|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Apr 30, 2018 15:20:28 GMT -5
As much as I hated HHH run when you look back on and know why it happened the way it did. A lot of it was justified and a lot of what poor timing or booking choices. Starting with RVD he was the hottest hand in the WWE at the time and would made sense to give him the title run. They teased it against Taker, the issue was HHH just got the belt when they decided to make Brock Smackdown only. Which was a bad move and just handing HHH the title was even worst. How HHH got the belt aside should have HHH lost the title weeks later? Not really. If it was me, the chamber should been his night. Kane honestly this was the worst version of Kane period and the angle around this match was even worst. When Kane returned from injury and had him act far to human right out the gate, just didn't care for it. Kane as champion acting the way he was leading up to it, just not buying in. Steiner: Honestly the first problem was having this title shot his first match period. As much people blame HHH for making Steiner look bad, Steiner was just god awful period. Honestly after what we saw from the guy, looking back did we really think he would been the better choice as champion? Booker T everyone because of the angle says Booker should have one. I agree but people also forgetting that at the same time he was thinking retirement. I think that played a role in him winning the belt or not. Match itself should been booked better in the ending. For me if I found out Booker was staying, I make the rematch. Nash: Honestly who really wanted Nash as champion? Sure the comeback story was nice but really? It didn't help Nash to not get a win in anyway during this. As nice it was to see HBK get a month title run, after proven he still got it. Sure I love a more legit run,but not sure how I would fit it. RVD and Booker overall would been the big benefit with the title. Yeah I had to do some looking into it because in retrospect it wasn't like I figured it was. You had Hunter going against all these established stars while the newer ones were being built up and ended up beating him most cases. I mean even Steiner for as bad as he is, the guy was destroying Trips in those promo segments where it was in competitions, beating him up or punking him out. The match was just bad though. Unlike with Lesnar's reigns, HHH's opponents here, I can see why they'd lose given the situations provided. I can't find any legit situations as to why Lesnar's opponents lost given they had pretty much every bracket checked off. And another thing is that I forgot how many times HHH and HBK fought during this time. It was crazy. Between the singles and multi person matches it was a lot. Luckily they worked well together so it wasn't that bad. Keep in mind Smackdown on the other hand did the same with Brock and Big Show. How many times where they in the same match and there match quality wasn't great. I agree about Brock. Losing to Brock now is pointless because he does nothing for anybody. When most cases after that one match, Brock goes away for months and it's forgotten. So many could have benefited from a win. Long term wise a win for Braun would been huge. Braun is a talent that is harder and hard in this day and age to find. Giant guys are not as easy to find as it once was in wrestling. Look around the indies and find one who has the charisma and skill that Braun has. Yeah he two years older that Vince's pet but the guy has it and fans love him. That your face of the company for the longer term at the moment. Most faces of the company don't go as long as Cena did. Hogan peak in the WWE was 8 years. 84 to 91. 92 he was fading out. Austin was short but huge. Braun can go longer as long he remains healthy like anybody that Austin. Austin wasn't in the best of shape when he took off, neck was already a mess and knee was a problem that he worked through. Braun has everything, you want. Outside of the ring he has the attitude you want. Nice to fans and respectful. So big guy can do the media stuff because he is a good talker. That means as we seen, he can carry his own in the storyline. The biggest miss Reigns has.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 18:41:05 GMT -5
We gotta address something else too. I've seen a lot of posts about Triple H "ruining potential stars" but I have to ask who do yall have that he ruined? Do you know how many potential stars he took out? I've just gone through each feud Trips had during the Reign of Terror starting in 2002 through 2005 and here's what we have. - RVD (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match) - Kane (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match, ended up winning the feud in a non-title casket match a week later) - HBK (a star, beat HHH for the title, lost the title to HHH months later due to Flair's help) - RVD and Kane (stars, beat Flair and Trips in a tag title feud) - Steiner (lost to HHH due to his boys and the sledgehammer) - Booker T (inexcusable, a star that lost due to Flair) - Nash (DQ'd but Nash laid HHH out afterwards, HIAC Nash lost) - Goldberg (Goldberg won repeatedly, lost the Armageddon match due to Evolution) - HBK (draw) - Benoit (Benoit won) - HBK (HHH won) - Benoit (Benoit won again) - Eugene (weird match but HHH won) - Orton (lost due to Evolution inteference) - HBK (lost due to Edge interference) - Batista (beat Trips and ended the reign) Those are the only feuds the guy had during that time. Booker T is the only guy who Triple H feuded with during that time who took a major hit. Well, Orton did as well but that was more along of what he was doing in real life so he's excused. All the others didn't need it, continued to elevate or ended up beating Triple H. You cannot excuse Booker. As for Lesnar, let's go through each feud he's had since he's beaten Taker. - Cena (beat Cena) - Cena and Rollins (beat them) - Roman Reigns (and Rollins) (yep) - Rollins (Rollins via DQ) - Kofi (BITE, needed that win) - Taker (Lesnar ended the feud) - Ambrose and Reigns (lost the match when Reigns beat Ambrose) - Ambrose (you know the result) - Orton (yepppppppppp, Orton was a bitch) - Goldberg (Bill pulled through) Now we get the Universal Champion Saga - Joe (Joe needed that win) - Strowman (needed that win) - Styles (Styles lost but he looked great) - Strowman and Kane (ugh) - Reigns (yepppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp) When I look at this I see Ambrose, Kofi, Joe and Strowman as guys who needed those heavy wins. In comparison to HHH's during his reign? Yeeeeaahhhhhhh. Okay, let's look at some of these. HHH's kill streak-Rob Van Dam: RVD was already a star? In 2002? Think about it...Van Dam beating Cena in 2006 mattered partly 'cuz of who he beat, and partly 'cuz he'd been an IC/tag guy for most of his WWE run. Mostly after the loss to Hunter. -Kane: The Katie Vick saga did him no favors. I know you mentioned that Hurricane fired back at Hunter, but that doesn't mean it wasn't bad TV that buried everybody involved. Furthermore, Haitch unmasked Kane months later, burying him even more. Kane's career never bounced back from that. -Booker T: Even you acknowledge the Booker feud was BS. And on top of that, he wouldn't be a top contender for years after. -Scott Steiner: Not only was Hunter's feud with Steiner trash TV, but Scott ended up a midcarder feuding with a never-was like Test. God rest Test's soul, of course. -Randy Orton: If by "what he was doing in real life" you mean "drugs and hotel trashing" the HHH feud that cooled him was in 2004, and Orton didn't start acting a fool until 2006. And let me add a bonus one: -Chris Jericho: Hunter and Steph buried the very first Undisputed Champion. Remember Y2J being forced to walk Triple H's dog? That was before the official Reign of Terror, but still the same damn year. Jericho didn't hit those heights again. Now let's look at Lesnar's body count: -Kofi: Beast in the East was a glorified house show. Didn't even break 9,000 attendance. NXT Takovers outdraw that. And if New Day was hurt by that loss, nobody noticed. They went on to do big things shortly after. -Strowman: Same as with New Day. He's a f***ing king and is still white hot. He got a 10 year old kid over! Who else could do that right now? -Samoa Joe: Okay, no excuses here. WWE just won't pull the trigger on him for stupid reasons. -Ambrose: Again, no excuse for the burial. Ambrose should've put up a bigger fight. But, amazingly, it didn't hurt his stock. He went on to win the WWE Championship two months later. Overall, HHH's Reign of Terror was worse than Lesnar's. Yeah, Lesnar's been more dominant, but Triple H actually buried more of his opponents with some of the worst storylines and promos in the last 20 years. Guys who've lost to Lesnar have moved on. Guys who lost to Haitch moved down.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Apr 30, 2018 19:04:24 GMT -5
I don't get this Triple H made himself look weak narrative going around. If that was meant to be their intention they never committed to it. Yes, there was cheating involved, but I chalk that up to lazy heeling than sticking to any sort of long term narrative point.
