|
Karmine posted:Right but they're still feuding. So guys that get beat up by a main eventer every other week for three months in between winning some mid-card matches and losing some mid-card match aren't mid-carders? Okaaaaaay. eta: Mr. Carlisle posted:Alex Riley was just the number one contender for the WWE championship in the main event match this week on Raw. If you add up everyone that's been in a main event RAW match and call them a main eventer, you'd probably have every male wrestler on the brand as a "main eventer" except maybe Yoshi Tatsu. oldfan fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Dec 9, 2010 |
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 04:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
Michaels vs. Undertaker was the best feud of the year and I don't even see an argument elsewhere. Story was great, build was great, video packages were great, the big match was the best match of the year.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 04:44
|
|
|
Are all of the WWE movies as bad as The Marine? It showed up in my free On Demand so I watched it, and if it didn't have a couple good Robert Patrick moments it might have been the worst movie I've ever seen. If they're all this bad, I need to see more.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 10:39
|
|
|
Wojtek posted:I don't get the hate for McGuillicutty, other than his terrible promo leaving NXT. I like him. Basically he's just very generic unless he's doing the Mr. Perfect Jr. gimmick and they went away from that instead of towards it. Not actively good or bad, just kinda there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 01:54
|
|
|
Sue Denim posted:What was Maven's (Tough Enough Season 1 winner) run like and did he havy any notable feuds? You remember right, he was pretty much jobbed and squashed into the ground. eta: Well, his first run at least. After a couple years of that, they moved him back up the cards into a feud with Evolution, then he turned heel and hung around the mid-card and got canned. oldfan fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Dec 10, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 07:26
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:great Scott Keith review Does not compute.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 06:07
|
|
|
Funny thing is that Undertaker is going to win back to back match of the year awards ten years after that stupid rant while Kurt Angle's drawing eight thousand buys per show and hasn't had a legitimately great match in a long time.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 07:19
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:It's good to remind people that Fully Loaded 2000 was one of the most stacked and best booked WWF PPV's. A Dusty finish in the main event disqualifies any show from "best booked" of anything.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 09:01
|
|
|
Web Jew.0 posted:Idk if jeffersonlives was trolling but angle's has like a dozen matches in the **** range every year This hasn't really been true in years. Angle still has a lot of good matches, but he's had some clunkers too and the serious MOTY candidates have all but disappeared. Part of this is probably due to incompetent booking.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 09:55
|
|
|
Web Jew.0 posted:also weren't his matches against desmond aj and kennedy serious serious motyc this year. The best Nigel matches were last year and I didn't think either of the big AJ matches this year were anything special. The Kennedy cage match was really good though, forgot about that one. (I haven't put together a MOTY list so not sure how high it is or anything.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 10:43
|
|
|
Atticus Finch posted:Maybe I am misremembering but Jericho's book made it seem like he signed as soon as they flew him in. Is that not how it happened? Pretty sure he's talking about Jericho in the mid-aughts and not Jericho in the late-90s.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2010 04:10
|
|
|
El Duke posted:It's Scott Keith. I've never read his MMA reviews, but he can't write for poo poo, has awful jokes, and horribly wrong opinions. I'm guessing his MMA reviews are filled with that, just about MMA. Add in not grasping the finer points of the ground game, and you're pretty much dead on.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2010 09:14
|
|
|
Yeah it was from a random newsboard and not the Observer, but like most fake newsboard stuff got credited to the Observer anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2010 06:19
|
|
|
El Generico posted:Exactly which episode of the Bryan and Vinny show was it that they reviewed Victory Road 2009 and Alverez yells MINUS FIVE STARS? I think it's actually on an Observer Radio and not a B&V show, since Vinny usually does his PPV report as part of those. So check the WORs from July 2009.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2010 09:25
|
|
|
MSG's floor is inclined, yeah. I was on the floor pretty far back for the 2008 Rumble and had no trouble at all seeing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 18:02
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:First of all is his physique. Call it a new WWE world if you want but he's very average. Look at Jeff Jarrett in his prime and then look at the Miz. Hell, the comparison is very apt. Miz has a great physique by any normal standard but a lot of WH2K is shares Vince's obsession with roid monsters, which is really sad in the 2010s. oldfan fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Jan 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 08:04
