cabbageboy

I've always maintained that the World title given to HHH was simply the same as the WCW title (which was renamed the World title in late 2001). Brock leaving for SD simply de-unified the belts. It was never exactly stated that way but it would have worked better. The biggest problem I always had with the Fingerpoke is the stuff that followed it. They had a chance to do Goldberg vs. a unified NWO which they never exactly did in 1998. He could go through Hall like he did at Souled Out, then Nash like at Spring Stampede. But the payoff here needed to be him going through Hogan at BATB 99, but Hogan got hurt and missed a few months, DDP got the belt literally out of nowhere, Goldberg vanished for months on end, and WCW went to hell.

I will go with a dark horse pick that was mentioned briefly in this thread: 1984 49ers. This is a team that went 15-1, lost their only game by 3 points (to the Steelers) and had a differential of +248. People wax poetic about the 89 Niners but they lost 1 more game and the differential was +189. So why do I say the 84 Niners over the 85 Bears? Both teams had the same record, Bears did have a slightly better differential (+258), but take a look at who the Niners beat in the Super Bowl compared to the Bears. The Niners assraped Dan Marino and the Dolphins by 22 points (Dolphins were 14-2 that year, +215...awesome runner up). The Bears beat up one of the lamest, shittiest teams ever to stink up a Super Bowl in the 85 Patriots. And bear in mind the one team that beat the Bears in 85 were the Dolphins, so who is to say they might not have had a shot if that was the Super Bowl matchup? The 1991 Redskins are unjustly forgotten but the sad reality is....they didn't really have anybody that is considered an all time great. Until this year they had no HOF guys on that team (Monk and Green got in). They were awesome but when you compare all time teams can you seriously take a team with Mark Rypien over a team with Montana? Anyway here is one thing no one really mentions about the 72 Dolphins: They didn't play anybody! They had a regular season schedule about like the Seahawks did this year, playing only TWO teams with winning records the whole year (Giants and Chiefs were 8-6, hardly world beaters). In the playoffs they beat the Browns by 6, Steelers by 4, Redskins by 7 in the SB. Not exactly an amazing run. If the 72 Dolphins had played a tougher schedule then there's no way they would go undefeated.

Here's the thing. The Rock was face when HBK was face through most of 1997, then they both were heels at the same time. HHH would always be either a heel or face while The Rock was the other, so those guys would feud. Also, Shawn was out injured from 1998-2002, which was Rock's heyday. I'm sure if HBK was healthy during that time period then Rock would put his differences aside and work with him.

I used to have that Harts/Strike Force tag title change on a Best of the WWF Vol. 15 tape. It's a fun match but it's not really a mega classic. And this is coming from a Strike Force mark, since the first wrestling match I ever saw was a Strike Force match vs. two masked jobbers (Shadows perhaps?).

I'll put it this way: Jeff vs. UT is a good match in the way HHH vs. Taka was a good match. It's an amusing little diversion but hardly a major effort.

There's really nowhere to go with another Over the Top. He won the tourney and got his son back. Now if there's going to be another Stallone 80s revival, I demand a sequel to Cobra. Was that HHH family emergency a real thing or something said on TV? I don't remember Ross or Lawler saying anything about it. If Finlay runs in next week and gets fired are to assume Kane would get that EC spot? It's a bunch of BS that Kane isn't in it anyway. Why not get rid of Khali or Big Daddy V, keep Finlay, and add Kane?

Yeah I saw this a week or so ago and liked it better than NCFOM. Maybe it was just Daniel Day-Lewis ruling more than anyone has ever ruled, or maybe I found it a bit more satisfying at the end (though this ending certainly doesn't wrap things up). I think DDL winning best actor is obvious and PTA may well win best director since they might not want to give it to two people (Coens). Best picture I dunno about so much. It might almost be viewed as too much of a one man show.

That is truly odd that Knight didn't even finish the season. What a strange end to his career. I always felt he would have a massive heart attack on the sidelines or go out like Woody Hayes. In other news U of L just owns Marquette this year and I love every second of it. Just gotta split with G'Town now, that's all I ask.

