It's time for TNA to step it up

[Guest Donners]

Much as Batista has improved (and he sure as hell had a lot of room for improvement) I just can't like him until he gets that damned falling through the ropes spot right...

[Guest MikeSC]

Much as Batista has improved (and he sure as hell had a lot of room for improvement) I just can't like him until he gets that damned falling through the ropes spot right...

Oh, he does have some issues to deal with. However, his improvement is dramatic and I can easily see him becoming one of the all-time greats.

-=Mike

[strummer 0]

A MikeSC, explain the success of 80's WWF. TERRIBLE wrestling, big business. Hogan fighting big stiffs on top and drawing huge houses. JYD, ANDRE, Bundy, Studd all subpar workers that did good business. I'm not all for Sports Entertainment, but there has been bad wrestling that has drawn. 84-90 in WWF, and 98-99 WWF. Zeus did a huge buyrate at SS 89, better than the next 7 Wrestlemanias (from Meltzer). If the people care enough about the workers, sub par wrestling can draw. I'm not saying it can today, but it has in the past.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

The difference being that even though they were shitty WRESTLERS, they were good WORKERS. Why? Because they knew how to get the fans interested. Hogan is probably one of the best workers ever in the industry, simply because he made millions of people love him by doing punches, a big boot, and a legdrop.

 

And yes, Mike is right. The Hot Rod, "Rowdy" Roddy Piper, did more to make wrestling national than Hogan did. Piper set things up, but Vince wanted Hogan to do it, so Vince pushed Hogan. Or do you not remember that it was Piper that starred in Cyndi Lauper's music videos, which was one of the big starts of the Rock N' Wrestling era?

 

ECW...this is where I disagree with Mike. I love ECW, and I have since I first saw it, and I always will. They got their fanbase by creating a product different than either company, and even when the WWF tapped into ECW's style, they still didn't do it like ECW did. Most of ECW's matches were downright terrible, I'll easily admit to that, but there was an energy about the shows that drew people in. Even you, Mike, can admit that ECW had a different aura to it than WCW or the WWF.

 

WCW didn't fold because it was a "wrestling" company. WCW folded because it was run by people that didn't know jackshit about wrestling, buried the people the fans wanted to see (Flair, Benoit, Jericho, and Hart), and had a new President every 6 months that would change the whole course of the company.

 

And the WWF had terrible matches in 1998 and 1999? I guess those ****1/2 encounters between Mick Foley and Steve Austin were imaginary, then. I guess the **** brawl between Foley and Rock at Rumble 99 never happened. And, gee, I guess even the **** ladder match between HHH and Rock at SummerSlam 98 was a figment of my imagination. But here's the thing: WWF's best matches were usually in the main event, or at least the uppercard. WCW's best matches were always in the lowercard.

 

Yeah, I'm really tired right now, and not making a whole lot of sense. But Paul and that other guy are fucking idiots on a TNARICK level from the TotalNonStop boards.

[CubbyBr 0]

I'll say it right now --- he's so much better than Monty Brown, it's comical. He's improved A TON.

 

That quote right there just shows how biased you are. Monty Brown has more charisma in his pinkey than Batista has in his entire body. As far as the in-ring wrestling, Batista's been doing it for longer than Brown so you can't really compare.

 

As I said, D-Lo's was the only underpush that was BAD. Burying dead weight like XPac, Dogg, Gunn, and Godfather was a GOOD thing.

 

And Kane was not even close to being de-pushed.

 

Forgot who I was talking to...Mike, who thinks anyone who doesn't churn out a ***** match is dead weight. Guys that were a lot more over in 1999 than 2000.

 

As far as Kane...not only was he depushed but he was, creative-wise, shot in the head by that writing staff. Deny it all you want but it's the truth.

 

When the hell was there a 6 month Rock v McMahon program? Vince was basically out of the angle entirely by the end of June --- about 3 months after it started.

 

And, no, it was not even close to the same thing.

 

My bad..it was so boring and crappy that it felt like six months. In terms of making money and entertaining people, you're right, it was nothing like Austin/McMahon.

 

It was a failed attempt to copy Austin/Rock that flopped completely.

 

Do you REALLY want to go into the lame ways angles started during "Attitude"?

 

Sure...they were a lot more creative than "wrestler A bumps into wrestler B backstage and they feud."

 

Especially the period from about Summerslam of 1998 to WM15 which had some of the most creative stuff ever. Rock heel turn, Rock vs. Foley, etc, etc. So much thought being put into the storylines that the shit in 2000 wasn't even close to the same level.

 

Missed HHH beating Angle, eh?

 

Missed the ending that never happened. It totally fizzled and had no ending. I'm sure you'll deny it but that's what happened.

 

Missed Fully Loaded 2000, huh? Shame, as it was an excellent show.

 

A feud ending in a no contest with nothing resolved...real good.

 

Yup --- fortunately, the IN-RING PRODUCT made it infinitely more tolerable.

 

Can you spell COP-OUT?

 

No, you hating wrestling means you hate wrestling.

 

Wow, you're a moron.

 

I hate matches with guys I don't know and with no story behind them just being thrown out there. I think its boring and I can't get into it.

 

Wrestling, the way it should be, with a good story/feud that closes with a awesome match is what I like.

 

I'm sure this will go into one ear and out the other but that's fine.

 

Remember who Russo stuck Jericho with?

 

Yeah, Finkle and it was funny as hell.

[Guest Paul H.]

What happened to TNS?

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

I'll say it right now --- he's so much better than Monty Brown, it's comical. He's improved A TON.

 

That quote right there just shows how biased you are. Monty Brown has more charisma in his pinkey than Batista has in his entire body. As far as the in-ring wrestling, Batista's been doing it for longer than Brown so you can't really compare.

Batista hasn't had promo time aside from some short remarks during an Evolution group promo to display his charisma. In the ring, he has the same amount as Monte, only he doesn't resort to the "crouching down like a demented hunter" thing Monte does.

 

As I said, D-Lo's was the only underpush that was BAD. Burying dead weight like XPac, Dogg, Gunn, and Godfather was a GOOD thing.

 

And Kane was not even close to being de-pushed.

 

Forgot who I was talking to...Mike, who thinks anyone who doesn't churn out a ***** match is dead weight. Guys that were a lot more over in 1999 than 2000.

 

As far as Kane...not only was he depushed but he was, creative-wise, shot in the head by that writing staff. Deny it all you want but it's the truth.

Mike never said that. He just said that people that couldn't churn out good matches for the lives of them - Pac in 2000 and most of 2001, Road Dogg, Billy Gunn, and Godfather - were depushed for a reason. D'Lo's never had a match above ***1/2 in his career, but he's a solid enough worker with enough charisma to never warrant a depush like the WWF gave him.

 

And Kane was shot in the head creatively the day Glenn donned the mask.

When the hell was there a 6 month Rock v McMahon program? Vince was basically out of the angle entirely by the end of June --- about 3 months after it started.

 

And, no, it was not even close to the same thing.

 

My bad..it was so boring and crappy that it felt like six months. In terms of making money and entertaining people, you're right, it was nothing like Austin/McMahon.

