Coffey

I don't get it. What are we supposed to say? "I agree, there will be a ten man run-in?" I thought it was a rhetorical statement.

Well, it'll definitely be worth checking out. The problem, of course, will be the rest of the card. What are they going to do, slap Mysterio and Super Crazy together? There's just not a whole lot of options left with a lot of the ECW alumi being in contract to TNA. Sabu, Shane Douglas, Raven, The Dudley Boys, etc.

How about "I don't even care to comment about it because it's just not worth that amount of time," on a MESSAGE FORUM.

RRR is a dumbfuck. Everyone should know that by now.

Because if a lot of people watch it, it's quality. WWE is a business first. More viewers = more money.

Just a reminder: Mick Foley presenting "this is your life" to The Rock is still, I believe, the highest rated moment in Raw history. A lot of people really don't watch for the wrestling. I'm trying to write parts of the review right now. I made an outline and jotted down some points that I wanted to convey but I just have so much to say, I feel like I'm getting disorganzied. I'm jumping around a lot. I will say this though, something to think about. When WWE present something, and it's obvious what's going to happen, is it so bad when it actually does turn out that way? For example, we all knew that Mickie was going to turn heel. We saw it coming from a mile away. However, when it finally happened, I see some people acting like it sucks, or that it was too predictable or whatever. Everything doesn't have to be a swerve. Sometimes, the clear path is the best one. It just seems like you can't please everyone. If they do the swerve, people complain. If they don't do the swerve people complain. Why are the complainers the loudest?

It doesn't at all. I didn't mean to convey that it did. I just wanted to illustrate that I wasn't alone in my boat. I recorded the show (glad that I did) and I'm going to re-watch it again, maybe twice, then I plan on writing a review of it. I'll post it here. I'm going to play some Warcraft for now to let some thoughts sink in though.

Ha! I'm using this elsewhere. Of course to mock you.

A bad username doesn't make someone's opinion less valid. Their points still stand.

Here's some quotes from some members of the Sports Argument Stadium section of the Something Awful message forums: Here's some quotes from some members of The Smart Marks message forums: ...obviously, I'm not alone in my praise of this show. You can find just as many negative quotes but it certainly wasn't a bad show. It was good at what it meant to do: entertain and sell Wrestlemania. It was entertaining. We got thumbtacks, flaming tables, superplexes off of ladders from the ring to the outside floor through two tables, Mickie finally turning heel, all kinds of shit. We didn't get 5-star matches but we got great TV.

If you don't like this show, you're not going to like a whole lot of shows. I'll leave it at that.

Holy fuck...

This has been such a great show. The best WWE show I've seen in years. YEARS. I really hope some of you guys watched it. There's some things I could nit-pick, like Cena/Triple H getting physical before 'Mania, etc. but really, this show single-handedly probably sold a lot of people on 'Mania. Really good show. Main event time. Street Fight.

Eh, March Madness will be covered by Sportscenter. SNME won't and I plan on watching Wrestlemania.

Not a lot to say really. Tonight is the return of SNME and I'm curious who all is going to watch it. Triple H & Cena Vs. Mysterio, Orton & Angle in the main event. Trish & Mickie Vs. Candice & Victoria. JBL Vs. Austin in a beer drinking contest. Boogeyman Vs. Booker. HBK Vs. Shane in a street fight.

This is the way I see if, or at least the way I've comprehended what's been typed so far: Loss is talking about each era during that era. The day-to-day of each era. The matches along with the storylines, build, etc. The impact that each era had on the business as a whole. Goodhelmet is just looking at the matches of each era because he didn't watch each era. Or at least '96 ECW, so he's just going by workrate/match quality whatever you want to call it. There's more to it than just matches. I think that's the point. You can say AJPW '94 was better than ECW '96 because Kawada/Misawa was better than 911/Dreamer but that's not the point of this post. At least, I don't think it is.

I did watch ECW live because it was shown on late night FSN, or ESPN at like 1am or 2am on Sat. nights. That was the first time I ever saw someone go through a table. I remember thinking "that guy's dead." Now table spots happen all the time, so it's no big deal. It was HUGE the first time I saw it. When I first saw Raven slap Dreamer with a chair, it was just a chairshot because I'd seen a lot of chair shots. When I first saw him drop-toe hold someone onto an open chair, or use a cheese grater or put someone threw a table or kendo stick someone, it was all new. It drew me in and I watched whenever it was on. ECW also popularized the multiple man run-in. I'm not talking like the IV Horsemen running out to save Flair. I mean, just random dudes coming out because they can. Everyone from the lower card guys up to the main eventers and then New Jack with a shopping cart full of "toys." Granted in '96 it was more like 9-1-1 doing run-ins and Chokeslamming everyone but still. I didn't see anything like that again until the nWo.

Half the roster won't be able to "pass" the drug tests.

Didn't see it being a female based on the thread title. She'll fail because WWE will make her fail. Women can't really get over on talent in WWE. It doesn't matter if she has a backround or not, unless she has a big fake rack, she'll get abused. Just like Jazz. The MMA backround worked for Ken Shamrock and to some extent Tank Abbot and Dan Severn as well. Hell, even Tito Ortiz showed up in TNA for a PPV. I would have more faith if the current crop of women on the roster, like Jillian Hall, weren't used so poorly. I always wondered why WWE didn't actively pursue Bob Sapp.

There's some people that would still argue for shit like HBK/Rock or Austin/Hogan, etc...but I think there aren't any left. Hell, if you looked hard enough, I'm sure there's some people itching to see shit like Kane/Abyss or Abyss/Mankind.

That's one of the biggest problems with wrestling today. There aren't any "dream matches" left. What are we going to get? A broken down Hogan against a broken down Austin? There's not a "second federation," so to speak, that can produce names that people really care about that'll get people talking. There's not a whole lot of "what if AJ Styles wrestled John Cena?" talk.

There's been talk of bringing back Waltman and Luger. Nash is still under contract. Hall has been there, more than once in the past. Of that list, only Bagwell is really a longshot to show up again on TNA TV.

Well, Samoa Joe is signed to a contract, so no one else really matters. TNA can build the company around Joe the same way ROH did. TNA also have people like Styles locked up, at least for awhile. They'll be fine.

If I were to display how I felt through text, the "H" and "A" keys would both break.

I'm not real fond of Elix Skipper either, I'd say he's third or fourth.