WWE General Discussion - February 2008

[cabbageboy 0]

Thing is, it doesn't matter how much Jeff was on top of the Rumble match....hell Edge was all over Cena at the 2006 Rumble, but he just jobbed clean. Jobbing clean when you aren't a clear cut main event guy requires a certain amount of rebuilding before fans accept that guy as a title threat.

[Black Lushus 0]

Summerslam just seems like the logical place to put the title on"guys you don't think are a WM type draw just yet"...Orton and Lesnar come to mind.

[Thanks for the Fish 0]

Hardy will never be as hot as he was @ RR though. And if they hotshot the title on to Cena at NWO just so they can give the title to HHH at WM than that's a friggin crime.

[lomasmoney 0]

Thing is, it doesn't matter how much Jeff was on top of the Rumble match....hell Edge was all over Cena at the 2006 Rumble, but he just jobbed clean. Jobbing clean when you aren't a clear cut main event guy requires a certain amount of rebuilding before fans accept that guy as a title threat.

 

I disagree, people act like the average fan sits around and analyzes the fact that Jeff Hardy lost to Orton at Royal Rumble and would therefore shit on a subsequent title reign. In actuality, the average wrestling fan is fucking retarded and wouldn't even care that he lost to Orton if he beat him a month from now. Smart fans put too much stock into shit like this. If Hardy won the belt tomorrow, that most likely, would not affect Wrestlemania buyrates

[Guest MadManOnTheWater]

I can understand WWE not putting the belt on Hardy. Who knows when he's going to fail another drug test? Of course you could say the same thing about Orton.

 

Hardy has shown a willingness to go to TNA if he's not working for WWE. Orton doesn't have the same loyalty question mark.

 

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

That's a ridiculous statement. Hardy had been out of the E for a long while before he went to TNA.

 

Orton (miraculously) has never been fired. Therefore never had the chance to look elsewhere.

 

Your post seems to be saying that Jeff should be blamed for finding work after a lenghty time off...while orton should be praised for never having to deal with said situation even though he's skated on thin ice for most of his career.

 

...

 

In summation...you, sir, are a retard.

[Atticus Chaos 0]

I can understand WWE not putting the belt on Hardy. Who knows when he's going to fail another drug test? Of course you could say the same thing about Orton.

 

 

I don't know. One look at Orton nowadays tells me he's certainly adhering to the wellness policy.

[luke-o 0]

He looked ill at the Rumble.

[Guest MadManOnTheWater]

That's a ridiculous statement. Hardy had been out of the E for a long while before he went to TNA.

 

Orton (miraculously) has never been fired. Therefore never had the chance to look elsewhere.

 

Your post seems to be saying that Jeff should be blamed for finding work after a lenghty time off...while orton should be praised for never having to deal with said situation even though he's skated on thin ice for most of his career.

 

It's an attempt to predict how WWE does things. My suggestion is based on the premise that the powers-that-be often make decisions based on ridiculous reasoning and has nothing to do with how I think things ought to be run.

[Guest Bigelow34]

Hardy will never be as hot as he was @ RR though. And if they hotshot the title on to Cena at NWO just so they can give the title to HHH at WM than that's a friggin crime.

 

It seemed like that for Eddie too, though, in the summer of 2003. He was super, super over and then he jobbed to Big Show at No Mercy 2003 and the push seemed dead, but the resurrected it in early 2004 and his title win still went over like gangbusters and seemed legit.

 

The loss for Hardy didn't help him, but he can easily be rebuilt.

[PILLS! PILLS! PILLS! 0]

Hardy will never be as hot as he was @ RR though. And if they hotshot the title on to Cena at NWO just so they can give the title to HHH at WM than that's a friggin crime.

 

It seemed like that for Eddie too, though, in the summer of 2003. He was super, super over and then he jobbed to Big Show at No Mercy 2003 and the push seemed dead, but the resurrected it in early 2004 and his title win still went over like gangbusters and seemed legit.

 

The loss for Hardy didn't help him, but he can easily be rebuilt.

 

Am I the only person who remembers how Mankind's main event spot was seemingly in limbo for a few months after his HIAC match in 1998? A loss for Hardy isn't going to hurt him more than a WWE Championship match at one of the big four PPV events is going to help him.

