Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
May contain ADHD
Posts: 13,487
|
Post by Malcolm on May 6, 2022 20:14:11 GMT -5
Brock Lesnar is just so damn boring and is the very reason why I stopped watching WWE for almost 10 years.
It annoys the every loving hell out of me how people will trip over themselves to swoon over him and give him a free pass for a lot of shit they raked other superstars over the coals for.
5 moves of doom? 1 move of doom! Suplex city!
Part timer's hogging the main event? He wasn't even there with the BELT during most of his reign! The main eventers had nothing to fight for in between his 7 defenses in 500+ days.
Buried by Cena? Buried by the Rock? Kofi Kingston and Ricochet and few otehrs I think I'm forgetting were fed for the sole purpose of getting him over. EXCEPT HE DIDN'T NEED IT!!!! HE CONQUERED THE f***ING STREAK!!!
"but he's entertaining". Not to me he isn't. Until he goes back to being more like 2003 Brock Lesnae he is not and he will NEVER be entertaining to me. EVER!
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on May 6, 2022 20:48:58 GMT -5
Which leads me to one of my other unpopular opinions, I think Brock is seriously underrated so far as putting on classic matches.
The AJ, Bryan and Finn matches, the rematch with Goldberg at Mania 33? The Extreme Rules Cena match, Brock vs. Rock? The three way with Cena and Seth? The underrated matches he had with Hunter?
Nah, man, Brock is GOATed up. Put some respect on the big gorilla.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on May 6, 2022 20:56:47 GMT -5
Finally...I feel that Trish Stratus was a tad overrated. I just feel other wrestlers in WWE's women's division around that time, while praised, got somewhat pushed aside for her. They have sort of rewritten history to be “Trish & Lita!” when Trish’s best work was in feuds with Molly Holly, Jazz and Victoria where she played a great babyface underdog against the more skilled and/or physically dominant heels. Trish could hold up her end in the ring and was just exploding with looks & charisma but you wouldn’t put her ring work up there on an elite level.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,274
|
Post by fw91 on May 6, 2022 22:33:28 GMT -5
I hate to ressurect this thread, but I just needed a few grievances I needed to release from my mind: First, in regards to NXT & The man with Three H's, I have mixed feelings on it. On one hand, it's sad to see how NXT got turned into NXT 2.0 to the point where it won WC's 2021 Gooker Award. The thought of seeing a creation you poured all your hard work into to get turned into an almost hilariously bad parody of itself can be frustrating (especially with Johnny Ace back in the fold) to see, all because Vinny Mac threw a hissy fit over AEW winning a "ratings war", to the point where the stress caused Hunter to nave a health scare that forced him into an early retirement. It's honestly sad and tragic to see and more reasons to hate Vinny Mac, among the other bad thing he's done. Not quite sure these two are connected. Viral Pneumonia and a congenital condition. I think this take is bit revisionist, but I could be wrong. But my hot take is that Black and Gold was really really boring post USA launch and was filled with square pegs for the main roster. 2.0 albeit not as good as pre USA Black and Gold was a very understandable move imo. I understand the reason, and it's not that bad. It's creation makes perfect sense. Black and Gold was broke imo.
|
|
|
Post by tagteammatchplaya on May 6, 2022 22:48:21 GMT -5
NXT 2.0 was needed, NXT was getting very stale before 2.0
|
|
|
Post by joeiscool on May 6, 2022 23:26:46 GMT -5
There's too much wrestling.
|
|
unc40
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 3,639
|
Post by unc40 on May 7, 2022 11:27:54 GMT -5
The Rock's promos are way overrated. He was fine as a heel but when he was a face he came across as a cliche machine.
