The "New Clique" Wrestling Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hacksaw Jim Duggan is actually a really classy guy.

Surprisingly, he isn't that tall but he has hands perhaps three times as large as a normal persons.
 
[quote name='ShinSolidus']I know how many of you guys like to kill TNA, so, for those who didn't see it, this is Hogan's take on the lack of progress:



So...thoughts, people?[/QUOTE]
t1rO9.jpg


PS: I always love it when myke argues with people.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Hacksaw Jim Duggan is actually a really classy guy.

Surprisingly, he isn't that tall but he has hands perhaps three times as large as a normal persons.[/QUOTE]

Actually my friend has one of his puppies. :) Hacksaw was looking to breed his dog and my friends father in-law owned the stud. They split the pups, so he ended up taking one. Of course we named him Hacksaw. When dude came over to the house he was awesome. Ended up talking for a few hours about WWF stuff.. old mid-south and UWF stuff. Really cool.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']To be fair, if you put a 2x4 in someone's hands, they're immediately going to be more threatening.[/QUOTE]
If someone called The Miz came up to me with a 2x4 I think I'd laugh before running away. Seriously, that name just kills any intimidation the guy could have. none of the current generation of guys really seem intimidating to me.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I find it to be like spam. There's no interaction, and this is a forum. If I want to read a webpage, I'll go read a webpage. If I cut and pasted Caldwell's PWTorch reviews in here every time they were posted, whether you asked for them or not, it'd probably be a nuisance. Then again, Jay is no Caldwell.
[/QUOTE]

OK, I'm like 6 pages late here, but do me a favor and lay off. I actually like that he posts the recaps here in this thread. I have 2 kids - ages zero and two. I'll be damned if I can watch anything when I want to. So it's nice to be able to read and catch up on what I missed in the very same thread I generally read anyway without having to go to an external site and get sodimized by ads and popups.

It's not like it takes all that long to roll your mouse wheel a few notches every few pages anyway. Hell, some people's sigs are far more annoying and frequent.
 
Does anyone remember the rhymes that Natalya said on Raw? The only one I can remember is "settle your tea kettle," but I could've sworn there was more.
 
[quote name='Mr. Beef']Does anyone remember the rhymes that Natalya said on Raw? The only one I can remember is "settle your tea kettle," but I could've sworn there was more.[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that was it, because she said it at the end of the divas match and they were transitioning to the next segment.

I thought this story was pretty funny:

How did you celebrate your first WCW Championship win?
Big Show: When I won the WCW title the first time, I wore it through the airport because I was so damn green. Nobody told me that I didn’t have to let everybody know that there was a new champion, so I wore it in the airport like an idiot.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
[quote name='Blackout']I'm pretty sure that was it, because she said it at the end of the divas match and they were transitioning to the next segment.[/QUOTE]
I couldn't sleep, so I did some digging, and she apparently called King "the bomb dot com." So unbelievably dorky. :lol:

Say what you will about my artistic endeavors, but I already know that I'm the Mason Ryan of Paint.

A7zET.png


Guyver's av was the hardest to crop, because I kept laughing at Goldberg's damn face.
 
I've been watching WWE programming since 1993 and I somehow only just now realized Goldust is supposed to look like an Oscar.

*facepalm*
 
[quote name='mykevermin']They're announcers, and they have the best match buildup of anyone for WM. Announcers. They talk.[/quote]

And they will put on a show. It's wrestling. Not MMA. You act like this is real. Yeah. fuck Bobby Hennan ever doing an angle in the ring. He is a manager. Not a wrestler. He should MANAGE.

Myke, they're entertainers. Not "announcers". It's a fucking role. Not a career.

The champ is not the focal point of the feud because he's the least over, and you're going to treat that kind of booking as *sensible*? You're just trying to score points with me at this point, with no concern for how dadgum idiotic you come off.
Click to expand...

Just because a guy is wearing a really, really heavy belt doesn't mean he should be the focal point of anything. The guys who draw the most money should be the focal point of any entertainment company. Is this happening with the WWE? Yep. That's EXACTLY what they're doing.