I can roughly sum up almost every Triple H title feud like so:
Step 1 - Trips comes out and brags about being the best, diamond in the rough, that damn good, et al. Face challenger then comes out and puts over how great a wrestler Trips is more, but adds that they can beat him. Trips then in a pseudo-shooty way mocks the face, i.e. paper champion in WCW, carried your ass, I'm gonna bury you, and so on. The face never really has a strong comeback against that. It's already clear who the big man is in this scenario. Step 2 - Face gets some token win over Trips in a tag match, or something. Trips sits in the ring making the 'shocked face' while JR and Lawler muse about how incredible it was that the face beat someone as good as Triple H. Step 3 - Trips beats the face, probably cheats some, but ultimately doesn't matter. Commentary make sure to note Trips doesn't need to cheat to win, and questions why he does it. In any case the face already looks worse for letting Trips walk all over him to that point. Step 4 - Go back to Step 1.
When someone loses to Lesnar they're never broken down to a point where they don't look like they belong. Lesnar is booked as a tank, so whenever anyone gets any sort of play on him they already look head and shoulders above anyone else on the roster. Like for as bizarre as Roman losing at Mania was, they gave him a hell of a lot when he kicked out of as many F5's as he did. He didn't look weak, so much as it was just confusing to see a sure thing lose so decisively. Also with the exception of Jinder Mahal, Paul Heyman never buries the challengers. That's something you cannot say about Trips back then. He made it a point to marginalise his competition on the regular. The only exceptions tended to be his friends, who he'd beat all the time anyway. You can't just list out victories between the two without context to what made them different. For all the talk of Lesnar not being around as often as we'd like, at least the show has other things going on outside of him. You can't say that about those old RAWs where Trips would tend to open and close the same show each week. RAW was basically Groundhog's Day, except depressing, and without the charm of Bill Murray... Actually I take that back, I like that movie and don't want to internalise that connection any further.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Apr 30, 2018 19:06:06 GMT -5
Nope.
Dude isn't opening the show with the same twenty minute promo every week. It's not even close.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 19:13:27 GMT -5
We gotta address something else too. I've seen a lot of posts about Triple H "ruining potential stars" but I have to ask who do yall have that he ruined? Do you know how many potential stars he took out? I've just gone through each feud Trips had during the Reign of Terror starting in 2002 through 2005 and here's what we have. - RVD (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match) - Kane (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match, ended up winning the feud in a non-title casket match a week later) - HBK (a star, beat HHH for the title, lost the title to HHH months later due to Flair's help) - RVD and Kane (stars, beat Flair and Trips in a tag title feud) - Steiner (lost to HHH due to his boys and the sledgehammer) - Booker T (inexcusable, a star that lost due to Flair) - Nash (DQ'd but Nash laid HHH out afterwards, HIAC Nash lost) - Goldberg (Goldberg won repeatedly, lost the Armageddon match due to Evolution) - HBK (draw) - Benoit (Benoit won) - HBK (HHH won) - Benoit (Benoit won again) - Eugene (weird match but HHH won) - Orton (lost due to Evolution inteference) - HBK (lost due to Edge interference) - Batista (beat Trips and ended the reign) Those are the only feuds the guy had during that time. Booker T is the only guy who Triple H feuded with during that time who took a major hit. Well, Orton did as well but that was more along of what he was doing in real life so he's excused. All the others didn't need it, continued to elevate or ended up beating Triple H. You cannot excuse Booker. As for Lesnar, let's go through each feud he's had since he's beaten Taker. - Cena (beat Cena) - Cena and Rollins (beat them) - Roman Reigns (and Rollins) (yep) - Rollins (Rollins via DQ) - Kofi (BITE, needed that win) - Taker (Lesnar ended the feud) - Ambrose and Reigns (lost the match when Reigns beat Ambrose) - Ambrose (you know the result) - Orton (yepppppppppp, Orton was a bitch) - Goldberg (Bill pulled through) Now we get the Universal Champion Saga - Joe (Joe needed that win) - Strowman (needed that win) - Styles (Styles lost but he looked great) - Strowman and Kane (ugh) - Reigns (yepppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp) When I look at this I see Ambrose, Kofi, Joe and Strowman as guys who needed those heavy wins. In comparison to HHH's during his reign? Yeeeeaahhhhhhh. Okay, let's look at some of these. HHH's kill streak-Rob Van Dam: RVD was already a star? In 2002? Van Dam beating Cena in 2006 mattered partly 'cuz of who he beat, and partly 'cuz he'd never won the big one before. Yeah, RVD was already a star by that point given his ECW history. He was already known. If you need an example go watch the Invasion 2001 match with Jeff and hear the response. Ever since RVD debuted in the company he's been seen as a star and beyond that for the next few months the guy was beating guys such as Rock, Austin, Jericho and numerous faces at that time and mind you this is all before the HHH World Title feud. RVD beating Cena was huge due to when it was, how it happened and who it was against. He wasn't some random midcarder who finally got his big shot, the guy had been in multiple world title matches in the WWE by that point. Hell he was so over they forced the guy to turn face shortly after he showed up. This goes back to what I said, Kane is not a "potential star" like others have been stating. Kane was already a star let alone being buried? The guy continued to get world title shots, be in major angles and it continued for a long time. People are misusing the word "buried" because Kane definitely wasn't buried but regardless the point of my post was that Kane isn't some "potential star", there's a difference being a potential star and already being one. At the end of the day though Kane continued to be in heavy storylines involving RVD, Goldberg, Taker, Lita, Benoit, Hardy and Edge not long after that. That's not what buried means. If you mean "Kane took a hit" I'd understand you because I agree he took a hit but tossing the word buried out like that? Potential star? Nah, that's false to both points. Kane hit a level where regardless of what happened he was good. Yep. That's 1 against Trips. That wasn't Triple H's fault by any means so you can't blame that on Hunter's reign. Trips was selling for the guy every time they came in contact, Trips put over the guy heavy but at the end of the day Steiner just wasn't good so when he was beaten? That was it. You can't blame that one on Trips at all here, that's ridiculous. There was even one segment where Steiner not only embarrassed Trips but the guy took out 6 men alone while Trips looked terrified. You can call it trash tv but you'd never see Lesnar in the same spot as Trips and by that you'd never see Lesnar put over an opponent each segment as the weeks go by like in that feud regardless if you think it's "trash tv." I didn't mention that, I mentioned his backstage attitude and how rowdy he was . There was a point where he had to be talked to by Trips and Flair even and it was mostly due to his age. You can't act like that and expect it to be ok. They mention that heavily in the Orton dvd. Yall gotta stop using that word buried like that because if that's what you're bringing to the table then it's not really factual. Secondly...Jericho is not a potential star. Jericho is already a star and by that point he was cemented. We gotta stop doing this because if that's what you have in defense of your point it isn't going to work. You even claim Jericho never hit those heights against when the guy had his late 00s run and then furthermore continued to put out great television recently. Come on now. Kofi, it doesn't matter if it's a glorified house show because doing well against Lesnar helps guys out regardless. Kofi isn't a star yet, New Day is but Kofi himself? He needs something to elevate which should have happened. Same can't be said for a lot of people. Strowman...people said the guy was done after that match happened to the point where multiple threads were talking about it, to the point where WWE legends on podcasts were talking about it and to the point where people wondered if the guy would even recover. Braun took a huge hit here and the hit Braun took wasn't warranted because Braun, unlike most of those you mentioned in your HHH response, wasn't a made man yet. He couldn't afford that by any means. Joe, you know the deal. Ambrose, you know the deal. 2 things. 