WWE General Discussion - March 2008

[Enigma 0]

I read that Mates column as well and comparing the initial ideas to what actually happened is truly sad in terms of what could have been. To think, we could have been spared the whole Katie Vick angle, the HHH/Steiner crap, HHH burying Booker in that race baiting feud. What does it say about HHH's 2002-03 title run that his best feud over that time period was against a washed up Kevin Nash?

 

Instead we could have had RVD defending in quality matches vs. HBK, HHH, Jericho, etc. And call me crazy, but I've always wanted to see an RVD vs. Goldberg match.

 

Will anyone ever get over this?

 

Probably not, but with good reason. Van Dam was ready to completely break out as the top face of the company. He wouldn't have gotten to the levels of Austin & Rock, but he would have been bigger than Cena because every fan unanimously loved Van Dam. RVD would have made the WWE a boatload of money if they let him run with it, but HHH killed it dead. And then HHH did it again a few months later against Booker T. Booker T. & Goldust were the hottest team to come around since the Dudleys in 2000 and when Booker went single, the fans were nuts for him. He had a Rock-like reaction since people went rabid for his little breakdance. HHH's ego and selfishness, along with Vince McMahon's blessing to do it, really cost that company a lot of cash in 2002 and 2003. There's a reason why those two years were the most unmemorable of the last decade.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

Hell don't get me wrong, I was pissed off at the RAW main event scene during those times aswell... But enough time has gone on to move on, Bret Hart fans got over the Montreal Screwjob, everyone got over the "fingerpoke of doom", everyone got over the horrible WCW Invasion, why can't people just move on from this?

 

It seems this whole argument is repetitive, we all know the details, and there is no point in burning this to the ground... And this is coming from fans of both Booker T (who is among my all time favorites), and RVD. It's been 5 years since it all happend, it's time for everyone to move on... We should all be grateful that HHH isn't nearly as selfish as he was back then.

[King Cucaracha 0]

Well, RVD did a good job when he did get the title as I recall, so...

 

EDIT:

 

Bret Hart fans got over the Montreal Screwjob

 

Wait, they did!? When did that happen!?

 

 

Man I'm in a sarcastic mood tonight.

Edited March 20, 2008 by King Cucaracha

[The Truthiness 0]

RVD would've been bigger than Cena?

[Wally Balls 0]

I read that Mates column as well and comparing the initial ideas to what actually happened is truly sad in terms of what could have been. To think, we could have been spared the whole Katie Vick angle, the HHH/Steiner crap, HHH burying Booker in that race baiting feud. What does it say about HHH's 2002-03 title run that his best feud over that time period was against a washed up Kevin Nash?

 

Instead we could have had RVD defending in quality matches vs. HBK, HHH, Jericho, etc. And call me crazy, but I've always wanted to see an RVD vs. Goldberg match.

 

Will anyone ever get over this?

 

Probably not, but with good reason. Van Dam was ready to completely break out as the top face of the company. He wouldn't have gotten to the levels of Austin & Rock, but he would have been bigger than Cena because every fan unanimously loved Van Dam. RVD would have made the WWE a boatload of money if they let him run with it, but HHH killed it dead. And then HHH did it again a few months later against Booker T. Booker T. & Goldust were the hottest team to come around since the Dudleys in 2000 and when Booker went single, the fans were nuts for him. He had a Rock-like reaction since people went rabid for his little breakdance. HHH's ego and selfishness, along with Vince McMahon's blessing to do it, really cost that company a lot of cash in 2002 and 2003. There's a reason why those two years were the most unmemorable of the last decade.

 

RVD would have NEVER been as big as Cena. First of all, RVD is terrible on the stick and second, he can't tell a great story inside the ring because of that. The greatest wrestlers have always had the most charisma and have always been able to tell great stories inside and outside the ring due to their charisma. Rock, Austin, Hogan and Cena aren't "technical" by most people's standards, but it really doesn't matter. They've still went on to wrestle in some of all time greatest matches.

[Hawk 34 0]

He would've been as popular as Cena but not a bigger star. Same goes for Jericho whom is often lumped with RVD in this conversation.

