As much as people would go, "Oh, when Cena's gone you'll miss him!" during his peak... Nope. No, I absolutely don't miss him and could comfortably live with never seeing one of his matches ever again. Same goes for Roman, whenever he goes to Hollywood I'm absolutely never going to want to watch him wrestle again.
I miss Cena, but then I actually liked him.
Then again, if they actually realized the core booking issue with Cena instead of repeating it even worse with Roman Reigns, I don't think his absence would've been as noticeable. Though Roman's booking since his heel turn is just proof that the oft-cited "turn Cena heel!" solution would've just been shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.
Last Edit: Jan 11, 2022 21:28:13 GMT -5 by darbus alan
WWE feuds being so hate filled and with all these weapon shots yet not an ounce of blood absolutely makes the feud/match seem considerably worse. Latest example to me of this is Seth/Edge hitting each other with 900 weapons and both looked like they were on a treadmill after the match instead of a brutal war. Obviously umpteen examples of this in the WWE the last 12 years or so, though.
Even if they don't want to blade, which I totally get, they used fake blood for the Roman/Triple H feud, and then just almost never seem to have done it again. I don't really get why not.
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Jan 11, 2022 22:32:28 GMT -5
Contrary to conventional wisdom about the one bright spot of the Invasion, I hated ECW joining the storyline and consider it the moment any embers of actual intrigue still left smoldering in the angle were snuffed out. Sure, as an old WCW loyalist who was hoping for one last shot at a miracle, it was a heartbreaking end and makes me considerably biased. But it effectively turned the storyline into WWF wrestlers vs. WWF wrestlers who were once in ECW (along with their new buddies Rob Van Dam and Tommy Dreamer and village idiots Booker T and Diamond Dallas Page). And that's even before Stone Cold became leader of the group and every WWF heel jumped ship!
Yeah, Buff Bagwell vs. Booker T wasn't great, but at least it was surreal and captured the worlds collide sensation you want from a storyline of this magnitude.
Contrary to conventional wisdom about the one bright spot of the Invasion, I hated ECW joining the storyline and consider it the moment any embers of actual intrigue still left smoldering in the angle were snuffed out. Sure, as an old WCW loyalist who was hoping for one last shot at a miracle, it was a heartbreaking end and makes me considerably biased. But it effectively turned the storyline into WWF wrestlers vs. WWF wrestlers who were once in ECW (along with their new buddies Rob Van Dam and Tommy Dreamer and village idiots Booker T and Diamond Dallas Page). And that's even before Stone Cold became leader of the group and every WWF heel jumped ship!
Yeah, Buff Bagwell vs. Booker T wasn't great, but at least it was surreal and captured the worlds collide sensation you want from a storyline of this magnitude.
Hindsight being 20/20 but that angle was dead the moment Shane showed up as the new owner on Nitro.
Vader wasn't buried by Hulk Hogan. If anything, Hulk gave Vader a lot in their matches, including letting him kick out of the leg drop at 1. All their matches were pretty evenly competed and Vader would lose by DQ or escape from the cage or whatever.
A lot of people point to the no sell of the Vader Bomb by Hogan, despite the fact that it didn't happen in a match...and that it was part of Hogan's gimmick to "Hulk Up" when you least expected it.
Had Vader stayed in WCW, he probably would have had a decent push by the following year.
Hindsight being 20/20 but that angle was dead the moment Shane showed up as the new owner on Nitro.
True, but I'd say it was over the moment you realized that the war between WCW and WWF was going to be fought for over the rights to which Mcmahon would reign supreme. On the "invading" side, you had Stone Cold Steve Austin, Kurt Angle, Rob Van Dam and Shane McMahon. Oh and Booker T.
It didn't help that from the get go, most of the WWE's WCW roster was made up of lesser known guys who had come around in the last two years, not that that's a bad thing, but they refused to give them anything to help them stand out. They buried DDP almost immediately. And no Sting. No Outsiders. No Eric Bischoff. No Ric Flair. No Goldberg. Just picking up a couple big names may have helped salvage it, as long as they elevated one or two other guys, and didn't bury any others.
