|
Post by Robbymac on Mar 21, 2010 19:53:36 GMT -5
A good Raw main event? C'mon now. Wrestlemania last year was largely considered a dud due to the big giant crap Orton and Trips laid in the ring in the main event. Last I checked that match was AFTER Taker-HBK. It wasn't like I, and the majority of people who thought it was the classic that it was, didn't decide after the match "oh wow, Taker-HBK was really incredible" Go back and read the Wrestlemania thread from last year during that match. People were marking out like crazy during the match. I remember actually breaking out into a sweat watching the match, and needing a cigarette when it was over because I was so physically drained from watching it. The match was incredible rather it took place at Wrestlemania or a house show. The fact that the show was awful has NOTHING to do with people's opinion of it. Almost the entire content of the match was "big move, kickout, shocked face, repeat" repeated ad nauseum. There's nothing entertaining about that at all, and the people who tout the "great psychology" of the match must not have watched it. It was the spottiest match I've seen in years. The fact that you didn't like the match doesn't bother me. To each is own. The fact that you somehow feel that your opinion is the right one, and everyone else is wrong is what is a little off-putting. Taker kicked out of a Sweet Chin Music. Shawn kicked out of a tombstone (which was possibly one of the two or three best moments in Wrestlemania's history, IMO). Then Taker pinned Shawn with a tombstone. So let me ask you, what exactly were they doing for the other 28 minutes or so? There was so much more to that match than kicking out of finishers its not even funny. This is kind of what happens when a wrestling fan becomes too smart for their own good. We sit around and nitpick things that don't need to be nitpicked. Just sit back and let the drama unfold. You'll enjoy it a lot more.
|
|
|
Post by Spankymac is sick of the swiss on Mar 21, 2010 19:59:28 GMT -5
Almost the entire content of the match was "big move, kickout, shocked face, repeat" repeated ad nauseum. There's nothing entertaining about that at all, and the people who tout the "great psychology" of the match must not have watched it. It was the spottiest match I've seen in years. The fact that you didn't like the match doesn't bother me. To each is own. The fact that you somehow feel that your opinion is the right one, and everyone else is wrong is what is a little off-putting. Taker kicked out of a Sweet Chin Music. Shawn kicked out of a tombstone (which was possibly one of the two or three best moments in Wrestlemania's history, IMO). Then Taker pinned Shawn with a tombstone. So let me ask you, what exactly were they doing for the other 28 minutes or so? There was so much more to that match than kicking out of finishers its not even funny. This is kind of what happens when a wrestling fan becomes too smart for their own good. We sit around and nitpick things that don't need to be nitpicked. Just sit back and let the drama unfold. You'll enjoy it a lot more. Here's the thing, I don't care if anyone else enjoyed it. More power to them, that's the beauty of opinions, as you said, but I'm sick of people talking about "the match was a 5 star classic" or talking about "Best 'Mania match ever" when it was a good match at best that only stood out because the rest of the card was really, really weak. The fact that I can only remember the one match from last year's 'Mania speaks volumes. As for "the drama", "Wow, I wonder if Undertaker will win at Wrestlemania?" isn't drama. It's a foregone conclusion. If 'Taker has a match at 'Mania, he's gonna win. That's just how it goes. 'Taker hasn't had a "dramatic" 'Mania match since Wrestlemania 17.
