|
Ok I have a couple of questions... What exactly is X-pac heat and how did Sean Waltman obtain this? Do internet fans really hate Hulk Hogan and why? He did a ton for the business in the 80s and seems like an ok guy from the interviews he gives and the vh1 shows he's on. I hear he has a huge ego but some of the stuff I've heard sounds borderline uncanny. Finally, have Kane and Big Show ever had substantial title runs? I started watching WWF/E at the tailend of 99 and Big Show had the title. I've heard Kane had it too but it was short-lived. I went about six years not watching wrestling starting late 02, and I wonder if either of them have had titles since then. They both have been legit main eventers at times and I don't understand why they don't get the main titles ever, considering how long their careers currently are. Am I just mistaken in thinking they are (or have been) main eventers for any significant time in their career?
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:19 |
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:Ok I have a couple of questions... Its a term that describes a hatred of a wrestler that inspires instead of fun 'boo boo you're a bad guy' reactions 'I am going to ignore everything you do because you are worthless reactions, the problem is that this is indistinguishable from just not getting a reaction at all. Either way it means that people don't like a guy. Its silly. quote:Do internet fans really hate Hulk Hogan and why? He did a ton for the business in the 80s and seems like an ok guy from the interviews he gives and the vh1 shows he's on. I hear he has a huge ego but some of the stuff I've heard sounds borderline uncanny. Hes a very mediocre wrestler and a terrible human being. Yeah he was a huge draw and that matters to some people but to a lot of people how much money Vince made off a guy is low on their list of reasons to like or dislike someone. He was also a huge backstage politicking bastard and that rubs a lot of people the wrong way. He said he understood how OJ could kill his wife and that the guy that his son crippled was a negative person and deserved it or whatever. Hes a bad person. quote:Finally, have Kane and Big Show ever had substantial title runs? I started watching WWF/E at the tailend of 99 and Big Show had the title. I've heard Kane had it too but it was short-lived. I went about six years not watching wrestling starting late 02, and I wonder if either of them have had titles since then. They both have been legit main eventers at times and I don't understand why they don't get the main titles ever, considering how long their careers currently are. Am I just mistaken in thinking they are (or have been) main eventers for any significant time in their career? Kane had the title for 1 night, I don't really know about Show. But neither of them NEED the title to be over (not that HHH or Batista do either but whatever) They can function as 'special attractions' and do fine in their own feuds and angles without being involved in the main event scene.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:06
|
|
|
X-Pac heat basically means that the fans aren't booing you because you are a really good heel and they want to see you get your rear end kicked, but they just do not like you and want you to go away. Or they'll just give you no reaction at all. I GUESS it started with X-pac so they call it X-Pac heat. It really depends on who you ask with Hogan. People have lost a lot of respect for him over the years. Big Show had the main title in 2002 and the ECW title. Kane had the ECW.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:08
|
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:Ok I have a couple of questions... This is a highly controversial term around here because nobody can really agree on what it is, who has it, or whether or not it's even a bad thing. As I understand it, it's when the crowd boos a guy not because they don't like him, but because they want him to go away. The term originated when X-Pac was forced to turn heel during the Invasion angle because he was being heavily booed despite acting as a face. quote:Do internet fans really hate Hulk Hogan and why? He did a ton for the business in the 80s and seems like an ok guy from the interviews he gives and the vh1 shows he's on. I hear he has a huge ego but some of the stuff I've heard sounds borderline uncanny. Hogan was pretty much always a terrible worker with a worse attitude. He did a ton of business in the 80s and early 90s, but was still being presented as a credible world champion as late as 2002, and would occasionally show up in WWE for a quick feud and paycheck as late as 2005. He and his friends always got the cushiest jobs and the biggest paychecks, usually to the detriment of more capable workers. quote:Finally, have