During a recent interview Eric Bischoff expressed strong opinions about Vince Russo's time as WCW president which stirred up the long-running debate about how Russo handled his role.
Bischoff directly stated that Russo failed to create meaningful wrestling stories that turned away fans and performers alike.
His approach displeased Bischoff because he treated wrestling scriptwriting as if he were writing for himself not people who love it.
He suggested that he used memorable moments exclusively without constructing proper stories.
Russo's unexpected speech at Bash at The Beach 2000 caused Hulk Hogan to leave and led to legal action which Vince developed without planning. According to Bischoff taking the planned direction away from WCW made it lose viewers in the end.
Clashing Visions: The New Blood Era
Eric and Vince could not cooperate well as leaders when they partnered to create New Blood.
The storyline sought to promote younger performers yet failed because managers disagreed on how to tell the story effectively. According to him Russo ruined the plot structure which made fans lose interest in the product.
He supported his methods as essential to compete with WWE's Attitude Era's content. He expressed that critics misunderstood his plans and that his work helped Booker T achieve prominence.
The dispute between Bischoff and Russo damaged WCW's ability to deliver effective results which effectively led to the company's closure.
Vince charged Eric with making up stories but Russo denied this and suggested that he blocked changes needed for success.
Through this Vice TV series named "Who Killed WCW?" the rivals continue their public dispute about WCW's decline. where both Bischoff and Russo share their perspectives. The show explores how WCW failed itself by letting conflict create damaging outcomes when it faced destruction.
When reviewing WCW history today the Bischoff-Russo saga shows everyone how a clash of creative views combined with personal hostility led WCW into dangerous waters.
Their experience as wrestling executives forms an important historical lesson on how differing creative visions and personal issues can hurt businesses.