1. You straight up said Lesnar was more dominant than Trips. Yep. He absolutely was. That's what a lot of us are saying. That doesn't help anyone but Lesnar out. You're agreeing with me here. 2. You're still using the word "buried" incorrectly. At the end of the day it revolves around this; you think Trip's reign was worse due to the storylines and promos but I think Lesnar's is worse due to the fact more people looked better against Trips than anyone did against Lesnar to the point where Trips had to cheat in every match to keep the title. There's a huge difference here because even in the promos you mentioned (like the Hurricane one I brought up) you said it was "bad tv" but the point is in theory everything can be bad tv. What isn't false is how one character shows up another. If someone gets knocked down, the person on the ground gets embarrassed. You can call it bad tv but the fact is the guy on the ground is down. The "trash tv" comment is subjective based on the person, what isn't subjective is how strong someone looks against another. In Trip's feuds, more guys just looked stronger which helps more superstars. At the end of the day more guys just looked better against Trips regardless of how that era was than guys look against Lesnar and that in itself is comparing reigns. If you have 1 guy far stronger than the rest (like Lesnar) you hit where we are today where everyone else looks like crap for no reason and where no one benefits against him. During Trip's reign though? Nah, all the main event guys were generally around the same level given how well they did against Trips so it was another's ballgame. I don't know about you but if you think sacrificing everyone in favor of making only 1 guy the strongest is great then God bless on that one. Lastly, we gotta end this whole "buried" talk and we gotta stop mentioning cemented status guys as "potential stars" because that's just not how things work. Nobody better be saying Kane and Jericho were "potential stars" by that point. That's crazy. When people say Trips "buried potential stars" they gotta start naming guys because no one here is a "potential star", a potential star is someone on a far lower level. Trips was facing already made guys when he beat them.
|
|
Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
May contain ADHD
Posts: 13,493
|
Post by Malcolm on Apr 30, 2018 20:30:02 GMT -5
It boggles my mind how people can say that Jericho was buried and never eeeeever(see what I did there?) recovered. I mean, buried, sure. Never recovered? Nope.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Apr 30, 2018 20:33:22 GMT -5
I would take Brock being champ for another 10 years over another month reign of the reign of terror.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Apr 30, 2018 21:17:21 GMT -5
We gotta address something else too. I've seen a lot of posts about Triple H "ruining potential stars" but I have to ask who do yall have that he ruined? Do you know how many potential stars he took out? I've just gone through each feud Trips had during the Reign of Terror starting in 2002 through 2005 and here's what we have. - RVD (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match) - Kane (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match, ended up winning the feud in a non-title casket match a week later) - HBK (a star, beat HHH for the title, lost the title to HHH months later due to Flair's help) - RVD and Kane (stars, beat Flair and Trips in a tag title feud) - Steiner (lost to HHH due to his boys and the sledgehammer) - Booker T (inexcusable, a star that lost due to Flair) - Nash (DQ'd but Nash laid HHH out afterwards, HIAC Nash lost) - Goldberg (Goldberg won repeatedly, lost the Armageddon match due to Evolution) - HBK (draw) - Benoit (Benoit won) - HBK (HHH won) - Benoit (Benoit won again) - Eugene (weird match but HHH won) - Orton (lost due to Evolution inteference) - HBK (lost due to Edge interference) - Batista (beat Trips and ended the reign) Those are the only feuds the guy had during that time. Booker T is the only guy who Triple H feuded with during that time who took a major hit. Well, Orton did as well but that was more along of what he was doing in real life so he's excused. All the others didn't need it, continued to elevate or ended up beating Triple H. You cannot excuse Booker. As for Lesnar, let's go through each feud he's had since he's beaten Taker. - Cena (beat Cena) - Cena and Rollins (beat them) - Roman Reigns (and Rollins) (yep) - Rollins (Rollins via DQ) - Kofi (BITE, needed that win) - Taker (Lesnar ended the feud) - Ambrose and Reigns (lost the match when Reigns beat Ambrose) - Ambrose (you know the result) - Orton (yepppppppppp, Orton was a bitch) - Goldberg (Bill pulled through) Now we get the Universal Champion Saga - Joe (Joe needed that win) - Strowman (needed that win) - Styles (Styles lost but he looked great) - Strowman and Kane (ugh) - Reigns (yepppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp) When I look at this I see Ambrose, Kofi, Joe and Strowman as guys who needed those heavy wins. In comparison to HHH's during his reign? Yeeeeaahhhhhhh. Some might even throw Roman's ass in there but that's another situation. Some might even throw Orton but luckily the Wyatts and SDL saved him. Regardless, when I look at both sets of feuds with HHHs I see him mostly feuding with guys who are stars while with Lesnar's I see him feuding with newer guys who need that rub. If they switched spots? HHH would make those guys Lesnar faced look way better and in turn if Lesnar faced those guys HHH faced, they've be beaten without much damage given how big they already were. Beyond that we also have to look around the RoT where they had a lot of main event guys who had a certain level of star quality. Today's WWE during Lesnar's reign doesn't, we have guys but they're not main eventers for the most part and when they are? You have people say that they don't have the credentials, resume nor the wins for that spot. So when you get a strong guy beat someone who's not up to their level? It doesn't help anyone out. People might think the RoT was worse but one thing we don't need to do is act like Trips "ruining potential stars" is worse than Lesnar. If you look at the stats that's clearly false and if anyone disagrees then shit, I wanna see some receipts for that one. Lesnar's hurt way more people that Trips did. Let alone the fact that he did it all clean with no help, shenanigans nor weapons. I agree with everything except Kofi needed a win. That brother was and still is in a tag team. No way he was getting a career changing W while he's still with New Day
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 21:18:49 GMT -5
We gotta address something else too. I've seen a lot of posts about Triple H "ruining potential stars" but I have to ask who do yall have that he ruined? Do you know how many potential stars he took out? I've just gone through each feud Trips had during the Reign of Terror starting in 2002 through 2005 and here's what we have. - RVD (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match) - Kane (a star, lost to HHH due to Flair and Trip's sledgehammer, kept elevating after the match, ended up winning the feud in a non-title casket match a week later) - HBK (a star, beat HHH for the title, lost the title to HHH months later due to Flair's help) - RVD and Kane (stars, beat Flair and Trips in a tag title feud) - Steiner (lost to HHH due to his boys and the sledgehammer) - Booker T (inexcusable, a star that lost due to Flair) - Nash (DQ'd but Nash laid HHH out afterwards, HIAC Nash lost) - Goldberg (Goldberg won repeatedly, lost the Armageddon match due to Evolution) - HBK (draw) - Benoit (Benoit won) - HBK (HHH won) - Benoit (Benoit won again) - Eugene (weird match but HHH won) - Orton (lost due to Evolution inteference) - HBK (lost due to Edge interference) - Batista (beat Trips and ended the reign) Those are the only feuds the guy had during that time. Booker T is the only guy who Triple H feuded with during that time who took a major hit. Well, Orton did as well but that was more along of what he was doing in real life so he's excused. All the others didn't need it, continued to elevate or ended up beating Triple H. You cannot excuse Booker. As for Lesnar, let's go through each feud he's had since he's beaten Taker. - Cena (beat Cena) - Cena and Rollins (beat them) - Roman Reigns (and Rollins) (yep) - Rollins (Rollins via DQ) - Kofi (BITE, needed that win) - Taker (Lesnar ended the feud) - Ambrose and Reigns (lost the match when Reigns beat Ambrose) - Ambrose (you know the result) - Orton (yepppppppppp, Orton was a bitch) - Goldberg (Bill pulled through) Now we get the Universal Champion Saga - Joe (Joe needed that win) - Strowman (needed that win) - Styles (Styles lost but he looked great) - Strowman and Kane (ugh) - Reigns (yepppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp) When I look at this I see Ambrose, Kofi, Joe and Strowman as guys who needed those heavy wins. In comparison to HHH's during his