Paul Heyman Talks TNA Doing ECW Reunions, Spike TV Not Renewing TNA, His WWE DVD
Source: NewsdayAlfonso Castillo of Newsday has a lengthy Q&A up with Paul Heyman at this link, to promote Heyman's new WWE DVD. Below are a few highlights:
WWE releasing a DVD about him:
"I look at it from many different perspectives. Number one, I don't think I ever had any bigger advocate, besides my father, than Vince McMahon during the 1990s. There's a story that is recounted on the documentary. I was sitting in the office with Steven Chau in 2000, who was the president of the USA Network reporting directly to Barry Diller. This was at the time when WWE was in federal court in order to jump to Viacom off of USA Network. And USA was looking to fill the programming slot, and ECW was the frontrunner for that option at the time. And during the meeting, Steven Chau showed me a printed-out email that he had received the night before from Vince McMahon that said, "If your network doesn't do business with ECW and, more specifically, with Paul Heyman, you will be depriving your network of a great resource and your viewers of guaranteed great programming." And Vince had no reason to do that except it's what he felt at the time. He felt ECW was a great shop for the industry in terms of developing talent. So I can't tell you that I've spent my life butting heads with the McMahons. I've had my ups and downs with them, as anybody else in my position would. I would not have guessed three or four years ago that a documentary on my career would have been released by WWE. But I wouldn't have guessed three or four years ago that I would have been back in WWE."
TNA doing another ECW revival and if it's time to move on:
"I think it's very much time for anybody and everybody to move on, especially on a product that you're trying to push forward. Nostalgia tours are great, but not in a youth oriented and dominated industry. I think the lesson learned in all this is that Spike TV didn't renew them. And one of the reasons has to be that the most passionate reaction they can get is for a product that went away in 2001. And they've been trying to brand themselves since their inception and they can't get it done. They should have spent that time and energy trying to brand themselves and not trying to elicit a response of an audience based on a product that they don't even own."
Got a news tip or correction? Send it to us by clicking here.