Guest glennsoe Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 'I've read the results from the "England tour" and i got to say; What's going on ??? Basicly wwe had 3 shows with the same matches, the same winners and the same endings in 3 different cities ?? And they wonder why the business are down ?? But wtf is going on ?? Kidman has 3 straight victories and they all end with a roll up !! His new finisher maybe ? - Glenn -
Guest Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Did this really need to be made into a thread? Come on now.
Guest Choken One Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Business is UP actually...and most house shows tend to be identical... I don't understand the point of your bitching? It's three different towns, thus not all of them know how the others ended...so...not like it's hurting business there... There's other examples of why the business is "down"...it's not because they had three identical shows on a tour.
AndrewTS Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 This has been going on since the territory days, so no surpise here.
razazteca Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Kidman has to practice for his next PPV match. Now you don't want to see Kidman to hurt himself doing a silly spot and blowing it like at WMXX with the SSP to the outside? Business is down because HHH was champ
AndrewTS Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 "Kidman has to practice for his next PPV match." ...Kidman deserves to be on a PPV why, exactly?
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Cough:Stupid Thread:cough Seriously, they are HOUSE SHOWS. Only people who'll know about them are those who attend, so why would WWE care to write up different matches for each show, and risk injuries on high spots that Kidman does? Watch WM XX. He nearly kills himself doing the SSP to the outside. Thank God Nunzio & Noble kinda caught him.
RavishingRickRudo Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 The topic itself is completely valid. House Shows are an integral part of the WWE's Business Plan and they haven't done anything to spice them up or give the fans a reason to go. This is an example of that.
Guest Choken One Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 business was up when he was champ too... You can't blame HHH for everything.
Guest Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 House shows are used as practice matches. If that is changed the matches you see on PPV will be soooo much worse.
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 The topic itself is completely valid. House Shows are an integral part of the WWE's Business Plan and they haven't done anything to spice them up or give the fans a reason to go. This is an example of that. If House Shows are so bad, why do attendance levels continue to rise? And we all know England fans. They'll eat anything you feed them. For example (pulls out copy of UK Rampage 93) the main event is LUGER v. DUGGAN! And the crowd loved it! Were these shows even on T.V., or the random UK PPV WWE does every year
razazteca Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 "Kidman has to practice for his next PPV match." ...Kidman deserves to be on a PPV why, exactly? After the draft Kidman will move from Velocity jobber to Raw jobber losing to Lance Storm or Hurricane...
razazteca Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 business was up when he was champ too... You can't blame HHH for everything. Ok than it's the wife's fought.
AndrewTS Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 "Kidman has to practice for his next PPV match." ...Kidman deserves to be on a PPV why, exactly? After the draft Kidman will move from Velocity jobber to Raw jobber losing to Lance Storm or Hurricane... Kidman/Storm.... Yeah, that'll put butts in seats.
The Amazing Rando Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 the fact that the WWE has to "write up matches" in the first place just .... ugh .... I would think most of the guys know how to put matches together...at least in some way. It wouldn't take much for the WWE bookers to say "Kidman, you are wrestling Noble tonight...do what you want but don't kill yourselves" ...and let them go out and have a match... ESPECIALLY if the only fans that care are the ones in the arena that night.
