Random Wrasslin' thoughts.....

johnnyryan89

LeeJM wrote: »

A PPV special event like a King of the Ring or a Money in the Bank having a specific date for a title shot takes a slight bit of prestige away from the Royal Rumble. At least I think that was their thinking behind dropping the KotR title shot stip.

The main thing about the Rumble match is not only you get a title shot but you get to headline Wrestlemania so that along wouldn't cheapen the Rumble because you can get a title shot anytime but headlining Wrestlemania is probably a once in a lifetime opportunity for a lot of guys imo.

Regarding MITB, I'd like to see them replace it with KOTR and build it like the SS Deadly Games PPV from 98 and have the MITB contract match at Mania, always felt the match itself wasn't as good when they gave it its own PPV and scrapped it from the Mania card.

sky88

Does it make anyone else a bit sad anytime they read bet Hart comments. he's one of my favourite wrestlers but he just seems so bitter now towards everyone especially hhh.

Andersonisgod

sky88 wrote: »

Does it make anyone else a bit sad anytime they read bet Hart comments. he's one of my favourite wrestlers but he just seems so bitter now towards everyone especially hhh.

Not at all. I'd say if anything he is one of the more balanced, level headed ex-pro's around. He's not afraid to say when somethings bad and he praises things that are done well. Honestly I think the people who try to portray him as bitter are those who can only see things from a WWE point of view.

briany

If you wanna look at someone who's bitter, look at Jake the Snake. I'm happy for him that he's worked through some of his demons but he hasn't got many good things to say about anyone in the business.

If you want to see someone who's not bitter, look at Fret Ottman, AKA Tugboat/Typhoon/Shockmaster. He didn't let a humiliating live incident put a damper on his wrestling memories. Loved working with pretty much everyone.

leggo

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Not at all. I'd say if anything he is one of the more balanced, level headed ex-pro's around. He's not afraid to say when somethings bad and he praises things that are done well. Honestly I think the people who try to portray him as bitter are those who can only see things from a WWE point of view.

Didn't he recently rip into Triple H for the poor WrestleMania booking while holding NXT Dallas up as an example of how it should be done?

LeeJM

leggo wrote: »

Didn't he recently rip into Triple H for the poor WrestleMania booking while holding NXT Dallas up as an example of how it should be done?

Sounds exactly like something Bret would do.

A Rogue Hobo

Enzo and Cass' "Rocket Launcher" is really dumb. Mostly because Cass is always about a second behind Enzo jumping off the top.

CastorTroy

Yeah I don't know if he's meant to be throwing Enzo or pushing him down or both

Looper007

sky88 wrote: »

Does it make anyone else a bit sad anytime they read bet Hart comments. he's one of my favourite wrestlers but he just seems so bitter now towards everyone especially hhh.

Seen as HHH was the one behind getting Vince and HBK behind the screwjob I can see why Bret has a hatred for HHH. HBK and Vince are almost forgiven but HHH is Bret's number 1 target. But I love how honest Bret is and he's 99 % always right imo.

Ageyev

Bret Hart has often spoken negatively about Triple H's work. And if you think if it, what great matches has he had? (without gimmicks and weapons and Mick Foley)

briany

Ageyev wrote: »

Bret Hart has often spoken negatively about Triple H's work. And if you think if it, what great matches has he had? (without gimmicks and weapons and Mick Foley)

You could say he's been a B+ player. Good hand in the ring and fairly charismatic, but he's never going to get on the Mount Rushmore of wrestling in most fans' eyes.

Chain Smoker

If they keep saying "The Guy", it'll stop sounding like The Guy and will start sounding like the guy.

LeeJM

briany wrote: »

You could say he's been a B+ player. Good hand in the ring and fairly charismatic, but he's never going to get on the Mount Rushmore of wrestling in most fans' eyes.

