cabbageboy

My main point is that they just did this DVD and it's a one sided trashing of the guy. If Warrior was actually on the DVD to defend himself (which he refused I guess, can't say I blame him) then I wouldn't have a problem with it. What were they really trying to accomplish with this DVD? If it was to bury the Warrior I don't think it really worked all that well. If anything it made me sorta feel sorry for him.

Michigan has been struggling this year though, is it possible that they might have quit on the season to some degree? It wouldn't shock me if Michigan beat Penn St. this weekend but Penn St. has way more to play for. U of L vs. WVU this weekend. Talk about a must win for the Cards. We cannot under any circumstances start off 0-2 in the friggin Big East. The main thing is that WVU doesn't pass much, which is our big weakness (giving up big pass plays). I'm hoping U of L stops the run.

Heh, well they could have not let the Ravens get that garbage TD in the last minute. I'm just saying before I pronounce the Colts D the next Steel Curtain or 2000 Ravens I want to see them dominate a powerful offense. Hold the high powered Rams offense to 10 points and I'll be impressed. Dominate the Patriots and hold them to under 10 and I'll be amazed.

One interesting aspect here is the idea that Houston's pitching is so much better than STL. If I'm not mistaken weren't the Cardinals #1 in the NL in pitching this year? I made my thoughts on the Astros known after the 18 inning affair the other day. I hope the Cardinals sweep.

Dungy has never had the best team (until possibly now). Martz had the best team by far in 2001 and still didn't win the Super Bowl. That takes talent. Hell, Dungy got within an eyelash of the Super Bowl with the Bucs with SHAUN KING. As far as the Colts D goes, I can't say it is overrated. Hard to say that when no one has put up more than 10 on them. I'm cautiously optimistic.

I can't think of anything offhand that this guy Craig has starred in that I have seen, but when I read this a while back I couldn't help but think "Is this really the best they can do?"

Double post.

Am I the only one who is bewildered by the whole theory of "Austin was going to feud with Flair and get the world title?" Austin in 1994 WCW had almost ZERO heat. In the post Hollywood Blondes era neither he or Pillman had much going and Austin's US title reign was extremely forgettable. I don't think Austin had any real command of the crowd at this point.

Guess I won't check out the Garvin/Valentine match then. The problem I have with the Ground Zero match is that it shows the inherent emptiness of Michaels' style. His whole purpose in matches seems to be getting his ass kicked and doing wild overselling. Yeah I know it seems like Shawn never lost to UT, but given the way he was beat down do you really think he could seriously WIN vs. UT without ludicrous interference?

I voted for Smackdown since the show is never hideously bad it seems like, whereas Raw tends to go off the deep end with stuff like the McMahons/JR angle the other night. You know, reading this is interesting. It seems like a lot of people on here give this same act of "WWE sucks now, I don't watch it anymore." I find it curious. Why would someone who no longer cared about the shows and didn't watch anymore actually spend time posting on a WWE forum? I do still watch the shows, but if I ever stop I'd probably have little reason to post on this forum (which isn't to say I wouldn't still visit the sports, movies, etc.).

I don't get the talk of "Serenity isn't making any money, thus everyone in America is stupid." How about the studio being stupid instead? Look, it's based on a TV show that was cancelled, so it's not like many people know what it is outside of the cult followers. And also the trailer I saw (I think before 40 Year Old Virgin) made zero impression as anything but "this month's lame sci-fi film." It needed a much better trailer, one that stood out as being something different. I haven't seen the film, but might rent it at some point. But really, unless I was desperate to see anything why would I go see a movie based on TV show I didn't watch and whose trailer I didn't like?

T.O.'s attorney? I thought it was Drew Rosenhaus, his agent, that saved someone from drowning not long ago?

Here's the match I consider the definition of a forgotten little gem: Ronnie Garvin vs. Greg Valentine from the 1990 Royal Rumble. Submission match, first I'd ever seen actually. I haven't seen it in years, wonder if it would hold up?

Actually yes Kennedy was on the Smackdown spoilers this week but just to introduce himself or something. I don't think he had a match. Trading RVD back to Smackdown at this point makes zero sense. And how could anyone think RVD has no use on Raw? Raw has a truly horrid face side of the roster once you get beyond Cena. What other face do they have that anyone would want to see in a title match? Flair is way too old, Big Show way too stale, Michaels is played in the title scene. RVD would give the Raw face side a major lift. What would Kennedy do on Raw? They have heels as it is, whereas Smackdown has no credible heels whatsoever.

Major difference: The Colts have Tony Dungy and not Mike Martz. Let's face it, the main reason the Rams lost to the Pats is Martz being outcoached by Belichick. I am not 100% sold on the Colts D. I want them to be excellent but let's take a look at who they have played: Ravens (horribly shitty offense) Jacksonville (known to have some ugly games) Browns (see Jacksonville) Tennessee (ok they held them pretty well but the Titans aren't remotely what they once were) 49ers (rookie QB in his first game) In other words I wanna see the Colts shut down a pretty powerful offense like the Rams. The Rams might be losing games but they are mainly being outscored, not shut down.

