Hunter's Torn Quad

If I thought for one second Russo and Ferrera would tell the truth, I'd give it a shot. As it is, I'll wait for it to be uploaded in some fashion, and get it for free.

With Canadian and other non-US wrestlers, it's likely they take a different viewpoint in losing in their hometowns/countries, because they don't wrestle there as often as they do in America. Bret's refusal to put Shawn over wasn't just down to not wanting to lose in Canada, but not wanting to put over a guy who not only refused to lose to him in return, but had also repeatedly stated in the months and weeks before Montreal that he wasn't going to do jobs to anyone at all. In Meltzer's big piece on Montreal, he mentions two times where Michaels told Vince and Bret to their faces that he (Shawn) wasn't going to do any jobs to anyone in the company. When it came down to Bret dropping the title, as the aforemention Meltzer piece, and the Meltzer quotes also state, Bret was willing to drop the belt to anyone at any time once they got out of Canada. He even broke down and agreed to lose to Shawn if he had to, just not in Canada. It should also once again be pointed out that Bret had the contractual right to refuse any job asked of him in his last 30 days with the WWF, as all finishes had to be mutually agreed upon with Vince, and they had agreed on a finish for Montreal, and for the next month in Springfield.

Whether anyone has gotten over Montreal or not, everything will undoubtedly get started all over again when WWE releases Screwed: The Bret Hart Story, and we'll be right back at the beginning.

I see they're still letting the barbers get drunk at Supercuts.

What made Kreski so good was that he paid attention to detail, something that has been lacking ever since he left. Kreski would have all sorts of boards and flowcharts set up, which indicated what characters were feuding with who, which people could team up or not based on whether they had feuded in the past, etc, that sort of thing.

This is a problem that is unlikely to ever be addressed, and one that is going to dog the company until it is. Stephanie has been head writer for over 4 and a half years now, and hasn't shown the slightest hint that she's any good at her job. While it's true that Vince makes the final call on things, some of the blame has to go to the people who come up with the stuff that gets presented to Vince, because he can only work with what Stephanie and co give him.

The New Japan v UWF-I feud in a nutshell Nobuhiko Takada formed UWF-I in 1991, which was an offshoot of the second UWF incarnation, which itself was founded by Akira Maeda in 1988 when he and Takada left New Japan. The second version of the UWF shut up shop in 1990-1, with Maeda going on to form RINGS and Takada forming the UWF-I. In 1993, UWF-I, with the aid of Lou Thesz who had publicly endorsed UWF-I as real wrestling, made a grandstand challenge to New Japan for a ‘real’ match with Nobuhiko Takada, who was the UWF-I World Champion at the time, and even had Lou Thesz’s original NWA Title belt, to take on Masahiro Chono. They even went to New Japan’s offices to make the challenge, and the wrestling magazines in Japan covered it, which got them heat with New Japan, as New Japan felt the magazines should have known that it was a grandstand challenge and shouldn’t have given them coverage. Anyway, this all ended with New Japan, in order to save face, making a series of counter demands, such as having the match in a cage or something like that, as well as demanding some sort of battle royal, which they knew full well UWF-I would never agree to, as UWF-I was a shoot group, and they’d never do something as obviously fake as that. Later that year, when Vader agreed to work dates for UWF-I, the basis was that Takada had challenged other world champions, with Vader, the WCW Champion at the time, being the only one to accept the challenge. This was also continued in 1994, when UWF-I did this big tournament, and made a grandstand challenge again to other world champions, including RINGS, New Japan, and All Japan, with RINGS and All Japan ignoring it, and Shinya Hashimoto, who was IWGP Champion at the time, publicly decrying UWF-I for not going through the right channels to make the challenge. Fast forward to the middle of 1995, and UWF-I, which had been riding high, was down and virtually out of it. Thesz had left them, Kazuo Yamazaki had jumped to New Japan, and Gary Albright had gone to All Japan, all of which had to do with UWF-I being in a money losing spiral. So, Takada did the only thing he could do to try and keep UWF-I going, and approached New Japan in order to work an inter-promotional feud. The three big events were the Tokyo Dome shows in October of 1995, and January and April of 1996. The October and January Dome shows were both sellout headlined by Takada taking on Keiji Muto, with the first one being the UWF-I Champion (by this time Thesz had gone, so Takada was no longer seen as a true World Champion) against the IWGP Heavyweight Champion, and the combined attendances and gates were 132,000 fans and over $12 million dollars respectively, which make Takada v Muto the best drawing singles feud in history. In addition to that, the April 1996 Dome show, headlined by Takada, who had won the IWGP Title in the second match with Muto, defending against Shinya Hashimoto, was another sellout, drawing 65,000 fans, with a gate of $5.7 million dollars, which make the UWF-I v New Japan the best drawing feud in history. Eric Bischoff was in attendance for the October 1995 Dome Show, which drew 67,000, and was amazed at the business it did, and he was able to see that an inter-promotional feud could do big business, and when the opportunity came at recreating his own version in WCW with Hall and Nash, he jumped at the chance What made the UWF-I v New Japan feud different to the NWO v WCW feud is that it ended with the hometown team winning the decisive match and the invaders being the ones to go out of business, and not the other way around.

