|
grody but still def posted:loved his constant misuse of the word literally. There's an awesome scene from How I Met Your Mother involving this same misusage by Robin, unfortunately it's not on Youtube or Hulu though.
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2009 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Karmine posted:So is Beth Phoenix actually pregnant or not because I have no idea anymore. Dave hinted in the Observer that her vacation was wellness-related without saying it, as he is occasionally wont to do, but the official line was that they just didn't have anything for her for a month.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2009 16:01
|
|
|
I looked again at the Observer in question and the exact quote was "Phoenix (back after 28 days of being gone with no explanation)" which is Meltzerspeak for something fishy going on that he doesn't have enough confirmation to print.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2009 19:20
|
|
|
It's hard to explain without being a regular Observer reader, but Dave drops cryptic hints all the time in that sort of format. Now I'm curious, so I sent a question in for the next radio mailbag asking for elaboration.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2009 20:08
|
|
|
Bret Hart had Goldberg in the sharpshooter, special guest ref Roddy Piper rang the bell and awarded the match to Hart even though Goldberg didn't submit. Somehow or another this led to the reformation of one of the last versions of the nWo but those particulars escape me right now. This is far better known as the match where Goldberg nearly killed Hart with a superkick.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2009 06:21
|
|
|
Isn't that just a slightly different way of doing developmental? They talked awhile back about splitting the brand extension even further into circuits that would run different markets, something like two for the US and Canada (at one point even considering breaking North America into regions), one for Mexico and other Latin America countries, one for Europe, one for Asia. Almost like the old school territorial system where you'd rotate guys around to keep them fresh and build local angles. But it didn't go anywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2009 00:36
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Yeah I've also heard he's good buddies with CM Punk and even fat ol' Samoa Joe, so it just sounds like he's a hell of a nice guy who everybody gets along with. Cena and Joe both started in UPW around the same time, so they go way way way back.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2009 01:18
|
|
|
maniacripper posted:I future endeavored wrestling from 2002-2007 and I was talking with my brother about the things WCW actually got right. The one thing that stood out to me was that they actually had the Title change hands on Nitro a few times. I know the WWF did it a couple times around when WCW did it. But more recently, what were the last 3 or 4 Heavyweight or WWE championship title changes not on a pay-per-view? Most of the MITB cash-ins have been on TV and Punk the first time definitely wasn't an injury thing, it was part of the draft title shenanigans. The aforementioned Jericho/Batista match, obviously. Edge won the WWE title on RAW from RVD in 2006 which wasn't an injury or contract dispute.  Changing World titles on television is generally a terrible idea and was one of the things that led to the demise of WCW, by the way.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2009 16:56
|
|
|
Justice Grieves posted:No, changing the world title 23 times in a YEAR was. In 2001, I think, the WCW title changed hands 2 times less than the NWA title did over a period of thirty years. That's a byproduct of changing it more than once in a blue moon on TV, though. You can't change it more on your television than your PPVs, otherwise you're conditioning your audience that nothing important or special happens on the stuff they have to pay money for. WCW was changing the title way too much on Nitro long before Russo came in and started flipping the title every week. No sane company would have given the Luger and Goldberg title wins over Hogan away for free, and those were in a time period where they were moving around the title less than WWE does now.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2009 17:56
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Never changing the world titles on television sends the message to your fans that no title match not on pay-per-view matters and that there will never be surprises on television. And this is a bad thing how exactly? You should want the fans to have to buy the PPV to see the important stuff, if your primary goal is to sell PPVs. If you want to start giving important stuff away for free, you can't run monthly PPVs because there just isn't that much to go around. Plus, the less you switch your titles in general, the more they mean. quote:Considering they were doing incredible ratings and STILL doing insane buyrates, I'd say there's some give to this statement. Is there? The Luger change gave away the happy ending that should have been on Hog Wild or whatever the Sturgis PPV was in 1997, if you're going to switch the title to Luger briefly. Having Luger win the title at all made no sense within the Sting vs. nWo storyline either. It was a hotshot for the sake of popping a one-week rating and it didn't matter for business at all. Putting the Goldberg title switch on Nitro was a complete disaster and I think everyone involved admits this at this point. They could've done an absolutely huge PPV number with that match.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2009 23:35
