Hunter's Torn Quad

Would you blade?

It matters because Steve Austin was Stone Cold Steve Austin. He might have turned the volume up a little, but he really was the character he portrayed on television. He wasn't some actor dressed up and being something he wasn't. The problem with the Mama Benjamin character isn't that she's a stereotype, it's that she's a stereotype for no reason. Why should she be a stererotype? Why not have her be something like Shelton's real mother? Why not have her be a strong willed black woman who wants the best for her son? Why does she have to be some stupid outdated stereotype of what the writers think is funny? A stereotypical character done just because the writers think it'll be cute is stupid.

No, but he could draw money. Mama Benjamin couldn't draw shit. Not to mention that Steve Austin is pretty much the same person as Stone Cold Steve Austin.

Mama Benjamin, is just another example of what is actually wrong with the company. I wouldn't have a problem with the character if it wasn't such a stupid over-the-top stereotype. Would it have been that hard for them to have the character be someone just like his real mother, and simply act like an actual mother?

It might be crossing the line, but I think it might be the right storyline to break the unofficial ban on women blading. They seem intent on getting this thing over, so they may as well go all the way, and Mickie leaving Trish a bloodied mess might really get this story over big. Or it might turn a lot of people off. But I think it's worth going for given what they've done so far. Could go the fake blood route. Like Mickie knocks the hell out of Trish from behind in the hallway but instead of finishing what she wanted to do on camera, she knocks the living hell out of the camera. If you can find a very good fake blood solution, you could do a "new camera guy and some secruity guys rush up to find Trish bloody mess with crazed Mickie with bloody chair". It's lame sure, but if they don't want to risk her blading it's the easiest way to go. The problem you have with blading the females is the whole looks is their gimmick. It doesn't have to be a big cut, and it can be easy to hide if done right. All it needs is the usual tricks, and a little cut, hidden under her hair, and Trish could easily bleed a fair amount. If it gets her hair all matted up, even better, because it would look worse than it actually is.

It might be crossing the line, but I think it might be the right storyline to break the unofficial ban on women blading. They seem intent on getting this thing over, so they may as well go all the way, and Mickie leaving Trish a bloodied mess might really get this story over big. Or it might turn a lot of people off. But I think it's worth going for given what they've done so far.

Not to mention that talent can leave even if they've just signed a multi-year contract.

Hit-and-miss. He used to be pretty good and worked hard, but since joining New Japan he's gotten lazy and only cranks it up once in a while. If TM is motivated, it could be very good. If not, then *** max.

If Brock Lesnar or Chris Jericho or anyone of real importance joins WWE or re-signs with WWE, then they'll get their own thread. As it is, we're talking about Test, who they never did anything with for years and will probably do nothing with when he comes back, and Ashley, who is unlikely to be around when her extension is over.

Oh well. I really think if people are easily offended, wrestling probably isn't the best hobby for them. The character is funny. Is it making fun of the sterotypical doting black southern mother? Probably. But so what? Do you think someone is the crowd is going "Gee Fred, that's what them coloreds are really like! Lets Lynch them!" No. Everyone who gets the joke is smart enough to see it as a joke, no different than the bowing asians, white trash, hillbillies, and siesta having Latinos. Wrestling has a bad enough image without backward stereotypes being portrayed and people just meekly accepting it because 'it's wrestling'. How is that any different from any sitcom you watch in prime-time? Hell, The Mom on "Everyone hates Chris" is Shelton's Mama minus 200 pounds and 15 years. Stereotypes are in no way restricted to "low brow wrestling" Some of the most popular shows ever are fool of flaming gays, neurotic Jews, drunken Irishman, unintelligible Asians stuffy Englishman, cowardly, obnoxious French, urban blacks, lazy Latinos and guineas. Why should wrestling be held to a higher standard? So, your defense is "well, everyone else is doing it"? You said it gives wrestling a bad image. Why? Its no different than anything else on TV. It might be no different, but it doesn't make it less wrong. Yes, stereotypes are all over other shows, but guess what? It's still cheap heat and an easy out for writers who can't write anything but paint-by-numbers nonsense.

Oh well. I really think if people are easily offended, wrestling probably isn't the best hobby for them. The character is funny. Is it making fun of the sterotypical doting black southern mother? Probably. But so what? Do you think someone is the crowd is going "Gee Fred, that's what them coloreds are really like! Lets Lynch them!" No. Everyone who gets the joke is smart enough to see it as a joke, no different than the bowing asians, white trash, hillbillies, and siesta having Latinos. Wrestling has a bad enough image without backward stereotypes being portrayed and people just meekly accepting it because 'it's wrestling'. How is that any different from any sitcom you watch in prime-time? Hell, The Mom on "Everyone hates Chris" is Shelton's Mama minus 200 pounds and 15 years. Stereotypes are in no way restricted to "low brow wrestling" Some of the most popular shows ever are fool of flaming gays, neurotic Jews, drunken Irishman, unintelligible Asians stuffy Englishman, cowardly, obnoxious French, urban blacks, lazy Latinos and guineas. Why should wrestling be held to a higher standard? So, your defense is "well, everyone else is doing it"?

While the first part is accurate, the sad thing is that to most people wrestling is whatever they see on Raw or Smackdown. What they see makes wrestling look like a complete joke, and I take issue with that.

