Email This Article - Contact Us - VIP Sign-Up - Back to Home Page

|

The following features key excerpts of Jim Ross's latest blog (available here) in italics followed by thoughts on his response - the first lengthy addressing of the suspensions by a WWE official other than perhaps Jerry McDevitt's interview on Fox News on Thursday night...

We have been hit with more negatively vented comments the past couple of days than I am going to suggest the webmaster post regarding the suspensions of several wrestlers regarding violations of the WWE's Wellness Policy. Some of these comments borderline on the insane ramblings of uninformed, albeit passionate people, who now have a new cause du jour to rally around. I must also point out that some of the comments were succinctly written, well thought out and heartfelt. Those might see "the light of day" but the voluminous, seemingly never ending ones will not.

WK: I'm just not sure on the week when more than a dozen WWE performers have been caught buying drugs online that were supposedly being tested for with WWE's Wellness Policy is the time to be making comments about people with a "cause du jour." It comes across immediately as blaming people for overreacting or gang tacking WWE when it's down. Instead, more often, I'd like to see someone representing WWE lead with a comment about how disappointed they are that their system failed them.

Shouldn't WWE's first finger be pointed at someone such as Dr. Black, who assured WWE that he was thoroughly testing these performers for many of these drugs that wrestlers, we now have found out, were buying online for a full year after the policy was implemented? Shouldn't WWE's first finger pointing be at the wrestlers who let down the company by breaking the rules? Shouldn't the first finger be pointed at WWE itself, the institution, for creating incentives for wrestlers to use these drugs?

No, the first two paragraphs immediately take aim at "critics" or fans who choose to make this their "cause du jour." This should have been WWE's "cause du jour" five years ago, not something that took one tragedy after another to care enough about to act on. If fans want to make wrestlers' lies, hypocrisy, policy-breaking, law-breaking, and system-cheating their cause of the moment, so be it. They should be applauded for caring. If a few overreact, deal with it. WWE has earned it. The level of trust WWE fans have in management, the drug testing company, and the wrestlers is perhaps at an all-time low. Blaming them right now for overreacting is not, I would humbly suggest, an approach that's going to fly with the people WWE most needs to win over right now.

The WWE's Wellness Policy is real. It is also evolving and improving. Changes to this program needed to be made and are being initiated. The long term health of all WWE Superstars should be, and I feel, is the top priority of the company. It certainly is from my personal perspective. Talent and Television are what makes the WWE what it is today and one without the other is a recipe for less then desired success. Being a former head of talent, I have always, perhaps egocentrically, said that talent was the key to the WWE because that's what the company is selling; talented, athletic, charismatic performers who draw fans into the talents' personas by encouraging the fans to emotionally invest. Without talented and highly skilled men and women, what do the TV folks put on the tube? Again, that's an old, talent guy talking.

WK: The Wellness Policy is now constantly referred to by people within WWE as "evolving and improving," yet this is the same policy they boldly (and hastily) proclaimed in a press release - written a day after the Benoit Family Tragedy - somehow definitively proved Benoit "could not have been on steroids" at the time of his death. If it's been improved or evolved, how? Where is the latest press release from WWE updating everyone about what's changed? You can't even find their policy online - or at least I can't, and I've looked.

The WWE has suspended several of its superstars this past week for the right reasons.

WK: I'd have led with that line. I'd have saved the complaints about overreacting until a bit later if included at all. As J.R. would say, that's just my opinion.

Some "fans" and many wrestling pundits/critics will say, "well, it's about time," or some might say, "it's only because Congress is looking over the WWE's shoulder," and a few, I stress a few, might even say, "Good job, WWE." You select any response you choose. That's your right, but most likely the responses will be less than positive because that's the type of society we seem to live in today. Good news doesn't travel as fast as bad news nor is it as ratings worthy or as topical. Cable news shows rarely lead off their broadcasts with "good news" and there is a reason for that. It's called ratings. Controversy does create cash.

WK: First, let's admit that there are good and bad reporters, good and bad cable news programs, good and bad media entities. Some are after the truth, others just out to sensationalize or take a shortcut to garner ratings. It should be frustrating to WWE that some reporters get the story wrong. I understand that. I also don't believe that the bad media is the story here. Nor should it be a constant target of WWE until WWE gets its house in order.

