BomberPat

I just think Reigns is damaged goods. He could walk out on RAW on Monday, cut a promo better than "Hard Times", then step in the ring and outdo Steamboat and Flair, and half the crowd would still say he sucked.

With Cena and Reigns I've never been one to jump on the bandwagon of assuming that a heel turn would miraculously fix all of their problems, but a turn for Reigns after beating Undertaker would have been a chance to strike while the iron was hot, capitalise on some real heat, and let people get it out of their system.

1 hour ago, ColinBollocks said:

It's definitely a different time - I think fans were much more willing to accept WWE leading their hand back then, or certainly weren't so weird about it.

It helped Lesnar's rise up the card happened when he was a heel. Even if there were people being that way, it didn't matter because the boos were welcome. IIRC, fans were cheering him over The Rock when he first won the title.

The only time I remember the fans really kicking off at a push was JBL - and, again, he was a heel, so unless they were turning the TV off, job done. You're not going to notice people booing the bad guy and think, "blimey, they're unhappy with this decision".

I think part of it is down to Daniel Bryan, and to a lesser extent CM Punk. They played on an element of the crowd that had  been there all along, but never been given so much attention, who are going to actively reject "stars" that the company "created". Between them and years of Vince and "corporate" WWE being positioned as the heels, it got to be that the only way you could be a babyface in WWE was, paradoxically, to hate WWE. We ended up in this weird situation where WWE was presented as this evil corporate entity, but one where everybody was really desperate to work.

As soon as you have guys like Bryan and Punk break the fourth wall and say, "we weren't supposed to be in the main event because we're not the WWE's style", and present them as babyfaces for saying so, you're painting anyone who doesn't have the Punk/Bryan backstory as being the corporate choice by default. And particularly with Bryan, they changed the booking explicitly to respond to the fans' wishes, which made them think that they have more control over the booking than they do, and that if they just make a lot of noise eventually they'll get what you want. So they're just going to boo anyone the moment they see them as being the anointed "star". It doesn't help that Reigns suffered, early on, simply from not being Daniel Bryan. And I don't think he's ever really recovered from that.

These days, I think if you ask most of the people who hate Roman Reigns why they hate him, they'd struggle to articulate it. It's not a very defensible position. The way he's booked can suck, but it's better than it was, and no worse than any top face before him. His promos aren't the best, but they're considerably better than they were. I remember when he was fighting AJ Styles, the crowd were chanting "you can't wrestle" at him. He busted out a fancy indie-tastic move, and they start chanting "you still suck". So, you say he can't wrestle, he has an awesome match and proves you wrong, and your response is a playground "I still don't like you, boo!"?
 

Quote

 

 

I'm interested to see how a Shield reunion helps Reigns, because it's probably the last move WWE can make to get him more cheers. I still maintain they were absolutely stupid if they somehow thought "retiring Undertaker" wasn't going to lead to massive backlash from their fans. Vince has tried his hardest to make Reigns sympathetic, but he's just a lesser version of Cena again. Shame because the HEAT he got immediately after Wrestlemania could have been used to create a super heel, and more interesting telly going forward. I hate Reigns taking the high road (it's overrated), he was dynamite playing up to the boos in the Undertaker feud.

 

I absolutely agree that he should have been turned heel after his match with Undertaker. The reaction, and his "promo", the following night on RAW was one of the most brilliantly real moments, impossible to replicate, in years. To not immediately capitalise on that is mind-boggling.

The only problem, as with years of people calling for Cena to turn heel, is who is the babyface? For Reigns to turn heel, you'd need to have someone waiting in the wings ready to step up and take his spot as the top face, otherwise you're left with a top heel wrestling schmucks. Seth Rollins? Even with the roles reversed, that match is done to death - and nothing about Rollins screams "top babyface". Shifting Cena over to RAW? No way they give away that match this early, and Cena's taking time off anyway.

Then who? Orton? Ambrose? Finn Balor?

The Shield reunion is absolutely the last thing to get Reigns over as a significant face. It would undone shitty booking for him, Ambrose and Rollins. Every time they tease it, or the triple powerbomb spot, it gets a great reaction. But it needs to be well executed, and they would need good heel foils to go up against.