 

It was a failed attempt to copy Austin/Rock that flopped completely.

Actually, know. It was a feud that had roots before Austin/Rock ever began. HHH's first title in the WWF was the Intercontinental title. Who feuded with him over it? Rocky Maivia. It made complete and utter sense.

Do you REALLY want to go into the lame ways angles started during "Attitude"?

 

Sure...they were a lot more creative than "wrestler A bumps into wrestler B backstage and they feud."

 

Especially the period from about Summerslam of 1998 to WM15 which had some of the most creative stuff ever. Rock heel turn, Rock vs. Foley, etc, etc. So much thought being put into the storylines that the shit in 2000 wasn't even close to the same level.

Ummmm...most of the feuds during the Attitude era DID start because "wrestler A bumped into wrestler B backstage." Either that, or something ludicrous like, I dunno, a satanic cult tried to rape the boss' daughter.

 

And notice how your "great" feuds from that period all involved Rock and Foley...hmmmm...considering it's pretty much always acknowledged that Foley does a lot of his own booking himself, as far as how feuds take place and whatnot.

Missed HHH beating Angle, eh?

 

Missed the ending that never happened. It totally fizzled and had no ending. I'm sure you'll deny it but that's what happened.

No, it ended. It just ended poorly. But that doesn't change the fact that it had an ending.

 

HHH and Angle squared off at Unforgiven 2000, I believe. During the match, the referee was knocked cold, and both Angle and Hunter were trying to get back to their feet. Stephanie came in, and Kurt and Hunter made her choose who she'd be with...so she kicked Angle in the balls, and HHH gave him the Pedigree for the 1-2-3.

Missed Fully Loaded 2000, huh? Shame, as it was an excellent show.

 

A feud ending in a no contest with nothing resolved...real good.

Actually, the feud ended with HHH barely defeating Jericho, thus making it seem as though Jericho was at HHH's level. Both men were broken and beaten down at the end of the match.

Yup --- fortunately, the IN-RING PRODUCT made it infinitely more tolerable.

 

Can you spell COP-OUT?

C-O-P-HYPHEN-O-U-T. And Mike's not disagreeing that the angles weren't as off-the-wall and original in 2000 as they were in 1997, 1998, and 1999. He's just saying that the GREAT WRESTLING we got every week made the angles seem better.

No, you hating wrestling means you hate wrestling.

 

Wow, you're a moron.

 

I hate matches with guys I don't know and with no story behind them just being thrown out there. I think its boring and I can't get into it.

Then you hate wrestling.

Wrestling, the way it should be, with a good story/feud that closes with a awesome match is what I like.

Unfortunately, so many feuds do NOT end with an awesome match, so I guess you don't like much.

I'm sure this will go into one ear and out the other but that's fine.

No, considering we have to read it.

Remember who Russo stuck Jericho with?

 

Yeah, Finkle and it was funny as hell.

It was? I don't remember it being entertaining at all, really. Then again, I was spoiled at how great 1998 Jericho was, and was more into ECW at the time to care for the WWF or WCW in 1999 (in fact, I didn't watch WCW in 1999 from May until October, but that's besides the point).

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

What happened to TNS?

Well, TNS was stopped by Bo because too many people flooded the boards with stupid shit, and everybody was drawn into too many flamewars. Not that big of a loss, though, considering the only people there that knew jackshit about wrestling were myself (Drezzy), Mike, kikrusher, Amdub (even though me and Mike never really agreed with him, we'll both readily admit he knows his shit), and Voltage. So, basically, the only people that really knew anything about wrestling were the "TNA haters," as the idiots of the board (read: 95% of the posters) would say.

[Guest Paul H.]

Damn,i wonder what happend to Rod Stagger and AMWRULEZ!?

[Guest MikeSC]

I'll say it right now --- he's so much better than Monty Brown, it's comical. He's improved A TON.

That quote right there just shows how biased you are. Monty Brown has more charisma in his pinkey than Batista has in his entire body. As far as the in-ring wrestling, Batista's been doing it for longer than Brown so you can't really compare.

 

 

1) Brown is not that charismatic. Hate to break it to you. Batista is FAR more charismatic in my humble opinion --- and he's MUCH, much better in the ring. "He's been doing it longer" --- hell, Brown was better --- IN HIS FIRST TNA RUN.

As I said, D-Lo's was the only underpush that was BAD. Burying dead weight like XPac, Dogg, Gunn, and Godfather was a GOOD thing.

 

And Kane was not even close to being de-pushed.

 

Forgot who I was talking to...Mike, who thinks anyone who doesn't churn out a ***** match is dead weight. Guys that were a lot more over in 1999 than 2000.

Who said guys who can't churn out ***** are dead weight?

Dead weight is dead weight.

 

What has Billy Gunn EVER brought to the table --- outside of dragging Benoit down to one of his worst matches ever and NEARLY breaking the man's neck?

 

What has Road Dogg EVER brought to the table? Hell, he was stale LONG before Russo left --- so Russo forced JERICHO --- you know, the hottest free agent on Earth --- to work with that useless slug. God knows he hasn't done squat for TNA to date.

 

What did Godfather ever bring to the table, outside of getting over by having a bunch of skanks at ringside with him?

As far as Kane...not only was he depushed but he was, creative-wise, shot in the head by that writing staff. Deny it all you want but it's the truth.

As opposed to the absurd Kane v UT program of Russo. Or Kane suddenly getting a girlfriend? Or him and X-Pac splitting up and reforming needlessly?

 

Yeah, THAT is a massive depush.

When the hell was there a 6 month Rock v McMahon program? Vince was basically out of the angle entirely by the end of June --- about 3 months after it started.

 

And, no, it was not even close to the same thing.

 

My bad..it was so boring and crappy that it felt like six months. In terms of making money and entertaining people, you're right, it was nothing like Austin/McMahon.

They weren't striving for that. They were going for Rock v HHH --- and Rock v HHH was a terrific program, easily the best matches of the series they've had with one another.

It was a failed attempt to copy Austin/Rock that flopped completely.

I thought it was a failed attempt to copy Austin v McMahon. Keep your erroneous comparisons straight, please.

Do you REALLY want to go into the lame ways angles started during "Attitude"?

 

Sure...they were a lot more creative than "wrestler A bumps into wrestler B backstage and they feud."

Nah, it was more like "Forget what's happened the past few months --- THIS is the new storyline".

Especially the period from about Summerslam of 1998 to WM15 which had some of the most creative stuff ever. Rock heel turn, Rock vs. Foley, etc, etc. So much thought being put into the storylines that the shit in 2000 wasn't even close to the same level.

Actually, try Survivor Series 1998 until, oh, February 1999. Yes, solid writing.

 

Too bad there was so much OTHER crap.

Missed HHH beating Angle, eh?

Missed the ending that never happened. It totally fizzled and had no ending. I'm sure you'll deny it but that's what happened.

That WAS the ending. Not really that hard to follow.

Missed Fully Loaded 2000, huh? Shame, as it was an excellent show.