We live in a "type of society" that trusts until that trust is violated. That's how I look at this situation. Fans were told a Wellness Policy was in place that worked. Fans were assured by wrestlers, voluteering themselves to speak on this subject, that the locker room was clean, that Marc Mero didn't know what he was talking about, that it was a business now, not party-central. That may be true in some technical sense, in that perhaps (perhaps, but how are we trust anything at this point coming from WWE wrestlers who speak on this?) there is less party-drug use and less prescription pill usage. But if that's been replaced with body chemistry experiments with various versions of steroids, growth hormone, breast cancer medicine, and other drugs purchased in one of the most shady ways possible - through an online pharmacy without a doctor actually physically examining much less meeting these wrestlers - how cleaned up is WWE?

Why would anyone say "Good job, WWE" at this point? Because, when faced with a government-obtained list of contracted performers who violated their policy they acted as they promised the public they would - with suspensions? WWE didn't go above and beyond anything in doing this. If they want a pat on the back for the equivalent of a police officer reading a witness his rights or a judge instructing the jury properly or a child saying thank you after receiving a gift from grandma, then so be it: Great job, WWE! But at this point, WWE shouldn't be complaining about the type of society we live in.

The idea that "bad news" draws ratings and sells newspapers and is thus why "bad news" is reported is silly, and Ross is smarter than that. Does he really want to watch a newscast that lists every citizen who drove at or under the speed limit on his or her way home from work today, or an update on the high-speed drag race that endangered the lives of innocent drivers in the area? Does he want a list of the homes in his neighborhood that weren't broken into, or the one across the street from his house that was? Does he want to hear about all of the police officers who are doing their jobs properly in his neighborhood, or the one who is in cahoots with local criminals betraying his citizens? Does he want a list of the international airlines that are safe, or be alerted to the three that have a terrible safety record? Does he want the news filled with lists of products that are safe, or should scarce newscast time be given to listing the toys from China with lead paint on them? When a dog bites a man, it's not news. When a man bits a dog, it's unusual, so it makes news.

Are people saying WWE acted only because Congress is looking over their shoulders? Some are. And what even minuscule piece of evidence is there that such a thought is unfounded? When was the last time WWE started a pricey, inconvenient drug policy when there hadn't been any media stories or government interest in their lack of a policy? For the stretch of years when WWE got one puff piece after another during the Monday Night War era, WWE didn't implement drug testing. When did it start? After Eddie Guerrero died, when the media storm arrived. When was the second round of cardio testing? Right after Benoit died. When did WWE decide to go public with future Wellness Test failures? Right after the government provided them with a list of wrestlers blatantly violating the Wellness Policy by buying banned drugs online - two offenses for the price of one.

Why isn't Jim Ross publicly asking how wrestlers buying steroids weren't caught by Dr. Black's program? Why isn't he saying more about the catch-22 of growth hormone, and how even a perfect drug testing system isn't going to catch growth hormone use if growth hormone isn't tested for - and it's expense and requires blood samples, not just urine? Why isn't he talking about pushing cruiserweights and tag teams who are athletic and have marketable personalities instead of continuing with WWE's policy of giving chance after chance to body-building types with limited skills or assets beyond that?

I applaud the WWE for taking such a strong stance in suspending many of its Superstars for violation of policy. The WWE cut the wrestlers a break by not making their names public but will do so after November 1 to anyone who is in violation of the Wellness Program. Even though it would have not been totally fair, I would have been tempted to make these recent offenders' names public on this go round. Most likely or at least in my personal opinion no one violated the Wellness Program inadvertently and everyone knew the ramifications. It will be interesting to see how many "fess up" to their indiscretion and admit their wrong doing and learn from this experience. How many will pass the buck and rationalize that what they did was somewhat, no matter how vaguely, the right thing to do under their particular and specific situations?

Not getting paid for 30 days and being largely forgotten on TV isn't a good thing for any performer or wrestler. Adding the public embarrassment of the world knowing of the indiscretion will also be challenging and embarrassing for individuals to handle as it relates to their families, including their children, business associates, fans and themselves. Some of these wrestlers could easily lose six figures of income for their lack of judgment. That would definitely get my attention. And if it didn't, I would suggest I did not belong in the organization. Period.