I don't think there's much insincerity in Ruby's case; that's pretty much her. They do overdo it with her entrance; on the indies, she'd stick her tongue out at the camera once or twice, in NXT it's hanging out all match, and she's skipping about like sodding AJ Lee. They seem to be exaggerating the wrong bits of her character.

And, I've said it before, but the announcers keep going on about how she could be just as crazy as Nikki Cross, while Ruby's doing calm and measured promos, and getting video packages about how she's just a small town girl trying to make a name for herself. The disconnect in their storytelling is the problem, not her.

2 hours ago, bAzTNM#1 said:

Did I imagine these two things?

1. nWo come in during 2002. A vignette thing is aired where "nWo" is spray-painted over an old picture of Vince McMahon's dad. Freddy Krueger style

That rings a bell - the angle was Vince bringing in the nWo to destroy the WWF, so it makes sense. Anyone prepared to watch through old episodes of RAW from February 2002 on the Network to figure this one out?

Random thought, but noticed Corey Graves' voice on the promo package for Itami/Strong at the beginning - do they use Percy Watson or Nigel McGuinness' voice on any of these? I don't remember ever hearing them.

It's likely because Percy's never said a single thing worth remembering, but it doesn't suggest they're all that happy with Nigel "Ring Of Honor" McGuinness as a colour guy if they're not getting a single soundbite out of him, surely? Or am I just over-thinking this.

Again, on Ruby Riot, I've worked with her, like her a lot, and a big fan of her work. She's done just about nothing in NXT so far that's as good as what I think she's capable of. I'm hoping that she'll have the chance to showcase that at Takeover, as most of her "crazy brawls" with Nikki Cross so far have just been them rolling around on the mat like an Attitude Era catfight.

29 minutes ago, Uncle Zeb said:

There was another photo going round at about the same time - I think involving Edge or his gear - with the common suggestion being that it was something they did to amuse themselves at house shows.

If I remember correctly, it was something like Umaga's gear going missing one show and him having to wear Edge tights, and then for the remainder of that house show loop, Rated RKO and Umaga just took it turns dressing up as each other. I'm sure there's a photo of Edge wrestling barefoot a la Umaga from the same tour.

16 hours ago, The Cutting Edge said:

Been watching some Brock Lesnar from 2003, his stuff from 02-04 does'nt get mentioned too much but in 2003 he was great, his stretcher match vs Big Show at Judgment Day 03 is a really good and maybe forgotten match, Lesnar bumps like crazy for any size but the fact he's 265 pounds or so is even more impressive.

Shame we did'nt/don't get to see more of Brock the wrestler rather than the suplex exhibition stuff he's done since his 2nd run cause he's seriously good

Even when Lesnar had his mini-feud with Big Show a couple of years ago, he bumped like a maniac for him - flung himself half away across the ring off a Beell with possibly the best flip bump I've ever seen. I remember thinking then that we've been robbed of years of Brock Lesnar selling and bumping like a champ.

The best "Undertaker losing his gear" match is the title match he had with Kurt Angle at Survivor Series one year, where he had to wear the Godfather's shiny gold trousers.

Hopefully closer to Dredd than the Stallone movie, and hopefully recognising that 2000AD is funny, not just grim moody dystopia. Fingers crossed.

Yep, being reported just about everywhere. Sucks if true.

Strowman was about the one thing keeping Roman Reigns interesting - what's he going to do now, feud with The Miz? Strowman was about the one credible heel on RAW, and one of the only guys who feels like a star. 

Going out injured kills a little of his unstoppable monster credibility, too, and he risks being lost in the shuffle and losing a ton of momentum if he's out that long.

I've been rewatching Yes Minister as my background viewing on Netflix while I do housework or whatever, and it's bloody brilliant, maybe one of my favourite ever comedies. Really well scripted, perfectly acted, and gets just absurd enough without falling into being unbelievable.