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Mar 21, 2010 20:00:02 GMT -5
A good Raw main event? C'mon now. Wrestlemania last year was largely considered a dud due to the big giant crap Orton and Trips laid in the ring in the main event. Last I checked that match was AFTER Taker-HBK. It wasn't like I, and the majority of people who thought it was the classic that it was, didn't decide after the match "oh wow, Taker-HBK was really incredible" Go back and read the Wrestlemania thread from last year during that match. People were marking out like crazy during the match. I remember actually breaking out into a sweat watching the match, and needing a cigarette when it was over because I was so physically drained from watching it. The match was incredible rather it took place at Wrestlemania or a house show. The fact that the show was awful has NOTHING to do with people's opinion of it. Almost the entire content of the match was "big move, kickout, shocked face, repeat" repeated ad nauseum. There's nothing entertaining about that at all, and the people who tout the "great psychology" of the match must not have watched it. It was the spottiest match I've seen in years. You and I must have watched a different match then, because I tend to go along the lines of what Robbymac is saying....that it was a damn heart-attack inducing affair all the way through. I see what you're saying, and yeah that element was present in the match, but then again, it's present in MOST main events these days, is it not? It's rare for one main eventer not named HHH to finish another main event talent with one finisher. Personally, though I wouldn't call it "Best of all time" I think it's one of the better matches of the past few Mania's, for sure. Both guys brought their A-game, and they both entertained and thrilled the hell out of me with a nailbiter match with more swerves and false finishes than a Shyamalan film.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Mar 21, 2010 20:04:20 GMT -5
The fact that you didn't like the match doesn't bother me. To each is own. The fact that you somehow feel that your opinion is the right one, and everyone else is wrong is what is a little off-putting. Taker kicked out of a Sweet Chin Music. Shawn kicked out of a tombstone (which was possibly one of the two or three best moments in Wrestlemania's history, IMO). Then Taker pinned Shawn with a tombstone. So let me ask you, what exactly were they doing for the other 28 minutes or so? There was so much more to that match than kicking out of finishers its not even funny. This is kind of what happens when a wrestling fan becomes too smart for their own good. We sit around and nitpick things that don't need to be nitpicked. Just sit back and let the drama unfold. You'll enjoy it a lot more. Here's the thing, I don't care if anyone else enjoyed it. More power to them, that's the beauty of opinions, as you said, but I'm sick of people talking about "the match was a 5 star classic" or talking about "Best 'Mania match ever" when it was a good match at best that only stood out because the rest of the card was really, really weak. The fact that I can only remember the one match from last year's 'Mania speaks volumes. As for "the drama", "Wow, I wonder if Undertaker will win at Wrestlemania?" isn't drama. It's a foregone conclusion. If 'Taker has a match at 'Mania, he's gonna win. That's just how it goes. 'Taker hasn't had a "dramatic" 'Mania match since Wrestlemania 17. The match was a five star classic, and it was the second best Mania Match ever. ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) IMO, of course ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) FWIW, I actually thought Shawn had a shot last year, especially after he kicked out of the tombstone. This year I think its 50/50...really
|
|
|
Post by perpetualn00b on Mar 21, 2010 21:04:07 GMT -5
If Undertaker can walk his ass to the ring...then Shawn will take care of the rest, and the match will once again leave us breathless. I think this statement grossly underestimates the part of Undertaker in that match. I know you don't like 'Taker, but you don't get a match like that without both performers being superb. And with any luck, we'll get a different match this year. Last year was a pure wrestling clinic. But both men are a year older, and I think setting the match up as just straight trying to out-do the previous year would be setting them (and us) up for disappointment. I think that this will be a "spottier" (for lack of a better term) match then last years, with the focus on HBK doing anything and everything he possibly can to win. the No-DQ stip lets this happen without pulling in too many improbably long ref-bumps. But I digress. I certainly think we'll be left breathless by the end of the match, but it will be due to the efforts of both men. Shawn can't do it himself.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Mar 21, 2010 21:12:51 GMT -5
If Undertaker can walk his ass to the ring...then Shawn will take care of the rest, and the match will once again leave us breathless. I think this statement grossly underestimates the part of Undertaker in that match. I know you don't like 'Taker, but you don't get a match like that without both performers being superb. And with any luck, we'll get a different match this year. Last year was a pure wrestling clinic. But both men are a year older, and I think setting the match up as just straight trying to out-do the previous year would be setting them (and us) up for disappointment. I think that this will be a "spottier" (for lack of a better term) match then last years, with the focus on HBK doing anything and everything he possibly can to win. the No-DQ stip lets this happen without pulling in too many improbably long ref-bumps. But I digress. I certainly think we'll be left breathless by the end of the match, but it will be due to the efforts of both men. Shawn can't do it himself. I love Taker, don't get me wrong. I just want Shawn to win. I think Taker will more than carry his end of the deal as well. I was just saying that someone saying they don't expect a good match when the last time Shawn Michaels had a match that you wouldn't call good at Wrestlemania was in 1993 is silly. He could probably get 4 stars out of me at Wrestlemania.
