|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 22, 2009 14:36:19 GMT -5
WCW did that like three times. There really is no defending WWE on this one. The only thing separating bad celebrity involvement in WCW to WWE at this point is WWE hasn't given a celeb the World or WWE Title yet. You make it sound as though celebrities in wrestling are a concept that WCW invented and that has never, ever worked out. Which of course ignores even the original WrestleMania, though even besides that wrestling has a long, long history of bringing in stars for cameos or even some story involvement here and there. And while it doesn't always work out, it's hardly been a policy that's done nothing but fail. On another note, I'm still waiting for Schwarzenegger to defend the Undisputed Box Office Championship. It's been like ten years. Oh, and there is in the strictest sense no harm in having a concert on PPV - know why? On TV, people can change the channel. On PPV, it doesn't matter what they do because WWE's already got their money. If anything, it is a good way to get the live crowd to go get extra merch and snacks if the performance bores them. Im aware WCW didn't invent the celeb thing, which actually makes it even sillier to criticize them for doing it every so often. Theres no harm in having a concert on PPV because people already paid their money and it may bore the crowd enough to go buy stuff? Thats one of the silliest things I have ever heard. Yeah, if only WCW had their boring concerts on PPV! That would have made everything okay!
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 22, 2009 5:01:04 GMT -5
Yeah it's not like WWE ever had a live concert from an outdated performer on TV. Or even stupider perform it live on their biggest show of the year... for over 10 minutes. Doing something once is not tantamount to doing it repeatedly. WCW did that like three times. There really is no defending WWE on this one. The only thing separating bad celebrity involvement in WCW to WWE at this point is WWE hasn't given a celeb the World or WWE Title yet.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 21, 2009 19:58:40 GMT -5
Kaz may have been lacking as a character, but his ring work made up for that. He was put in very high profile matches, some of which he won. He was riding the momentum wave of a lifetime up until the last World X Cup. That's when it all came to a screeching halt. Well now he has interesting ringwork combined with a decent character. The problem isn't his character, its how hes being booked. Removing the mask isn't going to make his booking better, if anything it will make it harder for the bookers to come up with something for him since hell just be Kaz. If they can find a way to make the Kaz character more interesting than Suicide I would support an unmasking, but right now I dont see that.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 19:57:19 GMT -5
Yeah, because the WWE has never publicly gone after somebody before... That's a pretty cynical way to think about it. I'm just saying that the whole "Mickie James is fat!" thing is blown so much out of proportion here that the moment some 'news' piece on her being held back because her weight comes out, people are quick to jump all over it without even looking for confirmation. As much as I dont give an eff what goes on with Mickie James, you cant really dispute that its quite a strange coincidence that all this news comes out for weeks that WWE are concerned with her weight and image, then an angle gets ran where a heel calls her fat and makes a big deal out of it.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 19:44:44 GMT -5
Great read. I have so much respect for Bret, probably more than any other wrestler aside from maybe Mick Foley.
I wish as many people as possible could read this so we dont need to read all these ignorant discussions online from people who STILL say Bret is a bitter old man who never got over Montreal. He let it go before most wrestling fans did and while many still refuse to.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 19:09:49 GMT -5
What I think is funny is a couple main eventers dont like Kennedy and he gets fired, but nobody defends him and everyone says hes deluded and bitter since John Cena, Orton, and HHH all dont like him. If all those guys have a problem with him they must be right! Yet all of these people say this stuff about HHH and for some reason this principle doesn't apply to him, they are all just bitter hasbeens or people who couldn't draw. Sure. Keep in mind Im not defending Kennedy either [dont like him], just pointing out that people on here and within the IWC will cherry pick evidence to support or refute any argument/rumor they like or dislike. Except we all saw Kennedy botch moves and be noticably difficult to wrestle with. Therefore, it's probably true that everyone disliked wrestling with him, and he's deluded about them all conspiring to hold him down. Everyone having it in for HHH, "just for the sake of it" is a bit more difficult to believe, though. Well I agree on the Kennedy thing and also see why those guys had a problem with him. I also think a lot of this HHH stuff is true as well. When that many people have bad things to say about you, perhaps not everything is true but there is some truth somewhere. More than a lot of HHH fans would like to admit, so they say oh all these guys are just jealous. Maybe some of them are but guys like Rock have no reason to be and still speak ill of HHH. If anything all the proof you need that HHH is a schemer and a dick is the fact that he was caught on tape lying and saying he knew nothing about Bret being screwed but years later has himself retconned that into he SUGGESTED THE IDEA IN THE FIRST PLACE!
