Q&A thread - Your Questions Answered! **no chat**

Hematocyte

I actually like the current way in WWE of (pretty much) 'anyone vs anyone'. Whilst it's good to have a selection of titles, I don't like the concept of 'divisions' in wrestling. It seemed to happen a lot in TNA up to when I stopped watching it a few months ago. The tag-teamers stayed almost exclusively to tag matches and the x-division were also very separate from the rest. As a result they seemed to have the same guys meeting each other every three weeks in what was already a smaller pool of participants.

gnfnrhead

Hematocyte wrote: »

I actually like the current way in WWE of (pretty much) 'anyone vs anyone'. Whilst it's good to have a selection of titles, I don't like the concept of 'divisions' in wrestling. It seemed to happen a lot in TNA up to when I stopped watching it a few months ago. The tag-teamers stayed almost exclusively to tag matches and the x-division were also very separate from the rest. As a result they seemed to have the same guys meeting each other every three weeks in what was already a smaller pool of participants.

Having divisions means the writers cant be lazy and have to actually put effort in. We often see the likes of Del Rio vs Kofi Kingston. Why? There is no reason for them to be facing each other. With divisions, that kind of match rarely happens. 90% of the matches happen for a reason instead of just being wrestler a vs wrestler b for the sake of it.

jaykhunter

What's all the hullabaloo about "Bad news Barrett"? I've only heard it mentioned here. What info do we have on it?

ceegee

jaykhunter wrote: »

What's all the hullabaloo about "Bad news Barrett"? I've only heard it mentioned here. What info do we have on it?

Afaik the gimmick has only been seen on the jbl and cole show, with Barrett randomly popping up to break bad news to people. Cant see it working as a proper gimmick

Hematocyte

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Having divisions means the writers cant be lazy and have to actually put effort in. We often see the likes of Del Rio vs Kofi Kingston. Why? There is no reason for them to be facing each other. With divisions, that kind of match rarely happens. 90% of the matches happen for a reason instead of just being wrestler a vs wrestler b for the sake of it.

I see what you mean. However, if that's what the idea behind divisions is, then I certainly didn't get that impression from my six months watching TNA anyway.

In TNA impact I got the impression most of the matches were happening for no reason either and that most of the pairings were just thrown together on a whim. To see what I mean, the whole thing felt like when I was a kid and I used to play wrestling with action figures in the backgarden, just making it up match-by-match. I genuinely got this vibe from the TNA show and that's why I eventually gave it up.

I mean TNA even have that 'bound for glory' tournament that pretty much encapsulated the phenomena of taking a single slice of the roster and pairing them up every week for no actual personal or dramatic reason. It's no coincidence that I eventually dropped TNA Impact from my viewing schedule fairly early into this tournament.

At least with WWE, even if it's Kofi v Del Rio (or two guys who have no feud or would theoretically be in different 'divisions') I feel that it's building towards the next PPV. I never got that impression with TNA. I'm a relative newcomer to the wrestling scene so maybe I'm still naive in that regard, but I do enjoy that there always seems to be a direction or momentum to the WWE stuff.

I guess maybe other fed's do it better when it comes to divisions, but going on how TNA do it anyway I'd certainly not be a fan of it.

gnfnrhead

I see what you mean. However, if that's what the idea behind divisions is, then I certainly didn't get that impression from my six months watching TNA anyway.

Since you go on to mention the Bound for Glory Series, I'm guessing it was fairly recently. As such, it was during the Hogan regime. The divisions dont really exist anymore. Since Hogan and Bischoff joined it was literally throw shit at the wall and run with whatever sticks. Going back to my point about division meaning the writers have to work harder. TNA used to do it correctly. They had a great X-Division, a great tag division, a great Knockouts division and an okay Heavyweight division. That's all gone out the window in the last few years.

I mean TNA even have that 'bound for glory' tournament that pretty much encapsulated the phenomena of taking a single slice of the roster and pairing them up every week for no actual personal or dramatic reason. It's no coincidence that I eventually dropped TNA Impact from my viewing schedule fairly early into this tournament.

The winner gets a World title match. I'd call that a fairly good reason.

At least with WWE, even if it's Kofi v Del Rio (or two guys who have no feud or would theoretically be in different 'divisions') I feel that it's building towards the next PPV. I never got that impression with TNA. I'm a relative newcomer to the wrestling scene so maybe I'm still naive in that regard, but I do enjoy that there always seems to be a direction or momentum to the WWE stuff.

