Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Not even Big Daddy Batista can look out for his friend, MVP.

 

I didn't know they were close friends with the way MVP almost always jobs to Batista.

 

One of the reasons why they're always matched up when they have nothing else to do.

Posted

In regards to MVP, when I gave it some thought I can't really recall hardly any of his ring work that impressed me outside of the Benoit feud. And I know some will say the Matt feud, but most of those matches were perfunctory matches that didn't stand out.

 

ONS looks like a good PPV so far on paper. It's a good idea to finally blow off a bunch of feuds on a PPV with nothing but gimmick matches. That's how you use the stipulations. Take note, Russo.

Posted
In regards to MVP, when I gave it some thought I can't really recall hardly any of his ring work that impressed me outside of the Benoit feud. And I know some will say the Matt feud, but most of those matches were perfunctory matches that didn't stand out.

 

Although MVP hasn't had any ****+ matches(mainly due to the fact he hasn't faced the best wrestlers in the company)... Night in and night out, he's always putting on solid to very good matches. He still can improve, but he is still one of the better workers in the company right now.

Posted
The only draws that could replace Taker on Smackdown are HHH or Cena. I don't think they're moving one of those two to Friday nights.

I think the theory behind putting the stipulation on the TLC match is precisely because it does give away that Undertaker is winning the World title. They figure that's something people will pay to see, and if they, in their minds, tell people ahead of time Undertaker is winning, it'll get people to order the PPV because they won't want to miss seeing it.

 

I also like the idea that the stipulation might have been added just to swerve people and that Undertaker is going Raw. That's Russo-level thinking right there.

Posted

Any chance they could actually put the title on Edge and allow for the annual Undertaker sabbatical? While Smackdown lacks star power as it is, I don't think ratings would be drastically altered by another disappearance act from Undertaker.

Posted
Any chance they could actually put the title on Edge and allow for the annual Undertaker sabbatical? While Smackdown lacks star power as it is, I don't think ratings would be drastically altered by another disappearance act from Undertaker.

I don't think they want to take Smackdown's biggest star off the show when they just moved to a new network. Even assuming Edge wins and Undertaker takes time off, what viable options do they have left to push on top? Batista and who else?

Posted
Any chance they could actually put the title on Edge and allow for the annual Undertaker sabbatical? While Smackdown lacks star power as it is, I don't think ratings would be drastically altered by another disappearance act from Undertaker.

I don't think they want to take Smackdown's biggest star off the show when they just moved to a new network. Even assuming Edge wins and Undertaker takes time off, what viable options do they have left to push on top? Batista and who else?

 

 

How about Matt Hardy? He and Edge have a ton of history together, both in the ring and out of it. Moving Undertaker would free up some room at the top of the card. C.M. Punk could also cash in his contract and challenge Edge. There are some options, it just depends on whether WWE is willing to take a chance and push some people. Batista is an old reliable, Jerhico too... There are some options.

Posted
I don't think they want to take Smackdown's biggest star off the show when they just moved to a new network.

 

Except that for the next four months plus, Smackdown will be a lame duck show on the old network. It would make a lot of sense to pull Undertaker off TV after ONS and save him for a big return on the new network.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...