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 18:47:17 GMT -5
What I think is funny is a couple main eventers dont like Kennedy and he gets fired, but nobody defends him and everyone says hes deluded and bitter since John Cena, Orton, and HHH all dont like him. If all those guys have a problem with him they must be right!
Yet all of these people say this stuff about HHH and for some reason this principle doesn't apply to him, they are all just bitter hasbeens or people who couldn't draw.
Sure.
Keep in mind Im not defending Kennedy either [dont like him], just pointing out that people on here and within the IWC will cherry pick evidence to support or refute any argument/rumor they like or dislike.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 18:25:18 GMT -5
I really hope Shane buys into UFC and becomes even more successful and sticks it to Vince.
Everything I have ever heard about him from shoot interviews and articles paints him as a really cool, nice guy. Not so much with Vince. Definite props to him for going his own way and hopefully he ends up being successful outside of wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 17:31:12 GMT -5
Honestly, Bruno is just like any other pro wrestler who made it big.
He has an ego, he thinks he was one of the best ever [he was], he was such a big deal for so long and started becoming a mark for himself and believing in his own crap.
Its nothing new. When you read a Hogan interview its almost the same thing. He has his points, some good ones, and some good reasons for saying the things he says and believing what he believes but he is also out of touch with reality.
Plus all these old wrestlers always try to apply todays guys to the world they know, a world that doesn't exist anymore. Hogan does the same thing.
I see Brunos point about the cauliflower ears and all that, but kayfabe is dead. Theres no reason to keep it up to that level if everyone knows its fake. Its also not like plenty of todays wrestlers dont have tons of injuries or are totally run down from toll the business takes on your body either.
To answer the original question, I say a little from column a and a little from column b.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 16:09:43 GMT -5
From my experience, anyone who is a good promo tends to also have a really good shoot.
The most entertaining shoots by my recollection were Ravens [anything with him is good especially a joint one he did with Honky Tonk], Scott Hall, Kevin Nash. I have seen so many shoots I cant remember all of them but those were the ones that stick out in my mind. I THINK I saw Honkys shoot as well and it was good but its fuzzy to me.
It probably doesn't help that I watch these things when I am bored and drunk by myself. :]
A lot of shoots are really boring to me, either the wrestlers dont remember anything or you have to sit through a bunch of boring crap to get to the good stuff, all of those I remember being consistently entertaining.
Other guys I remember having entertaining shoots are Corino, New Jack and Sandman. Actually, it seems like any ECW guy with a shoot I saw was entertaining and informative, even Danny Dorings shoot was pretty good. New Jacks shoots are basically just him doing promos on people for hours.