Did you even watch their match at Unforgiven ? Hunter dominated most of it. I'll get to the Jericho and Rock matches in a minute. While that may be true, if you're going to put him in the main event scene, book him so he can actually draw. Disguise his flaws, don't shine a spotlight on them. I can only guess you never watched the nunumerous Raw's where he speared the referee or other babyfaces by accident, and very rarely speared who he was aiming for. During the build up to his matches with Jericho and Rock he was spearing everyone except the guys he was aiming for. He was portrayed as putz who couldn't hit the target. Yeah, that'll make people get behind him(!) Which is where building up the midcard comes in. He beat them clean, but he was never really put over them, because the build up to most of those matches made him out to be an idiot. Sure, it might not last, but that doesn't mean you don't even try, or do your best to cut him off as soon as possible. And while the screwjob loss to Nash might have damaged his drawing power, he still got big reactions from the fans. Again I have to ask if you actually watched the Unforgiven match. And so what if Goldberg only looked competent in short matches ? You don't book a guy to expose his weaknesses, especially if he's meant to be a main eventer. People who know better say otherwise. I'm going to let everyone else debate the question at hand. It's tiresome having to explain basic booking concepts over and over again.

Have you seen her face recently ? She looks like the Cher's son in Mask.

Walk up to him and say, "Dude, you fucked Chyna. What the hell were you thinking ?"

WWE did misuse Goldberg, and it amazes me that people still say otherwise. Goldberg got over by being a monster, the same way Batista got over, and you don't book a monster to be a clueless fool, who keeps getting outsmarted all the time, and made to look like an idiot who is always spearing referee's and other babyfaces by accident. If Steve Austin had been booked so badly, getting outsmarted by Vince McMahon every week, and accidentally Stunning everyone in sight, he never would have gotten over big either. It's basic common sense to not book a top babyface in such a insanely stupid manner, and how the heck anyone can say that the way Goldberg was booked was anything other than inept is baffling. Goldberg was allowed to slaughter Hunter, including beating ALL of Evolution before pinning Hunter at SSeries. If Goldberg is unable to get over without destroying a company in the process, there is a big problem. Goldberg seemed to want to destroy Rock, Jericho, Hunter (which he did), Mark Henry, etc. and it would have been idiotic for the WWE to trash everybody to protect GB. The WWE tried to give him something resembling a character and still had him dominate the company. To give GB what he wanted would have led to more destruction than JJ has done in TNA. Hunter made Goldberg look like an unbeatable God in the ring. -=Mike Not surprising, considering he had been devalued considerably by that point. If they had booked him that strong from his first day in, and not made him such a joke of a babyface, he might have really gotten over, but for the usual petty reasons that was never going to happen. He doesn't have to destroy everyone. He just needs to be portrayed as a dominating monster, who isn't a clueless putz. He felt like that because that is how he was booked in WCW, which was his only experience in wrestling. Why he felt like that doesn't really matter, because he was right. Monsters don't get over as monsters by being booked as idiots. And it's not done primarily to protect Goldberg, though he should be protected, but to get him over. When Goldberg was a monster, like at Summeslam, the people went crazy for the guy. Why should he have been given 'a character' in the first place ? It was alread proven he could get over like crazy just by being a monster. Why tamper with what works ? Only at Survivor Series, long past the point when it really mattered. Hunter outsmarted him at Summerslam even though he could barely walk to the ring, and at Unforgiven Hunter was dominant for most of the match, with Goldberg having to sell for most of it, which isn't what the people wanted.

Hunter v Nash went on for so long because Hunter wanted it to. That simple really. WWE did misuse Goldberg, and it amazes me that people still say otherwise. Goldberg got over by being a monster, the same way Batista got over, and you don't book a monster to be a clueless fool, who keeps getting outsmarted all the time, and made to look like an idiot who is always spearing referee's and other babyfaces by accident. If Steve Austin had been booked so badly, getting outsmarted by Vince McMahon every week, and accidentally Stunning everyone in sight, he never would have gotten over big either. It's basic common sense to not book a top babyface in such a insanely stupid manner, and how the heck anyone can say that the way Goldberg was booked was anything other than inept is baffling.

Hey, who hasn't done that at least once.

Hardway.

It'll be interesting to see how they get around London bleeding so much.

While nobody is arguing that Hunter should have been on Raw in some fashion, did he really have to open Raw and then walk out after the main event and steal the spotlight from the new champion ?

