Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 Sin Cara should never have been called up until he'd been through developmental, and I think they realise that now, as is evidenced by their moving him to SD. Daniel Bryan has been polishing his craft 72 ways from Michaelmas for years, something which WWE recognised fully - even then, Bryan didn't go straight to TV, he was in dev for a short while. Kong, well - most Divas don't really need to be in developmental, because they're not expected to be good at the wrestling aspect of things, and whatever Kong can do now is already double what the likes of Melina can manage anyway; I don't think WWE were expecting Kharma to set the world on fire, so it didn't matter. Joe DOES need development. He needs to learn how to work matches other than squashes and dominating bouts, and he certainly needs to learn to sell against guys who are bigger than him, of which there are plenty in WWE. He's got nowhere near the intensity of Umaga, for a start. I'm not saying he doesn't need to develop, but to call him a "full on developmental case"? That's a bit of an overstatement. Bryan wasn't in development for long enough for it to merit a mention. Plus he was there at his own request. Joe, if he were signed, wouldn't spend long in development if he spent any time at all, and I'd imagine he'd likely adapt on the main roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 To me, the best thing that could happen to Joe now is unemployment. As was said above, he's only 32 - he's got time. Â He really doesn't though. Look at it this way: Â Samoa Joe is 32, and has been getting progressively less good for 5 years now. His gimmick is weight vs speed and that's not one that gets better with age. Â Robert Roode is 34 and has been getting progressively better for 5 years now. His gimmick is fire and skill. Â So even though Roode is older, he's got loads more upside for WWE, and would be a much better hire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 Doesn't the signing of the 33 year old Kharma? The supposed rule (according to the Observer) makes an exception for talents who're already established. If she is, I'm pretty sure he'll count as that too. Kharma's totally different. Women wrestlers shelf life in WWE is so interchangable. Surely you can see that. The divas have one segment on the show and there are less women workers in the US than men. The policy is 100% different. What a horrid example. And why would you think he'll count? He doesnt wrestle the WWE style at all. Â "A full on developmental case"?! Seriously?! Sure he may need to adapt to the WWE style, but if they let Sin Cara, Daniel Bryan and Kong do that on the main roster I'm sure he'd be given the same respect in that front. 1) Daniel Bryan never went to the main roster. He was in FCW. And thats with training from two of big name players on the active roster. 2) I'd have loved to have been in the meeting where someone asked if a member of the Divas division needed polishing up on their in ring skills. Timmy Mallet would have the acceptable skills fit for the women in WWE. 3) Comparing Sin Cara's worth to one of WWE's biggest markets to Samoa Joe is insanity. Pure insanity. You should wash your keyboard out for typing that. Â He's a proper case for a developmental contract. He's wrestled in TNA and ROH for the past 8 or 9 years. WWE dont put you in developmental because your shit. They do it to make you work the right style of wrestling they want on TV, to know where the cameras are, to get used to the ropes, to get used to the 20x20 ring, to understand what they want from you and all that. Thats why everyone from Low Ki to CM Punk has went down to FCW. And thats why Sin Cara completely died on his arse initially. If it wasnt for name value, Sin Cara would have been down there for months. Â Obviously Joe's chances of getting brought in are less and less by the year, which is why I say there's really a three year window where they could bring him in. Wrestlers have debuted at an older age in the past and had success, there's no reason why Joe couldn't if he kept himself fit and able. You keep banging on about this three year window. In three years time, he'll be fatter and THREE YEARS OLDER. He was out of contract at the age of 32 during a period where they needed new fresh bodies and were hiring different wrestlers like Awesome Kong and Sin Cara. Of any year, 2011 was the time he should have been signed due to the likes of the different types of wrestlers they have at the moment or at least to stick on NXT. Â I'm not saying he doesn't need to develop, but to call him a "full on developmental case"? What would you call him then? A half developmental case? Send him there on weekends? Let him do a paper round for them? If your sent to FCW, there's no two ways about it what your there for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanchiz Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 He really doesn't though. Look at it this way:Â Samoa Joe is 32, and has been getting progressively less good for 5 years now. His gimmick is weight vs speed and that's not one that gets better with age. Â Robert Roode is 34 and has been getting progressively better for 5 years now. His gimmick is fire and skill. Â So even though Roode is older, he's got loads more upside for WWE, and would be a much better hire. Â Not arguing for a minute that Robert Roode would be a better hire than Samoa Joe for WWE. In fact, totally regardless of age, theres lots of people in TNA that I would say would be in front of him in the line - Eric Young, James Storm, Magnus to name a few. Which isnt even to suggest that WWE would/should be interested in any of them either, just that they would be more suited than Joe is. Â He does have some time though to get back into the swing of things IF they were going to take him on - hence my point that he would be best out of TNA now, and also IF he cared - but recent performances would suggest that he doesnt anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 Kharma's totally different. Women wrestlers shelf life in WWE is so interchangable. Surely you can see that. The divas have one segment on the show and there are less women workers in the US than men. The policy is 100% different. What a horrid example. And why would you think he'll count? He doesnt wrestle the WWE style at all. Let's look at other wrestlers who made debuts at a similar age then: Â * Batista at 33 (2002) * MVP at 33 (2006) * Umaga at 32 (he'd been Jamal before, of course, but debuted in this gimmick) * The Great Khali at 34 (2006) * Monty Brown at 36 (2006) Â You could throw The Boogeyman in there too, but he's a bit of an oddity in many ways. Â 1) Daniel Bryan never went to the main roster. He was in FCW for months. And thats with training from two of big name players on the active roster. That's not true. He made his debut for the WWE on January 4th 2010, then requested he be sent to development, and debuted on NXT in February. He was in FCW for a very, very short while. Â It's absolutely possible they'd sign him. He's not the kind of guy who'd need to spend years in development, and he could add something to their roster. This is kind of a hypothetical debate here. You can't say "I'm right - THEY'LL NEVER SIGN HIM!!" and I can't say the opposite because it's utterly impossible to prove. All I can do is say it's possible, I think it could happen, and I don't see why he couldn't achieve upper card success if he did sign. Â 3) Comparing Sin Cara's worth to one of WWE's biggest markets to Samoa Joe is insanity. Pure insanity. You should wash your keyboard out for typing that. I'm not comparing his worth, just the fact they've years of wrestling experience outwith WWE, Joe on a global level. Obviously Sin Cara has a much higher market value. But because of what Joe's done in the past he's not exactly going to stick out like a sore thumb on the main roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted July 22, 2011 Moderators Share Posted July 22, 2011 Let's look at other wrestlers who made debuts at a similar age then:Â * Batista at 33 (2002) * MVP at 33 (2006) * Umaga at 32 (he'd been Jamal before, of course, but debuted in this gimmick) * The Great Khali at 34 (2006) * Monty Brown at 36 (2006) Â That's prior to WWE deciding to pretty much hire only under 30's. Well prior. How many in 2010 and 2011 were there? There was Kong, but I can't think of many others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 Let's look at other wrestlers who made debuts at a similar age then:Â * Batista at 33 (2002) * MVP at 33 (2006) * Umaga at 32 (he'd been Jamal before, of course, but debuted in this gimmick) * The Great Khali at 34 (2006) * Monty Brown at 36 (2006) Â You could throw The Boogeyman in there too, but he's a bit of an oddity in many ways. That isnt the current policy though, so it doesnt hold any relevence to this discussion. And look at all of those men and look at fat old worn out Samoa Joe. Imagine what he'd be like in 2014? They already have fat lads they dont want on TV already. What happened in the past doesnt matter when they have an 30 or under policy in 2011. Â Â It's absolutely possible they'd sign him. He's not the kind of guy who'd need to spend years in development, and he could add something to their roster. This is kind of a hypothetical debate here. You can't say "I'm right - THEY'LL NEVER SIGN HIM!!" and I can't say the opposite because it's utterly impossible to prove. All I can do is say it's possible, I think it could happen, and I don't see why he couldn't achieve upper card success if he did sign. You can say it all you want, but you should deal in facts, not opinion. For about the millionth time: WWE doesnt want to sign a wrestler over 30 with no name value. They've taken wrestlers off television for weight problems before. He'd