|
|
|
Post by oxbaker on May 7, 2022 11:46:38 GMT -5
I hate to ressurect this thread, but I just needed a few grievances I needed to release from my mind: First, in regards to NXT & The man with Three H's, I have mixed feelings on it. On one hand, it's sad to see how NXT got turned into NXT 2.0 to the point where it won WC's 2021 Gooker Award. The thought of seeing a creation you poured all your hard work into to get turned into an almost hilariously bad parody of itself can be frustrating (especially with Johnny Ace back in the fold) to see, all because Vinny Mac threw a hissy fit over AEW winning a "ratings war", to the point where the stress caused Hunter to nave a health scare that forced him into an early retirement. It's honestly sad and tragic to see and more reasons to hate Vinny Mac, among the other bad thing he's done. On the other hand, I felt that as much as I get NXT's golden age getting lotsa praise, I feel it felt hollow considering how a majority of them were either not utilized well on the main roster or just plain wasted. Granted, this is because the main roster's presentation has declined HARD and the company's effort at putting anything good feels like they're trying to be as lazy as Orange Cassidy's character, but instead of being endearing like Cassidy, it feels frustrating. Furthermore, personally, I feel that the amount of praise Hunter had running NXT, while deserved, felt like some people were downplaying the bad parts of his career, including the Awfulness that was The Authority (the angle which I feel is the reason why WWE is in the sad state that it in today) when it was still going on (remember when fans cheered for both him & Steph over Roman during their short but awful feud? That actually caused me to lose all sympathy for WWE fans plagued by bad booking.). Plus, I felt Dusty kinda was overlooked during his time running NXT. Another thing that grinds my gears is when fans take a look at one wrestler's gimmick that seems harmless and throw hissy fits over it, saying they hate the wrestler because of the gimmick and downplay/ignore other stuff like their in-ring or promo skills. I hate to sound rude, but I cannot take fans seriously when they do this stuff. Like for example, a certain somebody here who dislikes Kairi Hojo (one of my all time faves) just for her pirate girl gimmick and ignored everything else she does. I can understand if it's say, Damien Sandow (a below-mediocre wrestler who lost his fans in Impact with that horrible Liberace-wannabe gimmick, especially in comparison to what he did in WWE), but if it's someone really good like Kairi, it just feels like the fan is being a jerk. I'm sorry, but I don't like anyone who says that stuff. Finally...I feel that Trish Stratus was a tad overrated. I just feel other wrestlers in WWE's women's division around that time, while praised, got somewhat pushed aside for her. That is all. I guess this is an unpopular opinion but considering Shawn Michaels is in charge of NXT 2.0 I think he should be getting the blame/criticism rather than Johnny Ace. I don’t care for Laurenitis but this seems to be to be a case of people deciding: ‘I don’t like what they’ve done to NXT, I like Shawn Michaels, I don’t like Johnny Ace … therefore I’m going to blame Ace for it.’ Michaels in interviews and by all reporting moved up from coaching to be put in charge of 2.0. If you like it, give him credit. If you don’t, he’s the one who should be blamed.
|
|
|
Post by Jindrak Mark on May 7, 2022 12:05:07 GMT -5
Interestingly there was a Brock story a few days ago and what he said could fit in this thread. Apparently he went to Vince recently and said that guys should stop saying on TV that they want to steal the show. The goal should simply be to win. You should want to win in 30 seconds if you possibly can.
There was probably more promos in the build to Wrestlemania about wanting to steal the show than about wanting to actually win your match. The whole Edge/Styles was basically built on that. And stuff like Britt Baker losing a match then afterwards laughing about whether the match will get 5 stars from Dave Meltzer. You shouldn't care! You lost! Remember Dolph Ziggler would lose all the time and brag about having the best matches? Shawn Michaels was the show-stopper because it evolved naturally over time that he had iconic, classic matches but go watch the build to his match with Flair or the aftermath of his loss to Taker. He desperately wanted to win beforehand and was crushed if he lost. He didn't just shrug it off and say oh well, the match was exciting.
Goldberg beating Brock Lesnar in a minute or Lesnar decimating John Cena for 15 minutes with nothing but suplexes and F5s is way more impressive and should be the kayfabe goal over having a 30 minute back and forth epic that could go either way.
|
|
Ozman
Samurai Cop
Chi-Town!!!
Posts: 2,386
|
Post by Ozman on May 7, 2022 15:03:24 GMT -5
Here’s mine. If someone leaves a Royal Rumble match by going under the ropes, that person should have a ten count to return to the ring. They shouldn’t be able to stay on the outside for an unlimited time. The same goes for someone who hasn’t entered the ring yet. If they haven’t entered the ring by the time the next competitor enters, then they’re eliminated.
