Hunter's Torn Quad

I don't think Spike would want to have another 2 hour prime time wrestling show on their network. Also, having both his prime time shows on the same network would take away a negotiating tool from Vince McMahon. If he has Raw and Smackdown on different networks, he can play them off each other when negotiating a new deal.

This is a really good match. Watch this to see great old school tag team wrestling, and also to see Dusty kill Chicago for the NWA.

I've seen most of the matches on the Dome Event, and it was easily the best match of those that I've seen from that night. It was really good, very crisp, everything was well executed, and it was a treat to watch. Tanahashi and Nakamura, more Tanahashi, are really good young workers, and if they improve as well as they have done so far, a rematch at next year's Dome Event would probably by near or at MOTY levels.

Imagine how many units would have been sold had WWE actually promoted the thing on TV.

If Vitali was so inferior to Lewis, why did Lewis conveniently choose to retire before there was a rematch between the two ? There was enough clamor for a rematch that Lewis would have made a decent payoff for the fight. And yet Lewis decided not to take a fight that you imply he would have easily won. If Lewis was as confident of beating Vitali as you are, he would have taken one last payoff before retiring. Could Lewis have beaten Vitali convincingly in a rematch ? You seem to think so, but Lewis evidently didn't.

Yeah, he should have been stopped, but I see the way the fight ended as Vitali losing rather than Lewis winning. Vitali was way ahead on points at the time the fight was called off, and, if not for the cuts, Vitali would almost assuredly have beaten Lewis that night. And if that had happened, you can bet that Lewis would have stuck around until he got the World Title back. So what you're saying is that he'd NEVER retire then He'd have won the World Title eventually, even if not by totally honest means. Lewis was probably the most credible World Champion when he retired, and as such meant $$$ at the box office, and someone like that doesn't go without a title for long, even if he doesn't have to really earn it

A title that starts out life as being handed to someone from a briefcase doesn't start out with a lot of credibility. If only to at least make it look like the title was earned, they should have had Hunter v Flair that night be for the vacant World Title.

Actually, Lewis will probably be looked on rather favorably by future generations, whereas at this rate, Vitali will probably be known as the guy who took out some out-of-shape fighters (Johnson, Sanders, etc.) except the one that truly mattered (Lewis). The only reason Vitali didn't take Lewis out was because Lewis didn't have the balls to give him the rematch he deserved. And while Lewis will be looked favorably upon by future generations, he'll always have the cloud hanging over his head of having quit rather than facing Vitali again. As for: Yeah, he should have been stopped, but I see the way the fight ended as Vitali losing rather than Lewis winning. Vitali was way ahead on points at the time the fight was called off, and, if not for the cuts, Vitali would almost assuredly have beaten Lewis that night. And if that had happened, you can bet that Lewis would have stuck around until he got the World Title back.

That's a lie. Nash became booker just before World War III of 1998.

The trouble is, while that makes sense and is how it should be done, WWE are too set in their ways to work around weaknesses like that. Things are done a certain way in WWE, and their mindset is to have people adapt to their thinking, rather than the other way around, regardless if the later is what's best for business.

What would Nash's immediate family and friends do with a lock of his hair ?

Hey Nash, fuck off.

Actually, he will have to be able to cut good, long interviews. WWE top guys, the ones that are given a proper run on top, as Batista surely will be given, have always had to do long interviews, and Batista isn't at that level yet. If he doesn't get to that level fast, before he's finally put in that position, it could be the thing that drags him down. WWE will have to be very careful with how they book Batista if they want to work around that, and, while they can do it, I don't think they will, simply because they have set ideas about how top guy should be handled, regardless of whether it's for the best.

I stopped watching Smackdown regularly right when the Bradshaw push started. I flicked over to see what was happening on SD for a few minutes at a time until around September, at which point I stopped watching it altogether. The only time I ever watch any of SD is if anything big happens, which is very rare, and even then all I watch is that one segment before turning over to something else. I stopped watching Raw regularly when Orton won the title. I still check it out, but I rarely, if ever, watch it live anymore, and I stick to taping it and skimming over the crap to watch anything of value that might happen to take place. The only wrestling I watching regularly now is OVW or New Japan, with some ROH thrown in.

Either way I don't think it's fair to call him chickenshit, since you don't know if it's a money issue or a personal decision. So it was pure coincidence he decided to retire right after he barely got past Vitali Klitschko ? If Lewis had any kind of manhood about him, he would have wanted an immediate rematch against Klitschko, if only to prove that he really was the best heavyweight in the world. The ironic thing is that Lewis did to Klitschko the same thing that Riddick Bowe did to Lewis, that being chicken out of a fight that he should have taken. Lewis was the first in line to call Bowe a coward for ducking him, and it's the same thing here. Lewis was too scared to take on someone he didn't think he could beat, and so refused to fight, instead deciding to 'retire on top'. Nobody retiring like that retires 'on top'. Lewis is, was, and always will be known as the guy who quit rather than give Klitschko the rematch he deserved.

For what it's worth, the original plan was for Orton to win the title at WM, jump to Smackdown and turn heel. Currently, the plan is apparently for Batista to turn before WM, probably at the Rumble or Raw the day after, and Orton to go heel, with him still jumping to Smackdown, and the WM main event being a three-way with Batista, Hunter and Orton.

Stacy doesn't miss a trick, does she ? While in WCW, she goes out with the son of Ric Flair. Then, she goes to the WWF and begins dating the kind of wrestler that is likely to get chance after chance to become a superstar. And when that guy is fired, she starts going around with the guy who is set to be one of the wrestlers the company is going to build its future around. Batista's wife should be worried right about now.