reign? Yeeeeaahhhhhhh. Some might even throw Roman's ass in there but that's another situation. Some might even throw Orton but luckily the Wyatts and SDL saved him. Regardless, when I look at both sets of feuds with HHHs I see him mostly feuding with guys who are stars while with Lesnar's I see him feuding with newer guys who need that rub. If they switched spots? HHH would make those guys Lesnar faced look way better and in turn if Lesnar faced those guys HHH faced, they've be beaten without much damage given how big they already were. Beyond that we also have to look around the RoT where they had a lot of main event guys who had a certain level of star quality. Today's WWE during Lesnar's reign doesn't, we have guys but they're not main eventers for the most part and when they are? You have people say that they don't have the credentials, resume nor the wins for that spot. So when you get a strong guy beat someone who's not up to their level? It doesn't help anyone out. People might think the RoT was worse but one thing we don't need to do is act like Trips "ruining potential stars" is worse than Lesnar. If you look at the stats that's clearly false and if anyone disagrees then shit, I wanna see some receipts for that one. Lesnar's hurt way more people that Trips did. Let alone the fact that he did it all clean with no help, shenanigans nor weapons. I agree with everything except Kofi needed a win. That brother was and still is in a tag team. No way he was getting a career changing W while he's still with New Day Sadly it's not like it used to be where a tag guy could get a big win to help solidify them in single's action but even so if I remember right Lesnar took out all 3 New Day members off the strength alone.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Apr 30, 2018 21:23:45 GMT -5
I agree with everything except Kofi needed a win. That brother was and still is in a tag team. No way he was getting a career changing W while he's still with New Day Sadly it's not like it used to be where a tag guy could get a big win to help solidify them in single's action but even so if I remember right Lesnar took out all 3 New Day members off the strength alone. True. Even tho weren't New Day still heels then? They didn't really lose anything and luckily for them that was just a one off and not a TV program like when Lesnar was killing the Wyatts before they switched his program to Ambrose However, even then unless you plan on moving a guy up the card with a rocket up his ass (which would have been Big E) there's no way any tag wrestler is beating Lesnar Now let's not forget Kofi is a decorated mid card champion and one of the more decorated champions of this era but yeah if they ever wanted to give him a singles push again than it will be on his own away from New Day tho I want them all to go after singles titles as a unit
|
|
|
Post by bcdx97 on Apr 30, 2018 21:55:04 GMT -5
Just wait until the Reigns of Terror begins!
Wait, we’ve been suffering through that for 3 years now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 21:58:10 GMT -5
Yeah, RVD was already a star by that point given his ECW history. He was already known. If you need an example go watch the Invasion 2001 match with Jeff and hear the response. Ever since RVD debuted in the company he's been seen as a star and beyond that for the next few months the guy was beating guys such as Rock, Austin, Jericho and numerous faces at that time and mind you this is all before the HHH World Title feud. RVD beating Cena was huge due to when it was, how it happened and who it was against. He wasn't some random midcarder who finally got his big shot, the guy had been in multiple world title matches in the WWE by that point. Hell he was so over they forced the guy to turn face shortly after he showed up. You're conflating "being over" with "being a star". Not the same thing. RVD was very over. He got huge pops. Not denying that. But he wasn't a star, as in a marquee player. Stars are treated as such by the company. He'd had main event matches over the years, but he'd never been a proper main eventer in WWE. Again, not the same thing. They didn't pull the trigger on him for years, and you know this, man. Okay man, then what exactly do you think "burying" means? You need to state it for the record. No, Kane was not a "potential star", you know I never said that. But he WAS one of their hottest commodities at the time, and the HHH feud, Katie Vick angle, and unmasking objectively lowered his stock and were bad for his career. Simple as that. Kane could've been a long-term big name for the company. Instead, he had four years of fire and the rest were mostly dog shit. Also you just implied that Kane having that rape baby / marriage angle with Lita, Matt Hardy and Edge was a good sign for his career. Man, come on...if you were a wrestler, would YOU do shit like that if they pitched it to you? Would YOU consider that a sign that your career was going okay? You know what, I'll give you Steiner. He'd lost it by then, fair point. I decided to check it out just to see what you were talking about. you realize that documentary had a ton of kayfabing, right? I wouldn't trust it as a source of backstage info, especially not on THAT particular issue, because Randy's temperament has legit been a big part of his in-ring gimmick for like 10 years now. Hell, they did an angle where he claimed to have Intermittent Explosive Disorder. It's a work. I myself never said Jericho was a "potential star" (just like I never said it about Kane). So you need to miss me with that "y'all gotta stop." I said he was the first Undisputed Champion. And the first Undisputed Champion should be treated with some gravitas. Or at least, he shouldn't be relegated to tagging with a perennial midcarder like Christian months later, like Jericho was. And no, Jericho never hit those heights again. Sorry, but winning a cheesy Scramble match for the belt, beating Shawn Michaels and getting punched out by Mickey Rourke doesn't impress me. To say the least, it isn't on par with beating Stone Cold and The Rock in their primes in the same night. Dude, just because a guy's an established star doesn't mean he can't be knocked down the card or his career can't be hurt. Yes, New Day, collectively, are stars. No matter how you spin it, that's a plus. Give me a living reason why Kofi, specifically, needs to be pushed as a singles guy again. Because New Day, right now, has achieved a happier outcome losing to Lesnar than a lot of the guys who lost to Haitch (Jericho, Booker, Kane, Orton) because their careers didn't take years to re-rail. Hey, you know what? People sure did say Strowman was done after the Lesnar match. WWE Legends sure DID talk about that shit. People SURE DID wonder if he would recover. Guess what though? Braun SURE AS HELL DID shake the loss off and bounce back, didn't he? Slicing the tag division singlehandedly, culminating in a Wrestlemania Moment that turned some referee's kid into a meme? How many wrestlers have done that? Then he relinquished the belts the next night. In other words, in a span of weeks, Braun Strowman established that he, alone, was above the tag division and the championships they contend for. This is not the sign of a man whose career took a hit or had his status reduced. So I don't care what people said about Strowman. They are dead-ass WRONG Check the post again because I had edited in a point about how Ambrose won the WWE Championship a mere two months after losing to Lesnar. Chalk it up to f***ed up, inconsistent, asinine WWE booking these days, but hey...he got something out of it. That's exactly what I said. Lesnar is more dominant. And yet, HHH managed to damage more careers than Brock ever did. And probably ever will. Burial: "The worked lowering of a wrestler's status." This is the most common definition. And if you think Kane going from charismatic, powerful masked superstar to losing his mask and kayfabe raping Lita isn't a "worked lowering of his status", I don't know what to say to you. Chris Jericho (as the Inaugural Undisputed Champion, titles IN HAND) being forced to walk Triple H's dog because his wife said so? Then being knocked down to the tag division alongside Edge's second banana? Not a burial? Come on... Man, this is TV drama, not a real sport. If a heel wins by cheating, and isn't punished, he still won. He still has the title. The feud is still done, finished, over. And after it happens enough times in a row, the whole "Well, the other guy looked good in defeat.." excuse does not cut it. That stuff didn't cut it in the Cenamania Era, it doesn't cut it in today's wrestling, and it doesn't cut it while we're getting all nostalgic over the Brand Split 1/Ruthless Aggression Era. And as subjective as HHH's Reign of Terror being bad TV may be, what isn't subjective is what it did to ratings and buyrates. People weren't checking for Haitch, so there's yet another thing he screwed up. Lesnar admittedly doesn't move the needle forward...but he doesn't move it backwards at least.