Also, Money In The Bank matches should be reserved for those who never won the World or Universal Championship yet.
|
|
Teemu
Tommy Wiseau
Posts: 91
|
Post by Teemu on May 8, 2022 1:57:39 GMT -5
"In-ring ability", being a "good wrestler" is absolutely the least important thing in a wrestler. Look, mic skills, character, and the stories you have are what I care about. I don't get invested in matches, I get invested in the story leading to the matches. I don't even know what a good match is because every time the IWC tells me a match was ten stars, I watch it, and I'm just bored to tears and browse my phone. The 60 minute draw between Hangman and Bryan is a recent example. I was just swiping Tinder around the 15 minute mark. I've never been sure what it means when someone is a good wrestler according to the IWC. Is it just moveset? Amount of high risk spots? I really don't know, most wrestling matches blend together for me these days. I see no difference between them.
Getting into MMA also hurt my interest in pro wrestling because it gets harder to watch wrestling after that. No one struggles for a minute in a submission hold in real fights; you tap out immediately because you know that if you don't, your bones break. And OH MY f***ING GOOOOOOD don't get me started on "working the leg". Or working a body part, or all that nonsense. You never see people working their opponent's knee in the UFC to prepare for a kneebar. There's no need. You snap in the kneebar, done.
And I hate it when it's one chop block, and boom, the wrestler is basically immobile, hobbling around. Come on, man. I've been in a car accident, I've flown several feet off my bike onto asphalt, my body's gone through a lot - in addition to also doing MMA and being involved in a lot of real fights when I was younger - and I feel like I've been able to get on my feet easier after being whacked by a car than wrestlers do after a minor blow to their leg. The overselling is so dumb, and it's only done because it's just always been the accepted narrative in wrestling that that's "good storytelling". Guys don't sell their leg in the UFC.
These are highly trained athletes, coming into the fight of their lives, all full of adrenaline, ready to go, biggest badasses in the world and then - one strike on the guy's knee and boom "oh my god I can't walk!"
It's stupid. That's why wrestling should focus on larger than life characters and storylines and soap opera because the actual in-ring action is ridiculous beyond belief.
That's why I disagree with a guy like Cornette about comedy wrestling: who cares when the serious matches are just as dumb? Irish whips? Hello? Wrestling is not real. It's nothing but a scripted television show, just like any other scripted television show. It's fake. Embrace it. Geesh.
|
|
|
Post by stoptheclocks on May 8, 2022 3:34:43 GMT -5
I hate to ressurect this thread, but I just needed a few grievances I needed to release from my mind: First, in regards to NXT & The man with Three H's, I have mixed feelings on it. On one hand, it's sad to see how NXT got turned into NXT 2.0 to the point where it won WC's 2021 Gooker Award. The thought of seeing a creation you poured all your hard work into to get turned into an almost hilariously bad parody of itself can be frustrating (especially with Johnny Ace back in the fold) to see, all because Vinny Mac threw a hissy fit over AEW winning a "ratings war", to the point where the stress caused Hunter to nave a health scare that forced him into an early retirement. It's honestly sad and tragic to see and more reasons to hate Vinny Mac, among the other bad thing he's done. Not quite sure these two are connected. Viral Pneumonia and a congenital condition. I think this take is bit revisionist, but I could be wrong. But my hot take is that Black and Gold was really really boring post USA launch and was filled with square pegs for the main roster. 2.0 albeit not as good as pre USA Black and Gold was a very understandable move imo. I understand the reason, and it's not that bad. It's creation makes perfect sense. Black and Gold was broke imo. I just don't think there was any need for it to exist after Dynamite started. It got as big as it got by being the best alternative to Vince McMahon's view of wrestling (or at least the perception of it). Once AEW came along, and was an actual alternative, NXT as it was, was completely redundant. I don't know if it counts for the thread as it's been around forever, but the idea of a broadway in wrestling is terrible and the longer they are, the worse they are.
|
|
tirtefaa
Unicron
If you wanna know the truth, you gotta dig up Johnny Booth.
Posts: 3,033
Member is Online
|
Post by tirtefaa on May 10, 2022 19:52:52 GMT -5
A bit of a controversial thought and maybe I'm putting too much stock in the idea, but Dave Meltzer is partially responsible for the evolution and decline of modern professional wrestling.
