LaGoosh

7 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

He can't be completely oblivious to that, surely?

He's definitely aware of the growing fan resentment as he has addressed it in interviews. He puts it down to something along the lines of anyone doing something at his level for such a long time the fans will naturally turn on them but in hindsight his run will be celebrated, which doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me. I think also despite the hatred/apathy he still has the occasional good night which probably gives him the self justification he needs to just crack on with whatever he's doing. I'm guessing he's probably checked out of things a bit these days anyway. His booking in AEW used to be very solid and consistent with clearly laid out stories, angles and progression that he had a huge hand in putting together but he's just floated around doing fuck all for the past year or so. He's either run out of creative juice or just can't be arsed anymore.

Matthew Vaughn is a hack. I'm convinced he keeps getting money for his terrible films as part of some kind of tax dodging scheme by his producers.

Any metal song is likely to have been used by some mid 2000s indie twerp it seems.

13 hours ago, waters44 said:

One thing I learnt a few years ago is often ignorance comes from a place of self preservation rather than malice. Some people have such hard lives or worries that they simply can’t bear to take on any other stress and block it out. I’m not commenting on if that’s a good or a bad thing just the reality of what’s going on with some people. And problems are relative too - what could be a minor niggle to you can be extremely stressful to somebody else. So try not to get too down if people close to you don’t seem interested in the worlds problems, everyone is different 

This is very true. Life is stressful and hard enough even without the endless nightmare of geopolitics. You can't blame people for not engaging with something they have no personal connection or understanding of and zero control over. Likewise someone might be incredibly engaged with this conflict but completely ignoring the civil wars with mass civilian casualties going on in Africa at this very moment. Everyone has to draw a line somewhere.

JBL was good in retrospect for me. I enjoy watching the highlights of his run now but at the time his sudden main event spot felt completely unearned and out of nowhere. Watching week to week was pretty brutal.

27 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

without the brand split we may not have had the JBL gimmick

Have you ever watched the shows from this period back? Full of absolutely awful stuff. Heindenreich's, Basham Brothers, Orlando Jordan's, Renee Dupree's...the list of shite hawks stinking up the cards is overwhelming. Argument enough against brand splits.

As for Don Callis...I like him more than most but no, he's not good right now. He works when he's with Kenny but no one else.

26 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

See, the reasons you dislike them are the reasons I like them! The brick wall you describe is imaginary really, you can shift talent any time you want. But it can create demand to see a match; and by having that demand it allows you to create a feeling of freshness any time a wrestler moves from one show to the other. Without a split, you can't do that. 

If you can shift the talent whenever you want then a split is pointless! It's what happens with every WWE split, they start moving people about and before you know it the split is dead and everyone ignores it/forget it even exists then a few years later the cycle repeats.

Relying on a brand split to create demand to see a match is a lazy short cut. It's creatively bankrupt. Wrestlers, stories and matches can and should be kept fresh with good booking and good storytelling. Plenty of companies have managed to do this in wrestling history without a brand split. 

And finally, a "brand split" is such a WWE concept I never want to see it anywhere near AEW. AEW should always be different. 

EDIT: I think fundamentally RedRooster me and you see wrestling in completely different ways, we rarely seem to agree on anything. Glad we can disagree constantly without being arsey with eachother though x

8 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

What makes you think it would be harmful? For me, the pros outweigh the cons. You're right in your assessment of both brands in WWE - but that's more down to booking than anything else. 

How can forcefully seperating your top acts and putting up a barrier stopping them from interacting with eachother not be harmful? Let me give you a scenario - you have Eddie Kingston on Collision and Samoa Joe on Dynamite...now they can't feud with eachother because of a "brand split". Why would you intentionally put up a brick wall to stop Kingston and Joe feuding? I want to see Joe/Eddie feuding!

All the positives you've listed you can absolutely do without a brand split. Brand splits are shit! And the second you start "trading" people over to the other show the whole concept becomes pointless anyway. 

