RavishingRickRudo

RAW is WAR (Wrestling and Romance)

FINALLY! The sexual tension from what-the-fuck-ever-that-show-was-last-year-where-they-kissed BOILS OVER! They hate each other, but they can't resist their FEELINGS! MY GOD! She's a McMahon! He ran WCW! They're two starcrossed lovers whose love was just not meant for this world! Erico and Fattyet!

You still got the "HBK turns" and "Guerreros break up" ...

Yeah, but it's by the same 5 people.

You're going to have to be more specific in the "You all" thing... not all of us said that.

Here are Meltzers thoughts on the card. He's freaking nuts and has been so for a while, but it's probably what you want to hear... Tonight's line-up and thoughts: *Molly Holly vs. Lita for womens title - I'm kind of surprised they didn't get the belt on Lita about a month ago to help promote her book, but the timing didn't work out. I expect Lita to win to complete the comeback from a broken neck story. It will probably be kept short and it should be decent. *Tajiri vs. Jamie Noble for the cruiserweight title - This is one of those bouts that the crowd will make a difference in because you know it'll be technically sound. Just a question of how much they get behind Tajiri. Expect interference from Tajiri's crew, who will apparently be given the name Kyo Dai (Japanese for enormous) tonight. Nobody has told me this, but the timing looks right for Nidia to come back, but if she does, it should lead to a title change. I was under the impression the title goes to Mysterio and this was just a program to buy time, so we'll see. *Bashams vs. Guerreros for Smackdown tag titles - Based on the matches on Smackdown, including the handicap match with Eddy, this should be a sleeper on the show. Bashams have not been allowed with the limitations of their character to show that their interview skills (Doug in particular) are as good as their wrestling ability. Eddy in the ring is pretty close to the best in the business and theoretically Dallas should be a great city for him. It's not a match that people are going to rush to spend money to see, but in its spot on the card, should do very well. *Chris Benoit & Kurt Angle & John Cena & Bradshaw & Bob Holly vs. Nathan Jones & Matt Morgan & Big Show & Brock Lesnar & A-Train in an old school elimination match. I consider this a very important match for a few reasons. Most importantly, Cena has to be put over strong as a face. The finish of the match needs to be Lesnar getting pinned (it would have been so much more effective had they protected him from being pinned on TV so often in recent months but that can't be undone) to set someone up for a title run. It should be Cena who does it, and does it in a non-fluky manner because Cena has to win the confidence of the audience that he's more than just an entertaining high middle guy who brushes but can't beat the headliners. But there are several other important stories. Bob Holly needs to shine at some point, just so he's not buried from the start. Benoit needs to shine. Morgan & Jones can't get buried. Jones is hopeless, at least for now and shouldn't be here. Morgan is here too soon but he's got potential and they need to protect him. And then there is Angle, who one would think should take it easy in this match due to his impending surgery, but the last time Angle was in this position at Mania, he did anything but take it easy. But this isn't Mania and it's a ten-man. This is a tough one to book and I expect either a lot of "groan" weak DQ finishes to eliminate people, or some people getting pinned at a time they shouldn't. On paper, Benoit, Angle, Lesnar and maybe Holly literally have the weight of the world on their shoulders in a match that doesn't seem on paper as important as it really is. *Team Austin (Rob Van Dam & Booker T & Dudleys & Shawn Michaels) vs. Team Bischoff (Chris Jericho & Christian & Scott Steiner & Mark Henry & Randy Orton) and if Austin's team loses, he's gone. If they win, he can run wild. Since Raw is infinitely better with Austin running wild than with Austin gone, his team should win. The only thing is they can do a strong heel turn by someone out of this for screwing Austin. And of course, they screw with the fans on stipulations even more because if they were to do this, we all know Austin is coming back anyway. There are enough strong workers here, plus being in Texas with Austin's career at stake, that this should have great heat and be a strong match. Steiner & Henry are the clear sore thumbs, but you can hide people in a ten-man. Lord knows in the previous bout you're going to have to. *Shane McMahon vs. Kane in an ambulance match. Since this is apparently Shane's farewell for a while, there are going to be some nutty things here. I don't know if that's good or bad, but it won't be boring and there will probably be another stunt man spot finish. Let's see, Shane could be put in a car that explodes, but that only keeps you out for two weeks. Kane can fall off the Titantron and get his balls electrocuted. We don't do guns. So I guess the finish will be a live sodomization. *Bill Goldberg vs. HHH for the Raw title. They didn't do a good match the first time because they went long. This time, Goldberg has to sell a worked ankle injury, while HHH has to be on the offensive not being fully recovered from his latest groin aggravations. Logic says to keep it short, but we've been saying that about every HHH PPV match this year, and ego has consistently prevailed over logic, and probably will happen again. As far as the title. HHH is out all of next month filming a movie. It makes no sense for him to regain the title here, although that was the original plan. On the finish, I'm predicting logic will prevail, and I have a feeling I may be feeling like I was really naive in a few hours. *Vince McMahon vs. Undertaker in a buried alive match. Hardly a wrestling classic, but Vince had pulled off entertaining spectacles this year with far worse than Undertaker. In fact, he's pulled them out with nobody as good as Undertaker. Buried Alive is one of those goofy matches that ruins all logic. Figure Vince goes over, maybe with help from Kane, or Stephanie, or both.