 

A feud ending in a no contest with nothing resolved...real good.

A feud ending with a Jericho job, followed by a quick Jericho v Benoit match, and leading to ANOTHER attempt to give XPac something to do, dragging Jericho down the hole.

Yup --- fortunately, the IN-RING PRODUCT made it infinitely more tolerable.

Can you spell COP-OUT?

Yup.

 

Apparently you are unable to define it, though.

No, you hating wrestling means you hate wrestling.

Wow, you're a moron.

 

I hate matches with guys I don't know and with no story behind them just being thrown out there. I think its boring and I can't get into it.

And nobody is doing that, so it's more than mildly irrelevant.

Wrestling, the way it should be, with a good story/feud that closes with a awesome match is what I like.

 

I'm sure this will go into one ear and out the other but that's fine.

I can only WISH it went in one ear and out the other.

Remember who Russo stuck Jericho with?

Yeah, Finkle and it was funny as hell.

Well, I wondered what kind of a person could possibly enjoy that moronic angle.

 

Now I know.

Damn,i wonder what happend to Rod Stagger and AMWRULEZ!? huh.gif

If Rod pulled his gimmick off here, he'd have been banned inside of three days.

-=Mike

[bob_barron 0]

Forgot who I was talking to...Mike, who thinks anyone who doesn't churn out a ***** match is dead weight. Guys that were a lot more over in 1999 than 2000.

 

X-Pac was so dead weight they coined a phrase because he was hated so much. Remember that Road Dogg v. X-Pac feud? That pretty much is why they were depushed. They're both fucking useless.

 

The Godfather is fine as an opening match guy who wakes up the crowd on HEAT. Not a main eventer.

 

As far as Kane...not only was he depushed but he was, creative-wise, shot in the head by that writing staff. Deny it all you want but it's the truth.

 

Kane main evented two PPVs and had an extended feud with Y2J. Some depush.

 

 

My bad..it was so boring and crappy that it felt like six months. In terms of making money and entertaining people, you're right, it was nothing like Austin/McMahon.

 

It was a failed attempt to copy Austin/Rock that flopped completely.

 

Wrong.

 

Backlash did an unheard of 1.62 buyrate. Judgement Day drew a 1.05. KOTR did a 1.19.

 

RAW Ratings during that time period-

 

April 3, 2000 6.4

April 10, 2000 6.2

April 17, 2000 6.7

April 24, 2000 7.1

May 1, 2000 7.4

May 8, 2000 6.2

May 15, 2000 6.1

May 22, 2000 7.1

May 29, 2000 6.4

June 5, 2000 5.9

June 12, 2000 6.8

 

April 5, 1999 5.8

April 12, 1999 6.3

April 19, 1999 6.1

April 26, 1999 6.0

May 3, 1999 6.4

May 10, 1999 8.1

May 17, 1999 6.4

May 24, 1999 7.2

June 7, 1999 6.7

June 14, 1999 6.7

 

Some flop eh?

 

Especially the period from about Summerslam of 1998 to WM15 which had some of the most creative stuff ever. Rock heel turn, Rock vs. Foley, etc, etc. So much thought being put into the storylines that the shit in 2000 wasn't even close to the same level.

 

The Jericho-Benoit feud, the stuff with Eddy and the Radicalz, Rock v. HHH every week- great stuff.

 

 

Missed the ending that never happened. It totally fizzled and had no ending. I'm sure you'll deny it but that's what happened.

 

Stephanie kicked Angle in the nuts, sided with HHH. They did the business partner thing for a month and dropped it.

 

 

QUOTE

Missed Fully Loaded 2000, huh? Shame, as it was an excellent show.

 

 

 

A feud ending in a no contest with nothing resolved...real good.

 

WRONG.

 

HHH won the match, Jericho was put over as a tough SOB and they moved on.

 

 

 

I hate matches with guys I don't know and with no story behind them just being thrown out there. I think its boring and I can't get into it.

 

Wrestling, the way it should be, with a good story/feud that closes with a awesome match is what I like.

 

I'm sure this will go into one ear and out the other but that's fine.

 

You hate wrestling

 

Yeah, Finkle and it was funny as hell.

 

2000- Jericho has awesome matches with HHH, Benoit, Angle

1999- Jericho pals around with Howard Finkel.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

I think Rod actually tried coming here once, too. I'm wondering why Amdub didn't come, because even though he'd disagree with most of us, we'd still have some pretty good convo's.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Much as Batista has improved (and he sure as hell had a lot of room for improvement) I just can't like him until he gets that damned falling through the ropes spot right...

Oh, he does have some issues to deal with. However, his improvement is dramatic and I can easily see him becoming one of the all-time greats.

-=Mike

I completely agree. I'd even go so far to say that Batista is improving and has improved more than Randy Orton in the last 6 months.

[CubbyBr 0]

Brown is not that charismatic. Hate to break it to you. Batista is FAR more charismatic in my humble opinion --- and he's MUCH, much better in the ring. "He's been doing it longer" --- hell, Brown was better --- IN HIS FIRST TNA RUN.

 

No need to even take that comment seriously...Complete and utter biased...nuff said.

 

Who said guys who can't churn out ***** are dead weight?

 

Dead weight is dead weight.

 

What has Billy Gunn EVER brought to the table --- outside of dragging Benoit down to one of his worst matches ever and NEARLY breaking the man's neck?

 

What has Road Dogg EVER brought to the table? Hell, he was stale LONG before Russo left --- so Russo forced JERICHO --- you know, the hottest free agent on Earth --- to work with that useless slug. God knows he hasn't done squat for TNA to date.

 

What did Godfather ever bring to the table, outside of getting over by having a bunch of skanks at ringside with him?

 

No argument that BIlly Gunn, Road Dogg, and Godfather aren't the greatest workers but they were over as hell when Russo was writing and were part of what made the shows entertaining.

 

The thing is...they weren't even really buried...its just that the "genius" creative team couldn't get them over again.

 

And don't give me the dead weight argument because if that were the case, guys like T&A, Too Cool, Rikishi and others wouldn't have been used either.

 

Creative couldn't get the guys I mentioned over so they weren't used- period.

 

What did he do in TNA? Well, he's over to start with...something he wasn't in WWF2000.

 

They weren't striving for that. They were going for Rock v HHH --- and Rock v HHH was a terrific program, easily the best matches of the series they've had with one another

 

They were striving for that.

 

And Rock/HHH was already done to death and completely stale.

 

 

I thought it was a failed attempt to copy Austin v McMahon. Keep your erroneous comparisons straight, please

 

Same thing...1999 it was McMahon/Rock vs. Austin. 2000 it was McMahon/HHH vs. Rock.

 

 

Actually, try Survivor Series 1998 until, oh, February 1999. Yes, solid writing.

 

Too bad there was so much OTHER crap.

 

 

 

The buildup to Survivor Series was tremendous as well.

 

Was there crap? Sure but no worse than the stuff like the stinkface match between Patterson/Briscoe in 2000.

 

Yup.

 

Apparently you are unable to define it, though

 

Looked it up and found a bunch of your old replies (with no facts behind them) from old threads.