[Mike wanna be 0]

Whether they could cut promos or wrestle mat classics or tell stories is irrelevant. People wanted to see Van Dam take the belt, and when you're on top of the "People want to see you win/retain the top belt" ladder, no other attribute means anything.

[The Truthiness 0]

So RVD being a bad wrestler and bad on the mic, doesn't matter?

 

But because people liked to see him jump high and do flips, he should've got the title?

[RonL21 0]

You people know nothing about the Business [/HHH}

[Enigma 0]

Give me a break. Van Dam was so well recieved that he was beating Steve Austin clean and in main events for the WWF Title just three months after he debuted. Where was John Cena three months after he debuted? Jobbing to Reverend D-Von on Velocity?

 

And I think Goldberg established that you don't have to have mic skills to be rabidly popular and make a ton of cash in wrestling. Van Dam cut great promos in ECW for what his character was. His promos sucked in WWE because: 1) your promos are written word-for-word and you have to recite them verbatim and 2) the shit they wrote for him to say was retarded.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Being a good wrestler is not a prerequisite to getting over with the fans. Nor is being good on the mic, though that helps. The number one trait needed to get over more than anything is charisma, and RVD had that in spades.

[The Truthiness 0]

When people say things like “RVD would’ve been more over than Cena and a better choice to market the company around”. I got to wonder, what the logic behind that assumption is. What, because he got a bigger pop than most of the other faces? Well in 2002 Raw didn’t really have any dominant faces; they had Booker T, Goldust, and a fucked up Jeff Hardy. Then you had RVD, who was very over and had tons of fans fare, but none of really translated in to any money, he didn’t boost any ratings during his segment, and he sucked in the ring. Yeah they popped for Rob, but I’m pretty sure Hurricane was right behind him in getting cheers, as was Booker T and probably Goldust. It’s no secret that all 3 of them were better workers than RVD, better talkers than Rvd, and for all intent and purposes more capable of of being a company guy than RVD. There has been plenty of talk from Rob himself that he never really cared for the schedule. He’s also very vocal about not liking a lot of guys, and never really embraced the WWE style. Hell he was the only guy WWE would let work their own way, because they knew it’d be a chore to retrain him and more than likely he wouldn’t go a long with it anyway. It’s been a few guys who’ve been pretty vocal about RVD not being able to work, he has legitimately knocked guys out in the ring, because he had to do his little kick offense, and he didn’t really know how to do it properly. Not to mention both Benoit and Eddie could’ve easily been moved over to Raw, and done a better job than RVD as champ at the time.

 

He wasn't setting the world on fire when it came to cutting promos, I mean this is pretty essential when you're talking about building a company around the guy. I don’t want to hear that bullshit, about “RVD was a good promo guy in ECW”. Because he wasn't, Fonzie was a good promo guy, and a hilarious character, even Sabu just looking like a lunatic helped carry RVD through those promos. RVD was the residential stoner of ECW, and they made no secret of this in ECW, hell it was one of the reason he got over so strong. But when you're talking about being the top face of a publicly traded company, I dont think you would want to market a pot head as the face of the company.

 

Rob was very good in the spot he was in, he tnever should've been on top and he never was. Some guys are just meant to be in the mid card for life. Rob was one of these guys. When he did get a shot he fucked it up anyway.

 

 

Being a good wrestler is not a prerequisite to getting over with the fans. Nor is being good on the mic, though that helps. The number one trait needed to get over more than anything is charisma, and RVD had that in spades

 

Booker T had tons of charisma also, could work, and was good on the mic. I wouldn't say having charisma and not being able to wrestle is really that accurate either. almost all of WWE Campions were good- great in the ring, and had the charisma to go with it. Only Warrior, Sid, Nash, and Khali come to mind as I think about it now.

