SuperJerk

If you really think they'll use that as a springboard to give Helms a new gimmick, then you're giving Gerwertz and the rest of the writing team more credit than they deserve. Chances are Hurricane only lost to help push Flair's book. **Suddenly remembers old storylines.** "Helms, you're an embarrassment! I know when I hired you and Mighty Molly back when I was co-owner I said the company needed some super-heroes, but you're still an embarrassment."

He also gave an excellent explanation for the premise of "the X-Files". Jericho's role on the "I Love the..." shows is one of the Explainer Guys, as he always has to do the set up while Hal Sparks and Michael Ian Black get all the best lines. Sadly, I can't come up with just the right Montreal joke for this. Can someone help me out?

There's no way Bret could've known Hogan was going to turn heel before it happened. If Hart had been the "third man" (which we'd have to know about when WCW made Bret that first offer before this rumor could be given weight), then Hogan probably wouldn't have turned heel.

Bret was trying to get acting parts when he left after WM12. I figure he came back because he couldn't get any.

Reports at the time were saying that Vince waited until the last minute to decide who would win the match. There was a lot of talk leading up to the match (on air from Jericho) that Triple H wouldn't be as forgiving towards Hogan as The Rock had been the month before, but there was no pay off for the hints. After the match, Triple H said he had to fight the instinct to be heelish during the match.

I'm usually not self-congratulatory, but that's a damn good line.

The WM12 match was being praised and ejaculated over so much in 1996, a rematch does make sense. But you raise a good point, as it could just be part of the legend (not that I beleive for one second Shawn was really too hurt to defend the belt). To answer chaosrage's question, my guess (only a guess) would be that he'd face Rocky for the IC title. I'm not sure when it was decided that Austin would turn face, so who knows?

That's pretty damn convulted booking on the WWF's part. No wonder I was confused. What was the original point of the Fatal 4Way, then? Was Undertaker supposed to win it and become number one contender? (I'm also guessing the only reason Michaels was given the title at the Royal Rumble was because it was in San Antonio?)

Sid? I always thought the cause of that was not wanting to job to return Bret's job from WMXII. My understanding was that the "In Your House" fatal fourway--which happened three days after the "lost my smile" speech, if I'm not mistaken--was originally intended to be for number one-contendership until Shawn vacated the title, and it became FOR the title, which Bret was booked to win. When Shawn vacated the title, it was too late to include Sid, so Bret dropped the strap to Sid on the next night's Raw. Sid would then go on be in WM13 main event.

The problem with rewriting history is that you tend to leave out your own mistakes. A mistake forgotten is a mistake repeated.

The NWO might've worked if Triple H had turned heel on Hogan at Backlash and retained the Undisputed Championship with their interference. I always wondered what the original planned storyline with HHH and the NWO would've been if Nash hadn't blown his quad. Also, according to this, Nitro was doing in the 2-3 share Neilsen cable range for its last year. While not great, it shows that some people were watching. Imagine those folks added to the 4-5 share Raw was getting at the time. The Invasion could have been a winner.

A-Train's physique hurts him about as much as anything else. He looks like a wad of cookie dough that fell on the floor and got dog hair all over it.

(1) TNA didn't even exist yet when Road Dogg and Killings were released. It would've been impossible for them to be signed then. (2) Foley quit, he wasn't fired by WCW. (3) I'd always heard Triple H left WCW by choice, but this could be bullshit. TNA has made an offer to about every person fired from WWE in the last 2 years. That's not true of WWE and WCW.

In Lita's mind you can only get pregnant if you had an orgasm?

This is a straw man argument if ever there was one. (And there's no way you're going to convince me Matt Hardy's generic based on the description you gave.) Let's look at some other crappy gimmicks, using this standard: Hulk Hogan- Superhero guy who wrestles heels. Bret Hart- Serious guy who wrestles in good matches. Mankind- Standard crazy guy who does bumps. Stone Cold- Rebellious face who hates his boss. The Rock- Guy who does catchphrases and wrestles same match over and over. Eddie Guerrero- Generic Mexican dude. Ricky Steamboat- Wrestles good but is boring. Randy Savage- Needs his wife to get over. See how easy it is to give a bare-bones description and call someone boring? "In recent memory"=the most overused expression in the IWC. Its such a subjective term that its meaningless to actually try to measure time with it.

Nothing against the point you're trying to make, but the term "In recent memory" has become really overused. We've come to use it to justify any and all timespans. The term was pretty meaningless to begin with, and yet gets used constantly in the discussion of wrestling. Especially when you hit 30, when its easier to remember shit that happened ten years ago than what happened 10 days ago.

That's when the promo lost me.

HBK didn't have Stephanie killing his heat, though.

He fessed up in 2002, after his religious conversion.

"Mein fuhrer...I can walk!" This week's episode is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face.

If and when Bret's book comes out, it'll rule. I really hope Shawn Michaels writes a book, too. (Yeah, I know what your thinking, but since Shawn admitted knowing about the Montreal ahead of time, I'm willing to give the guy a little more credit when it comes to telling the truth.)

I so hope an uneditted version of that is on the DVD. If Jana Speaker can't get regular acting gigs out of being on this show, then no one will.

Wouldn't you be?

The theory Vince is proceding from is that Raw and Smackdown do not completely share an audience (there was reportedly some Nielsen evidence to back this theory up at some point), and therefore he's not charging the same people twice, but two sets of people once. The problem is that he doesn't realize that neither roster is strong enough on its own to support its own PPV market the way that Raw did by itself until late-1999.

Here we go again. On the night Triple H was awarded the title, Bischoff SPECIFICALLY SAID it was the same belt Triple H had won at Wrestlemania earlier that year by referring to Triple H as being the last one to have held the belt. The belt that Triple H won at WMX8 was the same belt as the WCW championship. Ric Flair spoke that night about having held that belt before also. On Confidential that weekend they did a piece on former World Heavyweight Champions who'd held that resurrected belt before, and specifically mentioned guys like DDP, Sting, and Goldberg (this piece is on the "Best of Confidential" DVD). Is there some kind of rule that says we have to have this debate once a month?