WyattSheepMask Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 How do you turn Rusev face though? You know they'd just end up sticking in the red, white & blue and being the foreigner embracing Americana like they have before. I wouldn't be against a face turn, and I've all the the time in the world got Rusev I think he's great, but I just don't know how they'd go about a full on face turn for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam O'Rourke Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Two thoughts.. Watched Bret vs Owen from Mania X and Vince talked about his accomplishments..."2 time tag, 2 time IC Champion" etc...and they sounded like a massive deal. Nowadays when they rhymed off whose won what, to me it sounds meaningless...Cena is what,15 time champ? Orton is in double figures? In 11 years there's been those two plus Ziggler, Del Rio, Punk, Edge, Bryan, Trips, Rollins , Reigns and many more. Winning a belt now truly means fuck all IMO. They've been devalued so much. Yeah, its a major aspect of less roster churn that I dislike. It used to be guys got shorter runs because there was money and a spot elsewhere. Now you have a guy like Dolph Ziggler who has quietly been in the company for a decade. It was seen as a notable exception when Taker made it to ten years in 2000. Now nobody bats an eyelid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Two thoughts.. Watched Bret vs Owen from Mania X and Vince talked about his accomplishments..."2 time tag, 2 time IC Champion" etc...and they sounded like a massive deal. Nowadays when they rhymed off whose won what, to me it sounds meaningless...Cena is what,15 time champ? Orton is in double figures? In 11 years there's been those two plus Ziggler, Del Rio, Punk, Edge, Bryan, Trips, Rollins , Reigns and many more. Winning a belt now truly means fuck all IMO. They've been devalued so much. Really it just means there's a big event every month, and Duane Gill doesn't main event the TV shows anymore. The last 20 years have had more meaningful TV time to fill in higher pressure situations, so everyone has done/achieved more than their counterparts from before that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted May 21, 2016 Awards Moderator Share Posted May 21, 2016 Two thoughts.. Watched Bret vs Owen from Mania X and Vince talked about his accomplishments..."2 time tag, 2 time IC Champion" etc...and they sounded like a massive deal. Nowadays when they rhymed off whose won what, to me it sounds meaningless...Cena is what,15 time champ? Orton is in double figures? In 11 years there's been those two plus Ziggler, Del Rio, Punk, Edge, Bryan, Trips, Rollins , Reigns and many more. Winning a belt now truly means fuck all IMO. They've been devalued so much.Yeah, its a major aspect of less roster churn that I dislike. It used to be guys got shorter runs because there was money and a spot elsewhere. Now you have a guy like Dolph Ziggler who has quietly been in the company for a decade. It was seen as a notable exception when Taker made it to ten years in 2000. Now nobody bats an eyelid. Decade of Dolphstruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra1000 Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 On one of Stone Colds recent podcasts he was talking to Hornswoggle. Turns out Hornswoggle had a longer tenure in the company than Austin himself! Make of that what you will... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gaffer Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Re: The decade run thing: To me certain aspects of wrestling trivia just kinda stopped happening around 2005/2006. That's where I put it if you're a statistics fan you must get clown dunked. That's about the point in time where to my mind there just became too much WWE history and things stopped having significant relevance. I can't remember how many Hell In A Cells or TLC matches there are after 2005 but I'd probably manage it before then. I wouldn't get 100% by all means going back trying to name all the intercontinental champions before then but I'd give it a fair shake from the 90s on. From the mid noughties on though? Fucking forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe_Knuckleball_Schwartz Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 I've been watching a lot of Raw's and SmackDown's from 2001 on the WWE Network and to be honest, the Invasion angle is not as bad as I remembered it to be. I thought the ECW turn was really well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 (edited) Read the other day that dolph has been in 400 televised matches. No wonder nearly everyone is bored of him Edited May 21, 2016 by Louch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Re: The decade run thing: To me certain aspects of wrestling trivia just kinda stopped happening around 2005/2006. That's where I put it if you're a statistics fan you must get clown dunked. That's about the point in time where to my mind there just became too much WWE history and things stopped having significant relevance. I can't remember how many Hell In A Cells or TLC matches there are after 2005 but I'd probably manage it before then. I wouldn't get 100% by all means going back trying to name all the intercontinental champions before then but I'd give it a fair shake from the 90s on. From the mid noughties on though? Fucking forget it. I've just tried to remember IC title changes from memory (Saturday night ain't it) and I can get from Savage in the eighties to Christian in 2003. I think, but have very little certainty, that it then went to Booker T but I'm lost from there. I think I can get a fair bit further with the WWE title but there was a point towards the end of the 00s where I get lost in the belts jumping shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEWM Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 My counting sheep on a night if I was stuck awake was always World/IC/Tag champions from 85 onwards and it would always hit the wall on secondary titles after 06/07. I think there's definitely something to the frequency of matches and changes around then killing the stats. Somebody said it on here but there seems to be a bit of protection on the World Title since the belt changed to the Undisputed one. And that's considering it pinballed a bit when Rollins got injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJM Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 I was reading during the week that Vince has taken a liking to Kevin Owens and is looking to give him a main event push after he has finished with Zayn/Miz/Cesaro. What actually constitutes a main event push in WWE in 2016? Matches with Cena (again), Orton, Lesnar, Reigns (again), Styles, Ambrose (again)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daaaaaad! Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 I was reading during the week that Vince has taken a liking to Kevin Owens and is looking to give him a main event push after he has finished with Zayn/Miz/Cesaro. What actually constitutes a main event push in WWE in 2016? Matches with Cena (again), Orton, Lesnar, Reigns (again), Styles, Ambrose (again)? In fairness, he's only had a brief programme with Ambrose and I don't remember him having any sort of serious run against Reigns. That said, putting him against Reigns is a pretty stupid idea if Vince is still clinging on to the hope of Roman winning the crowd over. Owens is cheered louder than half the faces on the roster, and he's probably one of the more solid heels they've got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJM Posted May 22, 2016 Share Posted May 22, 2016 I was reading during the week that Vince has taken a liking to Kevin Owens and is looking to give him a main event push after he has finished with Zayn/Miz/Cesaro. What actually constitutes a main event push in WWE in 2016? Matches with Cena (again), Orton, Lesnar, Reigns (again), Styles, Ambrose (again)? In fairness, he's only had a brief programme with Ambrose and I don't remember him having any sort of serious run against Reigns. That said, putting him against Reigns is a pretty stupid idea if Vince is still clinging on to the hope of Roman winning the crowd over. Owens is cheered louder than half the faces on the roster, and he's probably one of the more solid heels they've got. I am probably wrong, but in my mind he has had loads of matches with Reigns, Cena and Ambrose already. But I guess that is just the way it feels with WWE at the moment; it feels like most wrestlers have fought each other so many times already and there are very little fresh matches for them to have. Would matches with returning face Seth Rollins feel like a main event push for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Duke Posted May 22, 2016 Paid Members Share Posted May 22, 2016 I assumed ko was going to be reigns ext opponent, as I don't know who else theyd give him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavemanLynn Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Has anyone tried to map a wrestler's career in terms of appearances and placement on cards, to compare someone like Austin to Ziggler? Might just be perspective, age or visibility, but it doesn't feel like there's been an organic rise-up-the-card for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts