Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 9, 2002 Man... Just went and pulled out WM12. Just Six years ago, Yokozuna/Jake "the Snake" Roberts/Ahmed Johnson vs. Vader/British Bulldog/Owen Hart Rowdy Roddy Piper vs. Goldust The Ringmaster, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin vs. Savio Vega Hunter Hearst Helmsley (pre-roids) vs. Ultimate Warrior debut of "Wildman" Marc Maro Diesel vs. the Undertaker Ironman Championship Match Shawn Michaels vs. © Bret Hart And, MOST IMPORTANTLY!!! TODD PETTENGILL!!! Now the more I watch this, the more I wonder how much we end up with the shit thats on TV today. Not a single theme music that didnt sound as much a cartoon as the characters the Wrestlers were. Diesel vs. Undertaker was slow and lazy, its good to know *some* things never change. The "backlot brawl" seemed pretty cheesy a la the crap hardcore match bullshit thats shoved down our throats nowadays, but when yout hink about it being a one time special event, it wasnt bad, especially considering using a shirt to choke piper was the most "hardcore" it probably got. The Six man tag was used as the curtain jerker, a great change from the ME on RAW every week now. (btw im watching the taker/diesel match, good lord its so fucking slow.) Watching Helmsley, STILL higher on the card than Austin ;-), job to the Ultimate Warrior, who no-sold the pedigree (its just hilarious to watch Warrior, i want him to come back on smackdown). But the quality of the matches between even a lame WMXII is so far above that of "X8." The disparity between the two shows is more stunning every time I watch it. The WWF today is so formulaic and rigid, nothing "spectacular" ever happens anymore. Theres no more magic. Just more fireworks. No feuds are ever resolved, and now, WrestleMania is used to sell RAW ratings the following night. And the crowd was so frigging into the show. They loved it! I'd be DAMN proud to have a WMXII shirt, than I would a lame ass "X-8 Hockey Jersey." The more of this I watch, the More I wish I could find old tapes of all the RAW's since Hogan left. The last Survivor Series before WM X was great as far as I'd remembered, and anytime you watch Bret and Owen go at it, its great. I know '95 through '97 was part of the WWF's "dark age," but god, the wrestling was fantastic compared to the shit we have in 2002. From the Survivor Series after WM9 until WMXIV, thats it. Thats the glory days of the WWF. I'll take Shawn/Bret over Rock/Austin any day of the week. I dont really know if I have a point but... yeah, the WWF is gone to shit. Thats kinda it. Its... its just shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 9, 2002 Rock/Austin is better than anything on WrestleMania Xii. I haven't re-watched it in nearly six months, since I put together the WWF Best of the 90's comp and a few months before when I picked up the Owen/Bret and Flair/Bret iron man matches, when I actually sat down and watched each iron man match in succession (Bret/Owen, Bret/Flair, Rock/HHH, Steamboat/Rude, Angle/Benoit). Well, I loved Bret/Flair and Bret/Owen (the former gets ***** no problem and is the best WWF match you'll ever see, the latter gets ****1/2), Rude/Steamboat was great (around ****1/2 too). Rock/HHH was nearing great (***3/4 to ****), while Bret/HBK and Angle/Benoit were both diappointing (like ***1/2 each). Rock/Austin and Benoit/Angle at WrestleMania were far from formulaic. Though the finish killed it somewhat, Benoit/Angle was a solid mat-based match the likes of which the WWF doesn't seem interested in picking up on. Rock/Austin had such a solid ringwork and a suer storyline and psychology to boot, with a screwjob finish that for once told a story within the match and helped push a new direction, which is part of the point of show like WrestleMania which is not just the centerpiece and conclusion of an old year but the signaling of a new year. Though the rest of the matches were pretty formulaic, those two were more than worth the price of admission. The crowd and atmosphere live at WrestleMania X-8 was amazing. They accepted everything and were live. I'll take Austin/Rock any day over an ego-fest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 9, 2002 yeah, but at X-8 you had to listen to Drowning Pool thats not my idea of "atmosphere" But really, would you rather watch everything from WM12 to 14 or everything from WM2000 to WM X8? For the first time. Theres ALWAYS going to be ego's. if you're telling me that HBK/Bret was so big an ego fest, and