Guest Anglesault Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I just realized something. At **** 1/2 (My rating,) this match has more stars than the sum totals of Orton's best match (1 1/2 and Batista's best match (*). God they suck.
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Brock-UT was horrible IMO. Yeah, I didnt understand his ironman rating either, he complained about the parts that sucked and then gave it a great rating. Huh? Outside of the dumb interference and lack of chain, it wasn't that bad. Crowd was actually alive for it, which is a +, Undertaker worked as hard as he could these days, Brock has been improving, and overall, it went well I think. Maybe not as good as their HiaC match, but it wasn't bad.
NYU Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 He gave probably one of the worst over-hyped matches (Angle/Brock Iron Man) ****1/4, when he himself said the first half practically sucked dick, and said Brock/UT from No Mercy, even though it was pretty good, was boring as hell, when everyone here was marking out like bitches, myself included. Eh, I agreed with Scott when it came to Brock/Taker. I despised that match and couldn't understand the praise it got around here. Tonight, he may have overrated the match a little....but I find that better than severely underrating a match.
Guest Brian Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Why exactly does interference and ref bumps always have to bring down the rating of a match? This is all a huge part of American wrestling and has been for as long as I've been watching. There has to be a focus on the storyline aspect and it has to be a huge part of WWE. Just because there may have been ref bumps or a screwy finish shouldn't take away from the in ring work or what they did in the ring. It still takes away from the actual wrestling event, which is what people are trying to rate. Just because its an accepted part of the culture of the WWE style, doesn't mean it has a rightful place in a wrestling match. Ref bumps and such do take away from the general in-ring presentation, and generally act as a distraction.
Michrome Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 The match was a joke....the MMA-style moves were SO out of place, unlike the Angle match, where it seemed like UT was trying to beat Angle at his own game. The lack of use of chain killed the whole match, because no nearfall was believable until the chain got involved. It was way too long, plodding as hell, and had a horrible ending.
J.B. Buzzkill Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Personally, I had it at ***1/2. But if SK enjoyed it as much as he did, more power to him.
iggymcfly Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Well, first off I want to say it was an excellent match. The worked shoot injuries and hometown crowd were nice touches that really added a lot. I'd even go so far as to say it was far and away the best match on Raw this year. However, I'd probably only give it a **** rating and I was surprised as anyone that Keith gave it that much higher.
razazteca Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 MMA moves in HHH vs HBK? What? Where? When?
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 MMA moves in HHH vs HBK? What? Where? When? He meant UT/Angle and UT/Brock.
razazteca Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I was going to say I did not see any ground & pound or any chokes or anything outside the standard armbar rest hold.
Prophet of Mike Zagurski Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Why do people have to give star ratings for matches? I mean do **** or ***** matter or does ***3/4 or does ****34/37 matter. It was a good match.
Michrome Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 It matters because there's a distinction between good, great, and perfection.
The Kid Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 What they need is an I Quit match with no interference. Would HHH say I quit after being in Figure Four or would HBK say it after being in a Chicken Wing/Crossface/STF? Now that right there is my point...you'd be guessing until the very end. Both guys would have huge advantages over their opponent HBK would attack the legs where Triple H would attack the back. With Hunter's new love of storytelling in matches it would be perfect and HBK could still bump his ass off.
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Theres only one or two things I hate about star ratings. If a match is classified as "bad", how does that result in a *? What can be worse than bad than horrible (which is negative stars)? Utterly bad?
Guest Choken One Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I loved This match. I can't remember the last time I was really REALLY digging a Free TV match like this because unlike Benoit/Brock or even Flair/HHH...I had no clue who would go over. ****3/4? Not at all. Not even on the Free Tv Scale. ****. I had no real problems with the match as the story was good, the selling was good, it had a nice blend to it. The ref bumps didn't bother me all that much. A fantastic way to end 2003. Only Question is...Clearly...HHH/Shawn is a better way to go then HHH/Kane...Do they have 2/3 Falls Match or what at Rumble or does Shawn get a title shot next week and loses via DQ or something and it's scrapped under the table?
Guest Your Olympic Hero Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 retarted. Just like you get to spell retarDed in your own little way, Scott can rate matches in his own way as well.
Tawren Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Why do people have to give star ratings for matches? I mean do **** or ***** matter or does ***3/4 or does ****34/37 matter. It was a good match. Because maybe people want to use them? Because it's an easy way to explain how you feel about a match? Because it's a universally recognized system?
