WWF's Big Smack

McMahon had approached "a number of networks," including Fox, about a broadcast-television slot, secure in his belief that wrestling was ready for prime time. Needless to say, he feels more than a little vindicated by Smackdown!'s performance: "We're the only successful variety show on television."

It's certainly a triumph of opportunism. Thanks to NBC's Nielsen juggernaut, Thursday night has been a virtual death sentence for new series for well over a decade, but Smackdown! has flourished by counterprogramming against the rest of the schedule: shows that skew older (CBS' Diagnosis Murder and Chicago Hope), more female (The WB's Popular and Charmed), or just plain dumb (ABC's Wasteland). Most tellingly, perhaps, Fox wound up shelving its entire Thursday lineup just last month, including its two male-friendly comedies Family Guy and Action.

Valentine attributes the success of Smackdown! solely to McMahon, whom he describes as "a genius. [He] is basically the P.T. Barnum of our age, the Steven Bochco of this particular form of entertainment." And while he puts the show's female viewership at around 30 percent, he also sees it as a reaction to an "increasingly feminized prime time," claiming "UPN is here to plant the flag for guys."

The question for the network and the WWF is one of endurance. Historically, wrestling has been a maddeningly cyclical phenomenon, muscling its way into the zeitgeist every 10 years or so (usually due to the emergence of a larger-than-life character like Hulk Hogan in the '80s or, more recently, Austin and The Rock), then receding to a place of relative obscurity. Valentine, for one, isn't worried. "I think it will probably be around longer than a lot of currently popular shows, like Dawson's Creek. Talk about cyclical," he adds, alluding to the current crop of teen-friendly dramas. "If [the WWF] keeps on working at getting great stories, there's no reason it shouldn't have the same longevity as Days of Our Lives." McMahon believes audiences will stick around because Smackdown!'s "such a hybrid—we borrow from action-adventure, talk shows, rock concerts, Comedy Central."

Whether advertisers stick around is another question. In mid-October, Coca-Cola bailed out of its sponsorship of the WWF, citing its envelope-pushing shenanigans. And though Smackdown! is hardly hurting for advertising dollars, attracting upscale, mainstream endorsement has been a continuing problem (the show's ad schedule thus far has been dominated by spots for young-adult-oriented fare like videogames, auto parts, and fast food). The "sport" may never overcome its low-rent stigma, no matter the size of its audience or the precious male demo it brings. Then again, says Tim Spengler of Western Initiative Media, "advertisers will sometimes lower their standards, quote unquote, if it's that unique of a reach." He cites NYPD Blue as an example. "Remember when no [advertisers] wanted to be on it? Then they were saying 'Well, they're going to show butt and be a little gratuitous, but it's a big hit....'"

On the other hand, there's always the danger that blue-chip advertisers and continuing ratings growth will corrupt the WWF's gleefully disreputable image. Could wrestling actually get too mainstream? "No," says McMahon, "because we're always making fun of the mainstream. We'll always have our edge, we'll always have our mystique."

As for the perennial chorus of criticism against the WWF for violence, alleged sexism, and general profanity (most recently by L. Brent Bozell III's Parents Television Council), McMahon is practically hospitable: "That plays right into our hands. We enjoy creating the image that we are the bad boys of television, when obviously we're not. We don't pick fights, they just come along. I guess we're truculent by nature." Let's see Felicity use that word in a sentence.