then talk about todays programming with HHH, HHH(hollywood hulk hogan,) Austin, who's been so whiney about the program he "quit" for two weeks, and you still have nash and hall. The WWF now is all focused on which MTV band they can try to get over, and pushing wrestlers who suck by giving htem Rob Zombie music. Maybe in the next year or so we'll be lucky and get to see Jericho, Benoit, RVD and other new superstars created and pushed to the top, but instead of seeing Angle get his fair shot at the title, we have Austin, Rock, Hogan, HHH, and other guys who just arent what they used to be. Rock wants to make movies, Hogan wants his ego to get bigger and bigger, HHH wants his muscles bigger and bigger, so he can rip a new shirt and look like a real biker, and Austin just doesnt seem to care anymore. Unfortunately nowadays there isnt a WCW for all the old guys to go retire to, so we wont get to see the newest new generation of WWF stars, and if we do, we'll be lucky to see them in the midcard. I'd rather watch vintage HBK than the crap Austin and HHH have left in them now. I might not get vintage HBK, but we can get better guys than HHH out of the midcard, and god I hope Vince doesnt decide test is the way to do it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 9, 2002 Generally, I'll watch anything from Final Four in Summerslam 1996 to Survivor Series 1997 compared to naything else the WWF puts out. It's not that there isn't egos. It's that the ego's got in the way of the main event of the biggest show of the year. With thre finishes, the match could hvae easily been better than it was. The false finishes would have meant more in the course of the match. The general match flow would have benefitted. The psychology would have carried better throughout the match rather than sporatic selling and no-selling during the last fifteen or so minutes. It would have built stronger rather than having alot of restholds heading no where. The only story that satisfied me was that Shawn was "out-wrestling" Bret, but that story had nojustification in a match that went to overtime, because if Shawn was proving himself against Bret, why wouldn't he have found some way to win in the time alotted and hwy was he generally getting his ass kicked and getting worked over? So he could forget it all. Like I said, I'll take Rock/Austin any day over the ego's. It's actually the only feud the WWF has produced that rivals what they did with Hart from Survivor Series 1996 and 1997. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 9, 2002 Well, Rock / Austin is something special nowadays, but we're not getting the sort of Rock / Austin feud that we'd ever gotten with Shawn and Bret. We get Rock / Austin at Wrestlemania, and again, and screwjobs. The WM Screwjob on Rock was yet again another point of why WWF TV is horrible, the ending was to get people to watch RAW the following night. I really wouldnt object to Rock / Austin, that kind of match is always huge, but the feud nowadays that mirrors Bret/HBK is Rock/HHH. And we're not even getting that. All we're getting is Undertaker, who has no place in any event anywhere anymore, Hogan, who I'll admit is a god of pro wrestling, but he shouldnt be a champion anymore. The buisness has become so much more "by the numbers" than anything. edge will get more airtime because of the rob zombie theme, while a better match will be skipped on so they can make an extra buck instead of putting good shows on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 9, 2002 Te WrestleMania screwjob was there to turn the corner, turn Austin heel, and push the match storyline (Austin having to revert back to everything, from old big moves to old tactics to teaming with his greatest enemy). It wasn't there to get ratings; post-WrestleMania ratings are a guaranteed high no matter what, and running Rock/Austin again would have gotten a good rating no matter what. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 9, 2002 Well either way, it was shittily done with Austin. or at the very least its me being bitter that a quick austin catchphrase ruined an otherwise great heel turn because vince wanted to make "What?" t shirts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheMikeSC Report post Posted April 10, 2002 yeah, but at X-8 you had to listen to Drowning Pool thats not my idea of "atmosphere" But really, would you rather watch everything from WM12 to 14 or everything from WM2000 to WM X8?