|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Nov 29, 2007 19:47:01 GMT -5
Except the incidents he's talking about happened about four or so years before the weed incident. Big whoop. He smoked marijuana. OOOOOOO. Yeah, nobody ever could've guessed RVD smoked pot. Meanwhile, steroids are completely acceptable. And it's not like it garnered even half the negative press as did a certain stunt in Germany which saw the perpetrator punished for his actions with an extremely stale year-long run with the belt. To be fair, I think most of the people who actually heard about either of those things are wrestling fans. I don't know if RVD jobbing to Triple H was neccessarily about holding RVD down. The way they were booking it, they would build up a babyface to make it look like he would take the title from Trips but it would never happen. People often fell for it, so in that sense it was good booking. RVD should still feel like he deserved the title anyway, and he apparently does. Wrestlers should believe they're the best and go for the gold. It's a sign of greateness. In hindsight, what RVD got caught for was nothing compared to the Benoit tradegy and what that brought to the table. And for the record, weed isn't the end of the world. If he was pulled over for being drunk, do you think he woulda been stripped of his titles? It's basically the same level of messedup-iness. Ask anyone who has driven drunk and driven high. I'm sure the vast majority will tell you driving high is safer than drunk. I don't think he woulda been stripped for driving drunk. And I certainly think if he wasn't RVD it wouldn't have been such a big deal. If it were Orton, or Edge, it wouldn't have mattered, IMO. And he's right about him in 2002. He was INSANELY over during the Invasion. Go look at any written reports (like from CRZ) and they ask why the strap didn't go to him during the time. RVD nearly outshined Austin in the Alliance. And he doesn't need to like HHH. He doesn't seem bitter about it, but he seems like the laid back guy who doesn't play politics. And HHH does...a lot. Need proof? Watch HBK's new DVD. HHH is a master policker. So RVD doesn't like HHH. I don't blame him, HHH comes off as an ass to me too. Edit: Also, for the record, I think they should have went along with it. RVD has always been known as a weed smoker, and it would have set the 'anti-establishment' tone of the company. To be honest, most of the fanbase wouldn't have even known about it. Nor would stockholders if WWE didn't do anything about it.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Nov 29, 2007 21:37:14 GMT -5
To be fair, I think most of the people who actually heard about either of those things are wrestling fans. I don't know if RVD jobbing to Triple H was neccessarily about holding RVD down. The way they were booking it, they would build up a babyface to make it look like he would take the title from Trips but it would never happen. People often fell for it, so in that sense it was good booking. RVD should still feel like he deserved the title anyway, and he apparently does. Wrestlers should believe they're the best and go for the gold. It's a sign of greateness. In hindsight, what RVD got caught for was nothing compared to the Benoit tradegy and what that brought to the table. And for the record, weed isn't the end of the world. If he was pulled over for being drunk, do you think he woulda been stripped of his titles? It's basically the same level of messedup-iness. Ask anyone who has driven drunk and driven high. I'm sure the vast majority will tell you driving high is safer than drunk. I don't think he woulda been stripped for driving drunk. And I certainly think if he wasn't RVD it wouldn't have been such a big deal. If it were Orton, or Edge, it wouldn't have mattered, IMO. And he's right about him in 2002. He was INSANELY over during the Invasion. Go look at any written reports (like from CRZ) and they ask why the strap didn't go to him during the time. RVD nearly outshined Austin in the Alliance. And he doesn't need to like HHH. He doesn't seem bitter about it, but he seems like the laid back guy who doesn't play politics. And HHH does...a lot. Need proof? Watch HBK's new DVD. HHH is a master policker. So RVD doesn't like HHH. I don't blame him, HHH comes off as an ass to me too. Edit: Also, for the record, I think they should have went along with it. RVD has always been known as a weed smoker, and it would have set the 'anti-establishment' tone of the company. To be honest, most of the fanbase wouldn't have even known about it. Nor would stockholders if WWE didn't do anything about it. I agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Nov 29, 2007 21:48:50 GMT -5