You've got some kind of moronic ideology where if the guy has a belt, he MUST automatically become the guy that draws and hence MUST be the main event. But that doesn't happen in reality. Giving someone a title belt doesn't mean that guy will draw people to the venue and sell PPVs.

It's a fact. Look at the ratings. Miz has consistently lost viewers whenever he shows up on TV. Why the hell would someone who loses viewers become the focal point of any entertainment company, especially heading into the biggest show of the year?

It's not about champions, it's about draws. It doesn't matter if they're wrestlers. It matters if they're draws. That includes Michael Cole and Snooki.

Besides, The Corre is slated to be booked for WM. If you wanna be a snippy cunt for workrate, be consistent.
Click to expand...

Nexus members Michael McGillicutty and Husky Harris were both second season NXT wrestlers and were far more green than the cast of season one NXT. The same can be said of Mason Ryan. If you ever watched the fucking NXT show you would know this. The wrestlers on season one were far better than season two.

You're terrible with blanket statements Myke. The Corre: Wade Barrett, Justin Gabriel, Heath Slater, and Ezekiel Jackson are all better workers than the members of the current Nexus and I think everyone here will agree with me on this. Stop pursuing this stupidity Myke. You're just blabbering without bothering to be familiar with the subject matter.

There is a reason they were taken out.

Well, typically companies develop and implement new strategies when they discover their revenue sources are declining, yeah. That's how successful businesses operate. If you want to argue against that, fine. My point is simply that they need to make some aspects of their product more elite and therefore desired. Why pay to see Edge wrestle when you can see him do it for free every Friday night?
Click to expand...

Why stream to see Edge wrestle when you can do it free every Friday night?

A company that doesn't respond to declining revenues is going to fail. WWE must respond. So, rather than just being a sniveling brat and oversimplifying what I'm saying as "going back to the 80's," why don't you tell us what brilliant changes you'd make to the program?
Click to expand...

Because you made an ignorant suggestion. When you do that in a public forum, the forum has a right to respond to that ignorance. I think it's especially cowardly to try and say "Don't respond to what I say. Just pretend it doesn't exist so people can't see my foolish concepts and present your own so I can have my turn to knock them down. I'm tired of being your whipping boy."

You got numbers from me, sweetheart. Revenue numbers. What WWE gives a shit about as a publicly traded corporation.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point entirely. The numbers were irrelevant. The problem was how you were comparing them. Maybe you're just not capable of proper reflection on such things.

It is terrible business logic to suggest that the WWE change how they run business in 2011 to the way it was run in the 1980's when that wasn't even the most successful period in the history of the company. It's like saying Nintendo was failing with the Gamecube so they should have start selling playing cards all over again instead of having concentrated on the Wii or DS.

Who did he wrestle?
Click to expand...

I believe it was a squash and I didn't bother remembering the name. Hence the entire point of a squash.


I'm well aware of who the tag champs are. The point is that the tag titles are beyond meaningless. TNA, when they try, has an incredible tag title scene. Slater and Gabriel are more on the level of Shannon Moore and Jesse Neal than coming anywhere close to Beer Money or MCMG. WWE's tag division is a shitshow of monumental proportions. That's why you can be assured that the tag champs will either not be defending the belts at WM27, while if they do, it will be a preshow curtain jerking match. At least Demolition got a prominent spot on the card. They helped make the tag titles mean something to the crowd.
Click to expand...

And?

They're meaningless. And?

So?

Even if Slater and Gaberial were pushed, they both lack the personality of a Beer Money or MCMG to draw or sell PPVs.

Why should the WWE waste resources on these guys?

You're acting like Slater and Gabriel are comparable as team to Demolition and should be pushed as such. If not, then what is the point you're trying to make? As it is, I just see someone that is just ranting for the sake of throwing out the name of a tag he likes.

DEMOLITION!

ROH is just fine as a product, but an indy is an indy. They're just an indy with three folding tables of merch instead of one.

