The Thread Killer

Of all the notoriously full of shit shoot interviews I have ever seen, I think Manny Fernandez, Greg Gagne and Black Bart (of all people) win the awards for most ridiculous nonsense spouted per minute.

You take that back. That's Canada's Greatest Athlete you're talking about there, pal.

One of the things (perhaps the only thing, actually) I think WWE has done right with the Cruiserweight Division is how they have booked Neville. He went from being an afterthought on Raw, to an absolute killer who has been pretty much unbeatable. How they have booked his title reign has a lot to do with that, IMO.

If you do that EVERY time with EVERY title it'd be pretty damn boring. I disagree, but I readily admit that my tastes when it comes to things like that are pretty conventional (if there is such a thing.) I'd just much rather see a championship "chase" with long reigns and even multiple title shots by one contender, than the title switching back and forth like a pendulum. I think they could have easily booked this entire angle between Owens and Styles and made it just as effective with only one title change. In fact, I feel the title change would have been a lot more effective if Owens had thwarted Styles at every turn only to have Styles win the title once and for all in the triple threat with Jericho. Owens could have whined and bitched that he got cheated and never really lost the title, and Styles would have been champ with a title that hadn't been all over the map recently. But YMMV.

I couldn't agree with you more. The quicker this angle ends, the better. I strongly dislike seeing one of my favorite wrestlers being wasted in a stupid angle with one of my least favorite. I usually skip anything involving Kevin Owens, but when it's AJ Styles, I end up being compelled to watch.

I don't hate title changes at all, but they lose their significance if they happen eight times in seven months...especially when most titles are defended monthly. Having something happen that often makes it seem far less special or eventful. Also, it's hard to get excited about a title change or be happy when one of your favorite wins a title, when you assume they're going to drop it in their next match. Building up a successful title reign and defending the title on multiple occasions helps make the champion more popular and adds to their mystique, as well. That way, when somebody finally does beat them, it makes whoever did it look more impressive. If you just randomly trade the title back and forth, why should anybody care that you have it at all?

So regarding AJ Styles and the US Championship...to borrow a line from The Rock (which I'm pretty sure he stole from my Uncle Roger), what in the Blue Hell is going on? First he wins the title at a house show that he and Owens weren't even supposed to be on. Some people speculate that Owens is injured (which he probably isn't.) Some people speculate that Vince thinks that between Jinder, Rusev and Owens, that's three anti-American gimmicks on one show, so he wants to scale back on at least one. Whatever the reason, the title is now on AJ. Then there is speculation that their match on Battleground is scrubbed, because for a couple of days after the title change, there is no mention of the match being on the card anymore. But then SDL happens and it turns out that Owens is not injured, still the New Face of America, and the match is still on. Fine. Then they have the match, and it really isn't all that great...and from all accounts the finish gets botched. Whether it did or didn't, you have to admit that the end of that match was strange. This is where things get really weird. I've seen some sites claim the finish got fouled up and Styles was supposed to retain. Some people that were there live claimed that Styles looked legit pissed off after the match and kicked the stairs or something. (Although how they can tell that was legit and not just him selling his loss, I have no idea.) But THEN...they pull a Russo on SDL and switch the title AGAIN, back to Styles? In theory, you could speculate they brought Jericho back in to take that pin to protect Owens from another loss to Styles...but was this always the plan, and Jericho was always coming back now? If so, what possible good did that title change do? (The one at Battleground, not the one at MSG. I get that one. I think.) I am legit confuzzled. If they really did plan all this out to happen this way, then I think they are nuts with all this Russoesque hot-shotting of the title. I thought WWE had done a good job recently of making their titles seem a bit more important and not flinging them all hither and yon, but this whole thing has been really odd to me. Anybody have any theories or heard any believable reasons for all this stuff?

That opening segment was pretty damn good, and you know what I liked most about it? It advanced the angle, but it wasn't agonizingly long. Five guys in the ring, everybody made their points, got their promos in, but they did so expeditiously. I appreciate that. Hey, Balor is pretty damn popular, huh?

Point well taken. You're right, Heyman's performance during the buildup to Brock vs. Joe was pretty damn good. I just hate the promos where it seems like he does nothing else but announce his name, and then screeches out Lesnar's name. It seems like pandering to me, like he just wants to get the crowd to go along with him.