|
|
|
Post by YellowJacketY2J on Mar 21, 2010 21:15:37 GMT -5
I think this statement grossly underestimates the part of Undertaker in that match. I know you don't like 'Taker, but you don't get a match like that without both performers being superb. And with any luck, we'll get a different match this year. Last year was a pure wrestling clinic. But both men are a year older, and I think setting the match up as just straight trying to out-do the previous year would be setting them (and us) up for disappointment. I think that this will be a "spottier" (for lack of a better term) match then last years, with the focus on HBK doing anything and everything he possibly can to win. the No-DQ stip lets this happen without pulling in too many improbably long ref-bumps. But I digress. I certainly think we'll be left breathless by the end of the match, but it will be due to the efforts of both men. Shawn can't do it himself. I love Taker, don't get me wrong. I just want Shawn to win. I think Taker will more than carry his end of the deal as well. I was just saying that someone saying they don't expect a good match when the last time Shawn Michaels had a match that you wouldn't call good at Wrestlemania was in 1993 is silly. He could probably get 4 stars out of me at Wrestlemania. Shawn Michaels vs Robbymac at Wrestlemania 27. BOOK IT!
|
|
|
Post by perpetualn00b on Mar 21, 2010 21:20:18 GMT -5
I love Taker, don't get me wrong. I just want Shawn to win. I think Taker will more than carry his end of the deal as well. I was just saying that someone saying they don't expect a good match when the last time Shawn Michaels had a match that you wouldn't call good at Wrestlemania was in 1993 is silly. He could probably get 4 stars out of me at Wrestlemania. Shawn Michaels vs Robbymac at Wrestlemania 27. BOOK IT! I'd pay for that. And it wasn't really a comment on your sig, robbymac, I'm on sort of the opposite boat. I just thought I recalled you expressing distaste for 'Taker a year or two ago. Maybe I misremembered.
|
|
|
Post by punksdisciple on Mar 21, 2010 21:33:01 GMT -5
I still think the "Running Up That Hill" promo they ran just before the match was made official is leaps and bounds above the current Johnny Cash segment. For one, it had much more emphasis on the interesting part of the match, which is Shawn Michaels' obsession with Taker's streak, but I think it was just a more technically and viscerally pleasing promo. In terms of the match build-up, I do agree it's been lacking. We'll just have to see what happens next week on Smackdown to try and get us out of our hype apathy. Regardless, I believe the actual match will live up to expectations and make up for the lack of build-up. Is that the one they ran the night after EC & right before Shawn's promo? Because if so, then I agree with you that that one was better. That is, indeed, the promo I was talking about. The song is by a band called Placebo, if you're interested, and it's a freaking awesome song. I practically haven't stopped listening to it since I found out who did it and got it.
|
|
|
Post by Piccolo on Mar 21, 2010 21:36:08 GMT -5
I think the build has been kind of sparse on new material (just the rerunning of the Cash promo in every episode), but in a weird way, I think that almost lends it a more serious air of significance. It's like a feud happening just out of sight... we see it erupt into the main show when Shawn pops out of nowhere to attack Taker, or when Taker comes down to randomly destroy some tag teams to vent his spleen, or when Shawn is having an unrelated match and has a backstage segment about it, but can't talk about anything but his upcoming match with Taker. We see it preying on his mind and on Taker's mind, but it's not something they come out every week and talk to us about.