>>> Seeing as how I've seen both, WM2000 to WM X-8 is a MUCH better stretch. It's not even close. <<<For the first time. Theres ALWAYS going to be ego's. if you're telling me that HBK/Bret was so big an ego fest, and then talk about todays programming with HHH, HHH(hollywood hulk hogan,) Austin, who's been so whiney about the program he "quit" for two weeks, and you still have nash and hall.>>> Austin had legitimate complaints and acted upon them. He is now back. Better than Bret refusing to do anything to make Shawn look decent in a friggin' Ironman match on PPV. Do you even REMEMBER the WWF between WM12 and WM14? I have it all on friggin' tape and, well, it isn't too much fun. <<<The WWF now is all focused on which MTV band they can try to get over, and pushing wrestlers who suck by giving htem Rob Zombie music.>>> And the pushing crap wrestlers is different in what way, exactly? <<<Maybe in the next year or so we'll be lucky and get to see Jericho, Benoit, RVD and other new superstars created and pushed to the top, but instead of seeing Angle get his fair shot at the title, we have Austin, Rock, Hogan, HHH, and other guys who just arent what they used to be. Rock wants to make movies, Hogan wants his ego to get bigger and bigger, HHH wants his muscles bigger and bigger, so he can rip a new shirt and look like a real biker, and Austin just doesnt seem to care anymore. Unfortunately nowadays there isnt a WCW for all the old guys to go retire to, so we wont get to see the newest new generation of WWF stars, and if we do, we'll be lucky to see them in the midcard. I'd rather watch vintage HBK than the crap Austin and HHH have left in them now. I might not get vintage HBK, but we can get better guys than HHH out of the midcard, and god I hope Vince doesnt decide test is the way to do it >>> You seem to forget how polluted the WWF upper and mid-cards were in that era. It wasn't exactly a golden era. WCW spanked them for a reason, ya know. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest evenflowDDT Report post Posted April 10, 2002 I downloaded the HHH vs. Ultimate Warrior match on Kazaa... God that was terrible, but so funny at the same time. To see him get the Pedigree and just stand up, not even selling it for a 2-count... hilarious. And above all else, it was short! The sad thing is, the match between HHH and Hogan at Backlash will be exactly the same (except Hogan will be nice enough to kick out of the Pedigree instead of just standing up), only twenty times longer . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 10, 2002 It wasn't exactly a golden era. WCW spanked them for a reason, ya know. Yeah, but I'd rather watch funny crap than bad crap Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest humongous2002 Report post Posted April 10, 2002 Believe it or not WWF 1996 was a pretty good year because HBK was doing a good job as a champ and the reason WCW did better ratings was because they had a great angle with the NWO and people were still marking out with getting to see Hogan on free tv than a PPV.1997 was the era that the WWF attitude began but I think 96 was the precursor of attitude and the end of the new generation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kahran Ramsus Report post Posted April 10, 2002 1996 was crap. Sure HBK had good matches, but the midcard was shot to hell until the rise of Austin. The WWF started getting good again in the fall. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Report post Posted April 10, 2002 Hey I was watching that last week. That Piper vs Goldust match was pretty good. Until they did that whole Oj Bronco Bronco thing. I didn't really enjoy any of the other matches though. But seeing the return of the warrior pumped me up for awhile. The Iron Man Match was pretty great had some great wrestling in it. Which is how it should be in pro wrestling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheMikeSC Report post Posted April 10, 2002 Quote It wasn't exactly a golden era. WCW spanked them for a reason, ya know. Yeah, but I'd rather watch funny crap than bad crap >>> But it wasn't all that funny. It was just plain bad. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 10, 2002 You cant tell me watching Warrior no-sell the Pedigree and then re-retiring like a month later isnt just plain funny.