 

And nobody is doing that, so it's more than mildly irrelevant.

 

Not irrelevant at all...you claim (since you obviously know everything) that I hate wrestling when the fact is I hate it when wrestling matches are just thrown out for no reason between guys I don't know that go forever. I loved the early X-Division matches from TNA. I'm loving the great tag action in TNA right now. If I didn't know the guys and they were just thrown out there with no story every week then I wouldn't have liked it.

 

Just because I don't like pure marathon matches all the time doesn't mean I hate wrestling at all and you're a moron if you think I do.

 

Now go ahead with your immature cop-out response of... "you hate wrestling."

 

 

Kane main evented two PPVs and had an extended feud with Y2J. Some depush

 

KOTR where he was nothing but a McMahon lackey and was basically slopped in there. Don't remember the other PPV he main evented...probably because I didn't care like many others.

 

And, oh yeah, I forgot that epic feud with Kane/Y2J over spilled coffee. Hogan/Andre type heat in that one. lol:

 

Backlash did an unheard of 1.62 buyrate. Judgement Day drew a 1.05. KOTR did a 1.19.

 

RAW Ratings during that time period-

 

April 3, 2000 6.4

April 10, 2000 6.2

April 17, 2000 6.7

April 24, 2000 7.1

May 1, 2000 7.4

May 8, 2000 6.2

May 15, 2000 6.1

May 22, 2000 7.1

May 29, 2000 6.4

June 5, 2000 5.9

June 12, 2000 6.8

 

April 5, 1999 5.8

April 12, 1999 6.3

April 19, 1999 6.1

April 26, 1999 6.0

May 3, 1999 6.4

May 10, 1999 8.1

May 17, 1999 6.4

May 24, 1999 7.2

June 7, 1999 6.7

June 14, 1999 6.7

 

Some flop eh?

 

 

They were riding a wave that was soon to run out. If you look at columns on the internet from back then it was the general consesus that the product was stale.

 

The Jericho-Benoit feud, the stuff with Eddy and the Radicalz, Rock v. HHH every week- great stuff.

 

Jericho/Benoit feud was good because of the wrestlers involved. Creatively, it didn't touch any of that stuff from 98 that I mentioned. And that's why it got stale by Summerslam.

 

You're right...Rock v. HHH EVERY SINGLE WEEK and it was stale as hell. They didn't push any new talent in the main event during that time (exception of angle) and some guys that did get the shot were pushed right back down (Benoit, Jericho, etc). The fact that they didnt make any new true main event superstars that year (besides Angle) came back to bite them in the ass in the coming years.

 

 

Stephanie kicked Angle in the nuts, sided with HHH. They did the business partner thing for a month and dropped it.

 

My bad..it was a shitty ending. A feud that could have gone on for 6 months ending like crap because creative couldn't do anything with it.

 

You hate wrestling

 

WOW, the originality around here. I could've sworn you and Mike were one person for a second.

 

2000- Jericho has awesome matches with HHH, Benoit, Angle

1999- Jericho pals around with Howard Finkel.

 

1999- HHH just starts main eventing, Benoit and Angle aren't around, Jericho hasn't even been in WWF for a month.

 

He just entered the fed, he was feuding with Shamrock and they put him with Finkle to build on his WCW persona, which was hilarious and a lot more entertaining than the Jericho of today.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

Brown is not that charismatic. Hate to break it to you. Batista is FAR more charismatic in my humble opinion --- and he's MUCH, much better in the ring. "He's been doing it longer" --- hell, Brown was better --- IN HIS FIRST TNA RUN.

 

No need to even take that comment seriously...Complete and utter biased...nuff said.

When expressing one's own opinion, one is allowed to be biased.

Who said guys who can't churn out ***** are dead weight?

 

Dead weight is dead weight.

 

What has Billy Gunn EVER brought to the table --- outside of dragging Benoit down to one of his worst matches ever and NEARLY breaking the man's neck?

 

What has Road Dogg EVER brought to the table? Hell, he was stale LONG before Russo left --- so Russo forced JERICHO --- you know, the hottest free agent on Earth --- to work with that useless slug. God knows he hasn't done squat for TNA to date.

 

What did Godfather ever bring to the table, outside of getting over by having a bunch of skanks at ringside with him?

 

No argument that BIlly Gunn, Road Dogg, and Godfather aren't the greatest workers but they were over as hell when Russo was writing and were part of what made the shows entertaining.

 

The thing is...they weren't even really buried...its just that the "genius" creative team couldn't get them over again.

 

And don't give me the dead weight argument because if that were the case, guys like T&A, Too Cool, Rikishi and others wouldn't have been used either.

 

Creative couldn't get the guys I mentioned over so they weren't used- period.

 

What did he do in TNA? Well, he's over to start with...something he wasn't in WWF2000.

Maybe the creative team couldn't get them over again because there was no way to actually get them over. Road Dogg's schtick has been the same for the past six years, Billy Gunn's pure shit on the stick, has no charisma, and sucks in the ring, and the Godfather was only over AS the Godfather, as all of his other gimmicks failed in the past. It's called sticking to what works.

 

And who are you referring to in that last line? D'Lo? I don't even remember Brown on WWF TV in 2000, so that could be why he wasn't over.

They weren't striving for that. They were going for Rock v HHH --- and Rock v HHH was a terrific program, easily the best matches of the series they've had with one another

 

They were striving for that.

 

And Rock/HHH was already done to death and completely stale.

So stale it routinely drew sell-out live crowds, and average of 1 million more viewers than the prior year, and gave Backlash it's highest buyrate to date! Sorry, but "stale" refers to something that has been done too many times before and DOESN'T work. Rock/HHH had been done differently twice before (snobby Hunter Hearst Helmsley vs. Blue Chipper Rocky Maivia, DX vs. The Nation), so stale the feud was not.

I thought it was a failed attempt to copy Austin v McMahon. Keep your erroneous comparisons straight, please

 

Same thing...1999 it was McMahon/Rock vs. Austin. 2000 it was McMahon/HHH vs. Rock.

2000 it was HHH vs. Rock. HHH just had some new friends to aid him. The main focus was still on HHH and THE ROCK.

Actually, try Survivor Series 1998 until, oh, February 1999. Yes, solid writing.

 

Too bad there was so much OTHER crap.

 

 

 

The buildup to Survivor Series was tremendous as well.

 

Was there crap? Sure but no worse than the stuff like the stinkface match between Patterson/Briscoe in 2000.

Hmmm...let's see...

 

-Bossman/Big Show feud.

-Mae Young and Mark Henry love affair.

-Feud over the rights to the DX name

-Sammy

Yup.

 

Apparently you are unable to define it, though

 

Looked it up and found a bunch of your old replies (with no facts behind them) from old threads.

...so? This pertains to the topic at hand how?

And nobody is doing that, so it's more than mildly irrelevant.

 

Not irrelevant at all...you claim (since you obviously know everything) that I hate wrestling when the fact is I hate it when wrestling matches are just thrown out for no reason between guys I don't know that go forever. I loved the early X-Division matches from TNA. I'm loving the great tag action in TNA right now. If I didn't know the guys and they were just thrown out there with no story every week then I wouldn't have liked it.

Two contradictory statements, and why am I not surprised? The early X-Division had one storyline: Jerry Lynn vs. AJ Styles. And when new storylines were added (The Plumtree Family, Sonny Siaki - X-Division champion, etc.), the majority of X-Division matches were still - you guessed it - randomly thrown together elimination or tag matches.

Just because I don't like pure marathon matches all the time doesn't mean I hate wrestling at all and you're a moron if you think I do.

 

Now go ahead with your immature cop-out response of... "you hate wrestling."

You hate wrestling because you're saying a match cannot be good without an angle leading up to it, when there have been several solid matches that have been stellar with no backstory behind them.

Kane main evented two PPVs and had an extended feud with Y2J. Some depush

 

KOTR where he was nothing but a McMahon lackey and was basically slopped in there. Don't remember the other PPV he main evented...probably because I didn't care like many others.

 

And, oh yeah, I forgot that epic feud with Kane/Y2J over spilled coffee. Hogan/Andre type heat in that one. lol:

KOTR 2000? Kane was a McMahon lackey? Funny, because I remember Kane, you know, teaming up with 'Taker against HHH, Vince, and Shane O Mac.

 

And yes, the Kane/Jericho coffee feud. No worse than Bossman and Al Snow feuding over Snow's dog Pepper.

Backlash did an unheard of 1.62 buyrate. Judgement Day drew a 1.05. KOTR did a 1.19.

 

RAW Ratings during that time period-

 

April 3, 2000 6.4

April 10, 2000 6.2

April 17, 2000 6.7

April 24, 2000 7.1

May 1, 2000 7.4

May 8, 2000 6.2

May 15, 2000 6.1

May 22, 2000 7.1

May 29, 2000 6.4

June 5, 2000 5.9

June 12, 2000 6.8

 

April 5, 1999 5.8

April 12, 1999 6.3

April 19, 1999 6.1

April 26, 1999 6.0

May 3, 1999 6.4

May 10, 1999 8.1

May 17, 1999 6.4

May 24, 1999 7.2

June 7, 1999 6.7

June 14, 1999 6.7

 

Some flop eh?

 

 

They were riding a wave that was soon to run out. If you look at columns on the internet from back then it was the general consesus that the product was stale.

Actually, the general consensus was that the product was great from January 2000 until around October/November 2000, when it become just very good. Revisionist history only works if your name is Vince McMahon.

The Jericho-Benoit feud, the stuff with Eddy and the Radicalz, Rock v. HHH every week- great stuff.

 

Jericho/Benoit feud was good because of the wrestlers involved. Creatively, it didn't touch any of that stuff from 98 that I mentioned. And that's why it got stale by Summerslam.

Well, considering it was a feud based on WRESTLING, as in "Wrestler A was beaten by Wrestler B, and wants a rematch to prove who is the best," then yeah, it's not as "creative" as The Union of People You Oughtta Respect, Son.

You're right...Rock v. HHH EVERY SINGLE WEEK      and it was stale as hell. They didn't push any new talent in the main event during that time (exception of angle)[1] and some guys that did get the shot were pushed right back down (Benoit, Jericho, etc)[1]. The fact that they didnt make any new true main event superstars that year (besides Angle) came back to bite them in the ass in the coming years.

1. They pushed Benoit and Jericho into the main event as well.

2. Pushed right back down, yes, but that's not a fault of 2000, as neither man WAS ready in 2000 as they were just recently in the WWF. However, both men held the top belt within four years.

Stephanie kicked Angle in the nuts, sided with HHH. They did the business partner thing for a month and dropped it.

 

My bad..it was a shitty ending. A feud that could have gone on for 6 months ending like crap because creative couldn't do anything with it.

No, it's not because creative couldn't do anything with it. It's because HHH was getting sick of being in that angle, and wanted out of it ASAP, so he skipped over the "Steph joins Angle" section of the story, and went right to the finish. That's not creative's fault, that's HHH's fault.

You hate wrestling

 

WOW, the originality around here. I could've sworn you and Mike were one person for a second.

Mike's a lot sexier than Bob is, but that's not saying much. And we'd all stop saying you hate wrestling if you didn't act like you hated wrestling.

2000- Jericho has awesome matches with HHH, Benoit, Angle

1999- Jericho pals around with Howard Finkel.

 

1999- HHH just starts main eventing, Benoit and Angle aren't around, Jericho hasn't even been in WWF for a month.

 

He just entered the fed, he was feuding with Shamrock and they put him with Finkle to build on his WCW persona, which was hilarious and a lot more entertaining than the Jericho of today.

What was? Finkle? No, sorry. I'll take Jericho having a good feud with Christian, and the buildup to that feud starting, than Finkle being pulled out of the trunk.

 

The teaming with Finkle was an attempt to capture the magic of the WCW teaming with Ralphus, but it didn't work because Russo didn't realize that Jericho booked his own segments in WCW.

[CubbyBr 0]

When expressing one's own opinion, one is allowed to be biased.

 

I don't get how someone with that much of a biased opinion can be taken seriously. All he does is go on this forum and say the same thing about TNA every time. Yeah, its his right but it says something bout the person when he spends a lot of his time on a forum dedicated to a promotion he can't stand.

 

 

Maybe the creative team couldn't get them over again because there was no way to actually get them over. Road Dogg's schtick has been the same for the past six years, Billy Gunn's pure shit on the stick, has no charisma, and sucks in the ring, and the Godfather was only over AS the Godfather, as all of his other gimmicks failed in the past. It's called sticking to what works.

 

And who are you referring to in that last line? D'Lo? I don't even remember Brown on WWF TV in 2000, so that could be why he wasn't over.

 

In the last line I was referring to Road Dogg.

 

So when the creative team can't get a certain talent over then it's the fault of the talent? I don't buy the argument of 'there's no way to get them over" when I see Road Dogg and even Konnan in TNA and they get mad pops.

 

I find the whole 3LK stable pretty cool in that it's three guys from completely different backgrounds able to bond and work together. It's something new for Road Dog and even though his promos are the same, he's put in a different situation and is over again.

 

So stale it routinely drew sell-out live crowds, and average of 1 million more viewers than the prior year, and gave Backlash it's highest buyrate to date! Sorry, but "stale" refers to something that has been done too many times before and DOESN'T work. Rock/HHH had been done differently twice before (snobby Hunter Hearst Helmsley vs. Blue Chipper Rocky Maivia, DX vs. The Nation), so stale the feud was not.

 

It did big business, I can't deny it, but I believe it was because they were riding a wave. If you look at some of the internet articles from back then you'll see that people were complaining about the stale product. There was hope going into the Fully Loaded PPV (which I'll admit was good) but then those three guys that were being elevated (Jericho, Benoit, Angle) were all pushed back down to the midcard.

 

2000 it was HHH vs. Rock. HHH just had some new friends to aid him. The main focus was still on HHH and THE ROCK.