Del Rio faces people like Kofi every two or so weeks. Why? Just to give Del Rio a match. Thats it. He faces the same people on a rotation basis for absolutely zero reason. It's lazy booking.

jaykhunter

ceegee wrote: »

Barrett randomly popping up to break bad news to people.

Oh. So it's not a Bad News Brown rip-off? Sounds like a "Just Joe"-level gimmick

DM_7

Barrett has visa issues at the moment, is that right?

rovert

bigron2109 wrote: »

Its probably been asked in this thread before, so apologizes if has. But why does the WWE not have a cruiser weight division any more? I don't think it is because there is a lack of cruiser weights as i believe a number of wrestlers could fall into this category. There is a lot of guys at the moment, who have no direction in the company so i think the cruiser weight division should be re-instated into the company.

If the WWE Network ever launches there will be a cruiserweight show. They have the show title and concept art decided on. They have hired a lot of talent the past 2-3 years that would indicate at least some interest. They at one stage were going to call the show Livewire repurposing a name they used in the 90s.

jaykhunter wrote: »

Oh. So it's not a Bad News Brown rip-off? Sounds like a "Just Joe"-level gimmick

Nope it is better.

DM-ICE wrote: »

Barrett has visa issues at the moment, is that right?

Did have Visa issues. They have been resolved the past few days.

Hercule

uwwedoogie wrote: »

The term 'tornado' in recent years is merely a video game reference. It was used more in the territory days and occasionally used on WWE TV but it's generally just used by the guys who make the game - who aren't WWE.

wikipedia says otherwise
Tornado tag team match

Originally known as the Texas Tornado match. In this match, all wrestlers involved are allowed to be in the ring at the same time, and thus all wrestlers are vulnerable to having a fall scored against them. Whether or not it is truly a "tag team match" is debatable, as it involves no tagging, but it is contested between tag teams. The first match of this kind was held on October 2, 1937 in Houston between Milo Steinborn and Whiskers Savage against Tiger Daula and Fazul Mohammed. It was the brainchild of promoter Morris Sigel.

Charisteas

Watched the entire 1998 Royal Rumble PPV today (on VHS tape no less), brilliant show from start to finish. Anyway, how and when did Undertaker escape the casket before Kane set it on fire? I vaguely remember reading something about a trap-door, but I think that was in reference to a buried alive match.

Adiboo

Charisteas wrote: »

Watched the entire 1998 Royal Rumble PPV today (on VHS tape no less), brilliant show from start to finish. Anyway, how and when did Undertaker escape the casket before Kane set it on fire? I vaguely remember reading something about a trap-door, but I think that was in reference to a buried alive match.

If memory serves me right, the casket was right next to the ring. I always just assumed the side of the casket against the ring apron was trap door loaded and he just slipped away under the ring.

gerrybbadd

Charisteas wrote: »

Watched the entire 1998 Royal Rumble PPV today (on VHS tape no less), brilliant show from start to finish. Anyway, how and when did Undertaker escape the casket before Kane set it on fire? I vaguely remember reading something about a trap-door, but I think that was in reference to a buried alive match.

I remember watching that live. Was 14 at the time. Goosebumps. Had a poster of Kane doing the Undertaker kneeling pose in front of the flaming casket on my wall for years!

To answer the question, as someone else has said, Taker escaped via trapdoor. If you ever fet a chance to see Breaking The Magicians Code, you will get an idea how these rigged caskets worked. Helps you understand how Buried Alive matches were pulled off too.

Omackeral

jaykhunter wrote: »

What's all the hullabaloo about "Bad news Barrett"? I've only heard it mentioned here. What info do we have on it?

He did it at the Dublin House show last week. He came out with the mic and said something to the effect that , ''we're in Ireland tonight, but old Bad News Barrett has a bit of news for you all''. Then he proceeds to run down the local area or that. He did it while wearing an England jersey too. Was pretty cool. He's smarmy enough to pull it off I think. The man needs and deserves a bit of help from creative I think.

Hashtag_HEEL

Omackeral wrote: »

He did it at the Dublin House show last week. He came out with the mic and said something to the effect that , ''we're in Ireland tonight, but old Bad News Barrett has a bit of news for you all''. Then he proceeds to run down the local area or that. He did it while wearing an England jersey too. Was pretty cool. He's smarmy enough to pull it off I think. The man needs and deserves a bit of help from creative I think.

