Guest TheGame2705 Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Yeah but the point is...Kane's been built up as evil and untouchable. A guy who has to be kept in shackles shouldn't get hurt by Shane even if it was a sneak attack.
Guest Anglesault Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 And why does it make a difference if he's the boss's son? He's a pissed off guy (who looks a lot bigger than the last time we saw him) that dove at Kane, who by the way wasn't expecting it. Then he kept hitting him with hard chair shots. You know this won't lead to Shane winning like it probably would if it was Vince, and you know it'll probably be a good match. So what's the problem? Shane's not a wrestler. That's the problem. a wrestler just got fucked so the guy who runs the website can be on the show. Oh, and that McMahon/Austin feud a couple of years ago was useless too right? Damn those non-wrestlers! 95 % of the time it was McMahon's hired gun wrestler fighting while McMahon pulled the stings.
Guest Lil Naitch Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Shane looked amazingly good out there tonight. I am torn on the Shane issue. As much as I love him, I know his presence can deprive wrestlers of valuable tv time. But, as it was said, it's Raw so it ok. I'm a Shane mark, and I make no bones about it. Have KAne destroy him at SS on next week and continue the RVD fued.
Guest Human Fly Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 At least Shane will actually wrestle though. Austin has been going around punking out wrestler after wrestler, and he can't even get in the ring. Shane can attack Kane, and then they can have a match. Austin can have an even brawl with Kane and all we get is a watered down version of 'Wrestler v. Authority Figure' where there can be no payoff.
Adam Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 ^I'd mark for that idea. Shane could talk on RVD's behalf, then maybe he'd win a title.
Guest BionicRedneck Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 95 % of the time it was McMahon's hired gun wrestler fighting while McMahon pulled the stings. So? You said people who aren't wrestlers shouldn't be on TV. Without Vince McMahon would that feud have worked?
Guest CanadianChick Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 I fucking hate it. Shane McMahon comes back to waste twenty minutes a week playing "30 year old who thinks he's 15" on th mic so he can go and take a PPV match away from a WRESTLER. Yippee. Whewww...thank god mole's mom's corpse is rotting with his semen in it! Moles dead mom=fun What. The. Fuck.
Guest JRE Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 First of all, if you're so annoyed by a non-wrestling person being involved in the WWE....you must be really screwed up by watching the WWE every week. That's a different matter, and one that can't be pinned right to this occurence with Shane, a non-wrestler who is quite entertaining and "pays dues" in his matches. Second of all, beyond the facts that Shane's offense was a surprise clothesline and chairshots, driven by his mother being abused, and the fact that Kane no-sold them. I'll point out that Rob Van Dam got plenty of offense last week, before he was rammed into the set, granted, "he's a wrestler" but the replies stating that "not even RVD could hurt Kane" called for that comment.
Guest Trivia247 Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Shane maybe the closest McMahon you could call a wrestler, but like many here state... Kane is being built as a Monster even unlike the Monster he was originally.... He took Austin's Beatdown and Stunner and got back up (Which makes me wonder why Austin would want to try it again without acknowledging he got his ass whooped) Shane with the Rightious power of a scorned and wounded Mother complex maybe be a logical retaliation to Linda's downfall, but if it leads to Shane beating Kane then thats fucking insane.. if you read between the lines however, Shane did do as much as he could with both fist and chair even knocking him off the stage, and Kane was just laughin at him.
NYU Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 95 % of the time it was McMahon's hired gun wrestler fighting while McMahon pulled the stings. So? You said people who aren't wrestlers shouldn't be on TV. Without Vince McMahon would that feud have worked? So one good non-wrestler feud justifies the countless non-wrestling, boring feuds we have had since ? It was what....4 years ago ? Seriously, it's time for Vince to let it go. It was the exception. Not the rule. Just look at the shit we're dealing with now. Austin/Bischoff Austin/Kane Vince/Gowan Vince/Brock Stephanie/Sable Shane/Kane and why?! This stuff sucks. Let the wrestlers feud. Please.
Mecha Mummy Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Whoa, whoa, whoa. First people were pissed that RVD would be sacrificed to Kane at SS and now they're pissed that RVD WON'T be sacrificed to Kane at SS? Yeesh...
NYU Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Whoa, whoa, whoa. First people were pissed that RVD would be sacrificed to Kane at SS and now they're pissed that RVD WON'T be sacrificed to Kane at SS? Yeesh... I'd rather have RVD sacrificed to Kane at SummerSlam in a high-profile match than have RVD not appear on SummerSlam at all. But that's just my opinion. It's amazingly ridiculous that one of the top faces on RAW looks to be, yet again, not appearing on a PPV.
chaosrage Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Shane's not a wrestler. That's the problem. a wrestler just got fucked so the guy who runs the website can be on the show. So what? He's not a wrestler but he puts on good matches. I'd rather see him fight Kane than Austin, or anybody else they would put in. Even RVD because Kane's a monster now so he would just get squashed.
