My View on things

[Guest tank_abbott]

Ok, I'm one of the so-called WWE "apologists", and I've been reading the boards here with great amusement for a few years now. Alot of people are complaining about today product, but I've noticed that alot people will complain regardless (SHOCKING NEWZ~!) any ways, no matter what the WWE books.

 

HHH pins Booker T with only 1 pedigree and a 23 second pause before getting the 1-2-3 (Bah Gawd! He's burying Booker T!! Booker should've went over/ Booker should've took 3 pedigrees to be pinned like all the other matches at WM! HHH is burying the darkie! Augh!) Me: HHH/Booker had a more realistic match ending, because kicking out of someone's finisher repetitively only serves to kill the finishers and tends to expose the business (Not that Kayfabe means anything anymore...)

 

As far as the 23 second pause before the pin...HHH was putting over the fact that Booker had laid one hell of a whuppin' on him and Trip's had to use his last once of strength to hit one big move on Booker to finally put him down... as far as burying him: Y2J waited 15 or so seconds before pinning the Rock at Vengeance in 2001 (I think that was the show) was that a case of Jericho burying the Rock? or was Jericho putting over his exhaustion etc. from the pummeling he had absorbed.... I think certain situations are over looked because they involve a smark darling.

 

Okay that’s just one example on how dissecting a situation can allow you a bit of introspective on the situation…

 

Then we have arguments about how today’s storylines are pushing all the wrong people, etc. etc.…every major angle has been botched…etc. etc.… I have to agree not every angle has been utilized to maximum effectiveness, but when you’re looking to point out any and every little flaw within these angles, they bound to fall apart. Wrestling at a whole is one big stupid unbelievable “story”. (Men are hit with a fist 10 times in a corner and are not KO’d?…Rikishi’s opponent’s always happen to fall unto the bottom turnbuckle …etc.…etc. a lot of little things like that are over looked for the sake of “suspending belief”) But let’s go back to one story that wasn’t “botched”…a story so good, its credited with helping kick start the late 90’s wrestling boom. The n.W.o. I firmly believe if this storyline were occurring today (ala 96), the smarks would shit all over it…

 

Examples:

 

The central players are Hogan (He’s in his mid-40’s and hasn’t been over in 4 years!…Why do they keep pushing this washed up primadonna?) Nash (He just came off one of the worst drawing championship runs in history, he has no business in this main event angle!) Hall (The guy was so coked up even the sinking WWF ship saw him as more of a liability than as a draw!)

 

Hogan in his early N.W.O. days still very much played to the crowd… looking to them for approval at times, and I’m pretty sure he did a Hulk up vs Flair at the Clash… totally not playing the top heel.

 

Hall and Nash used their political pull to get the Tag belts and then never defended them, keeping them as “trophies” for their own egos while the Faces of Fear/Steiners/Harlem Heat/ Nasty Boys/Public Enemy/ High Voltage were left with nothing to chase. Fuck WCW.

 

N.W.O.Sting- Why are they putting this garbage on my TV? He looks nothing like the real Sting, do they think were all fools, who’d fall for this crap. Fuck the WCW.

 

Rey jr was launched into a trailer like a lawn dart by Nash. Boy way to put over the cruiserweight division! Nash is tall and Rey is small so Rey gets buried! Fuck WCW.

 

Main players for the WCW: Savage (By gawd he’s too old and roided up! Push some else else!) Luger (Roid Monkey!) Sting (Prima donna took off of in ring performing for a year thanks to clauses in his contract. Fuck Sting.) Giant (He’s a no talent Hoss by GAWD!)..

FUCK WCW

 

See even an angle that has been almost universally acknowledged as one of the best of all time was rather horribly flawed.

 

At this point I should add a conclusion, but alas I’m sure your mind is made up that I’m just a WWE Sheep and you will (I’m sure) make it abundantly clear to me how little you think of my view point in your comments below.

 

Quick Summary of argument: Over analyzing a entertainment program will (almost without exception) provide much evidence of a flawed product (Wrestling, Sitcoms, movies or otherwise). We only think fondly of how it used to be (WWF Yr 2000) due to forgetting the flaws and missteps that the product took along the way.