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:Well of course by a normal standard. I'd love to look like the Miz in terms of physique. The guy works his rear end off in the gym. But pro wrestling is still larger than life. And Miz honestly isn't. If you really still think in 2011 that having an unnatural physique is a prereq for being a star, I don't even really know what to say.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 08:14
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:Yes, the great Andy Kaufman. He was one of the best WWE World Champions in recent memory. Shawn Michaels is the WWE proclaimed Greatest Ever and compared to him Miz looks like Lou Ferrigno.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 08:45
|
|
|
I think it's the famous Caddock/Stecher match from MSG which is considered the oldest pro wrestling film still in existence but I'm not 100% sure. Dave and Bryan have discussed it on Observer Radio at some point or another.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 06:27
|
|
|
MassRayPer posted:I vaguely remember Karl Stern saying it was even older, from 1908. I think the Caddock/Stecher footage is the second grainy footage shown, while the first (from the lower camera angle) is from 1908. I can't remember who is in it. That sounds about right. So the answer is basically "e-mail Dave or Karl Stern."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 06:39
|
|
|
Sue Denim posted:When did people outside the industry become knowledgeable of Hogan's true character, in relation to the egotism, lying, exaggerating and politicking? Mainstream it would have been all of his lying and equivocating about steroids in the 1991-1993 area. The fan backlash was already starting as early as the Savage feud in 1989, and that's around the period where the sheets would have started hitting Hogan for such things.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 22:52
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:I think it's the most likely explanation, given how the Invasion ended up. Vince couldn't accept the fact that he owned his competition and that burying them was burying what he owned. He had to get the last laugh, and he considered everyone from WCW and ECW the other. To be fair the real problem with the Invasion is that instead of paying to immediately bring in all the WCW stars for the invading force, he didn't bring in any of them except DDP and Booker T immediately, even though they all came in within the next two years. So the Invasion angle, which should have been the biggest thing ever, just turned into a new way to resuscitate the very stale McMahon vs. Austin and feudin' McMahons storylines.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 23:12
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Just for clarity's sake, I'm not pretending the Invasion angle was done right or the best way it could have been (though I do think it was better than a lot of people give it credit for) but the idea of "just pay millions upon millions of dollars for Goldberg, Hogan, Nash, Hall and Sting and buyrates would have doubled and the ratings would have hit the 10s!" (yes I know that is hyperbole) is simplistic and not realistic. The problem is that by bringing in none of them, the WCW guys had no credibility and the actual WWF vs. WCW part of the angle bombed horribly and lasted like three weeks before it was co-opted as the second stage of the Steve Austin heel debacle, complete with McMahons. I know your gimmick is to find the positive in everything but it cost Vince enormous money in the long run not to be able to do any of those dream matches immediately or a real dream feud. Much, much more than it would have cost to bring in Flair and Goldberg, so your analysis is abjectly horrible. And that's not even counting the enormous, still-continuing nosedive in business after the Invasion debacle, which has to be in part a side effect.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
Saying RVD was depushed for being a botch machine in a company that regularly attempts to push green steroid monsters who can't even run the ropes to the moon is a bit myopic.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 00:03
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Well given that he wasn't a steroid monster and therefore didn't have people backstage saying "Well yeah he can't wrestle BUT LOOK AT THAT BODY!!" it is understandable. It's retarded, but understandable. Well yeah but he was really depushed for being a small guy with a non-WWE gimmick that didn't wrestle generically enough. WWE doesn't give a poo poo about botches and drugs if you've got the paint-by-numbers WWE superstar kit.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 00:07
|
|
|
This is probably a double post but I feel like it deserves its own post and not a ninja edit soooJerusalem posted:It's more that I try to see the (possible) reasoning behind a decision as opposed to a kneejerk and silly,"But Vince didn't do this because he hates money," statement as is often used. Vince does almost everything to make money. The problem, which has been shown over and over and over again, is that he has a pretty narrow and largely inflexible conception of what makes money. WWF/WWE has destroyed every invasion angle they've ever done within one or two major shows, including ones like the WCW invasion and the Nexus that started out amazingly hot and looked like huge business. I'm pretty sure the problem is with WWE booking mentality because other promotions, hell even other sports, have done wildly successful invasion angles that have led to amazing business. More specifically, I don't think Vince understands that a successful invasion angle has to start with the invaders going over for a long, long time. The invaders need to be established as not just at the level of your top guys but actually above them, and WWE won't push anything as legitimately better than their protected Approved Top Stars at any given time. There's no real threat, and thus no real heat, if your Booker Ts or DDPs are perceived as immediately being pegged lower than The Undertaker and The Rock. Real top WCW guys - not WWE "turncoats" - had to go over the big stars for titles for the Invasion to work. WCW had to win, a lot. And that's where you needed Goldberg and The Outsiders and Sting and Hogan and Flair (or at least some of them). Booker T and DDP weren't the stars that WCW created when it was actually hot and not in the death throes and Booker T and DDP weren't guys that Steve Austin and The Rock were going to lose feuds to.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 00:17
