thecitythesky

do you want to slap him for debuting a year earlier than generico too.?

I would assume then that your favorite shows/movies are such because of their compelling/marketing campaigns. And that you judge books, exclusively, by their covers. I think what you're failing to understand is that people (literally target demographic-type people) are aware of TNA and Impact. Wrestling fans, though certainly not all of them, do know that TNA exists and I would say in more cases than you seem to even entertain consciously choose to not watch the show. And judging by the percentage of their audience that carries over to pay money for the shows I think says a lot about the interest of the remaining audience. I even know exactly when the show is on and frequently scroll past it; because it's terrible - they air a show not worth fast-forwarding through. Heyman is not the end all and be all but to say that improved writing doesn't matter if people aren't watching ignores the fact that that same improved writing is absolutely necessary when people do. Marketing a wrestling program this (generally) bad in a better way is the worst way to spend company money; you're attempting to draw attention to a steaming pile. There's a reason that the highest rated scripted shows on television are the ones that people seem to think have the stories that interest them most, and clearly the answer must instead be better public relations.

* That in a "tragically ironic" not-so-much-of-a-twist Undertaker was finally able to defeat Edge hopefully, once and for all; but the effort has in some way changed him, and turned the Undertaker himself into the monster in need of being stopped.

* Given that Austin hasn't wrestled in a *very* long time, the notion of a angle leading to his "retirement" are essentially moot. However, Austin has gone on record in an interview somewhere that he has one last big match in him. Now, if he worked out and literally said that this match was only about that one last "big match" to give a knowing goodbye to the fans (read: a "special challenge" sort of scenario) and didn't get run into the ground by and overly contrived angle that the WWE can't possibly sustain (i.e. Flair's retirement) I'd be really interested in watching it. But if he's magically inserted into a title match or random bullshit that coincides with his last match calander, I can't possibly begin to care. Really, I love Austin and would like to; but, man, it's just not going to happen. Exhibition or bust. Otherwise I think that no one buys the attempt or cares about the match.

* I plays guitar in this band (and also don't know html) www.whitewrenchconservatory.com and play through this line: Danelectro: PB&J delay Chorus Reverse Delay Daddy-O Overdrive Boss: Flanger Super Phaser Super Overdrive Digital Delay Super Feedbacker/Distortion Other: Memory Man Occasional: Morley Wah Digitech Whammy/Wah Small Clone (chorus) Small Stone (phaser) [/transmission]

* NOTE: I'd like to preface this by saying that while I don't post much, I've lurked the shit out of this board for far too much of my free time over the last five years. And why I joined is also why I'm posting this: 1. What have we done that you like? Killing General Discussion threads in the main wrestling folders. Like I said, I don't post much, but I always enjoyed reading other perspectives and thoughts on the things that I was watching (read: food for thought). And even though I'm here at least twice a day, I never liked trying to figure out where I stopped in a dozens page long thread about topics I may or may not care about. I first re-visited this forum because of the breadth of discussion and the General Discussion threads seemed prohibitive to focused discussion about smaller issues; as well as bringing out the worst in the "thread police" of posters. 2. What have we done that you wish we hadn't? Really, nothing, thus far. As it stands, there seems to be an attitudinal (sp?) shift towards the less policed board of 2003(4)-ish. A vibrant board which I greatly prefer. 3. Is there anything you'd like us to do? Jumping Jacks. 4. Would you invite people here to expand the community? No less than I always have. 5. Are you optimistic that we're not going to be fucking terrible at this? Sure. 6. Chicken tenders or chicken fingers? Chicken tenders for days. for days.