|
|
Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
May contain ADHD
Posts: 13,493
|
Post by Malcolm on Apr 30, 2018 22:11:55 GMT -5
I would take Brock being champ for another 10 years over another month reign of the reign of terror.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 23:06:48 GMT -5
You're conflating "being over" with "being a star". Not the same thing. RVD was very over. He got huge pops. Not denying that. But he wasn't a star, as in a marquee player. Stars are treated as such by the company. He'd had main event matches over the years, but he'd never been a proper main eventer in WWE. Again, not the same thing. They didn't pull the trigger on him for years, and you know this, man. What you're doing right now is thinking that you're only a star if you're a main eventer in the WWE and that's absolutely not true. RVD was a star well before then and if you think he wasn't then you only think guys such as Austin, Rock, Taker and other mega-big league guys like that are stars. Those are mega-stars, not stars. There's clearly a difference and never in my entire life of wrestling have I heard anyone say that RVD became a star once he joined the WWE, that's just not true by any means. Look at many guys in the Attitude Era who weren't at that level who were stars for example. Point being if you only think RVD became a star when he became that main big league player once he won the world title against Cena, even when the guy was beating guys such as Austin, Rock, Jericho, HHH and many others at that time I don't know what to tell you because those guys there are the mega-stars and yet RVD of all people was getting pins on them. He had the popularity, he had the wins, he had the merch, he had it all except the belt but the fact they let him do what he did and still not get the belt means something. You're really trying to tell us that the dude wasn't a star until he was in that world title spot right now. That's ridiculous. If you get squashed, always lose, are made out to be shit by not having your offense do damage, all of these things are burying you all over. It makes you look generally lesser as a whole from your previous level. Losing 1 match while being protected? That's not being buried. Losing 1 match at all against someone who's booked as really strong? That's not being buried if you do some sort of damage. In Kane's case, Kane was not buried against Triple H given he did damage to Triple H, given the fact Triple H had help to beat Kane, given Kane lost due to 3 low blows (one by the sledgehammer), given the ref had to be taken out in order for Kane to lose, given Flair had to interfere numerous times in order for Kane to lose and still got f***ed up and also given the fact that they even had a sub ref taken out in order to stop Kane. After all of that Kane took a shot given he didn't win...but the guy was absolutely not buried given everything it took to take Kane down. If you look at the Katie Vick feud as a whole rather than the match then you had Kane beating down Triple H most segments and with the unmasking? The guy had guards surrounding him making him appear more dangerous regardless. So you think it's bad and you think it's "dog shit" but the reality of the stories surrounding it made Kane appear stronger and more dangerous than ever. That's not being buried. Look at what I've stated and now look at what I'll say next. In Ambrose's case, none of his moves worked against Lesnar unless he used weapons while guys like Reigns, Goldberg, Cena, Strowman and even Rollins on the top rope did damage to Lesnar. Lesnar beat Ambrose with 0 help. Lesnar beat Ambrose in 13 minutes and 12 of those minutes Ambrose was being tossed around. When people say Ambrose was buried, that was accurate because in the eyes of the fans Ambrose was nothing without his weapons against Lesnar. You can't compare that to someone like Kane. What you're speaking on are subjective opinions. You're talking about what you think is "good tv" and if something is "good for someone's career" but me? I'm giving you the fact that these guys are still getting high-profiled storylines in a time slot, given time for matches, given wins, given titles, segments and angles, that right there qualifies more than your opinion because like I said your opinion is subjective. You can think someone who cut a great 5 minute promo is the best piece of wrestling you've ever seen but then you compare it to someone who's in numerous segments, has numerous matches and you think it's bad tv, at the end of the day the latter has the better career here and the same applies to Kane. You think these are "bad" but the reality is Kane in these times was doing damn well from a career standpoint, you ask other wrestlers what they think about it and they'd agree because to them it's not about what you think is "good tv", it's about getting screentime, major angles, matches, it's about all of that and that's what was given to him. If you get that? You're not being buried. My point stands. Ok. Orton's talked about it in numerous interviews. Even Cena's mentioned Orton's rowdy past before, that's definitely not kayfabe. Come on bruh that's not a gimmick. You know what it is with Orton. It just caught up with him. It's not like he hasn't made stupid mistakes before. He's changed but that is part of his past. You didn't dispute anything I said with that post but what I've bolded is something that needs to be said: not everybody can be in the main event picture every single angle. Reigns can't, Styles can't, Taker couldn't, Cena couldn't, Bryan can't, Punk couldn't, Rock couldn't, Austin couldn't, nobody can do that and Jericho follows along those same trends. Of course the guy wasn't seen as being on the same par as he was when he beat Austin and Rock in their prime, that doesn't mean that the guy's somehow been buried. Look at the definition of "buried" that I provided above. Everybody has to shuffle the deck and mix things up and as for Christian? Dawg, the way someone gets better is mingling with others and Christian was a great part of that and that helped Christian as well. AJ Styles mingled with Ellsworth who's seen as a joke even Styles was WWE Champion, same with him losing to Baron Corbin. You can see many great stars get into angles with those not on their level because that's how it works but the point I was saying is that that doesn't hurt someone's career especially, again I stress this, if they get tv time, angle time, match time and their career continues because believe it or not before you know it Jericho was mixing it up with the Cenas of the world. Yall really do gotta stop saying that "buried" shit like that too because that's just not what it is. ? Because one more main event star is better for the company? Because he's an established talent who can fulfill every box they need him to do? Because he's won every belt besides a world title which proves that they can trust him? Because he's the one of the most decorated Africans in WWE history and according to Xavier one of the most decorated champions in WWE history? Because because he can work with any talent you need him to work with whether big, small, fast, slow, striker, grappler, submission artist and etc? There's numerous reasons why Kofi can be pushed as a single's star but the point remains that the more main event guys they have that's established the better the playing field is. Having 1 guy at the top (Lesnar) is a bad business plan. Even during Trip's Reign of Terror it wasn't just him