Your point started in with "your ideas suck" and opinions that oversimplified what I said and weren't rooted in the fiscal history of WWE on the whole. You only have a point in so much as your spage age fantasy is what really is going on in the world. Which is not the case.
Click to expand...

I don't see what indy has to do with it. You're the one that snaps about weirdos with poor dressing habits when you hear ROH. It's inane.

I'm more interested in hearing how much NXT you've watched to even be familiar enough with how green those guys in Nexus are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Clak']If someone called The Miz came up to me with a 2x4 I think I'd laugh before running away. Seriously, that name just kills any intimidation the guy could have. none of the current generation of guys really seem intimidating to me.[/QUOTE]

This is the sum of the problem facing the WWE.

It's a bunch of very pretty men with very little true charisma and character who play fight. The brand of wrestlers available to the industry on the whole has deteriorated.

ALSO.



WWE Live Event Schedule for April 2011​

Sun, Mar 27 Kmart presents WWE Raw Road to WrestleMania - Indianapolis, us

Sun, Mar 27 Kmart presents WWE SmackDown Road to WrestleMania - East Lansing, us

Mon, Mar 28 Kmart presents WWE Monday Night Raw - Chicago, us

Sat, Apr 02 WWE Hall of Fame presented by WWE All Stars the video game - Atlanta, us

Sun, Apr 03 WWE presents WrestleMania XXVII - Atlanta, us

Mon, Apr 04 Kmart presents WWE Monday Night Raw - Atlanta, us

Tue, Apr 05 Kmart presents WWE SmackDown - Charlotte, us

Mon, Apr 11 Kmart presents WWE Monday Night Raw - Bridgeport, us

Tue, Apr 12 Kmart presents WWE SmackDown - Albany, us

Wed, Apr 13 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Glasgow, uk

Thu, Apr 14 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Belfast, ie

Thu, Apr 14 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Munich, de

Fri, Apr 15 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Dortmund, de

Fri, Apr 15 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Dublin, ie

Sat, Apr 16 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Birmingham, uk

Sat, Apr 16 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Kiel, de

Sun, Apr 17 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Nottingham, uk

Sun, Apr 17 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Newcastle, uk

Mon, Apr 18 WWE Presents RAW - London, uk

Mon, Apr 18 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Liverpool, uk

Tue, Apr 19 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Cardiff, uk

Tue, Apr 19 WWE Presents SmackDown - London, uk

Wed, Apr 20 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Salzburg, at

Wed, Apr 20 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Brussels, be

Thu, Apr 21 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Strasbourg, fr

Thu, Apr 21 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Bucharest, ro

Fri, Apr 22 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Istanbul, tr

Fri, Apr 22 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Liévin, fr

Sat, Apr 23 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Istanbul, tr

Sat, Apr 23 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Lyon, fr

Sun, Apr 24 WWE Presents WrestleMania Revenge - Lyon, fr

Mon, Apr 25 Kmart presents WWE Monday Night Raw - Raleigh, us

Tue, Apr 26 Kmart presents WWE SmackDown - Greensboro, us

TNA Live Event Schedule for April 2011​

3/24: Fargo, ND
3/25: Grand Forks, ND
3/26: Bemidji, MN
3/28: iMPACT! Orlando
3/29: iMPACT! Orlando
3/31: Corbin, KY
4/1: Pikeville, KY
4/2: Johnson City, TN
4/7: Erie, PA
4/8: Cleveland, Oh
4/9: Pittsburgh, PA
4/10: Moundsville, WV
4/19: iMPACT! Orlando
4/20: iMPACT! Orlando
4/29: Biloxi, MS
4/30: Baton Rouge, LA

ROH Live Event Schedule for April 2011​

Atlanta, GA- “Honor Takes Center Stage” April 1st
Atlanta, GA- “Honor Takes Center Stage” April 2nd

CHIKARA Live Event Schedule for April 2011​

King of Trios 2011 - Night 1 - Friday, April 15th - Philadelphia, PA
King of Trios 2011 - Night 2 - Saturday, April 16th - Philadelphia, PA
King of Trios 2011 - Night 3 - Sunday, April 17th - Philadelphia, PA

PWG Live Event Schedule for April 2011​

Pro Wrestling Guerrilla's WINNING on April 9, 2011 in Reseda, CA
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Ansé Solis']Just because a guy is wearing a really, really heavy belt doesn't mean he should be the focal point of anything. The guys who draw the most money should be the focal point of any entertainment company. Is this happening with the WWE? Yep. That's EXACTLY what they're doing.