 

/End rant.

[Guest Sakura]

I think fondly of WWE circa 2000 because it was entertaining.

 

I don't go looking for flaws. I watch shows the same way I watched them in 2000. The flaws hit me in the face. They are RIGHT THERE.

[Bored 0]

HHH pins Booker T with only 1 pedigree and a 23 second pause before getting the 1-2-3 (Bah Gawd! He's burying Booker T!! Booker should've went over/ Booker should've took 3 pedigrees to be pinned like all the other matches at WM! HHH is burying the darkie! Augh!)  Me: HHH/Booker had a more realistic match ending, because kicking out of someone's finisher repetitively only serves to kill the finishers and tends to expose the business (Not that Kayfabe means anything anymore...)

Now you do make a good point about how it can be counterproductive to have so many matches where someone kicks out of a finisher, even if it is Wrestlemania. But the problem is that on that same night you have Kurt Angle kick out of the F-5, becoming the first ever to do so, so what the big deal be if Triple H allows Booker T to kick out and force him to hit another Pedigree? Triple H has been doing the Pedigree for eight years now and at one time when he was just a nobody midcarder it was kicked out of plenty of times but now no one is allowed to kick out of it and your DEAD once he hits it and its the only finisher that currently has that distinction. Point is Booker T kicking out of the Pedigree does NOTHING to hurt Triple H's credibility or the effect of the move and makes Booker T look strong even if he loses. Fact of the matter is in that match Booker T had only one pinfall in the entire match that the crowd bought and that is why people felt he was buried along with the finish and also now that he is back in the midcard with zero direction and fighting meaningless matches.

[Guest NoSelfWorth]

When you come back from your trip to Fantasy Land, be sure to show us any photos you took.

[Guest Heel In Peril]

I get the impression that you, tankabbott, seem to be aiming your post at one universal smart mark out there. You weren't even talking to me and I took offense to your approach. I'm not gonna cry. Shit, offend me. I'm just unsure if you realize how much of an attitude you were expressing towards the opinions of others in your post. After all, it is your opinion that many of today's smart marks go looking for flaws. And I respect your opinion, not withstanding the fact that I happen to agree with that statement. However, I emphasize the word "many", so as not to imply by any means "all". With that said, allow me to take opposition to a couple of your thoughts:

 

HHH pins Booker T with only 1 pedigree and a 23 second pause before getting the 1-2-3 (Bah Gawd! He's burying Booker T!! Booker should've went over/ Booker should've took 3 pedigrees to be pinned like all the other matches at WM! HHH is burying the darkie! Augh!)  Me: HHH/Booker had a more realistic match ending, because kicking out of someone's finisher repetitively only serves to kill the finishers and tends to expose the business (Not that Kayfabe means anything anymore...)

 

I think the problem most people had, and at the very least I had, with that Pedigree was not necessarily that it only took one nor was it necessarily that Triple-H sold (or even felt) the work thus far in the match. But it was that Booker was yet another fine contender to place in opposition against Triple-H, yet he was verbally put down in the middle of the ring on more than one occasion with no comeback in his defense, made to look like a fool with no chance at winning the title, but most importantly, made to look like he wasn't "good enough," whether to defeat Triple-H OR hold the World Title; ALL without ANY payoff! The Pedigree symbolized how no matter how much hard work his competition puts forth, in this case every signature and finishing move in Booker's playbook (short of the Bookend), Triple-H never needs to exert too much effort to stay on top, symbolically. He may have sold a little after the delivery, but if he REALLY wanted to "sell" anything. Why not loan the title to Booker for a month or something, ya know? Gesture something that means SOMETHING. The job of a heel, especially that of the top heel in the company, is to make the babyface's struggle look marvelous! Of course, responsibility is also on the babyface to perform this task. But where the face in most cases must follow certain rules whether in word or in deed, the heel has none. No rules to follow, but one: turn the good guy into a hero. That's it. Even if Triple-H FAILS, EVERY SINGLE TIME to do so, he should be trying his heart out to help Booker and RVD and Kane and Steiner ALL look like they're gonna win. Like THEY'RE the superstar, the hero. But no. If this doesn't move you, that's cool either way, but just incase it hasn't, just ask yourself: Outside of the WWE office, who actually wants Triple-H to win anymore? Is there anyone? If Triple-H turned face somehow, would one person cheer him?

