cabbageboy

The biggest problem I have with The Village isn't the lame plot twists, but the fact that the 2nd one you mentioned is a blatant cheat. Consider:

The SD women's belt is pointless. How hard would it be to simply have Mickie James or Beth Phoenix simply show up on SD occasionally? The champ on both shows sometimes would work fine in this instance.

Well, the main problem is that they never went all the way with the Jericho/Steph relationship, likely because HHH nixed stuff like Jericho banging his wife in storyline (wisely to be honest). Since Eddie is dead he isn't here to protest Edge nailing his wife in storyline, and thus Edge has much more heel heat. Still, Jericho's run wasn't as bad as Rey's for instance. He wasn't out there jobbing in non title matches on a regular basis. Jericho's problem was more how they buried him completely after he lost the title. He was buried so hard that he didn't even make the next PPV after WM, then jobbed in a HIAC match to HHH, then jobbed to RVD in the KOTR semis (not really a burial, but another clean PPV loss). He also was the first guy who put over the ultra green Cena, then was the first guy in forever to tap out to the Figure 4 against Flair. I wonder, if Jericho had continued to feud with HHH post WM and regained the title at some point, would his reign be viewed so negatively? I think HHH's title reigns in 1999 were pretty horrible, probably worse than Jericho. HHH wasn't really over at all in 1999, and jobbing to Vince and that crap did him no favors. He also never beat Austin for the title. Russo never seemed to be much of a HHH fan, did he?

Jericho's title run is nowhere near as bad as reputed. We all knew he was jobbing to HHH at WM, so let's take that out of the equation for a minute. He did beat the Rock (even in nefarious fashion) at the 2002 Rumble, had a brief but fun mini feud with RVD on TV, and did get a win over Austin at No Way Out. I think the Austin match was worse than the HHH feud, just watch it. Austin gave Jericho nothing in that match and made him look worse than HHH did at WM.

I actually quite like the 1997 Wargames finish, but like with everything WCW did they never followed it with anything decent. Hennig and Flair should have had this massive, hate filled feud culminating with Flair beating the shit out of him. Instead Flair didn't really do much about Hennig's betrayal, Hennig had a heatless US title run, and then jobbed to DDP at Starrcade with no fanfare.

Wow, I figured the Lakers would lose in anticlimactic fashion tonight, but by 39? They couldn't even put forth the Sonics 1996 "Yeah we're going to lose but at least sorta try" Game 6 effort. Garnett's post game speech had me rolling. Ah well, he finally won a title so he's entitled to a bit of ranting and raving. As far as which was worse between 2004 and 2008 for the Lakers, it was easily 2004. This team is Kobe and not much else, and also went against a Celtics team with a 9 game better record. The 2004 team had a juggernaut lineup on paper with Shaq, Kobe, Malone, and Payton, but the team fell apart at the seams during the Finals against a Detroit team that few gave any shot of winning.

Well, let's check out that list. Rock isn't coming back to put over Cena. Austin is too injured to wrestle beyond a silly comedy match (if at all). Hogan is toxic right now and is like 53 years old, so I don't know what rub he has left (and he wouldn't job anyway). So that leaves UT, and the only real massive win Cena could get there is ending the WM streak, but that would cause a massive fan backlash against Cena more than it would help. Kamala, if you are trying to sell me on a young guy over established star win, Lesnar over Rock is NOT good salesmanship. I've spent the past 6 years ranting on this forum on how I thought Lesnar over RVD in the KOTR finals is the worst piece of booking WWE has done in the post Invasion era.

I probably would have liked Warrior as champion but what does it say that I had stopped watching wrestling by Jan. 1990? It simply seemed like there was nothing else they could do with Hogan as champ, so it was probably a good thing he lost to Warrior. I'm trying to think of great examples of using an older star to truly elevate someone. I would say HHH vs. Cactus but HHH had already been a 3 time champ by that point, that was just the final push over the cliff. I could also say Hogan vs. Goldberg but it didn't turn out to be the massive changing of the guard we thought.