 

Let's see...McMahon screwing Rock out of the belt at Mania, Shane McMahon the special referee at Backlash with Rock/HHH, McMahon's big group with HHH at the head going after Rock, Shane vs. Rock numerous times, Vince promising that Rock will never be champion again. Souds very familiar.

 

Two contradictory statements, and why am I not surprised? The early X-Division had one storyline: Jerry Lynn vs. AJ Styles. And when new storylines were added (The Plumtree Family, Sonny Siaki - X-Division champion, etc.), the majority of X-Division matches were still - you guessed it - randomly thrown together elimination or tag matches.

 

I liked the early X matches within the context of that show because it had other storylines/angles within the show to balance it out. I can't watch a full show with stuff like that because I'll get bored with it like I got bored with the recent ROH DVD I bought "The era of honor begins."

 

You hate wrestling because you're saying a match cannot be good without an angle leading up to it, when there have been several solid matches that have been stellar with no backstory behind them.

 

I'm not saying a match CAN'T BE GOOD without a story, not at all..I'm saying that I, personally, get bored after a while with stuff like that. Doesn't mean I hate it..it's just not my cup of tea. I would rather have matches with stories leading up. I can still be entertaining by random matches as long as its in a context of a show with other stories/angles so its not JUST random matches with guys I don't know. If its a show with just random matches with no stories or angle then I can't get into it.

 

KOTR 2000? Kane was a McMahon lackey? Funny, because I remember Kane, you know, teaming up with 'Taker against HHH, Vince, and Shane O Mac.

 

And yes, the Kane/Jericho coffee feud. No worse than Bossman and Al Snow feuding over Snow's dog Pepper.

 

My bad, he was teaming with Taker again. And then he feuded with him AGAIN two or three months later.

 

With Snow/Bossman - yeah it was terrible but I can atleast picture to guys wanting to kill each other over one of their animals being abused by the other guy but I can't picture two guys wanting to kill each other over spilled coffee.

 

-Bossman/Big Show feud.

-Mae Young and Mark Henry love affair.

-Feud over the rights to the DX name

 

-Bossman/Big Show - happened after Russo left

-Young/Henry - started about right when he was leaving, the birth of the hand was not Russo either

-Nothing wrong with the feud over the DX name IMO

 

 

 

1. They pushed Benoit and Jericho into the main event as well.

2. Pushed right back down, yes, but that's not a fault of 2000, as neither man WAS ready in 2000 as they were just recently in the WWF. However, both men held the top belt within four years.

 

Jericho wasn't ready? Maybe not to be world champ but definitly to be in the main event. HE was ready to be in the main event ever since he was challenging Goldberg in WCW. They needed fresh main eventers yet the creative team didn't put them in those slots.

 

Bottom line is that the only new star WWE made in the first 2 and 1/2 years after Russo left was Kurt Angle. I'm talking about a star that was taken seriously on the level of Rock, HHH, and Austin. Then it was Brock Lesnar but he was pushed too soon and couldn't handle it.

 

No, it's not because creative couldn't do anything with it. It's because HHH was getting sick of being in that angle, and wanted out of it ASAP, so he skipped over the "Steph joins Angle" section of the story, and went right to the finish. That's not creative's fault, that's HHH's fault.

 

Proof?

 

I doubt Hunter had enough pull in the fall of 2000 to just end a hot storyline like that.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

When expressing one's own opinion, one is allowed to be biased.

 

I don't get how someone with that much of a biased opinion can be taken seriously. All he does is go on this forum and say the same thing about TNA every time. Yeah, its his right but it says something bout the person when he spends a lot of his time on a forum dedicated to a promotion he can't stand.

Because Mike's opinions tend to come from sound reason. If you ask him for a list of what he feels are TNA's positives, he'll produce one.

Maybe the creative team couldn't get them over again because there was no way to actually get them over. Road Dogg's schtick has been the same for the past six years, Billy Gunn's pure shit on the stick, has no charisma, and sucks in the ring, and the Godfather was only over AS the Godfather, as all of his other gimmicks failed in the past. It's called sticking to what works.

 

And who are you referring to in that last line? D'Lo? I don't even remember Brown on WWF TV in 2000, so that could be why he wasn't over.

 

In the last line I was referring to Road Dogg.

 

So when the creative team can't get a certain talent over then it's the fault of the talent? I don't buy the argument of 'there's no way to get them over" when I see Road Dogg and even Konnan in TNA and they get mad pops.

Read this sentence carefully: TNA is a glorified indy fed. Two wrestlers that had mainstream, national exposure less than 5 years ago, are charismatic, and are usually used in one of the opening matches get pops? It makes sense.

I find the whole 3LK stable pretty cool in that it's three guys from completely different backgrounds able to bond and work together. It's something new for Road Dog and even though his promos are the same, he's put in a different situation and is over again.

Well...all three had a rapper gimmick before coming to TNA...all three are a kind of minority (Konnan is Hispanic, Truth is Black, and BG is Redneck)...and two of them are terrible in the ring (Konnan and BG)...so there's not a whole lot of differences.

So stale it routinely drew sell-out live crowds, and average of 1 million more viewers than the prior year, and gave Backlash it's highest buyrate to date! Sorry, but "stale" refers to something that has been done too many times before and DOESN'T work. Rock/HHH had been done differently twice before (snobby Hunter Hearst Helmsley vs. Blue Chipper Rocky Maivia, DX vs. The Nation), so stale the feud was not.

 

It did big business, I can't deny it, but I believe it was because they were riding a wave. If you look at some of the internet articles from back then you'll see that people were complaining about the stale product. There was hope going into the Fully Loaded PPV (which I'll admit was good) but then those three guys that were being elevated (Jericho, Benoit, Angle) were all pushed back down to the midcard.

But then couldn't you say 1999 was riding the wave that started in late 1997 because of Vince McMahon and Steve Austin? Also, internet articles from 1999 routinely bashed the products of both WCW and the WWF, WCW for their inability to understand what the fans want, and the WWF for not making any damn sense.

2000 it was HHH vs. Rock. HHH just had some new friends to aid him. The main focus was still on HHH and THE ROCK.

 

Let's see...McMahon screwing Rock out of the belt at Mania, Shane McMahon the special referee at Backlash with Rock/HHH, McMahon's big group with HHH at the head going after Rock, Shane vs. Rock numerous times, Vince promising that Rock will never be champion again. Souds very familiar.

So there are similarities. Your point? The focus of the feud was still "how will Rock defeat HHH and the obstacles placed in front of him?" The focus was on the WWF Champion, HHH, and the #1 contender, The Rock. Vince McMahon, Shane McMahon, and Stephanie McMahon were supporting characters.

Two contradictory statements, and why am I not surprised? The early X-Division had one storyline: Jerry Lynn vs. AJ Styles. And when new storylines were added (The Plumtree Family, Sonny Siaki - X-Division champion, etc.), the majority of X-Division matches were still - you guessed it - randomly thrown together elimination or tag matches.

 

I liked the early X matches within the context of that show because it had other storylines/angles within the show to balance it out. I can't watch a full show with stuff like that because I'll get bored with it like I got bored with the recent ROH DVD I bought "The era of honor begins."