 

The n.W.o. I firmly believe if this storyline were occurring today (ala 96), the smarks would shit all over it… <insert argument here> ... See even an angle that has been almost universally acknowledged as one of the best of all time was rather horribly flawed.

 

You have plenty of fine points on how the original nWo angle was technically a bad one. However, you generalize here as well. As "accepted" as it may be that the original nWo angle was "one of the best of all time" should prove NOT that it is in fact what's claimed to be of it, but that it fulfilled it's purpose. IT GOT OVER! That's what matters! The fans ate it up! How much of today's wrestling angles do fans really eat up? 20%? 25%? Less? There is no abundance of impelling storylines on Smackdown, and forget about Raw. I only watch on Mondays to keep up with my favorite guys now. Is that what wrestling should be merely because it's not me booking, merely because I don't own the place and that means I shouldn't complain? The nWo angle, with ALL of it's flaws, got over and that's why it's one of the best angles of all time. Funny, I don't even agree that it even was one of the best. I do believe it was groundbreaking for WCW and revolutionary in how far gimmicks and backstage attacks will go nowadays. I never loved the angle, but if it puts asses in every seat in the house, it just did something right. Does Triple-H fill arenas with his challenger-of-the-month feuds? Of course not. 'Cause he's proven it isn't about pleasing the fans to a guy like him. Evidently, it's all about the Gheyme. And I'm not spending $40 on this shit!

[Guest tank_abbott]

Triple H has been doing the Pedigree for eight years now and at one time when he was just a nobody midcarder it was kicked out of plenty of times but now no one is allowed to kick out of it and your DEAD once he hits it and its the only finisher that currently has that distinction.

One could conclude then that in the 8 years of doing the move, HHH has now perfected it to a Deadly Science. A end all/kill all move.

[Guest tank_abbott]

BTW, I appreciate the effort put out by the posters so far, (Minus NoSelfWorth) who put time/effort and THOUGHT into there responses.

[Guest tank_abbott]

I think fondly of WWE circa 2000 because it was entertaining.

 

I don't go looking for flaws. I watch shows the same way I watched them in 2000. The flaws hit me in the face. They are RIGHT THERE.

Mae Young Nekkid? Biker Taker? Big Show in the WM main Event? Rock vs HHH 4,345 times? McMahon's main eventing? Chyna in the uppercard? Mark Henry fueds with Viscera? Test and Albert tagging? Bull/Bossman tagging? RTC? Road Dog and X-Pac tagging? Big Show squashing Angle in a comedy match? HHH burying Beniot/Angle/Jericho on PPV in one calender year? Tazz fueding with JR/Lawler?

 

Oh yeah 2000 was entertaining as all hell, no crap in there you forgot about....

[Guest NoSelfWorth]

BTW, I appreciate the effort put out by the posters so far, (Minus NoSelfWorth) who put time/effort and THOUGHT into there responses.

I put as much time, effort and thought into my post that I felt your post deserved.

[Guest CanadianChris]

I think fondly of WWE circa 2000 because it was entertaining.

 

I don't go looking for flaws. I watch shows the same way I watched them in 2000. The flaws hit me in the face. They are RIGHT THERE.

Mae Young Nekkid? Biker Taker? Big Show in the WM main Event? Rock vs HHH 4,345 times? McMahon's main eventing? Chyna in the uppercard? Mark Henry fueds with Viscera? Test and Albert tagging? Bull/Bossman tagging? RTC? Road Dog and X-Pac tagging? Big Show squashing Angle in a comedy match? HHH burying Beniot/Angle/Jericho on PPV in one calender year? Tazz fueding with JR/Lawler?

 

Oh yeah 2000 was entertaining as all hell, no crap in there you forgot about....

Why must you hate on WWE so?

 

- Bikertaker was interesting when he first debuted.

 

- The main event of WM was good, even with Big Show in it.

 

- As long as Rock and HHH want to put on ***, **** and ***** matches, I'll watch them every time.

