The Official UKFF RAW Thread...

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

Steph said "12 year old friend", right? Poorly worded, but yeah, that could be saying the Steph/Show friendship is 12 years old.

 

Good show from what I watched, but I couldn't sit through it all, particularly having read the spoilers. I know, reading the spoilers tends to affect enjoyment of the show according to some, but I've been doing it since I was 12/13. 3 hour shows weekly are just too much now. It's easy to snipe at people for short attention spans, but the amount of content is just ridiculous at the moment. 3 hours a week for just Raw, then Smackdown's getting good, add 2 hours, 5 hours a week. Then a 3 hour PPV every month. Doing a bit of math, 5 X 52 weeks, 260 hours a year just watching Raw and Smackdown. 3 hours X 12 months of PPV, another 36 hours on top of that. Throw in Main Event and Superstars if you're really keen for another 104 hours a year. One year of following the current WWE product= 400 hours a year, or almost 17 full days. Crazy amount of oversaturation, and crazy amount of justification as to why I don't have the patience for Raw's 3 hour format. Like it matters, but past midnight here and I start overthinking irrelevant things

 

Two other random thoughts- provided I don't get a stern telling off from UKFF vets for having those:

 

* Nice bit of continuity in having Cody Rhodes have his "last" match with the man that he made his WWE debut against in Randy Orton. He'll be back after his honeymoon but it was still a nice little touch, unintentional or not.

 

* Punk's promo to the fans- "for all the kids who made signs for me"- camera scans the crowd only to find every Punk sign held by a young adult male. Actually, I saw considerably less kids in the crowd than usual, guess some parents thought a WWE show wasn't an appropriate Labor Day activity (I'm being facetious, before any fuckwads pull the stick out of their arse to wave it at me).

[d-d-d-dAz]

And to Butch, I never replied before and can't really be arsed to start it up again too much but faces will find that they're bumping around a lot more in a match than a heel. The face has the comeback section to bump about in quick succession, but the face takes the beating. That's why they get sympathy. Big Show takes the routine dropkick to the knee and the stomps whilst he's on the ground along with high flying offence. As a heel (and as a face, but moreso as a heel) he'll be grabbing the face by the neck and lobbing them across the ring. The face is taking that bump. I'm the first to hold my hand up and say I was wrong, to the point where when I've admitted it before on here I've been told that it's not good enough and I should be arguing my case regardless.

 

That's the opposite of the WWE house style, though, unless they are trying to push an underdog story real hard. The general rule is that there is a striking exchange, the babyface gets put in a chin lock, the heel bounces around like a goon and there's the finish.

 

It's why Dolph Ziggler is a naff face in the WWE, he's only really good at the 'bounces around like a goon' bit.

[PowerButchi]

Hole In One there Daz. I don't even know why Sphinx brought it up again this week anyway, as he was already handily defeated in the "Dolph Ziggler is a shit babyface, and was always going to be one and here's why..." stakes last week. Really, what's the point?

 

I love the Big Show me, but there was too much of him in too many tears this week. I mean it'll be a great moment when he finally Virgil's Ted DiBiase, but I can see it being really hard going getting there.

Edited September 4, 2013 by PowerButchi

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Sphinx in missing the point shocker.

 

You sense Ziggler is not long for this world. His stop start pushes and the lack of any appeal when he is being pushed isnt doing him any favours. I remember when CM Punk and Daniel Bryan were losing matches in early 2011 and mid 2012 (before they both caught fire massively) and people were screaming from the rooftops about how both men didn't deserve to be doing high profile jobs and how their mic skillz and work was at such an exceptional level that top shoving them to the moon was a disaster. You even got that attitude with the likes of Jericho and Benoit back in the day. Is there actually anyone on the internet passionate about Dolph Ziggler's place as a midcard worker? I read nobody crying about him not being in main events. There isn't a significant level of support even on the internet regarding him being pushed. If Punk or Bryan lost to Cody, you would have thought they were caught with something in their bag. If Ziggler lost to Kofi or one of the Matadors, I dont think anyone would bat an eyelid. Nobody seems to care and nobody seems to believe he should be in main events. Can anyone really see him, with that noodle hair, with that stupid name, with the Billy Gunn tights and the Ray Von casual dress working on top of Raw? He can't talk like CM Punk. He cant work like Daniel Bryan. He doesn't seem to carry himself with the belief in himself like Punk does. He isn't as likable Bryan. Ziggler lives up to his name. He's a show off. But main eventers don't need to show off. Because they have a fan base who doesn't demand it off them. And for all his bullshit, he really doesn't look confident at all. When he gets the microphone he's shaking like a shitting dog and trying desperately to hit his buzz words. There is no flow or rhythm to his speeches. Its why he had Vickie with him for years.