He has the right to express my foot up your ass. ... I don't really know what that means, but the WWE sucks and I don't need to see their PPV's to say that.

If you want to buy it, buy it. If you end up feeling bad about it, don't worry, come to this board and there will be half-a-dozen people saying it was a good show and it will make you feel better.

1993: 0.82 SS / 1.3 Avg – 1994: 0.90 / 1.1 – 1995: 0.57 / 0.75 – 1996: 0.58 / 0.6 = 1997: 0.89 / 0.61 + 1998: 0.89 / 1.03 – 1999: 1.14 / 1.3 - 2000: 1.00 / 1.34 - SS Avg: 0.85 Typically, Survivor Series doesn't do very well. Some of the avg's should be adjusted because of the WM spike. But generally, Survivor Series doesn't do as well as Mania, RR, and Summerslam. It more closely relates to King of the Ring... but since KOTR is gone now, it's hard to get a good measure. There are more variables to take into account, as well as this years PPV performance, 2002s and 2001s. However, if someone wanted to guage how well this did compared to others, it would probably be "lower".

Heh, I guess that isn't very "open minded".. My real answer is: Why didn't you get the PRIDE ppv last week?

Lemme put it this way. If you have watched WWE programming for the last few months, know what the card is, and are actually THINKING about getting it... Get it. It's pretty black and white. You either hate it or you don't.

I was hoping that 2000 was the last year. I won't make the "Where did those 10 years of laughs come from?" comment.