 

- T&A was a decent team. No Hollywood Blonds, but no Bushwhackers either.

 

- The Showster match was fun and entertaining.

 

- If you don't think HHH is burying people now, you can't possibly be serious about him burying those three. Those matches were all OUTSTANDING, particularly the Last Man Standing match.

 

What's there to like about WWE right now?

[Guest MaxPower27]

HHH pins Booker T with only 1 pedigree and a 23 second pause before getting the 1-2-3 (Bah Gawd! He's burying Booker T!! Booker should've went over/ Booker should've took 3 pedigrees to be pinned like all the other matches at WM! HHH is burying the darkie! Augh!) Me: HHH/Booker had a more realistic match ending, because kicking out of someone's finisher repetitively only serves to kill the finishers and tends to expose the business (Not that Kayfabe means anything anymore...)

I felt that it made Booker look less superior to HHH. I understand that you want to have your champion look better when he wins the feud, however:

 

A) HHH has had the title for far too long, the ratings aren't going anywhere but down with him as the champion, but Vince refuses to try anything new.

 

B) Booker was repeatedly insulted, made to look like a fool, and racially judged(!) in order to gain attention for a heatless title feud. Booker pinned HHH in a tag team match, and there was no big deal made of it, but HHH gets the job back that matters; the job at Wrestlemania.

 

C) As for the whole pedigree thing, HHH hadn't had that much done to him as you'd think storyline-wise, therefore the pedigree followed by the pause was kind of another way to knock Booker down a few pegs. Personally, I don't feel that Booker kicking out of the pedigree once would have made HHH look bad, it would have elevated Booker a bit more. But, we can't have that!

 

 

As far as the 23 second pause before the pin...HHH was putting over the fact that Booker had laid one hell of a whuppin' on him and Trip's had to use his last once of strength to hit one big move on Booker to finally put him down...  as far as burying him: Y2J waited 15 or so seconds before pinning the Rock at Vengeance in 2001 (I think that was the show) was that a case of Jericho burying the Rock? or was Jericho putting over his exhaustion etc. from the pummeling he had absorbed.... I think certain situations are over looked because they involve a smark darling.

 

The Jericho example isn't relevant because that elevated Jericho into Rock's echelon of main event for a time. Booker losing just proved for good that Booker wasn't good enough to hang with HHH. As for the "smark darling," that's a bullshit excuse. It's plain as day when you watch the WMXIX match that HHH hadn't had that much done to him to warrant that type of pinfall.

 

Okay that’s just one example on how dissecting a situation can allow you a bit of introspective on the situation…

 

Then we have arguments about how today’s storylines are pushing all the wrong people, etc. etc.…every major angle has been botched…etc. etc.… I have to agree not every angle has been utilized to maximum effectiveness, but when you’re looking to point out any and every little flaw within these angles, they bound to fall apart.  Wrestling at a whole is one big stupid unbelievable “story”.  (Men are hit with a fist 10 times in a corner and are not KO’d?…Rikishi’s opponent’s always happen to fall unto the bottom turnbuckle …etc.…etc.  a lot of little things like that are over looked for the sake of “suspending belief”) But let’s go back to one story that wasn’t “botched”…a story so good, its credited with helping kick start the late 90’s wrestling boom.  The n.W.o.  I firmly believe if this storyline were occurring today (ala 96), the smarks would shit all over it…

 

I don't. If the angle had never been done before, it would be one of the freshest things in wrestling history. It's obvious that it was so fresh that it turned WCW around, and the same could be said for WWE.

 

Examples:

 

The central players are Hogan (He’s in his mid-40’s and hasn’t been over in 4 years!…Why do they keep pushing this washed up primadonna?)

 

I hated Hogan when I was a kid, but I enjoyed him in the nWo. It was a fresh character.

 

Nash (He just came off one of the worst drawing championship runs in history, he has no business in this main event angle!)

 

I hated Nash in the nWo, so I can see your argument here.

 

Hall (The guy was so coked up even the sinking WWF ship saw him as more of a liability than as a draw!)

 

This is true.

 

Hogan in his early N.W.O. days still very much played to the crowd… looking to them for approval at times, and I’m pretty sure he did a Hulk up vs Flair at the Clash… totally not playing the top heel.