Kane and Big Show ever had substantial title runs? I started watching WWF/E at the tailend of 99 and Big Show had the title. I've heard Kane had it too but it was short-lived. I went about six years not watching wrestling starting late 02, and I wonder if either of them have had titles since then. They both have been legit main eventers at times and I don't understand why they don't get the main titles ever, considering how long their careers currently are. Am I just mistaken in thinking they are (or have been) main eventers for any significant time in their career? They both had pretty lengthy runs with the ECW Title, but other than that their world title reigns have mostly been transitional. Of course, both of them are always within a few weeks of being a serious title contender just because of their size and their ability to dominate opponents. Ninja edit: Beaten everywhere 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:09
|
|
|
That really sucks about Hogan. From a mark's viewpoint he seems like a great guy, like a children's hero or something. I mean...you could trace wrestling's big booms in the 80's and 90's to him, he means so much to the business (bad worker and all too, but so was the Rock). But if he really is this big of an rear end in a top hat that kind of ruins all of that. Oh well, same goes for Austin, Benoit, Angle, and probably a shitton of others too 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:23
|
|
|
Oh no. You did not just call the Rock, Austin, Benoit, and Angle bad workers. They were all light-years ahead of hogan. Guys like Kevin Nash, and Lex Lugar are more like Hogan with regards to in ring work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:42
|
|
|
Magic_Ceiling_Fan posted:Oh no. You did not just call the Rock, Austin, Benoit, and Angle bad workers. They were all light-years ahead of hogan. He was saying the Rock was a bad worker and those other guys are assholes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:50
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:He was saying the Rock was a bad worker and those other guys are assholes. Right...but more of a "I want to root for him but he sucks in real life" kind of thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 22:54
|
|
|
When it comes to the recent years of WWE, I'm fairly new to wrestling. Thus, seeing this video got me thinking, has the Undertaker ever had an actual feud of any kind with Ric Flair?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 23:08
|
|
|
Hungry Hungry Hippo posted:When it comes to the recent years of WWE, I'm fairly new to wrestling. Thus, seeing this video got me thinking, has the Undertaker ever had an actual feud of any kind with Ric Flair? Oh hell yes. They had a massive feud in 2002 which led to a match at Wrestlemania 18.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 23:12
|
|
|
Which led to Taker eating the best spinebuster of the past decade courtesy of Arn Anderson.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 23:20
|
|
|
CM Junk posted:Which led to Taker eating the best spinebuster of the past decade courtesy of Arn Anderson. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyLCK-hoahI
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2009 23:22
|
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:Ok I have a couple of questions... He refuses to put anyone over and if he does lose its usually by interference on the behalf of the other wrestler or it will take a supreme amount of punishment to beat Hogan as in "No mortal man can beat the Hulkster, brother"! He sells very poorly, as well. He's also the textbook example of why giving a wrestler creative control is a bad idea, as you can look at his WCW career as proof. Still till this day, he thinks he lives in the 80's where he was number 1 and top dog in the industry. Now look at him; he's old and broken. The WWE won't touch him now, and he's so desperate that he is looking to go to TNA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 00:31
|
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:Oh well, same goes for Austin, Benoit, Angle, and probably a shitton of others too Austin beat up Debra, and that's not excusable. But as for being a likeable guy outside the ring, or an unselfish person/wrestler, I'm not sure you'll find a better guy. Austin has always been one of the most respected wrestlers ever, never putting himself over to the detriment of the company, and he gave a lot more than he had. I'm sure his walkout could be used against him, but the point is the man was physically ruined and kept on giving a lot longer than he should have.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 00:49
|
|
|
Strenuous Manflurry posted:Austin beat up Debra, and that's not excusable. Benoit killed his family...
