Dot Net Mailbag Answers to reader questions on the Congressional hearings, ECW, and Hulk Hogan Mar 2, 2008 - 12:11 PM Email This Article | Printer Friendly Page Send Us News & Results | Back to Main Listing I'm not very knowledgeable regarding these Congressional investigations. So what was this conference all about and what is it going to lead to? For months it's been said that Congress is investigating wrestling. So is this a hearing on WWE? What does it mean that Vince McMahon won't be attending and what could be the ramifications? What does this all mean for WWE's future? Noe Salgado Powell replies: This was not a hearing on WWE. The conference on Wednesday covered professional sports. They had a second panel that was geared toward amateur sports shortly after the professional sports people were dismissed. The first panel featured commissioners Roger Goodell (NFL), David Stern (NBA), Bud Selig (MLB), and Gary “Screw Canada” Bettman (NHL), among others. Vince was invited to appear, but cited the fact that his attorney Jerry McDevitt was involved in a high-profile hearing in Pittsburgh as the reason for declining their invitation. WWE critics feel he dodged the hearing and should have attended even though McDevitt was unable to join him. Congress has been investigating the use of performance enhancing drugs in all professional sports, not just professional wrestling. Vince, Linda McMahon, and Stephanie McMahon all testified individually at a previous hearing. Bobby Lashley and Chris Masters were contacted as part of the investigation shortly after they were released from WWE. I was told they were asked about the company’s drug testing policy among other things. The hearing chairman Bobby Rush sent Dixie Carter a letter back in August and the company held their first drug tests earlier this year and the crew was told that the results would be submitted to Congress. What does this mean for professional wrestling? It’s hard to say at this point. Given some of the comments made by Congressmen during and after the hearing, it sounds like Vince made it personal by not attending. One representative even went so far as to suggest that he “flipped his finger” at them by not taking part in the hearing, while another stated that Vince didn’t deserve to sit at the same table as their “esteemed panel.” If Congress wants to play hardball with Vince, they could subpoena him for further testimony. Vince has claimed that he will make himself available to a future hearing when his lawyer is available. Congress could force WWE to adhere to stricter drug testing by passing legislation to ensure the validity of the testing procedure. WWE and the wrestling business could receive bad publicity if the Congressmen choose to hit hard with their comments and questions if a hearing were to take place (and based on some of the comments made at the previous hearing, it’s safe to assume that some would come at him hard). Of course, the McMahons could face severe punishment if Congress feels any portion of their previous testimony was untruthful. The subcommittee that held the hearing has been doing its homework as the discussions with Lashley and Masters (and who knows how many other wrestlers) prove. If the McMahons were not truthful, they could face perjury charges much like Barry Bonds is battling. There is also a chance that nothing could happen. Dave Meltzer noted in this week’s Wrestling Observer Newsletter that he’s convinced there will not be a hearing on professional wrestling because it’s an election year and the media reaction to the Roger Clemens hearings has been so negative. Meltzer wrote that before the hearings last week, so obviously his opinion may have changed based on what went down at the hearings. If the Congressmen who spoke out against McMahon are to be believed, Vince and WWE hasn’t heard the last from them. It's possible that McMahon avoided the national television cameras by not appearing at Wednesday's hearing. ESPN may not be inclined to a hearing that does not involve one of the mainstream sports, which would be a shame for a number of reasons, not to mention a mistake on their part because the volatile comments some Congressmen made toward McMahon at the last hearing combined with Vince's temper are causes to believe that a hearing with McMahon could make for great television. At this point, only time will tell what happens next and what the ramifications will be for WWE. I didn’t intend to write a novel, but even this is a simple description of a complicated matter. At this point, everything hinges on what Congress chooses to do next. *** I would love to see you