Guest Downhome Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Sure, he's a great on air personality, and I enjoy his matches, but am I the only one that realizes what it means by his return? AM I!? Yes, it's yet another chapter in the damn McMahon family storyline. It will be nothing different, it's just yet another aspect of the family to be on TV to take all of the glory. I try to look on the bright side of things, but do we really need another McMahon on my TV? I think one McMahon is enough thank you very much, and Shane should be in Steph's place if we have any at all. I pray to God, if we MUST have Shane on TV, that this leads to Shane having control, and then Bishoff creating a renegade group, the way the Invasion SHOULD have happened the first time... ...instead, we will more than likely get Shane Vs. Steph, the battle of the RAW and SD brand. I'll wait to judge it, but really, do we need more than one McMahon's on TV? When has that EVER been the answer to anything? Sincerely, ...Downhome...
Guest Youth N Asia Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 I'd like to see Shane back, but here's how it goes for me. When Shane shows up I enjoy it...then I get tired of him and wish he would pull off tv...then he does...then I kinda want Shane to show up again...then he does and I get tired of him... It's an endless cycle for me. I could handle him as a face, but a McMahon never stays a face for any length of time. And his matches bore me...he does the same table spot every time. I think it's selfish of Shane to do all these huge spots KNOWING he's only going to work 2 or 3 times a year, it puts more pressure on the guys who have to work every night. And the argument goes "well if SHANE is doing them..." just bugs me
Guest EternallyLazy Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 The only reason I was excited about seeing Shane was because I saw him one other time on tv in the past year... and it, like last night, was a cameo appearance. If he comes back and it all turns out like you said it would... then that may be the thing that finally turns me away from wrestling for a while. I might stick around until Mania, but I'm really really getting tired of this.
Guest notJames Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 McMahons on TV make baby Jeebus cry.
Guest bcu1979 Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 No, we don't need another McMahon on tv. But they're going to be around anyways so I'd rather have one who doesn't like Triple H much around to hopefully balance things out. And at least Shane is something of a fresh character at this point. Stephanie has no use as a tv character anymore. As long as she's dating Triple H, she is never going to allign herself with another wrestler on screen to help get them over. And the idea of her as this authority figure who all the wrestlers fear is unbelievably short-sighted. I like the idea of Shane v. Bischoff. But they would have to take Vince off tv again to do the program right.
Guest EternallyLazy Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 I hate to resurrect the old WCW/Nitro return theory, but if they were thinking about doing it anytime in the near future, then this would be a good time to do it
Guest EternallyLazy Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 and as for Shane vs. Bischoff... that would be something new and somewhat fresh, but wouldn't it make more sense to just go with Vince vs. Bischoff?
Guest Jobber of the Week Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Shane is smart. He knows when he's been on TV too much and leaves at the appropriate time. I'd rather have him on my set than Steph or Vince.
Guest AndrewTS Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Shane is smart. He knows when he's been on TV too much and leaves at the appropriate time. I'd rather have him on my set than Steph or Vince. Amen. And I was momentarily excited, but by the time Nitro--Raw, rather--went off the air I'd forgotten all about him.
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 All 3 of them (Vince, Steph, and Shane) can stay off my tv for about a year if I had my way. I would only have them out for the announcement of something important like Jack Tunney was used. When you saw Tunney, you knew something big was going down. It' how they use Linda right now and the other 3 McMahons should comply. Shane has been off for quite awhile and that's good. But if the 30 day thing is a way to get him back on tv as a regular, then color me disappointed.
