|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
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
|
|
|
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. I think Lex Luger fell from grace quite a ways in WWF. He wrestled for the title at WM 10 and by next Wrestlemania he was in a crap tag-team and on his way out.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2009 07:10
|
|
|
Carlton Banks posted:Since WM19 happened during my 2 year hiatus from wrestling, what was the build for Austin/Rock like? Was it hinted that it would probably be Austin's last match? Or was it just about how Austin always beat the Rock at WM and the Rock wanted revenge? It was kinda weird to me. Rock was in his Hollywood heel mode and spent some time playing his guitar and messing with the Hurricane. He seemed like more of a comedy heel than anything else. He gave Rock concerts and insulted towns while playing guitar. Austin broke his Willie Nelson guitar at one concert. Austin had come back from walking out in 2002 and a retirement angle was never really played up on TV, but looking back years later i can pick up on small things that I missed watching the first time. At the time, I certainly had no idea it was his last. But I guess it meant alot to him to come back for one more and put over Rocky. It was based mostly on Rock's revenge after he finally got serious about it. His best line was at WM19 when he said something like "All people ever remember is the final act" referring to movies and his trilogy with Austin.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2009 20:09
|
|
|
KungFu Grip posted:And then they lost and Austin was forced to leave the WWE. And he was never seen again.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2009 23:31
|
|
|
bradzilla posted:Here's a thought. Do most people consider Wrestlemania X7 to be the pinnacle, as well as the death of the Attitude Era? It seemed like a perfect storm of a show, and with WCW being purchased a week before, the Monday Night Wars were effectively ended. All of the matches on the undercard were pure Attitude Era poo poo, and then the main event with Austin's heel turn seemingly nailing the coffin shut in that one night. I think WM X7 is generally seen as the end of the Attitude Era. Austin was seen as the foremost representative of the Attitude Era and his heel turn ended that, even though he turned back a few months later. Plus, it was also the last time the Rock was really a full-time wrestler and he was a major leader during Attiude while Austin was out injured. That, and your abovve mentioned reasons seem to end that part of the WWE. Also, I remember JD Dunn over on 411 reviewing it and the tagline was "THe end of Ausitn, the end of attitude." So at least to some it was the end.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2009 15:36
|
|
|
dusty udder smoker posted:honestly i wonder if jericho was even supposed to get the title then. if you noticed, the set for Vengeance was extreeeeeeeeeeemely sledgehammer themed, and hhh was originally thought to be returning a little big after survivor series I hope he wasn't the original choice. I can't believe the writing team sat down, chose Jericho as champ, wrote out his storyline, and then everyone agreed this was good for both Jericho and the WWE.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 15:39
|
|
|
CM Junk posted:Chris Jericho, one of the most consistently popular wrestlers in the WWE, who up until then had never held a top belt for longer than three minutes in a reign that wasn't official in the first place? Yeah, terrible idea. As a whole, yes. It was terrible. The whole thing was just a loving clusterfuck of a joke and made Jericho look so weak and HHH so dominant, ending his reign was more a mercy-killing than anything else. So, your right. It was terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 22:22
|
|
|
Super Ninja Fish posted:How wasn't Jericho winning the Undisputed Title good for him and WWE? His reign didn't end well thanks to HHH and Stephanie but winning it was a good idea. I meant the whole thing taken altogether. Yeah, Jericho winning initially was a good idea but then what happened with the booking and with Stephanie overshadowing him was God-awful. If what happened was really planned in advance by the booking team, then the whole thing was terrible regardless of Jericho's individual merits. I would rather have had Jericho never be champ and stay over than watch his title reign devalue him and just be an excuse to put over HHH and Stephanie.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 22:27
|
|
|
CM Junk posted:You aren't putting blame where blame is due. You're acting like the problem with the angle was the fact that it was Jericho they put the title on, but at the same time you've made it exceedingly clear that the fault lies with the bookers for making Jericho look weak through the usual HHH-centric booking. You're right. It was not Jericho's fault, but it was still a bad reign due to booking. The beginning was good with paranoid Jericho but when I think of his Undisputed Champion run, it goes back to how it ended so badly for Jericho. Good God, that crowd was disinterested in the HHH-Jericho main event. But once the WWE had put Hunter on the fast-track to the title after returning from injury, Jericho paid the price for it. And that pisses me off.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 22:44