Okay I read that Simmons column and you know what pissed me off the most? The notion that the 2001 Rams were somehow the equivalent of the 2007 Patriots in terms of being this vile, loathesome team that people wanted to desperately lose. Compare a humble guy like Kurt Warner to Tom Brady's smarm. Did people really feel angered by Isaac Bruce or Marshall Faulk? Sure, Mike Martz is kind of a wacko, but we didn't really know it so much in 2001 (this was more apparent in subsequent years). The Rams have never been my absolute favorite team, but I quite liked the Greatest Show on Turf. Simmons is kidding himself if he thinks people outside the northeast wanted the Pats to win that game, especially considering the dubious way they even got there with the Tuck Rule and all. In retrospect we all would have been spared quite a lot had the refs not shafted Al Davis. At least we could have gotten some hilarity out of Kordell Stewart throwing 4 INTs in the Super Bowl.

Okay I didn't post here while the game was ongoing and I'm just now posting because I've been trying to comprehend what I just saw. I don't know if that was the greatest game I've ever seen, but the last quarter was the most jaw dropping, amazing stuff I've ever seen. Going in I thought the Giants would have to play over their heads, avoid ANY turnovers, and hope the Patriots screwed up a bunch of times (fumbles, Brady INTs, etc.). Shockingly the Giants really didn't play a perfect game and the Patriots didn't really screw up with turnovers, and the Giants still beat them! So many wonderful little moments tonight. I was fuming when Belichick challenged that one guy being on the field, figuring it was the typical BS luck the Patriots get and that they would score a TD to lead 14-3. But, no. They went 4 and out and for some strange reason didn't attempt the FG (and I bet they wish they had now). It was at this point where I thought something different was going on tonight, like maybe the Patriots luck had finally run out. Of course they scored to make it 14-10, anyone who has ever watched a single NE game knew that was coming. But there was one problem...they left over 2 minutes on the clock. What else can be said about that final Giants drive? Maybe it's a spur of the moment feeling, but I think that had to be the single greatest drive in the history of football when you take into account it was in the Super Bowl, down by 4 points (recall that Montana was only down 3 against Cincy), against an 18-0 Patriots team people were calling the greatest ever. Take a look at that crazy drive. 4th and 1 conversion? Check. Utterly impossible play from Eli to Tyree where Eli avoided 3 defenders and somehow escaped, then Tyree barely grabbed it with his fingertips over Rodney Harrison. Another stellar 3rd and 11 conversion to Smith, who atoned for his muff that led to Eli's 1 INT. And then of course the score to Plaxico Burress, who got to back up his seemingly insane prediction. The brilliant irony of it was this: The Giants did to the Patriots exactly what the Patriots did to teams like the Ravens or Eagles. They made seemingly impossible or at least highly difficult plays and found a way to win. A team that was as heelish as the Pats were this year, with the Spygate crap, running up the score on people early, lucking out in some games late, generally being douches....it's like this HAD to happen tonight. I didn't think the Giants were going to win this game, at most I thought they might put up a game Rams/Steelers type effort before losing. But they certainly proved me wrong and quite honestly I am incredibly glad that they did. Take a bow, Eli.

Thing is, it doesn't matter how much Jeff was on top of the Rumble match....hell Edge was all over Cena at the 2006 Rumble, but he just jobbed clean. Jobbing clean when you aren't a clear cut main event guy requires a certain amount of rebuilding before fans accept that guy as a title threat.

Truth be told I don't really think all the ultra insane violence really even fits the series. I watched #2 and 3 tonight and there really isn't all that much crazy sick shit in them. Maybe him shooting the one dude in #2 with the exploding arrow, but that's it. While I enjoyed this one pretty well the review it is getting on imdb.com are a bit absurd. 8.1?? Hell, it's really only the 3rd best movie in the series behind Rambo: First Blood Part 2 and First Blood. It is better than the dreary Rambo III though.