WK: Now we're getting somewhere in these paragraphs, and I sincerely applaud Ross. I believe this is closer to how he really feels, and I think he led with the paragraphs he did in order to build up some points within WWE with management and the talent that he, too, can engage in the media-bashing, before also unleashing on the talents who let WWE down - management, fans, sponsors, affiliates, etc.

What WWE needs is someone with the credibility and tenure of Ross, someone respected by fans as Ross is (and deservedly so), to speak out on behalf of the fans and the industry at large, strongly nudging wrestlers to hold themselves accountable and ask for forgiveness instead of offering up excuses or remaining silent when faced with facts that fly in the face of their previous public statements.

I don't know how any of us are going to change the past and the tragedies that have occurred to another generation of wrestlers. I sure wish I could. We can't bring back our many friends and peers who have left us too early. But we can do something about the future. Things can and must change going forward. And I believe they will.

WK: I do believe as soon as WWE wrestlers and management stop playing the victim card in situations like this and speak more like Ross did in this very paragraph, fans will be willing to forgive, but not forget. Fans will be forgiving - perhaps even moreso than WWE deserves - if WWE collectively coordinates a tone of regret and a true dedication to improving - not slowly, not only when under outside pressure, not only after another tragedy - but rapidly and transparently. Fans will allow WWE to save face if they seem willing to admit - without excuses or playing the "victim card" first - their mistakes and lay out a clear plan to fix things.

As mortal beings we can only affect the present and the future to any degree. The past is history and history is to be studied and learned from.

WK: Excellent. The past is not to be forgotten. It should be studied and learned from. Again, great points by Ross. That it took this long for WWE to take these steps is, frankly, shameful. But beating that drum won't lead to change, just more resentment and finger-pointing. WWE has perhaps a final chance to do the right thing and not timidly make small changes, but drastically and decisively make big changes to prevent more preventable tragedies and disasters.

I am saddened and disappointed in those that have been suspended. I hope they learn from their mistakes and can return to the roster and become positive role models to their teammates and to the fans. That opportunity exists. In the meantime, the absence of the offenders from the locker room will provide an extraordinary opportunity to those superstars who haven't cheated and are still on the active roster. In all candor, I would say fans of the product are in for some interesting TV fare over the next several weeks. New faces in new scenarios isn't a bad thing.

WK: There's still the question of what other online pharmacies were used by another group of performers. What is WWE doing to find out about that? One way would be to have Vince McMahon and others, such as Ross, meet privately with every contracted performer and ask them to reveal any previous online purchases anytime in the past. If they come clean voluntarily, they will not be suspended for it. But they will be told that their next strike is their last. While they won't be suspended, they will have two strikes on their record, so any future test failures or policy violations will lead to termination.

The roster should also be told that if they don't admit to past online purchases and a future government investigation reveals they lied, they will be fired and not rehired. It would be great to have TNA join WWE in committing to not hire wrestlers who are revealed to have used online pharmacies in the past and didn't reveal it privately to McMahon during meetings this month. That would go a long way to insulate WWE from future surprises. If they explained that they conducted the exact above procedure, then when future lists were revealed, WWE could explain that none of the names surprise them and everyone on that list had admitted it in the past and had been punished - through the two strikes being added to their record.

WWE should submit the list to an independent agency or attorney or even a member of Congress so that should other wrestlers turn up on such online pharmacy customer lists, WWE could have an independent entity confirm they fessed up before there was such proof.

Opportunity knocks and I can't wait to see who steps up.

As usual, I am not asking anyone to agree with my personal opinions. This space is my space to express myself and to provide a platform for the visitors of our site to do likewise much more often than not. If you are angered that your comment was not posted, then I apologize. However, there are plenty of forums that will encourage and solicit all the angst one might want to contribute.

I have been honest with you on this commentary and if that isn't good enough, then so be it. No one asked me to write this nor did any one approve or disapprove it before it was posted in case some of the "Oliver Stone's" out there might be thinking otherwise.

WK: Same here. These are my opinions. Nobody asked me to write it, either! If I angered Ross or anyone in WWE, I am sorry they feel that way. If anyone within WWE, including Ross, wants to respond, I would obviously give them space on this website.

