|
Post by TheShowStoppin Classic JBHENDU on Dec 24, 2010 22:13:06 GMT -5
I mean, Jesus. No one who has ever had poontang pie would have ever worn this, or they would never get any again. I own this shirt and still proudly wear it and I get plenty of pie
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Dec 24, 2010 22:15:38 GMT -5
I mean, Jesus. No one who has ever had poontang pie would have ever worn this, or they would never get any again. I own this shirt and still proudly wear it and I get plenty of pie I'll need to see some video evidence of this so called pie-getting.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Dec 24, 2010 22:50:58 GMT -5
Wasn't there a Chyna shirt that said, "Va-Chyna"? I could've swore I saw that in a magazine once. I cant see any fan, male, female, or otherwise wearing that shirt, even if they were chyna's number one fan and had a "misery"-style obsession toward chyna.
|
|
|
Post by Trip Fisk a.k.a. Foley is Good on Dec 25, 2010 0:39:09 GMT -5
I mean, Jesus. No one who has ever had poontang pie would have ever worn this, or they would never get any again. They would never get any again if they wore it? Challenge accepted.
|
|
|
Post by golding on Dec 25, 2010 11:29:20 GMT -5
EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ATTITUDE ERA WAS AWESOME! YOU SHUT YOUR FILTHY MOUTH![/everythingwasbetterbackthenandtoday'swrestlingsuckswhining] Man we had some horrible shirts back then, and that one's pretty offensive. I think it's kind of funny that people who try to justify WWE's current product have to do so by trying to denigrate the Attitude Era. WWE used to take more chances, and many flopped. But those that didn't turned into the most memorable moments in wrestling's history. Like it or not, the current product plays it too safe, and that makes it rather uninteresting.
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Dec 25, 2010 11:34:15 GMT -5
Another thing, why would the Bull have a tattoo of himself on his arm?
Unless, the Bull is in fact The Rock transmogrified via a machine that turns people into animals.
OR The Rock is in fact Manimal, solving crimes in his spare time by turning into various animals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2010 11:39:55 GMT -5
EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ATTITUDE ERA WAS AWESOME! YOU SHUT YOUR FILTHY MOUTH![/everythingwasbetterbackthenandtoday'swrestlingsuckswhining] Man we had some horrible shirts back then, and that one's pretty offensive. I think it's kind of funny that people who try to justify WWE's current product have to do so by trying to denigrate the Attitude Era. WWE used to take more chances, and many flopped. But those that didn't turned into the most memorable moments in wrestling's history. Like it or not, the current product plays it too safe, and that makes it rather uninteresting. Could you provide some examples of how they play it safe in contrast to how they didn't during the WWE era and how/why "safe" automatically means something isn't interesting?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2010 11:57:02 GMT -5
I do have a question about a Rock shirt. Specifically the one he wore at WM XX. Anyone know what that said? I didn't recognize it, and it moved too fast for me to freeze-frame and read it.
|
|
|
Post by N E O G E O B O Y S on Dec 25, 2010 11:59:44 GMT -5
Am I a bad person for having read this in Aksana's voice? Thank god I'm not alone. nah, it's ok, I know that my english sucks
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2010 15:26:33 GMT -5
I'm sososososo close to buying this from Ebay.
|
|
|
Post by golding on Dec 25, 2010 16:26:37 GMT -5
Could you provide some examples of how they play it safe in contrast to how they didn't during the WWE era and how/why "safe" automatically means something isn't interesting? I'm honestly amazed that it's even being questioned. The recent example being Cena returning to RAW after being fired, and without an ounce of suspense or build to his return immediately comes to mind, though. To me, playing it safe equates to uninteresting because it makes the show that much more predictable. The major reason I can't bring myself to watch any WWE shows to the end is because I already know what's going to happen (aside from the fact that the predicted outcome is also usually pretty lame). With WWE playing it as safe as they are, whether you care to acknowledge it or not, the show gets stale. Fast.
|
|
|
Post by Branimal on Dec 25, 2010 16:41:47 GMT -5
what about the Outlaws Down Where? Down Here points toward crotch I actually owned that. This was back when I was so desperate for ANYTHING that had D-X on it that I snatched it up as soon as I saw it. Looking back, I can't imagine how I let myself walk around wearing that at age 14.
|
|
|
Post by Spankymac is sick of the swiss on Dec 26, 2010 0:13:21 GMT -5
EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ATTITUDE ERA WAS AWESOME! YOU SHUT YOUR FILTHY MOUTH![/everythingwasbetterbackthenandtoday'swrestlingsuckswhining] Man we had some horrible shirts back then, and that one's pretty offensive. I think it's kind of funny that people who try to justify WWE's current product have to do so by trying to denigrate the Attitude Era. WWE used to take more chances, and many flopped. But those that didn't turned into the most memorable moments in wrestling's history. Like it or not, the current product plays it too safe, and that makes it rather uninteresting. I don't agree with you on much, that I've seen, but man, is this the gospel truth. WWE's so obsessed with making sure certain guys NEVER look weak, even for two consecutive shows, that it hurts the quality of the product.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,170
|
Post by agent817 on Dec 26, 2010 0:36:31 GMT -5
I do have a question about a Rock shirt. Specifically the one he wore at WM XX. Anyone know what that said? I didn't recognize it, and it moved too fast for me to freeze-frame and read it. I think it said "How long Has It been..."(Front)"...Since I Kicked Your Ass?" (Back).
