Snitsky's back acne Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Saw this on a couple of sites..... Â 'WWE ordered O2 Arena security to confiscate all signs from fans relating to Zack Ryder at yesterday's Monday Night Raw taping at in London, England. Â The Raw Superstar has been encouraging fans to bring Ryder related signs to WWE events, such as "Broski of the Week." He often goes on Twitter acknowledging Ryder signs shown on television. He asked for an image of the "Zack Ryder = Ratings" sign that briefly appeared on Raw. That too was confiscated. Â Ryder was backstage at last night's show, but was not used.' Â Â Seeing how popular Jersey Shore is at the mo you'd think WWE would want to push the talented and charismatic Ryder. Â Where's the love? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Hitman Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Saw this on a couple of sites..... 'WWE ordered O2 Arena security to confiscate all signs from fans relating to Zack Ryder at yesterday's Monday Night Raw taping at in London, England.  The Raw Superstar has been encouraging fans to bring Ryder related signs to WWE events, such as "Broski of the Week." He often goes on Twitter acknowledging Ryder signs shown on television. He asked for an image of the "Zack Ryder = Ratings" sign that briefly appeared on Raw. That too was confiscated.  Ryder was backstage at last night's show, but was not used.'   Seeing how popular Jersey Shore is at the mo you'd think WWE would want to push the talented and charismatic Ryder.  Where's the love?  Thats ridiculous! How counterproductive is that? "Oh we don't want someone getting over unless we SAY they can get over!" With their patchy record of star-making in recent years they should be glad an act is taking off. Like the OP says, with the Jersey Shore runnin' wild at the moment you would have thought WWE would be dying to capitalise further after their Snooki success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamtheman Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Hopefully people wont stop  its ridiculous he's getting himself over and the company wont acknowledge it his last video is up to 80,000 views which says a lot for an guy whos barely on tv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Surf Digby Posted April 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'm hoping it's a reverse psychology way of thinking, to which there will suddenly be an explosion of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick O'Keefe Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Somebody had a Gail Kim sign confiscated as well yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangerously420 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 God damm. Why will WWE not allow Zach Ryder to get over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthofsin Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 God forbid any stars get over and potentionally make the company mega bucks down the line.. Would be a terrible shame that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members FLips Posted April 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 19, 2011 That's so dumb. They're actively stopping someone getting over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpearCode Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 What a load of bollocks and this is from a company who ''listen's'' to it's fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spotlightmagnet1 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 If true, Ryder must be pissed. Why can't security just confiscate signs which would be bad to be on primetime tv (i.e. 'Big Show has fucking sausage fingers') why do we have this pettiness? Â Incidently, Ryder mentioned his youtube show getting high ratings/views on Superstar last week, just before losing to Khali in what was an adequately comeptitve match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rave Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 This is fuckin horse shit!! Who in WWE doesn't like Zack Ryder, when I find out who it is, I'm writing them a strongly worded letter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted April 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 19, 2011 This was always going to happen. Get yourself over at your peril. WWE has never liked anyone doing stuff like this. WWE doesnt like superstar wrestlers who could potentially draw money for them if they have gotten over before the pen has hit the paper in Titan Towers. Just because we like Zack, seems to be a bad thing for his career. Look at Scotty Goldman. He was brilliant on his webshow, he already was well liked by a portion of the wrestling community, had someone who could speak up for him and he was handy in the ring. But the Brooklyn Brawler and Dusty Rhodes didnt like him, then he had a shit match with Umanga so he got sacked because he was apparently useless in developmental. All it takes is for some 60-year-old road agent or someone like Dean Malenko to say "I dont get it" and tell Vince to fuck it off and this happens. Its pretty daft when you think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Chris B Posted April 19, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 19, 2011 I remember WCW doing something similar with Chris Jericho - but at least they were paranoid about him going to the opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seratonin Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Thats ridiculous! How counterproductive is that? "Oh we don't want someone getting over unless we SAY they can get over!" With their patchy record of star-making in recent years they should be glad an act is taking off. Like the OP says, with the Jersey Shore runnin' wild at the moment you would have thought WWE would be dying to capitalise further after their Snooki success. Â Probably because they don't want him getting more exposure than the top liners? Â WWE has always stopped guys lower on the card from stealing the show so-to-speak, an example being limiting the moveset of the cruiserweights year ago. Their concern was it would make the main events look shabby in comparison with not as much action. So I guess it's a similar thing where they don't want signs for guys who job on Superstars to get any more exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 They should have done the same thing with those pesky "Austin 3:16" signs that started popping up in '96. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.