|
Post by lookout on Dec 2, 2014 12:11:49 GMT -5
The problem though is vince claims to give the audience what they want but there wasn't a single person out there probably who wanted to see the streak end...at least not at the hands of brock. Uh, actually quite a lot of us wanted it to end - and quite a lot of us were okay with it being Brock too. I'm sure there was..you can always find some people who would agree with something the rest few as way out there but the vast majority didn't like it... otherwise you don't have 70,000 people going silent and being in a state of depression, shock, and disbelief until the very end of the show. It was absolutely stunning to see that many people instantly go silent and depressed. I have to seriously question the wisdom of anyone who thought brock was the right guy and it was "best for business". I think a lot of people would have been more ok with it IF it had benefited somebody other than brock because brock didn't need it. There was the potential right there to instantly build a star, almost overnight even, and it was flushed away at the last minute. For vince to say that it gave brock credibility and be more of a monster is like saying cena needed it to become a star..which is patently absurd. Anyway, the overall point is vince seems to be at a stage of really being out of step with a lot of his audience and the business overall because I don't think the vince of the last 90s/early 2000s would have made that decision. Worse is he is in a total state of denial about it and won't listen to anyone who says he is. I mean it's one thing to be out of touch but to completely dismiss and all criticism as just noise is a really bad way for someone in his position to be at and it's disheartening because nothing is going to change anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by lookout on Dec 2, 2014 12:14:24 GMT -5
The problem though is the vast majority of the audience/fans didn't want to see the streak end...at least not at the hands of brock. At most, if the streak was to end it was in hopes that he would pass the torch to someone young and instantly make them a star. Instead, he lost to someone who is hardly ever around, hates the business, is already a star, and absolutely did not need the win. Brock was already looked at as a monster and the idea that vince thought that him ending the streak is what he needed is just absolutely absurd. Not only that but there probably wasn't a single wrestler, past or present, who wanted taker's streak to end. Every one i've heard talk about it said they thought it was a bad idea and they couldn't believe it. So the only person around who thought it was "the right time" was probably just him. It's hard to picture him losing happening if taker didn't approve it or go along with it so Although taker probably had no problem putting him over , especially knowing how much he respects the business and vince, it's hard to fathom he would think it was a great idea. The reaction of the crowd when it happened and how deflated and depressed they were the rest of the show (until the very end of the bryan match) proved just how absurdly out of touch he is because any 5 year old could have told you what would happened if he lost and how little benefit there even was in him losing. But most importantly it went against 99% of what his audience wanted..the same audience who he claims he listens to and has the pulse of. If it was time to end the streak it should have been taker having one last win and retiring...not losing to someone who might not even be with the company a year later. Well there is another way of looking at it that doing it with say Bray Wyatt or someone like that could be such a weight that it'd crush his whole career ruining it. I've heard a few people say that but that never made any sense to me. Using that logic, no young person should ever beat a top star or end the reign of a popular or over champion. Would there be extra pressure on him to succeed in a big way? Sure..but that should never have been a deterrent. Besides that rub shouldn't have been given to just anyone..it would have been given to someone who has "it" and one the company felt would have been around for the long haul.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Dec 2, 2014 12:30:45 GMT -5
It would have just looked weird having a new guy do what however many legends couldn't. Even moreso if that person then went the way of Lashley, Kennedy etc. Brock is credible and will still look that way 10 years down the line. I disagree that he needed it because he didn't, but it provided an unforgettable moment (much moreso than Taker retiring undefeated would have done), and that's good enough for me. It added something more to the story than just The Undertaker continually winning year in year out.
Anyway, I could listen to those two talk all day. Who'd have thought that the most competitive part of pro wrestling would be between podcasts?
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 2, 2014 12:49:59 GMT -5
It was a good interview for the most part.