|
|
|
Shelton Benjamin had tons of charisma before he got stop and started so many times that he stopped giving a poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 01:53
|
|
|
The A-Team Van posted:Why is Rey the only masked wrestler on the main roster? Vince historically doesn't like masked guys.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2011 05:47
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:So Jericho's first title win would be a Dusty Finish? The one where Earl Hebner fastcounted, they brought out another ref (Jack Doan?) who gave his opinion that the count was fast and then Earl overturned the decision while being physically threatened? Yep, that was a classic Dusty Finish.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2011 08:31
|
|
|
RAW hasn't been the top show on cable in a long time, and it doesn't make the top 5 most weeks, although it's usually in the top 20 somewhere towards the middle or bottom. In addition to football it also regularly gets beat by stuff like Jersey Shore, Pawn Stars, and random Disney shows now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 03:39
|
|
|
Toadofsky posted:Who was booking for TNA when it was supposedly good in ~2005? Dutch Mantell and Jeff Jarrett, among others.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 22:32
|
|
|
MassRayPer posted:Many also thought he was being pushed in WCW because he was Bischoff's neighbor. Or because he was wife-swapping with Bischoff.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
MrMondayNight posted:Why would you swap Kimberly for anyone? To get a ridiculous push from your next door neighbor!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the story was that WCW/the toy company were intentionally putting the wrong barcodes on the figures to have them show up as Hogan figures, not a TRU thing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 03:48
|
|
|
The A-Team Van posted:Besides The Rockers and Steenerico, what are some other shocking/amazing tag team break up angles? THE MEGA POWERS EXPLODE is the best of all-time as long as you pretend it ends at Mania V. Tag team breakup angles usually suck because either the partners don't want to be broken up or nobody cares (including the bookers).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 07:09
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Exhibit ZZZZZ: Hollywood Blonds
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 07:41
|
|
|
Bart Gunn was actually really, really over at the end of Brawl For All and I think he was a lot better than you're giving him credit for. There's all kinds of rumors about why they never gave him a chance, most of which circle back in some form into "they were really pissed he won instead of Williams." The idea also wasn't Williams vs. Butterbean, it was to build Williams as a legit shooter to feud with Steve Austin as Vince McMahon's new hired gun. The Butterbean thing was many, many months later after they'd buried Gunn and then yanked him from television. eta: Semi-beaten by MRP but I think we have slightly different takes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 09:56
|
|
|
Brawl For All also had the usual Vince Russo problem where by saying "THIS IS REALLY REAL" you're breaking the fourth wall and reminding everyone that everything else is fake and unimportant. And while 90% of the audience knows that wrestling is fake, it's generally not good form to keep hammering it home in the middle of the show.OneThousandMonkeys posted:This is getting off on a side discussion but I recall UFC in general being mostly retarded for a while. Like, "OK we will get a few serious fighters and have them KO these fat guys and shrimpy motherfuckers" and other circus poo poo. Also "We will create a rulebook as we go" which led to things like a guy winning a match by rabbit punching his opponent's groin. We've talked about this a bit in the MMA questions thread, but MMA doesn't really come together with a cohesive rules set that looks pretty much like what we know now until the late-90s. The original idea for UFC was basically just an infomercial for Gracie BJJ, and things like Shooto and Pancrase were still relatively in their infancy and not really A Big Deal until UFC was already underway, so they were making it up as they went along. Rules changed from promotion to promotion and even show to show within the major promotions, it was unregulated, etc. oldfan fucked around with this message at 10:10 on Feb 7, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 10:07
|
|
|
McCain was going after UFC because he's very closely tied to the boxing promoters and beer companies and it was hurting their business, not for any good reason. Although in general I think regulation has been good, there are certainly also significant aspects of regulation of MMA (athletic commissions that don't understand the sport, 12-to-6 elbow strikes, Adelaide Byrd, grounded knees, Cecil Peoples) which are very bad.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 10:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
WWF was actually cross-promoting with UFC in that time period (1997-1999 was quite a different time for both UFC and WWF) and was quite aggressive about presenting him as a "real fighter." And yes it was the Russo fourth wall thing again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 10:54
|
|