I haven't seen Flairs shoot but I would imagine its very good, how could it not be? Although if I have to sit through him complaining about WCW not pushing him enough when he was past his prime during one of the hottest angles in wrestling history I might put a Figure Four Leglock on myself.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 10:28:26 GMT -5
Isn't it weird that TNA has been more entertaining in the past few months than it possibly ever has withOUT the Hogan stuff, and now we're in for big changes that may torpedo the hell outta all of that? True. VERY true. However, TNA will never ever ever get past their current blockade without some mainstream, big-time names. It's sad that names like Kurt Angle and Sting can't pull in viewers, but it's all about that "casual" viewer that doesn't even know these guys are still wrestling. Hogan can bring that mainstream media attention. Angle and Sting could too. TNA has piss poor advertising. Any casual fans I know act surprised if I tell them guys like the Dudleys, Foley, Angle, Sting, etc. are still wrestling in another company. Keep in mind these are people who dont really watch wrestling anymore, so they arent going to keep up to date on stuff like that. WWE drove them off so they just dont watch at all. Thats the sorta fan TNA has to aim towards. They must do that by advertising on other mediums and other sorts of shows that cater to similar demographics. Throwing out a commercial during RAW or something like that isn't going to do anything since WWEs ratings have dropped significantly and also I am sure even the stupidest WWE fan knows what happened to Kurt Angle or Mick Foley.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 10:21:48 GMT -5
Could someone explain why this is such a big deal? I don't know I feel like I am missing something for not caring as much as other people seem to. I guess I just don't understand how "Daniels" is apparently boring and bad but adding Christopher to it makes it exciting and great. I am with ya. Beyond that, his last name is the least of his worries, as far as credibility goes. He has the look and build of a Junior High substitute math teacher. If his nameplate starts suddenly flashing CHRISTOPHER Daniels and the announcers refer to him every now and then as such its going to make such a huge difference in anything? Its essentially meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 9:54:19 GMT -5
it's because Daniels owns the copyright for the name " The Fallen Angel". And TNA wants to wants to own their talents copyrights for merchandising. So TNA is going to copyright his last name? That's what baffles me, the announcers go out of their way to only call him "Daniels" yet Joe and AJ will constantly call him Chris. This would be fine, except you have two guys on the roster now who go by one name with the announcers and get called "Chris" during promos. Thats nothing new in wrestling. Goldberg, Tista, etc...
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 9:48:57 GMT -5
I dont want to see TNA go a WWE route. I hated when WCW began doing that and it made me stop watching. If I have to choose between WWE or a badly done poor mans version of WWE, I will just watch WWE.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 9:22:31 GMT -5
One thing this thread made me realize: Festus would be completely useless in a stable.
Especially a WCW stable. In fact, he probably would have just had a seizure the first time he ran down during the end of any random Nitro and been forced to retire.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 8:59:00 GMT -5
I think its the wrong way to put heat on CM Punk and its burying his character. Like when Christian called him a nerd. I mean, Raven in ROH forcing beer down his throat is one thing, because it got tremendous heat, but this makes Punk look like a joke. Thing is, I've liked the way they've handled his character since his debut. But, this is the first time where the WWE's writing really hurt him. Eh, if that was true every guy Rock ever feuded with would be seen as a joke. If Punk and his character have lost momentum at all, its because WWE have shown the fans that he is second rate against anyone that matters. He was allowed to look good against Jeff Hardy and thats it. Morrison beat him a bunch of times recently when he was still WHC. Taker squashed him. Back during his first title reign he barely escaped Big Dave AND JBL over the summer and his title reign was given the Chris Benoit treatment [WHC coming out for the RAW opening match or not even the main event on PPV? OKay...]. Things like that do a lot more damage to a guy than someone calling him a dork. Look at Jericho, his character has been mocked and embarrassed countless times over the year but he is still credible because he is booked to look capable of beating main eventers and when he does hold any championship its given focus and made to be a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 20, 2009 1:50:13 GMT -5
Do we need a topic like this everytime someone makes fun of Punk for not drinking?
Its starting to get annoying. Punks character also clearly brings it on himself.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 19, 2009 21:17:17 GMT -5
Why is it that diehard WWE fans will apply every argument to defend what creative churns out?
Show them an indie match with two great workers, you get "its just two generic guys fighting, no drama, no storyline, why should I care about them or who wins?"
WWE lazily books this triple threat with no conflict and has everyone involved seem to care even less than the writers. "This main event will be great, it sells itself so it doesn't need a storyline."
Hmm. All right then.
|
|
|
Daffney
Nov 19, 2009 20:31:20 GMT -5
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 19, 2009 20:31:20 GMT -5
Personally, I liked her better as "The Governor". Now she just seems to be a live version of Harley Quinn from the Batman cartoons. You liking her more as the Governor combined with your sig makes me question any opinion you might have. That Governor thing was just...horrible. She is MUCH better just being Daffney, loved her in WCW and she is 100 times better now.
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 19, 2009 20:02:04 GMT -5
I loved it in WCW when they would do that. nWo would brawl for like ten minutes while the bell kept ringing, it reached comic levels.
|
|