Well thats where the whole Daniel Bryan B+ player comes from, The Meltz once described HHH as a B+ and Paul never forgot it. TBF though I think HHH is an all time great. The DB match at WM XXX was great no gimmicks, weapons or Foley there. The two triple threat matches with HBK and B****t in 2004 were great. The Cena match at WM 22 was better than it had any right to be. But all of his best matches are brawls or gimmick matches. The Undertaker series, the Batista series in 05 (minus WM 21), the original Elimination Chamber, Jericho matches both Hell in a Cell and Last Man Standing, Summerslam 02 vs Shawn making a comeback after 4+yrs away from the ring, 3 stages of Hell vs Austin at No Way Out in 01. And thats all without mentioning any of the Foley matches.

Mick Murdock

He was my fav wrestler as a kid and his constant burial of everyone can be funny and often has some truth to it but he seriously needs to get over f-cking 1997. He shares at least some of the blame.

I don't think carrying all that negativity around will help with his health problems.

Wonder if the content of Flairs podcast has something to do with the hiatus? Can't see him ever getting a mic live on TV again.


HHH gets a raw deal. He's been a big star for 20 years. Very good promo.

sky88

hhh is an all time great but I do think his greatest matches have come with stipulatetions involved.

Riddle101

sky88 wrote: »

hhh is an all time great but I do think his greatest matches have come with stipulatetions involved.

Definitely, as a wrestler Triple H is a solid enough worker but nothing special at the same time. His matches tend to be quite boring and generic unless there's a special stipulation involved. In fact, a lot of his matches at Wrestlemania have been very underwhelming when he could have delivered something special. I'm talking about the likes of Jericho Vs Triple H WM18, Triple H Vs Booker T WM19, Tripe H Vs Randy Orton WM25, Triple H Vs Sheamus WM26, Triple H Vs Undertaker WM27, Triple H Vs Brock Lesnar WM29, Triple H Vs Sting WM31, Triple H Vs Roman Reigns 32. He just isn't in Shawn Michaels league when it comes to putting on great Wrestlemania matches.

That being said, one match that I can remember that was really good that didn't have a special stipulation involved was Triple H Vs The Rock at Backlash 2000, but a lot of the hype surrounding the match was because of Stone Cold returning.

leggo

I don't know why people attach less value to a stipulation match than a regular match. You've more to work with, but it's just as easy to have a jumbled mess of a match that means nothing as it is to have a classic. Has there been more classic or mediocre HIAC matches for example? I'd say it's easier to have a standard *** Raw main event as a regular singles match than it is a stip, because there's an established framework to work with there, whereas you can easily overthink a stip match. You also almost have to plan it meticulously and have less flexibility to work and change it on the fly to suit the crowd, so if your stuff isn't working in, say, a TLC match with 8 people...you're stuck in a dead match and bound to the script because it's too difficult to change up.

Another thing you have to take into account is crowd reactions. For example, Shane/Taker for me was a great match that told a great story, in a vacuum. But the fans were waiting for interference and a big Shane spot so sat on their hands for much of it, and it felt kinda flat as a result. You don't have those kind of expectations to overcome in a regular match and can draw off a blank canvas essentially, telling the story you want and getting the reactions when you want. Ever wonder why pre-show matches on PPV so often tend to overshadow a lot of the main card, for example? It's a combination of low expectations and the lads being given time to just work and do what they do.

At the end of the day, though, it's all just telling a story and the type of match you do is just part of that.

Angron

I think part of the problem with gimmick matches, at least in WWE, is that there's been whole PPVs dedicated to them which kinda devalues them, at least that's kinda how it's gone for me. It just feels less special when you know you're going to have a night with a few of them thrown at you.

johnnyryan89

Angron wrote: »

I think part of the problem with gimmick matches, at least in WWE, is that there's been whole PPVs dedicated to them which kinda devalues them, at least that's kinda how it's gone for me. It just feels less special when you know you're going to have a night with a few of them thrown at you.

Something like Extreme Rules I think is fine because it's a whole night for people to get extreme but the PPVs that carry the names of gimmick matches that take the biscuit and make matches like TLC, MITB, HIAC less special for me.

briany

Kevin Owens reminds me of the fat kid from the film Mean Creek if that kid had

grown up instead of drowning in the river

.

