FUM

The CEO nickname is so TNA after a WWE release. It’s very like The New Age Outlaw and Kahoneys. Just absolutely terrible.

Despite actually rating Mercedes myself, I’ve always found her ridiculously overrated by the fanbase and in her own head. She’s not the top two of the horsewomen for me never mind the greatest woman ever that some have her as. I don’t think she’s going to be much of a game changer as her fans expect.

Ospreay is someone I never thought I’d love but I honestly find myself checking out the show just to see him. He’s been a great addition to the roster and I’m massively excited to see him take on Danielson.

1 hour ago, RedRooster said:

but I thought the Triple H match was good fun, for what it was! The best kind of overbooked nonsense, with the wrong end result. 

Genuinely think that match holds up excellently. Just chaos everywhere, it’s a very fun rewatch.

That Darby spot was mental. Some will criticise it but as someone alludes to above it’s exactly the stuff you send to those non-fans so they can see you’re not actually as much of a nerd as they reckon.

I’m a Celtic supporter who has spent multiple thousands following them over the years. I absolutely hate the way our current board are legally handling a sensitive topic of what happened at a Boys Club we used years ago. Should I give it all up after 30+ years because a legal team made a decision I don’t morally agree with? I love the club itself not the guys running it.

The same logic applies to wrestling. People shouldn’t need to just give up something they love because some people made a decision that doesn’t fit them morally. By all means be critical of those individuals or the company involved but to get almost offended that others don’t want to give it up just because you do is nonsense.

Nobody has a perfect moral compass and acting like you do doesn’t make a difference.

It was okay - which is what I’m finding most Triple H shows just now. I get long term storytelling and subtle hints is his thing and it absolutely needs to be but you need to balance that. Right now, it feels like nothing really happens because he progresses things so slowly week to week. If you want a wrestling show, it’s all good but it you want to be sports entertained like some of us do then it can be a bit boring.

That’s not to say shows in general aren’t worth a watch but move something along once in a while. 

Cody gave a big speech on RAW for example but then doesn’t bother showing up knowing The Rock and Roman are advertised. Even just a token out at the end, stands on the ramp and not saying a word while The Bloodline pose would have been better but they obviously wanted that hard cam Bloodline pose. 

The Elimination Chamber also feels like it’s getting in the way a bit which probably adds to the slowness. 

Another watchable but missable SmackDown for me.

9 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

he literally called for The Head of the table in his return promo last month. Which is why the re-pivot makes no sense.

Our definitions of literally are different. He made a hint to facing Roman Reigns. They had a stare-down. He hardly said he hates the guy and is coming to take his head off. They’ve hinted to The Rock coming for his spot in the family for sure but at no point have they actually said it or hinted he hates him. Family is family.

I’m not saying this all makes perfect sense - it was a pivot so it absolutely was never going to - but there are some people reaching into what they believe was meant to be happening rather than what’s actually been shown on TV.

1 hour ago, RedRooster said:

As for the pivot, they can easily write their way out of it. Maybe Cody felt pressured by his new boss; perhaps Cody had a lapse in confidence, and the fans snapped him back to his senses; perhaps he thought he had no right to deny the fans the Rock/Reigns dream match before fans made him realise that HE was the dream match.

I think people are overthinking it a bit in terms of changing his mind. I was half joking earlier about Drew but they’ve had him go out while Cody was about to confirm to Seth and try to convince him to go another way. I’m not saying you say Drew convinced him on TV but in story terms, it’s been explained. Fans moan when they treat us as simpletons by literally explaining every detail rather than let us just work it out - I seen someone on here moaning because Bayley told us she was speaking Japanese rather than us just realising as an example. They’ve had a guy on TV try to convince him otherwise, the story is explained.

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

They could have leant into it more, but the subtext was definitely 'the fuck mate? Thought you hated him and now you're bonding it in blood? Fuck that.'

The last time The Rock was around in segments with Roman Reigns he was saving him from a beatdown. There’s never been any hint of hating him on TV as far as I’m aware though happy to be corrected.

