Hunter's Torn Quad

Not sure why Ahmed joined the Nation, but he got kicked up because he injured himself, something he did quite a lot, and needed time off. Austin/Ahmed, I think, was a match floated for One Night Only or some PPV, before Austin went down with his neck injury. Once Austin hurt his neck, though, no way would they have risked putting Austin in the ring with Ahmed.

They gave the first Angle/Sting match away for free in April. It had no build, opened up the show, and lasted about five minutes before ending in a double disqualification. while i don't think the main should be Angle/Sting (i'd much rather since Joe in the spot), i don't buy the argument that the Angle/Sting can't draw anything because they had a dq ending on Impact in April. WM14 wasn't the first time Austin/HBK wrestled (they did a double dq on an IYH in 97), and then did ok. Of course, i'm in no way saying either Angle or Sting are draws like HBK and Austin. I'm just saying that having a match on the big show that has happened before isn't the end of the world always. The catch is that it has to be promoted well, which TNA hasn't shown it can do since Jarrett/Raven. I don't think people are necessarily saying Angle/Sting can't draw because they gave away the first match on Impact. However, that the first match has already been done, and in such a throwaway manner, means a crucial promotional aspect of the match, that would have helped it draw, can't now be used. And TNA needs all the help it can in order to get people to pay to see the PPV's.

He used the name Junior Fatu. Clean or not, Lethal losing right now is beyond stupid. Whatever he gained from last night was wasted.

They gave the first Angle/Sting match away for free in April. It had no build, opened up the show, and lasted about five minutes before ending in a double disqualification.

At this stage, it's pointless trying to come up with reasons for the stupidity that is TNA booking. You can't reach a conclusion that makes sense, and you just give yourself a headache.

when will people realize that Wrestling Internet Rumors are normally a 50/50 shot on being true or false? They're not always true, so yeah it's a possibility that the Booker T rumor is false as well. Wouldn't this be the 50% that is true then? I think he probably did give his notice in, but more to register his disgust with how he's being used rather than with a real intent to quit. I think when push comes to shove, they'll come to an agreement that will bring Flair back, if they haven't already. As for Booker, I think if he doesn't appear tonight then it's pretty much a given he's suspended, at least. Has he quit over it? Maybe. That one wouldn't surprise me.

A possible debut at Impact:

This story could still be true, and the Booker one could be too. Flair is asked: "I heard you have now quit the WWE" Flair says: "That is not true. " It doesn't mean the original story is false, because if he's come to terms on a return, he's back with the company, and is quite correct in saying he hasn't quit. If Flair is being honest, but the original story is true, then it's simply a non-denial denial. Of course, that's assuming those circumstances to be correct; the original story could be false or Flair could be lying. Either way, it's probably not wise to take Flair's comments at face value just yet. We'll probably know for sure either way in a few weeks.

Meltzer's latest update says Angle against Sting is the planned main event for BFG right now.

I believe the story was that Lynn asked for his release because after being removed as a road agent and made a wrestler again, he was being used rarely, if at all, and so wasn't getting paid as often as he used to be. He wanted out so he could get back on the independent scene and start making money..

It's like WWE can't help but do things that an intelligent person would know to avoid doing.

When was Booker's first suspension? I won't miss the King Booker gimmick.

Skipping to the end: This gives us: But the big news is: Joe debuts two days earlier in his only other date for NOAH on that tour.

The HHH-related heat between Rock and Shawn basically stems from the time when Rock and Hunter were being built up to eventually take the top spot, with Shawn backing Hunter and trying to stop Rock from getting that position. There's the often told story from that time period, and this is around 1997, when Bret was booked to beat Rock clean via sharpshooter on Raw. Bret felt Rock was the future and didn't think he should beat him clean and got the finish changed to Rock winning via disqualification. This pissed off Shawn for a couple of reasons, one of them being that he was the one who pushed for Bret to win clean, and he wasn't doing it to build Bret up by any means. Rock appreciated what Bret did for him, which is why he always speaks highly of him. Rock is also aware of who came up with that finish and why.

WWE.com reports Hunter against Carlito for Unforgiven. Boy, they're really feeding some red hot names to Hunter in his big comeback...

Real reason? He complained that he should be on the card over Al Snow because he'd been with the company longer.

Hogan didn't put Goldberg over. To save time, I'll repost my explanation from the earlier thread: True, and some people assume that jobbing to someone means putting them over, when you can lose to someone and bury them at the same time, either in the body of the match or the follow up.

Nobody really, but because he was friends with Dave Meltzer... Except he wasn't friends with Meltzer. In fact, he hated him quite a lot until around 1998. He did. His argument was that he didn't need to beat Benoit because the match was going to be such that they'd both gain from it so it didn't matter if he won or not.

That's funny, I thought it was because RVD got busted with pot and had to give up two titles in consecutive days. That's why RVD dropped the belt, but Edge got the nod to be put in the title program because he drew ratings during his short-term title reign earlier in the year.

Karen is on TV all the time, in the top angles, and a central figure in all of Kurt's storylines. What would she have to complain about?

Minor note here. Since Cena and Batista switched shows, the World Heavyweight title is now on Smackdown I believe. I'm too used to all the important things being on Raw.

This is always a fun debate... I don't think there is any accepted consensus opinion on the lineage of the various world titles, but this is how I see it: The NWA title is the one currently held by Adam Pearce, and has no modern connection with any of the world titles in WWE. The board of the NWA, such as it is, sanction the NWA champion and they recognize Adam Pearce as NWA world champion. The WWF title is the WWE title, and the 'World heavyweight' title is simply the gold belt that Eric gave to Hunter and has nothing to do with the NWA title, the WCW title or the WWF title. The WWF and WCW titles were merged into the Unified title. When Brock Lesnar took it to Smackdown, it was subsequently renamed the WWE title, and so for me the WWE Title is still the merged WWF and WCW titles, simply with a new name. The 'World heavyweight' title on Raw is simply a title belt that came out of a suitcase and was given a fancy name. Because it looks like the old Big Gold Belt, some people take it to mean it's a continuance of the NWA or WCW title, but I don't see it that way. Whatever the NWA title was is strictly a part of the NWA and not WWE, and the WCW title is still part of the Unified title which is now called the WWE title. For me, the WWE title's lineage goes back to Chris Jericho, because it's still the renamed Unified title. The lineage of the 'World heavyweight' title goes back to when Eric pulled it out of the briefcase.

It's the follow up that means as much, if not more, than the actual clean job. Goldberg didn't drop the ball after beating Hogan simply because he never got the ball. Hogan still had it and never let it go even though he 'put Goldberg over'. It's far too simplistic to say if someone jobs clean in the middle he put someone over. Nash lost clean to Rey, but he sure didn't put Rey over, and it would be beyond comical to suggest he did. Once a guy gets the ball, yes, he should be judged on how he runs with it. However, if the guy who gave him the ball, by losing clean to him, makes sure he never gets a real chance to run with it, how can you say he put him over?