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 01:10
|
|
|
grody but still def posted:ric flair and dusty rhodes would like to disagree They came up during a different era and in the South where lisping can happen from the accent. Justice Grieves posted:(Billy and Chuck was less than a half decade ago). No it wasn't but maybe I'm spergin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 01:41
|
|
|
Batmanuel posted:Benoit killed his family... Yes, yes he did. But I'm solely talking about Austin and it looks like we got our signals crossed. My whole point is that as far as being an overall good person who is well-liked seemingly unanimously amongst his peers, Austin fits the bill. But I made sure to note his issue with Debra is inexcusable on his part. As for a question, can someone give me a quick rundown of the aftermath of Survivor Series 1997? I know Owen was the only Hart Foundation member to stick around, Foley sat out the next RAW, and Bulldog had to buyout his own contract, but I can't remember what else was going on backstage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 02:29
|
|
|
Strenuous Manflurry posted:Yes, yes he did. But I'm solely talking about Austin and it looks like we got our signals crossed. My whole point is that as far as being an overall good person who is well-liked seemingly unanimously amongst his peers, Austin fits the bill. But I made sure to note his issue with Debra is inexcusable on his part. Someone had to do it v  vPart of the aftermath was Undertaker making Bret and Vince hug it out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 02:49
|
|
|
Strenuous Manflurry posted:Yes, yes he did. But I'm solely talking about Austin and it looks like we got our signals crossed. My whole point is that as far as being an overall good person who is well-liked seemingly unanimously amongst his peers, Austin fits the bill. But I made sure to note his issue with Debra is inexcusable on his part. HBK/HHH said the Harris Twins were their protection in the locker room after the match. Neidhart was embarrassed on Raw I think two weeks later then left for WCW. Foley, Taker, and I think one other name (Maybe Vader?) all skipped the Raw the next night. Foley came back when he realized he needed money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 02:55
|
|
|
Ktik posted:HBK/HHH said the Harris Twins were their protection in the locker room after the match. Neidhart was embarrassed on Raw I think two weeks later then left for WCW. Foley, Taker, and I think one other name (Maybe Vader?) all skipped the Raw the next night. Foley came back when he realized he needed money. I remember the Neidhart deal--he joined DX, only to be low blowed by Chyna at the end of RAW and never seen again. But I've never heard this: Batmanuel posted:Part of the aftermath was Undertaker making Bret and Vince hug it out. Did this actually happen? All I know is Bret punched Vince, but I hadn't heard they later bro hugged.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 03:25
|
|
|
What was Evolution's vibe? How did they act? Were they liked by fans or disliked or was it a mixture of the two? Were they smarky at all as HHH sometimes (more than sometimes) is?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 04:05
|
|
|
PitifulLoser posted:What was Evolution's vibe? How did they act? Were they liked by fans or disliked or was it a mixture of the two? Were they smarky at all as HHH sometimes (more than sometimes) is? It was essentially Triple H's attempt at reforming the Horsemen. They were booed. They got heat. Not the massive, Horseman like heat they were going for. Actually, HHH was supposed to be the "Ric Flair" of the group, but IIRC, Randy Orton got the most heat. They weren't really "smarky", Triple H tends to do that poo poo more as a face.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 04:32
|
|
|
TL posted:It was essentially Triple H's attempt at reforming the Horsemen. They were booed. They got heat. Not the massive, Horseman like heat they were going for. Actually, HHH was supposed to be the "Ric Flair" of the group, but IIRC, Randy Orton got the most heat. He did compare a malfunctioning mic to Goldberg saying they both don't work correctly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 04:34
|
|
|
Ktik posted:HBK/HHH said the Harris Twins were their protection in the locker room after the match. Neidhart was embarrassed on Raw I think two weeks later then left for WCW. Foley, Taker, and I think one other name (Maybe Vader?) all skipped the Raw the next night. Foley came back when he realized he needed money. If Taker stayed home (he might have, I don't remember all the details), it was probably to back up the guys like Foley who threatened to, sense there's no chance (...in...hell) they would fire him over it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 04:39
|
|
|
PitifulLoser posted:What was Evolution's vibe? How did they act? Were they liked by fans or disliked or was it a mixture of the two? Were they smarky at all as HHH sometimes (more than sometimes) is? It did what it was supposed to, be a vehicle for making orton and batista stars in the future, let hhh be mega champ forever, and have flair go around doing stuff that flair does. They acted like a very succesful heel stable with an unorganised resistance. Disliked, but evolution slingshotted each of its members straight into being really over faces because of turning on hhh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 04:47
|
|
|
Wazzu posted:It did what it was supposed to, be a vehicle for making orton and batista stars in the future, let hhh be mega champ forever, and have flair go around doing stuff that flair does. They acted like a very succesful heel stable with an unorganised resistance. Disliked, but evolution slingshotted each of its members straight into being really over faces because of turning on hhh. Although while Orton was briefly REALLY over as a face, he quickly had his legs cut out from under him by dropping the belt to Triple H after a month. And I can't really blame them for putting the belt on HHH so quickly, since Randy SUCKED as a face.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 05:07