Being the go to and probably the most dedicated journalist when it comes to wrestling, many people have taken his word as the gospel, going back years. His personal opinion on what is a good match has ushered in a wave of wrestling that is more dedicated to spots to 'wow' the audience as opposed to telling a story.
If I watch a match from 30 years ago, the fans cheered based on the story of a match, whereas now the cheering usually comes from spots in the match and it isn't dedicated to the face or the heel, rather the match itself, therefore the story isn't even relevant to the action in the ring.
As a result, the industry has churned out a full generation of wrestlers who want to get noticed in the ring, so they are doing more dangerous moves and putting themselves at risk because they don't want to get the "boring" chants. I don't doubt the athleticism of a lot of these men and women, but a lot of times I think there's more risk involved than there needs to be.
I think for too long Dave put too much stock in technical and high flying wrestlers, while usually lambasting the meat and potatoes workers who could still get reactions from the crowd by doing very little. Pretty soon, a lot of wrestlers were following Dave's opinion and the business (over the last 20 years especially) lost a lot of the elements that made these athletes larger than life.
Quite frankly, it's not what mainstream audiences are looking at. Maybe at some point, that might be the case, but for the most part the audience wants a simple story that involves good wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by Instant Classic on May 10, 2022 19:58:38 GMT -5
A guy who can wrestle but has no character sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Tea & Crumpets on May 11, 2022 8:36:25 GMT -5
Interestingly there was a Brock story a few days ago and what he said could fit in this thread. Apparently he went to Vince recently and said that guys should stop saying on TV that they want to steal the show. The goal should simply be to win. You should want to win in 30 seconds if you possibly can. There was probably more promos in the build to Wrestlemania about wanting to steal the show than about wanting to actually win your match. The whole Edge/Styles was basically built on that. And stuff like Britt Baker losing a match then afterwards laughing about whether the match will get 5 stars from Dave Meltzer. You shouldn't care! You lost! Remember Dolph Ziggler would lose all the time and brag about having the best matches? Shawn Michaels was the show-stopper because it evolved naturally over time that he had iconic, classic matches but go watch the build to his match with Flair or the aftermath of his loss to Taker. He desperately wanted to win beforehand and was crushed if he lost. He didn't just shrug it off and say oh well, the match was exciting. Goldberg beating Brock Lesnar in a minute or Lesnar decimating John Cena for 15 minutes with nothing but suplexes and F5s is way more impressive and should be the kayfabe goal over having a 30 minute back and forth epic that could go either way. Cannot agree with this enough. Wrestling is at its core a TV drama about sports,and in no other sport or sports drama do the characters go "I just want to put on the best show" or "I am the most entertaining/ticket selling person and that's what matters" or other meta stuff. Best match should only matter if they heavily kayfabe Fight of the Night bonuses, and should still be secondary. My own cranky views: -Inring ability is the least important aspect (even if I adore Cesaro), and the most important inring aspect is selling. Matches need drama, story and structure. John McClane got over in Die Hard because he sold every hit huge. ZSJ sucked (despite doing my pet fav style) until he'd been in Suzukigun a couple years because he was a blank robot. -Related to the above- Kenny Omega and especially the Bucks were way better in NJPW with restrictions. The Bucks should never be allowed any creative control over their matches. -Social media should all be 100% kayfabe. People don't need to know you've been playing PUBG before the PPV or ate falafel this morning with your pals backstage. You want personal social media? Do a separate account, or don't be a wrestler (but then I hate all encompassing social media anyway). -Related, larger than life always trumps relatable, giving fans characters to aspire to and look up to rather than think "They're exactly like me", and wrestlers should only "play versions of themselves" if they are already a big or distinctive personality. Brock Lesnar works because he's an amped up version of someone who is already an infamously surly, prickly and unusual individual and once in a lifetime multi sport athlete. Hangman Page doesn't because Adam Page is not all that remarkable as himself. CM Punk works because he's an extremely misanthropic, smug and abrasive individual anyway. Wrestling is all about playing to the cheap seats and drawing in broad strokes, you can do subtlety,nuance, complexity and longform narrative but it needs to be built on a certain broad bedrock first. -Related again, even if they struggle to be big personalities, wrestlers should look larger than life in bodytype, ring gear and clothing. It's something Kenny Omega has often done well, you don't have to all be huge muscular bodytypes but you should be distinctive and exaggerated/stylised. Someone who stands out on the street. If you're fat be really fat or dress to accentuate it don't just be a little flabby. No t shirts, suit jackets or plain leathers unless nobody else wears