33 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

Apply that to AEW, and you could remove the feeling of title fatigue and faction stagnation quite quickly by divvying them up. You reduce the travel schedule. You can freshen up a stale act, simply by having them move show. There are opportunities to push certain wrestlers to a greater degree - Daniel Garcia, Big Bill, Takeshita, Powerhouse Hobbs, Hook, Willow Nightingale, Billie Starkz, Athena, Dalton Castle - the list goes on.

They could do all that stuff now without a hard roster split. It just requires them to be more creative and more consistent with their booking. An actual proper split isn't required and is actually harmful. And I don't think a roster split has actually ever been successful in WWE except the very first one. And that was only halfway successful - Smackdown was bloody great but Raw was the absolute shits.

44 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

I'm not sure how people feel about it these days, but if Collision remains, I'd definitely favour a roster split; and brand-specific titles. If Collision - due to having different wrestlers - can't continue on plot threads from Dynamite, it would help them shape each show into something that feels distinct. 

I think you could do a relatively unofficial light roster split which could still be very effective without having to do a hard split that limits storylines and creativity. They are already kind of doing it with FTR and House of Black pretty much being Collision only acts. I'd like to see them do that a bit more of that. Dump ROH and put the best elements of it (Dalton Castle, Athena, Willie Mack, a few others) on Collision. Keep the World, International and Tag Titles on Dynamite/Rampage then keep the TNT, Triple Crown and Trios on Collision seems like a simple enough formula.

I'd have the shows set up something along the lines of Dynamite - the flashy, flagship show, Rampage - the absolutely mad bonkers fun hour, and Collision - the slower paced, more traditional wrasslin' show with a decent long main event each week. 

15 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

Creatively, I think AEW would benefit from losing two out of these four shows

Obviously getting rid of ROH is a must but I think there's enough talent to carry five hours of TV a week. They just need to put more effort into each show having an established identity, utilising their roster better and get better at maintaining momentum. I'd be pretty sad if they ever ditched Rampage or Collision. 

2 hours ago, RedRooster said:

found most of the matches hard going; not because they were bad, but because AEW often has a tendency to book match after match with an obvious outcome

Yeah it's a tricky balance sometimes. You need to protect/push your stars and avoid 50/50 booking while also getting your characters into the place they need to be for bigger matches/stories without it being too obvious. It's not a balance many companies get right and AEW certainly struggle with it.

As you say, all these matches in a row doesn't help either. Sometimes when I look at all of a week's worth of AEW shows I think if you just switched and moved around the lineups for each show you could definitely get 3 better paced shows with more variety on each without changing up the actual content at all.

Bully Ray is such an idiot.

I've only seen the first two matches from this week so far. Jeff hardy may look like he's in constant unbelievable pain but he's had three good singles matches in three weeks now. There's a story there about a broken down old daredevil if they feel like telling it. Mox straight up punching him out the air was glorious.

Toa Liona isn't someone I've paid much attention to but he showed something here against Hangman. I think he could be better off as a singles, his partner whose name I can't even remember is boring as sin. This match would have been better if they cut 1/3rd off the time and kept it as two blokes smashing the shite out of eachother. I enjoyed it.

This would be perfect for a sleazy, Southern red beck brawler type character. And when they turn face the fans can sing along to the chorus.

Operation Mincemeat is brilliant. 

I saw Guys & Dolls at the Bridge Theatre this past weekend and it was an amazing time. Highly recommend and matinee tickets are only 35 quid.

Even missing so much of the year I had to vote Danielson. He's been incredible and on a whole new level. Feels like he's approaching his God-like Final Form. Just amazing to watch possibly the best to ever do it on such an insane last run. We are truly blessed.

Orange Cassidy was close though. Brilliant matches every week against a range of opponents while telling a slow and engrossing story of a fighting champion slowly breaking down but as his body crumbles his passion, desperation and drive to win only increases. Best story of the year.