But you're contradicting yourself, considering you said you liked matches that had reasons to them, and then gave examples of matches that routinely did NOT have reasons to them. And yes, there were angles elsewhere on the show to balance it out. Just as there were in 2000 WWF, and just as there are in current TNA. What's your point again?

You hate wrestling because you're saying a match cannot be good without an angle leading up to it, when there have been several solid matches that have been stellar with no backstory behind them.

 

I'm not saying a match CAN'T BE GOOD without a story, not at all..I'm saying that I, personally, get bored after a while with stuff like that. Doesn't mean I hate it..it's just not my cup of tea. I would rather have matches with stories leading up. I can still be entertaining by random matches as long as its in a context of a show with other stories/angles so its not JUST random matches with guys I don't know. If its a show with just random matches with no stories or angle then I can't get into it.

Well, duh. RoH learned that their second show in, when the main event scene of Christopher Daniels, American Dragon, and LowKi began feuding with each other because the prior event's Triple Threat match ended in a tie. But you can't have matches with stories leading up to them without matches that have no real rhyme or reason, as those exhibition bouts are what lead to the feuds.

KOTR 2000? Kane was a McMahon lackey? Funny, because I remember Kane, you know, teaming up with 'Taker against HHH, Vince, and Shane O Mac.

 

And yes, the Kane/Jericho coffee feud. No worse than Bossman and Al Snow feuding over Snow's dog Pepper.

 

My bad, he was teaming with Taker again. And then he feuded with him AGAIN two or three months later.

 

With Snow/Bossman - yeah it was terrible but I can atleast picture to guys wanting to kill each other over one of their animals being abused by the other guy but I can't picture two guys wanting to kill each other over spilled coffee.

Considering Kane was a BURN VICTIM and HOT COFFEE tends to BURN...it makes sense, especially given Kane's mental state. I'm not saying it's a great way to start a feud, but it is sensical if you think about it.

-Bossman/Big Show feud.

-Mae Young and Mark Henry love affair.

-Feud over the rights to the DX name

 

-Bossman/Big Show - happened after Russo left

-Young/Henry - started about right when he was leaving, the birth of the hand was not Russo either

-Nothing wrong with the feud over the DX name IMO

1. Doesn't matter. You said 1999.

2. Started in the summer of 1999, when Russo was still with the company. And I know the hand birth was when Russo was gone, but the whole angle was retarded.

3. Aside from the fact that the matches were terrible, and the feud was awful because HHH was no longer in DX, so why would he care? Also, he turned on Billy Gunn, so why would Billy Gunn want to be with him?

1. They pushed Benoit and Jericho into the main event as well.

2. Pushed right back down, yes, but that's not a fault of 2000, as neither man WAS ready in 2000 as they were just recently in the WWF. However, both men held the top belt within four years.

 

Jericho wasn't ready? Maybe not to be world champ but definitly to be in the main event. HE was ready to be in the main event ever since he was challenging Goldberg in WCW. They needed fresh main eventers yet the creative team didn't put them in those slots.

Considering fans who only knew of Jericho from the WWF saw him as an upper-midcarder, and he was only a midcarder in WCW, there was no real reason to care for him. Yes, he should have been put into the main event by the end of 2000, but he wasn't ready for most of it, since he was over, but not THAT over.

Bottom line is that the only new star WWE made in the first 2 and 1/2 years after Russo left was Kurt Angle. I'm talking about a star that was taken seriously on the level of Rock, HHH, and Austin. Then it was Brock Lesnar but he was pushed too soon and couldn't handle it.

Randy Orton, John Cena...both are legitimate WWE stars. And considering that most of WWE's roster is useless shit? Yeah, I can see a big gap between the amount of wrestlers on the roster and the amount of genuine stars.

No, it's not because creative couldn't do anything with it. It's because HHH was getting sick of being in that angle, and wanted out of it ASAP, so he skipped over the "Steph joins Angle" section of the story, and went right to the finish. That's not creative's fault, that's HHH's fault.

 

Proof?

 

I doubt Hunter had enough pull in the fall of 2000 to just end a hot storyline like that.

Hunter first received pull when he joined The Kliq in 1995. Sure, the MSG Incident did ruin some pull, but he got it back by the time DX started. Do you really think the feud against Owen Hart in 1998 would have been so one-sided had he not had pull? Hunter had even more pull in late 1999 when he LEGITIMATELY started dating Stephanie McMahon, AKA the boss's daughter.

[bob_barron 0]

No argument that BIlly Gunn, Road Dogg, and Godfather aren't the greatest workers but they were over as hell when Russo was writing and were part of what made the shows entertaining.

 

Billy Gunn and Road Dogg were moreover because of their DX association and saying naughty words.

 

Godfather is nothing but cheap heat.

 

The thing is...they weren't even really buried...its just that the "genius" creative team couldn't get them over again.

 

Billy Gunn was injured most of 2000. And then he got the IC Title.

Road Dogg was always a big part of the scene for the first half of 2000.

 

And don't give me the dead weight argument because if that were the case, guys like T&A, Too Cool, Rikishi and others wouldn't have been used either.

 

T&A was a midcard tag team.

 

Too Cool and Rikishi were very over- and good workers.

 

Creative couldn't get the guys I mentioned over so they weren't used- period.

 

What did he do in TNA? Well, he's over to start with...something he wasn't in WWF2000.

 

 

They were striving for that.

 

And Rock/HHH was already done to death and completely stale.

 

Considering the buyrate and ratings info that I just gave you- you're wrong.

 

Same thing...1999 it was McMahon/Rock vs. Austin. 2000 it was McMahon/HHH vs. Rock.

 

Was there crap? Sure but no worse than the stuff like the stinkface match between Patterson/Briscoe in 2000.

 

That just filler- it never took up too much TV time.

 

 

KOTR where he was nothing but a McMahon lackey and was basically slopped in there. Don't remember the other PPV he main evented...probably because I didn't care like many others.

 

Wrong. He teamed with Taker and Rock to take on HHH and the McMahond.

 

And, oh yeah, I forgot that epic feud with Kane/Y2J over spilled coffee. Hogan/Andre type heat in that one. lol:

 

The feud was stupid but you're argument is that he was depushed. He wasn't.

 

 

 

They were riding a wave that was soon to run out. If you look at columns on the internet from back then it was the general consesus that the product was stale.

 

The buildup to KOTR was weak but the product picked up big time after that. The ratings and buyrates speak for itself.

 

Jericho/Benoit feud was good because of the wrestlers involved. Creatively, it didn't touch any of that stuff from 98 that I mentioned. And that's why it got stale by Summerslam.

 

It was great because every week we were getting ***-**** matches. Who cares if it wasn't the best storyline ever?

 

It had good WRESTLING on a WRESTLING show

 

 

My bad..it was a shitty ending. A feud that could have gone on for 6 months ending like crap because creative couldn't do anything with it.

 

 

He just entered the fed, he was feuding with Shamrock and they put him with Finkle to build on his WCW persona, which was hilarious and a lot more entertaining than the Jericho of today.