I could not disagree more with the above. And I'm saying this having seen my first live NXT show very recently. Hey were you at the Vancouver NXT show? How was it? Was Aleister Black there? I am still back and forth on whether or not I should go to the Toronto show. I am curious how the Vancouver one was...

I could not disagree more with the above. And I'm saying this having seen my first live NXT show very recently. I usually agree with you on most issues, El-P. I am especially a big fan of your views on Vince Russo. However, in this case I agree with Mr. Shrike. (If that even is his real name

That promo was dope Which one? Heyman has cut about 493 "My client retired the Undertaker" promos, all of which are pretty much the same. I think Lesnar has rubbed off on Heyman (eww that sounded wrong). What I mean to say is that I think Paul Heyman has adopted Brock's attitude towards putting in an effort. Like: "Why work hard when I can get the crowd to chant along with me just by saying my name and Lesnar's name? Who needs to cut an original sounding promo?" Listening to Heyman now, it's hard to believe he's the same guy who cut some of those blistering promos during the Invasion angle. Were I going to bet on the reason, this would be where I put my money.

I really agree with you about this. I think the show has been really good the past couple of months, but that is all on the in ring stuff and the natural innate talent of the roster. The creative team is doing them no favors. They really don't seem to know what to do with Aleister Black, which seems insane to me. I might be wrong (after all, I like Bray Wyatt) but based on his look, entrance and work, I think that guy has a huge upside and could be big money for WWE, but they really haven't done squat with him since his NXT debut. He's half the reason I tune in, and a lot of weeks they don't even mention him. It makes no sense. I won't even get into the weird stop/start push of a guy like Almas. I still love NXT but somebody needs to give their creative guys a bit of a kick in the pants.

I remember part of the angle at the time involved Jimmy Garvin losing some match where he had to go to David's farm and do chores for the day, like wash his dog, etc. I remember thinking it was hysterical at the time...but I was about 15 when I saw it, so it's likely one of those things that you look back and remember as being great, but may not have aged well. Then again, this was over 30 years ago and I still remember it quite vividly, and I've not seen it since - so who knows.

Like that weird club that ROH runs in New York? (I forget the name.)

As I said, I know that Conrad and Prichard are friends and business associates, so I know that for the most part, any tension between them during the show is either inconsequential, or yes..."a work." But if it is a work, then it's a really stupid work, in my opinion. Having a gimmick that gives listeners the impression you don't even want to be doing the show, or giving straight answers to questions isn't exactly going to inspire listeners to want to keep coming back. Then again, even Vince Russo can get weekly listeners for his stupid crap, so what the hell do I know? I guess there are fans for just about anything.

I generally don't like Bruce Prichard, but I had listened to his Russo podcast and found it somewhat interesting, so I listened to some of his older episodes. I took special interest in the one that focuses specifically on why he got fired from WWE, and also the one regarding the Matt/Lita/Edge love triangle and subsequent angle. I also listened to this past week's episode about Demolition. Unless he does a new episode about something particularly interesting, I don't think I am going to listen to his podcast anymore. I really don't like the format. I don't dislike Conrad anywhere near as much as most of the people in this thread do, I guess mostly because he at least calls Prichard on his bullshit most of the time. The main thing that strikes me about this show, is that it really seems like Prichard doesn't want to be doing the show at all. Some episodes, it seems like pulling teeth to get any substantive information out of him, it's like he's being deposed or something and doesn't want to give away any information unless he is asked a specific question about a specific issue which is worded exactly in a way that leaves him no choice but to answer. Even when he does answer, he tends to give one word answers and can be downright rude and dismissive to Conrad. I know they are friends and get along outside the show, but to me it seems Conrad wants to do the show and discuss the topics, and he has to force Prichard to do that most weeks. I think Prichard would be happier doing his ridiculous impersonations (which aside from his Vince impression, are pretty terrible. Especially his Cornette, it doesn't sound anything like him.) I can live with him being a WWF/E apologist. I went into this show expecting that, you'd be a fool not to. But his evasive and sometimes rude and snarky attitude is really off-putting to me. I really get the impression he doesn't like doing this show and he does it because he has to, or something. I contrast that with the other podcasts I listen to, Killing the Town with Storm and Cyrus, Cornette's Late Night Drive-Thru, and The E & C Podcast of Awesomeness. All three of those shows, you can tell the hosts are having fun and enjoy talking with their co-hosts and guests. Not Bruce Prichard. I'm giving up on this guy, he's just too damn cranky, dammit.