Edited September 4, 2013 by IANdrewDiceClay

[King Pitcos]

Good show from what I watched, but I couldn't sit through it all, particularly having read the spoilers.

Yeah, every time I read a complete synopsis of a long film immediately before watching it, the film turns out to be a bit of a slog as well.

[d-d-d-dAz]

Ziggler is like a cartoon version of a dumb frat boy, the sort you usually only find in supporting roles in hammy crime shows like CSI.

 

He's what you get when you make a middle aged stamp collector binge on pop culture over a weekend, and then ask him to write a 'cool' character. He couldn't be less cool if he tried.

 

The only fans he seems to have are clueless dorks who think any of the above is something to aspire to.

Edited September 4, 2013 by d-d-d-dAz

[Magnum]

I watched WWE Superstars at the weekend, and it was the first time I'd seen Dolph Ziggler since I stopped watching regularly a couple of years ago. I couldn't get over how much he looked, dressed and acted like Billy Gunn. Not sure if that's a frequent comparision, but it's probably not great for someone aspiring to rise above midcard, I'm guessing.

[Mr Lawrence]

I know times have changed slightly but in any situation if played out correctly, it doesnt matter who the main bumper is. Morton,micheals, hennig, rude, flair....goodies and baddies. I love the bandwagon hate for ziggler...much like the bandwagon love then hate for miz...cracks me up.

[d-d-d-dAz]

I know times have changed slightly but in any situation if played out correctly, it doesnt matter who the main bumper is. Morton,micheals, hennig, rude, flair....goodies and baddies.

 

I don't think you're making the point you think you're making.

 

The babyface being the rag doll is the traditional way of working. But, wrestling is a fundamentally unstable business model; its never going to attract the raw numbers of grass roots participants that real sport does. As such, you can never guarantee that the next generation is going to have the star power of their predecessors. So, the 'traditional' style in so much as it was (babyface bumps like a loon, makes a comeback, heel bumps like a loon and then finish) evolved into the current house format because why, on a regular basis, have twice as many stars bumping around breaking their backs and blowing their knees out. The current stock style plays the averages, more than anything.

 

But, no, no one ever said that it mattered how its done in practice. Just that WWE's house style is a certain way. It just is. They might change it for big matches, PPVs etc. to vary it up but they have a stock model that everything else is built on.

 

Sure, it works fine the other way and there's a tonne of great examples of babyfaces who threw themselves about. But, that's not really the point anyone was trying to dispute.

 

As for Ziggler bandwagon hate? Nah, not really. People used to like him, so to speak, or at least tolerate him because his sole attribute (bumping like a loon) complemented his role as a WWE heel in 2013. Now, he has nothing going for him because he's just a square peg in a round hole. He's still a bad cartoon caricature, but now his act doesn't match his character. He's got nothing going for him.

Edited September 4, 2013 by d-d-d-dAz

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

Good show from what I watched, but I couldn't sit through it all, particularly having read the spoilers.

Yeah, every time I read a complete synopsis of a long film immediately before watching it, the film turns out to be a bit of a slog as well.

Oh, shut the fuck up, you miserable twat. I have the same problem with or without spoilers, a 3 hour episodic weekly show is far too much.

[King Pitcos]

I have the same problem with or without spoilers

How do you know?

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

Occasionally I have Tuesday mornings off and can watch Raw live on a stream. Yeah, I've been reading spoilers for years, but not for every single show I've ever watched. I'm just impatient because no TV provider shows Raw live here.

 

It's a shame, because I'm enjoying WWE over the past year more than I have in years, but these marathon shows really take up my wrestling quota for the week, especially if I happen to have watched some old videos. For example, before watching Raw yesterday I watched the 2004 Rumble. That probably contributed to burnout more than anything else, but I think I switched Raw off close to the 2 hour mark.

[King Pitcos]

That probably contributed to burnout more than anything else, but I think I switched Raw off close to the 2 hour mark.

Well at least you know what happened in the third hour.

[Arch Stanton]

It's a shame, because I'm enjoying WWE over the past year more than I have in years, but these marathon shows really take up my wrestling quota for the week, especially if I happen to have watched some old videos. For example, before watching Raw yesterday I watched the 2004 Rumble. That probably contributed to burnout more than anything else, but I think I switched Raw off close to the 2 hour mark.

That's a bit like moaning about not enjoying your dinner and having to leave half of it for the dog, then admitting that you ate a loaf of bread before you sat at the table.

[DCW]

Brilliant little sit down interview between Triple H and Michael Cole from WWE.com:

 

http://www.wwe.com/videos/wwe-coo-triple-h...ar-fir-26146347