off the charts and Vince McMahon’s vision and aggressive television philosophy ultimately sank WCW. But from what I’ve heard, Russo’s strength came in one-on-one interaction, whether it was with guys like Steve Austin and The Rock making slight alterations for the long-term health of their respective characters to godfathering the Goldust character with the man behind the paint, Dustin Rhodes. It does stand to reason though that the guy needed a filter, and for that we have to be careful not give him too much credit for WWE coming out of the doldrums.

Should WWE bring him back?

Corrigan: I would absolutely sit through all three hours of Raw next week if Russo wrote it.

Bautista: Hell no.

Smith: I don’t think it would help at this time. I was really excited to have Eric Bischoff back in the fold on SmackDown, and before we could even blink our eyes, he was gone. With no one allowed to have creative control, I don’t see what good bringing him back would even do.

Gelfand: As 2013 Daniel Bryan used to say, “NO!”

Gibb: Anybody can be brought back on a short leash. He already did it once, though, and I think it famously lasted about a week.

Jackson: At this point, bringing Russo back wouldn’t do any more damage than what is already being done. Or would it?!

Goodwillie: Again, I would not hire Vince Russo to a wrestling company in 2019. He is a non-fit in WWE particularly, because his angle-heavy approach to wrestling television is really the basis of Raw and SmackDown these days, with wrestling mattering very little in the grand scheme. On top of that, his racy ideas bordered on controversial at times and would not fly with the current WWE branding. Smaller companies like AEW, MLW and Impact seem to have their bases covered with some of the most critically acclaimed shows out there, and New Japan and NWA are no-fly zones for their wrestling focus. One show lacking identity, however is Ring of Honor. While I’m not advocating for that marriage, this is a company that has seen its standing in North America dip considerably in recent years. What would there be to lose?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xH_RsQ_UgY

What’s his worst contribution to the industry?

Corrigan: Oklahoma, the J.R. parody. I’d bet Russo regrets that one the most.

Bautista: There’s so much, but I’ll just stick with what I was able to watch: the Last Rites match.

Smith: Winning the World Title. It made the belt look like a joke and just put all eyes on him.

Gelfand: His car crash style of television, while working fantastic in the short term, proved to actually be detrimental in the long term. Doing constant title changes, blowing through feuds and throwing a million things at the wall to see what sticks isn’t conducive to making good long term television.

Gibb: Guiding fledgling TNA toward being a raunchier version of a ‘98 Raw rather than something completely different.

Jackson: His worst contribution to the industry is a toss-up between the terrible TNA period of 2009 and WCW 2000. Due to the immediate impact on wrestling, WCW 2000 is his worst contribution. Such a terrible waste of talent and money.

Goodwillie: It either has to be a.) Ruining what at the time was the hottest company in pro wrestling (TNA), or b.) The overuse and general over saturation of worked shoot angles, including my personal favorite, “Goldberg REFUSES to Follow the Script.”

Is his feud with Jim Cornette the only real rivalry left in wrestling?

Corrigan: I’m under the impression that almost everything is a work in wrestling, but I truly believe that Cornette hates Russo. I don’t think the feeling is mutual, so maybe it’s not a real rivalry.

Bautista: Yes. It has been going 20 years strong now.

Smith: I don’t know, things between Cornette and Joey Janela are kind of picking up. Honestly, I think there are plenty of real rivals in the wrestling world – they have just kept a tighter lip about them.

Gelfand: I don’t know about the only real rivalry left in wrestling, but it’s certainly the most long term rivalry. They will be fighting with each other until the end of time without ever actually fighting one another.

Gibb: No. Most of the other contenders I’m thinking of also involve Jim Cornette, though.

Jackson: Not at all. The Russo vs. Cornette feud has just had its day and really tires me now. There are plenty more scripted and un-scripted wrestling rivalries that are a lot more entertaining and exciting than theirs.

Goodwillie: Depends on how you view the term, “real rivalry.” AEW vs. NXT can certainly be defined as a tenuous, but friendly rivalry, and there’s definitely something to MLW and ROH. But as far as rivalries go, can you even call the hatred between these two a rivalry? No one’s going over. Depending on who you talk to, there’s not necessarily a face or a heel, and as of this writing, neither guy is currently involved in the creative of a wrestling company. That said, the exchanges are wildly entertaining and there IS a ton of money to be made in some sort of 1-on-1 confrontation. They’d be a fool if they didn’t take advantage, and quite honestly Impact seems like it would be a great place to stage it as a company that’s not afraid to push the envelope and has shown a willingness to work with anybody.

BETTER YET (this just came to me), I’d have it headline the rumored TNA throwback show scheduled to go down WrestleMania Weekend. Russo vs. Cornette in the main event, MCMG vs. Generation Me in the co-main. If any of you guys are reading this, please make it happen.