|
CombineThresher posted:On paper, I can see why he would want to build up his opponents instead of dismissing them - if you, as a face, call your opponent a piece of poo poo and he beats you, you don't have anywhere else to go promo-wise. To see an example of completely tearing down your opponent and making them look like poo poo during a face promo, check out anything Hunter does when he's a face champion; it's freaking brutal. He spends more time hitting on the interviewer chick than talking about his match. And if he does happen to mention his title defense he's all "Pfft, I'm gonna be champion for a decade  It's horrible, because if he's so goddamn certain, then why in the hell do I want to spend my money to see him win? There's a fine line between running down your opponent and building yourself up so big that it looks like a fluke when you lose.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Speaking of terrible championship reigns, which was more terrible: Triple H's 2003 super reign? Or, John Cena's Reign of Doom?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 17:03
|
|
|
I say Triple H. Cena actually got some good matches out of his and if nothing else, Edge and RVD got their first title reigns in the middle. HHH's did bring us Legacy and it was ridiculously satisfying when Goldberg won it off of him and again when the reign was "ended" at WMXX, but he just got it right back off Orton that summer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 18:03
|
|
|
ColeM posted:Speaking of terrible championship reigns, which was more terrible: Triple H's 2003 super reign? Or, John Cena's Reign of Doom? Triple H's was much worse. I wish Cena's went on longer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 18:10
|
|
|
CombineThresher posted:On paper, I can see why he would want to build up his opponents instead of dismissing them - if you, as a face, call your opponent a piece of poo poo and he beats you, you don't have anywhere else to go promo-wise. I can see your point, though, about how it's something Cena should stop doing after Orton proves time and again what a slimy heel he is. "I want to end your career at any cost and will do anything to win" vs. "I respect you" is always a terrible storyline. It's not hard to figure out which character here is more appealing, either. This is also far from the first time Cena has done this promo/storyline setup. quote:But if you don't want WWE babyfaces to pander to the audience, you should maybe watch something else. They have always done that. Hogan did it, Austin did it, Rock did it, Human Muppet Commissioner Foley did it, etc. They may have been pandering to different audiences than the dorky kids who like Cena, but they were pandering all the same. Sure there was pandering, but the popularity of guys like Austin and Rock had very little to do with what they thought of their audience. You got the feeling that Austin would beat asses no matter who didn't like it--which made you like him more--and that if Jesus floated down to the ring to guide the Rock, the Rock would talk trash to him, too. It's no coincidence that both guys got their big breaks as heels. As a viewer I'm just not interested in how much Cena needs my love and how he wants to deliver me the great matches of the century with Triple H and Randy Orton and by golly isn't he a trooper. He doesn't come off as a genuine character in any way, which sets him apart from virtually every other main eventer in the company for the last decade or so. As FishBulb said, he's shamelessly packaged to be a substitution Rock/Austin, because that's what will make kids buy merchandise. When he does interviews outside of wrestling, it's really clear that he's not his character at all. quote:I say Triple H. Cena actually got some good matches out of his and if nothing else, Edge and RVD got their first title reigns in the middle. HHH's did bring us Legacy and it was ridiculously satisfying when Goldberg won it off of him and again when the reign was "ended" at WMXX, but he just got it right back off Orton that summer. They were both bad at times, with a few good things in between, but at least you were supposed to hate Triple H--which people tend to somehow forget.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 18:21
|
|
|
Hey I know Triple H was a heel during his super reign, but his title reign was ridiculous for its length and his feud with Micheals was also way too drawn out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 19:30
|
|
|
Late for the discussion of it, but this is fart juice:
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 19:41
|
|
|
I wonder what it smells like...