I'm not explaining this well. It feels more real to me than if they were doing what they did last year, with all the back and forth promos and mindgames played out in the middle of the ring. That felt like a scripted performance. This feels like the unintended fallout that turned into an inevitable showdown with their most treasured professional possessions on the line. Like they're both stalking around backstage, obsessively keyed up about it, while everyone else just tries to stay out of their way. It makes ME feel like I'm on eggshells waiting for it to come.
I've decided that I like the way they're doing it.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Mar 22, 2010 8:29:11 GMT -5
A good Raw main event? C'mon now. Wrestlemania last year was largely considered a dud due to the big giant crap Orton and Trips laid in the ring in the main event. Last I checked that match was AFTER Taker-HBK. It wasn't like I, and the majority of people who thought it was the classic that it was, didn't decide after the match "oh wow, Taker-HBK was really incredible" Go back and read the Wrestlemania thread from last year during that match. People were marking out like crazy during the match. I remember actually breaking out into a sweat watching the match, and needing a cigarette when it was over because I was so physically drained from watching it. The match was incredible rather it took place at Wrestlemania or a house show. The fact that the show was awful has NOTHING to do with people's opinion of it. Almost the entire content of the match was "big move, kickout, shocked face, repeat" repeated ad nauseum. There's nothing entertaining about that at all, and the people who tout the "great psychology" of the match must not have watched it. It was the spottiest match I've seen in years. That's just WWE style wrestling. If you don't like it, it's probably going to be the case that you won't ever rate anything they serve up too highly. People only kick out of finishers multiple times at Wrestlemania. It's saved up all year for that one event and it's what sells it. In any other match you are going to just get a basic match, with a lot of reversals of attempted finishers thrown in. Mania is the time when anything can be kicked out of, it's what pops the crowd.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Mar 22, 2010 8:40:42 GMT -5
Granted, I have no hopes for this actually being good. Taker hasn't had a good match since the one with Shelton Benjamin like three weeks after last year's match. You realize Shawn hasn't had a Wrestlemania match that wasn't spectacular in seventeen years right? In that time he's taken Scott Hall, Kevin Nash, Mr. McMahon, John Cena, & a 59 year old Ric Flair and gotten MOTY candidates out of them. I've got to defend those guys. He wrestled Scott Hall and Kevin Nash when they were still young, and could put on a decent match. Vince in a streetfight is always entertaining, and Cena rarely has a bad big time match. A 59 year old Flair is the worst guy he's face since Wrestlemania IX. He hasn't exactly been saddled with bad workers.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Mar 22, 2010 11:13:10 GMT -5
You realize Shawn hasn't had a Wrestlemania match that wasn't spectacular in seventeen years right? In that time he's taken Scott Hall, Kevin Nash, Mr. McMahon, John Cena, & a 59 year old Ric Flair and gotten MOTY candidates out of them. I've got to defend those guys. He wrestled Scott Hall and Kevin Nash when they were still young, and could put on a decent match. Vince in a streetfight is always entertaining, and Cena rarely has a bad big time match. A 59 year old Flair is the worst guy he's face since Wrestlemania IX. He hasn't exactly been saddled with bad workers. Well I think Nash always sucked in the ring, but I'd agree with you on the rest of the guys. Especially Cena. More just a list of non-IWC favorites that Shawn has had phenomenal matches with. If you ask me Shawn's greatest Mania performance was Wrestlemania XIV where he had a great match with Steve Austin with a BROKENFREAKINBACK /Angle
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Mar 22, 2010 11:16:36 GMT -5
Shawn Michaels vs Robbymac at Wrestlemania 27. BOOK IT! I'd pay for that. And it wasn't really a comment on your sig, robbymac, I'm on sort of the opposite boat. I just thought I recalled you expressing distaste for 'Taker a year or two ago. Maybe I misremembered. Not to my knowledge. Taker has never been on my list of all-time favorites, but I have tremendous respect for him.
|
|
|
Post by Threadkiller [Classic] on Mar 22, 2010 11:27:49 GMT -5
Running Up That Hill promo > Johnny Cash promo
Even though they clipped the hell out of Running Up That Hill, I still haven't gotten sick of watching that puppy on YouTube, and they could keep updating it as the story progresses.