Oh well. I really think if people are easily offended, wrestling probably isn't the best hobby for them. The character is funny. Is it making fun of the sterotypical doting black southern mother? Probably. But so what? Do you think someone is the crowd is going "Gee Fred, that's what them coloreds are really like! Lets Lynch them!" No. Everyone who gets the joke is smart enough to see it as a joke, no different than the bowing asians, white trash, hillbillies, and siesta having Latinos. Wrestling has a bad enough image without backward stereotypes being portrayed and people just meekly accepting it because 'it's wrestling'.

Orton was booked to go over at Mania. He wasn't. I had to go back and remember what happened, but Meltzer agrees with the story. He injured his shoulder a few weeks before the match, and once they found out the severity of the injury, which he had to have major surgery for after Mania, Dave said they had to go with Taker winning. Which is strange because I asked Dave about the story of Orton set to win as well, and he said he didn't think it was the plan. Didn't mention anything about them 'having to go with Taker winning'. He must have found something more out after talking to one of us, because we can't both be right.

But other hot girls weren't released by WWE and TNA seems to thrive on picking up people WWE release for no reason.

Well, one of them has fake tits and looks hot in short skirts while standing next to Jeff Jarrett. The other is Charlie Haas. Which one do you think Jeff is going to want to bring in?

Definetly, I think the only things most people remember from his WCW run are when He used a steel plate to absorbe a spear from Goldberg, and the Owen Hart tribute match with Benoit. And that he was forced to retire and was fired while recovering from multiple concussions.

Whichever match goes on last will see the babyface win. In the case of the SD match, Rey, in the case of the Raw match, Cena. Though, I have got a feeling they may go for the shock of having Cena turn heel to retain the belt, because if Cena retains then he won't get a babyface reaction, and they may feel like they've got to go with it and so turn him heel

He has. He said it was basically down to TNA showing no interest and he felt he had to work somewhere. They were, but that was then and this is now. Plans change constantly in WWE.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/21/lionel.tate/index.html

Yeah, it makes sense to let him keep on going even if he has a bad hip. I remember years ago people saying that wrestlers should go over Benoit because of how injured he was and it was only a matter of time before he had to retire. Yet, Benoit's still there and some of those guys that "should've" beaten Benoit are gone. Benoit was ten years younger. Undertaker is ten years older and a lot more fragile and more likely than Benoit is, even now, to fall apart so bad he can’t come back. Man, I don't even know what I'm arguing anymore. That's what I'm kind of saying. Taker shouldn't necessarily run the company as champion or anything but he should always be at the top and always a threat. Kind of as a side attraction but not too, too much. To do that he has to be invincible or almost invincible. Yes, it's true that he hasn't been a top draw but there seem to be signs of that turning around. His DVD was apparantly from what I heard the best selling wrestling DVD of all time. I think he's having a little bit of a resurgence in popularity. If Undertaker is always meant to be at the top and a threat, what about when it comes time for the new guys to take his spot and help carry the company? That time is now. It’s his time to stop being a top guy and let someone new in his spot. As for his DVD selling huge, that’s great, but it was nostalgia. Nostalgia does not last and is not something to build around. Just going back to that equation thing again. Lots of us on this board thumb up are nose at the WWE storylines. Yet, we continue to watch and why is that? A lot of it is due to the possibility of watching an entertaining charactor or a great wrestling match. That keeps us hooked and lets us survive the junk that is constantly thrown in our faces by the WWE. The Undertaker even if he isn't the best draw ever does keep a lot of people hooked like that and that's why he has to stay strong. I’m all for Undertaker being kept strong, so it means something when he gets beaten, but it should not be at the expense of someone who could mean something and doesn’t need to be squashed, which is what usually happens with people Undertaker feuds with.

Sure, Taker's fragile but he's tougher than a lot of other wrestlers and he can still go which is amazing considering he's supposed to be due for hip surgery which could possibly end his career. You admit he’s fragile and that he needs hip surgery, which is true, and you want him as a top guy? Does that make any sense? Why not have Taker at the top? The Undertaker's about the best thing going right now. He's got a mystique, he's got notsgolia, he's credible, he's still wrestling well, he has respect, he's got a great look, he is unique compared to the rest of the roster and from what I've seen of casual fans they almost all want the Taker to be just like he is. Invincable. The Taker is a special case and he's kind of a side show anyway. Let him be the man. Jobbing him out is just stupid. Great, he’s got a mystique. So what? It gets cancelled out by everything else. Nostalgia? Nostalgia only lasts for so long. Hulk Hogan had tons more nostalgia than Undertaker when they put the belt on him. Ratings for both show promptly fell a full point. He can wrestle well, but he wrestles well on a part-time schedule. No part-timer, unless he’s a super draw, which Undertaker isn’t, should be a top guy. A great look? He has a great entrance, I’ll give him that. Nothing is wrong with Undertaker being a special case, a side show type who does his thing a few times a year. But making him a top guy is insane. If Taker wasn't who he was would Angle vs Taker be as intriguing as it was? No, it wouln't. Doesn’t mean Undertaker should be a top guy,

Because I can see what the casual audience likes? No, it's because you're a bit of clueless monkey. Now seriously, would you really job the Taker out? I can't see him losing cleanly more than once a year otherwise his charactor is ruint and his ability to put anyone over which so much smarts want is gone. Who said he had to be jobbed out? He just shouldn't be beating guys who shouldn't be beaten, especially by an old part-time wrestler.

I can see why you're on so many ignore lists.

We need layers, but a 44-year old who is fragile and doesn't work a full schedule should not be at the very top of the list.