Guest RickyChosyu Report post Posted December 27, 2002 I don't understand the confusion over the Paul-Show-Angle thing. It breaks down pretty easily to this... Angle - Uses and abuses Brock into assuring that he gets to beat Show, while at the same time signing with Heymen to make sure Brock doesn't get a shot. Paul - Didn't care who won at the last PPV since he had both guys secretly under contract anyway. Gets to play with Brock more and expand his sphere of power. Show - Big dumb guy is getting used by his manager as a road block. If Heyman had both guys in his pocket, why not just save them the trouble of kicking the shit out of each other and have Show lie down for Angle? Why even bother getting Brock's suspension lifted? What does Heyman have to gain by having his two clients kick each other's ass's while re-instating his arch nemesis? How the hell is that logical? Anyone? Anyone at all? I'm not holding my breath. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RavishingRickRudo Report post Posted December 27, 2002 Heyman didn't want Brock to know about his and Angles relationship - so most likely having Brocks suspension lifted was opening up a way to screw him again and further manipulate him. The whole Heyman/Brock issue needs to be elaborated on a lil more by the WWF. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted December 27, 2002 I don't understand the confusion over the Paul-Show-Angle thing. It breaks down pretty easily to this... Angle - Uses and abuses Brock into assuring that he gets to beat Show, while at the same time signing with Heymen to make sure Brock doesn't get a shot. Paul - Didn't care who won at the last PPV since he had both guys secretly under contract anyway. Gets to play with Brock more and expand his sphere of power. Show - Big dumb guy is getting used by his manager as a road block. Yes, but why did Heyman and especially Angle decide that they randomly hated Brock enough to come up with this confusing plot? Heyman's hatred: Brock refused to listen to Heyman time and time again. Heyman got pissed off at this, so he starts to screw Lesnar. Angle: Lesnar is probably the only guy that actually has amature wrestling titles under his belt in WWF/E besides Angle. Angle doesn't like that...so auto-hate for Lesnar by Angle. And yet Heyman is the heel. Wrestling is strange, aint it? As for Angle, unless you are trying to make him out as paranoid, who the fuck cares? I mean, Angle did all that brock did and more. It would make sense for Brock to be jealous of Angle, not the other way around. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RickyChosyu Report post Posted December 27, 2002 Heyman didn't want Brock to know about his and Angles relationship - so most likely having Brocks suspension lifted was opening up a way to screw him again and further manipulate him. The whole Heyman/Brock issue needs to be elaborated on a lil more by the WWF. Why "screw" him, again? What did Heyman gain? Lets look at the situation pre-Angle/Heyman: *Smackdown! Title on a champion under his control *The only threat to him is suspended indefinitely *He has no obligation to grant Brock a re-match, and could, in theory, never give him one, ever. Now let's look at the standings after this whole mess: *He's thoroughly pissed off his "favorite client" by cutting him out of the loop and taking the belt off him. *He's got two world title contender's who are bound to be at odds with one another because they both want the top strap, on top of the resentment Show has for Angle thanks to being screwed. *Brock is re-instated and again poses a direct threat to Heyman. Yeah, that Heyman is a *genius* ya know. How long are we going to have to overlook huge logic gaps for this crap to make sense? How long am I, some Joe Nobody on wrestling message board, going to be able to point out the blatant plot-wholes from a company that is trying to recover? How long is everyone going to continue making excuses for Heyman's shallow, short-sited writing before he actually gets taken to task for making a bad decision? Surely, after making himself the top heel on the show he writes for, *someone* is going to point out the conflict of interest instead of blaiming it on the MchMahons and the usual Heyman Scape-goats, right? Right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ram Report post Posted December 27, 2002 Well, Brock's suspension would've eventually been lifted anyway. Heyman knew this and felt Show wasn't enough to protect him. So he went to Angle. Speaking of Brock's suspension, who's to say Angle actually went to Steph to get it lifted? Maybe she did it on her own, but Angle/Paul wanted it to look as though they double-screwed Lesnar. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest nikowwf Report post Posted December 27, 2002 Maybe Heyman LIED. He is, a HEEL after all. I don't recall actually seeing Angle get Brock's suspension lifted. I recall Steph getting pissed, and then lifting it. niko Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest nikowwf Report post Posted December 27, 2002 As for Angle, unless you are trying to make him out as paranoid, who the fuck cares? I mean, Angle did all that brock did and more. It would make sense for Brock to be jealous of Angle, not the other way around. Angle is a heel. Heels are paranoid and worried and do anything to keep their position. I think it makes perfect sense that Angle behave like that. Now, if you want to argue Angle should be the face and Brock the heel for all this to work better, I'd be hard pressed to argue. BUt as long as Angle is the heel in this feud, he's going to have to act like a heel. niko Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RickyChosyu Report post Posted December 28, 2002 "Well, Brock's suspension would've eventually been lifted anyway. Heyman knew this and felt Show wasn't enough to protect him. So he went to Angle." Even if we assume that Heyman favored Angle's protection over Big Show's, why would he go through the trouble of having them feud, beat each other up, and interject Brock into the situation when he could just have one lie down for the other without having to worry about Brock at all? He's got both of them working for him, yet lets them go to war? Why? This reminds me of Milo Minderbinder in Catch-22 helping the German's re-build their bridge while he shipped suplies to the Americans to bomb it because he was making a profit off both, accept this angle is actually supposedly a serious one. Again, if blatant plot holes like this that a two-year old would be able to spot make it onto the air, then long-term storylines themselves are useless. If you're going to insult everyone's intelligence while you get organized, it's better to just be unorganized and not build their hopes up. "Speaking of Brock's suspension, who's to say Angle actually went to Steph to get it lifted? Maybe she did it on her own, but Angle/Paul wanted it to look as though they double-screwed Lesnar." Listen, I've made enough assumptions on the part of WWE creative to make this angle seem logical, and it still hasn't worked out, so I'm not about to fill in the plot whole with my imagination of Steph lifting the suspension herself and Heyman taking credit. Angle claimed that he intentionally brought Brock back in, so that's how the storyline is going to be percieved, whether you or I have anything to say about it. "Maybe if I allign myself with someone who the fans care about, no one will notice that I'm blatantly putting myself over to the detriment of my wrestlers! Well, no one accept that pesky Ricky Chosyu. Doesn't he know that Kevin Dunn is responsible for all the bad ideas on my show? or is that Johny Ace?" - Paul Heyman, Super Genius Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Your Paragon of Virtue 0 Report post Posted December 28, 2002 We know the Angle turn was stupid and made things worse than before, but we're just trying to at least salvage something and make a little sense out of it, whatever amount there may be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mole Report post Posted December 28, 2002 Wow, it sounds like a bunch of marks calling... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