Someone's enjoyment of the 2008 Rumble is based on how much they like or dislike Cena. If you are a fan, then his comeback surprise is a treat. If you are sick of him, then it is groan inducing. The 1999 Rumble is the total Russo experience. Just totally mad overbooked insanity, people running in, leaving the match, coming back, even literally having men with the white coats and nets come after Kane. It's certainly not good by any means, but it DOES matter and was relevant. Both of the HBK Rumble wins are just dreary, dull, offensive, have a weak roster, and so on.

This Cade push can't possibly lead to something decent. The dude has been around for about 5 years now and has he really shown us anything? Maybe if somehow you could pour a bit of Murdoch's charisma into Cade's physique you could have something. I suppose I'll give them points for an attempt to elevate someone, but at the end of the day it's hard to see a Cade "push" amounting to much more than him taking a Pedigree in a TV match. Or maybe being Jericho's lackey. Am I the only one who thought the mixed tag was the best thing on the show? But then I have a thing for Katie Lea as it is, going back to her OVW stint. I say forget about Mickie James, put the women's belt on Katie, then go with her against Beth Phoenix and do the first PPV women's ladder match (Beth and Katie did one in OVW that was good stuff).

I don't really mind Roode and Storm as a team as long as they don't just put the tag belts on them ahead of other, more deserving teams like the MCMG. I assume they get a rematch at the next PPV and job out to LAX, and that's that.

How did either Warrior/Hogan or Orton/Foley really work though? Warrior didn't really draw shit as champion and quite honestly his win over Hogan signalled the end of the WWF's golden era. Orton basically beat a washed up, retired Foley who had nowhere near the rub to give that he did when he put over HHH. Even after that perceived big win, WWE ended up burying Orton with the HHH feud later in 2004, so it's not like either of those examples led to the young guy drawing serious money.

The 1992 Wargames is one of the best things WCW ever produced. It's about as vicious and brutal as mainstream wrestling could get circa 1992. The 1991 match isn't as good really, but maybe it's because I was distracted by Rick Steiner and Sid blatantly calling spots throughout. Seriously watch the match with that in mind, they practically have a conversation!

Am I the only one who is continually perplexed at WWE jobbing guys out on a show before trading them to another? Do they not realize that Raw and SD aren't different promotions or anything and that jobbing guys out only hurts their perceived value in their OWN promotion? I bet they trade Umaga to SD and then act shocked when he has zero heat from jobbing out on Raw for the last 6 months.

If there is one thing I will say about Mark Henry, he at least has shown he can do a variety of roles. He can do a goofball comedy act like the poetry readings with Chyna. He can do embarrassing crap like the Mae Young angle. Or he can be a monster heel that destroys people. When it comes to have the token Fat Black Guy I'd take him any day over Viscera. At least Henry has some charisma. But then I've often thought Viscera/Mabel/Big Daddy V is the least talented guy ever to somehow hang around for like 15 years (on and off).

Actually I think those marks were the ones who ended up booking Rey's actual title reign. They never wanted the belt on Rey anyway, he only got it because Orton was a total douche and screwed up. Am I the only one who doesn't really mind the 1999 Rumble? Vince winning is utterly foolish, but that at least led to the wildly fun match with Austin. I do think the 99 Rumble is the epitome of Russo almost out thinking himself. Just let the Rumble happen and let the guys wrestle. I wonder, would so many have been pissed if they hadn't done the "Austin and Vince are 1 and 2" storyline and had Vince at #30 and he screwed Austin over in the same fashion. The 1995 Rumble is to me, as a Bulldog fan, the purest form of agony I've ever seen in wrestling.

The ending of War of the Worlds was kinda crappy, not so much for the reason for the alien defeat but as everyone noted the notion that his son survived and all that. It felt like a tacked on happy ending. As far as War goes, I guessed the ending to that in the first 10 minutes. Well maybe not the true motives of Statham, but I did guess the part about Jet Li.