Guest bob_barron Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Sure, he's a great on air personality, and I enjoy his matches, but am I the only one that realizes what it means by his return? AM I!? Yes, it's yet another chapter in the damn McMahon family storyline. It will be nothing different, it's just yet another aspect of the family to be on TV to take all of the glory. I try to look on the bright side of things, but do we really need another McMahon on my TV? I think one McMahon is enough thank you very much, and Shane should be in Steph's place if we have any at all. I pray to God, if we MUST have Shane on TV, that this leads to Shane having control, and then Bishoff creating a renegade group, the way the Invasion SHOULD have happened the first time... ...instead, we will more than likely get Shane Vs. Steph, the battle of the RAW and SD brand. I'll wait to judge it, but really, do we need more than one McMahon's on TV? When has that EVER been the answer to anything? Sincerely, ...Downhome... When have two McMahons been the answer? How about when Shane aligned himself with Austin and then turned on him- that was awesome. Shane is my favourite of the McMahons so as long as I get to hear 'Here comes the Money' I'll be a happy viewer
Guest HartFan86 Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Shane is the only McMahon I can stand (I don't mind Vince at times, but he can be annoying.) I like the idea Dangerous A said about comparing Tunney to Linda cause it makes sense. Whenever Linda is on WWF TV, you konw something big is happening.
Guest Human Fly Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 I'd rather Shane be on tv then Goldberg. Maybe we can finally get a great invasion angle. Also, who knows what Bischoff will try in the next 30 days to try and stay. Should be good stuff. Shane will take over just in time to get a good setup for something big to go down at Wrestlemania. It should be good.
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 I don't like Shane. Why? Maybe you forget all the promos and stuff he did during the Alliance angle where he put himself over the wrestlers. He's just as guilty of this as Stephanie McMahon is.
Guest Youth N Asia Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Would wrestling be better without the boss or a general manager on tv every week? Or do we have to have someone in charge on tv now?
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Here is the thing, Shane McMahon or Eric Bischoff being the GM won't change a damn thing about RAW in all likelyhood. So you have to go with who you would rather see in the non-important role of Raw GM. I would rather have Bischoff there for at least the fact that he is something different, and he isn't a McMahon so he can only be booked to be so powerful. Maybe Vince can show up on Smackdown and say the same thing to Stephanie, so it is more like a test for BOTH shows rather than just RAW, but if I remember, there was no announcement for Vince on Smackdown. Oh well.....
Guest Human Fly Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Would wrestling be better without the boss or a general manager on tv every week? Or do we have to have someone in charge on tv now? If they wanted to go back to how it used to be with Monsoon, Tunney, Bill Watts, etc. They would have to re-educate a lot of new fans who are used to visible authority figures. On top of that with so much of the shows being booked around said figures for so long they would have to change their booking strategies. I doubt they could stay away from using the authority figures in angles, so I guess we have to have someone in charge now.
Guest notJames Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Yeah, unfortunately, the GM/Commissioner/Whatever vehicle has become so entrenched in wrestling TV that it would take a lot to veer away from it. The audience is so trained to expect someone to make the matches that they'd be lost without it. It sucks that we can't go back to the way things were, where matches were put on for only two reasons: to determine the pecking order of the roster and to settle grudges. And they all made so much sense that you didn't need some idiot with a mike to spell it out for you and hype it for two hours. Nostalgia's a bitch in these shitty times...
Guest RedJed Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 This is how I look at it: Shane v. Steph, or generally any McMahon rehash.......obviously its taking a HUGE step back in the product and to even think they would do this with the intention of having McMahons sparring again is RIDICULOUS. Shane v. Steph w/ Bischoff as an outside force trying to take both of them out somehow.........that could work but I don't think they would book it to be believable and interesting. If they had Bischoff somehow take out both Steph and Shane out of the storylines by having people injure them, etc, it could be an interesting catalyst to a Bischoff-Vince feud. Another way to do this would be for Vince to actually approve of keeping Bischoff after 30 days, and Shane becomes defiant and joins Smackdown with Steph and then we have basically Bischoff v. Shane/Steph. Bischoff v. Shane........this is the likely idea they have once a month comes around, and hopefully to keep the brands seperate (which they don't really try to but still......) they dont even bother having Steph stick her nose in any of this and just leave it as a Raw feud between the two guys. This could lead to Bischoff somehow taking over Raw and turning it into WCW, and the entire McMahon family (well mayby not Linda) move to Smackdown for the time being and the interpromotional feud leading to Mania and Bischoff v. a McMahon happens. Vince v. Bischoff with no other McMahon interference........would rather it go this route, I wouldn't even waste time before the 30 days, have Bischoff become definant and etc either tonight or next week already. Have Bischoff point out some small detail technicality in his contract saying Vince can't just have his way with him or whatever. Anyway once that is revealed, Bischoff turns Raw into WCW again which turns Vince crazy and the feud begins. He lets Steph go and runs Smackdown himself.