at the top, you had numerous guys that could contend with him which made each title defense questionable compared to Lesnar where you know how it'll go unless it's Roman Reigns. New Day is great but that doesn't mean they all can't branch off and be single's stars while still being part of New Day like many of us have been saying on this forum. That's the natural next step especially if they've done all they can do as a tag team which at this point they're scrapping the bottom of the barrel. Do you even remember how that happened? Strowman after the Lesnar match was floundering a bit until the Shield reunited and then after that they did the Raw/SDL match and then when Strowman turned face things changed for him. After the Lesnar match though? The guy took a hit and it took perfect booking from all angles to bring him back up. That in itself was a hit towards Strowman regardless of where he is today and that's the point I and many others have been making about this entire Lesnar thing and you straight up confirmed people had negative comments after Strowman was beaten by Lesnar. They're doing all this stuff to help guys out after a Lesnar match when the reality is the match and angle should be so good you don't have to do all of that to help them recover because they should already be recovered before their next angle but it's not that case for a Lesnar feud. You're proving my point here. An example is this, Ambrose/Styles and their late 2016 feud. Ambrose lost the title due to Ellsworth but what happened next for him? Ambrose immediately entered a feud with The Miz which came off that Renee Young situation. That's how you do it. Even before that feud the seeds were planted there. Ambrose didn't lose momentum against Styles (given he was protected when Styles beat him and given Ellsworth caused his loss) and all 3 of them looked great. Strowman did not look great after the Lesnar loss. There's a huge difference. If you can't see that then God bless but there's clearly a way to book matches and have the loser still look amazing afterwards. Strowman looked like a bitch until he recovered. Do you know what happened after that Lesnar match? Let me break it down to you: - The announcers said Ambrose "took Lesnar to the limit" mere days after that match due to the fact that they know Ambrose looked bad so they had to cover for it. - Ambrose got his own talk show mere days later with his own personal set. - Ambrose entered a feud with WWE legend Chris Jericho where he destroyed Jericho's legendary jacket even. - Ambrose had his own match invented called The Ambrose Asylum. - Ambrose threw Jericho onto thumbtacks. - Ambrose beat Jericho 2 ppvs in a row. - Ambrose won the MITB. - Ambrose cashed in on a Rollins who won due to Roman's Wellness Violation. Look at everything I wrote there. All of that happened due to that Lesnar match. Hell Jericho himself said he did his damnest to help Ambrose out after that Lesnar match which is why he put him over so much. They did all of that shit to help Ambrose climb out of "Lesnar's Lair" and with that in mind look at what I said about Strowman. Dawg, yeah Ambrose became champion months later but it took a lot for that to happen. You know what would have been a better transition? Had Ambrose looked better in that Lesnar match so it made sense and it didn't look like Ambrose only got it due to a Wellness Violation and how bad the Lesnar match was even though that's why he got it. You need to provide more facts because you're not speaking facts right now. Again, you're speaking on what's subjective as in what you think is "good" and "bad" rather than tv time, angles guys were in and things of that sort. You mentioned guys like RVD and Kane who kept getting massive tv time as if you didn't ask them and they said "no Triple H hurt my career." Come on now bruh. I've already explained burial above and again you keep speaking on subjective things. You know what a burial would be? If Kane wasn't in any angles, if his tv time was heavily cut down, if Kane lost more and more matches repeatedly, if Kane eventually was seen off of tv, if Kane didn't win anymore titles, if Kane had to be rebooted and/or left the company. You're not speaking of a burial here because if you look at what I described about the match in the very beginning you'd see the guy was heavily protected. That's not a burial bruh bruh. As for Jericho, yeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh, I've explained that too and if you agree with that then I guess AJ Styles was buried by being in that US Title feud with Owens then. Stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. You mean to tell me that if a guy had to be hit by a car and then the heel pinned him, the guy wasn't protected? Even though the car took him out? Oh because the heel won the guy isn't protected? Son, that isn't a burial by any means yo yall need to stop wilding out with this. There is such a thing such as protecting someone with a loss and if you think there isn't then we don't need to talk anymore because that's another thread entirely. Yes this is a drama but those types of situations happen in real dramas. If someone's arm is hurting enough that they can't finish their job and they get fired during the first 5 minutes of a show that shows reasoning. Don't tell me that if the same shit doesn't happen in wrestling it doesn't matter. That's ridiculous. As for ratings, buyrates and all of that stuff bruh, you know for a fact why the ratings went down. You can't chalk all of that up to HHH's reign and if so then shit you would have brought that up during your initial points rather than now where. As for Lesnar doesn't move the needle back, you're basically doing the same thing Vince does as the champion being the only guy who dictates how good the product is. If that's your mindset then give props to the fact that Jinder as champion actually did do better ratings than some more recent champions recently. That's not how things work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 23:38:43 GMT -5
Sadly it's not like it used to be where a tag guy could get a big win to help solidify them in single's action but even so if I remember right Lesnar took out all 3 New Day members off the strength alone. True. Even tho weren't New Day still heels then? They didn't really lose anything and luckily for them that was just a one off and not a TV program like when Lesnar was killing the Wyatts before they switched his program to Ambrose However, even then unless you plan on moving a guy up the card with a rocket up his ass (which would have been Big E) there's no way any tag wrestler is beating Lesnar Now let's not forget Kofi is a decorated mid card champion and one of the more decorated champions of this era but yeah if they ever wanted to give him a singles push again than it will be on his own away from New Day tho I want them all to go after singles titles as a unit I think they were in the same space as Brock as in heels who the crowd loved but yeah Lesnar destroyed all those boys. As for the Wyatts I completely forgot about that shit. Fact is I don't know who's beating Lesnar anymore and to this day it's still crazy Goldberg did it. As for Kofi yeah, they'll eventually step out into the single's arena and see how it works out. Xavier would make me watch 205 and he'd freshen up the midcard scene and I can see Kofi and Big E as world champs easily.
|
|
Renslayer
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
every time i come around your city...