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:And of course, the reaction for Hogan was so huge they had him win the Undisputed title off of Triple H almost immediately which certainly seemed like the right choice at the time, but it wasn't long before the nostalgia completely disappeared and people were actually booing Hogan. Thank God for the Undertaker. Heel BikerTaker remains one of my top five wrestlers of all time. Good God he was awesome during that phase. I wish he could have stayed heel longer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 22:50
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:I dunno I've seen that and honestly, considering how well he goes up the second time (not very well at all) I assumed that Hogan just didn't have it in the tank to even jump, and UT probably just said something like 'come on, seriously?' I thought it was more just they got the timing wrong and Taker counted off so it would go smoother. (hosed up chokeslam) Taker: gently caress. 1..2..3!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2009 22:59
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever heard anyone badmouth Kane. I heard a story where UT offered to put him over at Wrestlemania and Kane refused because he thought the streak was too important.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 05:28
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Sorry to keep doing this, but it's the only way to prevent urban legends continuing. Kane turning down breaking the streak (or even being OFFERED to break the streak) was just a made up story. Yes, he is. But if it's just an urban legend, then it should be stopped. Does anyone in the wrestling industry badmouth Lance Storm?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 05:48
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:I did hear about how he was advertised for an indy show in canada, his secduled oppenet could not go on for some reason so Storm just decided to go home without wrestling. Lance Storm is a jerk!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 05:58
|
|
|
dusty udder smoker posted:only it's been confirmed by other wrestlers and austin himself that hulk hogan held him down. go hunt down a few of his ecw promos. On the Legacy of Stone Cold DVD, Austin cuts a promo just burying WCW and another promo he is imitating Hogan and cuts off in the middle and walks off saying "this lame-rear end poo poo ain't gonna get the job done." Or something to that effect. Austin's promo in ECW where he talks about WCW and all the politics and does imitations of Flair and Dusty holding him down has got to be one of the all-time great promos. I think the DVD is worth buying just to see it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 16:22
|
|
|
So who are the most hated wrestlers? We listed good guys and everyone talks about Hogan and HHH. But let's list people who aren't the hugest stars around and still make enemies everywhere. 1. Buff Bagwell: He was a popular midcard act for WCW and held a few championships, but he got the reputation of being a prima donna and refusing to job in the late 90's and thought he was bigger than he was. And I'm sure having his mom around didn't help him out. And he was a huge bust when he went to the WWF. 2. Jeff Jarrett: J-e-doublef J-a-doubler-e-doublet. Besides having the worst catchphrase, Jarrett has his share of detractors. He has been given lost of chances and opportunities throughout his career. He comes from a wrestling family, fueded with Jerry Lawler when he started out, and had multiple stints with the two biggest companies during the height of the Monday Night Wars. He was put into a Horsemen storyline, a multiple-time IC champ, multiple tag-team champ, member of the NWO, world champ in WCW, focal point of his own promotion after WCW folded, and has a long list of accolades and is considered to be a good wrestler. But...something went wrong. Most of his accomplishments all have an asterisk next to them or circumstances that were not the best. To me, he always had to get the absolute cheapest heat he could. And not in the enjoyable Edge and Christian sense. In the WWF, he always had a valet or tag partner to cheat behind his back. He was portrayed as weak all the time. And I realize thats how lots of heels work, but instead of making me "What a bad guy! I hope someone cleans his clock" angry, it made me legitimately angry. He was boring and no matter how many guitars he smashed or women he allegedly beat, I never got interested in him. He was taking time away from people I wanted to see. He screwed with Vince. His contract ran out before a PPV and he had a match as the IC champ. He held Vince up for allegedly 150,000 to do the job and then jetted to WCW where he was pushed to the top. And all the stuff I said before about him boring me to tears? Magnify it tenfold in late WCW. Now he was still boring, still a coward, still had a deep South aura about him that lots of people couldn't get into, but now it seemed he was around ALL THE TIME. He had top storylines, more mic time, more title shots and mostly due to his friendship with Vince Russo. To me, he got more Xpac heat than Xpac. In the Fall of WCW DVD, Jarrett is given about 2 minutes of straight bashing. Everyone who speaks badmouths him and dislikes him. Someone says "He broke 6000 guitars and never drew a dime." And I agree. He was never able to make it as a top draw at the hottest point in wrestling and the top guy at the