This reminds me of the whole New Generation thing. In 1994 the leader of it was that young up and comer Bret Hart, who had only been in the WWF for a decade. Hell Shawn had been there for about 6 years as well, though I guess only 2 of which were as a singles wrestler. I guess Diesel was fairly fresh but Nash was in his mid 30s then, haha. Personally I don't believe in angles like the New Blood/Millionaire's Club. There's a certain amount of business exposing in the entire "You held me down!" aspect of it. Or talking about hitting the glass ceiling. It would have also helped if WCW had started the feud with the Millionaire guys having all the belts, with the idea that the New Blood was trying to win. Also, what is the end game? As in how does the New Blood achieve victory? By retiring all of the rich guys? I guess they tried this with the Hogan and Flair retirement matches but then we all knew the old dudes were winning. Much like with the WCW vs. NWO feud, what exactly constitutes winning at the end of the day? Say what you want about the botched Invasion angle in 2001, but at least there was a clear beginning, middle, and end with the Alliance trying to take over the WWF and ultimately failing and having to disband.

It's tough to tell a story with a Rumble winner in the 15 range though. With the first 5 guys you can sell it with the longevity aspect, and with the last 5 guys you can say "these guys are fresh." They probably should mix it up and have a Rumble winner in the 10-20 range though, just to show it can happen. As far as 2006, it's not the worst Rumble but it's far from a favorite of mine too. My main problem is that I can't buy a runt like Rey lasting 60 minutes in a Rumble. Couldn't someone simply pick him up and toss him into the 5th row? The whole "Do it for Eddie!" storyline was dreck as well. Being a big RVD fan I was hoping he would win since that was his return, but he finished 4th.

See, here was my problem with Diesel. Even though he was booked as a tough guy I could never get past the notion of Nash being Vinnie Vegas in WCW and a total jobber. I wasn't even a smark at that point per se, but wasn't a total mark either. I never really bought Diesel as world champion for the simple fact that he was like the 5th biggest star in the company. Watching this show made me think about the WWF in 1995 with Diesel on top. I think the biggest problem they had by far was that everyone who was a top star was a face with no decent heels to feud with. From WM until roughly Sept./Oct. of 1995 they had Nash, Michaels, Bret, UT, Bulldog, Luger....all faces. This was a major problem since they couldn't put Diesel against hardly any of those guys since they were more over than he was, so we got the dreary Sid and Mabel feuds. Hell late in his run they had Bulldog do a heatless heel turn and I think he was even more over with the fans than Diesel. The irony is that I have enjoyed a lot of Nash's post WWF title reign work. His initial WCW run with Hall is brilliance, I'll even excuse his horrible booking and the Hummer Angle. Even his late era WWF 1996 run set the template for tweeners to follow. But I just never had any use for his 1993-95 work.

I actually am planning to see The Happening at some point during the week, probably on Thursday. It will hopefully suck. I'll be disappointed if it doesn't suck.

While this was certainly better than the dreck from 2003, I can understand the assessment that Sam Elliott was way better as the General. In this film Hurt plays him almost like he's the total heel who is out to use Banner to create a race of Hulks or super soliders. At least this film actually moved though. The 2003 Hulk made the unpardonable sin of being a comic book flick that was really, really slow and boring. And Nick Nolte was really bad and over the top in it.

I actually don't mind the Chamber of Horrors match. It's pretty funny and isn't dull at least. I think the weirdest part is that they put that match on as the opener of Havoc 1991, with a heel Luger retaining as the main event. Shouldn't such a bizarre spectacle be saved for the main event?

What's funny is that the stale Flair/Luger feud from 1990 actually won PWI's Feud of the Year. The sad thing is I tried to think of something that should have won instead and couldn't. In 1987 why not just give Windham some sort of title run? He had some great matches with Flair back then. I guess maybe he didn't want to be a lame duck since Flair was just getting the belt back at Starrcade.

Eh, generally speaking I tune out when a guy has the IC belt and is also going for the world title. It's like code for "This guy ain't winning unless he's the Ultimate Warrior." Besides, Diesel had done very little to even deserve an IC title run, much less a world title in mid 1994. The only thing of note he did was toss a bunch of jobbers at the 94 Rumble. The funny thing is that when Diesel did win the belt by beating Backlund I honestly thought they would just job him to Bret at the 1995 Rumble, figuring they would realize how foolish it was. They eventually did job him to Bret, but not for another 10 MONTHS.