them, be ostentatious. -Related again, wrestling has always played off of real world tensions, but the constant infusion of real world into all entertainment coupled with an increasingly complex, polarised and divided world means that if you're going to draw on real world affairs it probably more than ever needs to be separated as a character not the real person, to avoid go away heat. -Stone Cold's heel turn was the perfect twist that should have been Hogan's turn MK2, it was at the perfect time, but was executed entirely wrong. The match itself pulls the trigger far too early on Vince intervening/Austin seeking his help, and should have played it with both men unable to finish each other, Vince stepping in, Rock thinking Vince is here to help him and refusing,THEN Austin wilfully takes Vince's help and the reveal. Instead it's played off as Austin not knowing, then he does. Likewise the Two Man Power Trip and comedy singing killed it- he should never have teamed with the guy who ran him over and beat him in 3 Stages of Hell two months earlier,any union should have been reluctant and Austin played as having reluctantly sold his soul to Vince in desperation and taking his self hatred out on others. The desperation was in the build but the execution was all off. -WM17 is a terribly paced show with crowd killing duds involving RTC and an overly long HHH/Taker which fatigues the main event. -Shane buying WCW was a good idea, but they should have taken everything slower. Do the PPV later, keep ECW separate for longer and play them as an anarchic spoiler unconnected to Stephanie, rather than resolving it when they did then immediately bringing in Flair and the NWO. They only have to drag it out til Flair and that changes the game, and if you get the NWO in by the Rumble and disrupt it you have a billion possibilities- or you have HHH join the NWO as the Kliq. They burned through everything so quickly. Take your time, no use trying to strike while the iron is hot if you miss. -Randy Savage is the greatest wrestler of all time- believable, intimidating, charismatic, can sell anything, distinctive and good in ring. William Regal is #2 and had he been American then even with his drug problems would have been a top top star for years, his perceived niche appeal to US crowds as a Brit held him back far more than his screwups. Chris Jericho is #3, less intimidating but excellent range and understanding of how to meta kayfabe.
|
|
Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
May contain ADHD
Posts: 13,487
|
Post by Malcolm on May 11, 2022 9:11:47 GMT -5
I am an idiot who stopped watching. I had no idea that Brock Lesnar became a cowboy and a lumberjack. I just assumed he was still rolling through the motions with Heyman doing the talking and him bouncing in the background.
|
|
|
Post by Jindrak Mark on May 11, 2022 12:16:11 GMT -5
I don't get why the Vince only pushes blondes with big boobs thing is still a thing. If that was the case Mandy Rose would have been a multiple time champ on Raw or Smackdown by now and wouldn't have had to be shipped down to NXT to get a push. Of the biggest female stars in the past decade (Becky, Sasha, Charlotte, Bayley, Bianca, Bellas, AJ, Paige, Ronda, Alexa, Asuka) only a couple are even blonde and one of them is clearly loved because of her family name more than anything, one of them is loved because she was a mainstream star and Alexa if anything has been underutilized outside of 2017-18.
|
|
|
Post by Fake Jesus on May 11, 2022 14:00:34 GMT -5
A bit of a controversial thought and maybe I'm putting too much stock in the idea, but Dave Meltzer is partially responsible for the evolution and decline of modern professional wrestling. Being the go to and probably the most dedicated journalist when it comes to wrestling, many people have taken his word as the gospel, going back years. His personal opinion on what is a good match has ushered in a wave of wrestling that is more dedicated to spots to 'wow' the audience as opposed to telling a story. If I watch a match from 30 years ago, the fans cheered based on the story of a match, whereas now the cheering usually comes from spots in the match and it isn't dedicated to the face or the heel, rather the match itself, therefore the story isn't even relevant to the action in the ring. As a result, the industry has churned out a full generation of wrestlers who want to get noticed in the ring, so they are doing more dangerous moves and putting themselves at risk because they don't want to get the "boring" chants. I don't doubt the athleticism of a lot of these men and women, but a lot of times I think there's more risk involved than there needs to be. I think for too long Dave put too much stock in technical and high flying wrestlers, while usually lambasting the meat and potatoes workers who could still get reactions from the crowd by doing very little. Pretty soon, a lot of wrestlers were following Dave's opinion and the business (over the last 20 years especially) lost a lot of the elements that made these athletes larger than life. Quite frankly, it's not what mainstream audiences are looking at. Maybe at some point, that might be the case, but for the most part the audience wants a simple story that involves good wrestling. Evolution, yes, decline, though? You can have your subjective opinion on what constitutes a good match, or a good worker, and in fact I actually agree with you completely on a lot of these guys not standing out, but I don't think the in-ring product is at all responsible for the decline of wrestling's popularity with mainstream audiences.