time, Austin, refused to work with him. And once he started his own promotion, it got even worse! I realize Jarrett probably did what he did for a few reasons: it was his company, people randomly watching would probably recognize Jarrett more than anyone else and say "Hey, its him. Let's watch.", maybe he felt he really was the best choice as champ, he was afraid that others might leave his upstart promotion and didn't want to invest time and money and exposure on them that might be wasted, the others in charge decided he was actually the best choice. All valid reasons I could understand the logic behind. But it seemed like everyone and every column I read hated his reign as top dog. He seemed to have that belt forever as top heel and was put over at the expense of everyone else until, like before, people wanted him to lose and get out of the title scene not because they hated the character, they hated the man. Ok, I'll end this now but i want to say that these words really can't express how much I loving hated Jeff Jarrett on my screen all the time.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 21:48
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:This is Vince's fault entirely, and from what I understand was no-where near this much money. I don't remember if any exact figure was thrown out the last time I remember this coming up in the forums, but while Jeff and the WWE may not get along, the amount of bad blood is vastly overstated. I think it the book The Death of WCW that listed 150,000. Maybe they don't hate each other then, but I was going off of the book and the fact that the WCW DVD seems to go out of its way to bash Jarrett. And didn't Vince insult Jeff the night he bought WCW on tv?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 22:13
|
|
|
Wojtek posted:Can anyone elaborate on this? Maybe he means Bruiser Brody getting stabbed to death?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 22:14
|
|
|
Rockfish posted:if so, then they were pretty stupid because urine is generally pretty close to sterile, almost any other substance would be more effective Like jelly?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 22:23
|
|
|
Karmine posted:Reminder: This is a guy who supposedly asked one of his workers to "spic it up a bit" so at the very least we know that tact is not his strong point. Who did he ask? And Vince seems to be a dick and a saint at different times. Austin always praises him and lots of people say he will give people their jobs back over and over. Foley praised Vince non-stop in his first two books but quit as an announcer and didnt like Vince after that. So like any person, it is all viewpoint. And people will probably also base their whole opinion on their last dealing with him.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 23:16
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Carlito. Well, do they talk in a derogatory or hateful manner? If not, i'm not sure it can be called racism. Not politically correct, sure, but without intentional malice I've heard in classrooms that the remarks are not actually racist.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 23:21
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:It's just a little troubling to hear my parents talking about the number of asians in an area with the implication that this is something to be worried about. My parents are fine people, they were opposed to apartheid and mock and deride open racists, but they grew up in an entirely different time to me and things they think are fine to say are not the same for me. Show them Jimmy Wang Yang. He's the best of both Asian and Anglo worlds!!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 23:29
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:
Who is most people? Don't shoot down the source I based it off of, even if wrong, and then use "most people" to back up your claim.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2009 13:52
|
|
|
Sionistic posted:Yes but what will he be like tomorrow Probably either on the DL or about to go on it. It seems like he and Batista are out half the time. poo poo, I wouldn't be surprised if Batista got another serious injury before Christmas.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2009 06:04
|
|
|
Deranged Hermit posted:Hell, they probably would have had contests where a fan at home could win the WCW title. Riki Rachtman could announce their names live on Nitro.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2009 18:36
|
|
|
gibsonisacripple posted:This was answered on todays Wrestling Observer Radio. Meltzer basically said Vince used to pay himself top salary in comparison to other performers on the show as he believed regardless of which match he was in, he was drawing the buy rate. Shane slightly less so but still a good amount. This kind of makes sense, if you imagine Vince trying to justify to people. When Vince wrestled, it was usually against one of the top-stars in a storyline that had lots of TV time and build-up so he could make the claim that he was one of the head-liners and thus responsible for drawing the buy rate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2009 18:20
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:To add; It has a sticker on it that says "Title". That implies to me that there is a SEPERATE bell for title and non-title matches. Title-match bell is holding Non-title-match bell down. Whatever could be the reason for having two seperate bells?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2009 20:39