need to go to developmental to bone up on his skills in the ring and the style of wrestling they like to do. So thats three road blocks. Its you thats keep saying "they could". Well of course they could. They could hire my Mam and have her win the European belt if they wanted to. Discussing why they wouldnt and why they havent and why they probably never will hire him is completely different that just saying "well ... they could if they wanted to". No shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 That isnt the current policy though, so it doesnt hold any relevence to this discussion. And look at all of those men and look at fat old worn out Samoa Joe. Imagine what he'd be like in 2014? They already have fat lads they dont want on TV already. What happened in the past doesnt matter when they have an 30 or under policy in 2011. You say deal in facts: WWE's supposed policies on hiring chop and change when it suits them, look at their "over 6 ft 3" hiring rule in the past. The "under 30s" rule you keep talking about, if it indeed exists, specifies "unless a talent is already established". You say Women's wrestling is different than men's and there's a limited market. True, but WWE have tackled this by signing models. The signing of Kong shows they'll still sign wrestlers over 30 when it suits them. If she counts as "established" then so will Joe. Â You can say it all you want, but you should deal in facts, not opinion. For about the millionth time: WWE doesnt want to sign a wrestler over 30 with no name value. They've taken wrestlers off television for weight problems before. He'd need to go to developmental to bone up on his skills in the ring and the style of wrestling they like to do. So thats three road blokes. Its you thats keep saying "they could". Well of course they could. They could hire my Mam and have her win the European belt if they wanted to. Discussing why they wouldnt and why they havent and they they probably never will hire him is completely different that just saying "well ... they could if they wanted to". No shit. Calling Joe's weight a "problem" is a bit of an exhagerration, they've taken wrestlers off the road before, but only when they've reached Yokozuna or Big Daddy V levels of fat. Joe's not even close to that. Â You say "deal in facts", but you're simply dealing with gossip when you watch wrestling. Based on Triple H's hiring policy so far I think they'd be totally open to signing Joe. Based on what I've read and heard him say in interviews I think his vision of a star is more open than Vince's. And in the past decade they've been catering more to Vince's tastes than anyone else in the company. Triple H now seems to have much more swing, and I believe because of this there's a better chance than ever Joe could sign for the company IF the opportunity arose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Anyway... I wonder if Austin's been watching some "Best of TNA" DVDs or something. You have to wonder how he could watch TNA's current product and think Joe is the standout star. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 You say deal in facts: WWE's supposed policies on hiring chop and change when it suits them, look at their "over 6 ft 3" hiring rule in the past. When was this? Are you sure thats not just *snigger* internet gossip? When did they announce this? Are you telling me there was once a period in WWE when everyone they hired was 6'3"? Bullshit. Â The "under 30s" rule you keep talking about, if it indeed exists, specifies "unless a talent is already established". It does exist and Samoa Joe isnt Goldberg. Â You say Women's wrestling is different than men's and there's a limited market. True, but WWE have tackled this by signing models. The signing of Kong shows they'll still sign wrestlers over 30 when it suits them. If she counts as "established" then so will Joe. Thats a rotten example and doesnt even make any sense. Awesome Kong doesnt fit the under-30s policy at all. The women are a special attraction portion of he card with limited shelf life. What does hiring models have to do with anything? And there's only one Awesome Kong. There are a million Samoa Joe's. Â Calling Joe's weight a "problem" is a bit of an exhagerration, they've taken wrestlers off the road before, but only when they've reached Yokozuna or Big Daddy V levels of fat. Joe's not even close to that. They just taken Husky Harris off television because his look (i.e. his addiction to cream buns). Yokozuna was an extreme case, which lead to his death. Â You say "deal in facts", but you're simply dealing with gossip when you watch wrestling. No, the facts are from stockholders meetings where they have to justify there decisions, such as the hiring policy and how it will benefit the growth of the company in years to come. Your the one dribbling about a 3 year window, even though common sense says they'd have signed him before this. Its an actual hiring