I know WWE do it themselves but fans lean far too much into what they know about the business side at times while just ignoring what the actual story is being told on TV.

This was clearly the never the plan but they’ve accidentally stumbled into something that I think may be infinitely more interesting TV wise than plain old Cody picks Roman from the start with no involvement from The Rock at all.

1 minute ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Friday he backed down, Monday he was about to accept Seth as his match and now tonight he’s maybe back in with Roman…? Make it make sense

A wee word from Drew McIntyre can make all the difference.

To be fair, leaning into The Rock as a total family man rather than coming to take the head of the table was a nice swerve and about as good a recovery as they could do.

The Rock told Triple H to fix it too so not sure it’s as rolled back as you may think.

If anything they have me interested in them just rattling out a 4-way with this. An Uso in every corner.

The Rock has always been at his best as a heel.

What a waste of an over 3 year title reign if Roman was to lose it in a triple threat. An absolute out for him even if he takes the fall rather than someone taking him down and becoming a star.

I don’t think a title unification match down the line is out of the question though as the loser bracket title was only really created so they had a champion around. Once Roman loses the strap, there is no need for it.

2 hours ago, Kfogg1991 said:

This is on me here but fuck me I truly am fucking awful at putting together posts on here. My autism and Asperger's just make it all come out fucking awfully.

Not an excuse I'm just fucking sorry and understand people taking the piss I make it to easy.

Hey, man. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen you beat yourself up on here in recent weeks. The internet is full of comedians, don’t let it get to you - nobody genuinely wants you to feel bad about yourself, it’s in good jest.

Don’t apologise for being you.

14 minutes ago, DavidB6937 said:

What's the benefit to them turning the fans on The Rock though? He's had a very good relationship with the fans for many years and that's always been important to him. Surely there's no way they'd deliberately tank that.

Fair comment.

I guess I still hold out on “they didn’t officially confirm it”.

The suggestion they’re backed into a corner or will be concerned about this backlash is completely wrong. This backlash has achieved what they needed the reactions to - Vince who?

I wouldn’t be surprised if the extras around The Rock proposing he wins were purposely leaked. They leaked a few things before the Rumble about Cody not winning and pivots to Cody/Punk too when the plan was evidently Cody all along. I don’t buy that this wasn’t a short term call from the TKO higher ups on the back of the Vince news.

I think it’s dramatic after the crowd reactions last night to claim the main event or The Rock will be booed out of any buildings. I’ve said it recently on here but this modern WWE crowd just wants to enjoy their wrestling show, they’re subservient to what is put in front of them. The Rock v Roman Reigns will be a spectacle and all about that rather than the wrestling. Fans might pick Roman as their side come the actual match but that doesn’t matter - they’ll be into it.

I also don’t think The Rock v Roman Reigns is a terrible route. It’s the biggest money match left in the business, I’ve always maintained if the offer of it comes up then you need to do it as soon as possible because The Rock is one gym injury from never being able to again at his age. 

My only issue is Cody. The best way to get to this wasn’t to have Cody to win the Rumble so it’s definitely been a pivot with the Vince news and Punk out. If you pivot then the best way is also not Cody nearly crying as The Rock comes in and takes everything away from him. They honestly should have just went down a route of Cody set on picking Roman but Seth baiting him for weeks - proper baiting him to the point of fury to make it impossible for him not to pick Seth. Anything but the way it was done would have been preferable quite honestly.

That ending was so poor the way it was done. I must admit I still had a bit of goosebumps at the stare-down but Cody saying all that then just stepping aside? There were far better ways. I get it has kind of half been left open and could still wind up Cody v Roman but it made no sense to me.

Logan Paul is the best they have. Outstanding from him.

John Laurinatis pretty much confirming the allegations are true but he was a victim of Vince too is quite the move. Quotes from his lawyer below.

HBK handled the Vince allegations far better than his mate on the NXT media call today.

First time I’ve seen him comment on the allegations levelled at him too which I also felt he handled quite well.