I will conclude by saying that Ross's heart is in the right place. I think he is a loyal WWE employee and it does hurt him to see people piling on during a time like this. He contributed so much in so many largely thankless or underrecognized ways as V.P. of Talent Relations during WWE's most successful boom period he hates to see that lost or soiled by a company earning a disgraceful reputation over the past two years - which is a result of a dozen years or more of failures to act on a growing problem. He also doesn't want people to drive by his BBQ restaurant and say, "That's that guy who hosts that TV show with all of those lying, hypocrtical, or dying drug users. Let's go to KFC instead."

As natural as it is to focus on a few people who write to him or post elsewhere comments that go overboard and aren't founded on reasoned, informed opinion, by the second half of his commentary, he hit most of the key points that needed to be addressed. There are still unanswered questions that aren't appropriate for Ross to ask in public. I hope he and others in WWE are asking them privately - first and foremost being: "Dr. Black, how did the vaunted WWE Wellness Policy that you administer and oversee fail to detect all of these banned drugs from the systems of so many wrestlers?"

Then, Vince McMahon needs to ask himself and others in management how they can reconfigure the way WWE presents itself on television in a way that doesn't send wrestlers scurrying to online pharmacies to obtain drugs that help them look a certain way. What is it about the incentive-system WWE has created that rewards wrestlers who resort to such actions? Once that is answered, some tough changes need to be made to who is pushed, what is asked of wrestlers (both in the ring and in terms of the demanding schedule), and who is hired in the first place. The message WWE sends will be heard all the way to the recent high school graduate who is thinking of getting into pro wrestling.

There's the skinny kid who looks like a young Barry Windham who is willing to take steroids and HGH and whatever else and will "do whatever it takes" to impress Vince McMahon. Then there's the other skinny kid with just as much athletic skills and charisma who is not willing to put that stuff in his body; he is therefore likely to choose a different career path because he doesn't see role models in WWE who got the break he seeks looking like he does.

Most 20 year old, athletically gifted people who are Jamie Noble's size aren't likely to pursue a career in pro wrestling right now because there isn't a message being sent by WWE that people under 5-9 stand a chance to win a match on TV or become a bona fide superstar in WWE. Let's see: There's Rey Mysterio, and... uh... Do London & Kendrick count?

As soon as WWE stacks its roster with super-talented, super-charismatic, super-motivated wrestlers under 5-9 either in a serious cruiserweight division or a revamped and stacked tag team division, the under-5-9 crowd of twentysomethings won't bother attempting to get to WWE. (And let's be clear: You can be a steroid abuser under 5-9, too. WWE needs to hire smaller wrestlers and then push them based on talent and charisma, not being short bodybuilder types like the dead Brady Boone or Rick McGraw - two of the early casualties of the bodybuilder era of this industry.)

So WWE can send that message from the top down. Once they do, a wealth of previously untapped talent will begin to surface in coming months and years. We will suffer through fewer Chris Masters and Sean O'Haires and Mark Jindraks getting chance after chance after chance before fizzling, fewer Batista clustermess disastrous matches at or near the top of PPVs, and more Barry Windhams, Mick Foleys, Jamie Nobles, Sean Waltmans, Shawn Michaels, Jeff Hardys, Bobby Eatons, Ric Flairs, Alex Shelleys, and Rey Mysterios - the bodytypes right now getting fewer opportunities and incentives than the bigger guys with less talent but genetic "gifts" and a willingness to swallow and stick anything into their bodies to impress Vince McMahon. Those are the types right now WWE is seeking out and attracting into this industry - as evidenced by this week's list of online drug customers working for WWE.

I am positive that WWE stacked with a roster of wrestlers similar to Windham, Foley, Noble, Waltman, Michaels, Hardy, Eaton, Flair, Shelley, and Mysterio - the sleek, cut, athletic versions of them - would draw money and provide a better overall product. The choice to change isn't a bitter pill to swallow; instead, it's a path to another boom period. It's win-win for the wrestlers (with talent and charisma) and for Vince McMahon.

Send feedback on this article to pwtorch@gmail.com and we'll regularly publish reader feedback in the "Torch Feedback" category on the Main Listing.

For more BREAKING NEWS on WWE, TNA!
VISIT OUR AFFILIATE - PROWRESTLING.NET

For UFC & MMA NEWS & BLOGS:
VISIT OUR SISTER SITE - MMATORCH.COM

Upgrade to PWTORCH VIP: DETAILS & SIGN-UP INFO

(c) 1999-2009 TDH Communications Inc. - All rights reserved.