You've got some kind of moronic ideology where if the guy has a belt, he MUST automatically become the guy that draws and hence MUST be the main event. But that doesn't happen in reality. Giving someone a title belt doesn't mean that guy will draw people to the venue and sell PPVs.[/QUOTE]

So let me see if I understand you correctly.

The belts mean nothing, they're just props, and it's OK if someone like, say, David Arquette or Michael Cole holds the company's top title, as long as Cena continues to draw and remain the focal point?

[quote name='Ansé Solis']Why should the WWE waste resources on these guys?[/quote] Because, Cena can't carry the show for forever; something's going to happen. See: Undertaker, several times.

Myke's point is valid. That guy holding the big heavy belt is supposed to be, in a word where it's "still real to me dammit" representative of the best guy a company has. It used to work well (See: Flair, Rick; Sammartino, Bruno; Hogan, Hulk; Bockwinkel, Nick; Race, Harley; Autsin, Steve). They'd experiment from time to time, and get met with failure -- See Ronnie Garvin, Tommy Rich, Diesel. But those titles used to mean something -- that you were considered the best in the world (or at least in your company). The most entertaining, the best talker, the best storyteller. Now, it's just the big heavy belt. You are the WWE's target audience -- because you'll watch what they put out, and lap it up.

Mildly unrelated side note: If the Miz drops the belt to Cena at WM, his reign will be longer than 7 of Cena's 9 WWE/WHC reigns, and one day short of an eighth. And the longest in 3 years for the WWE Title.
 
The title changes hands too often too. It doesn't mean anything if the guys who have it can't keep it for long. Makes it seem as if most of the guys you have are fairly equal. The title used to mean the guy who had it was the baddest of the bunch, and anyone who tried to take it better be ready to do it, now it actually does seem to be on some rotating schedule, like there is a calendar marked month by month with who's turn it is.
 
[quote name='Iron Clad Burrito']

Mildly unrelated side note: If the Miz drops the belt to Cena at WM, his reign will be longer than 7 of Cena's 9 WWE/WHC reigns, and one day short of an eighth. And the longest in 3 years for the WWE Title.[/QUOTE]

I miss the days of lengthy title reigns. I don't mean a Sammartino-length title run or anything, but really it's just nice to see a guy hang on to a belt for longer than the time between PPVs.

I think a lot of it has to do with the attention span of the audience these days. They're so used to seeing seat-of-your-pants booking and don't have the patience anymore to see a guy have a title for any real extended period of time.
 
[quote name='Mr. Beef']I couldn't sleep, so I did some digging, and she apparently called King "the bomb dot com." So unbelievably dorky. :lol:

Say what you will about my artistic endeavors, but I already know that I'm the Mason Ryan of Paint.

A7zET.png


Guyver's av was the hardest to crop, because I kept laughing at Goldberg's damn face.[/QUOTE]

Clearly I'm better than the rest of you.

[quote name='ShinSolidus']Random question, but...Should I feel a certain way for just buying "Basic Thuganomics" by John Cena on iTunes?[/QUOTE]

Uh...self-loathing?
 
a few things i've noticed over the last few weeks... what happened to wade barrett's push? where is christian's angle going? > will he be part of the main event/triple threat match? is there any freaking way cena doesn't win??? and im sure rock will put over cena some how, be it something like counting the 3 count or just simply raising his hand after the victory. that being said please wwe be less predictable. also i love how WWE "forgot" about HHH and taker's first match at WM. lol they could have used that in the angle you'd think. WWE programming is driving me nuts. but it's still better than anything TNA has put on TV in 2 years.
 
