sek69

Yeah but this is WWE we're talking about, certainly she's better than Alica Fox.

She was the AAA women's champ, and from what I saw wasn't worse than the women WWE has on TV and PPV. I would go as far to say she's probably better than most of them. Also does WWE expect Mexicans (as in people born and raised in Mexico) to speak perfect English? For looks, well here's some photos: With mask Without mask (candid shot): Considering the stories of how she tends to rub people the wrong way in AAA, I get the feeling she went to Florida expecting WWE would hire her without hesitation and they decided to bring her down a peg or two.

lol @ Dave owning Green Lantern Fan in the latest WON talking about Pierce getting fired as ROH booker: ZING!

That reminds me of a video I saw on YouTube of babyface Jerry Lawler in Memphis calling Jimmy Valiant a fag from New York City.

As a subset of that, it's apparently OK for souls to go go hell (Kane and Taker have both said it numerous times) but saying a person will go to hell is a no-no.

I don't see what Tamana, Kumamoto means even to hardcore fans, and Birmingham is pretty infamous for its crappiness. So is Cleveland, but they still announce the Miz from there.

It's even more odd considering that Sheamus's worked last name was O'Shaunessy, which you'd think Vince would have marked for since he loves all things Irish.

Dave discussed this in the WON, basically a ratings point today is different than one in the late 90s, but not to the point that a 3.4 today equals a 5 or 6 they were getting at the height of the boom.

They do the name thing a lot in the midwest. They'll say something like "RAW tonight live in Illinois" instead of whatever town not Chicago they happen to be in.

Black wrestlers are always the best "pure athletes" it seems. Also Lawler having to make a choking noise every time someone gets grabbed by the throat.

Poor Darren Young, looks like he's going to get exiled from Nexus by his Caucasian doppelganger (unless it's a SWERVE~! for the much rumored Cena heel turn).

There was that period where JR worked "surcease" into every main event match, which never sounded like a word someone like JR would use in those occasions.

Not so much a WWE quirk, but I never noticed until last night how Layla pronounces it "Deever" instead of "Diva". I know she's got an accent and all but it's like her version of Regal always referring to "Triple Haitch". Also it's funny when the commentators start speaking like Vince, like using "be that as it may" as a bridge from one train of thought to another when calling a match. Don't forget they aren't straps or belts, but championships.

The timing of that was uncanny, it's as if Missy lurks here or something. She's absolutely right about Apter of course, especially the point about making dying territories appear better than they actually were.

Cena has a reputation as a kiss-ass, and I wonder if it's starting to hurt him since it's apparent he doesn't seem to voice his opinion much in terms of how his character is booked. You would think that by now he would have at least mentioned to someone that maybe some of the backlash is a result of being booked like Superman. Even when he shows vulnerability like the initial Nexus beatdown, he was on TV the next week not selling it a bit.

Not to single out Matt, but his post reminded me of how many people seem to be buying into the whole "nexus = inexperienced rookies" deal that WWE is pushing. I'm pretty sure all of them have at least 5 years in the business and several have more. Granted, it wasn't on national TV in front of millions of people, but these guys aren't right out of wrestling school either. It does help them out in the sense that if they screw up, it won't come off as badly since the crowd sees them as noobs, but after a while it does start to go against them when they do stuff like pointing out that 7 "rookies" are in the main event at SummerSlam. It started to make them look like maybe they didn't deserve to be there which isn't what you want to do.

Yeah Batista gave her the Ortonesque "you are worthless" bullying treatment according to her. I just thought there was more to it than that. That always seemed odd considering how quickly Batista made his way through the Divas, why would he bother getting pissed at Shelly when there was like 10 more still to (attempt) to nail.

Considering the whole buildup was "can Team WWE get its shit together" it's no surprise they won, it was classic against-the-odds babyface stuff.

Dave on the latest Observer Radio defending John Cena is kind of hilarious. Bryan made mention of how everyone on the board hates Cena now because of him always being booked as Superman, and Dave's defense is Cena doesn't book the matches so you can't blame him. He seemed to miss the point entirely that people hate Cena because of the booking, not because anyone thinks he had anything to do with it. After this and the constant "aw shucks he doesn't want you all to know all the nice stuff he does" reporting in the WON, I'm wondering is Cena his new WWE source or did he rescue Dave's family from a burning building or something?

Yeah it was hardly a decisive victory, so I don't know if the angle is over. I'm stoked for the continuation of Miz-Bryan though. I just hope when the inevitable Michael Cole beatdown occurs he remembers to leave the tie alone.

Adding fuel to the fire, WO is reporting WWE is specifically checking for Daniel Bryan/Bryan Danielson signs and that no one was allowed in the arena during the run through of the main event other than the people in the match due to "a big surprise" for the main event.

I found it very telling that the episode where RAW finally broke Nitro's 83 week winning streak was all non finishes. Between Undertaker interrupting all the matches to goad Kane and the main event of Austin-McMahon turning into the return of Dude Love, everything on the show was a schmozz. Ironically, considering the detour this thread took, it also had the promos building to the debut of Val Venis. Those porno double entendres that were so edgy in 1998 come off so forced and corny in 2010.

If I'm remembering correctly, he took those indy bookings right after the whole Tiepocalypse occured, when it looked like it would be a while before WWE would be calling back.