It reinforced what was already known before. Vince IS out of touch, he has a fixation with being regarded as anything except the owner of a wrestling company, and his hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness knows no bounds.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Nero....Wolfe on Dec 2, 2014 12:52:11 GMT -5
I think that the train of thought was more in that knowing the deteriorating state of Undertaker's health and the small crop of REALISTIC people to have him face at Mania and beat him, Vince realized that instead of having someone beat Undertaker to become a star, they could use a middle man. You have Lesnar beat Undertaker, then whoever beats Lesnar, is a made man. Because it took a monster to end the Streak. How badass is the guy who takes down the monster then going to be? I think that was the line of thinking and I do agree with it, in so far as the guy that beats Lesnar is not Cena or Orton. The problem though is the vast majority of the audience/fans didn't want to see the streak end...at least not at the hands of brock. At most, if the streak was to end it was in hopes that he would pass the torch to someone young and instantly make them a star. Instead, he lost to someone who is hardly ever around, hates the business, is already a star, and absolutely did not need the win. Brock was already looked at as a monster and the idea that vince thought that him ending the streak is what he needed is just absolutely absurd. Not only that but there probably wasn't a single wrestler, past or present, who wanted taker's streak to end. Every one i've heard talk about it said they thought it was a bad idea and they couldn't believe it. So the only person around who thought it was "the right time" was probably just him. It's hard to picture him losing happening if taker didn't approve it or go along with it so Although taker probably had no problem putting him over , especially knowing how much he respects the business and vince, it's hard to fathom he would think it was a great idea. The reaction of the crowd when it happened and how deflated and depressed they were the rest of the show (until the very end of the bryan match) proved just how absurdly out of touch he is because any 5 year old could have told you what would happened if he lost and how little benefit there even was in him losing. But most importantly it went against 99% of what his audience wanted..the same audience who he claims he listens to and has the pulse of. If it was time to end the streak it should have been taker having one last win and retiring...not losing to someone who might not even be with the company a year later. I think the fact that people didn't want the streak to end is what made it so memorable though. It was the wrestling equivalent to the red wedding and people were devastated by it. It was what made me realize how much I could still get invested in the results of a fictional show, and for that alone, I think it was worth it.
|
|
DjZonk
Don Corleone
Where's my cat?
Posts: 1,325
|
Post by DjZonk on Dec 2, 2014 15:08:45 GMT -5
That was the closest we will ever get to finding out what the deal with Randy Savage is, and Austin didn't follow up. Damn you Steve, I thought I knew you!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 15:12:06 GMT -5
That was the closest we will ever get to finding out what the deal with Randy Savage is, and Austin didn't follow up. Damn you Steve, I thought I knew you!!! I'm starting to think everyone in wrestling actually knows the real reason(s), but they're all being bastards and not letting us in on it.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Dec 2, 2014 15:53:28 GMT -5
Steve: Hey Vince, did you notice that one thing that completely ruins Savage/Steamboat from Wrestlemania 3?
Vince: OH MY GOD! You saw it too?!? Isn't it crazy?
Steve: Yep....now tell me about your hair.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Dec 3, 2014 7:50:29 GMT -5
That was the closest we will ever get to finding out what the deal with Randy Savage is, and Austin didn't follow up. Damn you Steve, I thought I knew you!!! I'm starting to think everyone in wrestling actually knows the real reason(s), but they're all being bastards and not letting us in on it. All I know is this... if I were in the same situation and a man that worked for me had statutory relations with my hypothetical daughter, I would not only erase his name from history FOREVER faster than you can fathom, I would not only try to get him blackballed from the industry so that NOBODY ever works with him EVER, I would not only get the damn police involved to put him behind bars... I'd probably hunt the bastard down and kill him with my bare hands. The fact that Savage is highlighted as much as he is still, to me, either signifies that the Stephanie thing NEVER happened or that Vince McMahon is the most forgiving parent in world history (because I can't imagine Stephanie keeping something like that a complete secret for more than 20 years).
|
|
Zach
Trap-Jaw
Posts: 368
|
Post by Zach on Dec 3, 2014 8:45:57 GMT -5
It was pretty cool hearing Vince talk wrestling and using all the insider terms for once. His contempt for "wrestling" is bizarre, but at least Stone Cold didn't put up with his BS explanation about "sports entertainment". I swear though, I heard Vince answer all those tough questions but I can't even pull a straight answer out of anything he said.