 

Hogan has always been more interested in selling t-shirts and videos than doing what is right for business.

 

Hall and Nash used their political pull to get the Tag belts and then never defended them, keeping them as “trophies” for their own egos while the Faces of Fear/Steiners/Harlem Heat/ Nasty Boys/Public Enemy/ High Voltage were left with nothing to chase. Fuck WCW.

 

Well, this is true. How many "number 1 contendership matches" did Harlem Heat and The Steiners have while the Outsiders did nothing with the belts? Exactly.

 

N.W.O.Sting- Why are they putting this garbage on my TV? He looks nothing like the real Sting, do they think were all fools, who’d fall for this crap. Fuck the WCW.

 

I guess you're assuming that all smarks think like this, but it's not true. I happened to get a kick out of the fake Sting, mostly because he looked NOTHING like Steve Borden.

 

Rey jr was launched into a trailer like a lawn dart by Nash. Boy way to put over the cruiserweight division! Nash is tall and Rey is small so Rey gets buried! Fuck WCW.

 

This "smark" thing that you're pulling is getting old now. This was the launching pad for the nWo angle, and most smarks enjoyed this moment.

 

Main players for the WCW: Savage (By gawd he’s too old and roided up! Push some else else!)

 

Once again, I don't know if you're aiming this at all smarks, but if you are, you're an ass.

 

Luger (Roid Monkey!)

 

Were we wrong about this?!Luger's Warrant

 

Sting (Prima donna took off of in ring performing for a year thanks to clauses in his contract. Fuck Sting.) Giant (He’s a no talent Hoss by GAWD!)..

FUCK WCW

 

This "all smarks think like this" is stupid. It's obvious that you have no real argument with this, so you resort to this unfunny bullshit.

 

 

See even an angle that has been almost universally acknowledged as one of the best of all time was rather horribly flawed.

 

Yeah, you really showed me

 

At this point I should add a conclusion, but alas I’m sure your mind is made up that I’m just a WWE Sheep and you will (I’m sure) make it abundantly clear to me how little you think of my view point in your comments below.

 

No, my mind is made up that you have no central argument and think that all smarks think exactly the same, when in fact, they don't.

 

Quick Summary of argument: Over analyzing a entertainment program will (almost without exception) provide much evidence of a flawed product (Wrestling, Sitcoms, movies or otherwise).  We only think fondly of how it used to be (WWF Yr 2000) due to forgetting the flaws and missteps that the product took along the way.

 

/End rant.

 

Quick summary of argument: You have no argument.

[Guest gansobomber]

Hey, if not over analysing things, we would'nt be here.

 

What are you gonna debate about?

 

OMG HHH SCREWED KATIE VICK!!!!!!!!!!

 

Don't take me seriously...

[Guest cabbageboy]

I think I'm the only one on this board who thought that 2000 sucked. In fact I've rarely been as pissed as I was after WM2000. Let's face it, the HHH crap started in full force in 2000. Sure the beginnings of it were 1999 but for the most part that year was amusing for the WWF.

 

I've never understood why people praised the booking in 2000. It was horrible. Most of it centered around the main event stuff: HHH retaining at WM in an idiotic move, the whole Angle/HHH feud being botched horribly, people like Jericho and Benoit not winning key matches...face it, most of the problems WWE has today started in 2000.

[Guest the pinjockey]

Because in 2000 the WWF hadn't blown their benefit of the doubt card yet. Look at Fully Loaded 2000 most people were willing to think that even though Benoit and Jericho lost their matches they would be pushed in the future because they were credible after that night. The writing team hadnt done anything to give people the feeling that they will blow it eventually.

 

Also they were putting on great matches up and down the card at almost every PPV and that will cover up a lot of flaws as well.

[Guest AndrewTS]

Triple H has been doing the Pedigree for eight years now and at one time when he was just a nobody midcarder it was kicked out of plenty of times but now no one is allowed to kick out of it and your DEAD once he hits it and its the only finisher that currently has that distinction.

One could conclude then that in the 8 years of doing the move, HHH has now perfected it to a Deadly Science. A end all/kill all move.