One video I wish they'd use, or something like it, is a video made by a guy named Th3rd, the same who did that absolutely heartbreaking and brilliant video about the Benoit tragedy set to No Bravery by James Blunt. It's a retrospective of Shawn's career featuring a "rewind" gimmick, like he's re-doing the biggest moments of his career. I can't find a link to it to save my life, but if anyone knows, post the link, it's an amazing video.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Mar 22, 2010 14:22:07 GMT -5
Running Up That Hill promo > Johnny Cash promo Even though they clipped the hell out of Running Up That Hill, I still haven't gotten sick of watching that puppy on YouTube, and they could keep updating it as the story progresses. One video I wish they'd use, or something like it, is a video made by a guy named Th3rd, the same who did that absolutely heartbreaking and brilliant video about the Benoit tragedy set to No Bravery by James Blunt. It's a retrospective of Shawn's career featuring a "rewind" gimmick, like he's re-doing the biggest moments of his career. I can't find a link to it to save my life, but if anyone knows, post the link, it's an amazing video. To be honest I thought someone at WWE had seen the video and decided to pay tribute to Th3rd's work/steal it with the use of the rewind in the Placebo video when Shawn gets eliminated from the Royal Rumble.
|
|
JoDaNa1281
Crow T. Robot
Jackie Daytona, Regular Human Bartender. #BLM
Posts: 40,709
|
Post by JoDaNa1281 on Mar 22, 2010 15:22:57 GMT -5
You realize Shawn hasn't had a Wrestlemania match that wasn't spectacular in seventeen years right? In that time he's taken Scott Hall, Kevin Nash, Mr. McMahon, John Cena, & a 59 year old Ric Flair and gotten MOTY candidates out of them. I've got to defend those guys. He wrestled Scott Hall and Kevin Nash when they were still young, and could put on a decent match. Vince in a streetfight is always entertaining, and Cena rarely has a bad big time match. A 59 year old Flair is the worst guy he's face since Wrestlemania IX. He hasn't exactly been saddled with bad workers. Agreed, esp. with Hall, who I feel gets slighted by some people, I hate the whole "Shawn had a 5* match with a ladder & Hall just happened to be there" statement that people make, which makes it seem like Hall was some untalented slug who got lucky to be in the same ring as HBK.
|
|
|
Post by Nuke is Good on Mar 22, 2010 16:12:25 GMT -5
I still think Undertaker's ultimate revenge against HBK would have been to reject HBK's challenge. And for Undertaker to watch HBK just wallow in agony.
|
|
|
Post by perpetualn00b on Mar 22, 2010 17:29:02 GMT -5
I'd pay for that. And it wasn't really a comment on your sig, robbymac, I'm on sort of the opposite boat. I just thought I recalled you expressing distaste for 'Taker a year or two ago. Maybe I misremembered. Not to my knowledge. Taker has never been on my list of all-time favorites, but I have tremendous respect for him. Ah, OK. I must have misremembered or misinterpreted you in some way. Sorry about that. And I agree, even though it's my least favourite rendition of the song, that Running Up That Hill > Johnny Cash.
|
|
Hanzo
Dennis Stamp
"You want Cena to go to ECW?!"
Posts: 4,666
|
Post by Hanzo on Mar 22, 2010 17:43:20 GMT -5
The fact that I can only remember the one match from last year's 'Mania speaks volumes. I wish that was all I could remember. I still haven't been able to erase that Kid Rock/Diva Battle Royal stuff from my memory.
|
|