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 21:56
|
|
|
a shameful juice
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 21:58
|
|
|
AlbertFlasher posted:I wonder what it smells like... Brocolli
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 21:59
|
|
|
AlbertFlasher posted:I wonder what it smells like... Edge's shirts
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 22:27
|
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:Edge's shirts And with that, Wrestlehut just came full circle. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 23:15
|
|
|
If Wrestlehut came full circle, at least clean up. Geez.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 00:24
|
|
|
The A-Team Van posted:Besides WM 3 (including Hogan slamming Andre), what are some of the most important matches/storylines/promos/wrestlers/events/promotions/etc to come out of the 1980's? I thought one of the best storylines of the 80s was the Savage-Steamboat affair, with Savage "crushing" Steamboat's larynx with the ring bell and then draping his throat over the outside rail and coming down off the top with the axhandle to drive it in. All of that was awesome and innovative, and it culminated in that classic match at WM3.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 04:48
|
|
|
ColeM posted:Speaking of terrible championship reigns, which was more terrible: Triple H's 2003 super reign? Or, John Cena's Reign of Doom? Nthing HHH. Cena, as unpolished as he was back in 05-06 still had potential and could be carried to a hell of a match. HHH in 2003 was obscenely bloated due to a combination of steroids, laziness due to the fact he knew he was untouchable, and PB&Js. All of his matches suffered because of it. Plus you could argue a babyface is supposed to be dominant whereas a chubby, boring heel wiping the floor with his popular competition and talking for the first 20 minutes of every show isn't exactly the greatest way to convince fans to come back for more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 08:11
|
|
|
I was watching a MSG card from '83 (the one where Sheik beats Backlund for the title) and I noticed something - the title match/main event wasn't the last match on the card. I think the match went fourth from the top and was followed by a Santana/Koloff match + some tag team/6 man matches. Why did they do this? Was it because of the curfew law they had to work with when they were regulated by the state athletic commissions?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 08:42
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:I was watching a MSG card from '83 (the one where Sheik beats Backlund for the title) and I noticed something - the title match/main event wasn't the last match on the card. I think the match went fourth from the top and was followed by a Santana/Koloff match + some tag team/6 man matches. Why did they do this? Was it because of the curfew law they had to work with when they were regulated by the state athletic commissions? generally you send the fans home happy, so the mentality was if the heel is winning the title, try not to put it as the last match on the card.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 09:02
|
|
|
dusty udder smoker posted:generally you send the fans home happy, so the mentality was if the heel is winning the title, try not to put it as the last match on the card. Right, but the last match had the Puerto Rican Invaders go over in 4 minutes in a terrible match and based on the crowd reaction I don't think they were faces, or the crowd just didn't care.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 09:05
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:Right, but the last match had the Puerto Rican Invaders go over in 4 minutes in a terrible match and based on the crowd reaction I don't think they were faces, or the crowd just didn't care. If I remember correctly, they didn't expect much from the Backlund/Sheik match, but it ended up getting over much better than they expected, to the point where they wanted to do a return match. But Hogan balked, since he was promised the belt in his first match in. So it may not have been the heel winning the belt so much as them having no faith in Backlund and Sheiky.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 09:07
|
|
|
The A-Team Van posted:Besides WM 3 (including Hogan slamming Andre), what are some of the most important matches/storylines/promos/wrestlers/events/promotions/etc to come out of the 1980's? I'd say Orndorff turning on Hogan and Savage also turning on Hogan were pretty big 80s wrestling moments that led to huge money-drawing programs and great matches. Orndorff never really gets credit for how awesome he was back in the day, either. Rock 'n Wrestling was pretty popular too, setting the stage for the first Wrestlemania and more or less building it up single-handedly. If we're not just talking WWF/E, the Four Horsemen joined forces in the mid-80s and had a huge impact on the business, drawing big money and basically killing the idea of a hodgepodge stable of guys for a long time. In terms of individual wrestlers who aren't obvious choices, I'd put Roddy Piper, the Million Dollar Man and the Honky Tonk Man up there because they're guys who casual and lapsed wrestling fans still remember - hell, Dibiase still gets strong pops whenever he returns. And they all drew money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 09:16
|
|
|