|
|
|
Repeatedly giving away PPV-caliber matches and title changes on free TV makes people not buy the B-show PPVs because the PPVs are just a three-hour RAW. The titles don't draw on their own anymore because title matches and title changes aren't important or big occasions anymore. Changing them more isn't the answer to that. Good programming is what draws ratings and buys, and you can have that with or without changing titles.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2009 02:36
|
|
|
TNA was hinting at an angle where Madison Rayne was sleeping with Slick Johnson to get favorable reffing for The Beautiful People, but it didn't go anywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2009 02:39
|
|
|
Axissillian posted:He never main-evented, he never drew, never held the world title, his only memorable matches were against Bret, and by that point in his career he was a comedy buffoon and not likely to improve. He had a ***** match (Observer rating) in the main event of SummerSlam. Owen was an occasional main eventer from 1994 until his death and one of the best workers of the era. This is a Hall of Fame that has Vince's loving limo driver in it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2009 06:50
|
|
|
HorseHeadBed posted:Why are wrestling fans so obsessed with TV ratings and buy-rates? I can understand the people working in the companies having an interest, but why is there this slavish attention to it from people it doesn't affect in the slightest? It highlights poor decision-making when the companies do poo poo that's clearly contrary to their business interests.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2009 17:15
|
|
|
seregrail7 posted:When did the WWF Attitude logo start getting censored on DVD releases? I've got Royal Rumble 99 & 2000 in some Classics Tag Pack thing and there's no logo blurring in it at all even thought the box uses the WWE logo and the copyright on it says 2007. Mid-2002. They're allowed to release reprints of old video releases, so they can put the Coliseum/WWF Home Video versions of those old shows out unblurred but with no special features or editing or whatnot.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2010 12:13
|
|
|
Kerck Pnameless posted:What are Bret Hart's best matches in WCW and how do they compare to his best matches in the WWF? The ones I can think of are the Flair match at Souled Out 98 and the two big matches against Benoit (which I wouldn't watch again for obvious reasons). They're not nearly as good, the only great thing Bret did in WCW was that angle with Goldberg in Toronto.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2010 05:07
|
|
|
CVagts posted:Are the two Benoit matches the WCW world title tourney final and the Owen tribute match? Just want to make sure that we're thinking of the same matches, or if there were more Bret/Benoit matches that were good. Those are the two I was thinking of, yes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2010 06:37
|
|
|
KuruMonkey posted:Watching 1998; what happened to the midget division?!? or, converssely; where the hell did this midget division come from?!? Midgets don't draw but Vince fucks around with them from time to time anyways as comedy. quote:Third question: when and why did Kane lose the mask and hair? He lost the mask to Triple H in 2003 as part of the Triple H is the ruler of the world multi-year mega-push that contributed heavily to declining business. I believe the long hair was revealed as a wig attached to the mask and he shaved what was left of it afterward because a balding monster doesn't really work.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2010 22:22
|
|
|
I really loving loved the New Year's Revolution one that was built around Big Dave. But the best Chamber moment is Edge cashing in the first MITB.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2010 09:07
|
|
|
Hockles posted:Yes. It's one of the few WWE DVDs I own, mostly because I really enjoy reliving that moment. I get chills each time Edge's music hits, when he enters, and when he wins. It's really one of the best angles they've done in the last decade. The match itself, such as it is, was even worked really smartly. Cena kicks out of the first spear, everyone is preparing themselves for Cena to OVERCOME THE ODDS again, then Edge just casually spears him again and pins him clean. It's also one of the most successful, they turned Edge into an instant superstar and ratings draw in one night after he'd spent years as a stale midcarder. eta: Part of what helped so much was that Cena and Batista were both on ten month title reigns at the time. When you change the titles so infrequently and make it a really big deal when a title does change, the title switch actually means something. So of course WWE did the opposite and started flipping the titles all the time shortly after this. oldfan fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Feb 6, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2010 09:23
