HE’S the man who revolutionised the wrestling business.

The outspoken leader of a hardcore cult that will never die.

The creative genius forever synonymous with the letters E-C-W.

But for more than a year no one has heard a peep out of Paul Heyman.

Where was he? Why did he walk out of the WWE in December 2006? And most importantly what does he really think of Vince McMahon’s ‘new’ ECW?

Now, for the first time Paul answers those questions and more as only Paul can.

He also reveals the first details and advert for his exciting new project, the Heyman Hustle, which starts on The Sun Online on Monday February 18.

Enjoy!

Paul, let’s cut right to the chase. What happened with you and Vince McMahon?

I think what it boils down to is Vince McMahon and I have totally separate and distinct visions for what a wrestling or sports entertainment product should be.

There’s nothing wrong with having those different visions, the problem was that Vince started to take the difference of opinion personally.

And once that personality conflict comes into play, when you’re trying to steer the direction of a product, it becomes a bad work environment.

So Vince didn’t like working with me anymore and I didn’t like working with Vince anymore.

And it’s his company, so obviously he has to stay!

What do you think went wrong and why?

The brand should never have been brought back after the very first One Night Stand in 2005.

The follow-up show in 2006 made money, but only because it served as the platform for Rob Van Dam to beat John Cena.

Then Sci-Fi Channel was willing to give a test run for the brand ECW and they currently pay a lot of money for that TV show.

So the theory of bringing ECW back and making it profitable worked as a business move.

But the expectation from the audience that ECW was being brought back only served to be a monumental letdown.

By comparison, if someone were to resurrect The Beatles and say: “You know what, we want to make them more globally accepted, so we’re going to have a white guy, an Asian female, a Hispanic Bisexual and an African-American with a Scottish accent.”

In the land of WWE that actually makes sense.

But no matter how you look at it, it’s just not the Beatles.

So in the same light, it’s just not ECW.

‘Extreme’ doesn’t mean blood, or tables, or barbed wire. ECW was always about progression, moving forward, giving more bang for the buck.

For example, a finish in most every match. Simple thought. A winner and a loser. And a story with it that makes sense.

But if you voiced that opinion, Vince would take it personally.

If you look at the attempts to recreate the nWo, to re-create Goldberg and, even now, trying to recreate Ric Flair’s career on the line, Vince’s magic only happens when he creates it from the get-go.

If Vince doesn’t create it from the get-go, he can’t embrace the formula.

But why didn’t Vince just say: “Paul, I know you’re good at ECW, it’s on Sci-Fi, do your stuff, work your magic, make me some money?”

Because that goes against everything that is Vince McMahon.

Vince is such a control freak that if he sneezes, the next 10 minutes of any meeting are ruined because he is so p***ed at himself for not being able to control the sneeze.  And it’s worked very well for him in life.

He is a billionaire. He has his own luxury private plane and, by the way, it’s a really nice plane. He has things and property and cash that every other wrestling promoter in the world doesn’t have.

He has achieved these goals HIS WAY and so Vince is not about to let anyone have free reign over anything in his kingdom. That’s just not going to happen.

How was it for you to see ECW - your baby, the thing you created - almost destroyed in front of your eyes?

It was a very rough road because, make no mistake about it, Vince McMahon has every right to do anything that he wants with ECW.

He bought the right to exploit the intellectual property of the brand. It’s his, he owns it, and nobody can question whether or not he is entitled to do whatever he damn well pleases with it.

Rob Van Dam has articulated on this brilliantly in some recent interviews and it kind of brought back the memories of that time in 2006.

I tried to resign, and in front of other people because I wanted witnesses, several times in last two months of my tenure in WWE/ECW.

I offered my resignation to Stephanie on several occasions. I told her the tensions between me and Vince were getting in the way of the brand, that Vince was taking everything personally, and that it was neither fun, creative, or productive any more.

I thought if I left, Vince would give the brand the TLC - um, that’s Tender Loving Care, not Tables Ladders and Chairs - it needed. Stephanie kept trying to get involved, but Vince was on a tear.

I dare suggest that Vince was craving for someone to compete with him on any level, in anything in life, and also at the same time, hating to lose, said: “I have the original owner of ECW, I have the original creative mind of ECW, and you know what, we’re gonna battle over the creative direction of this product.”

And, at the same time, it’s like the WrestleMania main event - because it’s a predetermined finish.

At the end of the day, Vince has to determine what the direction is.

I’m not there to compete with him. I’m there to help him. I’m on his side, I’m his tag team partner.

It just became misery to work there which is why, as Van Dam has pointed out, I just wanted out so badly I finally couldn’t take it any more.

When did that happen, what was the actual date, because no one has known where you’ve been for a long time?

The final straw was the December to Dismember Pay Per View. That show was just a wreck.

I knew it going in. I kept trying to pitch different things for the show that week, that weekend, and even the day of the show. All day long on the day of the show, I kept coming to Vince saying: “The people are going to throw this back in our face.”

Can you give us some examples of the things that you wanted to do that Vince said “no” to?

I thought the undercard was horrible.

I thought that the design of the show itself made no sense.

I just felt that the entire layout of the show, the entire complexion of the event was a downer.

I also thought that we were doing Bobby Lashley no favours the way he was going to win the title. Lashley winning the title, especially if you eliminate Rob Van Dam and CM Punk early, would be leapfrogging over RVD and Punk.

Van Dam was the sentimental favourite, Punk was the kid that all the crowd was getting behind and they wanted to see the upset.

If you don’t appease the need for the audience to see that new hero get crowned like Punk did the week before at Survivor Series when DX let him say ‘Are you ready?’ then the audience will feel ripped off.

If you don’t put that spotlight on Van Dam, with whom the paying customers have just taken this long ride back into the title chase, then the paying customer will feel ripped off.

My opinion was to start the chamber off with the Big Show saying: “I’m a seven foot tall, 500lb giant, I’m gonna mow through every one of you.”

And the first to take him on would be Punk. Playing to the fact that UFC is so hot and in the public consciousness, Punk chokes out Big Show in the first round of the Elimination Chamber, four-and-a-half minutes in, and now the champion is out.

You know for a fact, before any two contenders lock up, I’m getting a new champion at the end of this match.

Then, the first guy to come out after Big Show v Punk, would be Van Dam. You let Van Dam and Punk fight it out, and then you start feeding in the heels.

Vince hated this. He especially hated the fact that Big Show liked it.

CLICK HERE FOR PART TWO