|
Post by The Verdict on Jan 1, 2010 13:34:35 GMT -5
Oh, God. I would rather Cena / Taker than either of those possibilities, by far. Me too f*** Dwayne Johnson
|
|
spagett
Hank Scorpio
Great Job!
Posts: 5,649
|
Post by spagett on Jan 1, 2010 13:54:28 GMT -5
Oh, God. I would rather Cena / Taker than either of those possibilities, by far. Me too f*** Dwayne Johnson You sound like a jilted lover. Personally I would like to see Rock/HBK but Rock/Cena would be interesting to watch. If Cena's fanbase is as young as it seems they would probably not know who The Rock is which is a shame when you think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Cactus Jack on Jan 1, 2010 13:57:00 GMT -5
Oh my god, that would be amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Brickstone Kid on Jan 1, 2010 13:59:18 GMT -5
I'd almost rather see Rock/Orton. I think it'd have a more interesting buildup.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Jan 1, 2010 14:57:10 GMT -5
I think this is actually more feasible now than before. The Rock has definitely had some success as an actor, but I think his career is at a point where he would benefit more from doing some big wrestling events than from shying away from his wrestling career.
Also, I don't know why people assume that Cena would win. Usually guest stars go over at WWE events (i.e. LT over Bam Bam, Mayweather over Big Show, even K Fed over Cena!) I'm 90% sure Rock wins if this match takes place, unless he really takes a liking to Cena and decides he wants to put him over.
|
|
|
Post by DrizzlinShytes on Jan 1, 2010 15:35:50 GMT -5
Be clear. You "heard" from Bret Hart in his book that (big shocker) everyone agreed with him and not with HBK/Vince. Bret claimed that Shawn and Hunter were trying to bury Rock. Bret claimed that the wrestlers supported him over HBK to a man. This is of course, in Bret's mind. That don't make it so. For example: in his book, Bret claims that Steve Austin came to him and said he wasn't taking sides in the Bret/Shawn dispute. Bret then further claims this was only because he didn't want Shawn as an enemy. This is also why he claims Taker never publicly took his side against Shawn (Taker was working with Shawn as the situation deteriorated b/w the two). Of course this is Bret putting words and intentions where there is no proof. It could be, and is very likely that most of the guys just saw two grown men fighting like children and didn't think either had much of a leg to stand on in their unprofessional actions. But to listen to Bret, the whole company just hated Shawn and loved him. Even though after the screwjob no non-family member quit and they all seem to praise Vince to this day (including Mick Foley who supposedly quit for a day only to return and be the first heel to work with Vince after he made his name off Bret). Mick's book also says that while no one was quite willing to quit there were a hell of a lot of people who were pissed. Call me harsh, but Mick can't say he was pissed when he was the first guy to cash in with Vince as the heel character that was only made possible by the screwjob he supposedly hated. It is real easy to say you were so pissed by what happened, but no one did anything and they all gleefully worked with Vince and his new character. Including Taker, Austin, Foley, etc. Perhaps they say they were pissed because it is the PC thing to do? There is certainly no proof in their actions that it hurt their feelings too much.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,070
|
Post by Mozenrath on Jan 1, 2010 15:42:33 GMT -5
Mick's book also says that while no one was quite willing to quit there were a hell of a lot of people who were pissed. Call me harsh, but Mick can't say he was pissed when he was the first guy to cash in with Vince as the heel character that was only made possible by the screwjob he supposedly hated. It is real easy to say you were so pissed by what happened, but no one did anything and they all gleefully worked with Vince and his new character. Including Taker, Austin, Foley, etc. Perhaps they say they were pissed because it is the PC thing to do? There is certainly no proof in their actions that it hurt their feelings too much. Actually, there's a fair amount of proof on Mick's part. He no-showed a Raw after the PPV to prove his point. That's a big move, and could easily have cost him his job. It was only through talking to Shane and Owen that he was convinced that walking out wouldn't be prudent and that Vince had his reasons for what he did. He of course capitalized, but it was only after he had shown his support to Bret, which was appreciated on Bret's part.
|
|
|
Post by dh03grad on Jan 1, 2010 16:04:52 GMT -5
You need as big a match as possible to cover up the Sheamus-HHH possibility.
|
|