Jump to content

Possible reason why Hulk's not on TNA anymore ...


IANdrewDiceClay

Recommended Posts

So, what? No newer guys should job to established acts?

 

Wrestling should just be a staid production line where you win for a set number of years, then lose for a couple of years, pick up a HOF ring then fuck off?

 

Nah, losing done right provides development.

 

The Shield as a destructive force that never loses and kills stars is a dead act. It got played out. If they don't stay over as wrestlers once the buzz dies down, then the connection with the audience wasn't that genuine to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Paid Members

I love Ian's idea. Imagine what that would do for someone like Langston. I'm a sucker for nostalgia stuff I must admit, but really don't see the harm in a nice little tribute to the origins of the event thirty years later. That's a show where a little nostalgia spot surely has it's place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
I remember the talk at the time of WrestleMania 20, was that they were going to have Austin and Rock vs Hogan and Flair (with Flair taking the pinfall and everyone going home happy including Ric) in a 2 generations colliding type match. Hogan and Flair were still in reasonable shape to do it at the time as well. I thought that would have been pretty great.

 

Personally, I say team Hogan up with Big E (obviously he'd be renamed Mr. E, but that is flexible) and put them against Orton and Piper. With Mr. T in Hogan and E's corner and Bob Orton Jr in Randy and Piper's corner. E and Orton could work the whole match, Hogan could get the hot tag and knock Piper about to the sound of loud cheers and Big E could score the pin fall. Pose down, lots of oil etc. I had this idea months ago, but with Sheamus in mind, but Big E's probably going to be their next big babyface eventually so he would be better for it.

 

This is utterly brilliant and I can see myself being pissed off with Ian come WrestleMania time if this doesn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
I like the idea of a Mania 30 match that riffs on the first.

 

 

I don't. Can't see the point in that in the slightest. Make new history rather than a pointless tribute.

Wrestling has no new history. Every storyline has always been the same. There isn't anything original about it ever. WrestleMania is about attracting the fan that doesn't watch for the rest of the year. Its why Rock, Undertaker, Brock and Triple H are the main stars of it each year. They have 11 months to "make new history". Its why an average pay-per-view does 150,000 and WrestleMania breaks a million each year. Their biggest money spinners are based on the past. Their DVDs, figures and computer games are all promoted around stars of the past. One off attractions always work. Wrestling is all about telling a story and booking ending the first WrestleMania with the 30th one would be very special. Especially for WrestleMania I. There still hasn't been a more famous WrestleMania to people outside of wrestling. That thing was mainstream.

 

The main event planned currently is Triple H vs a Vince McMahon picked star. That's isn't very fresh. The touted Sting vs The Undertaker? Not exactly an original idea, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, what? No newer guys should job to established acts?

 

Wrestling should just be a staid production line where you win for a set number of years, then lose for a couple of years, pick up a HOF ring then fuck off?

 

Nah, losing done right provides development.

 

The Shield as a destructive force that never loses and kills stars is a dead act. It got played out. If they don't stay over as wrestlers once the buzz dies down, then the connection with the audience wasn't that genuine to begin with.

 

I never said that. We all know however that there is a right was and a wrong way to put talent over. If the Shield pushed the NWO to the limit before finally losing I would be quite happy with that. However, please tell me one act (who are not their friends) that Hogan, Nash and Hall have put over the correct way in the last 10 years. The Shield would be treated as a joke! Just like Nash did with Sabin and just like he did with the Kings of Wrestling gimmick. I'm not saying that I am against young guys losing to the older guard. But as I say, it has to be done in the right way for it to have any benefit in the long term!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

I get that. And of course they and things of that nature have their place on such a show. I'm more than happy for guys from the past turning up at 'Mania. Wrestling has no new history is an absurd thing to suggest though, a completely defeatist thing to suggest. WrestleMania XX lasting memory was Chris Benoit reaching the top of the mountain. That was new and it was absolutely magic, what WrestleMania is all about, capturing new, magical moments and lasting memories and a year later, one of their most successful 'Manias ever featured Hogan in a small guest spot but was mostly centred around creating new stars and new history with Edge, Cena and Batista and those were the lasting memories and made bona-fide stars for the next decade. I despise this notion that everything has been done in wrestling, I love nostalgia as much as the next person but the idea that all that can be done has been done is ridiculous and actually impossible.

 

I'd love WrestleMania XXX to make a star of Big E and wouldn't be surprised if it does in truth. Not as Mr. E though (not I think that was a serious suggestion)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking to you, sir.

 

And, anyway, Hogan put Lesnar over like rover.

 

Apologies Sir...

 

Firstly, Lesnar beat Hogan in 02. Secondly, he only did the job because he was under the incorrect impression that Lesnar would drop the World Title to him (cleanly) at Survivor Series. When that didn't happen, good old Rover took his ball and went home!

 

And when he did have a chance to put over younger talent in 06 he hardly did Randy Orton any favours!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Hogan put Lesnar over like rover.

 

Apologies Sir...

 

Firstly, Lesnar beat Hogan in 02. Secondly, he only did the job because he was under the incorrect impression that Lesnar would drop the World Title to him (cleanly) at Survivor Series. When that didn't happen, good old Rover took his ball and went home!

In Hogan's world there's a massive difference between doing the job and putting someone over.

 

He put Lesnar over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Hogan's world there's a massive difference between doing the job and putting someone over.

 

He put Lesnar over.

 

Yes, Hogan put Lesnar over the right way. I never denied that he did business the correct way. What I said was the only reason that he did that was because he thought that he would get his win back at SS. When he didn't he left. He didn't put Lesnar over as a one off. There was a motive for the way in which he did the job for Brock. He got his fingers burned and didn't do anything like that again in the WWE. He wouldn't even let Shawn Michaels win one of their proposed series of matches which is why the SS05 match ended up the way it did!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Firstly, Lesnar beat Hogan in 02. Secondly, he only did the job because he was under the incorrect impression that Lesnar would drop the World Title to him (cleanly) at Survivor Series. When that didn't happen, good old Rover took his ball and went home!

Completely wrong. He went home over a dispute over his WrestleMania payoff. He was supposed to wrestle on a tour of Australia following it and he didn't return. When he was asked to come back, he said he'd return if he beat Lesnar at Madison Square Garden. He put Lesnar over clean, he put Kurt Angle over clean, he put over Triple H, he worked with Christian and Lance Storm. I know it obviously hurts you to admit it, but he put a lot of people over when he came back.

 

When he returned in 2005, he beat Shawn Michaels because it was personal between them. He had the right to say no and he used it. He was totally in the right and everyone from Court Bauer (who was there) to Dave Meltzer backed Hogan up on that. In a legend vs legend match, Michaels was never going over Hogan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...