The sad thing is that's the most exercise that little porker has had in his entire life. He was completely winded after swinging his little alligator arms around for less than 3 minutes.
 
[quote name='Iron Clad Burrito']So let me see if I understand you correctly.

The belts mean nothing, they're just props, and it's OK if someone like, say, David Arquette or Michael Cole holds the company's top title, as long as Cena continues to draw and remain the focal point?[/quote]

No. You don't understand me correctly.

The belts ARE props that are used to signify importance. However, signifying importance onto the title holder doesn't make the title holder into a draw.

Like you've used David Arquette or Michael Cole as examples. If the WWE were to put either of the World Titles on Arquette or Cole, would they draw more people than The Rock or John Cena? Probably not.

The Miz is in the same boat. He isn't a draw. Not like those guys.

So now. From a business perspective. Does it make more sense to push John Cena and The Rock into the build for Wrestlemania or The Miz if the company is trying to sell Pay-Per-Views?

I don't agree with what the WWE is doing but at least I can understand what they're doing.

Although a possibly legitimate argument could be made that The Miz should at least get a better role in all this, it just makes no sense that he should be on equal footing as the other two when he regularly LOSES viewers on Raw.

Because, Cena can't carry the show for forever; something's going to happen. See: Undertaker, several times.

Myke's point is valid. That guy holding the big heavy belt is supposed to be, in a word where it's "still real to me dammit" representative of the best guy a company has. It used to work well (See: Flair, Rick; Sammartino, Bruno; Hogan, Hulk; Bockwinkel, Nick; Race, Harley; Autsin, Steve). They'd experiment from time to time, and get met with failure -- See Ronnie Garvin, Tommy Rich, Diesel. But those titles used to mean something -- that you were considered the best in the world (or at least in your company). The most entertaining, the best talker, the best storyteller. Now, it's just the big heavy belt. You are the WWE's target audience -- because you'll watch what they put out, and lap it up.
Click to expand...

Where was this post last year when Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker (Not John Cena vs. Batista) headlined Wrestlemania?

Additionally, I am not WWE's target audience. I mean this strangely feels like politics. If I explaining the WWE on how they do business, suddenly I'm their target audience. If I discuss ROH, I'm suddenly orchestrating fellatio on them.

I suppose this is how a moderate feels.

Also. Newsflash: It was never real. It's broadway theater. Get over it and enjoy yourself.
 
[quote name='Blackout']I'm pretty sure that was it, because she said it at the end of the divas match and they were transitioning to the next segment.

I thought this story was pretty funny:


:lol:[/QUOTE]

lol funny stuff. On a side note, I went to high school with Sully. Good guy.
 
Just because a guy is wearing a really, really heavy belt doesn't mean he should be the focal point of anything.

...

You've got some kind of moronic ideology where if the guy has a belt, he MUST automatically become the guy that draws and hence MUST be the main event.
Click to expand...

herp.
a.
derp.

EDIT: This is a terrible promotional idea, but I'll be damned if I wouldn't try to go to that kind of event:
IMG_20110327_131700-1%5B1%5D.jpg
 
[quote name='mykevermin']herp.
a.
derp.[/QUOTE]

Exactly what I expected of a man of such low mental fiber. :applause:

Here's a simple question to you. Did you tune in to see Arquette's title run JUST because they put the belt on him.

Yes? No?
 