MassRayPer posted:If I remember correctly, they didn't expect much from the Backlund/Sheik match, but it ended up getting over much better than they expected, to the point where they wanted to do a return match. But Hogan balked, since he was promised the belt in his first match in. So it may not have been the heel winning the belt so much as them having no faith in Backlund and Sheiky. Either way it had Ayatollah Blassie and god drat did he rock that pink robe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 09:18
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:Either way it had Ayatollah Blassie and god drat did he rock that pink robe. He was the Hollywood Fashion Plate after all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 11:59
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Nthing HHH. Cena, as unpolished as he was back in 05-06 still had potential and could be carried to a hell of a match. HHH in 2003 was obscenely bloated due to a combination of steroids, laziness due to the fact he knew he was untouchable, and PB&Js. All of his matches suffered because of it. I know Goldberg won the title and held it for a good time, but to me it looked like he was just holding the belt for Triple H until he healed. Plus, he was getting beaten and buried every week on Raw, too. Also, that horrible ending to the elimination chamber match that year, as well. I hate Cena but I hate Triple H more. It was obvious he got lazy in 2006 when he was in DX. Now that's when he was a lazy, tubby bastard
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 15:03
|
|
|
Triple H's reign was far worse probably because he'd already been a main-eventer for so long. Cena's reign was when he was still new and fresh as a main-eventer. I own dvd's from Triple H's 2002-2003 run as champ and the matches bore me to tears, not so much as they are basic, plodding, and dull (which they are), but because I'd been so used to it already. And having a long heel run after the magnificence of his 2000-2001 run just served to show how much worse H was as a wrestler. He was heavier and more muscled and looked bloated. Now a question: did anyone ever go to onlineonslaught.com? I remember the guy running it did a long RAW recap which was entertaining for the most part except for his inflated sense of ego. And they had columns also which I tohught were good for the most part.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 16:58
|
|
|
How many grossly overweight black wrestlers in the WWE have had the "ladies man" gimmick?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 17:03
|
|
|
Burrito posted:How many grossly overweight black wrestlers in the WWE have had the "ladies man" gimmick? At least two.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 17:15
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:At least two. Three once they sign Awesome Kong
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 17:24
|
|
|
ColeM posted:I know Goldberg won the title and held it for a good time Except he really didn't, though. He won it at Unforgiven, from Triple H. He defended it at Surivor Series, against Triple H. He lost it at Armageddon, to Triple H. He has it for three months and did nothing but wrestle Triple H with it. It was extremely frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 18:09
|
|
|
TL posted:Except he really didn't, though. He won it at Unforgiven, from Triple H. He defended it at Surivor Series, against Triple H. He lost it at Armageddon, to Triple H. He has it for three months and did nothing but wrestle Triple H with it. It was extremely frustrating. That's the thing I hate the most about the WWE right now. They have this mindset that only their tippy-top guys can get shots at the title, and it makes me not give a gently caress about the John Cena, Randy Orton and DX division. If they would build to title matches with promoes and runins, rather than six man tags, normal matches, tag matches and triple threats with their top dudes, and had actual title defenses against people who weren't in the main event, then the champ could continue to look strong and all that, but he'd look like a real champion in any other sport. It was really bad back then, and still is bad now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 18:22
|
|
|
CombineThresher posted:I'd say Orndorff turning on Hogan and Savage also turning on Hogan were pretty big 80s wrestling moments that led to huge money-drawing programs and great matches. Orndorff never really gets credit for how awesome he was back in the day, either. Agreed. Orndorff was probably my favorite character of the 80s, and his turn from face to heel to face again was awesome. He was a pretty good wrestler, too. It was sad to see him go from main eventing Wrestlemania to jobbing on WCW Saturday Night. I was really happy to see him get into the Hall of Fame awhile back and liked when 24/7 did a month focusing on him. In fact, to ask a semi-related question, has anyone else really fallen from main event to jobber status? Jeff Hardy WWE Champion to TNA Champion doesn't count, but has someone gone from WWE Main Eventer to WCW Jobber like Orndorff did? Hacksaw might count for this, too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 20:51
|
|
|
Matt Cruea posted:Agreed. Orndorff was probably my favorite character of the 80s, and his turn from face to heel to face again was awesome. He was a pretty good wrestler, too. It was Pretty Wonderful to see him go from main eventing Wrestlemania to jobbing on WCW Saturday Night. I was really happy to see him get into the Hall of Fame awhile back and liked when 24/7 did a month focusing on him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 21:26
|
|
|