Posts: 16,878
Member is Online
|
Post by Renslayer on Apr 30, 2018 23:44:13 GMT -5
The thing with HHH was that he was incredibly boring and when you combine that with how god awful Raw was from 2002-2004, he wins this in a runaway.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on May 1, 2018 0:14:44 GMT -5
True. Even tho weren't New Day still heels then? They didn't really lose anything and luckily for them that was just a one off and not a TV program like when Lesnar was killing the Wyatts before they switched his program to Ambrose However, even then unless you plan on moving a guy up the card with a rocket up his ass (which would have been Big E) there's no way any tag wrestler is beating Lesnar Now let's not forget Kofi is a decorated mid card champion and one of the more decorated champions of this era but yeah if they ever wanted to give him a singles push again than it will be on his own away from New Day tho I want them all to go after singles titles as a unit I think they were in the same space as Brock as in heels who the crowd loved but yeah Lesnar destroyed all those boys. As for the Wyatts I completely forgot about that shit. Fact is I don't know who's beating Lesnar anymore and to this day it's still crazy Goldberg did it. As for Kofi yeah, they'll eventually step out into the single's arena and see how it works out. Xavier would make me watch 205 and he'd freshen up the midcard scene and I can see Kofi and Big E as world champs easily. No one that needs the rub has beaten Lesnar. Reigns, Strowman, Joe, Ambrose, Rollins etc have all lost to Lesnar while he's only lost to Goldberg, HHH, Taker and Cena. At this point i'm inclined to think they bring back Batista and have him beat Lesnar In regards to New Day yeah I can see Kofi being a late bloomer like a Mark Henry per se. Big E seems ticketed to be a world champion but the problem is you have to find a perfect balance for him. Don't take away his personality and make him ultra serious but also don't let him be soo goofy it takes away from what he can do as a performer. Xavier will easily take over 205 Live if it's still around whenever they break them up. If it's not than hopefully he is the manager for either Kofi or Xavier because otherwise he's going to be a jobber.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,396
|
Post by The Ichi on May 1, 2018 1:34:53 GMT -5
You're conflating "being over" with "being a star". Not the same thing. RVD was very over. He got huge pops. Not denying that. But he wasn't a star, as in a marquee player. Stars are treated as such by the company. He'd had main event matches over the years, but he'd never been a proper main eventer in WWE. Again, not the same thing. They didn't pull the trigger on him for years, and you know this, man. What you're doing right now is thinking that you're only a star if you're a main eventer in the WWE and that's absolutely not true. RVD was a star well before then and if you think he wasn't then you only think guys such as Austin, Rock, Taker and other mega-big league guys like that are stars. Those are mega-stars, not stars. There's clearly a difference and never in my entire life of wrestling have I heard anyone say that RVD became a star once he joined the WWE, that's just not true by any means. Look at many guys in the Attitude Era who weren't at that level who were stars for example. Point being if you only think RVD became a star when he became that main big league player once he won the world title against Cena, even when the guy was beating guys such as Austin, Rock, Jericho, HHH and many others at that time I don't know what to tell you because those guys there are the mega-stars and yet RVD of all people was getting pins on them. He had the popularity, he had the wins, he had the merch, he had it all except the belt but the fact they let him do what he did and still not get the belt means something. You're really trying to tell us that the dude wasn't a star until he was in that world title spot right now. That's ridiculous. If you get squashed, always lose, are made out to be shit by not having your offense do damage, all of these things are burying you all over. It makes you look generally lesser as a whole from your previous level. Losing 1 match while being protected? That's not being buried. Losing 1 match at all against someone who's booked as really strong? That's not being buried if you do some sort of damage. In Kane's case, Kane was not buried against Triple H given he did damage to Triple H, given the fact Triple H had help to beat Kane, given Kane lost due to 3 low blows (one by the sledgehammer), given the ref had to be taken out in order for Kane to lose, given Flair had to interfere numerous times in order for Kane to lose and still got f***ed up and also given the fact that they even had a sub ref taken out in order to stop Kane. After all of that Kane took a shot given he didn't win...but the guy was absolutely not buried given everything it took to take Kane down. If you look at the Katie Vick feud as a whole rather than the match then you had Kane beating down Triple H most segments and with the unmasking? The guy had guards surrounding him making him appear more dangerous regardless. So you think it's bad and you think it's "dog shit" but the reality of the stories surrounding it made Kane appear stronger and more dangerous than ever. That's not being buried. Look at what I've stated and now look at what I'll say next. In Ambrose's case, none of his moves worked against Lesnar unless he used weapons while guys like Reigns, Goldberg, Cena, Strowman and even Rollins on the top rope did damage to Lesnar. Lesnar beat Ambrose with 0 help. Lesnar beat Ambrose in 13 minutes and 12 of those minutes Ambrose was being tossed around. When people say Ambrose was buried, that was accurate because in the eyes of the fans Ambrose was nothing without his weapons against Lesnar. You can't compare that to someone like Kane. What you're speaking on are subjective opinions. You're talking about what you think is "good tv" and if something is "good for someone's career" but me? I'm giving you the fact that these guys are still getting high-profiled storylines in a time slot, given time for matches, given wins, given titles, segments and angles, that right there qualifies more than your opinion because like I said your opinion is subjective. You can think someone who cut a great 5 minute promo is the best piece of wrestling you've ever seen but then you compare it to someone who's in numerous segments, has numerous matches and you think it's bad tv, at the end of the day the latter has the better career here and the same applies to Kane. You think these are "bad" but the reality is Kane in these times was doing damn well from a career standpoint, you ask other wrestlers what they think about it and they'd agree because to them it's not about what you think is "good tv", it's about getting screentime, major angles, matches, it's about all of that and that's what was given to him. If you get that? You're not being buried. My point stands. Ok. Orton's talked about it in numerous interviews. Even Cena's mentioned Orton's rowdy past before, that's definitely not kayfabe. Come on bruh that's not a gimmick. You know what it is with Orton. It just caught up with him. It's not like he hasn't made stupid mistakes before. He's changed but that is part of his past. You didn't dispute anything I said with that post but what I've bolded is something that needs to be said: not everybody can be in the main event picture every single angle. Reigns can't, Styles can't, Taker couldn't, Cena couldn't, Bryan can't, Punk couldn't, Rock couldn't, Austin couldn't, nobody can do that and Jericho follows along those same trends. Of course the guy wasn't seen as being on the same par as he was when he beat Austin and Rock in their prime, that doesn't mean that the guy's somehow been buried. Look at the definition of "buried" that I provided above. Everybody has to shuffle the deck and mix things up and as for Christian? Dawg, the way someone gets better is mingling with others and Christian was a great part of that and that helped Christian as well. AJ Styles mingled with Ellsworth who's seen as a joke even Styles was WWE Champion, same with him losing to Baron Corbin. You can see many great stars get into angles with those not on their level because that's how it works but the point I was saying is that that doesn't hurt someone's career especially, again I stress this, if they get tv time, angle time, match time and their career continues because believe it or not before you know it Jericho was mixing it up with the Cenas of the world. Yall really do gotta stop saying that "buried" shit like that too because that's just not what it is. ? Because one more main event star is better for the company? Because he's an established talent who can fulfill every box they need him to do? Because he's won every belt besides a world title which proves that they can trust him? Because he's the one of the most decorated Africans in WWE history and according to Xavier one of the most decorated champions in WWE history? Because because he can work with any talent you need him to work with whether big, small, fast, slow, striker, grappler, submission artist and etc? There's numerous reasons why Kofi can be pushed as a single's star but the point remains that the more main event guys they have that's established the better the playing field is. Having 1 guy at the top (Lesnar) is a bad business plan. Even during Trip's Reign of Terror it wasn't just him at the top, you had numerous guys that could contend with him which made each title defense questionable compared to Lesnar where you know how it'll go unless it's Roman Reigns. New Day is great but that doesn't mean they all can't branch off and be single's stars while still being part of New Day like many of us