discuss the state of ECW. I believe they put the final nail in the coffin by giving Chavo Guerrero the ECW Title. They definitely don't have enough talent for three brands, but ECW could have potential. Dan Giusti Powell replies: ECW is a third-rate brand that had the potential to be so much more. The creative end of the product should have been turned over to Paul Heyman. He was the mastermind behind the original ECW and I think he's the only person who could have wrote the next chapter properly. As someone who enjoyed the original ECW, it bothers me that WWE continues to use the name. It’s their property and I know they can do whatever they want with it, but it’s a shame that they didn’t respect the original version enough to hand over creative control of the new company to Heyman or let the name rest in peace following the first One Night Stand event. Having said all that, the show that airs on Sci-Fi each week has some positives even though I wish it went by another name. The younger wrestlers get pushes they would not receive if they were wrestling on Raw or Smackdown. It’s essentially a proving ground for young wrestlers. I tend to enjoy the show more often than not lately. It’s not the same type of enjoyment I get from a strong episode of Raw, but I don’t get my hopes up going in so I’m rarely let down. I don’t think Chavo winning the title is the nail in the coffin. He would not have been my first pick to hold the title, but the ratings during his reign are at least similar to those C.M. Punk was drawing as champion. Creatively, the biggest flaw they have right now is that Punk and Chavo are the only wrestlers in the title picture. They’ve wrestled one another in almost every television main event this year and I’m not looking forward to their next match on Tuesday. I don't think Tuesday’s match will lead to bigger and better things no matter who wins. Chavo is a weak champion and the promotion doesn't have any strong babyface challengers waiting in the wings, and giving the belt back to Punk would set him up to defend the title against mostly the same guys he already defeated in his last reign. ECW is what it is. Really, the best you can hope for is to come away mildly entertained. It’s something to watch on Tuesday night if you have an hour to kill, but it's never must-see TV. *** I just wanted to get your thoughts on a few topics. First, is Hulk Hogan starting a promotion? Could it work? Also, is Hulk Hogan going to be at WrestleMania? Would you like to see him wrestle Ric Flair? Lastly, is the Hall of Fame going to be shown in it's entirety or live this year on USA Network?   David Nordby Powell replies: Hogan and Eric Bischoff are pitching a reality show that involves celebrities training to be pro wrestlers. Do I think such a show could be successful? I guess it depends the celebrities involved and network support. It’s nothing I’m itching to see. Then again, I have no interest in watching a Scott Baio reality series, yet Bischoff’s production company has turned that show into a hit. If Hogan were to start a wrestling company, it would be difficult even if he had the right financial backing and television support simply because there are so few free agent wrestlers. Rob Van Dam is reportedly open to the idea of working for Hogan, but no one else really jumps out as far as free agents who have star power and are in their primes. Hogan has teased launching his own promotion for years, but it's never materialized, so I'll believe it when I see it. Will he be at WrestleMania? Never say never, but I’d be surprised. Would I like to see him wrestle Flair at WrestleMania? No, and fortunately Flair is now scheduled to wrestle Shawn Michaels. As for the Hall of Fame, I believe USA Network is scheduled to show an hour of the event on tape delay. BOOKMARK DOT NET AND ADD US TO YOUR RSS • HELP DOT NET: TAKE OUR ADVERTISER DEMO SURVEY CLICK TO RETURN TO MAIN LISTING OR SELECT A LINK BELOW FROM THIS CATEGORY Dot Net Mailbag Latest Twelve Articles Round Two of Dot Net reader feedback to Twilling's "Wrestling is Fake" blog Readers respond to Twilling's "What to tell people that say professional wrestling is fake" blog Reader questions and editor responses regarding Shane McMahon, Triple H, John Cena, Jeff Hardy, Mr. Kennedy Reader comments and editor feedback on Hulk Hogan's appearance on "Larry King Live" Dot Net reader comments (and editor response) on Monday's Raw, Bryan Danielson's WWE appearance, and Sunday's TNA Slammiversary pay-per-view A news reporter explains why Nick Hogan's audio recordings were released, reader criticizes Dot Net for being too hard on the Hogans