How can you decide whether or not the leg is "setting up" to something? Well, if they do not follow their leg kicks through with a left straight or bodyshot (as Rutten always mentions and references his book) then they are not setting anything up. It's like a jab. Dana White said Lidell's strategy of using leg kicks was supposed to pay off in the second round, meaning the first round would have seen little but defense and leg kicks from Chuck. Would that have been stalling? Yes. If Chuck was content with avoiding Rampage and just hitting him with leg kicks, that would be stalling. He wasn't improving position nor looking to end the fight. Of course, Chuck wouldn't have actually done *just* that. It's an insurance policy. He would work the leg kicks and still try to finish it in the first. If it went to the second, those leg kicks would benefit him. How about Marco Ruas throwing all leg kicks to break down monster Paul Varelans for thirteen minutes until he wasn't able to move? Ruas was very effective in his strategy, but it took him a while to set up. I guess we're not allowing that anymore because it's boring? Ruas didn't *just* do that, though. Besides, everyone knows how to block a leg shot and Paul Varlens is a joke. The leg kicks are not an effective finisher and are only used in terms of strategy and wearing the opponent down. Pride promotes FINISHING, not "wearing down". But in this fight, the man throwing leg kicks was punished for his opponents lack of activity. Jackson had no way of forcing Silva to be active on the mat. Jackson could have went for more stuff. He could have tried to pass the guard. He could have tried for a kimura, a can opener, a knee bar, a slam, etc. There's lots of stuff Jackson could have done to push Silva. Of course, that would have given up his "safe" position in Silvas guard. A position where he could just rest rather than finish. If Silva was the one stalling, why was he rewarded with a stand-up? Jackson obviously wanted Silva on the mat, so punishing Silva for stalling on the mat by allowing him to stand up makes absolutely no sense. "Ok, you're doing nothing on the ground... so let's keep you on the ground" - that doesn't make sense. Silva got a point taken away and 10% of his purse is gone. Had the fight ended right there, Jackson probably would have won. Since nothing was going to change in that position, the ref changed it. They've done this in many fights before (herring/kerr comes to mind) and both fighters knew the consequences. If someone is taking leg kicks and doing nothing with them, should they be forced to go to the mat where they don't have to take leg kicks? Pride fights start on their feet. The ref returned ("reseted") them to where they began. If they started on the ground, then they would have been returned to the ground given that scenario. Not only was he tired, but he realized that, standing, he was no match for Silva. I think fresh, Rampage would have been a match for Silva. I think fatigue was the main factor. His first action in the fight was to pick up Silva to slam him down to the mat. Silva was too smart to let himself be slammed, but he couldn't avoid being taken down, and that's where he was at a disadvantage to Jackson. This was obvious by how little he did while on the ground and how much Jackson was able to pound on him. Silva attempted an armbar on Jackson. That was *much* more danger than Jackson had on him in the guard. Silva has ground skillz. He is not so much "bad" on the ground as he is *better* on his feet. So it was a detriment to Jackson. He had Silva where he wanted him, and Silva - by doing absolutely nothing to hurt Jackson - got a free ticket out. It wasn't free. It came at a cost. He got a yellow card. Jackson was trying much harder to advance his possition than Sakuraba was. No he wasn't. Sakuraba attempted a submission - he advanced his position. That position had the possibility of ending the fight. Jackson in the guard with Silva unwilling did not. Jackson just laid down and threw some weak punches and stayed there. Sakuraba was content to lie on the mat while Randleman struggled to find a way to hurt him. Jackson was constantly moving, punching, and trying to get at Silva. There's no possible justification of the call made in Silva/Jackson without condemning the absence of that call in Sakuraba/Randleman. Sakuraba had Randleman in a potentially dangerous position where one wrong move could have cost Randleman the match. In the end, that proved to be correct as Sakuraba tapped him out. Jackson was happy with laying and praying and Silva was waiting for a standup. The cut next to the eye occurred about a minute or so before they were told to stand up. As for turning away, he was doing everything he could to prevent Jackson from hurting him. Silva was not being hurt by Rampages assault and "avoiding a shot" is different than "turning away". "Turning away" is a reactionary move when getting hit, "avoiding a shot" is like rolling with a punch. The "cut" was superficial in a common cut area (corner of the eye) where Silva tends to get cut often. The punch that caused it wasn't very hard at all. These only advance the argument for Jackson. How so? Jackson didn't have dominant position nor worked for one. And he was advancing the fight, like I mentioned. Throwing weak head and body shots is not advancing the fight. That's Mark Kerr strategy and has been weeded out of todays fight game. I could see this argument being used if say those shots were like Fedor's to Nog, or like Rampage's to Liddell, where actual damange was being made, but they were not. They did. Five seconds prior, they had an exchange. Randleman and Sakuraba did nothing of the sort. The ref called "action" a number of times and then stood Rampage and Silva up. Sakuraba kept going for submissions, be it a triangle, armbar, or kimura. He wasn't just "laying on the mat". If Jackson had continued to dominate on the ground the way he had until the stand-up, there's no way Silva would have won the round. That round, up until the stand-up, was unquestionably Jackson's. Silva, other than a failed arm bar attempt, did absolutely nothing to Jackson. Jackson landed several strong punches and knees to the head and countless punches to the ribs and mid-section that would surely have hurt Silva's stamina. Those punches had very little on them and Silva is a machine. That round would have continued on with Jackson laying in the guard hitting at Silvas ribs and would have put the crowd to sleep - the ref made the right call in standing them up. Silva was more active after the standup than Rampage was on the ground. Just because he wasn't finishing the fight doesn't mean he wasn't taking advantage of his position. To anyone paying attention to the fight, he was taking great advantage and completely dominating Silva. "Completely dominating"? Sorry, Fedor completely dominated Noguiera as he actually landed shots that HURT. What Rampage did was crappy GnP. That's no way to "take advantage" of the guard position. Watch Fujita/Kerr from the 2000 GP. Kerr tries to end the fight early and does pretty well until he gets caught underneath Fujita. Fujita spends the rest of the fight punching Kerr in the head and body. None of Fujita's punches look good enough to KO Kerr, but Kerr mounts absolutely no offense and gets dominated for the rest of the round. Fujita won that fight via decision. Jackson, up to the forced stand up, could have done the same thing during the first round. That would have hurt Silva's ability to do what he did after the stand-up, and it would have scored Jackson points with the judges. But it wouldn't have finished the fight. That's exactly what the judges and refs want to STOP. They don't want people to "score points", they want fighters to finish the fights. A decision is the last thing they want. The standup and yellow cards are to prevent that from happening. Silva looked pretty hurt after those three rights to the face and big knees to the head. He was hurting, and had he stayed on the ground, he would have been hurting a lot more by the time the round ended. Silva looked perfectly fine. He wasn't wincing in pain and didn't seem troubled at all.