That said, having only ever really watched the odd episode at a time when I've caught them on TV before, and not in any real order, I'd never noticed how much the quality drops at series three. Real Flanderisation of characters - in the first two series you get the impression that Jim Hacker and Sir Humphrey have a reasonably amiable relationship despite everything, but in series three they're outright confrontational to each other, Hacker has turned from a bumbling but mostly good-hearted politician out of his depth into an inept, practically immoral careerist, and Sir Humphrey becomes obstructionist and corrupt for the sake of it. On top of that, there's one episode where they discover that Humphrey made a mistake costing the government millions of dollars some thirty years earlier, and Humphrey says;

Quote

 The identity of the official whose alleged responsibility for this hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion is not shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous disclosures may have led you to assume; but not to put too fine a point on it, the individual in question is, it may surprise you to learn, one whom your present interlocutor is in the habit of defining by means of the perpendicular pronoun.

And, yes, part of Humphrey's whole character is that he speaks in indecipherable jargon, but it's always bureaucratic, obfuscatory stuff to conceal his intentions, and is rooted in the relationship between the civil service and the minister - here it's just "he speaks in big words", as if that's the joke.

I'm probably the only person getting annoyed about the consistency of writing in a thirty year old sitcom, but there it is.

17 minutes ago, Statto said:

The major problem I can see with that storyline is I find it hard to believe they'd be able to resist boiling it down to Triple H (NXT, new direction) vs Stephanie/Vince (main roster, old direction) and I really don't want to see another rehash of a McMahon family feud.

That's the danger, and I was thinking that as I wrote it. You'd have to hope that the crux of the writing was down to the NXT booking team, not the main roster, but as soon as McMahons start getting involved, it's not going to work out that way.

To put my fantasy booking hat on, I'd keep the McMahons out of it, and have Triple H as the heel. Distance him from the babyface "creator" of NXT, and let William Regal be the sole figure of authority for that brand.

I'd have started on the RAW after Wrestlemania, I would have had Finn Balor turn heel on Seth Rollins on his return, the first time they tagged together, and have him explain that it was Rollins who put him on the shelf and took his title, and he was torn between revenge on Seth and coming back focused and driven to just get his championship back - until Triple H offered him some huge incentive to eliminate Seth Rollins, and made the decision so much easier.

Then you'd have a nice little heel stable of Finn Balor, Kevin Owens and Samoa Joe with Triple H pulling the strings, and what do they all have in common? Former NXT Champions. And so was Seth Rollins, Triple H's boy before them. You could explain that the whole time Triple H was bragging about signing these guys, working so closely with them in NXT, he was effectively weaponising the development system, and using it to produce not just the stars of the future, but his stars of the future, the way he's been doing ever since Evolution, and shaping the company in his image, allowing him to keep a tight grip on the reins of power.

Then you either have Triple H go down to NXT, or Regal pop up on RAW, and the two face off with Regal furious about Triple H using NXT like that. You can play into their real life history, and the real life history of NXT, and have a bit of a power-play of WWE Corporate backed by Triple H against NXT stars backed by Regal about the future of the brand. It could play well into Bobby Roode's gimmick to have him as Triple H's stand-in on the NXT shows themselves. Then you can do one or two cross-brand matches at Takeover, while on the main roster the story mostly remains Triple H & His Boys against Seth Rollins, with the NXT aspect not really playing into it much if at all. It could create a built-in storyline for NXT call-ups, especially Nakamura as a defiant former NXT Champion refusing to play Triple H's games.

There's probably a thousand reasons it wouldn't work, but that's the idea I've had basically since Samoa Joe debuted on RAW.

Yep, lead fella was in Hollyoaks. It's got Gillian Anderson and Crispin bloody Glover in it, too!

3 minutes ago, Ambulance Chaser said:

I think Bray should be seen looming in the distance/background at NXT events for a reasonable time, and actually recruit Killian Dain, do what cult leaders do.....turn his head and bring him to Raw, in the Wyatt family version 2. Let him recruit a new army. Then have EY either go singles as a gatekeeper type or put him in a comedy, feel good style tag team, he is great at being a goof.