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I agree Edge became a top star and cemented his role in the main event with that cash-in, but he's been making very well received pushes towards main event spots for years before then (normally as a face, and VERY over) but kept getting injured at the worst possible times and losing all his momentum. Modern WWE almost never gives guys that last shove to main event status who have been floating around in the upper-midcard for a long period. Occasionally someone like Booker T or Mysterio will float up to the main events for awhile, but they're not viewed by the company as real top guys and as soon as they drop out of title feuds they're back to an upper-midcard spot. It's rare that a guy becomes an official Vince-approved Top Guy, where he's always in the main event, after being established as less than that for years beforehand. Edge is one of the rare exceptions to that. When I said Edge was stale, it's more a knock on the booking than Edge himself. He'd been stuck at the same upper-midcard level with mostly the same opponents for five years. They probably should have went with him years earlier, and might have if he hadn't had his neck fused in 2003, but most guys in that position they never go with.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2010 09:51
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:...and they stayed with their HHH-Cena plan, having HHH win some laughable #1 contender's tournament They had already spent too much on set design. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2010 21:19
|
|
|
Yuriy posted:Apart from the Bryan Danielson/Morishima series, what are considered Danielson's best matches? I'd say vs. KENTA at Glory By Honor V and vs. Nigel at Unified and 6th Anniversary Show, but you could make a case for basically every match that's been listed by others plus 10 or 15 more.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2010 08:18
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:So I know that the Scorpion Deathlock was referred to as such before Sting started using it, but who started using the move first? Him or Bret? Sting was using it by around 87, Bret didn't start until he went solo in 91.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2010 08:47
|
|
|
ChampRamp posted:What day does the Observer come out on? It's usually posted online Wednesday afternoon. On a two Observer week, the second is posted on Thursday or Friday. When I used to get the hard copy, I usually got it on Saturday or Monday, but I live on the east coast.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 00:46
|
|
|
anakha posted:Just finished watching Summerslam '92 on PYBO, and I was wondering: when did Bret debut the entrance theme with the guitar screech? He was still using the old Hart Foundation entrance theme for the IC main event then. 95-ish.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2010 05:42
|
|
|
Moose Bigelow posted:The guitar screech is in that "go get em champ" promo for the new generation so it had to be earlier than that but not by much. Checking some old videos, Bret's theme appears to have been remixed with the guitar screech between WrestleMania X and Summerslam 94.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2010 08:39
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:He was also constantly derided as a geek and a nerd for making storyboards for the angles he'd write. Which is funny, because Brian Gewirtz was the guy Stephanie pushed up to take Kreski's place and he's like the kind of all nerds.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
I don't see what dislike of the "current product" has to do with liking Cena's work. I think WWE booking has mostly blown goats for a long time now, but have thought Cena is an excellent worker and one of the best in-ring guys in the company since 2006-ish.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2010 08:56
|
|
|
I remember seeing that Invasion show at a party and we all thought it was the greatest show (there was a loving awesome RVD/Jeff Hardy match on the undercard) and storyline ever, not realizing it had already kinda turned into a debacle with the McMahons. The glass shattering moment for everyone, ironically, was when Austin turned for the second time in four months.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2010 11:15
|
|
|
Kurt Angle and Triple H had a heel vs. heel match at Unforgiven 2000 that was both a great match and one of the biggest wasted opportunities ever.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2010 10:12
|
|
|
The famous one was Survivor Series 91, where Ric Flair got backdropped over the top rope in a melee and ended up being the sole survivor because everyone still inside the ring was DQ'd for failure to adhere to the tag rules.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 06:28
|
|
|
It's very possible to enjoy professional wrestling as an entertainment/art/sport while hating most of the current WWE product.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 03:28