Guest Anglesault Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Shane's not a wrestler. That's the problem. a wrestler just got fucked so the guy who runs the website can be on the show. So what? He's not a wrestler but he puts on good matches. I'd rather see him fight Kane than Austin, or anybody else they would put in. Even RVD because Kane's a monster now so he would just get squashed. He would at least make the show and get a paycheck.
Guest CanadianChick Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 I'm telling you guys, it'll be Vince/Kane vs. Shane/RVD.
Guest Askewniverse Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Well, CC was right about Benoit-Eddie. If she's right about this, she's psychic. There is a positive thing if RVD/Shane vs. Kane/Vince happens. We'll only have to sit through two McMahon matches at the most instead of three.
Guest Anglesault Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Well, CC was right about Benoit-Eddie. If she's right about this, she's psychic. There is a positive thing if RVD/Shane vs. Kane/Vince happens. We'll only have to sit through two McMahon matches at the most instead of three. So you see Stephanie/Albert happening too?
Guest Askewniverse Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Sadly, yes. Either that or Gowen/Steph vs. A-Train/Sable.
Guest RepoMan Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Better Shane jobbing to the Big Red Hoss than RVD, and it's better seeing Shane do a stupid bump than and actual wrestler who's livelyhood is dependent on their health. There is a place for non-wreslter's on wrestling shows, and I find Shane to be entertaing. He hasn't been made the main focus of the show, so I don't see all the bitching. No one complained about Hymen when he was on TV.
chaosrage Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 He would at least make the show and get a paycheck. But what would it do for his career? Getting treated like a Spike Dudley or a Stevie Richards. That might make him miss more shows.
Guest Trivia247 Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 we are forced to having to accept a Kane vs Shane match at the ppv bleh once we get that over with then maybe it will be Kane vs Austin or Kane vs Goldberg, unless they want to throw Steiner and Nash in front of Kane to give the Title match a good 4 month buffer (seeing how each brand ppv is now 2 months away)
Guest DrainYou42 Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Shane Vs. Kane? I like it. It couldn't be any worse than McMahon Vs. Gowan
Guest Anglesault Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 He would at least make the show and get a paycheck. But what would it do for his career? Getting treated like a Spike Dudley or a Stevie Richards. That might make him miss more shows. Not being on a PPV for the third time in a year (Including the two biggies) is doing fuck all for his career.
Guest NoCalMike Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 If they wanted Kane to come off as a monster, the appropriate thing to happen would have been. Shane's music hits, he runs down the ring with aggression. He jumps in the ring, charges Kane only to run right into Kane's Chokeslam grip and get BAH GAWD CHOKESLAMMED STRAIGHT TO HELL...........just my opinion though.
Lil' Bitch Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 ***It couldn't be any worse than McMahon Vs. Gowan *** Vince did a sick bladejob / hardway and he won the match so I was happy along with all the other Zack haters on here.
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 Yes but Ultra-Monster Kane needed Vince McMahon to save him from Shane's assault. And then he tried to run away!! He should've beat Vince's ass, then spun around and killed Austin, and then Shane should've run out and gotten murdered. And then if they really wanted to make him out to be the ultra-badass monster they should the cops should've come back for him and he should've taken them all out!! And if that didn't happen he should've at least destroyed all 3 of those jokers and gotten into a big ass brawl with RVD.
Guest bravesfan Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 No one complained about Hymen when he was on TV. Well, assuming you mean Heyman, that was because: A. He's a manager, therefore he isn't taking a spot away from a deserving wrestler looking for a PPV spot. B. Heyman was there to build up his client. Shane will be out there to defend the McMahon name, ONCE AGAIN. C. Heyman doesn't take any bumps or unveil a flashy moveset, that would risk showing up the talent who are limited by the "WWE style". I'm sure there's a LOT more reasons as well...
Cherry Blossom Viscount Posted July 29, 2003 Report Posted July 29, 2003 *Sigh* I knew they were going to ruin Kane. I guess they saw he was getting heat, but not heel heat like HHH and Jericho, so they decided to make him weak (gots to look weak as a heel), program him against face Shane, and tease an EVIL~ Mr. McMahon alliance. Damnit, leave Kane alone and let him destroy everyone in his path. Let him run loose over both rosters and retire Undertaker at one of the fall PPV's and continue his path of rage until he's finally felled at WMXX, wash, rinse, repeat every three or four years.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now