Totally agree on both points. Dain's a much better fit for the Wyatt Family than Sanity - though would probably end up with the same booking problems I explained earlier - and Eric Young seems a bizarre choice to me as an anarchist group leader, who could be better served in a more comedic role. I think part of the problem with Sanity is that for all extents and purposes they're Wyatt Family 2.0, and is there really a gap for that on the main roster? It hurts all of them by making them look like a second go-round at an idea that hasn't even had chance to die yet.

I like the idea of Wyatt lurking around NXT to recruit people - I know the point of NXT is that it's a separate entity, but I think it would be nice to have a little crossover with the main roster more often, like back in it's early days when Cesaro would pop down for a match now and then. It only makes sense that someone like Wyatt would be looking to recruit from the stars of the future. The only time they've come close to that, that I can remember is Seth Rollins showing up to call out Triple H, apparently being the first person in the whole company to realise that babyface boss Triple H who shows up to open every big NXT show is the same bloke who plays the baddy on Monday nights.

A while back, they did a great little self-contained story on one episode of NXT where Eva Marie got a title shot against Bayley. William Regal was away, so Michael Cole was down there representing "WWE Corporate" in charge that week, they had Charles Robinson as referee for the Women's Title match, and it seemed that "WWE Corporate" wanted Eva as champion and were taking the opportunity of Regal's absence to stack the odds against Bayley. I loved that, and kind of hoped it would lead to something a little more long-term, playing up the disconnect between main roster WWE and the more "underground"/indie feel that NXT goes for. Would have been a good excuse to send some main roster heels down to NXT for the odd big match and get some experience for the NXT guys coming up, and maybe get some of the NXT lot on RAW or Smackdown - I'm picturing it as something akin to the ECW invasion in '97.

Watched the first two episodes of American Gods last night. I don't watch a lot of "proper" telly, and outside of Doctor Who it's been years since I really committed to watching a series of anything week-by-week, so it feels frustrating not being able to just binge watch this!

It was astonishingly well shot and directed, though perhaps overdid the extreme close-ups, and Ian McShane is a delight throughout. I can only imagine it's horrendously confusing to anyone watching without having read the book, though - it was bad enough that it was me and a friend watching, both of us love the book but haven't read it in years, and were constantly turning to each other saying something like, "hang on, what's this bit?". Maybe a little too gratuitous for both of us - a little too much dicks and fannies for my tastes, and a little too much decapitation for her's - but mostly brilliant, looking forward to seeing how it shapes up.

Sanity have the problem any big lad stable does in WWE.

Killian Dane should be protected as an unstoppable beast - and in singles matches often is - but as soon as Eric Young's in the mix, he's just a big expendable mook. The big lads are never able to get over, because they have to spend half their time being knocked about by people trying to get at Eric Young.

Nikki's the best part of the whole act, but was more interesting when she was beating up on No Way Jose than she ever has been in the women's division. I did like her "Ruby, come out and play" promo the other week, just because it was more in character and more interesting than doing a standard "stand in the ring and call out your rival" bit, so there's at least some effort to make her gimmick work.

What I don't like with Nikki is how they're presenting the whole feud with Ruby Riot. I'll add the caveat that I'm a big fan of Ruby, I've worked with her in the past and really want to see her succeed in WWE, but the way they're handling her in NXT just doesn't work for me. The announcers keep banging on about how might be just as crazy as Nikki...but then Ruby's doing perfectly calm promos, making a logical case for why she has a problem with Sanity. There just seems to be a massive disconnect between the story the wrestlers are telling and the story the announcers are telling.

Ha, I remember seeing the VHS of Slant-Eyed Slaughter on eBay years back. Madness.

On ‎08‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 7:41 PM, tiger_rick said:

 Worst thing about this show though was Monsoon. I've always liked Gorilla. Loved even. What an arrogant cunt he is throughout this though. He makes a pretending to be hungover Heenan sympathetic.

I've noticed this watching some older stuff on the Network lately too - he can come across as a right prick at times, and I don't remember that at all!

I love that they gave Dean Malenko a ladies' man gimmick, and his response was to still act and wrestle exactly the same as he always did. The announcers trying to get him over as a charming lothario all the while.

True - the better part of 20 years ago people were saying Jeff would be in a wheelchair by X age, and he's still sodding doing it.