razazteca Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 "Kidman has to practice for his next PPV match." ...Kidman deserves to be on a PPV why, exactly? After the draft Kidman will move from Velocity jobber to Raw jobber losing to Lance Storm or Hurricane... Kidman/Storm.... Yeah, that'll put butts in seats. Don't worry its not going to be the main event, if anything it will be the 3rd segment of the 1st hour. Trust me it would be more entertaining than Rene Dupree vs D-Von Dudley.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 I will say that you'd think that WWE could have at least tweaked the ending of Kidman's matches a bit, because people can easily find out, like it matters. After the draft Kidman will move from Velocity jobber to Raw jobber losing to Lance Storm or Hurricane... *Salivates*
King Cucaracha Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 The topic itself is completely valid. House Shows are an integral part of the WWE's Business Plan and they haven't done anything to spice them up or give the fans a reason to go. This is an example of that. If House Shows are so bad, why do attendance levels continue to rise? And we all know England fans. They'll eat anything you feed them. For example (pulls out copy of UK Rampage 93) the main event is LUGER v. DUGGAN! And the crowd loved it! Were these shows even on T.V., or the random UK PPV WWE does every year a) That was 1993. I'm sure you Yanks had a house show with Luger/Duggan and a hot crowd at some point. 'As for eating anything we're fed'...you obviously havn't seen a UK show for a good few years, so we'll just ignore your point. b) It's ENGLISH fans, not England fans. c) English fans can't be all that bad, considering there's another tour coming up in May. And I find it funny that business is supposedly down because Kidman wins matches with roll-ups. I think that's the least of the problems.
RavishingRickRudo Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 If House Shows are so bad, why do attendance levels continue to rise? House Show attendance is rising?
AndrewTS Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 I will say that you'd think that WWE could have at least tweaked the ending of Kidman's matches a bit, because people can easily find out, like it matters. After the draft Kidman will move from Velocity jobber to Raw jobber losing to Lance Storm or Hurricane... *Salivates* Then again, despite Kidman's lack of anything interesting except for the finisher he fucks up 70% of the time, when they had a chance to turn Noble face and push him to the Cruiserweight title--they gave it to Kidman instead. So probably Lance will job to him, instead.
The Amazing Rando Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 And something I forgot...I'm all for them practicing matches for TV or PPV... but if i went to a house show and saw a good match, then went home and saw it the next night on Smackdown, I might get a little ticked off like "why did I just pay that money to see it live" I mean...the live experience is GREAT and everything... but not great enough to see Kidman win with a rollup
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 I'll use abetter example for UK PPV: Rebellion 2001 PPV Outside of Rock, Austin, Angle, Jericho, all the main eventers are off the card (RVD, Booker, Taker, Kane). The under-card included Scotty 2 Hotty v. Hurricane, Big Show vs. DDP, APA/HArdyz/Dudleyz, Tajiri/Regal, and a Divas Tag. Seems more like a RAW than PPV.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 If House Shows are so bad, why do attendance levels continue to rise? House Show attendance is rising? I think they've gone up since Eddie won the belt. Anyway, I've seen several differences in these three shows, be it different matches or different winners.
Guest Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Outside of Rock, Austin, Angle, Jericho, all the main eventers are off the card (RVD, Booker, Taker, Kane). RVD and Booker were "fired" as a part of the Survivor Series match.
Guest Anglesault Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Outside of Rock, Austin, Angle, Jericho, all the main eventers are off the card (RVD, Booker, Taker, Kane). RVD and Booker were "fired" as a part of the Survivor Series match. RVD was hardcore champ, so he stayed
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Rebellion 2001 was November 3, 2001 BTW, so the rosters didn't have the fired crap yet. I'm surprised for the lack of Test too. I thought he was the Alliance MVP once Kanyon disapeared.
AndrewTS Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Rebellion 2001 was November 3, 2001 BTW, so the rosters didn't have the fired crap yet. I'm surprised for the lack of Test too. I thought he was the Alliance MVP once Kanyon disapeared. Nope, him and Booker were tag-teaming, so it makes sense if one wasn't on the show, the other wouldn't be. Test wasn't MVP, although post-SurSer he was "TEFLON TEST!~"
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted March 21, 2004 Report Posted March 21, 2004 Rebellion 2001 was November 3, 2001 BTW, so the rosters didn't have the fired crap yet. I'm surprised for the lack of Test too. I thought he was the Alliance MVP once Kanyon disapeared. Nope, him and Booker were tag-teaming, so it makes sense if one wasn't on the show, the other wouldn't be. Test wasn't MVP, although post-SurSer he was "TEFLON TEST!~" Thanks for reminding me of the horrible Booker Test tag team. Not that it sucked but I hate throw together tag teams.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now