Guest Coffey Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 I'd rather Jericho be the Raw champ than anyone probably. Like Baron said though, they need time to build people up. Goldberg should've won the EC because the way everything was booked.
KTID Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Who would be your ideal RAW champ, Jago? So, Goldberg's your ideal World Heavyweight Champion? No. You ask who should've won the last EC, not who our ideal World Champion was.
Guest Coffey Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Who would be your ideal RAW champ, Jago? Right now, or over a period of time to build them up? *no response* 1) Who would you have had walk out of the elimination chamber with the belt. 1.) Goldberg So, Goldberg's your ideal World Heavyweight Champion? No. You ask who should've won the last EC, not who our ideal World Champion was.
KTID Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 (edited) Jago... 1) I asked you who your ideal champ would be. 2) You replied "Now?, or over a period of time with build up?"* 3) I then gave you the choice from either: (i) One of the 6 participants in the elimination chamber, or (ii) Kane or RVD, with build up between SummerSlam and Unforgiven. 4) You said "Goldberg to win the EC and defeat Kane, after Kane has been built up for a month"*. ...this implies that Goldberg is your ideal World Champ. So, is he or isn't he? * Your quotes paraphrased Edited October 1, 2003 by RVDMARK4:20
Guest Coffey Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 I just answered the questions that you asked. Who would be my ideal champion: It depends on whether or not you want me to pick from right now, or it I get time to build someone up. If I had to choose right now, I'd say Chris Jericho. It I got to build someone up, I'd choose Sean Morley (Val Venis). Who should've walked out of the last Elimination Chamber the winner: Goldberg, because of the way that it was booked. Who should've won Kane/RVD if it went down: Kane. Should he have went on to a title shot: Yes, but not win the title yet.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 No offense to the Jericho marks, I wouldnt have Jericho win anytime soon. Right now you got a guy who killed Jericho at Bad Blood as the champion, and its supposed that the guy who buried Jericho many times will be coming back to reclaim the title. I would want a face to be the champion anyways, and what better than milk the remaining time on Goldberg's contract than to see him try to draw.
KTID Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Sean Morley? I can't be that out of line to consider RVD a better choice of champion than Sean Morley, can I?
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Sean Morley is a good worker, but world title material.... not really. Unless Jag0 has a perfect buildup angle, then perhaps.
CanadianChick Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Unfortunatly, Goldberg is the best option RIGHT NOW. Not over all, but at the press time, he is. Now, who would be the best with proper build? I would say Jericho and RVD because the fans care about them, even without a monster push. TO be perfectly honest though, right now, the only viable options are GOldberg and HHH because they are the only built up guys on Raw. There is no one else that screams MAIN EVENTER right now either than those two. This is why I hate it when WWE only pushes two people to the top. When one is gone, then you only have one guy. Guess what happens then? Mark Henry is portrayed as a threat to the champ. Ew.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 EVERYONE KNOWS.... including the marks, that Henry isnt a threat.
cabbageboy Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 First off, yes RVD is more over than Goldberg. Let's review shall we: Goldberg has been fed the Rock, Jericho, and most recently HHH and has jobbed once (to a sledgehammer) after crushing 3 men. Despite being given the title about 5 months into his WWE tenure Goldberg still gets boos and "You suck" chants. Now let's look at RVD. He's been jobbed mercilessly to Kane for months, treated as a bitch in the Kane/Shane feud, gone out on a stretcher. Despite this the crowd still almost universally supports him and was thrilled when he won the IC on Raw. I'm telling you, if RVD ever won the world title the crowd would go apeshit.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Yes but the fact he has been jobbed so much.... you know, I would have preferred Kane going over Shane at Summerslam then nearly losing to RVD at Unforgiven not the other way around...
CanadianChick Posted October 1, 2003 Report Posted October 1, 2003 Anyone remember when RVD "won" the title from Undertaker in May '02? Remember how the crowd went absolutly nuts?
Guest Coffey Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 (edited) Sean Morley can wrestle (not sloppy) and talk (not poor). That's all you can ask for out of a WWE champion. Not to mention, he can bump good (not that RVD can't). He might not get the reaction that RVD gets, however he's always received a reaction. Both as a heel and as a face. He also has a good look and a great move set. He just needs built up...hopefully with a new (non-Val Venis) gimmick. Edited October 2, 2003 by Mr. Jag0
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 Jag0 what would you do to build Morley up?
Austin3164life Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 I honestly don't see the big deal about RVD. So he's over. That's great. I'm not trying to rip on him, but I think people give him more credit than he deserves.
bob_barron Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 I honestly don't see the big deal about RVD. So he's over. That's great. I'm not trying to rip on him, but I think people give him more credit than he deserves. It's not just that he's over. It's that in late 2001 he was really really over when they were putting him over anyway. Today he has no real push or direction yet he's still really over
CanadianChick Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 I honestly don't see the big deal about RVD. So he's over. That's great. I'm not trying to rip on him, but I think people give him more credit than he deserves. That is a big deal though. Seriously, not many people are legit over like RVD is.