Matt Cruea posted:Agreed. Orndorff was probably my favorite character of the 80s, and his turn from face to heel to face again was awesome. He was a pretty good wrestler, too. It was sad to see him go from main eventing Wrestlemania to jobbing on WCW Saturday Night. I was really happy to see him get into the Hall of Fame awhile back and liked when 24/7 did a month focusing on him. Pedro Morales was the first triple crown champ in WWF history, and spent the last year of his WWF career ('87) basically jobbing. Tony Garea was a five time WWF tag champ and ended his career as a jobber.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 21:28
|
|
|
Matt Cruea posted:In fact, to ask a semi-related question, has anyone else really fallen from main event to jobber status? Jeff Hardy WWE Champion to TNA Champion doesn't count
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 01:36
|
|
|
I was watching the 10th Anniversary of Smackdown DVD, and something really odd caught my eye. One of the 100 best moments was TLC III. They don't show the full match, but cut it together as a montage. They hype up the Hardys, the Dudleys and Edge & Christian. Then, they awkwardly cut around the fact that the champions and fourth team in the match at the time were Jericho and Benoit. They show Benoit's face for about two seconds, and the voice-over only refers to the team as "The Champs." Benoit was involved in the finish (they show his back while he unhooks the titles), and they only show Jericho clutching his title at the end of the recap. Now, my question is this: Unless it's a wholesale PPV DVD (like the Summerslam or Survivor Series releases), are all Benoit match appearances in future WWE Best Of releases going to be either cut out or edited heavily? For example, there's bound to be a Money in the Bank compilation at some point. Does the WWE just leave off the first MitB, or recap it and edit around Benoit? Because they'll have to publicize the match-up lineup if they leave it in unedited, there by publicizing Benoit. Or is there a certain point (five years from now? Ten years? Twenty years?) when it becomes kosher just to slip him back into releases (without having to edit heavily) without any flare-up?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 02:19
|
|
|
Nobody really knows yet. Right now they seem to want to avoid him and who can blame them. In a few years they might not care so much. Its really hard to know what Vince is going to want to do. I mean you can still buy The Naked Gun and Chinatown and a zillion other movies/tv shows whatever that feature terrible people being involved on DVD so its not like its unprecedented if they just leave him in there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 02:24
|
|
|
AKA Driver posted:I was watching the 10th Anniversary of Smackdown DVD, and something really odd caught my eye. One of the 100 best moments was TLC III. They don't show the full match, but cut it together as a montage. They hype up the Hardys, the Dudleys and Edge & Christian. The Untold History of the WWE posted:Magazine: We're two years removed [from the Benoit tragedy]- will there ever be a time when we can acknowledge him as part of WWE history? So my guess is you'll never see his one-on-one matches of DVD (maybe just a couple of photos from the match), and in big clusterfuck matches (Battle Royals, MitB, Royal Rumble, he'll be edited around). Davros1 fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Nov 14, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 02:45
|
|
|
I wonder how they'd handle the WrestleMania anthology if they were putting it out now. There's no way to edit around the main event of XX, no matter how many lovely jokes the internet makes about it. Frankly, I'm surprised they even mentioned it in WWE Magazine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 07:15
|
|
|
I think a big thing is that they don't want to be seen as profiting off of Benoit or the Benoit tragedy (only Scott Keith can do that). It really sucks because there are so many "historical" events that Benoit was involved in but if just one reporter can spin a DVD release into a story about how the WWE is making money off of Benoit, it could be a pretty bad situation. Also, there could be a possibility that Nancy's father could sue the WWE under the Son of Sam laws (which would be a stretch, but not totally inconceivable). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_sam_laws
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 07:16
|
|
|
TL posted:I wonder how they'd handle the WrestleMania anthology if they were putting it out now. There's no way to edit around the main event of XX, no matter how many lovely jokes the internet makes about it. I think the anthology releases are okay, because the WWE is just releasing the PPV as a historical record. This is what happened on the PPV, and that's what's on the DVD. I've got the Summerslam anthology, and Benoit is headlining a few of the cards, and as far as I know, they're relatively untouched (save for a few touch-ups, like when Flair yells "I'll loving kill you, too, bitch" at Melina during his I Quit match with Foley). And it came out a year after the killings. But, the edited "Best Of" materials are where everything is going to be altered, because the writers and editors have to make a specific effort to put in certain wrestlers for the compilation. Which is going to get really awkward when Orton gets a DVD, considering he won his first title off of Benoit. Monumental match in Orton's career, BUT how can you show that? AKA Driver fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Nov 14, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 08:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
I think editing the comentary will go a long way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 08:52
|
|
