zappafrank

i assume some sort of promo involving Nancy with Sandman D'oh! And duh. I guess they have to be equal opportunity editors.

Am I the only person who didn't think "Oh my God, that's racist!!!" when the vignettes started airing? When Henry referred to himself as a Silverback, I thought, "Makes sense. The Silverback is a huge, hulking beast of a beast, as is Henry. Both can be ferocious and imposing and dominating." The vignettes and gimmick actually have made me mark for Mark (...) for the 1st time since '99 when he was teaming with D'Lo. I think anyone who immediately thought of the nickname as racist might have issues of his/her own.

Does anyone know if the latest ep of The History of ECW (12/2/95, I think) is missing anything? Comcast lists the running time as 50 min, but it only went to the 42 min marker before ending.

While watching the latest epsiode of the MNW, I realized what it is about Nitro that just grates on me. I think it's the pseudo-intellectual slant that the announcers try to put on things, as well as overdoing it with regards to "reality." Zybysko (I don't feel like checking the spelling) trying to pontificate about the psyche, etc., simply comes across as someone who is trying to use big words and sound profound (and yes, I am saying this after using "pontificate"). Re: "reality": I love Heenan as a commentator, and although he didn't do it so much in this ep, he tends to overdo the "everyone is talking about this match or this ppv or this situation" hyperbole (damn, I keep using big words even though I am talking about how it's annoying...sorry 'bout that). Also, Tenay is pretty bad at playing up "And you have believe that a victory here will put him in contention for that World's (insert title here)". The extremes to which the announcers put over the product are legendary (esp. Schiavone), but c'mon, you never saw JR or Vince sitting there talking about how great WWF was, even when it did start to take over in the ratings. If you're good and the product is good, things should (but not always, of course) get over on the merits of quality alone. In all, it just feels like they were trying too hard. It's sort of like a humble person going on and on about he is so humble. If the product is so great, do I really need to be told how great it is if I've already attached myself to it?

For what it's worth, Comcast in Pittsburgh is showing a Benoit-less version of the MNW. In fact, the episode is listed as lasting 3 hrs, 24 min, but in fact ends before 3 hrs, 10 min. And just today the ep of PTW that expires on Tues showed up. Not that I'll be upset if I don't get around to watching it, but with WWE 24/7 having been around for a few years now, and in my area for just under a year, you'd think they'd have worked out the bugs by now.

Old School: Tommy Young Mid-School: Mark Curtis New School: Mike Chioda Earl Hebner should never be listed anywhere with regards to being a good ref.

Spoiler...?

(assuming it's not a sensational death, of course) Sammartino Hogan Savage Piper Flair Austin Rock Foley HHH Cena Vince Angle

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but with the talk of individual responsbility vs. the pressure to make oneself "pushable" (via size and mass), how much of the blame for the need (alleged or otherwise) to be huge in wrestling falls on the audience? The reason I ask is b/c I've come across plenty of people who have said, "I don't care about the cruiserweights. I want to see larger than life figures." And this is coming from "intelligent" people (as opposed to stereotypical rednecks/white trash/"IT"S REAL!!!" type people). Even Lawler has gone on record saying that he considered the ECW wrestlers to be like "miniature" wrestlers, even though most of them were bigger than the average male. So, what does it say about the image that the industry is trying to present - and by extension accepted by the fans - when a high profile and influential person within the industry implies that being a "normal" sized person is abnormal? How realistic is it that Rey Mysterio could beat or go toe to toe with Big Show or Kevin Nash (assuming no advanced knowledge of fighting techniques, self defense, etc)? It is probably not as lopsided in reality as it would come across within the wrestling world, but that's exactly the point: the image is of the HUGE guys. We think it's ridiculous to see Rey try to go at it with Big Show, but we feel more comfortable when we see Kane or even Austin or Rock go at it with him, and it feels more "normal." Remember Nash's term for Benoit, Malenko, etc? "Vanilla midgets." Only a few "smaller" wrestlers are the exception to the rule in terms of getting over with the crowd based on their ability alone. And don't try to use TNA or ROH as an example of "smaller guys don't bulk up like stereotypical wrestlers and are doing just fine with the crowd." That crowd is made up of WRESTLING fans, and is an entirely different target demographic than that at which WWE is and WCW was aimed. So it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Yes, there might be pressure internally to be big and hulking and all of that, but historically (at least since the mid-80's, at least, but quite possibly longer, and most likley just within the US), the crowd has responded best to those big, hulking guys...which of course only makes the powers that be say, "See, this is what the audience wants!" Out of curiosity (and this both is related as well as somewhat separate), this seems to be exclusively a US/Canadian problem. How do Mexico, Europe, and Japan fit in?