Guest tominator89 Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 I have to admit, I'm predicting a swerve. I don't know how they plan on doing it, but I'm seeing Shane and Bischoff uniting and possibilty resurrecting the WCW name....
Guest Downhome Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 We all know now that Austin more than likely will not come back for 30 more days, you know... ...the day of the first Shane McMahon show. I'm begining to think they might do this, to allow for Shane to really "look good" in the eyes of the casual fans, and then one or two weeks later, have Bishoff "invade" WWE along with a few friends, one being a certain Goldberg perhaps.
Guest jester Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Maybe Vince can show up on Smackdown and say the same thing to Stephanie, so it is more like a test for BOTH shows rather than just RAW, but if I remember, there was no announcement for Vince on Smackdown. I agree that's something Vince should do. In fact, Vince should have done this MONTHS ago, so it would have provided some motivation for the split. Basically said he's having revolving GMs. Whoever does the better show keeps their job. Whoever doesn't, get replaced and they do it all over again. As for the whole Shane thing, it just bothers me that right now the only long term stories we have involve the managers, and the whole Al Wilson Shyte.
Guest The Hamburglar Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 I don't like Shane. Why? Maybe you forget all the promos and stuff he did during the Alliance angle where he put himself over the wrestlers. He's just as guilty of this as Stephanie McMahon is. So, not at all like Austin and Angle burying the entire Alliance between them? Not at all like Austin, an obvious WWF guy, taking centre stage and hogging air time over the actual WCW/ECW invaders? The Invasion was booked and written to shit, I don't blame Shane for anything. He was trying to get Booker over as a heel like a madman, but it just wasn't working when Booker was portrayed as so markedly inferior to Austin, Rock and Angle.
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 At least they were wrestlers. Shane had no business making Alliance wrestlers cow before him.
Guest Big Poppa Popick Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 yes, but it was Shane behind the alliance maybe this is a swerve after all like someone said now id kinda like that idea
Guest NoSelfWorth Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 We are happy about Shane possibly coming back, because things are so bad, we are looking for the smallest shred of light to look forward to. I'd be happy to have Osama or Saddam on Raw right now. It can't get any worse, at least I hope not, so try anything.
Guest RedJed Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 We are happy about Shane possibly coming back, because things are so bad, we are looking for the smallest shred of light to look forward to. I'd be happy to have Osama or Saddam on Raw right now. It can't get any worse, at least I hope not, so try anything. What we all need to get through our heads is that bringing in anyone into the company isn't going to help for more than a few weeks, case in point Eric Bischoff, Hogan, NWO, Flair, Steiner, blah, blah, blah.......etc, etc, etc. I thought for sure that bringing in Bischoff was the answer last year, and would totally shake up the WWE core, but it hardly created a fizzle past the first week he was around, it was pathetic. With this thing with Shane, its totally the same situation. Bringing him back isn't even CLOSE to the answer to the problem. It's just an example of the Raw creative staff not seeing the big picture of things and not learning from their previous mistakes.
Guest bob_barron Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 We are happy about Shane possibly coming back, because things are so bad, we are looking for the smallest shred of light to look forward to. I'd be happy to have Osama or Saddam on Raw right now. It can't get any worse, at least I hope not, so try anything. Don't speak for all of us. I am happy to have Shane back because I find him to be an entertaining character with awesome entrance music and who when he wrestlers usually puts on matches that I enjoy
Guest NoSelfWorth Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 We are happy about Shane possibly coming back, because things are so bad, we are looking for the smallest shred of light to look forward to. I'd be happy to have Osama or Saddam on Raw right now. It can't get any worse, at least I hope not, so try anything. Don't speak for all of us. I never said I was speaking for "all of us".
Guest bob_barron Posted January 14, 2003 Report Posted January 14, 2003 Well you said 'we' like you meant the IWC. Sorry if I misread what you typed
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now