PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE

PWINSIDER Q & A: WRESTLERS PITCHING IDEAS TO CREATIVE, MILLION DOLLAR WORKERS, UMAGA VS. TAKER, FREE SPEECH AND WWE, WHERE IS THE TV TITLE AND MORE

I have a question about creative having nothing for talents. Surely the workers have tons of ideas for their own characters. Are they not allowed to voice these ideas to creative? I mean obviously someone is trying to be creative, why not harvest the resources of every brain in your work force? God forbid they hang a cardboard suggestion box hanging somewhere. Is Vince just scared of trying something new? 

They are absolutely allowed to take their ideas to creative.  Sometimes, Vince even listens to them!  Unfortunately, I have also heard that far too many times that creative team members just say "he's not realistic, he's just trying to get himself over" when a talent brings an idea to them.  Well, of course they are trying to get themselves over, that is what creative is supposed to do with workers!  But yes, they are allowed to bring things to the table.  It's just that too often that is where the suggestions are left, on the table.

I know that Mark Henry and the Big Show's contracts are soon to expire, but are they the last of the wrestlers to get multi-millions a year out of the WWE? This is not counting Triple H of course. Some wrestlers I can see making over a million a year, like Kane, HBK, Undertaker and Cena, but the majority of the roster I assume gets under a million a year, correct? Sadly in most cases, way under a million? 

Yes, there are a handful of guys that make seven figures in WWE and they are the established, top names that you mentioned.  I heard from a few sources that Kurt Angle was telling people he made around three million dollars last year, but he also had a good downside on his deal.  But most of the talent is well under the million dollar mark (and in many cases, way way under it).

Do you think that if they kept Umaga's undefeated streak intact until WM 23, that there could be some interest in a match between Umaga and The Undertaker with a battle of undefeated streaks? 

I think it would be a cool concept to do that.  Unfortunately, that would mean he would have to beat John Cena and I don't see that happening unless they do it in a way that doesn't change the title.  But if they were both undefeated, I think it would make for a cool match, one that I think Undertaker has earned the right to win.

When WWF/E took over WCW, The one title they didn't use was the WCW World Television Title. I always thought the TV Title had a lot of great champions (Whether it was NWA and/or WCW) and a lot of great matches. Plus, there was a lot of history in the TV Title that WWF/E could have used. Why didn't the WWF/E use the WCW World Television Title?

The TV title was created as a way to put a champion on television while keeping the world champ off of the small screen.  The theory was that if they put the real champ on the free broadcast, less people would pay to see him wrestle at live events.  Live shows are how the promotions made their money back in the day and the TV show was the infomercial that they used to get people out to the houses. So the TV Title was created to have something special, but not too special, on the weekly TV shows.  By the time WWE bought WCW, the world champ had become a staple of Raw and Smackdown, so there wasn't any real need to bring back the TV belt.

I have read several times now about how that signs fans bring to live WWE events are getting confiscated. I was wondering, could it be said this a violation of the U.S. Constitutions 1st Amendment protection of freedom of speech? Also, if a fan who had their sign confiscated tried to sue WWE (providing they had the time and money to do so) for violating the 1st Amendment, do you think WWE could be forced to discontinue this practice?

No, it's not a violation of free speech because WWE reserves the right to say what can and can't be done at their events.  People confuse the right of free speech with being able to say whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want.  They are too very different things.  So, there is nothing illegal about WWE confiscating signs.  Now, if you asked me if it was hypocritical, given all of the things that Vince McMahon has said about free speech, that is a totally different story!

You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.