The most important question anyone should be asking about WWE 24/7 right now is... ...will they leave in Mean Gene's slip-up from Summer Slam 89?

Has anyone had trouble with 24/7 updating this last week? I lost all the stuff that was set to expire, but don't have anything new with the exception of ECW (no Dusty AWA Tag Team Match, Bunkhouse Stampede, Monday Night War 2/10/97, or WWE Prime Time 6/17/87). FWIW, I have Comcast in Pittsburgh.

I guess that's my point: why was Daniel belly down to begin with? I haven't heard anything about marks anywhere indicating a possible struggle to get away. Since he was in his bed, maybe he was just asleep and Benoit locked it in like that b/c he wouldn't have to struggle with Daniel? I know it's horrible in any event, and I admittedly am not familiar with how easily wrestling moves might be able to be transformed into legitmate offensive maneuvers, but this aspect of the story just smacks of someone trying to use a wrestling move b/c he/she think it's real (i.e., legimately capable of inflicting more than just momentary discomfort).

So apparently there is renewed suspicion that Benoit did in fact use a Crssface type maneuver on Daniel, based on strange marks found on his arm and neck that didn't make sense to officials until they reviewed tapes of Benoit's work. Now, am I the only one who thinks that the Crossface seems a bit contrived to be used here? As a wrestling hold, it's believeable to be applied and believeable to be used as a submission move. But seriously, you can't use it in a real fight or struggle. So this would mean that Benoit would have had to set up Daniel to use it. What did he do, put him face down and then lock it in with his hands around his neck? I've read some places that Benoit could easily have set up the strangulation by play wrestling with Daniel and then locking in a legimate chokehold. People have said they wouldn't be surprised that Benoit did all of this in his tights (myself included, 1/2 jokingly), but c'mon, the Crossface thing just reeks of trying to sensationalize the wrestling aspect of the whole thing.

...as did Hogan to Arsenio EDIT: OK, I might have jumped the gun, since I don't recall if Hogan had said "I'm not on them" vs "I've never taken them."

I mark for Animal putting himself over. He said something along the lines of "As a top wrestler, one of the top tag teams in the world, I hear everything."

Here's the thing (and this goes back to C probably being for Chavom despite his real name starting with an S): The person to whom Benoit said "I love you" was not ID'd as also being the travel partner. So, that means Chavo couldn't be the travel partner since it's known that Benoit said "ILY" to Chavo. Logically, the travel partner would be someone on the same brand (unless it was for the PPV, and it might very well have been so, which opens EVERYONE up...but again, no one else caught my eye, and brand specific shows are obviously more frequent than PPV's). I considered Regal b/c of his former use of "Steve" but then caught myself b/c A) Regal is on RAW and B) his real name is Darren. For some reason, I don't think "Steve" would be such a holdover from the WCW days like Cactus is for Foley.

I didn't know that; thanks. Of course, if Chavo was "S," who is "C"? Switching Chavo from ring name to real name takes care of "S," but I looked over and no one else caught my eye for "C."

