Jump to content

DavidB6937

Members
  • Content Count

    950
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

423 Excellent

About DavidB6937

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yep I was coming here to post this. Amused me way too much.
  2. Just because one (or several) things don't make sense, it doesn't mean I'll give up hope on some things making sense.
  3. Plus they're building them on the wrong show if they're going to be Fiend related really. Makes no sense at this point.
  4. Yeah I remember when Stone Cold was headlining Wrestlemania and everyone shat all over him because he was The Ringmaster and they couldn't believe such a guy was main eventing.
  5. A mostly skippable show really. Glad this Sasha feud is giving Becky something better to do work with. Crowd were dead for most of the show but there wasn't exactly much to care about either. Luke Harper's return made me smile. Love that guy. Seth/Braun felt like one of those matches that just didn't need to be booked. This is where 'sports entertainment' confuses me sometimes. They book themselves into a corner with two guys that don't really need a loss. It's not a legit sport where you've ended up with the two best guys against each other. You've literally chosen to put them together and make one of them lose. It's annoying, and I'm not saying Braun looked especially weak in losing but he didn't have to lose because he shouldn't have been in that situation. Same goes with Seth vs The Fiend. In an ideal world The Fiend should be absolutely destroying Seth but they won't want that, as even Finn didn't get completely buried.
  6. The sociology degree was definitely worth all the money just for this topic.
  7. And yet if it was that easy, surely TNA/Impact would be doing far better?
  8. Depends what you look for though. I've dipped in and out of some indy stuff and NJPW over the years and rarely have any idea of the storylines etc, but the matches themselves have been enjoyable. Admittedly regular fans would enjoy the product on a totally different level, but I'd still say it's possible to have some appreciation of good matches without a full understanding of the context.
  9. Depends what you consider to be 'good wrestling' really? WWE has no issues with in-ring quality. It's the general stale presentation and booking that are the problematic areas.
  10. They're only ahead if people watch it. Wrestling on ITV4 is pretty random.
  11. Yeah I hope they manage to avoid the 'people come down and talk and then a match gets made' thing that happens on Raw and Smackdown ALL THE TIME, as if they hadn't booked anything to happen for a lot of the show.
  12. It's also quite a difficult story to tell when audiences have almost been conditioned to see the owners (and company people) as the bad guys. I'm hoping that they mostly stay away from referencing Cody's role behind the scenes. Same with Omega and the Bucks. It's been done to death.
  13. Having only ever played the SNES version - what's the difference?
×
×
  • Create New...