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RicFlairGlory Report post Posted April 10, 2002 Hey I was watching that last week. That Piper vs Goldust match was pretty good. Until they did that whole Oj Bronco Bronco thing. I didn't really enjoy any of the other matches though. But seeing the return of the warrior pumped me up for awhile. The Iron Man Match was pretty great had some great wrestling in it. Which is how it should be in pro wrestling. I think overall the matches were wrestled pretty well, Austin/Vega actually had wrestling in it, it wasnt just spots, it just had the DiBiase belt screwjob of Vega at the end, but he "wrestled" a lot more than his compliment of kicks and stomps are today The six man tag... maybe I miss marking out for Owen and Yoko The Backlot Brawl, even with the OJ bit wasnt too bad, as watching piper go stupid on air is always great Taker/Diesel... I wont try to say the match was even close to good, neither of them will ever change. Bret/Shawn was one of the better matches I've seen them have. I'll take it over a lot of the screwjob main events lately. I'll admit the continuation of the match had an aire of controversy involved, but screw it, it was great. Maybe the "boyhood dream" angle was overdone, but the match wasnt. They didnt spend an hour trying to use their finishers, they used a wide variety of moves, which you'll NEVER See today, and as many ego-stories as I'll hear, it still didnt make the match look that bad. and I'd rather someones ego affect whether or not he'll look bad in a match as opposed to saying "I wont job to him" a la Austin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 10, 2002 But the moves served no purpose in the match. Nothing until the last ten or fifteen minutes in that Iron Man match really mattered, and that defeats the whole purpose of the gimmick. It's an iron man match, not a one fall with a sixty minute time limit match. The basic premise is that falls can come from anywhere, that both guys realize that they have to think long-term rather than short-term, that going up a fall isn't that horrible a position until your in the final minutes. Easily I could have fit in a fluke roll-up by Shawn (to go with the wrestling storyline), a sharpshooter in the ealry round (or some other back submission that would give the fans a feeling that Shawn could tap at the end), and a sweet chin music after probably three or four attempts (one dogded at the start, one where Bret rolls out of the ring, and then the one that pins him). They had a whole lot of shots at taking falls. That's one of the things I liked about Rock/HHH, that moves that wouldn't always be pinfalls could win, that every shot counted, that they really booked a great match. And what I dislike about Angle/Benoit, that they ignored pinfalls that make a different, they took out the roll-up w/ the tights that Angle beat Benoit with to win their WrestleMania match. An iron man match should bring out elements where things can fall mysteriously, where everything counts. But Bret/Shawn lacks continuity, lacks long-term selling in a match where they were trying to base it around, lacks a good pace on a match that was basically an experiment with a WWF crowd, and lacks solid work from guys who should be able to better. They could have done the exact same thing with a sixty minute time-limit, one fall match and I probably wouldn't have been as harsh because it would have been more logical, but when you're working with a gimmick, use it. I'm surprised Bret who had wrestled two of these matches in four years coming in put himself so far above this that he wasn't willing to work towards something better that probably would have been more successful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted April 10, 2002 I think the biggest problem with Bret-HBK at WMXII was that they were already starting to become rivals, and didn't really trust each other. Watching the match, it seems like both guys were awfully stiff at times, unusually so for those two workers. Also there were a few sandbaggings and going limp while the other guy was trying to lift them, more on Bret's part than Shawn's though. I just think that Bret was legit pissed about being a placeholder champion for Shawn, refused to take the first fall or give him anything during the match, and Shawn replied in turn. Personal politics can sure ruin a match quick. As for 12-14 versus 16-18, it would be a tough call, because both periods are rather similar to me. They both had one WM that I thought was a great, standout show (14 and 17), one that was good in parts but had some crap too (12 and 18), and one that I absolutely hated and thought was worthless outside of one or two good matches (13 and 16). 