What's with all the hate for JFK on here? Tommy Lee Jones at least kinda looked like the real Clay Shaw in it. Does JFK have its share of crazed, crackpot theories? Of course. But as a film it is utterly amazing and is the fastest 3 hour movie I've ever seen. While I didn't think TLJ was the best thing about NCFOM, he's certainly a good actor. How about him in Lonesome Dove with Robert Duvall, or his breakout role in Coal Miner's Daughter?

Thing is, the Euro title at first had to go to the Bulldog. It was really the only acceptable tourney result. Unfortunately it was basically a vanity belt at that point. Oh, and HBK wasn't the WWF champ when he beat Bulldog. In fact that was slightly before the HIAC match with UT.

There's a simple reason why Jeff Hardy won't main event WM: Not enough people truly buy him in that spot yet. And I don't mean just WWE creative but also the fans at large. I don't really think Jeff is buried, though the Rumble did him no favors. Thing is, there is likely a MITB match he can win at WM, and thus WWE can build him for as long as necessary until he's ready to cash it in and then be seen as a main event force.

See, I took that scene with the uncle as something else, almost like a bizarre pep talk of sorts. As in "Hell, this stuff was awful and happened back in 1909....so don't let it get you down and do your job, dammit!"

I think any time they do a TLC match on free TV it's a bit silly. The Jericho/Benoit TLC match (#3) was a good match but a bit wasted just being on a SD show. And I praised TLC 4 to high heaven on the Jan. 24/7 thread...that was just a jaw dropping match.

I have to be the only one on this board who considers WM IV a personal favorite. But it was right when I started watching wrestling, so I remember all of the build for the show even if I watched Clash of the Champions instead that day (my parents wouldn't spring for PPVs).

How about virtually any WCW undercard PPV match from May 1999 through October 1999? That covers a lot of ground and a lot of jobber matches.

If they wouldn't put it on Jeff for a transition run then there's even less reason to put it back on Cena. I think what we will see at NWO is Orton just blatantly getting himself DQed which would keep Cena in the title scene for WM and HHH can jump in as well. I personally think Cena is back just to pop a couple of buyrates for NWO and WM, with no real serious designs on putting the belt on him right now. Let's say Cena wins at NWO and Orton is screwed out of the WM main event. HHH wins the Chamber match. Cheech, do you seriously think HHH is going to job yet AGAIN to Cena at WM, and make it his 4th straight title match loss at WM? He already jobbed to Cena at WM two years ago, then in subsequent rematches in 2006. HHH also put Cena over in the Rumble. If anything, HHH is due to win in order to justify his constant main event push.

The problem with MVP is that he's already tried and failed against Flair at the Rumble, so would it mean much if he got another shot at it? Kennedy is the same deal...he's likely losing to Flair at No Way Out so it wouldn't mean very much if he got a WM rematch. I think with this we won't see a dick HBK though. That worked better with Hogan because quite a few of Shawn's rants were true, and besides Hogan wasn't retiring. We've never gotten a sense that Shawn respected Hogan much as a performer whereas he certainly respects Flair. It might almost work better if Vince made HBK put something on the line himself, maybe make it career vs. career?

Fett, I don't think that is the case.

Let's see, Shawn did have the series with Jannetty that were all at least good to great matches, but outside of that his 1993 work wasn't that amazing. But then he was facing Tatanka, Crush, and so on for most of the year and wasn't good enough to flat out carry them. Still, he did have a misfire with Hennig at SS 93.

Considering Flair lost a "retirement" match to Curt Hennig on the 3rd Raw ever in Jan. 1993, I don't think it's really a big deal who beats him. See, one thing to consider is that the fans need to be able to buy into the guy who does it and if Kennedy or MVP did it fans wouldn't accept that. This isn't to say that fans wouldn't accept those guys beating Flair at all, but just not in this exact scenario (MVP beat Flair last summer and no one thought much of it). Also, this needs to be a slam bang finale to Flair's career and not some depressing scene with Flair jobbing to some cocky heel. So yes, Michaels is a good opponent for this.

I think that the Bulldogs vs. Dream Team from WM 2 is a great match and certainly non formula. But IX is really crappy and has nothing of note on it.