The execution has not changed at all in the slightest. He's just added a kick before doing the move. Although early on he'd sometimes botch the move and make it nearly a Tiger Driver 91--far more devastating than a Pedigree ever would be.

[Guest Coffey]

This is one of the better replies I've read on this site. A lot of it, I think, relates to this subject.

 

why do I have to be Blindy Markish? Because I don't respond like the common SMARK SHEEP?  I'm sorry that I don't have the RVD ROX! JERICHO AND BENOIT ARE GOLDEN GODS! THEY ARE INFALLIBLE!!! mindset.  Pardon me for having my own opinions and ideas.  I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING AN INDIVIDUAL.  Next time I'll reply "FUCK GOLDBERG, JERICHO PWNZ!!!!!!1", and listen to bad music off of MTV.

 

There is a double standard around here.  If some OTHER wrestler botches a spot, they're berated and called terrible.  But, if an 'untouchable' botches a spot, it's okay...he was trying to carry the match/opponent, or he was trying to hype the crowd, or some other FANBOY excuse.  Don't go throwing stones...you live in a glass house.

 

There ya go. The double standard.

[Guest Mik at Cornell]

I may not agree with tank but those of you who are saying he has no argument just because his opinion is different than yours (MaxPower) is just as stupid. I mean, he made some good points (I don't happen to agree with them) but they deserve respect because they were well thought out.

Edited May 10, 2003 by Mik at Cornell

[Guest MaxPower27]

What exactly was well thought out? The fact that he thinks all wrestling fans with computers think exactly the same? The fact that we hate everything about WCW? The fact that he doesn't know anything about me, yet he lumps my beliefs into a mold to prove some kind of point?

[Guest the pinjockey]

As far as the 23 second pause before the pin...HHH was putting over the fact that Booker had laid one hell of a whuppin' on him and Trip's had to use his last once of strength to hit one big move on Booker to finally put him down... as far as burying him: Y2J waited 15 or so seconds before pinning the Rock at Vengeance in 2001 (I think that was the show) was that a case of Jericho burying the Rock? or was Jericho putting over his exhaustion etc. from the pummeling he had absorbed.... I think certain situations are over looked because they involve a smark darling.

I am trying to figure out when exactly this was. I recall Jericho beating Rock three times:

 

No Mercy: The ref checked on Steph turned around counted three

Vengeance: The ref was busy with Vince turned around and counted the three

Royal Rumble: Quick roll-up

 

Now lets look at the other point in question

 

Wrestlemania: HHH hits the pedigree, takes a quick nap, crawls over, pins him with the ref sitting there waiting the whole time.

 

That damn Jericho if he wasn't a smark darling I would tear him apart for treating Rock like that.

 

And as for the blown spot arguement. Most of the smark darlings put on consistently good matches so a blown spot here or there is forgiveable, because they make up for it. And when Jericho was going through his rough stretch most of the people online were calling him on it.

[Guest EternallyLazy]

I think the general issue here, is that it's easier and more FUN to complain rather than praise. The typical arrogant "we know everything because we read it in the sheets!" smart mark (and don't kid yourself, this board is FULL of them) is like the typical partisan politician... they both have agendas.

 

I think it also depends very much so on the popularity of the product. I agree that 2000 pretty much sucked if you want to break it down. And WWF 1998/99 sucked too. Undertaker/Kane anyone? One of the most unrealistic storylines in the HISTORY of this company? Austin/Mcmahon while entertaining had an overdose of swerves. Hell, the whole product was swerve oriented. But guess what? It was popular... therefor, the smarks didn't complain. I personally long for the days of 1998 when Steve Austin (pre neck surgery) was stinking up the arenas with his workrate (unless you count his matches with Foley) and putting up his own glass ceiling against the likes of Owen Hart and Jeff Jarrett -- note sarcasm

 

It's the popular thing to do here to bash every little thing the WWE does, because quite simply... the product isn't on fire with popularity. If it was... then you wouldn't hear half as many complaints

[Guest bob_barron]

I may not agree with trivia but those of you who are saying he has no argument just because his opinion is different than yours (MaxPower) is just as stupid. I mean, he made some good points (I don't happen to agree with them) but they deserve respect because they were well thought out.