Unless it goes criminal, I’d suggest they’ll write him out to the extent of not mentioning him and actively going out their way not to show him but as far as the archive goes it’ll be left as is. Civil judgements have a way of being overlooked due to the balance of probabilities rather than beyond all doubt nature of them (I assume this is similar in US and why people go down this route so often). Wrong in itself I know but a man is running for president after being found to have sexually assaulted someone in a civil lawsuit.

“Against members of the WWE” is quite the spin when discussing your stepdad.

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

Lostprophets weren't ground-breaking, they were mediocre musical windsocks who went with whatever trend was going at the time. Absolute shite. I do feel bad for the other musicians, but let's not over-egg the pudding just because of how evil Watkins is.

I’m sure someone could play one I maybe know but I genuinely couldn’t name a single song of theirs.

12 minutes ago, Supremo said:

Bayley’s Big Babyface moment to Main Event night 1, I guess? Side ponies all round? Bayley Buddies as big as the outdoor stadium allows? There ain’t no stopping’ us now.

Imagine this is more likely to open the door to Rhea getting the main event at the biggest show spot she has deserved in this run.

Feel for Punk. Think main eventing Mania was probably all he was back for then he’d have called it quits. Now the guy has to come back even older and slower to try and do it next year.

While I didn’t expect any answers at the press conference from Triple H, I didn’t think he came across too well.

Hiding behind legal would have been better than admitting he’s not read the lawsuit which has a major impact on his organisation and employee welfare.

1 hour ago, Merzbow said:

I hate the term "low level worker" but it puts into perspective just who Vince was fine with showing/bragging to, if random production staff knew then there's almost no way others higher up like Paul didn't.

But again that ignores what “knowing” actually entails. I’m not sure these guys assumed this was anything more than a dirty old man bragging about some girl he was putting one away with. Even the line about saying no could easily be taken by a third party as him bantering if he’s giving it the big laughs while he’s saying it. The poor culture of the company says that would be treated as the type of thing they would joke about. It’s hardly like he’s flat out saying “listen lads I raped this girl and forced her to be raped off others”. 

Triple H undoubtedly knew of her and who she was, nobody is saying otherwise. That doesn’t implicate him as someone who was actively aware of the fact she was being sexually abused and allowed her to be sexually abused.

There’s also a side he could have been aware but the flat out assurances of he MUST have been are baseless allegations from people who love to gossip.

47 minutes ago, Infinity Land said:

When there are only so many WWE Board members still working there it's not exactly a surprise people are wondering what Vince's son-in-law did and didn't know.

 

I could be wrong as I’ve not read the full court documents but the “gotcha” people seem to be going with on social media for “WWE Corporate Office No. 1” is that upon meeting her he said he knows “exactly who she is”. That’s far from the “gotcha” people seem to think. There’s zero context and he could simply have been told “that’s the one I’m shagging”. The social media accounts desperate for Triple H to be implicated have this down as “actively participating” when it could just be awareness of Vince having an extra-marital affair for all they know.

If anything it makes far more sense he wouldn’t want his son-in-law to know the full truth so his daughter didn’t find out.

A lot of the timelines are also all around the time Vince/Trips seemed to have a bit of a fall-out and where he would have been off work recovering from his heart attack.

If he’s implicated fair enough and he absolutely should face consequences but right now it just seems to be baseless allegations against him from people on the outside who think because they read Wrestling Observer they know every inner working of the business.

20 minutes ago, Nick James said:

Whilst I get your point and fully agree, the copium is there, but there is also a lot of 'Hopium' (if that's a phrase) that HHH has GOT to be involved, from the other side of the fence without any actual evidence to suggest so.

This is pretty nail on the head. There’s a couple of particularly prominent social media accounts absolutely choking to implicate Triple H.

As I said we may never know the true extent of who knew what but being shown some pictures or told some stories probably framed in a way of how “up for anything” this woman was doesn’t automatically drive everyone to the full story of how despicable the treatment and abuse was.

You can know about something while not really knowing everything.