It sure isn't like Eddie, Kurt or Brock's reign. Fans actually cared about the title when those three had it. At least with those three, you could count on both a really good match and, nine times out of ten, a clean finish. With JBL, chances are you'll get a decent match, but you're assured of a screwjob finish. How can any title have credibility with a neverending stream of screwjob finishes ? At least when Honky had the IC Title, he did a bunch of non-title matches that had clean finishes in order to set up the screwjobs. We don't even get that with JBL. He's been jobbing on House shows and dark matches to Undertaker tons over the last 6 months.... HTM didn't job on TV either JBL's jobs to Undi are just to end tv tapings on a 'high' note. Other than that, they're meaningless. HTM's house show jobs at least led to return title matches at that arena, and meant something to the local market.

These are the average ratings for Smackdown from July to December of 2004: July Average: 3.18 August Average: 3.02 September Average: 2.84 October Average: 3.37 November Average: 3.25 December Average: 3.23 The three January episodes have an average rating of 3.6. Assuming the January 27th edition does a 3.5, the average rating for January would be a 3.57. It should also be noted that the worst rating for a non-holiday edition of Smackdown, a 2.5, was in September of last year. The ratings for this month so far are consistent, just as they were in December. However, while they are, on the whole, up from the last six months of last year, they aren't up a great deal from the last three months of 2004. In addition to that, as was pointed out in another thread, from October to December, JBL had a significant negative effect on viewership whenever he was the focal point of a match or angle, and it's hard to see how that would have changed much in the last month or so.

WWE is still making a profit. Business might be down across the board, for the greater part, but WWE is still making tons of money, so Vince and co probably don't care; they're still making money, so, from their position, they have no need to worry. As for why they don't change the titles, well, we all know the deal on Raw. With Smackdown, Vince loves the JBL character, on every level, so he isn't going to pull the plug on it.

It sure isn't like Eddie, Kurt or Brock's reign. Fans actually cared about the title when those three had it. At least with those three, you could count on both a really good match and, nine times out of ten, a clean finish. With JBL, chances are you'll get a decent match, but you're assured of a screwjob finish. How can any title have credibility with a neverending stream of screwjob finishes ? At least when Honky had the IC Title, he did a bunch of non-title matches that had clean finishes in order to set up the screwjobs. We don't even get that with JBL. As for people paying to see JBL lose, while that may be true, not many people have been paying to see him lose, at least for the majority of his reign. House show attendance with JBL on top sank to some horrible levels over the fall, and, while they've begun to pick up somewhat recently, that's more down to the markets they're in, rather than JBL being any kind of a draw. And the notion of someone being made a star by beating JBL, that's a joke. You get made a star by beating one, and JBL is no star. Stars don't run off viewers when they're the focal point of television. JBL did that for October to December, and probably is still doing that now.

Actually, we're both wrong. SD's worst rating was for the July 4th SD in 2002. However, discounting that, because it was a holiday number, the worst regular SD rating was a 2.5 for the September 2nd 2004 SD. Guess who was champion then ? I'll give you a hint; it wasn't Eddie Guerrero. Workrate isn't a big factor, true, but, all other factors being equal, a good worker will likely do better than a bad one, purely because people will be educated to expect a good/entertaining match from the guy. As for: Shame the fact that, for October to December on SD, JBL was a negative ratings draw blows that assumption out of the water. Not really. It's 'adaquete' for his current position, but put him in the top spot, and the fans are going to expect a level of work that he can't put out right now. In time, he probably could rise to a World Champion level worker, or at least be made to look like one. If that were the case, which it isn't, they wouldn't be strapping a rocket Batista. They'd be content to just make him a transition champion. You were shown to be wrong with a number of your assumptions, so I'd say that makes it more opinion, and a wrong one at that, than fact.

No, you are flat out wrong. Batista isn't bad in the ring, not by a long shot, but as a WWE main event level wrestler he can't cut the mustard. I'll reiterate what I said earlier has it appears you didn't notice it the first time. WWE fans expect a certain level of work in the main event scene, and Batista just is not good enough to work at that level. Could he be carried to it ? Sure. But there aren't enough people who can do that and be accepted in that main event spot. Can Batista get to that level ? Yes. But he'll find it easier and quicker to get there without the pressure of being in the top spot. As an overall package, Batista is not main event level yet. That's just how it is. And if he gets put in the spotlight before he is at that level, which he can get to, then he'll either have to improve like crazy, or he'll flop, and flop big. Smackdown got its worst rating ever under Bradshaw's watch. And buy rates, up until Armageddon, were sinking like a stone under Bradshaw's watch. Not to mention some really shitty house show attendances.

The stripes are new.

I'm with Haas Of Pain on this one. Cena IS super over - or as super over as it gets nowadays anyway - and I'd go as far as to say that he is currently the most over face in the company. Absolutely. He shouldn't be carrying the offense in a match anyway - he's a face! Cena is not a great worker (duh), but he is good at selling a beating and timing his comeback spots. He needs his flaws hiding and his strengths being played to by getting put in simple 80s-Hogan-style matches until he can manage to put on a stronger all-round match, if ever. Cena isn't super over by any means, and if how over he is as super over as it gets today, then things are really going to sink, because someone who is as over as Cena is isn't over enough to carry a company/brand. As for: That might be nice for the midcard, but it won't work at the top level. Today's fans aren't going to accept a "simple 80s-Hogan-style match" on top. They've been weaned on hard working good-to-great main events for so long, that something as basic as a formula Hogan match on top just is not going to cut it, no matter how over the wrestler might be.