Nog went straight to "guard position" after getting hit and his eyes were on Cro Cop - so he was still "in the game". If Cro Cop went in for some GnP he probably would have gotten caught in an armbar or triangle had time not expired. But Nog was getting fucked up in that match. He took some left straights that broke Sapps face. He took some liver kicks that broke Herrings ribs and dented Silvas. He took a highkick that KO'd Vovchanchyn... the man is just not human.

Well, I went from "Ok, let's see what they will do with Steiner" when he debuted to "Hey, Steiner is on *click*" Actually, that's a lie. I click AFTER his entrance.

I figured ethical responsibility and morals would overcome politics in the WWE... I was terribly wrong. I guess "those" kinds of people really don't become World Champions.

They will blame the buried alive and ambulance match(es) and realize that the real money is in the casket and inferno match(es). So Royal Rumble should be REAL fun.

And I thought HHH would put over Booker T at Mania. ...and Goldberg at SS. Sometimes I just give that man too much credit...

I was really looking forward to Brock vs. Angle WM - they had so many things to build on and they could reflect it in that match. I thought there was so much potential. I was wrong. I admit it. Umm.. I liked HHH in 99. Yeah. I know. I was going through this "anti-face" phase and he was just getting pushed as a heel and the "my time" thing... Oh god... what have I done??

So it's better to have people whom know nothing about wrestling, than have people whom know something about wrestling?? Oook. The only reason Vince hires "hollywood" writers is because he needs someone with proven durability. He needs someone who can write for 52 shows a year straight and be given instructions. That, and he's a fucking moron.

I say have Angle lose his grin. "What I'm going to do is go back home and see what's left for me; whether it'll be in this ring...whether it'll be out of this ring. I know that over the, uh, the last several months I've lost a lot of things and one of them has been my grin. And, and I know it doesn't mean a whole lot to everbody else, but it means a lot to me. So I have to go back and fix myself, and take care of myself, and I have to go back and I have to find my grin because somewhere along the line I lost it and I don't care, really, I don't care if it's unpopular, and I don't care if, uh, people want to make fun of me because I'm an emotional guy. But, um, this is all I've ever wanted to do and uh, over the last year I got to do it and whether you like me or not, I just want to tell you that, uh, last year was the most wonderful year of my life. And, uh, if I never do get to do it again, it'll be okay because I got to live one full year as being the number one guy in this business and it was the single greatest year of my life." "And I have you to thank, and I have everybody here to thank, and it means a lot to me and, uh, I'm gonna go home now. Okay?"

Daily Show South Park Seinfeld The Simpsons Family Guy For overall consistancy, Seinfeld gets it. For "peak" laughs where I basically am gasping for air because I laughed so hard - it's a 3 way tie between FG, DS, and SP. Family Guy doesn't age as well as I would have liked, and their jokes are very VERY spotty. Daily Show is generally high quality, but it can hit some bumps. Stephen Colbert is a fucking god, though. South Park has the satire of the Daily Show mixed in with the crudeness of Family Guy. Some episodes are out-right brilliant, while some leave a lot to be desired. In terms of aging well, the "peak" seasons of the Simpsons takes the cake. I can (and have) watched some shows a 20 times and I still laugh.

Spanky and London are now known as *The Regulators*. Their tag move is now known as Total Regulation.

Nathan Jones = The Humungus from Mad Max.

Ini Kamoze is good, but he's no Skeelo...