This is a fan letter to Jim that touched on some snide comments made on Eric Bishcoff's FB page and the responses. Hey Jim had a question I thought I'd throw at you. This was prompted by a discussion that was happening on Eric Bischoff's facebook page today where he was asking "who are these alleged young guys that draw money?" and then went on to say that hardly any of the guys mentioned count because he thinks your only a draw if you sell out major arenas/set records on PPV/do millions in merchandise and crossover to mainstream culture. He also said that besides Rock/Goldberg nobody's done it without 8 years in the business, and its very clear he meant 8 years in a company the size of WWE. His response when people named ROH talent was to quote directly: Interesting resonses.Clearly the majority of people here have NO IDEA what drawing money is. ROH is not making money on TV, PPV or arena shows. Its a backyard vanity project for marks. No disrespect to the talent who are working hard, but NUMBERS DONT LIE, THEY DONT HAVE OPINIONS AND THEY DON'T HAVE AGENDAS. Now personally I thought this was too narrow a definition and posted a few reasons I thought why and a few other things I thought should be considered such as talent that helps a regional company expand the number of cities they can work in and make money. He only responded to one of these comments and I thought I'd share it with you, though it has nothing to do with drawing, he ignored that: Graham-So with nobody setting PPV records, only WWE selling out major arenas and only Cena having any mainstream media impact, does that make him the only draw in wrestling? and if your basing it only on major arenas and PPV does that mean you can only know if you draw or not if you main event in the WWE? This definition is just to narrow! Eric Bischoff,-Controversy IMO social media has become the fly paper for the most vocal and the smallest percentage of fans. Most of the people who are the most active are losers/uneducated miscreants whose only validation of self comes from readng their own comments. 90% of the viewing audience have a completely differect pov (based on REAL research). Graham-well as charming as it is for you to call me a loser I'm not posting to read myself, I'm posting in hopes of responses that will increase my understanding. I want to understand how this standard can be right, it seems counter-intuitive, I have no problem with the fact I might be wrong, but if I am I need someone else to explain to me why I am, and this is a venue I may learn that. So my question to you is what I was trying to understand from him: How do you define a draw, and can you use a definition that only one company in the US can even achieve? And if you want to hurl a few insults at Eric while your at it thats fine by me Thanks Graham A response from JC: Graham, Traditionally, a guy who "draws money" means a guy who, when you have put him in main events or important programs, sells more tickets (or PPV buys these days) than other people who have been in a same/similar spot, and has done this not just once or twice but on a consistent basis. There used to be dozens and dozens of top guys who "drew money" in the territory days. Now, there are a few, and they ARE all in WWE. The problem is, as Bischoff either doesn't want to admit or is too clueless to know, is that the way people like him have changed the business is the reason, not lack of talent on the young guy's parts. In the territory days, the promoters didn't care WHO drew as long as someone did, they would push anyone they thought could draw, all their businesses were reasonably healthy, and they hadn't exposed everything/given people such bad booking and silly shit so that when angles were shot, they actually increased business. Now, these young guys are seldom put in the spot to draw to begin with because the "stars" have guaranteed contracts, and if you're paying someone main event money you keep them in the main event, so few get the CHANCE to prove they can draw money (It happens some in WWE, and rarely in TNA)--it doesn't apply in TNA to begin with as some of the biggest draws of the past 20 years work/have worked there and still haven't sold tickets/PPV's/increased ratings, because the booking and company structure itself is incompetant. Does that mean those guys "can't draw" because the company they work for has lost tens of millions and still doesn't make a profit of any real size? Also, since it's been 10 years since anyone in pro wrestling drew BIG money, not because of the talent but because of the shitty booking and poorly run companies, as well as the fact that WWE and TNA have made angles/big matches mostly meaningless by doing them too often, badly, and telling people they're all phony to begin with, someone has to be blamed--are these companies going to blame themselves, or their children or families, or "writers"? No--they blame the talent. Companies like ROH struggle because WWE and TNA have made LESS people, not MORE, interested in wrestling. He also shows his ignorance of his current residence in a glass house--if ROH is a "backyard vanity project for marks", what is TNA, since TNA has lost tens of millions MORE than ROH has lost in the exact same time in business, doesn't that mean that ROH is behind WWE but ahead of TNA? Do we grade by gross revenue or total profit? WWE has created an environment where WWE draws as a show, like the Harlem Globetrotters or Holiday on Ice, and the stars on a particular card mean less than they ever have. To truly have guys in the business who "draw money" again, we would have to pitch out the dreck like Bischoff and others who don't respect or understand wrestling, who think they are Emmy award winning "real" TV producers, ditch the comedy writers like Russo and Stephanie McMahon's comic reading college kids, and push wrestlers who win, lose and chase championships. People will watch what wrestling is now on TV for free, and a few hundred thousand might buy the pPV's, but ticket sales for wrestling will NEVER approach what they once were without taking those steps. That is why all the guys today who are actually draws, who sell live event tickets and PPV's in big numbers, almost all work for Dana White, the most successful pro wrestling promoter in the world. He just calls it UFC. Bischoff sees no similarity bewtween MMA/UFC and pro wrestling, which is why he is doomed to be a guy that was successful for 2 years out of a 20 year career. BTW, what other executive in any company actively dislikes, disagrees with, ignores and insults the 10% of people who are most dedicated to/spend the most money on their product or service? All of his "crossover to mainstream culture" bullshit is because people like him, Hogan, McMahon, Russo, etc are all embarassed to admit they are in the wrestling business (and the business hates to admit it has them) and they all want to be "real" stars--only the Rock has done that, but I wish all I named would leave our business to try! This is just my offhand impression of this nitwit's comments, but I think you're wasting time trying to quiz Eric Bischoff on anything other than a good hair dye, a nice tanbed, a well-fitting set of dentures and the current price of a 3 way at the Gold Club. Feel free to repost any/all of this if you want. Jim Cornette

OG = Oscar Gutierrez = Rey Mysterio Also I'd guess KA = Ken Anderson aka Mr. Kennedy and SH probably = Shane Helms. edit: didn't notice the timeframe, KA would have to be Angle.