|
|
|
Supreme Allah posted:Athletic ability is only one of many criteria for being a successful wrestler but it's the only criteria for being a successful football player. There have been plenty of wrestlers with little to no 'athletic' ability that have become successful by entertaining the fans in other ways. On the other hand, making a professional football teams roster requires you to simply be faster, stronger and more skilled than everybody else who wants that job. Kickers dont count and never will. Football is harder. Brock was world champ within six months of debuting in professional wrestling. He never made it in the NFL. I rest my case.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2009 22:43
|
|
|
Hey, what is the deal with Jesse Ventura's commentary on some of the videos? Sometimes he is on there but other times, like on the Rise and Fall of WCW DVD, you can plainly see Jesse at ringside talking and moving but it is all blanked out and only JR commentates. Does anyone know the reason for this?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2009 23:06
|
|
|
dusty udder smoker posted:vince didn't want to pay jesse royalty fees. But doesn't he have to pay royalty fees to anyone who ever commentated then? What makes Jesse such a special case? Did he want like ten times as much as anyone else?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2009 23:09
|
|
|
ColeM posted:Really? Because every time they aired a Bischoff or a Hogan segment, they would put a date in the corner for when it was taken(because they both refused to be apart of it, as with the Scott Hall segments). There were no dates placed in the Goldberg segments so I just assumed they were recent. They were recent, you're right. I always heard Goldberg was a prima donna and was a mark for himself but on the WCW DVD he really seems to just have a different perspective from everyone else. Like with David Arquette, everyone hates the idea and says it was the worst thing ever, but Goldberg seems to be in favor of it saying it draws attention and it's a fake title anyway so who cares? There's also another part of the DVD where he says nothing lasts forever so it makes no difference who gets the belt as long as it is good for business and gets people talking. So I guess either time away from wrestling has mellowed Goldberg out about it or, unlike the guys who were raised in it and make wrestling their entire life and therefore take it personally, Goldberg sees it more as just a business and no reason to take it all so personally because its all "fake." Of course, that still doesn't excuse any attitude he had as the champ as an active wrestler.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2009 18:22
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:They've had their own games be sponsors plenty of times. OK, but are the games a sponsor because no one else will step in? I would think if you order a PPV, you already watch their programming which is full of the game ads. So it's not like someone orders a PPV and sees the game as a sponsor and goes "OH! A game." Because if the WWE is their own sponsor, they are losing money right?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2009 14:08
|
|
|
OK, I was wrong apparently about WWE losing money when their game is a sponsor of a PPV. The publisher ponies up the cash. But then there's something I'm still fuzzy on. Doesn't it seem counterproductive to advertise to an audience that is probably already theirs? The people buying have already seen the commercials and probably bought the game already or have decided not to. Doesn't it seem wasteful to spend more money to sponsor the PPV? Maybe someone can explain it to me because I must be missing an obvious point or something. Does anyone know why it's a smart move finacially to do this?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2009 20:19
|
|
|
Ok. It was obvious and I just somehow didn't see it. Thanks to everyone for answering my question. It makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2009 00:44
|
|
|
HBK/Taker is first and then the match with Angle. I would put the ladder match with Razor next for being such a historical match.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2009 19:23
|
|
|
Goldberg's jackhammer finisher must be one of the most protected finishers of the last 10 years. All of the biggest finishers always had someone kick out, but I can't remember anyone kicking out of the Jackhammer. Ever. Note: This does not apply to TNA, as no-one watches TNA.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2009 03:42
|
|
|
Yes, both very good examples and ones I overlooked. My mistake.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2009 04:03
|
|
|
tzirean posted:It got kicked out of a few times when Malenko used it, but that was before Goldberg. Yeah, I knew Malenko used it before. It was just Goldberg's version that ended every match. It's the same way Billy Gunn busted out the jackhammer a few times, but I don't think he ever established it as a real finisher like Goldberg did.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2009 05:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Goldberg has never wrestled for TNA. What I meant was I dont watch TNA so there might be guys who have protected finishers, but I wouldn't be aware of them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2009 18:14
|
|