If "Triple f'n H" didn't have people on top lay down for him originally, he'd still be carrying HBK's luggage right now. You only get the opportunity to be on top if another guy on top puts you over. And by that I mean makes you look better or at least equal. It's how you make stars. So what? Triple H wrestled FOUR years before winning the WWF Title, he wasn't given it right away... RVD didn't lose that much credibility or fan support anyway, it's not like he was wrestling on Heat the night after he lost to Triple H. Did he look THAT bad? I don't think so. I think you missed my point completely. I said that in order to make new mega stars, established stars have to in turn put new people over. And regardless of whatever revisionist Bullshit people say, RVD was incredibly over at that point. I don't necessarily think he should have been made Champion right there, but the fact was the feud lasted all of one match and then was dropped. It did RVD no good. My point was that HHH, a guy you obviously love, had to be put over himself by main event guys to be taken seriously, yet, at that point, he was not doing that for others. People forget that HHH's first title run in 1999 was completely uninspired and uninteresting, and didn't pick up momentum until guys like Foley made him look like a major threat. It made HHH, and made him credible, and he went on to have probably the single best Heel WWF title run ever in 2000. And yet, HHH didn't even make RVD look like he was even close to his level. That's the whole point of wrestling. Oh, and the fact that Hunter wrestled for four years without a belt is irrlelevent. Because quite honestly, the guy wasn't over until he hooked up with HBK on camera. RVD was treated as mega star almost from his debut on. You go with what's hot. They did that with Hogan. They did that with Michaels. They did that with Austin and Rock, but they never fully capitalized on RVD's appeal. And his appeal was huge in 2001/2002. We're not talking about some run of the mill guy only IWC types like, people forget Rob was the most over guy during the Invasion, and someone the crowds at the time were chanting for during OTHER PEOPLE'S matches. It was insane. The thing is if you're over, you're over. And Rob was over. I think some people's prejudices cloud their judgment sometimes.
|
|
Warwolf
Unicron
Fear the Wolf
Posts: 2,541
|
Post by Warwolf on Nov 29, 2007 21:59:30 GMT -5
RVD was as over as anybody i think thats why he feels he shouldve got a run, and i agree.The guy was getting Austin pops during the invasion. RVD annoys me. He keeps acting like the WWE and HHH held him down. When ECW was relaunched, he had two titles, including the WWE title! TWO! He then smoked weed with Sabu and got caught by the police, so they obviously had to strip him of them. Basically, RVD screwed RVD, and I wish he would man up and stop blaming Triple H. This is the same company that simply made fun of Ric Flair's Road Rage incident and promptly PUT a belt on him instead of stripping him of it. Face it, RVD when he was at the height of his popularity was the biggest guy on the show practically. Yet HHH buried him after a buildup that SHOULD have lead to an RVD win, yet Trips won. The fact is that Trips DID hold him down. And again, many people who've done a lot worse have been caught and been rewarded for it. (Can we say Edge and Orton, for example?) The single dumbest thing I've yet heard of is Rhino being fired for attacking a potted Plant. Sid Vicious STABBED a guy with blunt scissors (I forget how the exact details of the story with him and Arn go, but I know scissors were involved somehow) and not only did he eventually regain gainful employment wioth WCW, they put the BELT on the guy. Jake Roberts has been on God only knows what for years, and he's STILL regarded as a legend by the WWE, even if they never put a title on him. Do I even need to point out that Hogan himself admitted in COURT to being a user of Steroids at a time when they were illegal, and STILL wound up as a 17 time World Champion? Didn't think so. Let's face it, RVD smoking weed in his car wasn't anywhere near as big a deal as some of these others, and yet he gets stripped of the belts. While Orton consistently acts like a complete Ass and STILL winds up being given the belt despite the fact that his behavior becomes public knowledge within HOURS thanks to the internet. There IS a discrepancy there people.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Nov 29, 2007 22:06:54 GMT -5
Well, RVD wasn't "homegrown". The same thing applies to Booker T. I felt like those two guys were the best, or close to the best, from their respective former companies (ECW and WCW) at the time, and should have had main title reigns back in 2002. Since Vince didn't originally make those guys, I felt like they were never looked at as serious title contender's, or champions in WWE's eyes only.