[luke-o 0]

Hardy will never be as hot as he was @ RR though. And if they hotshot the title on to Cena at NWO just so they can give the title to HHH at WM than that's a friggin crime.

 

It seemed like that for Eddie too, though, in the summer of 2003. He was super, super over and then he jobbed to Big Show at No Mercy 2003 and the push seemed dead, but the resurrected it in early 2004 and his title win still went over like gangbusters and seemed legit.

 

The loss for Hardy didn't help him, but he can easily be rebuilt.

 

They have the technology.

 

[majormayhem1 0]

Thing is, it doesn't matter how much Jeff was on top of the Rumble match....hell Edge was all over Cena at the 2006 Rumble, but he just jobbed clean. Jobbing clean when you aren't a clear cut main event guy requires a certain amount of rebuilding before fans accept that guy as a title threat.

 

I disagree, people act like the average fan sits around and analyzes the fact that Jeff Hardy lost to Orton at Royal Rumble and would therefore shit on a subsequent title reign. In actuality, the average wrestling fan is fucking retarded and wouldn't even care that he lost to Orton if he beat him a month from now. Smart fans put too much stock into shit like this. If Hardy won the belt tomorrow, that most likely, would not affect Wrestlemania buyrates

 

What's a smart fan? Someone with a high IQ?

 

Why are "smart fans" so concerned with fucking pay-per-view buy rates? Get a life. It's one thing to talk about angles, booking, and work rate but concerning yourself with how many people are buying the pay-per-views is really pathetic.

[Enigma 0]

Why? It's a good barometer of who the fans are (and are not) willing to pay to see.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

What's a smart fan? Someone with a high IQ?

 

Why are "smart fans" so concerned with fucking pay-per-view buy rates? Get a life. It's one thing to talk about angles, booking, and work rate but concerning yourself with how many people are buying the pay-per-views is really pathetic.

 

 

The reason people care is that the number one goal of professional wrestling is to make money. This isn't a legitimate sport that just exists to determine the best competitor. It exists as an entertainment product and the only way to measure success in meeting this goal is by analyzing how much money it makes.

 

Why take the time to discuss angles and booking if you're not concerned with the end product? Those things exist to SELL the ppv.

[Thanks for the Fish 0]

Observer put the kay-bosh on the Punk in the doghouse rumors, saying that in actuality Punk is in a better position now that Lagana was fired as he was his main detractor and was pushing for Morrison to get the title back right away before and was the person who put the title on Chavo. Dusty is a big Punk fan and Hayes has been trying to get him on SD! for awhile. Ed Koskey(sp) is booking ECW now, with Dusty's help, however Hayes has a TON of political power right now and is likely overseeing both ECW and SD!

[majormayhem1 0]

What's a smart fan? Someone with a high IQ?

 

Why are "smart fans" so concerned with fucking pay-per-view buy rates? Get a life. It's one thing to talk about angles, booking, and work rate but concerning yourself with how many people are buying the pay-per-views is really pathetic.

 

 

The reason people care is that the number one goal of professional wrestling is to make money. This isn't a legitimate sport that just exists to determine the best competitor. It exists as an entertainment product and the only way to measure success in meeting this goal is by analyzing how much money it makes.

 

Why take the time to discuss angles and booking if you're not concerned with the end product? Those things exist to SELL the ppv.

 

Sure, it's got to build to something, but I'm not actually working in the business so buy rates are really none of my concern unless I work for the company or own stock. This is all about fun and matchmaking for me. I know what I want to see as a fan, but am I really concerned with how many people are going to buy a pay-per-view or what weekly ratings are? No. Wrestling fans (not smart fans) will buy the pay-per-view if they are into wrestling, no matter what is going on.

[Black Lushus 0]

if the WWE can't sell shows, then they don't make money...they don't make money, they stop producing a show. As a fan and consumer of the product, you SHOULD be concerned with with buyrates because if they go too far downhill, goodbye WWE.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

I don't know, TNA seems to have avoided being dead despite a lack of PPV buys. WWE also has a lot of money on reserve, essentially stopping them from going out of business anytime this or the next decade, I believe. That said, I get what you're trying to say and it is correct.