[Enigma 0]

Van Dam's always a guy that marched to the beat of his own drum. RVD is not stupid enough to know that by the time WWE stopped dicking around and gave him the WWE title in 2006, it was too late to make any real money off of it and no one really cared. I don't think he was too happy either about being lied to by Vince McMahon about what the ECW re-launch was going to be. He also knew he was just keeping the belt warm for when Cena would get it back. I'm defending at all what he did because it is stupid and irresponsible, but I'm just trying see how he'd probably rationalize it. I seriously doubt that if they had done what they could have done in 2002, Van Dam would have been the first legit star in the post-Austin/Rock era and he wouldn't have put himself in the situation he put himself in during '06.

 

And to say RVD was nothing more than a mid-card-for-life guy is asinine. You don't keep a guy with that kind of charisma and the ability to hold the crowd in your hands like RVD had in the mid-card (unless you just don't want to make money and give preferential treatment to people who don't deserve it).

[Twisted Intestine 0]

What did he do, have pot on him? He wouldn't rationalize it because he wouldn't think he needs to. Neither do I, and I'm not even a pot user.

[The Truthiness 0]

Van Dam's always a guy that marched to the beat of his own drum. RVD is not stupid enough to know that by the time WWE stopped dicking around and gave him the WWE title in 2006, it was too late to make any real money off of it and no one really cared. I don't think he was too happy either about being lied to by Vince McMahon about what the ECW re-launch was going to be. I'm defending at all what he did because it is stupid and irresponsible, but I'm just trying see how he'd probably rationalize it. I seriously doubt that if they had done what they could have done in 2002, Van Dam would have been the first legit star in the post-Austin/Rock era and he wouldn't have put himself in the situation he put himself in during '06.

 

And to say RVD was nothing more than a mid-card-for-life guy is asinine. You don't keep a guy with that kind of charisma and the ability to hold the crowd in your hands like RVD had in the mid-card.

 

 

Well he was "stupid enough", and the fact that Vince gave him his own show proves they had plans for him. A lot of the ECW issues was Heyman's fault also.

 

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Booker T had tons of charisma also, could work, and was good on the mic. I wouldn't say having charisma and not being able to wrestle is really that accurate either. almost all of WWE Campions were good- great in the ring, and had the charisma to go with it. Only Warrior, Sid, Nash, and Khali come to mind as I think about it now.

 

I like Booker, but he had moderate charisma at best. He certainly never had the crowd chanting his name.

 

And I don't think you understood my comment at all.

[Enigma 0]

What did he do, have pot on him? He wouldn't rationalize it because he wouldn't think he needs to. Neither do I, and I'm not even a pot user.

Not rationalizing having pot, but rationalizing the question "Why would you put yourself in a situation to get busted for drugs when you're the champ?" That's what I meant. RVD knew it was too late by then and he was just keeping it warm for the Cena rematch anyways.

 

I like Booker, but he had moderate charisma at best. He certainly never had the crowd chanting his name.

Are you being serious? WWE crowds were going absolutely nutty for the spinaroonie in 2002-2003.

[Black Lushus 0]

The only time I really enjoyed Booker was during his Harlem Heat run in 1996, his "hot new ME guy" run in 1999/2000, and the King Booker run...the King Booker run was probably my favorite.

[The Truthiness 0]

What did he do, have pot on him? He wouldn't rationalize it because he wouldn't think he needs to. Neither do I, and I'm not even a pot user.

Not rationalizing having pot, but rationalizing the question "Why would you put yourself in a situation to get busted for drugs when you're the champ?" That's what I meant. RVD knew it was too late by then and he was just keeping it warm for the Cena rematch anyways.

 

Well he might've dropped the WWE title, but he still would've had ECW built around him. I'm pretty sure RVD would've been riding around with weed, if WWE would've gave him a long run also. Which is understandable, because WWE is not really big on pot, I don't think RVD tried to get caught, I think it was jost a unfortunate incident. The fact remains that RVD is just not a guy you want as the face of the company, the bust was just the icing on the cake.

 

What didn't I understand CHP?

[Hawk 34 0]

What did he do, have pot on him? He wouldn't rationalize it because he wouldn't think he needs to. Neither do I, and I'm not even a pot user.