ECW 24 Man Battle Royal - this really has to be Kane. And he really has to beat Chavo. It would give him something to do, give him and entirely new group of feuds, and breathe some life into the ECW shows. The only problem lies in creative taking him back "over the top" in an effort to make him "EXTREME". And I would imagine that given his size compared to a lot of the ECW roster and the monster push that always comes along with a hard Kane push , the heel that eventually fucks him out of the title would have all the heat in the world to go places. Diva Tag Match - I don't know, Maria gets the pin on Beth; we get Women's title program for Backlash. JBL vs Finlay - This one really seems tailor made for a Finlay win. They'll bring the hate, it should be really good and has the potential to be a sleeper hit. JBL hasn't been the most impressive lately, but given the stage, the stipulation and Finlay this has wild fun written all over it. Umaga vs Batista - Batista wins; Umaga gets drafted to Smackdown, fucks Batista out of high profile win. Umaga wins in fuck finishes until Summerslam. Money in the Bank - I would like to think that Matt Hardy makes an appearance in backstage segment and makes a play for the US title and MVP (assuming they don't just magically stop hating each other since the viewing audience has most certainly forgotten). Matt Hardy gets totally wrecked shortly thereafter by MVP. Hardy takes MVP away from the MITB match in some receipt getting capacity; Punk wins so that he can move to a bigger show (but ultimately not win the title in his cashing in NOTE: this requires the finish to the WWE title match). Flair vs HBK - HBK wins, but not without a really engaging opening segment (read: 4-6 minutes) wherein he does not really want to, when it is actually real, fight Flair and end his career (not dissimilar to the Eddie/Chavo match from RR 04(i think?)). Standing ovation, everyone cries. Let's hug. Orton vs. Cena vs. HHH - Cena get "re-injured" at some point. Orton wins via shenanigans. HHH rematch at Backlash, for just because; more nonsense. Orton wins cage match the following month. Punk loses title match somewhere in or around there, but has a good showing. Cena is done filming move, ultimately wins title at Summerslam. HHH gets another title run after that. Mayweather vs. Show: I don't really care. I'll probably enjoy it; although I'll also be hoping it gets really really unprofessional. Edge vs. Undertaker: Undertaker wins. Streak continues; show over. Absolutely a no-brainer.

No way. You cannot position Hardy in an upper card position now that he has failed two tests. He will either be fired or jobbed down the card until he regains trust within the organization. * Disagree completely. I think you can't afford *not* to push him hard (if not to the title*) on his return. If you know that you may be required under your policy to fire him soon regardless of how much money you can make with him, why would you choose to make none/as little as possible.? *Because, given that the AP has picked up on this, how good would this look from a PR standpoint if the first 3 strike firing is near/at the top of the card. The title will survive. The company can angle out of it on the air. And their commitment to "wellness" will be publicly viewed as having never been stronger. NOTE: The above may seem callous, but this assumes Hardy doesn't stop doing whatever he's doing. If he gets better, everyone wins.

I had a cousin who did that. She ended up with I think five girls, I don't know if they ever got a boy. I always thought it would've been funny if they had girl triplets or something, but in retrospect it would've been horrible. Stephanie doesn't seem like the type of woman to allow herself to be turned into a human conveyor belt. Anyway, there are certain processes couples can undergo to ensure they have either a girl/boy. But that's only usually used in cases of genetic disorders that are more likely in in a certain sex, I think. I don't think normal people can have it if they have no good reason to. True. But the wealthy. ..

* Cross Arm Breaker.

If you're 'supermaning'; i'd imagine that's the type of game you'd spit.

i think that's where you literally turn back time in an effort to save their life. i could be wrong.

* beefheart in '73-74 hum: the tour before downward is heavenward (then and only then) helmet in '93 sonic youth in '83 for the best of bert; and the early tours w/ shelley. butthole surfers: any time in post '86 - '89. coltrane in '60 or '66 fugazi in '90 aesop rock in '01 karate '96 - '99 masters of reality (at all)

* Well. .. it certainly wouldn't be the first time that Gabe overestimated the impact a *bombshell* would have on the cynical faithful.

* Quick question. Are you equally as dumbfounded when the annoucers dicuss that *pick sports team* is at a profound disadvantage because *star player* isn't in the game due to injury.? You know, how dare they exploit said condition as a talking point for their broadcast. I mean, it'd be different if they were making it up. But discussing a legit condition is perfectly normal.