|
The people mad about stuff like matches being edited off shows have a point, but if you thought they were going to have every single licensed theme on every show, that's just naive. I don't think anyone expected anything of the sort. And WWE did say, when asked, that the only edits would be for rights reasons.
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
Gaz-L posted:And WWE did say, when asked, that the only edits would be for rights reasons. This was the answer to the question. I wasn't sure they had said this. Also, I'm really hoping they recut their masters to remove the blurs, but that's splitting hairs at this point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Wise Fwom Yo Gwave posted:This was the answer to the question. I wasn't sure they had said this. I think chances are good they will considering they've apparently already re-edited some ECW stuff, it just probably wasn't a top priority.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Pinstripe Hourglass posted:Wait, I thought that got settled? I'm sure I've seen and heard "WWF" plenty of times on the Network... Why did the World Wildlife Foundation wait so long to sue the World Wrestling Federation over the name "WWF" despite Wrestlemania being a thing for many years? Is it because the company went public?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:Why did the World Wildlife Foundation wait so long to sue the World Wrestling Federation over the name "WWF" despite Wrestlemania being a thing for many years? Is it because the company went public? Someone can fill in all the details, but my understanding is that the two companies already had an agreement which allowed them to both use the name, but the Wildlife Fund didn't think the Wrestling Federation was living up to the terms of the agreement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
As I recall, they did have an agreement. McMahon breached it by changing to the scratch logo without clearing it with the Wildlife Fund first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
I thought they had an agreement that they'd minimize use of "WWF" in favor of World Wrestling Federation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Man, I can only imagine the reactions on this board to "get the F out" if it happened today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
So long as we're all vaguely remembering, I think the agreement violation had to do with them using WWF on the internet and consequently internationally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
It's really funny watching Shane Douglas on the Network go on his usual poo poo rear end poo poo promos, then he says WWF and is bleeped.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
To add to all of this, my understanding is that Vince approached the Wildlife Fund over it and that they legally didn't need to have any sort of legal agreement, given that both parties had been using the WWF acronym for something like 10-15 years at the time of the agreement. Vince basically gave them the grounds to take them to court, although I guess at the time (1994) he was more concerned with keeping his company afloat and avoiding any potential lawsuits. They've also made a new agreement which authorises use of WWF and associated logos, but it cannot be used in conjunction with any new/original programming or packaging.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
The World Wildlife Fund was founded in 1961. The World Wrestling Federation name wasn't used until 1979. I believe the issue occurred when Vince started focusing on selling WWF instead of the full name, since the Fund has used the acronym internationally and in the US for long enough to have a legit claim. They had an written agreement for Vince to limit the use of the acronym in his marketing and that any changes would be mutually agreed on. Vince, during the Attitude era, changed the logo l and started heavily using the initials. Silly or not, Vince flagrantly broke the agreement and was hosed when it went to court. By this point, the company had changed the name from Titan Sports to World Wrestling Federation Entertainment and it was easy to just drop Federation. Vince, being petty, wasn't willing to make a new deal and we got blurred WWF logos and would silence the name in old videos, kind of like how he edited Jesse Ventura's voice out of commentary after a judge ruled that Jesse was owed royalties for the use of his voice. When they finally realized that the video library was a major asset and editing WWF out was an unnecessary expense they made a new deal with the Fund to allow the name and logo in old material.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Yeah, the Fund had an agreement with Vince where they could use the initials "WWF" and their gold-plated logo within reason. Then wrestling blew-up in the late 90s and Vince aggressively expanded his operations without a care in the world and it was the change to the scratch logo that was the straw the broke the camel's back. Vince believed he could simply say "well, the agreement doesn't apply because it hurts a business' expansion!" but the judge disagreed completely and ordered the name and logo change. I was on another wrestling forum when the name change happened. It was ugly. People were saying they couldn't watch it anymore, others refusing to ever say "WWE" and the Fund was seen as the bad guy. It was also really bad for Vince because it happened at a time when ratings and buyrates were down, the ride that was the Attitude Era was over and Rock/Austin's status in the company was in question.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
I've been watching a lot of New Generation era PPVs lately and I've noticed that the WWF never seemed to have much faith in Bret Hart as the face of the company. It seems like he is only the top babyface when things don't work out like with Luger and Diesel's run or when Undertaker is injured. Going by the crowd Bret is clearly getting the biggest pops save for maybe Undertaker and is able to get a passable match out of just about anyone on the roster at the time. So why was WWF so reluctant to get behind Bret as the face of the company?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Honestly WWE is a better name, the only thing that makes them really look dumb is having to bleep and smudge out WWF on their 100,000 hours of tapes, which must have been loads of fun to do the grunt work on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
bartok posted:I've been watching a lot of New Generation era PPVs lately and I've noticed that the WWF never seemed to have much faith in Bret Hart as the face of the company. It seems like he is only the top babyface when things don't work out like with Luger and Diesel's run or when Undertaker is injured. Going by the crowd Bret is clearly getting the biggest pops save for maybe Undertaker and is able to get a passable match out of just about anyone on the roster at the time. So why was WWF so reluctant to get behind Bret as the face of the company? He wasn't very big and he didn't have pictures of Vince blowing a donkey like Shawn Michaels apparently had.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