Guest Coffey Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 Jag0 what would you do to build Morley up? Well, you have to get him out of the dead end gimmick first. Val Venis can't go anywhere. Just let him be himself, preferably as a heel (not Chief Morley) and just let him get some wins. He's a former Intercontinental Champion, if the commentators play shit up like they are supposed to, he would be very easy to make credible. The idea that I had for him awhile back isn't possible anymore because Mr. Perfect died. I suggested to give him Perfect as a manager and Morley could start using some of Perfect's spots. Like the Fisherman Suplex and the floatover neckbreaker thing. The thing is, Morley doesn't really need a manager/valet because he can talk himself. If you stick him with a tag team partner, it's just keeping him from singles gold. If you stick him in the IC division, he's been there and done that. So, either the WWE can't use him at all or they have to push him to the top. Perhaps they could give him some silly gimmick like "master of the cage match" or something. Of course, it would have to be the old school blue bar cage. Just so he can do the Money Shot off the top. He needs to come out and ditch the Val Venis gimmick. Tell the fans that they are idiots for getting behind such a dead end character, and go from there. He needs to talk about having a new passion towards winning the World Title and that he'll do anything that it takes to succeed. Then, of course, he'll cheat his ass off. That doesn't mean that he can't get some credible wins. Too bad about Mr. Perfect dying. Perhaps Dean Malenko could lend a hand on-screen? Malenko never was the best talker, so we wouldn't have to worry about him being the mouthpiece behind Morley. Perhaps they could just show some vignettes of Malenko teaching Morley the technical aspects of the business? I don't know, I'm not a booker. It all sounds corny to me. Just give him some big wins. Put him in a feud with someone that can get him over.
SamoaRowe Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 It's kind of funny that this topic comes up now. Earlier tonight I was watching the 2000 Fully Loaded (which I rented for shits and giggles) and there was an outstanding Val Venis/Rikishi cage match on the PPV. I was sitting here thinking "why the FUCK did the WWE not capitilize on this!!!"
Guest Coffey Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 The same reason the WWF(E) didn't capitalize on every one of their other mistakes. That match is one of the reasons why I like Rikishi still. I'll never forget that splash. Why didn't Stephanie leave Triple H for Kurt Angle?
CanadianChick Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 Because, um, well, I got nothing for that.
ChrisMWaters Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 The same reason the WWF(E) didn't capitalize on every one of their other mistakes. That match is one of the reasons why I like Rikishi still. I'll never forget that splash. Why didn't Stephanie leave Triple H for Kurt Angle? I'm sure that people will always blame HHH and/or Stephanie for that...but here's a thought. Kurt's a married man. How do we know that he didn't like where the storyline was going? I could be wrong, but something to noodle.
El Psycho Diablo Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 As much as there's bitching about "the RVD fans just saying RVD RULZ!" for half the thread..it's just as sad that half the argument is "He's not a great worker." How many World Heavyweight Champions in the WWF/E have ever been outstanding technical wrestlers? Bret Hart, yeah. I don't remember Hogan being one. Just in the last year, HHH, and Show have been champions, and they're no miracle workers, either. Only on the internet does being a great wrestler mean that someone should get a belt. The only thing great wrestlers get to do is put over the guys who are at the top. That's it.
Guest Coffey Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 That may be true, but Rob Van Dam can't talk either. So, if he's average in the ring and below average in promos, why should he be at the top? If Eddie Guerrero & Chris Benoit have yet to be champions, fucking Rob Van Dam shouldn't be the champion.
Guest MikeSC Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 That may be true, but Rob Van Dam can't talk either. So, if he's average in the ring and below average in promos, why should he be at the top? If Eddie Guerrero & Chris Benoit have yet to be champions, fucking Rob Van Dam shouldn't be the champion. Heck, I STILL would give Hurricane or Goldust the World Title on RAW before I gave it to RVD. Ditto Rico. All are better on the mic, better in the ring, and are over in spite of jobbing ad infinitum. RVD has NOTHING on their mis-use. -=Mike
Kahran Ramsus Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 It isn't just that he isn't a good worker, but that he is a terrible one. As far as champs go, he would rank with the likes of Ultimate Warrior and Sid. Both were mega-flops by the way, because they couldn't carry their end in the ring. It is a very legitimate criticism. Ideally, you need five things to be a good champ. 1. Overness 2. Credibility 3. Talent 4. Mic Skills 5. Charisma RVD fails with a score of 2/5. Credibility can be earned, but his lack of mic skills and in-ring talent are huge drawbacks. Eddy Guerrero has all five, with the possible exception of the cred, but he's close on that. Jericho has them all too, although isn't as good as Eddy on any of them except mic skills. And yes, Goldberg has a terrible score too, but that's besides the point. Randy Orton, who is a possible choice to beat Goldberg, gets 0/5. Anything less than 4/5 and you should think twice about giving a guy the World Title.
ChrisMWaters Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 It isn't just that he isn't a good worker, but that he is a terrible one. As far as champs go, he would rank with the likes of Ultimate Warrior and Sid. Both were mega-flops by the way, because they couldn't carry their end in the ring. It is a very legitimate criticism. Ideally, you need five things to be a good champ. 1. Overness 2. Credibility 3. Talent 4. Mic Skills 5. Charisma Um...Bret Hart, IMO, wasn't that great in the last two departments... And his first reign, the 2nd one wasn't really their either.
Guest Coffey Posted October 2, 2003 Report Posted October 2, 2003 3/5 = 60% which is a passing grade in high school.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now