50 minutes ago, Loki said:

Has anyone in any position of knowledge made any insinuation that HHH knew about Vince's sex trafficking?  I'm still somewhat baffled about how THIS continues to be the main topic of conversation, as opposed to the repercussions for Vince himself, Laurinaitis, Lesnar, and any other people actually directly involved in the abuse.  

HHH has been the on-screen WWE "head" for a few years but in reality apart from a brief period when he and his wife ACTUALLY managed to oust the villainous old bastard, he's not been in a particularly senior position in the main office.  The only point of contact I can think of is he and Stephanie instigating an independent investigation into the allegations, and I'm not sure that actually reported back before Vince forced his way back to power and sent his own daughter packing.

Perhaps HHH has been Cc'd in on all the videos of his father-in-law shitting on women, but there's been no suggestion of that.  Perhaps he should have resigned when Stephanie did, but he probably feels he has an obligation to the wrestlers and the product.

People on Reddit are going "HHH is definitely out" but I'm still unsure why apart from that he's a visible figure and everyone assumes he must be guilty of SOMETHING.

 

Triple H is essentially the public face of the company now so rightly or wrongly it's only natural for people to point fingers at him, I suppose.

Nevermind. Can't be arsed.

A WWE without Triple H at the helm is a fascinating prospect. I'd be very intrigued to see that.

On 1/26/2024 at 8:06 AM, BigJag said:

The International Court of Justice will today begin it's response to the South African charge of Genocide against Israel today. It should be being covered be the major news outlets.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68059715

ICJ have found that Israel have a case to answer. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-68097640

Israel disagree along with their allies. They must know something we don't. Or they just don't care. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/26/icj-ruling-israel-western-backers

https://x.com/TomLondon6/status/1751951867679043867?s=20

For fucks sake, this is a discussion forum. DISCUSSION. Please stop posting endless tweets and links to whatever is panicking or outraging you at any particular moment in time.

It's understandable but a shame that most people will overlook this show due to the Rumble and Vince The Rapist because I thought it was a pretty perfect episode of TV wrestling. Cracking matches of a variety of styles across the show, a hot crowd and a ridiculously fun main event. Absolutely buzzing after finishing that. I love AEW!

Oh, but Jericho is back with back to back singles matches over the next two weeks...I hate AEW.

Separate point, but I've never understood Best Film and Best Director being separate categories. Surely the winner of Best Film is also the Best Director because they made the best film? How can you separate the work of a director from the film? Doesn't making the best film make them the best director too? "Ok, you're the best director this year but you didn't make the best film...that was a different film by a different director, but you were a better director than they were" makes no sense to me at all.

Yeah Frank is key to the whole thing for sure. It'll feel empty without him. I think Devito retiring and maybe doing a Frank funeral episode or something like that is probably the natural ending point for the show and a good way to conclude it. Even the later seasons which haven't been anywhere near as good, he's usually the highlight. 

46 minutes ago, d-d-d-dAz said:

Saying he didn't read it was poor, as it comes across as callous, but the 'focus on the positives' stuff was probably quite smart

I dunno, basically saying "let's ignore that my step father raped, abused and sexually trafficked a human being and focus on our sweet Netflix deal" doesn't feel smart. It feels insanely cruel, stupid and evil. 

The fact that he took the time to get a fucking petty dig in at Tony Khan in the conference but not actually address something so huge and horrible properly says it all really. He's complicit and all the so called wrestling media there kissing his arse are bootlicking scum.

18 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

Admitting to having not read the lawsuit is an insane response when "it's an ongoing legal situation, I can't comment on it at this time but we are taking it seriously" is right there. Claiming to care about women's safety in your company, but not enough to have read a lawsuit that implicates your boss (and father-in-law), multiple colleagues and the entire corporate culture in sex trafficking and assault is a horrendous look. Yet somehow it's still the more generous reading, because the alternative is that he didn't need to read it if none of it was news to him.

He should have read it because it sounds like he might have been in it.

Guess who has an office suite on the executive 4th floor...

And this is his FATHER IN LAW. Who the fuck wouldn't read something like that about their own father in law? Absolute bullshit.