|
|
|
TL posted:Although while Orton was briefly REALLY over as a face, he quickly had his legs cut out from under him by dropping the belt to Triple H after a month. And I can't really blame them for putting the belt on HHH so quickly, since Randy SUCKED as a face. I think I'm the only person in the world who loved RKO's face run. I feel so alone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 05:52
|
|
|
Do you guys really have that short a memory? Orton failed as a face because he was set up to fail. The smart way to have him turn would have him continue to be heel for months as HHH said he was cool with it but secretly was filled with rage and jealousy, leading to the WM main event. Buuuuuuuuuuut this is WWE so they had HHH turn on Randy and they had their big WM main event at Unforgiven. They even had the WM ME staredown. Evolution was a crutch for HHH to keep winning without having to go over clean and for him to have his own Horsemen and it succeeded doing those things. If they really gave a gently caress about the future of the two "young" (Batista is like 86) guys, they wouldn't have written Orton's turn over 5 minutes during lunch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 05:58
|
|
|
TL posted:Although while Orton was briefly REALLY over as a face, he quickly had his legs cut out from under him by dropping the belt to Triple H after a month. And I can't really blame them for putting the belt on HHH so quickly, since Randy SUCKED as a face. And HHH sucked at whatever role he took on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 08:39
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Do you guys really have that short a memory? Orton failed as a face because he was set up to fail. The smart way to have him turn would have him continue to be heel for months as HHH said he was cool with it but secretly was filled with rage and jealousy, leading to the WM main event. Evolution turned Orton face by having Evolution turn on him, which failed. They turned Batista face by having him thumbs down and powerbomb HHH. That worked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 09:07
|
|
|
Sting vs. HBK or The Undertaker: This is the Last Great American Wrestleing Dream Match. Discuss?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 09:29
|
|
|
Pneub posted:Sting vs. HBK or The Undertaker: This is the Last Great American Wrestleing Dream Match. As far as nostalgia goes, I suppose these could be considered dream matches. Really though, without two concurrently running major pro wrestling companies, it's hard to say there's really any more dream matches. Sting's old and no longer relevant--if it were ten years ago that would be one thing (or even if Sting were ten years younger), but Sting in 2009 is not a major player in the wrestling world, and can't wrestle to a high standard anymore. There's one game in town, and a whole new generation of young fans, many of whom might not even know who Sting is. At least that's my two cents, and I know a few Wrestlehutters would love a Sting vs Taker match. And as far as nostalgia goes, I think there really may be one dream match left that hasn't happened in 20 years: Steamboat vs Flair.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 10:42
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:
I disagree. Kane needs a world heavyweight championship reign more than anyone on the roster.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 11:08
|
|
|
Strenuous Manflurry posted:And as far as nostalgia goes, I think there really may be one dream match left that hasn't happened in 20 years: Steamboat vs Flair. I don't know that you can call it a dream match when the two guys have wrestled each other roughly a thousand times over the course of their careers. I mean, don't get me wrong if a Steamboat/Flair match happened tomorrow it would still be pretty good but I feel like it would just make people go "wow these guys sure did get old."
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 14:23
|
|
|
Kane could have a great reign. He could explain that he wanted the title so badly because now, instead of him having to find people to hurt, they just come to him now!
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 15:21
|
|
|
Strenuous Manflurry posted:And as far as nostalgia goes, I think there really may be one dream match left that hasn't happened in 20 years: Steamboat vs Flair. Steamboat/Flair happened in 1994 at Spring Stampede and got at least 4 stars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 15:41
|
|
|
Indie wrestling rings seem a lot more bouncy and louder than the ones in WWE and TNA is that on purpose or are the rings just cheaper and thus not as solid?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 15:45
|
|
|
Rusty Shackelford posted:Steamboat/Flair happened in 1994 at Spring Stampede and got at least 4 stars. Is that the double pin match?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 15:48
|
|
|
When I go back and watch WCW I notice how loving tight the ropes are when compared to the WWE/F. What is the reason for this? Fake edit: The one wrestling school I went to was run by Jimmy Valiant and the ropes there were tight as gently caress too. But I got no explanation about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 19:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:19 |
|
|
joshtothemaxx posted:When I go back and watch WCW I notice how loving tight the ropes are when compared to the WWE/F. What is the reason for this? As far as I understand it heavyweight wrestlers who use a mat-based style like the ropes loose so that they don't hurt after lots of Irish whipping, while cruiserweights/luchadors who wrestle a more high-flying style prefer tight ropes they can safely springboard off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2009 20:04
|
|
