The wrestling world’s most controversial critic has set his sights on one of WWE’s most respected figures. Vince Russo recently unleashed a scathing assessment of Paul Heyman’s managerial choices, arguing that the legendary advocate has gotten too comfortable managing established superstars instead of creating new ones.
The Safe Play Strategy Under Fire
During his latest RussosBrand.com segment, the former WWE writer didn’t mince words about Heyman’s pattern of aligning with proven commodities. Russo’s main gripe centers on what he sees as a predictable cycle of the “Wise Man” jumping from one main event player to another.
The criticism gained steam following Heyman’s transition from Roman Reigns to his current association with Seth Rollins. According to Russo, this move represents everything wrong with how WWE utilizes their most gifted mouthpiece.
“So, now you know — Heyman, after Reigns — ‘I’m a man without an island.’ Ah, bro, let me turn on these guys and go with Seth Rollins.”
Why Seth Rollins Doesn’t Need The Wise Man
Russo’s assault on Heyman’s booking decisions focused heavily on the Seth Rollins partnership. The former writer questioned the logic behind pairing two already-successful entities together when countless mid-card talents could benefit from Heyman’s legendary mic skills.
“Can somebody tell me why Seth Rollins needed Paul Heyman? Seth Rollins was doing fine by himself. Seth Rollins did not, in any way, shape, or form, need Paul Heyman.”
This criticism highlights a broader conversation about resource allocation in modern WWE. With so many talented performers struggling to break through to the next level, pairing marquee managers with already-established stars seems like a missed opportunity.
The Challenge WWE Won’t Give Heyman
The heart of Russo’s argument revolves around testing Heyman’s true abilities as a star-maker. Instead of continuing the pattern of safe assignments, Russo believes WWE should challenge their Hall of Fame manager with a genuine developmental project.
“How about putting Heyman with somebody that needs help getting over? And let’s see if Paul Heyman can get a midcard guy over. Not a guy that’s already over.”
This perspective raises intriguing questions about Heyman’s actual impact versus his perceived value. While his associations with top-tier talent have been memorable, they’ve also been with performers who likely would have succeeded regardless.
The Pattern of Cherry-Picking
Russo didn’t stop at current booking decisions, instead painting a picture of systematic cherry-picking throughout Heyman’s recent WWE tenure. His analysis breaks down what he sees as a convenient narrative around each major pairing.
“It’s always hand-picking who he’s with. ‘Put me with Brock Lesnar, he can’t talk.’ Bro, every time I heard Brock Lesnar open his mouth, he was fine. ‘Put me with Roman Reigns, he can’t talk.’ No — Roman Reigns cuts one of the better promos in the business. And now Seth Rollins? He doesn’t need Paul Heyman either.”
This critique challenges the conventional wisdom about why these pairings happened in the first place. Rather than necessity driving the partnerships, Russo suggests strategic positioning has been the primary motivator.
The Real Test of a Manager’s Worth
The underlying question in Russo’s criticism touches on what defines greatness in professional wrestling management. Is it maintaining relevance alongside established stars, or is it the ability to transform unknown quantities into household names?
Historical examples of managers elevating lesser-known talent abound in wrestling history. From Bobby Heenan’s work with various mid-card acts to Jimmy Hart’s ability to maximize different personality types, the greatest managers have traditionally been measured by their developmental impact.
Russo’s challenge to WWE management is clear: stop giving Heyman the easy assignments and see if he can work his magic with someone who genuinely needs it. The results would provide a more accurate measurement of his current value to the company.
A Catalyst or Just Good Company?
While Russo’s reputation for controversy might make some dismiss his criticisms, his central point about resource utilization deserves consideration. WWE’s developmental system constantly produces talented performers who struggle to connect with audiences despite their in-ring abilities.
Pairing someone like Heyman with a promising but unproven talent could serve multiple purposes: testing the manager’s skills, elevating a deserving performer, and creating fresh storylines that feel less predictable than the current approach.
The question remains whether WWE has the courage to risk their most valuable advocate on anything less than a sure thing. If they truly believe in Heyman’s abilities, shouldn’t they be willing to test them where they could make the biggest difference? What do you think – should Paul Heyman be tasked with building WWE’s next breakout star from scratch?