bartok posted:I've been watching a lot of New Generation era PPVs lately and I've noticed that the WWF never seemed to have much faith in Bret Hart as the face of the company. It seems like he is only the top babyface when things don't work out like with Luger and Diesel's run or when Undertaker is injured. Going by the crowd Bret is clearly getting the biggest pops save for maybe Undertaker and is able to get a passable match out of just about anyone on the roster at the time. So why was WWF so reluctant to get behind Bret as the face of the company? 1. Bret wasn't as politically connected backstage as some of his competitors. 2. Bret was Vince's "safety net", in that Hart could always bring the goods in-ring, but Vince never thought he'd be the superhero face of the company. I think Vince was just hoping Bret would keep the seat warm until the next ***-mania took off. Lex Luger and Diesel didn't work, despite McMahon's best efforts. If you look at Austin becoming the face of the next boom era, then, well, maybe Vince would say he was right after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Is it just me, or does the world title match at Great American Bash '92 make Sting look like an idiot?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
This is probably a stupid question but is Jerry Lawler considered a good worker? I don't really have much experience of his matches but he seems to be able to take bumps when he's asked to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
He can throw one of the best punches. I'd only call Terry Funk better, and half the time he isn't pulling his punches.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Also heard the Lawler has one of the best piledrivers in the business. That and the punches are about as much as I know about his work, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Lawler could definitely go back in the day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
Jerry was the best of Memphis style. Dude could time everything down perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
ZDar Fan posted:Is it just me, or does the world title match at Great American Bash '92 make Sting look like an idiot? Without looking it up, the rule of thumb is that Sting usually looked like a moron. After looking it up, that match was really just Sting putting over Vader as a super monster, and setting up a rematch. The "dumb" part of Sting underestimating Vader worked for the story they were going for, so I think that was okay. I haven't really seen that stuff in ... years, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Speaking of Lawler, if I have to watch one match in his series with Curt Hennig from 87-88, which match should I watch?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
I don't remember on what program, but Jim Ross said he always felt that despite Lawler's many years in a non-wrestling role, his excellent body of work was going to be his legacy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
bartok posted:I've been watching a lot of WWE PPVs lately and I've noticed that the WWE never seems to have much faith in CM Punk as the face of the company. It seems like he is only the top babyface when things don't work out like with Miz and Del Rio's run or when Cena is injured. Going by the crowd Punk is clearly getting the biggest pops save for maybe Cena and is able to get a passable match out of just about anyone on the roster. So why is WWE so reluctant to get behind CM Punk as the face of the company? Could also sub Daniel Bryan in there, although he's getting a big push now haha. Basically it's just Vince being Vince.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Which Funkadactyl was on the Stone Cold Tough Enough?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Funktastic posted:Which Funkadactyl was on the Stone Cold Tough Enough? That was Cameron, and she was the first one cut that season.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Funktastic posted:Which Funkadactyl was on the Stone Cold Tough Enough? Cameron. Naomi was on NXT.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 17:47
|
|
Ultragonk posted:This is probably a stupid question but is Jerry Lawler considered a good worker? I don't really have much experience of his matches but he seems to be able to take bumps when he's asked to. He had a great feud with Andy Kaufman. http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...y#axzz2wKoVwI3I
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I don't remember on what program, but Jim Ross said he always felt that despite Lawler's many years in a non-wrestling role, his excellent body of work was going to be his legacy. That sounds like a very, very polite way for JR to say that he doesn't think his longtime friend is a very good color commentator.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Ultragonk posted:This is probably a stupid question but is Jerry Lawler considered a good worker? I don't really have much experience of his matches but he seems to be able to take bumps when he's asked to. In certain quarters he's considered one of the greatest of all time. Not a stellar athlete but a master of timing, selling etc. Why are New Jack's matches edited off the Network footage? Another rights issue?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Tokyo Slutty Gal posted:In certain quarters he's considered one of the greatest of all time. Not a stellar athlete but a master of timing, selling etc. They're having trouble cutting out Natural Born Killa without taking the commentary with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Claytor posted:That sounds like a very, very polite way for JR to say that he doesn't think his longtime friend is a very good color commentator. Well he had a few good years where he played a heel commentator really well but once the attitude era happened he was all "PUPPIES!". He hasn't really been good since.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Tokyo Slutty Gal posted:In certain quarters he's considered one of the greatest of all time. Not a stellar athlete but a master of timing, selling etc. He has Natural Born Killaz playing throughout his matches so they would have to be played with no audio or commentary. They're working on figuring something out, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
If WWE could pay for the rights to ONE song on the WWE Network, what would you choose? Natural Born Killaz is a pretty good one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:If WWE could pay for the rights to ONE song on the WWE Network, what would you choose? Natural Born Killaz is a pretty good one. Enter Sandman, purely to make ONS05 CORRECT. In the case of Jerry Lawler, he was one of those guys who didn't need to be a master technician, because he was so good at everything else. He put asses in seats, he'd always make his opponent look important, his selling and psychology were top-notch. Also, he throws the best worked punches in wrestling history. Seriously, Lawler's punches are works of art.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
VogeGandire posted:Enter Sandman, purely to make ONS05 CORRECT.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
What happened to the WWE having events in the UK? Selling out Wembley was always going to be hard to beat, but it seemed like they had a one or two PPVs there annually until about ten years back. Was it just a boom-bust thing over there, or did they stop going over for other reasons?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:16
|
|