 

And it fucking sucked and was pointless. I like Y2J a lot more today

[Guest MikeSC]

Brown is not that charismatic. Hate to break it to you. Batista is FAR more charismatic in my humble opinion --- and he's MUCH, much better in the ring. "He's been doing it longer" --- hell, Brown was better --- IN HIS FIRST TNA RUN.

 

No need to even take that comment seriously...Complete and utter biased...nuff said.

 

Don't take it seriously if you so desire. Monty Brown was regressed in his ring work noticeably over the last year or so.

Who said guys who can't churn out ***** are dead weight?

 

Dead weight is dead weight.

 

What has Billy Gunn EVER brought to the table --- outside of dragging Benoit down to one of his worst matches ever and NEARLY breaking the man's neck?

 

What has Road Dogg EVER brought to the table? Hell, he was stale LONG before Russo left --- so Russo forced JERICHO --- you know, the hottest free agent on Earth --- to work with that useless slug. God knows he hasn't done squat for TNA to date.

 

What did Godfather ever bring to the table, outside of getting over by having a bunch of skanks at ringside with him?

 

No argument that BIlly Gunn, Road Dogg, and Godfather aren't the greatest workers but they were over as hell when Russo was writing and were part of what made the shows entertaining.

No, they weren't over. I'm not sure where you'll pull this out of.

 

In fact, Dogg and Gunn were so UNOVER as singles that Russo decided to simply discard all of the storylines involving them two (notice how whenever he's lost for ideas, he simply discards storylines?) and reuniting them as the NAO --- which never approached their earlier run.

 

And Godfather, when Russo left, was getting present Scotty 2 Hotty-level pops. Namely, nothing to write home about.

The thing is...they weren't even really buried...its just that the "genius" creative team couldn't get them over again.

Nah, Gunn & Dogg were given the World Tag Titles for months, put over Rock & Sock and the MUCH more over Hardy Boys --- and couldn't draw heat without the benefit of kerosene.

And don't give me the dead weight argument because if that were the case, guys like T&A, Too Cool, Rikishi and others wouldn't have been used either.

T & A was basically buried. Too Cool was given a title run it sorely did not deserve and was subsequently buried as it deserved. Rikishi, for 2000, put on good matches with HHH and Val Venis and was given a push due to that.

What did he do in TNA? Well, he's over to start with...something he wasn't in WWF2000.

He's "over" (funny, Road Dogg doesn't really get marketed much in TNA, either --- 3LK does --- but they have to rely on Dusty Rhodes to give them heat) for a few fans, most of whom won't pay one red dime to watch him? Color me impressed.

They weren't striving for that. They were going for Rock v HHH --- and Rock v HHH was a terrific program, easily the best matches of the series they've had with one another

 

They were striving for that.

 

And Rock/HHH was already done to death and completely stale.

If you hate wrestling -- which you clearly do --- you'd think that and would, instead, be chanting "puppies" ad infinitum.

I thought it was a failed attempt to copy Austin v McMahon. Keep your erroneous comparisons straight, please

 

Same thing...1999 it was McMahon/Rock vs. Austin. 2000 it was McMahon/HHH vs. Rock.

Well, if you mean "same thing" as in "McMahon was involved", you'd have a point.

 

Otherwise, you don't.

Actually, try Survivor Series 1998 until, oh, February 1999. Yes, solid writing.

 

Too bad there was so much OTHER crap.

The buildup to Survivor Series was tremendous as well.

 

Was there crap? Sure but no worse than the stuff like the stinkface match between Patterson/Briscoe in 2000.

Shall I go down the list?

 

Beaver Cleavage?

Henry as a sex addict?

Henry and a transvestite?

Chaz as a girlfriend abuser?

PMS?

Meat?

 

You know, I can do this all night...

And nobody is doing that, so it's more than mildly irrelevant.

 

Not irrelevant at all...you claim (since you obviously know everything) that I hate wrestling when the fact is I hate it when wrestling matches are just thrown out for no reason between guys I don't know that go forever. I loved the early X-Division matches from TNA. I'm loving the great tag action in TNA right now

"Great tag action"?

 

Umm, yeah. Okay.

Just because I don't like pure marathon matches all the time doesn't mean I hate wrestling at all and you're a moron if you think I do.

Don't get pissy because you hate wrestling.

Now go ahead with your immature cop-out response of... "you hate wrestling."

Immature cop out --- or fact of life?

Kane main evented two PPVs and had an extended feud with Y2J. Some depush

KOTR where he was nothing but a McMahon lackey and was basically slopped in there. Don't remember the other PPV he main evented...probably because I didn't care like many others.

Because you hate wrestling. We got the point.

 

He ME'd Unforgiven, BTW.

They were riding a wave that was soon to run out. If you look at columns on the internet from back then it was the general consesus that the product was stale.

Outside of the trolls at vincerusso.net --- who said WWF was "stale" in 2000? Bob Ryder?

The Jericho-Benoit feud, the stuff with Eddy and the Radicalz, Rock v. HHH every week- great stuff.

Jericho/Benoit feud was good because of the wrestlers involved.

That whole pesky "good wrestling" thing. We know, you don't like it.

He just entered the fed, he was feuding with Shamrock and they put him with Finkle to build on his WCW persona, which was hilarious and a lot more entertaining than the Jericho of today.

Too bad it buried him until Russo left and the writers pushed Jericho --- getting him, you know, over.

I don't get how someone with that much of a biased opinion can be taken seriously

If it makes you feel better, you're not taken seriously whatsoever.

So when the creative team can't get a certain talent over then it's the fault of the talent? I don't buy the argument of 'there's no way to get them over" when I see Road Dogg and even Konnan in TNA and they get mad pops.

"Mad pops". By TNA's present standards, three people saying "Yay" is a "mad pop".

I find the whole 3LK stable pretty cool in that it's three guys from completely different backgrounds able to bond and work together. It's something new for Road Dog and even though his promos are the same, he's put in a different situation and is over again.

Nothing says "cool" like a white boy trying to act ghetto, Konnan trying to act ghetto, and Truth getting buried --- all the while being upstaged by a fat Texan.

 

THAT, my friend, is the epitome o' cool.

 

BTW, if Road Dogg was "over" --- wouldn't ticket sales be above the current level of "holy shit, nobody is paying to see us"?

 

Also, can you explain in what way, exactly, Konnan or Road Dogg or doing anything REMOTELY different from the same crap they've done for years? I know Konnan's mic schtick is identical.

It did big business, I can't deny it, but I believe it was because they were riding a wave.

And I believe John Kerry won't win a single state in the election.

 

Doesn't make it the case.

If you look at some of the internet articles from back then you'll see that people were complaining about the stale product.

You could name names or provide links --- because I know I don't remember that.

With Snow/Bossman - yeah it was terrible but I can atleast picture to guys wanting to kill each other over one of their animals being abused by the other guy but I can't picture two guys wanting to kill each other over spilled coffee.

At least Jericho v Kane didn't unleash "Kennel From Hell" on us. And THAT was Russo's baby.

-=Mike