The thing about Hogan, Orton, Austin, Michaels and even Batista is that despite their out-of-ring foibles, they were basically made stars in the WWE. I think that plays some part in their treatment.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,934
|
Post by Mozenrath on Nov 29, 2007 22:08:51 GMT -5
Well, RVD wasn't "homegrown". The same thing applies to Booker T. I felt like those two guys were the best, or close to the best, from their respective former companies (ECW and WCW) at the time, and should have had main title reigns back in 2002. Since Vince didn't originally make those guys, I felt like they were never looked at a serious contender's in WWE's eyes only. Booker wasn't give nthe belt for so long because he pretty much claimed he was about to retire a number of times over the years, so putting over a guy who isn't a long term investment would be rather unwise.
|
|
mo
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,987
Member is Online
|
Post by mo on Nov 29, 2007 22:15:42 GMT -5
I'd rather have sex with an unmarried woman with a boyfriend than get caught by the law driving with an illegal substance, I'm not sure how that's much worse Anyways I'm not sure what to think about the topic, I do feel that he should've got the title earlier but it's not like he was truly always "mis-used" as it may seem. He was always in a big storyline of some sort, just not in the main event.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Nov 29, 2007 22:15:55 GMT -5
Well, RVD wasn't "homegrown". The same thing applies to Booker T. I felt like those two guys were the best, or close to the best, from their respective former companies (ECW and WCW) at the time, and should have had main title reigns back in 2002. Since Vince didn't originally make those guys, I felt like they were never looked at a serious contender's in WWE's eyes only. Booker wasn't give nthe belt for so long because he pretty much claimed he was about to retire a number of times over the years, so putting over a guy who isn't a long term investment would be rather unwise. But what about Hogan's title run in 2002 as champion? He was by no means a long term investment. What about the hot potato like treatment when the Rock came back at Vengeance '02 and won the belt form Undertaker, only to lose it next month to Brock Lesnar. The Rock has basically been gone from wrestling since then save for a few matches with Goldberg and Austin in 2003. I mean, they essentially put the main belt on somebody they knew was going to be leaving to do movies on Hollywood, and a guy who was way north of his prime. You could even go back in the day to the fiasco at Wrestlemania IX when Hogan won the belt from Yokozuna.
|
|
Warwolf
Unicron
Fear the Wolf
Posts: 2,541
|
Post by Warwolf on Nov 29, 2007 22:16:16 GMT -5
Well, RVD wasn't "homegrown". The same thing applies to Booker T. I felt like those two guys were the best, or close to the best, from their respective former companies (ECW and WCW) at the time, and should have had main title reigns back in 2002. Since Vince didn't originally make those guys, I felt like they were never looked at a serious contender's in WWE's eyes only. Of interesting note, almost NONE of WWE's stars for the longest time were home grown. Hogan got his start in the territories and then a very brief stint with Vince Sr., before truly being developed in the AWA. Austin, Foley, Taker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Booker T, RVD, Christian, The Dudleys.....all of these guys grew to promenince (Or at least got their start) in other federations and Vince scooped them up when he could. RVD (and no, his being in the list above isn't a mistake) is no different from the other people he's mentioned with on that list. So far the ONLY three guys I can recall who were 'home grown' in WWE that wound up with belts (and even then I'm not sure about one of them) are Rock, Angle, and more recently Randy Orton. (I'm not altogether sure about the Rock since he started out in another federation in the indies for awhile.) John Cena started out in UPW, and then movedf to OVW, and finally to WWE, so even he didn't really start with the company either. If Vince's argument for who he puts belts on or strips them from if they make a brief newsblurb most don't even happen to be aware of until his company does something stupid and calls ATTENTION to it is 'they have to be home grown stars' then he better be ready to fire most of his roster, cause almost NONE of his major names started in his company.