Trivia didn't make any posts in this thread. Just because tank's points were well thought out doesn't make his argument flimsy and his points weak

[Guest JHawk]

I haven't read the other replies to this yet, so my apologies if some of these points have already been made, but I thought I'd chime in here.

 

As far as the 23 second pause before the pin...HHH was putting over the fact that Booker had laid one hell of a whuppin' on him and Trip's had to use his last once of strength to hit one big move on Booker to finally put him down...

 

I might have agreed with this had Triple H not kicked out of a scissor kick after a similar pause less than two minutes earlier. Also note that this was basically a Pedigree with no set-up and not the end of a sequence of moves. To me, the fact that Hunter could kick out when Booker couldn't exposes the business worse than had Booker kicked out of a finish.

 

Hogan in his early N.W.O. days still very much played to the crowd… looking to them for approval at times, and I’m pretty sure he did a Hulk up vs Flair at the Clash… totally not playing the top heel.

 

But Hogan was doing the same old act that he'd been doing as a face...and was being booed for it then too. Not all that far-fetched.

 

Hall and Nash used their political pull to get the Tag belts and then never defended them, keeping them as “trophies” for their own egos while the Faces of Fear/Steiners/Harlem Heat/ Nasty Boys/Public Enemy/ High Voltage were left with nothing to chase. Fuck WCW.

 

I think the main problem with that one was they lost the damned things TWICE without ever OFFICIALLY losing them, one of those being after they made the point that there was ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY NO WAY that the title change wasn't absolutely official! But outside of the Steiners and possibly Harlem Heat, none of those teams were ever given any credibility.

 

Main players for the WCW: Savage (By gawd he’s too old and roided up! Push some else else!) Luger (Roid Monkey!) Sting (Prima donna took off of in ring performing for a year thanks to clauses in his contract. Fuck Sting.) Giant (He’s a no talent Hoss by GAWD!)..

FUCK WCW

 

Point taken about Luger, but Savage was coming off a good series of matches with Ric Flair, Sting had the biggest run of his career because he didn't wrestle for over a year, and The Giant was actually pretty good before his weight got completely out of hand.

 

Quick Summary of argument: Over analyzing a entertainment program will (almost without exception) provide much evidence of a flawed product (Wrestling, Sitcoms, movies or otherwise). We only think fondly of how it used to be (WWF Yr 2000) due to forgetting the flaws and missteps that the product took along the way.

 

For the most part, the flaws weren't nearly as glaring. If fans were smartened up in 1983, they'd have been asking why Jimmy Snuka never got the I-C belt from Muraco. But they found a way for him to lose that seemed somewhat believable. There was always an effort. Now it's "Forget what you saw last week, because we're completely changing it with no explanation." There's still no explanation as to why Jericho is helping Triple H beyond their tag match a few weeks ago. There's no explanation as to why people who haven't wrestled in six months or longer get main events when guys who have won steadily for the same length of time can't get past the lower midcard. And to top it off, the shows aren't entertaining enough to counteract the sheer stupidity of the storylines.

[Guest AndrewTS]

It's the popular thing to do here to bash every little thing the WWE does, because quite simply... the product isn't on fire with popularity. If it was... then you wouldn't hear half as many complaints

 

The thing is, when they do something is entertaining but not workrate intensive, it's kosher because workrate alone won't make a fued interesting for a lot of people.

 

Rock/Hogan II --catered to the marks but it was cool with me because of the promos, and the match itself was fun to watch. The program it led into, Hogan vs. Vince, NOBODY GAVE TWO SHITS ABOUT BUT VINCE AND HOGAN THEMSELVES.

 

Take a look at the Mania buyrate--remember that Mania was centered mainly on that match.

[Guest saturnmark4life]

I actually see where tank is coming from with the HHH/Booker stuff, but why the hell did he need to win? Hell knows we've been through this crap, but HHH is a bad champion who can no longer perform to the levels he used to, and refuses to accept that he would be more use doind a few jobs than staying on top and killing the company.