1996-97 wasn't a complete dark age, you still had Bret, HBK, Austin, Vader, Mankind, and Undertaker to bump the workrate up, and while Sid was the suckiest main eventer, and even he could be carried to a decent match. (Yeah, I said 'Taker was good and you're gonna LIKE it. After all, he did have several really good matches on PPV during that time period.) Compare that to today, where you've got Austin and Angle as the only main-event worker standouts, with HHH and Jericho both being mere shadows of their former selves, Rock being unmotivated or gone half the time, 'Taker being broken-down and past his prime, and Hogan just being Hogan. (Of course, today's undercard is better than it was in 1996, but not a helluva lot better than it was in '97, and much worse than it was in 2000.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 11, 2002 The period for me that sticks out as the best period was from about Survivor Series 1996 to 1997, just because so many things stick out as being really good, and because I could remember a star and a revolution taking place. No one year period seems to strike me as being so important, so strong in both storylines and wrestling, so eventful and so revolutionary in change of style. This for me was like the christening of Austin as th black knight; not the purest, but a saviour. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest cabbageboy Report post Posted April 11, 2002 Kahran is correct on this, 1996 sucked big time for the WWF. I mean there IS a reason why WCW killed the WWF back then, it was a better show with better angles and a higher caliber of wrestling. And I will admit that I hate Shawn Michaels (hey, him beating Bulldog for the IC in 92 turned me on the guy for life) so seeing him as champ made me sick. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mastermind Report post Posted April 11, 2002 12-14 vs. 16-18. Funny what happened to 15? Don't answer I know. Well, here's my breakdown. main events of Bret/Shawn, UT/Sid, HBK/Austin vs. main events of Austin/Rock, Fatal 4 way, Jericho/HHH The BEST PURE WRESTLING match in this bunch is HBK/Hart easily. However, as Brian stated I think if the match should have just simply been a one hour time limit. If the match went that way I think the match would have been better. No one would have expected the 60 minute match plus over time, although the timing of the card might have made people wonder. I can't say it any better than how Brian said it although I can say that Bret kind of snubbed Shawn in the slightest way at the end of the match. Bret made himself look like he got screwed and didn't even shake HBK's hands like he did with British Bulldog in his I-C title match at SummerSlam '92. It's a small thing, but I think it was deliberate and in someway tainted Shawn's reign. Bret attacking from the sidelines didn't help either. My take on the match is that it is VERY over rated. Their survivor series '92 match was better. The BETTER MATCH though is Austin/Rock from WM 17. It told a much BETTER story and had better heat. Not to mention it had something historic with the heel turn. Historically this match will have more casual fans talking and be apart of mania lore. So, this era has the much more epic and better main event. UT/Sid was atrocious needless to say. Triple H winning also is historic breaking the heel jinx in the main event of Mania. Triple H/Jericho is nothing to write home about and HBK/Austin blows it away for historical and epic reasons. Ranking: 1. Austin/Rock 2. HBK/Austin 3.Bret/Shawn 4. Fatal Fourway 5. HHH/Jericho 6. UT/Sid Now for the main attraction or the second main events. Warrior/Triple H, Austin/Bret, UT/Kane, ??, UT/HHH, Hogan/Rock. Well, I think we know which one comes out of this #1. Austin/Bret one of the greatest matches we will ever see. It has historical and artistic impact. #2. Hogan/Rock. We know why this is here. #3. Warrior/Triple H. Probably will be the last time we will ever see Warrior at Mania unless hell freezes over AGAIN. Match was nothing, but it is kind of funny seeing HHH squashed like that. Has some meaning. #4. UT/HHH. Picked as the better of two evils. Better than expected I will say that, but still really just another victim in Taker's win streak. #5. UT/Kane was solid and better I thought it would be. I don't even see any match from WM 16 being a main attraction or second main event. Tag team title matches. Well, this is a no-contest with the Dudleys/Hardys/E and C trifecta at WM 16 and 17. Although I thought NAO vs. Hardcore Legends at WM 14 was the best tag title match since HF/Nastys. Sleeper Match. WM 12=??Austin/Vega. WM 13=LOD/Johnson vs. NAO. WM 14=Mixed tag match. WM 16=?? disappointing pick in the Eurocontinental title match. WM 17=Benoit/Angle. WM 18=UT/Flair. Take your pick, but I think I would pick the last two years over stuff with Vega, LOD, and Sable. WWF I-C title. Rocky/Rikishi. Rock/Shamrock. 