[Black Lushus 0]

How TNA still survives is beyond me. Obviously not travelling out of Orlando often certainly helps with expenses, but the secret to their eternal youth is a mystery to me.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

TNA survives because Panda, and Spike to a lesser extent, are willing to bankroll them. All it takes is the wrong Panda executive to realize they're funding a money pit, and TNA are done for. Not only that, but the TNA television deal with Spike runs out at around the same time that WWE's deal with USA runs out. If Vince wants to get back on Spike and Spike are receptive, if only to regain the one-two punch of having UFC and WWE again, that leaves TNA out in the cold.

 

And, as ever, I always get a laugh from the people who bring up the "Why do you care if WWE makes money?" type of argument.

[majormayhem1 0]

if the WWE can't sell shows, then they don't make money...they don't make money, they stop producing a show. As a fan and consumer of the product, you SHOULD be concerned with with buyrates because if they go too far downhill, goodbye WWE.

 

 

And that would be a bad thing, right??

 

I understand what you all are saying, though. But, with their DVD sales and WWE 24/7, they could stop producing shows. I think they're doing just fine.

[Black Lushus 0]

oh yeah, they're not closing their doors anytime soon, I was more or less making a general statement...HOWEVER, if PPV buyrates sharply drop off, the smart money says they're going to drop off in everything else as well. If a PPV is crap, why should I spend money on a Raw ticket? Hell, a regular house show...

[Guest Bigelow34]

Why? It's a good barometer of who the fans are (and are not) willing to pay to see.

 

I believe it's pronounced thermometer

[MillenniumMan831 0]

Why? It's a good barometer of who the fans are (and are not) willing to pay to see.

 

I believe it's pronounced thermometer

 

Kramer has a point.

 

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Why? It's a good barometer of who the fans are (and are not) willing to pay to see.

 

I believe it's pronounced thermometer

No, he had it right the first time.

 

It was a Seinfeld reference? I hated that show.

 

Getting back to the debate about declining PPV business. Sure, WWE are still making a ton of money elsewhere, so in that respect they've nothing to worry about. But it's a hell of a lot easier to stop a creative decline when it's just starting then when it's snowballing. Just because WWE are making tons of money elsewhere is no reason to let creative slide.

[Guest Bigelow34]

Why? It's a good barometer of who the fans are (and are not) willing to pay to see.

 

I believe it's pronounced thermometer

 

Kramer has a point.

 

Nice! I was hoping someone would get it.

[Enigma 0]

Former WWF and UFC star Dan Severn was recently on the Club World Wrestling Insanity Radio Show and told an interesting story about a proposed gimmick for him during his time in the WWF in 1998-1999.

 

I'll never be voted into political office because I'm a very blunt individual. At the point that when I was working for the WWF, we had creative differences. The cycle of a professional wrestler, if you're a good guy, sometime down the road you'll sell your soul and become a bad guy. If you're a bad guy, you'll eventually see the light and become a good guy. That's the circle of a professional wrestler. Well basically, in the beginning, I was labelled as a good guy -- the intense good guy. No frills, kind of like a Dean Malenko. I mean the guy didn't really ever cut any promos. He just went out there and got business done. That's what I went out there and did. Suddenly, Vince Russo got the idea to put 666 on my forehead. I can be an Undertaker disciple. I said, "Whoa, time out." I said, "I live in Small Town USA." I said, "I want to know I can take my family out to a local restaurant without having the local patrons come up to my table or some local minister trying to lay his healing hands upon me. I'm thinking 'cause that ain't going to happen." And then all of a sudden, I'm being told, "Well Dan, we could use you poorly." I go, "What does that mean?" They said, "We can start having you losing matches." I go, "Yeah. That's true. You could ask me, but where does it say in my contract that I have to lose to anybody? What if I walk into your world of fantasy and start showing them my world of reality? How many of your so-called stars would I make look pretty silly in the process?"

[PILLS! PILLS! PILLS! 0]

That would have been hilarious! Imagine the wooden Severn in the Dark Ministry with 666 painted on his forehead!

[dubq 0]

Seriously - WWE.com's "let's put an advertising page in after EVERY FUCKING LINK" thing is really starting to wear thin...