policy, not internet gossip. All of their policy's are onscreen directions are public record due to their position as a public company. Â Based on Triple H's hiring policy so far I think they'd be totally open to signing Joe. Based on what I've read and heard him say in interviews I think his vision of a star is more open than Vince's. He's a tanned, long haired musclehead, who hung around with Scott Hall and Shawn Michaels and idolised Ric Flair. Are you sure you havent been listing to interviews with Daniel Radcliffe again? Randy Orton and Batista were his two pet projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 When was this? Are you sure thats not just *snigger* internet gossip? When did they announce this? Are you telling me there was once a period in WWE when everyone they hired was 6'3"? Bullshit. It was over 6"2, that was a typo, and over a certain weight as well. Google it. Â Thats a rotten example and doesnt even make any sense. Awesome Kong doesnt fit the under-30s policy at all. The women are a special attraction portion of he card with limited shelf life. What does hiring models have to do with anything? And there's only one Awesome Kong. There are a million Samoa Joe's. If they wanted a fat/large/monstrous female wrestler they could have found another one. She's far from unique. Â They just taken Husky Harris off television because his look (i.e. his addiction to cream buns). Yokozuna was an extreme case, which lead to his death. Husky Harris has an all-round awful look. It's not just his weight that's the problem. Â He's a tanned, long haired musclehead, who hung around with Scott Hall and Shawn Michaels and idolised Ric Flair. Are you sure you havent been listing to interviews with Daniel Radcliffe again? Randy Orton and Batista were his two pet projects. He also idolized Harley Race who was far from a musclehead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 Anyway... I wonder if Austin's been watching some "Best of TNA" DVDs or something. You have to wonder how he could watch TNA's current product and think Joe is the standout star. I think this was Austin just being nice. It wouldn't suprise me if Austin hasn't watched TNA in years. He posted something nice about CM Punk, so by default he decided to say something about the other 'young, rising' ROH talent. It's the only thing that makes sense, given Joes current form. Â If there is one guy I think WWE need to get from TNA, that was a ROH star, it's Austin Aries. Fair enough he's small, but the guy is excellent for the midcard at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 It was over 6"2, that was a typo, and over a certain weight as well. Google it. Tried googling it. Nothing came up. When was this period when only 6'2" wrestlers worked for WWE? I cant believe this was anything other than bullshit. They may have went through a period hiring big guys, but they've always done that. That isnt a policy. Thats a scouting mission. Â If they wanted a fat/large/monstrous female wrestler they could have found another one. She's far from unique. She's a well known, well liked wrestler with a unique appearance. Nobody looks like Awesome Kong and she was available at the time. There's more Samoa Joe's that they are Aweome Kong's. Where are these over 6 foot, 300 pound black women who had experience on national television? Who else was there for the Diva Killer gimmick? Â Husky Harris has an all-round awful look. It's not just his weight that's the problem. I JUST WANNA BE YOUR TEDDY BEAR. Â He also idolized Harley Race who was far from a musclehead. Harley Race was a world class worker with a look of a complete hard bastard and attitude to match. He had everything. Like Triple H. Ric Flair wasnt a muscle head either. These men looked it, lived it and showed it. And they did it before they were in there mid 30s, which your suggesting he'd hire him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted July 22, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted July 22, 2011 Tried googling it. Nothing came up. When was this period when only 6'2" wrestlers worked for WWE? I cant believe this was anything other than bullshit. They may have went through a period hiring big guys, but they've always done that. That isnt a policy. Thats a scouting mission. It's absolutely true - annoyingly the only thing I could find about it was here after a Google search. Lance Storm rubbished the policy at the time, as did Jim Ross. Unfortunately sites like the Observer don't appear in the Google news feed, but I promise you there was a point where this was the hiring specs. Â I'd say you chose a bad photo of Joe, but somewhere, somehow, there's a gimmick in your picture choice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 I've never heard of this either, Ron. Do you mean the general trend towards hiring bigger wrestlers? You're not making yourself clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.