Some moron then proceeded to lob a bottle and him and get himself and his very young child tossed out if the arena. What a heat seaker

Hematocyte

Omackeral wrote: »

He did it at the Dublin House show last week. He came out with the mic and said something to the effect that , ''we're in Ireland tonight, but old Bad News Barrett has a bit of news for you all''. Then he proceeds to run down the local area or that. He did it while wearing an England jersey too. Was pretty cool. He's smarmy enough to pull it off I think. The man needs and deserves a bit of help from creative I think.

Here's video of it. Don't know if this has been posted yet. Saw it just now and thought it was pretty funny.

Must say Barrett got a more desirable reaction from the crowd then the time Shane McMahon misguidedly (I guess?) tried to get some heat by dissing the "head coach of the Chelsea football gang" .....

Hematocyte

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Since you go on to mention the Bound for Glory Series, I'm guessing it was fairly recently. As such, it was during the Hogan regime. The divisions dont really exist anymore. Since Hogan and Bischoff joined it was literally throw shit at the wall and run with whatever sticks. Going back to my point about division meaning the writers have to work harder. TNA used to do it correctly. They had a great X-Division, a great tag division, a great Knockouts division and an okay Heavyweight division. That's all gone out the window in the last few years.

The winner gets a World title match. I'd call that a fairly good reason.

Del Rio faces people like Kofi every two or so weeks. Why? Just to give Del Rio a match. Thats it. He faces the same people on a rotation basis for absolutely zero reason. It's lazy booking.

Ah ok. I was watching it from Jan 2013 to around July 2013. The part in bold certainly describes what I felt like I was watching. I'll accept what you're saying that it was done better previous to that.

Andy_rse

Was the Royal Rumble 94 ending planned? Likewise with the Cena and Batista one?

Omackeral

Andy_rse wrote: »

Was the Royal Rumble 94 ending planned? Likewise with the Cena and Batista one?

Cena v Batista was definitely not planned. So much so that Vince stormed down and restarted the match and tore his quad, infringing Kevin Nash's gimmick.

rossie1977

both went 100% as planned, vince tearing both his quads coming down to ring wasn't planned

Omackeral

rossie1977 wrote: »

both went 100% as planned, vince tearing both his quads coming down to ring wasn't planned

I thought Luger/Hart was planned but was under the impression Cena and Batista was a botch. Because then ya have the mystery of who Batista is facing at Mania and the excellent 'thumbs down' on HHH.

Deadlie

I remember as a kid someone telling me what 'Raw is War' was having the War bit removed because of the Iraq invasion. I've never had this confirmed and it's always something that I've wondered about! Any truth in it?

McLoughlin

Deadlie wrote: »

I remember as a kid someone telling me what 'Raw is War' was having the War bit removed because of the Iraq invasion. I've never had this confirmed and it's always something that I've wondered about! Any truth in it?

Monday Night Raw became Raw is War as a response to the Monday Night night war with WCW after WCW was bought and especially 9/11 Raw is War was quietly dropped.

Deadlie

Ah, yeah I'd forgotten about that timeline. That makes sense! Cheers

gerrybbadd

Remember when the first hour was Raw, and the second the Warzone? Good times

Sirsok

Few months ago I heard rumours samurai del sol signed a pretty hefty deal with wwe...any word on his status?

rovert

Sirsok wrote: »

Few months ago I heard rumours samurai del sol signed a pretty hefty deal with wwe...any word on his status?

I don't think it was anything hefty.

He is Kalisto, still masked, wears his Del Sol gear, works most live events and seemingly is allowed to do his old moves:

rossie1977

Sirsok wrote: »

Few months ago I heard rumours samurai del sol signed a pretty hefty deal with wwe...any word on his status?

he has been working live events, this was filmed in september and he seems much better than sin cara

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ym8tvbusW4

Kolido

Why did the WWE bring Brad Maddox in as an on screen personality rather than a full time wrestler? I believe he wrestled on NXT but I don't watch it.

Lord TSC

Kolido wrote: »

Why did the WWE bring Brad Maddox in as an on screen personality rather than a full time wrestler? I believe he wrestled on NXT but I don't watch it.

Personal opinion, he didn't look anything special as an in-ring preformer; he struck me as generic and not the body type typically likes. But he's got a decent enough character and persona, so the personality suits him more.