[quote name='pitfallharry219']:rofl: I posted that, but the one I posted didn't go on that long. This one is so much better.[/QUOTE]


So— This is your fault! >:[ ... ;]

[quote name='neocisco']"...swinging his little alligator arms..."[/QUOTE]


Ahaha.... :rofl: I'm stealing that phrase ("little alligator arms") for a later use. :applause:


(And Myke, it's not worth arguing with a 17-year-old. I just put him on ignore. He's the only person on my ignore list, by the way, out of everyone on CAG. "Anse" is apparently a derivative of "goose", and that guy is one silly goose. :lol:)
 
[quote name='neocisco']Clearly I'm better than the rest of you.[/QUOTE]
At least until myke squashes you for not wearing a suit. ;)
[quote name='Chase'](And Myke, it's not worth arguing with a 17-year-old. I just put him on ignore. He's the only person on my ignore list, by the way, out of everyone on CAG. "Anse" is apparently a derivative of "goose", and that guy is one silly goose. :lol:)[/QUOTE]
I actually took him off ignore just to see what he had to say during this entire thing, but since he was being quoted anyways, I put him back.
 
[quote name='Ansé Solis']So now. From a business perspective. Does it make more sense to push John Cena and The Rock into the build for Wrestlemania or The Miz if the company is trying to sell Pay-Per-Views?

[...]

Although a possibly legitimate argument could be made that The Miz should at least get a better role in all this, it just makes no sense that he should be on equal footing as the other two when he regularly LOSES viewers on Raw. [/quote]

This actually illustrates the point that the rest of us are trying to make. If the Miz is holding THE TOP TITLE IN THE BUSINESS (because the other one is on the B-show, and still looks like the former competition's belt) then why is he second fiddle to the conflict between the challenger and a non-wrestler? WWE isn't doing much for the guy, and he's left to get over any way he possibly can.

Where was this post last year when Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker (Not John Cena vs. Batista) headlined Wrestlemania?
Click to expand...
In my head; I'm not a terribly prolific poster here (I have more posts in the last 2-3 threads than I normally make in 2-3 months). But I had 2 complaints -- 1. Why was this the headliner not one of the title matches [and 1a: Third from the top is a 10-diva tag match, while the curtain jerker was the tag title match], and 2. Why did Michaels not give the rub to someone who could have used it? It's not like UT needed the rub. Could you see Jericho having done it? "I'm the man who retired Shawn Michaels!"

Additionally, I am not WWE's target audience. I mean this strangely feels like politics. If I explaining the WWE on how they do business, suddenly I'm their target audience. If I discuss ROH, I'm suddenly orchestrating fellatio on them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you misconstrued my position. The fact that you can take this without a word of complaint, and actually defend them is astonishing.
(And I like ROH, so I don't hold that against you)

-------------------------------------

The Monday Night Wars changed the business forever, and not just for the better. You posit that business is better now than it was in the 80s and early 90s, and that's true. However, it's nowhere near as good as it was in the late 90s and early part of the century. The business changed -- the companies had to put their top guys on weekly to keep the audience. They had to move the titles around more often, to keep the audience -- because it's more fun and exciting to watch a show where Hogan might lose his title to Sting in a just-booked match than it is to see Hogan take on Iron Mike Sharpe in a non-title 3-minute squash. So now, yeah, you see Arquette holding the title. You see 7 of Cena's 9 reigns lasting less than 4 months each. Edge, with 11 WWE/WHC reigns in 5 years. McMahon's held each of his titles once, I think. Judy Bagwell, WCW Tag Team Champ. The companies went so far to keep it interesting, and now that there's only 1 left, they can't go back to the way things were.

Even the upstart TNA has continued these trends.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']EDIT: This is a terrible promotional idea, but I'll be damned if I wouldn't try to go to that kind of event:
IMG_20110327_131700-1%5B1%5D.jpg
[/QUOTE]

I almost went. It was only about 90 minutes away from where I was living at the time.
 
Is that the problem, that the WWE is run too much like a business and not enough like entertainment program? I mean if all they care about is ratings then there is no limit to the stupid shit they'll pull if it gets ratings. Which would explain some more recent happenings. Seem like it sued to be important to feel like you were putting on a good show, these days it seems like nobody cares so long as it gets the TV ratings.
 