Yes, let's kill a babyface push on the biggest stage of the year for no real reason other than to swerve people. Welcome the TSM Vince Russo. I'd have LOVED to see NYC react to that. If Triple H had hit that pedigree right at the end and pinned Benoit, I have zero doubt that the fans would have become crazy unruly, and pelted the ring with anything they could get their hands on. MSG wanted Benoit to win, and they weren't going to be satisfied with any other result.

Yes, let's kill a babyface push on the biggest stage of the year for no real reason other than to swerve people. Welcome the TSM Vince Russo.

Domestic business has usually dropped after Wrestlemania, presumably due to all the major angles peaking. So, they go overseas, where business is usually pretty strong, due to them not running in overseas markets a lot.

No, Dixie Carter is. When it comes to matters of booking, Jeff has the real final say. If Dixie wanted something really bad enough, I'm sure she could put her foot down, but she usually stays out of the wrestling side of things, especially finishes. Let me specify about Jeff's booking power. He has the final say over his own programs. Like with bookers during Hogan's run in WCW, Dusty does the lions share of work, but Hogan had the final say over anything involving him. Same deal with Jarrett here. The final call over everything Jarrett does, as it always has done, lies with Jeff himself. Like the time when Jarrett wanted to drop the title to Monty Brown and Dusty said Monty was not ready? I can't think why Jeff would agree with a decision for him to not drop his vanity belt. Oh, wait. There have been two occasions when Jeff was 'meant' to drop the belt to Monty. If Jeff really had wanted to drop the belt Monty, he would have ensured Monty got built up enough so he could drop it to him the second time.

That was Hunter's main argument against losing to Booker, whether he really meant it or not is another question, seeing as he then got his title loss to Goldberg postponed for three months so he could feud with Kevin Nash.

No, Dixie Carter is. When it comes to matters of booking, Jeff has the real final say. If Dixie wanted something really bad enough, I'm sure she could put her foot down, but she usually stays out of the wrestling side of things, especially finishes. Let me specify about Jeff's booking power. He has the final say over his own programs. Like with bookers during Hogan's run in WCW, Dusty does the lions share of work, but Hogan had the final say over anything involving him. Same deal with Jarrett here. The final call over everything Jarrett does, as it always has done, lies with Jeff himself.

The HBK mark shouldn't freak out too much. Raw hinted at a rematch, where Shawn will no doubt get the win back that he doesn't really need.

I like this. Maybe even have Lilian Garcia/Tony Chimmel refuse to announce him to the ring and when he does wrestle in the first few months the WWE officials have an obvious bias against him, but since everybody in the company (including the commentaters) despise him, there's nothing he can do. Another good touch. The ring announcers can't introduce him because, in kayfabe, they don't have his details at hand because he's not under contract, and they can't introduce people who just hop over the guardrail. But how exactly would they explain him wrestling despite supposedly not having a contract? For his first few matches, have wrestlers come to the ring to try and get rid of Lesnar because they don't want him around. Lesnar beats them up and tosses them out of the ring; no referee to count a pinfall because he's not an official member of the roster yet. Lesnar can say that the only reason the wrestlers don't want him around is because they know that they can't beat him, and they're scared of him. After a few weeks of this, have Theodore Long, because this really needs to happen on Smackdown, confront Lesnar outside the arena and tell him that he can't keep doing this because it's disrupting his program, so Long reluctantly offers Lesnar a contract, on condition Lesnar stops disrupting Smackdown. Even after Lesnar has signed the deal, still have him have to get ready for matches in a part of the arena away from the locker room, which plays off of the fact that the wrestlers don't want him around them anymore, which is something everyone can buy as the truth, because it pretty much is the truth. Everyone with a brain also knows that matches, feuds and angles are predetermined. That doesn't stop them, nor should it, from trying to create a believable storyline around something that the people do know is the truth. The people know Lesnar walked out. The people know that Lesnar isn't liked by the other wrestlers. The people know that Lesnar filed a lawsuit. Well, some of them do. So why not use that truth to build a storyline around. Yes, the people will know deep down that it's a storyline, but it's not one that insults their intelligence, because it's one that’s believable and credible. After all, with what the people already know about how the wrestlers feel about Lesnar for what he did, it’s not that big of a stretch to picture them not even wanting the guy to dress anywhere near them. How are two people, who the fans know don’t really run things, bidding over the services of a wrestler who they already know has signed for the company, any more realistic ? For one thing, the people know the wrestlers don’t like Lesnar and don’t want him around, so why would either GM want him around ? In your scenario, they are actively wanting to bring in to the locker room someone that everybody knows nobody wants around. It makes more sense to have them reluctantly bring Lesnar back. If either GM brings back someone that everyone knows the rest of the locker room doesn’t want back, it’s far better that they be seen to do so reluctantly, and for the good of Smackdown/Raw, by stopping the interruptions.

It's not an angle. And the Hogan-Russo deal that ended up in court also wasn't an angle. It started out as one, but turned into a shoot on Hogan.