 

Anyway, I will always lavish praise on the following, however insignificant some of them are:-

 

Brock

Benoit

The FBI

Rico

Tommy Dreamer

Cena

Noble

Spanky

Booker

Piper (used minimally)

Mattitude

Jericho

Guerreros

Mysterio

Tajiri

Funaki

I think that's it, but there are aspects I enjoy, probably more than during 98/99 when I think about it. However, it's alright me marking for those guys, but none of them are used correctly in my opinion, save Lesnar (before backlash). I know that's why 99% of people bitch and we know that, but I think the most annoying part is that they could turn it around very easily with the TV time and talent available to them. With a monopoly like WWE's, they have no excuse for performing so badly.

[Guest EternallyLazy]

It's the popular thing to do here to bash every little thing the WWE does, because quite simply... the product isn't on fire with popularity. If it was... then you wouldn't hear half as many complaints

 

The thing is, when they do something is entertaining but not workrate intensive, it's kosher because workrate alone won't make a fued interesting for a lot of people.

 

Rock/Hogan II --catered to the marks but it was cool with me because of the promos, and the match itself was fun to watch. The program it led into, Hogan vs. Vince, NOBODY GAVE TWO SHITS ABOUT BUT VINCE AND HOGAN THEMSELVES.

 

Take a look at the Mania buyrate--remember that Mania was centered mainly on that match.

Ah, yes... the buyrate. I'm not referring specifically to you, but I remember a while back, I questioned whether Angle/Brock would pop a good buyrate, and most here responded with "it's Mania... the name itself will attract a good buyrate" so in other words, it doesnt matter who the machine centers the attention...

[Guest BoboBrazil]

Me: HHH/Booker had a more realistic match ending, because kicking out of someone's finisher repetitively only serves to kill the finishers and tends to expose the business (Not that Kayfabe means anything anymore...)

That is all well and good, but how come HHH kicked out of like 3 Booker T finishing moves and all it took was 1 pedigree to finish Booker T?

[Guest Anglesault]

I think the general issue here, is that it's easier and more FUN to complain rather than praise.

The problem is there is nothing to praise. I refuse to get up ad celebrate because "at least it's not..." or "well, it's better than..." That's just accepting something for the sake of accepting it.

[Guest Anglesault]

Me: HHH/Booker had a more realistic match ending, because kicking out of someone's finisher repetitively only serves to kill the finishers and tends to expose the business (Not that Kayfabe means anything anymore...)

That is all well and good, but how come HHH kicked out of like 3 Booker T finishing moves and all it took was 1 pedigree to finish Booker T?

Because Booker is black. I thought HHH had made that crystal clear.

[Guest Anglesault]

It's the popular thing to do here to bash every little thing the WWE does, because quite simply... the product isn't on fire with popularity. If it was... then you wouldn't hear half as many complaints

 

The thing is, when they do something is entertaining but not workrate intensive, it's kosher because workrate alone won't make a fued interesting for a lot of people.

 

Rock/Hogan II --catered to the marks but it was cool with me because of the promos, and the match itself was fun to watch. The program it led into, Hogan vs. Vince, NOBODY GAVE TWO SHITS ABOUT BUT VINCE AND HOGAN THEMSELVES.

 

Take a look at the Mania buyrate--remember that Mania was centered mainly on that match.

Ah, yes... the buyrate. I'm not referring specifically to you, but I remember a while back, I questioned whether Angle/Brock would pop a good buyrate, and most here responded with "it's Mania... the name itself will attract a good buyrate" so in other words, it doesnt matter who the machine centers the attention...

And centering a show around two old men stopped even the anual Mania buyers from buying it.

[Guest EternallyLazy]

I dont consider myself an "apologist" because there are many things I hate about the product... infact, SD this week was a milestone for me because it marked the first time since 1998 that I stopped watching a WWE program halfway through... I've done that before because I became busy, but I always recorded... this time, I didn't, and I wasn't busy.

 

BUT, what pisses me off, other than the arrogant attitudes here and the blatant spinning and hypocrisy, is that many of you tend to pick out every single thing about it, while forgetting that you're watching pro wrestling... not LA Law. Sure, I would love a change of pace... more realistic storylines, better action in the ring. BUT, it seems that even when we got that for a few months, you guys picked that apart as well