BY WADE KELLER, PWTORCH EDITOR

Here at WadeKeller.com, we'll be running a variety of articles on the fall of WCW and the takeover by WWE of the brand. This is an article from ten years ago this week looking at WCW's failure to develop young talent to help insulate them from the reliance on older talent with expensive guaranteed contracts well after their main event drawing power diminished.

The ideas in this column, and the picture of WCW mistakes, apply to WWE today as the draft this week reveals where their strengths lie but also where they have weaknesses in need of addressing. That is part of my analysis in this week's new PWTorch Newsletter cover story (#1201), which was posted earlier today for PWTorch VIP members. Sign up here: www.pwtorch.com/govip.

WADE KELLER'S END NOTES
PWTORCH NEWSLETTER #651
COVER-DATED: APR. 28, 2001

One of the key reasons for Eric Bischoff's downfall in WCW, according to Jerry Jarrett in this week's "Torch Talk," was his lack of cultivating young talent.

Those who were fans of WCW Nitro during its peak period were sounding sirens loudly that in order for the company to continue on its hot streak, it had to keep mixing unestablished talent with the established so-called Brand Names. Most often cited were Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, and Booker T. Instead, Bischoff stayed with the Brand Name power brokers who manipulated him into believing that to be worthy of a main event push you (a) either had to have drawn money before; or (b), well there was no other option.

Bischoff didn't believe in building new stars. Or he didn't have confidence in his ability to do so successfully. Or he didn't want to upset the powerbroker Brand Names who had the power to rally together to get him ousted should he even hint at wanting to share the wealth by introducing new wrestlers into the main event mix. Or he didn't think he had the proper young talent to become top tier stars.

Whatever the reason, this past Saturday night showed more effectively than anything how quickly a star can be established. In boxing, an unknown underdog upset a heavily-favored champion. Now the sports world is talking about boxing.

The introduction of an unknown into the main event mix can be done easily and without upsetting or bruising any egos. Pro wrestling is an athletic drama. No one should take themselves so seriously that they shouldn't be willing to do a job for the right reasons. No promoter shouldn't seize the opportunity to book an upset now and then with the proper young star.

One of the side-effects of booking an upset is that it can derail plans for two top stars to face off (Lennox Lewis vs. Mike Tyson). It may seem problematic to some, but to others it's an opportunity. It's a chance to delay the obvious and build anticipation for it as a result.

If, for instance, during Kevin Nash's run as WCW Champion, just a month or two before his big rematch with Goldberg or defense against Bret Hart, he could have walked into a TV defense against Booker T out-of-shape and overconfident (two traits that are far from a stretch for Nash to pull off). Booker T could have upset him, throwing off the inevitable, much-anticipated (?) defenses against the established stars.

Nash would then chase Booker T, trying to regain the title first. Even if Nash regained the title one or two PPVs later (Booker wins the first rematch, Nash wins the second), a new star is born. Nash's defenses against Goldberg and Bret would be even more anticipated because Nash's character would have grown as a result of the loss. Losing one match doesn't make you a loser. It means you entered a match overconfident and lost. Big deal. The Rams of '99-'00 lost a few games, but are still considered one of the greatest teams ever. The great Michael Jordan-led Bulls teams lost 20 percent of their games, but no one doubts they're among the greatest teams ever.

Boxing now has two "money matches" instead of one - and if Tyson vs. Lewis takes place, it will mean more now that everyone wonders if Lewis learned a lesson from his temporary loss of the title. In the mean time, boxing has a new star who may or may not turn into a long-term draw.

WCW could have turned Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Booker T, and others into stars. The people at the top usually have a mix of valid and bogus reasons for why those knocking on the door of the top tier aren't quite ready. Those reasons, though, rarely override the consequences of not taking the chance regularly. Staleness among main eventers is much worse than giving someone a push too soon.

In this era of 12 PPVs per year, WCW could have used a few short-term feuds to headline PPVs to pad the space between the Brand Name vs. Brand Name main events. The matches between the biggest stars seem bigger if they're not taking place every month. There are few stories that are more interesting to tell than an unexpectedly hot underdog fighting against the odds to reach main event status perhaps before his time. The Minnesota Twins in baseball are experiencing that right now, and it's the best thing that could have happened to baseball.

This brings us to a current event in pro wrestling: Jeff Hardy's push. The WWF powerbrokers may have a long list of reasons why Jeff Hardy is in no way, shape, or form ready to headline a PPV. He's not ready, undeserving, and it would upset the incentive structure of the WWF, some would argue. That may be true. But it begs this question: How many wrestling fans would be more excited about seeing the first rematch between IC Champ Jeff Hardy and former champ Triple H after three weeks of build-up this Sunday on PPV rather than a stale tag match we've seen in some form or another a hundred times? The WWF missed out on the chance to give Jeff a slightly longer push by giving him a PPV main event and for once build some delayed gratification among the top stars.

Please Recommend or Like This Article on Twitter or Facebook

KELLER BLOG: Paul Heyman alliance with C.M. Punk - where does it go from here?

KELLER'S WWE SUMMERSLAM PPV BLOG: Results and analysis throughout the show including Lesnar vs. Triple H, Cena vs. Punk vs. Show

KELLER: C.M. Punk is not best utilized as a tweener, despite a recent reader poll; he should be all out heel

Comment on this Article Below