Tickets go on sale this morning at 10:00 am. I just got my paycheck for the past two weeks, and it looks like I won't be going to NXT after all. I have three dogs, and two of them had to see the vet in the past couple of weeks, so there goes a big hunk of my pay, right there. I won't be able to afford NXT tickets with what's left, unfortunately. I'm not as upset about that as I was when I had purchased tickets and then they rescheduled the show. Last time they came around, Joe, Nakamura and The Revival were all on the NXT roster. While I enjoy the current NXT roster, there is nobody on there now that I am dying to see. It would have been fun to go, but it looks like it's not in the cards.

I agree. Whether it is WWE or UFC, I think the main thing Brock cares about is the money. To his credit, he admits as much when he's asked about it. I get the impression he'd rather be known as a UFC fighter or "real athlete" than a Pro Wrestler, but in the end, he's going to go wherever he gets paid the most. I certainly don't trust him as a news source now. He was reporting that it was a fact that Lesnar had re-entered the USDA testing pool, when he apparently hasn't. That kind of thing wasn't all that hard to confirm, it sounds like. I know Dana White is not beyond lying to reporters about stuff like that, but it is starting to look like this TalkMMA guy was talking out of his butt without getting any confirmation of anything.

I saw that one. I thought it was pretty good. Every time I see Mark Henry on Table for 3 or Ride Along he comes across as such a laid back, nice guy. I still love the Table for 3 with him, Kane and Big Show.

Santana lost the IC title to Savage in February 1986, Danny Davis didn't officially turn full on heel until February 1987, a year later. They had been building up to the Davis heel turn forever, but I'm 99% sure that it wasn't even on the radar when the Savage/Tito match happened, it was just happy coincidence that they used as justification for Tito being in the WMIII match. Whether or not it the reason they added Tito is because of Dynamite's back is up to debate. I remember reading that somewhere as well, but I don't remember where, and I can't be arsed to go looking for it. That part of the story may well be bullshit, you could very well be right about that. The stuff about Davis being a member of the ring crew and Mr. X as well as being a ref, I got at the time from a friend of mine who worked at Maple Leaf Gardens, plus Davis talked about it in his "Where Are They Now" feature on WWE.com.

You're right. At the time of the Savage IC title win, Danny Davis was just a masked jobber ("Mr. X") a referee and a member of the ring crew. They came up with the heel ref angle after the title change. Savage used an international object to knock Tito out and score the pin, and at the time they played it off as if Danny Davis didn't see it. After his heel ref angle started, they retconned it, to justify adding Tito Santana to the Bulldogs vs. Hart Foundation and Danny Davis match at Wrestlemania III. As I recall, they had originally wanted the match to be the Hart Foundation vs. The British Bulldogs for the titles, but Dynamite's back was still way too fucked up for him to wrestle a normal 2 on 2 tag match.

Well, if he hasn't re-entered the testing pool, (and the guy who runs it says he hasn't) then he still does have quite a lot of time left on his suspension, so this rumor likely is bullshit. Whether or not he is planning on retiring from everything after Wrestlemania is another story. Lord knows he doesn't exactly have an overwhelming love for the business - but on the other hand, as sek said in the other thread, Lesnar does make incredible money for very little effort.

I really liked that Burch/Lorcan match and am looking forward to the rematch. I didn't much care for Mcintyre/Dane, but that was all on Dane. He spends way too much time between offensive maneuvers wandering around the ring, staring at the crowd. I find him to be really plodding and uninteresting. Great show overall this week again, though.

I was watching NXT tonight and I saw that they are coming back to Toronto on September 9. Last time NXT announced they were coming to Toronto, they were supposed to be appearing at the Mattamy Athletic Center (which is the old Maple Leaf Gardens) I bought tickets. I was really excited because I wanted to go back to Maple Leaf Gardens where I had seen countless shows over the years, and also I was hoping to see Nakamura live, in a small show environment. (They got rid of most of the seating from the old arena and the new venue is much smaller and more intimate.) Then of course, the tickets sold out in a heartbeat, so they decided to change the show into a Takeover, and move it to the Air Canada Centre the night before Survivor Series. I cancelled my ticket because I didn't want to go to the damn Air Canada Centre, I wanted to go to a smaller show. I haven't been to a live show in years, but I really love NXT and I'd really love to go back to Maple Leaf Gardens again, so I'll probably buy tickets, assuming I can get them. I just hope WWE doesn't change the venue or whatever, and screw me again.