I'm Mad! (ECW and Bob Holly related)

[Arturo Classico]

The only person I would accept to be put over both RVD, Punk and Test is Kevin Thorn. I really like him! He moves well in the ring he has some really cool moves and has a cool gimmick that could really get over. The vampiric gimmick does fit in with the old ECW while keeping with the new ECW so he would make a great champ. Plus anybody is better Holly and Lashley.

[TRUTH TELLER]

RVD doing a job to Bob Holly is worthless. If the guy really is leaving WWE in a few months, they should be using RVD to put over NEW stars. Not a guy whose been a perceived jobber for 14 years straight. No offense to anyone, but every time someone does a stupid nonsensical job in WWE, there's always someone that jumps forward and says "Someone has to win or lose". And while that's true, it has to make sense or it's not worth anything. A loss to Holly by RVD doesn't really do anything for anyone. It makes RVD look bad for losing to a scrub, and Holly beating RVD really makes no longterm sense, because the guy's had a decade to get over, and he hasn't. If anything, it just makes the whole company seem bushleague. A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title. If it was someone like Burke, or someone else of that nature with an actual upside, I'd have had no problem with it. Guys on the way out job. That's how it works. They just should make new stars when they do. Not tired old acts coasting on seniority. Just my opinion.

[lildude8218]

jma said:

I'm afraid I'll have to agree with the "know-it-alls" (from the little that I know about them) on the other message board. Holly doesn't have the charisma, overness, or wrestling ability to be a main eventer, so why put him over a former WWE Champion and a wrestler that could be a World Champion in the near-future? Of course, I already know why--Holly is a WWE veteran that's close with the good old boy network within the company. Still, WWE is hurting itself in the long-run by rewarding seniority (and also, in this case, bad behavior) over talent and potential.

But in a final analysis, it's not really worth arguing about it. I'd suggest not getting mad at what other people think, though. It doesn't have an impact (or it shouldn't) on what you think, so it doesn't really matter. That's all I have to say on the matter.

You put him over them to keep things from being predictable. I have never been a Bob Holly fan, for 13 years now, but he really has stepped it up over the last few months and shown that he can keep up with guys like Van Dam.

And for the record, I was more angry with the fact that the guy in question was talking down to me like I was some sort of child and adding "Look" at the beginning of his sentences and basically saying "this is how it is, that's that."

[Dean-o]

mikebowski said:

A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title.

What is wrong with that? I think sometimes you people over analyze things too much. I mean, if the New York Knicks beat the Phoenix Suns one night, oh well, shit happens. Same goes with the underdog (Holly) beating a former WWE champion (RVD)

[HRH The KING]

Sparky Plugg shouldn't go over anyone because he's crap.

Always has been, always will be.

[lildude8218]

mikebowski said:

A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title.

Everyone forgets the circumstances involved in RVD beating Cena. First Edge interfered (sure it was Extreme Rules but that took something away from RVD's win) and then Paul Heyman (someone who wasn't a referee) counted the 3 count. It boggled my mind how that decision wasn't contested. If I was Cena, I would've definitely complained.

The title should've been given back to Cena the next night and then Heyman gives Van Dam the brand new ECW title at the first ECW on Sci Fi Show. I thought that would've been the perfect way to keep the fans at the PPV from "rioting" and then having 3 champions in the company, which they were going to do anyway.

[oltrelamorte]

"I'm pissed now!"

[angryfan]

deannjn said:

mikebowski said:

A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title.

What is wrong with that? I think sometimes you people over analyze things too much. I mean, if the New York Knicks beat the Phoenix Suns one night, oh well, crap happens. Same goes with the underdog (Holly) beating a former WWE champion (RVD)

See, I don't take it as overanalyzing. I remember many of the "Let's push Bob" decisions over the years. For recent history, what about his main event program with Brock Lesnar? Sweet Jesus, that sucked ass, remember?

Now we're getter an older and, thanks to his arm problems, less capable Bob Holly, getting yet another push? What can this culminate in? Holly/Test? Holly/Lashley? A three way dance of suckitude between the three?

I just find it odd that, if they really want this "new brand" to mean a damn, and make them money, that they'd entrust the pushes and main event program to a still green guy in his mid 30's, a guy who they already fired once for not getting over, and Sparky "I can make people already not caring care even less" Plugg.

[lildude8218]

By the way, some other dude over there told me that I "lose all credibility" because in my OPINION I feel that Holly is wrestling better than he has in years. If I wasn't paying to visit this site, I would really want to just get banned.

[Teddy Awesome- Back in Style]

HOW DO YOU LIKE ME NOW?

*Stiff Chops all around*

[TRUTH TELLER]

deannjn said:

mikebowski said:

A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title.

What is wrong with that? I think sometimes you people over analyze things too much. I mean, if the New York Knicks beat the Phoenix Suns one night, oh well, crap happens. Same goes with the underdog (Holly) beating a former WWE champion (RVD)

Because, for 13 years we've been educated to believe that Holly is a jobber and nothing more. And as for your underdog line, I'd totally agree if that was indeed the story going in. "Career journeyman upsets huge star". But it wasn't presented as that. It was just good old midcard-lifer Bob Holly pinning a former WWE champion clean. There's no rhyme or reason, and no one benefits. If they want Holly to be a main eventer all of a sudden, they need to do the groundwork, and build him up. You can't just have him cleanly pin *arguably* the top guy on the brand out of nowhere and expect people to buy it. It's WWE's own fault for convincing us the Bob Holly character is a scrub for over a decade.

