Jon-Carr_92 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 I've a few if I'm honest. WrestleMania XXX was completely predictable. If anything, it was pretty obvious Daniel Bryan was going to win it back in the end as that was the obvious payoff seeing how he'd been screwed over twice and in the process, achieving the unique distinction of having 2 WWE Championship reigns that didn't add up to a full 24 hours. Triple H got a lot handed to him is another and it does make me wonder how much of it had to do with running off with the boss's daughter. Yes, he got a few prior to that, so may not have made much difference. But I'm sure you can agree with me in wondering how many people who said circa 2003 when he was winning the World Heavyweight Championship every 5 minutes that Triple H was ruining the business but nowadays say they can't wait for him to run the business. Paul Heyman steals focus. See his stint with Cesaro as it was obvious it was just to keep him around after his other client won a match at WrestleMania that year. Don't think it went very noticed. I feel this will fly for a lot of people, but I will certainly add Roman Reigns was as destined as the next guy in The Shield. He does have what it takes, he looks the part, but it's pretty sad that it's come to this. When did he start to go wrong? Had a terrific 2014 for the most part, superb performance in the Rumble, broke the eliminations record, and feuded with The Wyatt Family and Evolution as part of The Shield. Then Seth ended them, he wrestled 2 main events for the WWE Championship, then the reactions started changing and he got hospitalised for his hernia and came back with the bizarre declaration for the Royal Rumble he would win. Have to agree, the It's My Yard Now bit was bloody brilliant. The crowd didn't troll Roman. Roman trolled the crowd. He only needed 10 minutes and 4 words because he had them where he wanted them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Dem Wanz Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 3 hours ago, air_raid said: From a business point of view it made perfect sense - they were scheduled to come to Manchester in April where the rematch would have sold out the MEN and done great on PPV, and Bulldog would have won the belt back in front of Lancashire. At least that's how they sold him on dropping the belt in the first place. Even leaving that (perfectly sensible and accurate if the insiders are to be believed) business logic aside - who wouldn't want to make their top heel appear even more dastardly by booking him to win by cheating a title belt off a hometown hero whose dying sister was watching at ringside in front of an area full of his compatriots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDDUM_N_STYLE Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 The Bret/Shawn Iron Man match is an enthralling spectacle that should have gone longer than 63.......sorry can't do it, that match still bore the shit out of me save for the last five mins and overtime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gaffer Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 36 minutes ago, Jon-Carr_92 said: WrestleMania XXX was completely predictable. I know you went on to make it about Daniel Bryan winning, but a part of me feels this could have been worded better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briefcase Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 (edited) I have always preferred Raw to Smackdown. Yeah there has been times Smackdown has had better in-ring talent & matches but to me Raw always feels like the show I cannot miss even if its pants 95% of the time. If something big is going to happen, its not happening on Smackdown. Also find Finn Balor's entrance too long and boring. Keep it to PPV and keep him off TV as much as possible to build a better aura for his character(s). Edited August 2, 2018 by Briefcase Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 If fans just rated matches by it being fun or not for them and ignored star ratings , it’s be far more fun to be at shows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members DEF Posted August 2, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 2, 2018 Demon Finn is crap. I can't stand his poxy head gear and he doesn't really wrestle any differently. I much prefer him just being a cool as heck James Dean type. That is not to say that the Demon couldn't work it's just I've sort of given up on waiting for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted August 2, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 2, 2018 (edited) The “Ruthless Aggression” era was crap, with the company being forced to push vanilla midgets to the top of the card as the WWE had run out of proper stars. There is nothing wrong, in essence, with Vince McMahon’s style of pushing bigger guys. Edited August 2, 2018 by garynysmon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted August 2, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 2, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, garynysmon said: There is nothing wrong, in essence, with Vince McMahon’s style of pushing bigger guys. There is if you're pushing dross like Lashley, Heidenreich, 2nd-run Test, a green Chris Masters, Nathan Jones, Garrison/Lance Cade, A-Train/Tensai, and Ezekiel Jackson. I think it's fair to say that how big the guys are does matter to an extent, but ability really does matter more. If a smaller guy is really good, people will accept him as being on a level with the bigger guys - HBK, Guerrero, Bryan, Jericho, etc. By the same token, smarks have a tendency to over-emphasise how useless big guys are, when there are so many demonstrable examples of hosses who clearly are good. Edited August 2, 2018 by Carbomb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members WeeAl Posted August 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2018 There hasn't ever been a great women's match on the WWE main roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porkchopcash Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted August 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2018 2 hours ago, WeeAl said: There hasn't ever been a great women's match on the WWE main roster. EVER is really harsh. If the Alundra/Bull matches didn't float your boat, I wonder where the barometer for "great" sits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted August 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2018 9 hours ago, tiger_rick said: It was like go to finisher for guys who didn't have one in the 90s and would get ditched ASAP. HBK and Rock both dropped it like a bad smell. Shawn went home with a shoulder breaker?? I'm going to need to see this. I remember when he bounced around between the superkick, flying elbow and piledriver for ages after deciding the side suplex was crap, but this is learning for me. As an aside, it irrationally winds up when Shawn's side suplex gets retconned to "Teardrop Suplex" - nobody called it that when he was using it, ever. Definitely not on TV, anyway, and I don't remember reading it in print or anywhere other than the internet at least 15 years after he stopped using it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted August 3, 2018 Awards Moderator Share Posted August 3, 2018 Where did the name come from, @air_raid? I’ve always known it as the Teardrop suplex but if it was never called that on TV I don’t know why. Is it one of these ones where they call it that on a game and everyone decides it’s right, like ‘moveset’? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Accident Prone Posted August 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2018 9 hours ago, Jon-Carr_92 said: WrestleMania XXX was completely predictable. If anything, it was pretty obvious Daniel Bryan was going to win it back in the end as that was the obvious payoff seeing how he'd been screwed over twice and in the process, achieving the unique distinction of having 2 WWE Championship reigns that didn't add up to a full 24 hours. I've never felt like predictability in wrestling is a bad thing and I think the assumption that it is bad comes from a generation of people brought up on the Attitude Era. If you've got a predictable, feel-good ending to a show or storyline, then pat yourself on the back as you've utilized storytelling 101 and gave the people a proper, legit narrative. 7 hours ago, garynysmon said: The “Ruthless Aggression” era was crap, with the company being forced to push vanilla midgets to the top of the card as the WWE had run out of proper stars. There is nothing wrong, in essence, with Vince McMahon’s style of pushing bigger guys. I'll always have a bit of dislike for Nash for coining the term 'vanilla midget'. Did you or Nash know that vanilla is the world's most popular flavour of ice cream? Really grinds my gears when the smaller lads, who have genuine bags of character, get grouped together like that. What about all those 'vanilla' giants that Carbomb listed? Fucking dross, the lot of them. I stopped watching/skipping WWE shows back then due to the amount of large hack-fraud tosspots bumbling around the gaff. That's not to say that some smaller guys were utter gash as well. Your John Walters, Matt Strykers and BJ Whitmers became cannonfodder for those shitting over ROH and rightfully so because they were boring as all fuck. Walters and Stryker especially were crap, and made those 'Pure Championship' matches proper fast-forward material. At least Whitmer became palatable when he had a no-DQ stip to play with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.