|
|
|
El Axo Grande posted:Yes, and that has nothing to do with this conversation Yep, definitely nothing to do with anything in this thread the last page or so... Wojtek posted:Yeah, what kind of person continually posts about something they don't like? OneThousandMonkeys posted:When the entire TV genre of wrestling is objectively in a sustained rut, whether you agree with my interpretation of why or not, it's a worthy topic of discussion, whether or not I interrupted everyone from being forum superstars and getting mass probated or even banned for never being remotely on topic. MassRayPer posted:Wrestling is like any sport in the sense that when you become a big fan you are always at least somewhat interested in it after. Years after people have given up on the Mets or the Orioles they will still be pissed at their team for incompetence. Or if they are sick of NASCAR for lovely rules, they will complain years after they've realized nothing will change about the sport in general. You're a really lousy troll.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 03:36
|
|
|
El Axo Grande posted:The argument is over bitching about WWE being bad without watching it, not hating WWE while liking wrestling. So people that have been beaten down into being casual fans can't discuss about why they've become casual fans (presumably because they think the product is bad) because they don't watch enough for you? That's a heck of a way to have a discussion, where you eliminate everyone's opinion that doesn't agree with your's. It's the exact same discussion, you're just framing it in a way that suits your point.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 03:49
|
|
|
Karmine posted:No one is talking about why they stopped watching or became casual fans. People are talking about THIS PRODUCT IS SO lovely THANK GOD I DON'T WATCH IT YOU'RE ALL DUMB FOR WATCHING IT. This is a total strawman, and really just an excuse to avoid the actual points raised about why people don't like or watch WWE when they bring them up.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 03:58
|
|
|
El Axo Grande posted:The "points" are that the Nexus storyline has been sabotaged by bad writing from the beginning and that RAW is filled with short squash matches. Points which are, you know, not at all true if you have actually watched the show. If anything Nexus is one of the most powerful motivators to tune in every week. The Nexus storyline has absolutely been sabotaged by bad booking (not really writing, Barrett's promos have been fine) and RAW match length has been a common complaint for fifteen years now. These aren't valid?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 04:03
|
|
|
El Axo Grande posted:No, because, if anything, pushing a year Rookie into the title scene and having the top babyface work as a heel-by-proxy for two months is pretty revolutionary booking that has made the show genuinely interesting. This is just not in the same reality as the actual reality. The "revolutionary" booking (and in reality the whole thing was the same invasion angle that has been done in every promotion repeatedly since the mid-80s) ended in August long before any of the stuff you mentioned happened. Nexus lost the first big match at Summerslam via the usual Cena overcomes the odds shtick, which is the usual WWE pattern of cooling off the newcomers too quickly. Barrett lost all of his title shots and didn't even look that good in them. Nobody but Barrett is any sort of a player at this point, even though most of them headlined the third biggest PPV of the year a scant four months ago. Cena in Nexus was a total bust after the first week, it was just Cena being Cena and doing what he wanted with an armband on. Cena being fired looks like it's going to last three weeks with him never actually having left, which is the usual. Truly revolutionary stuff when you can describe it with the word "usual" in almost every sentence. quote:These all being things you would know watching the show. I watch RAW pretty much weekly, some weeks live, some weeks on a replay fast-forwarding through the commercials and useless video packages which turns a 2:10 show into about fifty minutes. These are not things I agree with.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 04:17
|
|
|
El Axo Grande posted:Ok cool, ima be chilling in the Twilight Zone of liking RAW then. Me and Goatee Spock have a TLC PPV party planned. There's nothing wrong with liking RAW. There are aspects of RAW which I like. But claiming the Nexus is a revolutionary concept when it's every invasion angle ever, complete with the usual WWE tropes is nonsense. Six months later they're just another mid-card heel stable led by a guy a notch below the tip-top guys.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Karmine posted:How is Nexus a mid-card stable? They're feuding with John loving Cena. Wade Barrett is feuding with John Cena. The rest of Nexus has gotten beat up so many times by John Cena, sometimes 1-on-5, that it's now part of the storyline. This is like saying Alex Riley is a main eventer because he's associated with Miz.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 04:34
|
|