Instead, they had to rely on ECW guys and WWF defectors. That's beyond stupid. Once they had the WCW name, they should have changed the outcome of the main event of WrestleMania 17. With Austin trying his best to get a good heel run, it inevitably affected everything else.
Hindsight being 20/20 but that angle was dead the moment Shane showed up as the new owner on Nitro.
True, but I'd say it was over the moment you realized that the war between WCW and WWF was going to be fought for over the rights to which Mcmahon would reign supreme. On the "invading" side, you had Stone Cold Steve Austin, Kurt Angle, Rob Van Dam and Shane McMahon. Oh and Booker T.
It didn't help that from the get go, most of the WWE's WCW roster was made up of lesser known guys who had come around in the last two years, not that that's a bad thing, but they refused to give them anything to help them stand out. They buried DDP almost immediately. And no Sting. No Outsiders. No Eric Bischoff. No Ric Flair. No Goldberg. Just picking up a couple big names may have helped salvage it, as long as they elevated one or two other guys, and didn't bury any others.
Instead, they had to rely on ECW guys and WWF defectors. That's beyond stupid. Once they had the WCW name, they should have changed the outcome of the main event of WrestleMania 17. With Austin trying his best to get a good heel run, it inevitably affected everything else.
Sure, having a better roster of available wrestlers would have helped but, Vince owned everything. We knew that. We knew which side was going to be the faces and which the heels. It would be like beating an arrmy in battle and then having another mock battle a month later. Any real suspense was missing because one guy owned everything.
Post by GuyOfOwnage on Jan 12, 2022 0:07:45 GMT -5
I could never buy perennial tag team guy and low-carder Bradshaw becoming a main eventer and WWE Champion inside 2 months. His title reign single-handedly killed my interest in Smackdown for at least the next 2 years.
Sure, having a better roster of available wrestlers would have helped, but Vince owned everything. We knew that. We knew which side was going to be the faces and which the heels. It would be like beating an army in battle and then having another mock battle a month later. Any real suspense was missing because one guy owned everything.
I get that, but for the sake of wanting a good feud between both sides, I would have hoped that Vince would have done more to make it happen. Vince being the owner didn't change anything for me as long as the writing is there. This is wrestling, they could have added a stipulation that if WWF didn't win, then WCW defaults back to Bischoff or something. They did something similar with Flair later in the year, so it could have worked if they tried. And they didn't try.
It's amazing, Edge is one of my all time favorites, but I couldn't really tell you why. Very few great moments have anything to do with him, especially post 2004.
I think a lot of it comes down to preferring him to most of the guys who he feuded with. He was the default when it came to feuding with Cena, Del Rio and Batista.
But breaking it down? He was the Rated R Superstar, which was nothing more than a cheap monicker that had almost nothing to do with his personality. Sure, there was the Live Sex Celebration, but they tended to lean towards "Ultimate Opportunist" instead of develop anything "edgy" about him.
He had that Cutting Edge talk show, which is probably one of the worst talk show segments in history. I can't think of a single memorable moment that came out of this.
Then when he was the number one guy on Smackdown? Absolutely awful. Just the same shenanigans over and over... especially once they added La Familia, my pick for the worst stable ever.
Outside of mark out moments, I don't really enjoy most his main event matches. Him beating Cena was fun, but they never did much to follow up with most of his wins, and he typically would lose quickly thereafter.
What is the thing where it seems like people tend to disagree with you, but you know you’re right, damn it!
At first I would have considered the HHH/Sting match at WM31, but I have Sting on my side for that one.
The one that truly has me yelling at you kids to get off my lawn is Wrestlemania XIX
It kinda sucks, y’all.
Angle/Lesnar is tainted by Bork nearly killing himself, Austin/Rock is good but probably the least of their three matches, Triple H vs Booker T………..