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Another pt. on stars...wouldn't it be easier to said **1/3 or **2/3, instead of having to splice them in quarters? Oh ***1/2 is too little, but **** is too much, so ***3/4. It would be easier to just say ***2/3
Guest Brian Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Except that Kane showed gains in ratings, and is fairly fresh. It may not bring the matches, but it sometimes you have to go for the money. This is a business.
Art Sandusky Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I just saw it actually, then came online to read the reviews and then came here to the thread. I figured I'd see some kind of thread about the rating. I think it's a tad overrated myself, but not by too much. I was seriously enjoying this whole match, and I actually stood up and said "holy shit!" when Michaels "won" without even realizing it. The crowd was hot, they gave it a lot of time to develop, and neither man was particularly weakened by the ending (although the case can be made that Michaels really doesn't need protecting, the World Champion of the company certainly needs to be kept strong). I was thinking ***3/4 or so, nah, ****, because the only thing I saw wrong with it were the two referee bumps (only one with Bischoff taking over afterward would have had the same effect) and, as I remarked to myself while watching it, "this is awfully punchy-punchy." They can easily go out there and put a better one on at the Rumble, just going clean all the way through, having a definitive winner, and with HHH selling that leg a bit more (I was delighted to see Shawn noticing his sudden ginger steps and capitalizing on the injury) with the super-long submission coming later in the match so as to help aid in that. Just shuffle the parts of the match around, keep it clean and the ref upright, and less punch-offs, and then you've got your ****3/4.
Guest ArchoanJB Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Michrome..you just answered a question right there how easy would it be to say great match and then give a few points on it, other then saying I thoguht it sucked **1/2? SKeith does it that way too, but still usually it falls under those 3 things if it's good or better, how hard would it be to actually explain your oppinion other then saying *** sucked, he's a fool? thats not to you, of course, just to the people in the this thread saying that.
Guest Choken One Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Kane brought in Ratings in the Summer before the angle was aborted by SuperMcMahon... Any "edge" or appeal Kane had for "business" is dead and gone.
iggymcfly Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Kane DID show gains in ratings back last summer, when he'd just taken a new and exciting character turn. Now that he's lost all of his heat, Shawn would draw way better with HHH. In fact, if they'd kept with the "fired" thing for a little while, I think a HHH/HBK rematch would have been strong enough to build toward a WM XX main event.
Guest Brian Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 And when did Shawn? Kane wasn't killed off, or overexposed, so at least there's probably something left to milk. Besides, he's a fresh face in the main event for the time being, and I don't think reverting back to the old formula is what they need to do again. How many times have they played out HHH vs. HBK in the last year and a half?
Detective Comics Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 Personally, I would have probably given the match something around ****. But I'm not gonna argue with Keith giving it ****3/4. If he loved it that much, good for him. It was a very very good match. But like I said in the other thread....put Michael Shane in HBK's place and you wouldn't BELIEVE the improvement. Shane is TWICE the wrestler HBK is. If Keith was rating that match, it would be like TEN STARS ! MAKE IT HAPPEN, VINCE. SIGN SHANE!! Stupid ass Tammy. Michael Shane blows.... he think he can get over as a heel by doing rest holds. Fuck him!
Guest Brian Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 How many times have they pulled the fired angle? It's all rehashes.
Guest Choken One Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I'm convinced we're merely weeks away from a T-Shirt that has Bischoff's face with "YOU'RE FIRED!" on the front and The smiling Austin on the back saying "You're RE-hired!"...
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I'm convinced we're merely weeks away from a T-Shirt that has Bischoff's face with "YOU'RE FIRED!" on the front and The smiling Austin on the back saying "You're RE-hired!"... IT WILL BE A HIT AT OFFICE BUILDINGS! Boss: Read the shirt! Employee: I'm Fired?! NOOO!!!!!! Boss: now read the back. Employee: You son of a bitch! Don't do that! Boss: for that, your fired for real.
TheBostonStrangler Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 A definite **** match, but I really can't go above that for this matchup. Still, it's not every day you get a **** match on TV, and this might be my favorite TV match of the year. Hell of a way to end 2003.
Mole Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 I was going to stay in tonight to watch Raw, but I decided to go out. I need to see this match then.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now