And this is a tangentially related point:
Wrestling fans are completely stuck in the past because it's been so long since wrestling was mainstream. There are guys - I'm not saying you're this, this is a general point - who think the key to a successful wrestling show is copying an 80s/90s formula: It's like people who were saying Coltrane isn't posting numbers like Duke Ellington, so jazz has to get back to big band, and they never saw the success of 70s jazz rock fusion and 80s smooth jazz coming. If wrestling went mainstream again, it wouldn't be in a form that looked like Rock 'N' Wrestling, Crash TV, or the N.W.A, it would be something new.
|
|
tirtefaa
Unicron
If you wanna know the truth, you gotta dig up Johnny Booth.
Posts: 3,033
Member is Online
|
Post by tirtefaa on May 11, 2022 14:09:04 GMT -5
A bit of a controversial thought and maybe I'm putting too much stock in the idea, but Dave Meltzer is partially responsible for the evolution and decline of modern professional wrestling. Being the go to and probably the most dedicated journalist when it comes to wrestling, many people have taken his word as the gospel, going back years. His personal opinion on what is a good match has ushered in a wave of wrestling that is more dedicated to spots to 'wow' the audience as opposed to telling a story. If I watch a match from 30 years ago, the fans cheered based on the story of a match, whereas now the cheering usually comes from spots in the match and it isn't dedicated to the face or the heel, rather the match itself, therefore the story isn't even relevant to the action in the ring. As a result, the industry has churned out a full generation of wrestlers who want to get noticed in the ring, so they are doing more dangerous moves and putting themselves at risk because they don't want to get the "boring" chants. I don't doubt the athleticism of a lot of these men and women, but a lot of times I think there's more risk involved than there needs to be. I think for too long Dave put too much stock in technical and high flying wrestlers, while usually lambasting the meat and potatoes workers who could still get reactions from the crowd by doing very little. Pretty soon, a lot of wrestlers were following Dave's opinion and the business (over the last 20 years especially) lost a lot of the elements that made these athletes larger than life. Quite frankly, it's not what mainstream audiences are looking at. Maybe at some point, that might be the case, but for the most part the audience wants a simple story that involves good wrestling. Evolution, yes, decline, though? You can have your subjective opinion on what constitutes a good match, or a good worker, and in fact I actually agree with you completely on a lot of these guys not standing out, but I don't think the in-ring product is at all responsible for the decline of wrestling's popularity with mainstream audiences.
And this is a tangentially related point:
Wrestling fans are completely stuck in the past because it's been so long since wrestling was mainstream. There are guys - I'm not saying you're this, this is a general point - who think the key to a successful wrestling show is copying an 80s/90s formula: It's like people who were saying Coltrane isn't posting numbers like Duke Ellington, so jazz has to get back to big band, and they never saw the success of 70s jazz rock fusion and 80s smooth jazz coming. If wrestling went mainstream again, it wouldn't be in a form that looked like Rock 'N' Wrestling, Crash TV, or the N.W.A, it would be something new.
The point I was trying to make was that it is now considered more important to have a good match as opposed to having a match that tells a good story. You can look to any era of wrestling to have a good story. I remember there was a recent story about how the lead up to WrestleMania for a lot of talent was that they wanted to 'steal the show'. As a fan, I've seen a lot of great matches in my lifetime, and it takes a lot for me to care about a match if the story is terrible. That said, I'm not blaming simply talent, since booking goes a long ways to helping the matches, but WWE seems intent on giving out good matches with no substance for you to care about the story most of the time.
|
|