The undercard is severely underwhelming and, while both are solid, HBK/Y2J and Hogan/Vince aren’t enough to really push 19 out of the mid tier of Manias for me.
I’m not going to sit here and put it at the bottom 5 or anything, but I see people putting it top 3 and no, just no.
I’m gonna co-sign on this, and add that WMXIX might be the most depressing WM ever. between angle wrestling with a neck made out of paper mache and needing surgery afterwards, stone cold spending the previous night in an hospital with anxiety, and everything about triple h/booker, it’s just a bummer to watch now.
plus Vince and hogan was like watching two depressing angry grandpas fight.
I do things for newLEGACYinc and OSW Review. You should watch their stuff.
Post by "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik on Jan 12, 2022 10:10:16 GMT -5
I grew up with it so I might see it with rose colored glasses but RAW from 2002-2005 is legit one of my favorite periods in wrestling. I loved Triple H as the villain I could always root against and there were so many fun undercard guys I loved to root for. I get why it's seen the way it is by a lot of people but I'll always have a soft spot for it.
I thought Jinder Mahal was an excellent and enjoyable heel champion, and his reign tanking as spectacularly as it did was more of a self-fulfilling prophecy of people expecting it to suck and not giving it a chance, than it was that it actually sucked.
I enjoyed Jinder as well. I thought he got better as the reign went on. I was at Backlash when he won and the crowd did pop when he won. I think it was more of a "I can't believe WWE actually did this" than anything else... but there was a pop.
Cinematic matches being a semi regular thing was awful and I hated it.
They really let it last for like 3 paychecks lmao. I don't know what happened backstage then but they really ran it to the ground in that short amount of time.
Roman Reigns and Kenny Omega combined have less star power and mainstream recognition than Hacksaw Jim Duggan in the '80s.
I call bullshit on that. Roman makes a cameo in a Fast and the Furious movie and there are a good dozen youtube videos with other a million views for that. Roman's social media accounts all have millions of followers. Love Hacksaw but there's no way he had comparable fame in the 80's.
Hacksaw never appeared in a movie that grossed 760 million dollars. It's all apples and oranges.
Nobody saw Hobbs and Shaw for Roman Reigns. People saw that because it was in the Fast and Furious "universe" and for the Rock and Jason Statham. Everybody knew who Hacksaw Jim Duggan was in the 80s. If you want into Times Square and asked people about Roman Reigns and Kenny Omega... I bet 50% AT BEST know who either are.
True, but I'd say it was over the moment you realized that the war between WCW and WWF was going to be fought for over the rights to which Mcmahon would reign supreme. On the "invading" side, you had Stone Cold Steve Austin, Kurt Angle, Rob Van Dam and Shane McMahon. Oh and Booker T.
It didn't help that from the get go, most of the WWE's WCW roster was made up of lesser known guys who had come around in the last two years, not that that's a bad thing, but they refused to give them anything to help them stand out. They buried DDP almost immediately. And no Sting. No Outsiders. No Eric Bischoff. No Ric Flair. No Goldberg. Just picking up a couple big names may have helped salvage it, as long as they elevated one or two other guys, and didn't bury any others.
Instead, they had to rely on ECW guys and WWF defectors. That's beyond stupid. Once they had the WCW name, they should have changed the outcome of the main event of WrestleMania 17. With Austin trying his best to get a good heel run, it inevitably affected everything else.
Sure, having a better roster of available wrestlers would have helped but, Vince owned everything. We knew that. We knew which side was going to be the faces and which the heels. It would be like beating an arrmy in battle and then having another mock battle a month later. Any real suspense was missing because one guy owned everything.
Could they have just brought in the "lower card (minus DDP)" guys incrementally as time went by and then, when the main guys were available, done the invasion? I know it was about 2 years down the road for some of them (was it more for some?), but I think it would've been a better invasion (you could say the guys that were coming right in were doing recon or something like that) AND it might not have been necessary to have ECW a part of it. I don't know... just thinking out loud.