|
|
Warwolf
Unicron
Fear the Wolf
Posts: 2,541
|
Post by Warwolf on Nov 29, 2007 22:19:42 GMT -5
I'd rather have sex with an unmarried woman with a boyfriend than get caught by the law driving with an illegal substance, I'm not sure how that's much worse Anyways I'm not sure what to think about the topic, I do feel that he should've got the title earlier but it's not like he was truly always "mis-used" as it may seem. He was always in a big storyline of some sort, just not in the main event. Problem is, Edge was married at the time, and the unmarried woman's BOYFRIEND got fired because he spoke his personal feelings about being stabbed in the back. Edge was given a title belt. Again, this became public knowledge fairly quickly. (Enough so that everyone knew that the reason they pulled Matt Hardy from the roster and replaced him in that MITB ladder match was cause the WWE was scared he might decide to make a real fight out of the match if he got his hands on Copeland) By contrast, most people who're wrestling fans probably wouldn't have even KNOWN about RVD getting pulled over for the weed if the WWE hadn't been stupid enough to call attention to it so blatantly and then stipped him of the titles.
|
|
|
Post by jcdenton on Nov 29, 2007 22:21:11 GMT -5
By contrast, most people who're wrestling fans probably wouldn't have even KNOWN about RVD getting pulled over for the weed if the WWE hadn't been stupid enough to call attention to it so blatantly and then stipped him of the titles. uhhh, it was plastered over a ton of news sites before RVD lost both titles.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,934
|
Post by Mozenrath on Nov 29, 2007 22:21:12 GMT -5
I'd rather have sex with an unmarried woman with a boyfriend than get caught by the law driving with an illegal substance, I'm not sure how that's much worse Anyways I'm not sure what to think about the topic, I do feel that he should've got the title earlier but it's not like he was truly always "mis-used" as it may seem. He was always in a big storyline of some sort, just not in the main event. Problem is, Edge was married at the time, and the unmarried woman's BOYFRIEND got fired because he spoke his personal feelings about being stabbed in the back. Edge was given a title belt. Again, this became public knowledge fairly quickly. (Enough so that everyone knew that the reason they pulled Matt Hardy from the roster and replaced him in that MITB ladder match was cause the WWE was scared he might decide to make a real fight out of the match if he got his hands on Copeland) By contrast, most people who're wrestling fans probably wouldn't have even KNOWN about RVD getting pulled over for the weed if the WWE hadn't been stupid enough to call attention to it so blatantly and then stipped him of the titles. Your series of events is rather flawed. Edge didn't become champ until well after the incident.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,934
|
Post by Mozenrath on Nov 29, 2007 22:22:01 GMT -5
Booker wasn't give nthe belt for so long because he pretty much claimed he was about to retire a number of times over the years, so putting over a guy who isn't a long term investment would be rather unwise. But what about Hogan's title run in 2002 as champion? He was by no means a long term investment. What about the hot potato like treatment when the Rock came back at Vengeance '02 and won the belt form Undertaker, only to lose it next month to Brock Lesnar. The Rock has basically been gone from wrestling since then save for a few matches with Goldberg and Austin in 2003. I mean, they essentially put the main belt on somebody they knew was going to be leaving to do movies on Hollywood, and a guy who was way north of his prime. You could even go back in the day to the fiasco at Wrestlemania IX when Hogan won the belt from Yokozuna. In all fairness, Booker T didn't sell t-shirts and posters like Rock and Hogan.
|
|
|
Post by Threadkiller [Classic] on Nov 29, 2007 22:24:14 GMT -5
Well, as the guy who coined the term "smark bait," I've always envisioned it as a bad thing. Still, this type of thing does need a term. I'm going to go with "smark fluffing." Now to see if it becomes an IWC meme (it won't). Not catchy enough, maybe something like IWeCstasy? yeah, that sucks too IW-ecsta-C, maybe?