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Dec 26, 2010 9:53:42 GMT -5
I liked the Rock as much as anybody, but I HATED 'Poontang Pie' and 'The Rock's Strudel'.
It was all so lame and forced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2010 9:55:19 GMT -5
I do have a question about a Rock shirt. Specifically the one he wore at WM XX. Anyone know what that said? I didn't recognize it, and it moved too fast for me to freeze-frame and read it. I think it said "How long Has It been..."(Front)"...Since I Kicked Your Ass?" (Back). Thank you. I wouldn't buy it but it's still better than the OP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2010 10:51:59 GMT -5
Could you provide some examples of how they play it safe in contrast to how they didn't during the WWE era and how/why "safe" automatically means something isn't interesting? I'm honestly amazed that it's even being questioned. The recent example being Cena returning to RAW after being fired, and without an ounce of suspense or build to his return immediately comes to mind, though. To me, playing it safe equates to uninteresting because it makes the show that much more predictable. The major reason I can't bring myself to watch any WWE shows to the end is because I already know what's going to happen (aside from the fact that the predicted outcome is also usually pretty lame). With WWE playing it as safe as they are, whether you care to acknowledge it or not, the show gets stale. Fast. I think that applies to nearly every show on TV though. Its rare that a show - wrestling or otherwise - doesn't play it safe. You must not watch any television or go to the theaters. Maybe I've actually been watching the show, but I've been surprised by a lot of the things WWE has done recently. Miz actually winning the world title and CM Punk attacking John Cena are a couple of examples that spring to mind. A show can't be all surprises all the time. Because the the surprises become predictable. A show needs to play it safe so when they actually do something surprising it'll have an impact.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Bunsen Honeydew on Dec 26, 2010 11:15:34 GMT -5
I half-expected this thread to be about this shirt: I guess Russo had pull in the marketing department too. I'm pretty sure that one was JBL's idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2010 11:26:28 GMT -5
EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ATTITUDE ERA WAS AWESOME! YOU SHUT YOUR FILTHY MOUTH![/everythingwasbetterbackthenandtoday'swrestlingsuckswhining] Man we had some horrible shirts back then, and that one's pretty offensive. I think it's kind of funny that people who try to justify WWE's current product have to do so by trying to denigrate the Attitude Era. WWE used to take more chances, and many flopped. But those that didn't turned into the most memorable moments in wrestling's history. Like it or not, the current product plays it too safe, and that makes it rather uninteresting. How does "Playing it safe" make something bad? Was Naked Mideon playing it safe? No. Was it good? No. Was Beaver Cleavage playing it safe? No. Was it good? No. Was the Ministry of Darkness safe? No. Was it good? Sometimes. Just because something is "different" doesn't mean it's good. I grew up on the Attitude Era, but it was as hit and miss as it gets. For every Rock there is a Val Venis getting his dick cut off. Today's stuff isn't ground-breaking, but it's consistent. And I'd rather get consistent goodness than occassional greatness and have to sit through a bunch of lame shit.
|
|
|
Post by golding on Dec 26, 2010 12:42:37 GMT -5
How does "Playing it safe" make something bad? Was Naked Mideon playing it safe? No. Was it good? No. Was Beaver Cleavage playing it safe? No. Was it good? No. Was the Ministry of Darkness safe? No. Was it good? Sometimes. Just because something is "different" doesn't mean it's good. I grew up on the Attitude Era, but it was as hit and miss as it gets. For every Rock there is a Val Venis getting his dick cut off. Today's stuff isn't ground-breaking, but it's consistent. And I'd rather get consistent goodness than occassional greatness and have to sit through a bunch of lame s***. Already addressed this in an earlier reply to Numero99. There certainly were flops that resulted from the WWE taking chances, but there were also a great deal of successes that gave wrestling its most memorable moments. The fallacy you posted is that "For every Rock there is a Val Venis getting his dick cut off". The reason it's untrue is because McMahon had to assess what was taking off and what wasn't. See, you actually have it backwards. You weren't getting "occasional greatness while sitting through a bunch of lame BS". Beaver Cleavage never made it past vignettes, Val Venis' encounter with Kaientai lasted two episodes. Hardly a comparison to The Rock, who defined the scene for years. Furthermore, you should realize that you're not really even getting a consistent product. For all the degrading of the Attitude Era with Naked Mideon and Val Venis' samurai circumcision, you kind of ignore that you're putting up with Hornswaggle skits and celebrity guest hosts wrestling (and THAT stuff actually happens on a weekly basis). The only difference is that the remainder of the current product is PASSABLE, not exceptional.
|
|