have been saying on this forum. That's the natural next step especially if they've done all they can do as a tag team which at this point they're scrapping the bottom of the barrel. Do you even remember how that happened? Strowman after the Lesnar match was floundering a bit until the Shield reunited and then after that they did the Raw/SDL match and then when Strowman turned face things changed for him. After the Lesnar match though? The guy took a hit and it took perfect booking from all angles to bring him back up. That in itself was a hit towards Strowman regardless of where he is today and that's the point I and many others have been making about this entire Lesnar thing and you straight up confirmed people had negative comments after Strowman was beaten by Lesnar. They're doing all this stuff to help guys out after a Lesnar match when the reality is the match and angle should be so good you don't have to do all of that to help them recover because they should already be recovered before their next angle but it's not that case for a Lesnar feud. You're proving my point here. An example is this, Ambrose/Styles and their late 2016 feud. Ambrose lost the title due to Ellsworth but what happened next for him? Ambrose immediately entered a feud with The Miz which came off that Renee Young situation. That's how you do it. Even before that feud the seeds were planted there. Ambrose didn't lose momentum against Styles (given he was protected when Styles beat him and given Ellsworth caused his loss) and all 3 of them looked great. Strowman did not look great after the Lesnar loss. There's a huge difference. If you can't see that then God bless but there's clearly a way to book matches and have the loser still look amazing afterwards. Strowman looked like a bitch until he recovered. Do you know what happened after that Lesnar match? Let me break it down to you: - The announcers said Ambrose "took Lesnar to the limit" mere days after that match due to the fact that they know Ambrose looked bad so they had to cover for it. - Ambrose got his own talk show mere days later with his own personal set. - Ambrose entered a feud with WWE legend Chris Jericho where he destroyed Jericho's legendary jacket even. - Ambrose had his own match invented called The Ambrose Asylum. - Ambrose threw Jericho onto thumbtacks. - Ambrose beat Jericho 2 ppvs in a row. - Ambrose won the MITB. - Ambrose cashed in on a Rollins who won due to Roman's Wellness Violation. Look at everything I wrote there. All of that happened due to that Lesnar match. Hell Jericho himself said he did his damnest to help Ambrose out after that Lesnar match which is why he put him over so much. They did all of that shit to help Ambrose climb out of "Lesnar's Lair" and with that in mind look at what I said about Strowman. Dawg, yeah Ambrose became champion months later but it took a lot for that to happen. You know what would have been a better transition? Had Ambrose looked better in that Lesnar match so it made sense and it didn't look like Ambrose only got it due to a Wellness Violation and how bad the Lesnar match was even though that's why he got it. You need to provide more facts because you're not speaking facts right now. Again, you're speaking on what's subjective as in what you think is "good" and "bad" rather than tv time, angles guys were in and things of that sort. You mentioned guys like RVD and Kane who kept getting massive tv time as if you didn't ask them and they said "no Triple H hurt my career." Come on now bruh. I've already explained burial above and again you keep speaking on subjective things. You know what a burial would be? If Kane wasn't in any angles, if his tv time was heavily cut down, if Kane lost more and more matches repeatedly, if Kane eventually was seen off of tv, if Kane didn't win anymore titles, if Kane had to be rebooted and/or left the company. You're not speaking of a burial here because if you look at what I described about the match in the very beginning you'd see the guy was heavily protected. That's not a burial bruh bruh. As for Jericho, yeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh, I've explained that too and if you agree with that then I guess AJ Styles was buried by being in that US Title feud with Owens then. Stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. You mean to tell me that if a guy had to be hit by a car and then the heel pinned him, the guy wasn't protected? Even though the car took him out? Oh because the heel won the guy isn't protected? Son, that isn't a burial by any means yo yall need to stop wilding out with this. There is such a thing such as protecting someone with a loss and if you think there isn't then we don't need to talk anymore because that's another thread entirely. Yes this is a drama but those types of situations happen in real dramas. If someone's arm is hurting enough that they can't finish their job and they get fired during the first 5 minutes of a show that shows reasoning. Don't tell me that if the same shit doesn't happen in wrestling it doesn't matter. That's ridiculous. As for ratings, buyrates and all of that stuff bruh, you know for a fact why the ratings went down. You can't chalk all of that up to HHH's reign and if so then shit you would have brought that up during your initial points rather than now where. As for Lesnar doesn't move the needle back, you're basically doing the same thing Vince does as the champion being the only guy who dictates how good the product is. If that's your mindset then give props to the fact that Jinder as champion actually did do better ratings than some more recent champions recently. That's not how things work. Dude, you're getting way too upset over this. It's been pointed out to you that it's not just the feuds that make the Reign of Terror (c) so legendary. It's a perfect combination of things that make it official. Even some fans of him agree with it. It's a title that cannot be changed. Brocks may be worse, honestly I'm not watching anymore, but the title can't be changed. It's set in stone. No 50 paragraph thesis or feud breakdown changes that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2018 5:21:45 GMT -5
No one that needs the rub has beaten Lesnar. Reigns, Strowman, Joe, Ambrose, Rollins etc have all lost to Lesnar while he's only lost to Goldberg, HHH, Taker and Cena. At this point i'm inclined to think they bring back Batista and have him beat Lesnar In regards to New Day yeah I can see Kofi being a late bloomer like a Mark Henry per se. Big E seems ticketed to be a world champion but the problem is you have to find a perfect balance for him. Don't take away his personality and make him ultra serious but also don't let him be soo goofy it takes away from what he can do as a performer. Xavier will easily take over 205 Live if it's still around whenever they break them up. If it's not than hopefully he is the manager for either Kofi or Xavier because otherwise he's going to be a jobber. Triple H and Cena beating Lesnar don't even count really given it happened prior to Lesnar beating the Streak. Since that happened he's been an entirely different monster even in how he wrestles. Batista being Lesnar I think would be good business because Batista would put guys over. Yeah I agree with all of that on New Day and Xavier's just got that certain type of fire to keep 205 afloat if it's still going on. It's just in a weird spot right now. They gotta switch things up with that roster because man it's pathetic over there. Dude, you're getting way too upset over this. It's been pointed out to you that it's not just the feuds that make the Reign of Terror (c) so legendary. It's a perfect combination of things that make it official. Even some fans of him agree with it. It's a title that cannot be changed. Brocks may be worse, honestly I'm not watching anymore, but the title can't be changed. It's set in stone. No 50 paragraph thesis or feud breakdown changes that. ![](https://i.imgur.com/872q5ZZ.gif) Bruh bruh if you gotta go to the "you're upset about this/you're mad line" in a debate then that says everything. Don't try to come at me with any subjective opinions when I'm breaking these things down by facts. Just see what I say and move aside. If you do then shit, we got nothing to talk about because I'm not speaking on opinions. I can straight up said "nah I liked HHH's promos, come at me" and you don't have a thing against my opinion besides "but it wasn't good" given that's just that, an opinion and opinions are subjective. If you wanna argue about opinions? You gotta go somewhere else for that rather than respond to me because you're speaking to the wrong guy lol. If someone says "nah I like this guy" and I don't you don't see me going against them like "nah you're wrong to like that guy", that's silly. But if you want actual facts such as what happened in these feuds, those segments, how guys lost the matches, what they did afterwards and such, I got you because that's what I'm going off of when I make my comment rather than someone's opinion given, again, that varies. We're looking at data in that case and it's easy to see the results given you can actually go back and look at it. Man straight up went back and peeped the Orton documentary I just mentioned. I'm not going off of opinion and hell, I disliked Triple H's Reign of Terror and I dislike Lesnar's, I'm going off comparisons. Finally you also said breaking down the feuds (even though I also broke down the segments itself) don't matter...you said you don't watch anymore...you even said Lesnar's might be worse yourself...like bruh. Come on now. What is this lol?
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 29,096
Member is Online
|
Post by Sephiroth on May 1, 2018 5:50:06 GMT -5
When Brock’s reign of terror includes a skit of him raping a corpse and playing ventriloquist with a mannequin, get back to me.
|
|