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Nov 29, 2007 22:26:28 GMT -5
Well, RVD wasn't "homegrown". The same thing applies to Booker T. I felt like those two guys were the best, or close to the best, from their respective former companies (ECW and WCW) at the time, and should have had main title reigns back in 2002. Since Vince didn't originally make those guys, I felt like they were never looked at a serious contender's in WWE's eyes only. Of interesting note, almost NONE of WWE's stars for the longest time were home grown. Hogan got his start in the territories and then a very brief stint with Vince Sr., before truly being developed in the AWA. Austin, Foley, Taker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Booker T, RVD, Christian, The Dudleys.....all of these guys grew to promenince (Or at least got their start) in other federations and Vince scooped them up when he could. RVD (and no, his being in the list above isn't a mistake) is no different from the other people he's mentioned with on that list. So far the ONLY three guys I can recall who were 'home grown' in WWE that wound up with belts (and even then I'm not sure about one of them) are Rock, Angle, and more recently Randy Orton. (I'm not altogether sure about the Rock since he started out in another federation in the indies for awhile.) John Cena started out in UPW, and then movedf to OVW, and finally to WWE, so even he didn't really start with the company either. If Vince's argument for who he puts belts on or strips them from if they make a brief newsblurb most don't even happen to be aware of until his company does something stupid and calls ATTENTION to it is 'they have to be home grown stars' then he better be ready to fire most of his roster, cause almost NONE of his major names started in his company. No, wait . I think you may have misunderstood my other post. I'm not saying those guys I listed got their start with WWE. I know Vince scooped those guys up from other territories and federations. What I'm saying is that the majority of those guys (Austin, Rock, Foley, HHH, and to some extent Hogan) became major stars and household names under Vince's WWF producing them to be main eventers. When I say 'homegrown', I'm simply referring to the fact that those guys mostly became huge stars in the WWE, and as such seem to get preferential treatments in punishment before other guys such as Booker, Rob and Sabu (who were big names in WCW or ECW before they came to the E).
|
|
Warwolf
Unicron
Fear the Wolf
Posts: 2,541
|
Post by Warwolf on Nov 29, 2007 22:27:31 GMT -5
Problem is, Edge was married at the time, and the unmarried woman's BOYFRIEND got fired because he spoke his personal feelings about being stabbed in the back. Edge was given a title belt. Again, this became public knowledge fairly quickly. (Enough so that everyone knew that the reason they pulled Matt Hardy from the roster and replaced him in that MITB ladder match was cause the WWE was scared he might decide to make a real fight out of the match if he got his hands on Copeland) By contrast, most people who're wrestling fans probably wouldn't have even KNOWN about RVD getting pulled over for the weed if the WWE hadn't been stupid enough to call attention to it so blatantly and then stipped him of the titles. Your series of events is rather flawed. Edge didn't become champ until well after the incident. They still gave him the MITB though, which meant they wanted him to be lined up for the belt at some point in the near to mid-future, and I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't BECAUSE of that situation with Edge and Lita that sparked the idea to have him win the belt. Edge was, unfortunately, extremely over as a heel because of a real life series of events, which made him probably the most over he's EVER been. He doesn't get reactions like that these days, even though people still boo him, they don't do so as rabidly as they did when he was with Lita in that time right before winning the belt. If Hardy had been in the match, I think the WWE felt he might make a real fight out of it, disrupt the match, and thus ruin their story for Edge, who they wanted to benefit out of this situation.
|
|
mo
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,987
Member is Online
|
Post by mo on Nov 29, 2007 22:31:53 GMT -5
All I know is Edge as WWE Champion having sex with Lita wouldn't make headlines and make the company look bad. RVD as WWE champion getting arrested for driving with an illegal drug probably would. Also, the MITB was like a week after that news came out and they were always pushing Edge, sometimes even too hard. They wanted him to get the title regardless of who he had sex with. Hopefully I didn't start something I'll regret, offtopic too, I'll just keep my mouth shut from now on.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Nov 29, 2007 22:37:22 GMT -5
But what about Hogan's title run in 2002 as champion? He was by no means a long term investment. What about the hot potato like treatment when the Rock came back at Vengeance '02 and won the belt form Undertaker, only to lose it next month to Brock Lesnar. The Rock has basically been gone from wrestling since then save for a few matches with Goldberg and Austin in 2003. I mean, they essentially put the main belt on somebody they knew was going to be leaving to do movies on Hollywood, and a guy who was way north of his prime. You could even go back in the day to the fiasco at Wrestlemania IX when Hogan won the belt from Yokozuna. In all fairness, Booker T didn't sell t-shirts and posters like Rock and Hogan. I agree with that. I just personally think it was a poor choice in the long run to have the belt on Hogan at that time with so much more talented options on the roster at that time. In retrospect, yeah they made a lot of cash in merchandise, but damn.