The ECW show was basically not promoted though...TNA has had a hell of a lot more hype than ECW. TNA has some problems at the core: Do people really want to see a promotion based around Jeff Jarrett? Do people want to see a 6 sided ring? Do people beyond ultra smarks care about faceless cruisers fighting for a title that has no specific meaning? The main problem with problem with making the X division the main drawing card is that cruiserweight wrestling has never really been THE main draw of a promotion in the U.S. It can be a very entertaining side meal from the main course (a la WCW) but I'm not sure it can be the main draw no matter how good the matches are.

Truthfully, I worry about Smackdown's future. In fact I think that it is being buried deliberately by UPN on Friday nights to so devalue the show that no one else will pick it up next year.

I think you have to include both of the Bulldog matches. SS 92 is an obvious, top 5 pick for this disc. Also, the 12/95 PPV match is notable for being almost a totally different style match from Wembley, what with Bret's sick bladejob. Matches like this and the Diesel S. Series match shifted the WWF into a more mature, violent promotion. The only real significance of the Strike Force match is that the Harts lost the tag titles to them. It has significance, but perhaps Bret doesn't want to recall losing the belts.

Jacksonville at Pittsburgh--I'll go with Jacksonville if Roethlisberger is out, if he's okay I'll take the Steelers. Miami at Tampa Bay--similar deal here, if Cadillac is healthy I'll take the Bucs, otherwise Dolphins. Cleveland at Baltimore--What did anyone do to deserve this one? I'll take the Browns in a shitfest. Atlanta at New Orleans--Falcons rebound here. Minnesota at Chicago--Who knows? I'll take the Bears. NY Giants at Dallas--Good game here. I'll go with Dallas since it's at home and they seem to be rolling. Carolina at Detroit--Panthers win but closer than expected. Cincinnati at Tennessee--Bengals beatdown here. Washington at Kansas City--Very close game but KC needs it more and it's at their place. New England at Denver--Pats keep pulling it out of their ass but not here I don't think. Broncos by 10. NY Jets at Buffalo--I have no idea...another tough, close game but I'll take the Jets with a resurgent Vinny. San Diego at Oakland--SD rebounds from the Mon. loss...otherwise they are looking at 2-4. Houston at Seattle--Seahawks in an easy win. MON, OCT 17 St. Louis at Indianapolis--No upset here. It'll be a wild track meet though, a blast to watch. Colts are clearly better though, so it'll be about 45-31.

Not that many really. Maybe some of the pitchers but Spezio, Eckstein, Glaus, Salmon all gone, if I remember that team right. What happened to the ultra white bread Angels with a bunch of white dudes and Garrett Anderson? The reason the Angels didn't get much mention is that there isn't much of a story behind them. They aren't a shocking underdog, nor are they a team of downtrodden doomed losers desperate for the Series for the first time in 80 years. That said, my brother and I both agreed during the season that the Angels were the best team in the AL. All the other contenders seemed insanely up and down (Red Sox, Yankees, White Sox, A's), but the Angels went about their business and aside from a blip on the radar when the A's were in 1st they've been solid all year.

Yeah as far as the Owen/Bulldog thing goes, I believe they beat the Gunns for the belts at the Mindgames PPV. Isn't it interesting that their careers improved tremendously once Clarence Mason signed them away from Jim Cornette? Not that Mason was anything great, but it seemed like being associated with Cornette was the kiss of death back then.

The irony is that it's the opposite with me: on Spike TV (Ch. 41) the sound is really shitty but then on USA it's fine. As far as the ad revenue goes, the whole USA deal was insane. If I'm Vince I wouldn't be in THAT much of a rush to leave Spike, not to the tune of 20 million in lost ads a year.

It's funny but people thought it was nuts in 94 for them to have Backlund win the title at age 43, even though that's really not THAT old for a pro wrestler. I think more than sheer age with Backlund it was that he was so insanely out of date, having not been a notable player for a decade.

I'm not going to totally trash this yet because I wonder if the McMahons were just on for the first couple of USA shows, first for the Austin nostalgia segment and last night for the Ross firing. Vince or whoever might be there next week to bring in a new announcer but where else do you go with it after that? Their issue is with Austin, who isn't around. Cena and the faces on the roster have zero to do with any of it. There's not much you can do with it. I wasn't as baffled by the Vince/Steph alliance as I was Vince and Linda now making up and being thick as thieves again. And where the hell was Shane last night? He's the one McMahon I'd like to see.

Bret/Austin from WM is easily better than the Survivor Series 96 match. The Series match is also really good but it really had no suspense to it at the time (it was assumed Bret would win, in fact easier than he actually did) and it really doesn't have a huge amount that is flat out stand out about it. As in aside from the Million Dollar Dream finish I couldn't tell you a whole lot of the notable spots in the match and I've seen it a few times. I got the feeling Bret and Austin could do that Series 96 match any day of the week. The WM match was a once in a lifetime match. That's the difference. I might agree with HIAC not quite being ***** because of the Kane run in (Scott Keith deducted a bit for this as well). But it's an instant where the run in actually fits the context of the match so I was giving them the benefit of the doubt on that one. **** to me is a rating that can happen in a lot of matches. I don't dish out ***** very often. I wouldn't give Michaels/Mankind 5 due to the DQ (I'd give it about ****1/2). I also wouldn't give any of the Cactus/Nasty Boys matches 5 since garbage style wrestling even at its best is still a garbage brawl. I'd define **** as "An excellent match with a high level of work, solid story being told, but not necessarily an all time classic." Under that definition I have no problem listing those matches as ****.