[lildude8218]

mikebowski said:

deannjn said:

What is wrong with that? I think sometimes you people over analyze things too much. I mean, if the New York Knicks beat the Phoenix Suns one night, oh well, crap happens. Same goes with the underdog (Holly) beating a former WWE champion (RVD)

Because, for 13 years we've been educated to believe that Holly is a jobber and nothing more. And as for your underdog line, I'd totally agree if that was indeed the story going in. "Career journeyman upsets huge star". But it wasn't presented as that. It was just good old midcard-lifer Bob Holly pinning a former WWE champion clean. There's no rhyme or reason, and no one benefits. If they want Holly to be a main eventer all of a sudden, they need to do the groundwork, and build him up. You can't just have him cleanly pin *arguably* the top guy on the brand out of nowhere and expect people to buy it. It's WWE's own fault for convincing us the Bob Holly character is a scrub for over a decade.

There is a huge difference between a jobber and a midcarder. So which is he? I'm also not sure how they were educating us on him being a nothing when he got that Hardcore Title push (before the title was turned into a joke with the 24/7 rule,) then went after guys like Big Show and Kane with his "Super Heavyweight" gimmick. Plus the tag title reign he had with Crash. That broken arm he got from that botched Angle moonsault screwed up a lot of his momentum the same way most of his injuries have.


Also for those who care, I made one final post at that other site and said I was walking away from the thread. I looked back this morning just to see if anyone else said anything and a 3rd guy decided to chime in by saying:

"I hate smart marks."

[Bub (BLM)]

mikebowski said:

RVD doing a job to Bob Holly is worthless. If the guy really is leaving WWE in a few months, they should be using RVD to put over NEW stars. Not a guy whose been a perceived jobber for 14 years straight. No offense to anyone, but every time someone does a stupid nonsensical job in WWE, there's always someone that jumps forward and says "Someone has to win or lose". And while that's true, it has to make sense or it's not worth anything. A loss to Holly by RVD doesn't really do anything for anyone. It makes RVD look bad for losing to a scrub, and Holly beating RVD really makes no longterm sense, because the guy's had a decade to get over, and he hasn't. If anything, it just makes the whole company seem bushleague. A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title. If it was someone like Burke, or someone else of that nature with an actual upside, I'd have had no problem with it. Guys on the way out job. That's how it works. They just should make new stars when they do. Not tired old acts coasting on seniority. Just my opinion.

Exactly. Van Dam hould have been used to get over a CM Punk, or an Elijah Burke, or a Kevin Thorne. He should not be jobbed to Bob Holly, and I think the apathetic response from the crowd proved that. They weren't booing because the heel won. When Chris Jericho and Triple H beat RVD in the past, the response was good heel heat. When Bob Holly pinned RVD, the crowd felt ripped off and were completely alienated.

[Baixo Astral]

Holly should go over everyone, all of time.

[anticonscience]

mygreatesthour said:

So faces should NEVER lose and heels should never win? PERFECT!

*insert John Cena joke here*

[BHB]

Hardcore Holly shouldn't ever win, not because he's a heel, but because he absolutely SUCKS.

[skskillz]

deannjn said:

mikebowski said:

A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title.

What is wrong with that? I think sometimes you people over analyze things too much. I mean, if the New York Knicks beat the Phoenix Suns one night, oh well, crap happens. Same goes with the underdog (Holly) beating a former WWE champion (RVD)

Wrestling shouldn't be compared to sports. Basketball is not pre-determined. It's a real sport played to see who is the better team on that particular night. Purely athletic/talent based.

Wrestling is a business, where a promoter decides who wins and losses and every decision is (or at least should be) based on how much money it might be able to generate for the company. Holly going over two of the most over guys in the brand IS a questionable move. If I watched an episode or even cared about the new ECW, I'd be pretty upset at that decision. Not because Holly is a heel, but because he's simply not very good.

[nostradumbass]

evrbody said:

But honestly, you bring that upon yourself to visit such stupid messageboards, i.e. any one other than this one.

[leemir]

Holly doesn't have good heel heat, he has boring Wrestler heat.

[underhook]

theshow said:

mikebowski said:

RVD doing a job to Bob Holly is worthless. If the guy really is leaving WWE in a few months, they should be using RVD to put over NEW stars. Not a guy whose been a perceived jobber for 14 years straight. No offense to anyone, but every time someone does a stupid nonsensical job in WWE, there's always someone that jumps forward and says "Someone has to win or lose". And while that's true, it has to make sense or it's not worth anything. A loss to Holly by RVD doesn't really do anything for anyone. It makes RVD look bad for losing to a scrub, and Holly beating RVD really makes no longterm sense, because the guy's had a decade to get over, and he hasn't. If anything, it just makes the whole company seem bushleague. A midcard enhancement talent cleanly pins a guy who beat John Cena, their cash-cow for a title. If it was someone like Burke, or someone else of that nature with an actual upside, I'd have had no problem with it. Guys on the way out job. That's how it works. They just should make new stars when they do. Not tired old acts coasting on seniority. Just my opinion.

Exactly. Van Dam hould have been used to get over a CM Punk, or an Elijah Burke, or a Kevin Thorne. He should not be jobbed to Bob Holly, and I think the apathetic response from the crowd proved that. They weren't booing because the heel won. When Chris Jericho and Triple H beat RVD in the past, the response was good heel heat. When Bob Holly pinned RVD, the crowd felt ripped off and were completely alienated.

Ripped off? They had a good match and Holly used a heel tactic to win the match. (Thus good heel heat)

I don't get all this Holly hate. If Stevie Richards (Who has been jobbing for almost a decade) got a push then noone would complain. Holly hasn't always been a jobber either.

Usually lower midcard to midcard status. He has beaten top stars before.