2 out of 3 falls. Jericho/Regal. Regal/RVD. Well, in this group I would rank Rock/Shamrock and then Regal/RVD. The rest is plain garbage with no real meaning or just "there". Gimmick matches. Backlot brawl. Chicago street fight. Dumpster match. Ladders and Tables. TLC. ??? I guess TLC wins hands down, but I would choose the Dumpster match and then the street fight. I'm sorry I thought the Piper/Goldust thing was stupid until they went at it in the ring live. Which time span wins in general? I say 2000-current. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mastermind Report post Posted April 11, 2002 This is my take on 1996. For the overall wrestling scene I think it goes down in history. You had ECW, WCW finally having something stronger than the wwf for the masses, and the wwf actually caring about workrate in the main event scene. All together this year probably was the revolution year. As for the wwf. I think the wwf was ALMOST perfect from January 1996 until April 1996 with the Good Friends Better Enemies ppv show. I really had no complaints as the wwf was looking superior to wcw until Hall showed up in Nitro and made history. From there the wwf started to slide in quality over all until about SummerSlam '97. Vince was stuck with a new generation that couldn't draw as the old guard. Warrior alluded to this in wwf mag. Yeah, SOME were much better ring workers, but the wwf was losing depth. It had NO ATTITUDE with the exception of Austin. Even Austin wasn't really hitting it big until around summer 1997. Don't believe me? Watch the crowd heat with Austin in 1996 and even leading to WrestleMania 13 compared to the stuff around Canadian Stampede. When he would team with HBK, Sid, Patriot in segments. When Dude Love was breaking through. You can see the difference. Even his match with Bret Hart didn't have the same heat for Austin as his match at SummerSlam with Owen Hart did. Then when he was put in the angle with Vince it started to explode. That's why I always say people are mistaken with saying Austin was the ONLY reason the wwf came back. A lot of things added up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 11, 2002 I don't know. I still think the higher-end pay per view matches from Survivor Series 1996 to 1997 were on par (or better) with anything higher-end from 2000 and the TV had much more intriguing storylines, and the TV matches were better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mastermind Report post Posted April 11, 2002 Actually, if you go on consistent top level stuff you might have a point(I just watched Final Four from 1997 and it's a wicked match). Although Revenge of Taker was really terrible. I can't believe Austin and Bret put on such a subpar match just one month later. In 1999 I thought the wwf reeked. I just finished watching raw shows heading into SummerSlam 99 yesterday. There was some solid storytelling with Body and Michaels and the #1 contender status(although I still don't understand how that lead to a triple threat). The card is atrocious imo. Rock vs. Billy Gunn as your second main event or main attraction says it all. The only thing I liked on the show was Big Show/UT vs. 123 Pac/Kane. It's amazing how Taker moves much more like a younger man on the show. His look also is better than today as well. Foley shouldn't have even won the damn strap. Austin should have gone with the plan of crowning Triple H. Oh, Triple H! We rag on the man, but he is kind of the same thing back then. It's kind of strange how he pulled off that streak of good matches in 2000. Maybe the wwf just peaked with the influx of the radicalz. You know what else I found? That Rock HAS changed from 1999. I watched the first smackdown on the same tape. What happened to his $800 shirt and gucci shoes? Actually he used the same damn line he used last week calling Smackdown his show, but now it's the people's show. He also talked in third person a lot more. He looks way thicker as well. Just bringing it up for those who say he has been stale and been doing the same thing since turning face. He hasn't. He has changed a bit from things like the sideburns to his wardrobe. I also seen Jericho's first televised match on Smackdown against Road Dog. He seemed much more like wcw Jericho as a heel. It seems the wwf had plans for the guy as he is in different segments unlike now. Don't know what happened(actually I do). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 11, 2002 I loved that about the Rock as a whole. He was just so cool but so hate-able. He was pompous to "n"th degree. They need to bring that Rock back in the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest nWoScorpion Report post Posted April 11, 2002 I watched WM12 a few weeks ago, andi think the crowd woke up whenWarrior came back (barely). Also, i dont remember them SCREMAING like hell during the first 30+ minutesof Bret/HBK (niether was I) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mastermind Report post Posted April 11, 2002 Yeah, that was the bling bling Rock. You would think he would have more of that attitude now since being a movie star. I guess he is too commercialized and doesn't want to turn any fans away from his movies by being all arrogant and pompous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted April 11, 2002 His movie will probably do pretty well, so that could provoke some arrogance. I would be really surprised if it does bad. Anyways, I wouldn't turn him heel until he beats Austin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mastermind Report post Posted April 11, 2002 Yeah, I think Rock still has some unfinished stuff to do as a face before turning heel like finally beating Trips *hell he even jobbed to him on the first smackdown*. He is going to make another movie in the fall. Rock could become really big*not that he isn't now*. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheMikeSC Report post Posted April 11, 2002 <<<Actually, if you go on consistent top level stuff you might have a point(I just watched Final Four from 1997 and it's a wicked match). Although Revenge of Taker was really terrible.>>> Hmm, I actually preferred it to Cold Day in Hell. <<I can't believe Austin and Bret put on such a subpar match just one month later. In 1999 I thought the wwf reeked. I just finished watching raw shows heading into SummerSlam 99 yesterday. There was some solid storytelling with Body and Michaels and the #1 contender status(although I still don't understand how that lead to a triple threat).>>> It's Russo booking. Don't try and rationalize it. You'll just go mad. <<<The card is atrocious imo. Rock vs. Billy Gunn as your second main event or main attraction says it all. The only thing I liked on the show was Big Show/UT vs. 123 Pac/Kane.>>> Really? I thought the first 2 matches (D-Lo v JJ and the tag team turmoil match) were both quite good. <<<It's amazing how Taker moves much more like a younger man on the show.>>> Didn't UT have his groin problem at this time as well? <<<His look also is better than today as well. Foley shouldn't have even won the damn strap. Austin should have gone with the plan of crowning Triple H.>>> Once again, I doubt HHH was booked to go over. You don't have a face guest ref giving the match to the heel in the ME of a PPV. Austin had knee problems that needed to be fixed and, thus, needed to drop the belt. If a heel can't win it, it leaves one man who can---Mankind. <<<Oh, Triple H! We rag on the man, but he is kind of the same thing back then. It's kind of strange how he pulled off that streak of good matches in 2000. Maybe the wwf just peaked with the influx of the radicalz. You know what else I found? That Rock HAS changed from 1999. I watched the first smackdown on the same tape. What happened to his $800 shirt and gucci shoes? Actually he used the same damn line he used last week calling Smackdown his show, but now it's the people's show. He also talked in third person a lot more. He looks way thicker as well. Just bringing it up for those who say he has been stale and been doing the same thing since turning face. He hasn't. He has changed a bit from things like the sideburns to his wardrobe. I also seen Jericho's first televised match on Smackdown against Road Dog. He seemed much more like wcw Jericho as a heel. It seems the wwf had plans for the guy as he is in different segments unlike now. Don't know what happened(actually I do). >>> Well, Russo left and Jericho got away from getting stuck in feuds with guys like Shamrock. Thank God. -=Mike ...Amazed that the WWF could drop the ball so badly w/ Jericho after Vengeance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