|
|
|
Post by walterharrow on Dec 3, 2014 13:56:06 GMT -5
I still dont get his answer regarding Cesaro. He said that Cesaro didnt get a proper push because he lacks charisma etc. But, the problem is that Cesaro was already hugely over during Wrestlemania season. Austin mentioned this but i was hoping he was push Vince for a real answer. Cesaro was doing everything right and really didnt need mic skills to get over. His in ring work and badass attitude got him over so it was defintely the booking that let him down, not his lack of charisma or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by pencilneckgeek on Dec 5, 2014 0:08:28 GMT -5
That was the closest we will ever get to finding out what the deal with Randy Savage is, and Austin didn't follow up. Damn you Steve, I thought I knew you!!! Austin was calling it in the ring, and when Vince gave a quick answer, Austin didn't know whether to shit or wind his watch.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 5, 2014 0:23:54 GMT -5
I think that the train of thought was more in that knowing the deteriorating state of Undertaker's health and the small crop of REALISTIC people to have him face at Mania and beat him, Vince realized that instead of having someone beat Undertaker to become a star, they could use a middle man. You have Lesnar beat Undertaker, then whoever beats Lesnar, is a made man. Because it took a monster to end the Streak. How badass is the guy who takes down the monster then going to be? I think that was the line of thinking and I do agree with it, in so far as the guy that beats Lesnar is not Cena or Orton. I think it was a bit of a cop-out. They could easily have 'made' someone (for arguments sake say Cesaro since they spoke about him on the podcast) by having them face Taker, take him to the limit and almost get it done but have Taker keep the streak.. The night after have Taker come out and say after that match, he realizes it's time to pass the torch to that guy. I can see why they went down the Brock route but I think for something so huge, they could have put over someone who wasn't already a legit badass former UFC champion? There's also the backlash to consider: they realized there would be a lot of people upset about it, and no telling what kind of heat -- not the good kind -- might blow back on whoever ended it. There were probably very few that they trusted to handle it. Not that people would necessarily 'hate' Cesaro (or whoever) for it but that they would take out their anger over it on that person in a big way -- possibly ruining whatever they had planned for that person and maybe even shi--ing on him to such a degree that he could never recover from it. They knew Brock was the guy who, with Heyman's help, could handle all the heat -- openly mocking and laughing at their anger on the day-after Raw and embracing the reaction in true heel fashion. It's easy to dismiss that now but there was legit anger over the streak ending when it did, and if it had been someone who was going to be around week after week working a fulltime sked it might have really ruined the guy. Plus if it's a full-timer, he would have to basicaly go through the entire roster 2-3 times before losing to avoid the 'they wasted the streak on this guy and two months later he loses to ____???!!!!!!!" With Lesnar working the part-time schedule, whatever drawbacks there are to that at least they haven't had to book him in hundreds of matches (including hous shows) and had to make him invincible for that long with that much exposure.
|
|
|
Post by kingofthings on Dec 9, 2014 19:14:48 GMT -5
Finally watched it this morning. Austin brilliantly, yet subtley, exposed McMahon for what he is at the moment - Out of touch, too controlling and impossible to let anything go. He distanced himself from being a 'politician' but some of those answers....
|
|
|
Post by Error on Dec 9, 2014 22:51:38 GMT -5
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Apr 29, 2016 3:28:25 GMT -5
I'm starting to think everyone in wrestling actually knows the real reason(s), but they're all being bastards and not letting us in on it. All I know is this... if I were in the same situation and a man that worked for me had statutory relations with my hypothetical daughter, I would not only erase his name from history FOREVER faster than you can fathom, I would not only try to get him blackballed from the industry so that NOBODY ever works with him EVER, I would not only get the damn police involved to put him behind bars... I'd probably hunt the bastard down and kill him with my bare hands. The fact that Savage is highlighted as much as he is still, to me, either signifies that the Stephanie thing NEVER happened or that Vince McMahon is the most forgiving parent in world history (because I can't imagine Stephanie keeping something like that a complete secret for more than 20 years). We agree that shouldn't happen for Benoit, for all footage of him to be destroyed completely. I don't see why that should happen to Savage. Even if it's your daughter, you have a responsibility to act in a mature manner. Bring him to the cops, black ball him from the industry, sure. But don't erase all footage of him. Don't buy every single remaining dvd with footage of him on there and then destroy them. Maybe you feel it's your right, and that because you can, you should, otherwise you're doing your daughter a disservice. Actually I better end there because this might lead me into trouble. I'll delete it if it does. Not a personal insult. Just trying to find out if statutory rape allows f... ah forget it. Anyway uh......how about them millennials not grabbing the brass ring!?
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Apr 29, 2016 15:12:03 GMT -5
Why did you bump an eighteen month old thread?
|
|
|
Post by King Devitt and the Woke Mob on May 4, 2016 2:07:15 GMT -5
I say the thread gets bumped every six months or so, just so we're reminded how inept and horrible at his job Vince is.
We have proof here. Never forget.
|
|
|
Post by Zombie Mod on May 4, 2016 12:47:12 GMT -5
Why did you bump an eighteen month old thread? bumping an old thread isn't discouraged if you are adding something of merit to it, bumping an old thread to add something like "lol" "yeah" and the like, but adding to the previous conversation isn't an issue. just don't go on a necrobumping spree.
|
|
|
Post by Super Nintenjoe KBD on May 4, 2016 12:50:37 GMT -5
Wait, that podcast was in 2014!? Jesus time flies.
|
|