Not rationalizing having pot, but rationalizing the question "Why would you put yourself in a situation to get busted for drugs when you're the champ?" That's what I meant. RVD knew it was too late by then and he was just keeping it warm for the Cena rematch anyways.

 

I like Booker, but he had moderate charisma at best. He certainly never had the crowd chanting his name.

Are you being serious? WWE crowds were going absolutely nutty for the spinaroonie in 2002-2003.

It's a cliche comparison but people went nuts for The Worm and Rikishi's ass rub. Does that mean they should have been world champions?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Are you being serious? WWE crowds were going absolutely nutty for the spinaroonie in 2002-2003.

 

Yes, they went nuts for the spinaroonie, but that was the only thing Booker did that crowds went nuts for. RVD just had to stand there, and the crowds chanted his name. It's one thing to get the crowd going nuts with a signature spot; Scotty 2 Hotty did that. It's another to have crowds chanting your name when all you're doing is standing there.

 

What didn't I understand CHP?

 

My comments was about what it takes to get over, not what it takes to be WWE/F Champion; often you can be one and not the other. RVD was over, and huge.

 

[The Truthiness 0]

Well ok, I thought you was implying that's why he should've been Champion.

 

 

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Well ok, I thought you was implying that's why he should've been Champion.

Given how over he was, I don't think it would have hurt to give him a run.

 

Sure, RVD had his weaknesses, but you work around weaknesses and don't accentuate them. If RVD couldn't talk, and his ONS promo in 2005 suggests he could talk when motivated, then either have someone talk for him or don't have him talk at all. If he's not that hot when he isn't flying, then put him in with good workers who can hide his weaknesses and let him shine when he does what he does best and what the crowd go nuts for. You can pinpoint flaws in every guy who's been pushed to the top, but where would the business be if all you did was find those flaws and highlight them instead of working around them?

[bob_barron 0]

I never got the love for that ONS promo. It was just him whining about ECW, it made me really dislike him

[Hawk 34 0]

Well ok, I thought you was implying that's why he should've been Champion.

Given how over he was, I don't think it would have hurt to give him a run.

 

Sure, RVD had his weaknesses, but you work around weaknesses and don't accentuate them. If RVD couldn't talk, and his ONS promo in 2005 suggests he could talk when motivated, then either have someone talk for him or don't have him talk at all. If he's not that hot when he isn't flying, then put him in with good workers who can hide his weaknesses and let him shine when he does what he does best and what the crowd go nuts for. You can pinpoint flaws in every guy who's been pushed to the top, but where would the business be if all you did was find those flaws and highlight them instead of working around them?

 

In other words, book him exactly like Heyman did.

[The Truthiness 0]

Yeah, but RVD was working a style a WWE didn't really suit a WWE maineventer. Plus, a lot of guys were already saying he couldn't work, it wasn't just Triple H. People like Jericho, Angle, and Austin seemed to feel the same way about Rob, Rob's style isn't one you could polish like Batista. Like Pong said, he can't tell a story in the ring, and he's pretty awful at everything but jumping high. I mean yeah, it wouldn't have hurt to give him a run with the title, but it wouldn't have helped either in my opinion. He still would've had the same bad matches he had, with the same guys he ended up wrestling anyway.

[The Truthiness 0]

I never got the love for that ONS promo. It was just him whining about ECW, it made me really dislike him

 

That's exactly what it was, and it wasn't half as entertaining as what Heyman and JBL were doing.

 

[Wally Balls 0]

Well...being over isn't a reason to be given the title at all..Let's say RVD or Jeff Hardy got the titiles when they were at their best...What then?

 

 

They certainly can't do much in terms of making the stories behind the matches any good. I think if either one of those guys got the title, there would be the big moment when they won, but the months to follow would be awful. The only guy that can get over as champ without talking much is Taker. I think as soon as Hardy or RVD won the strap, they would have realized it was a bad idea, because the whole idea of wrestling, is storytelling. I think it would have been just like when Randy Orton won the title in 2004. It was great when it happend, but they soon realized that at the time, he wasn't the one for the job.

[MrRant 0]

Why was this dude banned? Because CTP didn't like his opinions?

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Seems a little harsh.