Exactly. But it's a peculiar right wing trait to be more concerned with "winning" an argument (even if nobody else was actually having said argument) and accusing the left wing or "progressives" of being hypocrites than with having any real ideology of their own.

Particularly the alt-right types, they're utterly defined by what they oppose, they don't stand for anything.

I think the reason people are saying it was a work is that Evans was seen back and walking around fine after the show - it's possible that he was just checked over and told that he'd be alright if he just took it easy, or whatever. Unless Meltz has something else on it, I don't think that's enough to write it off as a work. It also doesn't strike me as something Konnan would book - Konnan's booking The Crash, right?

And my first question almost any time someone claims a seemingly shoot incident is a work - where's the payoff? Not only that, but if Jack Evans can sell well enough to convince people he's seriously hurt and having a legit seizure, why hasn't he been doing that for the past fifteen years?

10 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

 Some people think you can only complain about one issue at a time. 

That might be my pet hate when it comes to internet discourse. "Why are you complaining about X when Y is happening?" - because, miraculously, I'm capable of holding multiple opinions at one time.

11 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

How do they know I'm doing nothing about Saudi Arabia?  As a member of Amnesty, I find most campaigns are centred on Saudi Arabia, but I'm just a do gooder.

This one's always amusing too. When people were protesting/marching after Trump was elected, or for his proposed state visit, I saw a lot of, "nobody marched when we gave state visits to China/the Saudis/insert despotic regime here" comments, to which I amused myself by pointing out that, actually, they did.

9 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said:

Disagree with your statement that 'if they gave a shit they wouldn't eat meat at all' though, Keith.

Again, with the caveat that I'm a filthy veggie, I do see that point, though. If someone objects in principle to Halal slaughterhouses on animal cruelty grounds, it implies a knowledge of how non-Halal slaughterhouses operate and implies that the individual is perfectly happy with how they operate. I suspect this isn't true of many people complaining about Halal.

5 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Again anecdotal, maybe I need new friends, but I notice those ban the burqa types say so on the grounds of female oppression, then also post those "A gentleman looks after his lady" type gubbins.

Indeed. There are, of course, problems with the treatment of women in some areas of Islamic culture, but you can tell there's a lot of people who use it a stick to simultaneously beat Islam and Western feminism with; they can accuse Muslims of hating women while also accusing feminists and "leftists", of those going on Women's Marches and the likes, of being hypocrites or whatever for not specifically fighting against sexism in Islamic culture. It's a lazy argument, but one that makes just enough sense to make them sound like they have a point.

Someone on a local politics Facebook group made that argument against me once - the whole "if you're marching for women's rights, why aren't you protesting the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia", the usual shit - to which I asked, childishly, "well what are you doing about women's rights in Saudia Arabia?".

20 minutes ago, westlondonmist said:

What happened to that Kota Ibushi institute thing? I'm guessing it was a dream child that he put no thought into.

People say NJPW waste him in his role, but he was the one who didn't want to sign a contract so I don't blame them for not wanting to push him. If he signed I think he would have won the IC title by now. If he were to take up the Tiger Mask full time I would say why not. Tiger Mask IV is far past his best but I would worry about what he would do if he lost the gimmick.

I doubt anything happened with the Kota Ibushi Wrestling Research Institute or whatever it was - like you said, probably put no thought into it. It was never particularly clear what it even was anyway. It seemed to just be a booking agency of which he was the only client, combined with a platform for him to suggest stuff like the three-sided ring. He made it clear it was never intended to be a promotion - though I would be extraordinarily curious to find out what a promotion booked by Kota Ibushi would look like!

I agree, that if anyone's to blame for Kota not getting a bigger push it's Kota. If he'd signed an exclusive contract with NJPW, he'd be a major star by now, and probably deep into a programme with Kenny Omega. I hadn't heard the story of him requesting to be Tiger Mask, but it wouldn't surprise me.

And given that it's a proper tie-in with the anime and not "just" being handed down the gimmick from Tiger Mask IV, I suspect he's making a fair amount of cash from it, but it's probably a short-term deal. If the cartoon's not on telly, that version of the gimmick doesn't have the legs that the conventional version does.