Does anyone know who the 2nd texted co-workers is (sorry if this has been answered somewhere in this thread)? The WWE.comnting of the texts shows that each begins with "C, S." No one else has reported this. It's been clarified that Benoit spoke with 2 unidentified co-workers (not office people) over the weekend, and it is further explained that the texts were sent to these co-workers. One co-worker was reported as saying that Benoit said "I love you" at the end of the convo, and Chavo made it clear on air that he talked to Benoit and that Benoit told him those words. So we would know who "C" is even without it already having been reported that Chavo received curious texts. But, who is "S"? This other person was ID'd as a frequent traveling companion, but there is no one on the SD/ECW roster whose name satisfies that, real name or otherwise. Was it an agent, maybe? I can't think of anyone. And I find it weird that Benoit sent the same message to the same 2 people (according to wwe.com) multiple times from Nancy's phone. I can understand sending more than one just in case, but maybe he wanted to make sure it the sentiment was "hey, pay attention to this" without outright saying what he did/planned to do...?

What are the odds of WWE editing the infamous Bret rant from the forthcoming RAW where he flips on McMahon?

Ah, so they will be showing Thurs RAW Thurs.

Now that RAW and Nitro are each 2 hrs long (original running time), they really need to stagger them. Instead of presenting an entire 3 hr block of straight content, they should start each show on alternating weeks, just to allow for some breathing room. I know that they want to be able to do a "side-by-side" thing, but truth be told 2 weeks for 3 hrs sometimes isn't enough, with this little thing called life going on. Add to this the fact that some cable companies only allow for 24 hrs of storage (like mine, Comcast) before the program resets, and you get people actually deterred from watching stuff b/c they know they won't be able to watch all of it within 24 hrs, and will just have to restart the show at a later point. And if they decide to expand permanently the MNW availability to 3 weeks instead of 2, then that will only slow things down on their end, in terms of new content.

I realize it's way too early to know for sure, but when all is said and done, how do you think this Vince angle will be regarded? From what I've read so far on websites and newsgroups, almost no one is saying "Brilliant." People are saying it's either really lame/retarded/stupid/etc or laughable. Sure, it's got people talking, but so did the Katie Vick angle. Unless WWE has some damn good ideas for the "whodunnit" portion of the angle, this sucker is gonna tank badly, forever rendering all other Wrestlecrap content obsolete.

They telegraphed that something was gonna happen like crazy. From Vince's overacting in the ring, to his quiet walk to the back, to his loooooooooooooooooooong walk out of the arena (complete with oh-so-dramatic wrong turn), and the sustained camera shot of the limo, they were just telling viewers "Just wait, something will happen!" And c'mon, who the hell didn't think that the limo was gonna blow up given how long they were focused on it, and from such a distance??? I myself was waiting for it to explode as soon as Vince stepped in, then stepped out (look at the footage, his foot goes in and out and in again). Plus they were showing the limo, all alone, away from everyone, in silence. Real subtle, guys. If WWE had been smart about this, they'd have had the walk not be so dramatic. Furthermore, they'd have had his exit be quick. There'd have been no dragging out the walk to the limo, and the limo even should have driven off and THEN exploded, from out of nowhere. And if they really wanted to add a touch of "what the hell just happened?!" they'd have had Coach or someone lead Vince to the limo, and walk away and be thrown down by the sudden blast. You claim that WWE is no different that Sopranos or 24, Vince. If you're gonna try to emulate that, at least try to do it well. But everything WWE did screamed "safety" and "even faker than wrestling!"

According the Observer, Mr. Kennedy is said to be irate at the Pennsylvania doctor that misdiagnosed his right triceps injury on 5/7. Dr. James Andrews determined that the injury was a severe hematoma, and not a muscle tear on 5/9. Had they known that injury wasn't as serious as it was first thought to be, he probably would have gutted it out because the original plan called for him to win the title at the 5/8 SmackDown taping. Also, the Money in the Bank gimmick is over because he already cashed it in. The working idea is for Kennedy to return to action around the first week of July. Does anyone think that Kennedy has a shot at a malpractice suit here? One could argue lost wages (i.e., PPV pay-offs, increased pay b/c of being champ, etc), and so on and so forth, not to mention quite possibly Kennedy being subjected to unnecessary surgery.

True, but what I gues the bigger issue of a potential misdiagnosis would be if for whatever reason Kennedy had the surgery and they got in and realized there was nothing to fix. Any surgery, however "minor," is still a big deal and puts anyone at risk. And let's not forget what would be the unneccesary cost associated with having the unneccesary surgery.