|
|
Warwolf
Unicron
Fear the Wolf
Posts: 2,541
|
Post by Warwolf on Nov 29, 2007 22:39:39 GMT -5
All I know is Edge as WWE Champion having sex with Lita wouldn't make headlines and make the company look bad. RVD as WWE champion getting arrested for driving with an illegal drug probably would. Also, the MITB was like a week after that news came out and they were always pushing Edge, sometimes even too hard. They wanted him to get the title regardless of who he had sex with. Hopefully I didn't start something I'll regret, offtopic too, I'll just keep my mouth shut from now on. The thing is, most people who don't watch wrestling when they see this little article about 'a wrestler was pulled over for smoking weed' aren't going to CARE. It's basically just another incident. Sure the guy was WWE champion at the time. But would they know that? Probably not. Would they care if they did? Again, probably not. Again, refer to Flair's Road Rage incident. Not only did people not GIVE two flips, the WWE actually GAVE him a goddamned Belt almost immediately afterwards. I think it was what? Less than a month, maybe month and a half after the road rage incident, that he wound up with the IC belt, and this was done right after they basically just had Edge make fun of it and then job out to Flair.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Nov 29, 2007 22:54:32 GMT -5
Given the way he F'ed himself over when they did give him the spotlight, it kinda looks like they made the right decision to not go to him earlier. Just sayin. How were they supposed to know RVD would smurf up like that back in 2002 (and arguably 2001)? That'd be like saying, I guess in retrospect Jackie O should have insisted JFK take a car with a roof. The facts as they had it at the time was that RVD was insanely over; arguably the most over babyface in the company at the time. My problem with that booking wasn't so much that Rob lost, but that the feud was over after one match. It buried Rob. Especially after WWE put RVD over so strong in months prior by having him absorb so many belts into the IC title. (a title HHH would "win" a month later, then never even acknowledge after the fact at No Mercy against Kane). As "brilliant" as HHH's 2002/03 run was, it actually put over only two guys. One of which was his best friend. And another who only got the belt after HHH tore his groin and went on his honeymoon. That first run did nothing for anyone who needed the rub. Now first off to the both of you this goes too. How can you say that title run was brilliant? The fans wanted him to loss because he was boring as hell and the storylines were pathic. It was one of the worst title runs in the WWE. Now in HHH defense on this. Look at that title run again. Mainly more the challengers he was facing. Outside of RVD and Booker T who else should have gotten the rub? Lets take a look at his challengers at the time: 1. RVD: who agreed should gotten the rub. 2. Kane: Should have won just to go though that crapty storyline but Kane at that time was very lame and weak. Even before Katie Vick. I mean Kane o ronee anyone? No. It wasn't until the unmasking before Kane could been taken seriously again. The who freaks are cool and crap. Kane was over but he was trying to be funny? 3. Shawn Michaels: He was great but unsure at that time still testing the back. So short title run was smart. 4. Scott Steiner: This man was horrible period. He was bad in the ring because his foot wasn't right. HHH should keep the title on that one. 5. Booker T: I agree it should been his time at WM. 6. Kevin Nash: Who in the hell would you want as champion. Nash or HHH. 7. Goldberg: he wins and still as the nerve to complain how "bad" he was treated. Even those he won. Goldberg is no great talent in the ring. As you can see most of the guys he face where name power only and because of that. A lot of those matches were bad. But HHH shouldn't be hold counted for them. Nobody has a great match with Steiner, Nash or Goldberg during there WWE runs. Now someone can though Jericho in this but Jericho was a heel. Which he was the number 2 heel on Raw and most of the guys who wasn't feuding with HHH feuded with him.
|
|