[quote name='Iron Clad Burrito']This actually illustrates the point that the rest of us are trying to make. If the Miz is holding THE TOP TITLE IN THE BUSINESS (because the other one is on the B-show, and still looks like the former competition's belt) then why is he second fiddle to the conflict between the challenger and a non-wrestler? WWE isn't doing much for the guy, and he's left to get over any way he possibly can.[/quote]

Because maybe they decided in the grand scheme of things, he isn't worth pushing any more than he is already is? He has a role to fill. He is filling it. And unfortunately, his role isn't to be the main draw because they don't believe he can fill that role. And I agree.

In my head; I'm not a terribly prolific poster here (I have more posts in the last 2-3 threads than I normally make in 2-3 months). But I had 2 complaints -- 1. Why was this the headliner not one of the title matches [and 1a: Third from the top is a 10-diva tag match, while the curtain jerker was the tag title match], and 2. Why did Michaels not give the rub to someone who could have used it? It's not like UT needed the rub. Could you see Jericho having done it? "I'm the man who retired Shawn Michaels!"
Click to expand...

Because "rubs" are relatively meaningless. They only elevate people whose stock is on the rise anyway. A title belt is just the most symbolic rub of all. Lets think of epic "rubs" that did nothing for anyone.

The Lex Express. He got a ton of "rub". But people today respond that he was shoved down our throats. Myke included.

Rikishi. He is the man that ran over Stone Cold Steve Austin. We all yawned.

And in the last 5 years, the biggest example of a person getting a "rub" would be Bobby Lashley. He was practically pushed to the moon. But again people would claim that he was shoved down our throats. I mean. Imagine if Bobby Lashley was the one who ended the streak.

No. Only deserving wrestlers are worth deserving "rubs". Having Jericho go over HBK would have been a waste. Jericho is gone. Taker is still here. And that speaks volumes.

If the streak is broken, the man to do it is either CM Punk or Daniel Bryan. No one else on the rosters comes close to deserving it more than those guys.

Punk for being a complete and utter ROCKSTAR over the past few years and Daniel Bryan for being able to carry a wet paper bag to at least a three and a half star match.

-------------------------------------

The Monday Night Wars changed the business forever, and not just for the better. You posit that business is better now than it was in the 80s and early 90s, and that's true. However, it's nowhere near as good as it was in the late 90s and early part of the century. The business changed -- the companies had to put their top guys on weekly to keep the audience. They had to move the titles around more often, to keep the audience -- because it's more fun and exciting to watch a show where Hogan might lose his title to Sting in a just-booked match than it is to see Hogan take on Iron Mike Sharpe in a non-title 3-minute squash. So now, yeah, you see Arquette holding the title. You see 7 of Cena's 9 reigns lasting less than 4 months each. Edge, with 11 WWE/WHC reigns in 5 years. McMahon's held each of his titles once, I think. Judy Bagwell, WCW Tag Team Champ. The companies went so far to keep it interesting, and now that there's only 1 left, they can't go back to the way things were.

And I agree with this. In fact this is exactly what I was saying. Myke was being foolish by not comparing business now to business in the late 90s. Instead he wanted the glory days of the 1980's which makes zero sense to me.
Click to expand...

I want to go out on a limb and I say I see Miz keeping the title and his reign will end up being one of the longest in recent memory. In fact it already is.
 
Oh, you're one of those deliberate contrarians.

You see Tyler Black holding the WWE title by December, instead of putting over "Primo™" on WWE Superstars™.
 
I don't want to get terribly involved in this argument, but if you need proof that the world title is not an indication of star power, please look at Rob Van Dam 1998-2001.

[quote name='Clak']Characters suck nowadays anyway. The Miz? What the fuck kinda name is that?[/QUOTE]

His last name is Mizanin. It's like "the Hoff" or "the Trump." It's a great name because it implies massive ego, which is the Miz to a T.
 
[quote name='Survivalism']I don't want to get terribly involved in this argument, but if you need proof that the world title is not an indication of star power, please look at Rob Van Dam 1998-2001.[/QUOTE]

Eh, that's ECW. That'd be like pointing to Lashley. Oh, wait... :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top