The Rog Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Im plan on watching WrestleWar 92 for the first time, is it the PPV as a whole or just the main event that gets such praise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Milano Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Im plan on watching WrestleWar 92 for the first time, is it the PPV as a whole or just the main event that gets such praise The last three matches on the card are all really good. You have the face vs face dynamic in a great Pillman/Zenk match, the Steiners absolutely brutalizing Fujinami & Iizuka followed by the awesome War Games. Nothing else on the undercard worth going out of your way to see, with the possible exception of Hercules' debut as the Super Invader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benbobjr Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Im plan on watching WrestleWar 92 for the first time, is it the PPV as a whole or just the main event that gets such praise The last three matches on the card are all really good. You have the face vs face dynamic in a great Pillman/Zenk match, the Steiners absolutely brutalizing Fujinami & Iizuka followed by the awesome War Games. Nothing else on the undercard worth going out of your way to see, with the possible exception of Hercules' debut as the Super Invader. Â i don't think the Freebirds Vs Terry Taylor & Greg Valentine is that bad (from my memory anyway) and it maybe worth watching Raven as his former incanation Scotty Flamingo Vs a young Marcus Bagwell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOlympicHero Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Im plan on watching WrestleWar 92 for the first time, is it the PPV as a whole or just the main event that gets such praise The last three matches on the card are all really good. You have the face vs face dynamic in a great Pillman/Zenk match, the Steiners absolutely brutalizing Fujinami & Iizuka followed by the awesome War Games. Nothing else on the undercard worth going out of your way to see, with the possible exception of Hercules' debut as the Super Invader.  i don't think the Freebirds Vs Terry Taylor & Greg Valentine is that bad (from my memory anyway) and it maybe worth watching Raven as his former incanation Scotty Flamingo Vs a young Marcus Bagwell   Yeah much more better PPV than the cack WWE gave us during Royal Rumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieranjennings Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 How do the WWE release guys when they are under contract? Do you they have a periodic review in the contracts so they can cut them at a certain periods notice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members CleetusVanDamme Posted April 16, 2010 Paid Members Share Posted April 16, 2010 How do the WWE release guys when they are under contract? Do you they have a periodic review in the contracts so they can cut them at a certain periods notice? Â They can just release you immediately no warning whatsoever, Im just going by what Kevin Nash says though so take it with a pinch of salt,He's probably just playing politics to hold young guys back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Austin Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 It's literally a phone call out of the blue to say "we don't need you anymore" from what I hear from those who have been on the wrong end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 How do the WWE release guys when they are under contract? Do you they have a periodic review in the contracts so they can cut them at a certain periods notice? Â They can release anyone at any time. The language in the contract would allow WWE to release a wrestler from it at any time so long as they continue to pay them for the next 90 days (providing the wrestler doesn't go and sign with TNA in that time or whatever). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOlympicHero Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 How do the WWE release guys when they are under contract? Do you they have a periodic review in the contracts so they can cut them at a certain periods notice? Â They can release anyone at any time. The language in the contract would allow WWE to release a wrestler from it at any time so long as they continue to pay them for the next 90 days (providing the wrestler doesn't go and sign with TNA in that time or whatever). Â They cant release Vince McMahon or Triple H! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Vince McMahon isn't an independent contractor. And I'm not sure Triple H is anymore, either, but if he is, then contractually he could be released at any time. As could Cena, Undertaker, Batista etc. But the stars would never get released without doing something very wrong. The reason that WWE has the option to end the contract is that shitehawks like Paul London or Tatanka or whoever can be cut loose if they aren't earning their keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Austin Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Vince McMahon isn't an independent contractor. And I'm not sure Triple H is anymore, either, but if he is, then contractually he could be released at any time. As could Cena, Undertaker, Batista etc. But the stars would never get released without doing something very wrong. The reason that WWE has the option to end the contract is that shitehawks like Paul London or Tatanka or whoever can be cut loose if they aren't earning their keep. Â Or they release them when the writers can't think of anything for them....as opposed to releasing the writer who can't do their job properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Austin Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 (edited) ((double post)) Edited April 16, 2010 by Phil Austin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Austin Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 (edited) ((double post)) Edited April 16, 2010 by Phil Austin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Vince McMahon isn't an independent contractor. And I'm not sure Triple H is anymore, either, but if he is, then contractually he could be released at any time. As could Cena, Undertaker, Batista etc. But the stars would never get released without doing something very wrong. The reason that WWE has the option to end the contract is that shitehawks like Paul London or Tatanka or whoever can be cut loose if they aren't earning their keep. Â Or they release them when the writers can't think of anything for them....as opposed to releasing the writer who can't do their job properly. Â If a full team of writers can't come up with anything at all for a wrestler, chances are the wrestler's useless or he's pissed them all off. Â Â Has Smackdown changed times in Australia or are the Aussies just getting lazy with uploading it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insert_name_here Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 When did Crash Holly wrestle for the original ECW? I know he did wrestle for them briefly at one point but i can't for the life of me remember when. And did any of his stuff make it onto any DVD/Video releases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts