Jump to content

UKFF Questions Thread V2


neil

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members

Can anyone remember Edge's motive for screwing the Undertaker out if the title at Survivor Series 2007 in the Cell match? I know Edge cashed in on Taker earlier that year but that was purely business, and I don't remember them two having any beef previously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing is, Kofi wasn't even on WrestleMania this year despite being perfectly fit. He was commentating on the pre-show.

 

Kofi was featured on the collectible chair for WM27. I can't help but think "the office" realised this when they were on-site and decided to swipe the rug from under Koslov to give Kofi something to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Did someone say token.

 

To be blunt "spot who doesn't belong" is more the phrase that comes to mind. Ziggler is probably climbing the walls that a relative nobody like Kingston has made it onto that and he hasn't. Not that I particularly think they should have made room for Dolph on there, but at least he's at points threatened to be a somebody and held a belt some people think matters since Mania XXIX. Fuck me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did someone say token.

 

To be blunt "spot who doesn't belong" is more the phrase that comes to mind. Ziggler is probably climbing the walls that a relative nobody like Kingston has made it onto that and he hasn't. Not that I particularly think they should have made room for Dolph on there, but at least he's at points threatened to be a somebody and held a belt some people think matters since Mania XXIX. Fuck me.

Have I missed something? Why is nobody mentioning the obvious lack of Daniel Bryan? Surely he's way higher up the pecking order than Del Rio, Kofi or Ziggler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Have I missed something? Why is nobody mentioning the obvious lack of Daniel Bryan? Surely he's way higher up the pecking order than Del Rio, Kofi or Ziggler.

 

Plays into the current on-going "not the face of WWE" storyline perfectly, doesn't it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi! Just been watching a load of Raws running up to Survivor Series 2004 yesterday. Gene Snitsky is getting the big push in them. Whatever happened to him? Is he still grappling? Looked well scary.

 

As of a few months ago he was doing the odd indy show, trying to get into acting and working as a minder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

A double question here:

 

1) On this week's episode of Vintage, there's a Warrior vs. Perfect match from the spring of 1990. Throughout, the word "Superstars" on those banners they used to hang from the ceiling is blurred. Any logical reason for this? Seems bizarre, given that it's a term they still use extensively, and indeed still have a show called that.

 

2) Back when Rhodes Scholars had their initial, mutually agreed split and Damien Sandow went on the search for an apprentice, were there even any names strongly rumoured to fill the role? Seems like a classic re-package/debut a developmental talent opportunity. If indeed it was ever intended to go that far? IIRC, they put Cody & Damien back together as a decent set of challengers for the suddenly taking-off Team Hell No, so it didn't seem like putting them back together so quickly was ever the initial intention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A double question here:

 

1) On this week's episode of Vintage, there's a Warrior vs. Perfect match from the spring of 1990. Throughout, the word "Superstars" on those banners they used to hang from the ceiling is blurred. Any logical reason for this? Seems bizarre, given that it's a term they still use extensively, and indeed still have a show called that.

If it's the old "Superstars of Wrestling" logo it's because they don't own the rights to that name anymore. They let it lapse in the 90's and some indy promotion nicked it. They usually only blur out the "Of Wrestling" part though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
1) On this week's episode of Vintage, there's a Warrior vs. Perfect match from the spring of 1990. Throughout, the word "Superstars" on those banners they used to hang from the ceiling is blurred. Any logical reason for this? Seems bizarre, given that it's a term they still use extensively, and indeed still have a show called that.

Titan Sports registered "Superstars of Wrestling" in 1987 and when it lapsed, someone picked it up. So WWE blurs it, because it no longer holds ownership to the "of Wrestling" part.

 

Here is the trademark. Fuck you Albert and your WWA:

Word Mark SUPERSTARS OF WRESTLING SW

Goods and Services IC 041. US 107. G & S: entertainment services in the nature of television programs featuring wrestling. FIRST USE: 19790000. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19790000

Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS

Design Search Code 01.01.03 - Star - a single star with five points

Serial Number 74429666

Filing Date August 30, 1993

Current Filing Basis 1A

Original Filing Basis 1A

Published for Opposition July 12, 1994

Registration Number 1857015

Registration Date October 4, 1994

Owner (REGISTRANT) Patterson, Albert P. DBA WWA SUPERSTARS OF WRESTLING INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 3840 NORTH SHERMAN BLVD. Milwaukee WISCONSIN 53216

Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "WRESTLING" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN

Type of Mark SERVICE MARK

Register PRINCIPAL-2(F)-IN PART

Affidavit Text SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR). SECTION 8(10-YR) 20050415.

Renewal 1ST RENEWAL 20050415

Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

Distinctiveness Limitation Statement as to "SUPERSTARS OF WRESTLING"

 

Or what CTXRussomark said.

Edited by IANdrewDiceClay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) Back when Rhodes Scholars had their initial, mutually agreed split and Damien Sandow went on the search for an apprentice, were there even any names strongly rumoured to fill the role? Seems like a classic re-package/debut a developmental talent opportunity. If indeed it was ever intended to go that far? IIRC, they put Cody & Damien back together as a decent set of challengers for the suddenly taking-off Team Hell No, so it didn't seem like putting them back together so quickly was ever the initial intention.

Your timeline's a bit off. The initial pairing of them was done to create challengers to Kane and Bryan. Kind of literally, actually -- it was Dr Shelby that booked the tag match.

 

After they split up (the first time), they were put back together for no real reason in a tag match against Tons of Funk. Looking back, the reunion was probably to give the Bellas something to do at WrestleMania. Plus, Cody Rhodes is really shit as a gimmickless singles wrestler so WWE probably thought they should just save the split until they could do something useful with it and give Cody some momentum. Instead of "we're still mates though" and him going back to being a boring midcard heel wrestling Sin Cara every week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

You're right, looking it up. My confusion came from the fact I knew the apprentice gimmick was about December time, and it seemed impossible to me that Hell No were champs as early as September. Blimey.

 

Cheers for the answer on the Superstars thing, chaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if it was true that Randy tried to hold WWA promoter Andrew McManus to ransom, and he wouldn't budge, resulting in Grandmaster Sexay versus Jeff Jarrett headlining the company's only PPV or indeed show held on US soil.

 

I have my doubts about how clear cut that situation was, given I've heard McManus stiffed Bret Hart on money, so perhaps not a straight up guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...