Ageyev

leggo wrote: »

I don't know why people attach less value to a stipulation match than a regular match. You've more to work with, but it's just as easy to have a jumbled mess of a match that means nothing as it is to have a classic. Has there been more classic or mediocre HIAC matches for example? I'd say it's easier to have a standard *** Raw main event as a regular singles match than it is a stip, because there's an established framework to work with there, whereas you can easily overthink a stip match. You also almost have to plan it meticulously and have less flexibility to work and change it on the fly to suit the crowd, so if your stuff isn't working in, say, a TLC match with 8 people...you're stuck in a dead match and bound to the script because it's too difficult to change up.

Another thing you have to take into account is crowd reactions. For example, Shane/Taker for me was a great match that told a great story, in a vacuum. But the fans were waiting for interference and a big Shane spot so sat on their hands for much of it, and it felt kinda flat as a result. You don't have those kind of expectations to overcome in a regular match and can draw off a blank canvas essentially, telling the story you want and getting the reactions when you want. Ever wonder why pre-show matches on PPV so often tend to overshadow a lot of the main card, for example? It's a combination of low expectations and the lads being given time to just work and do what they do.

At the end of the day, though, it's all just telling a story and the type of match you do is just part of that.

Can you name five memorable Triple H matches that didn't involve weapons, smoke & mirrors etc. ? I mean, seriously what classic matches has he had? On "the big stage"? Is HHH v Raney Orton at WrestleMania 25 the memorable classic from that show? Of course it's not.... c'mon here.

H had Reigns in a high profile Mania main event and there's no way it will be remembered fondly - last year's Reigns v Lesnar was far better than expectations; nevermind the finish. AJ Styles had a very good main event match with Reigns - although mired by shenanigans but goddamn, I nearly bought into them near-falls towards the end.

Bret Hart is probably the most overrated wrestler in recent memory* but he's right imo on Triple H, that he is not great, 'that damn good', doesn't have a resume of classic memorable matches etc


*c'mon, seriously, he had a handful of very memorable great matches in a short period of time during the mid-1990s, a lot of praise Bret gains is nostalgia or whatever.

leggo

Ageyev wrote: »

Can you name five memorable Triple H matches that didn't involve weapons, smoke & mirrors etc. ? I mean, seriously what classic matches has he had? On "the big stage"? Is HHH v Raney Orton at WrestleMania 25 the memorable classic from that show? Of course it's not.... c'mon here.

Did you read any of my the post you quoted?

ShagNastii

Rusev is looking jacked as of late. Really chuffed he won the battle royal. He hasn't set a foot wrong (bar the Ziggler stuff. Hardly his fault) since his run since started.

Surely has to be ranked all time top 3 for the "big, bad foreigner gimmick" at this stage.

ShagNastii

Rusev is looking jacked as of late. Really chuffed he won the battle royal. He hasn't set a foot wrong (bar the Ziggler stuff. Hardly his fault) since his run since started.

Surely has to be ranked all time top 3 for the "big, bad foreigner gimmick" at this stage.

ERG89

Every time I see Baron Corbins entrance I think of connect 4
I wonder will the last red circle ever be yellow

Riddle101

I think Big Cass has a bright future ahead of him. He's the first big man wrestler i've seen in years who i've genuinely been interested in. It will be interesting to see how he develops over time.

Enzo Amore also has a lot of potential for greatness. He's only 5"11 though which could hinder his chances of being a main eventer/world champion but I still think he could surprise us.

Agent Coulson

Enzo could be a great manager if the WWE ever decide to bring back managers.

martyos121

I can only see Enzo as a manager down the road. He really isn't that good of a wrestler, despite improving a lot in the past year. Cass is really, really good for a big man though, he's going to be a main eventer down the line as long as he keeps Enzo as a mouthpiece.

johnnyryan89

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Enzo could be a great manager if the WWE ever decide to bring back managers.

I'm surprised they didn't bring Carmella up as a valet for the duo, get the main crowd used to her for when she gets called up to wrestle.

Pentecost

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Enzo could be a great manager if the WWE ever decide to bring back managers.

Apparently he's always insisted that he wrestles and doesn't just do the talking. Might take a bit of convincing to give it up.