Mini Bennett

Initially I thought Mick Foley going on last was a lock, but with Bruno now getting inducted is it fair to say that definitely is not the case?

Who in the history of wrestling not Ricky Steamboat or Tito Santana actually prefer being a face? Dusty Magnum Von Erichs except maybe David Duggan JYD Greg Gagne Verne Gagne Bruno Just a few A recent example is Chris Masters. He's stated as such several times.

The Rumble match was really well-paced. Everyone who needed to perform did so and more. I am belligerently sticking to my guns that this was one of the best Royal Rumble matches ever.

WWE are at the Royal Rumble fan-fest this week. It involves a ton of former popular Indy guys, including Corey Graves (Sterling James Keenan), Luke Harper (Brodie Lee), Adrian Neville (PAC) and Xavier Woods (Consequences Creed from TNA). I'm pulling for Woods, who has grown a lot during his NXT/FCW stint, but I assume they're going with Mike Rotunda's kid, Bo Dallas. I don't think WWE have ever done anything similar to this with their developmental guys in the past, have they? There is also this:

Accidental post.

Chris Masters was doing the Ring Ka King show in India (in conjunction with TNA) for a while. He had a try out with TNA, but I think CMLL just picked him up. If TNA had any brains, Masters could easily be a Sting circa 1995-like babyface who you base your brand around, IMO.

I pretty much agree with all of the pro-WWECW posts in this thread. I'm only disappointed that we never ended up getting Evan Bourne/Big Daddy V or Bourne/Fit Finlay.

IMO, Flair in 1995-96 is when we started to see him decline somewhat, but it wasn't a massive drop off or anything. I think Triple H has recently started this point of his career as well (not that Hunter is really comparable to Ric). It's pretty remarkable that he only just show signs of declining around the mid-90s considering how good he was for that long. Also, what's the deal with Bret? Are his critiques of Ric in his book (during his WWF run and then again in 98) anything we can actually take seriously?

Eh, I kind of understand the gripe with Billy Gunn's rehiring. Dave Taylor, Haku, Sean Morley and a ton of other horrendously talented vets are sitting around doing nothing right now, yet Gunn of all people gets the job.

I'm trying to decide who the most overrated wrestler of the past 10 years is: John Morrison, Kurt Angle or Shelton Benjamin. I'm thinking Benjamin. At least Kurt had a couple of years of good stuff. Seriously though, what's the bet WWE are in fact intending on bringing back vets who can actually teach young guys stuff (Goldust, Masters, Venis etc.), but Meltzer is confusing those guys with who he considers underutilized?

MVP I could get behind coming off his run in NJPW, but why Shelton?

Nope, just fantasy booking.

Not if they were going with Rock vs. CM Punk for the WWE title at WrestleMania XXIX, which is whole point of my last post. And with Rock as the Rumble winner, he doesn't have to be on TV every week.

Hardcore wrestling obviously has it's place, but ECW basing it's entire entity on that style absolutely had a huge part to play in it's failure. It just isn't sustainable to a wider audience over a long period of time. When your whole brand is based completely on shock value, people get desensitized to it pretty quickly.

Would have the John Cena/Rock rematch worked at the Rumble? They could have had it for the title too. It looks like we'll be getting CM Punk/Rock at the Rumble and either Cena/Rock II or a Cena/Rock/Punk triple threat match at Wrestlemania XXIX, but for or a while I had Cena retaining the WWE title at the Rumble, only to have Rock enter the Royal Rumble match later on in the night last eliminating Punk. Punk gets the title back from Cena in the Elimination Chamber and later retains the title against Rock at WrestleMania. Both Cena and Punk come out smelling like roses in the end and you can still hype Rock being in the main-event at Mania every week on TV months before the show.

I'd almost completely agree, NintendoLogic. I wouldn't leave it off the table, though.

I get the feeling we'll end up with a triple threat situation, Kostka. Punk has said over the year that he doesn't have any interest in working with Taker at Mania. Here's my fantasy booked top of the WrestleMania card: - John Cena vs. Undertaker WWE Championship match - CM Punk © vs. The Rock - Brock Lesnar vs. Randy Orton World Heavyweight Championship match - Dolph Ziggler © vs. Ryback People are going to watch the show regardless of whether Triple H is on the show or not, so I don't see the point in throwing him on the card when he's not even a full time performer any more. This show, IMO, should be all about getting as much as you possibly can out of Rock and Lesnar. With the amount of exposure they're getting out of these guys it seems insane to me that you wouldn't use them to further legitimize your top guys. Not only by having Punk and Orton go over, but by having Cena and Taker, two "WWE guys" be the last match on the show. I don't think making Rock and Brock feel like they were a bigger deal than the WWE itself really helped much, so putting them in semi main-events certainly wouldn't hurt in that regard, and neither would the momentum Orton would get for his supposed upcoming heel turn. After that, I'd build him and Ryback over the summer, but that's neither here nor there. Ryback and Ziggler are just thrown in there together because they're basically made for each other stylistically.

Because Ryder's on the show every week. I don't think they were any less happy about the surprise. And if it's not worth arguing about, why continue to argue... using Ryder not being on the show as a reason to be upset really seems like grasping at straws to be honest.

How is throwing a nostalgia act from the area out there not accomplishing exactly that? And as mentioned before, Ryder isn't there anyway.

How is Zack Ryder any more of a joke than Brooklyn Brawler? He's one of like 3 loveable losers they have on the roster. Totally inconsequential either way. Really, really psyched to see Del Rio as a babyface.

Provided Undertaker isn't heading into his last match, I'd love to see him get Wade Barrett at WrestleMania XXIX. I get the impression we'll probably end up with him against Brock Lesnar, though, which completely bums me out. I haven't been watching the show, but looks pretty solid thus far.

You wouldn't happen to be talking about the Royal Rumble from earlier this year? Yeah, it was pretty fun. The end portion of the match was almost entirely filled up with mid-card/upper mid-card heels though and it felt really congested. The commentary totally missed a ton of important shit (Miz and Cody Rhodes finally getting eliminated after lasting the whole match, Big Show being single handily thrown out) and unfortunately the crowd was pretty dead for a really strong finishing stretch between Sheamus and Chris Jericho. I don't know. There were pros and cons, but it was one of the weaker Rumbles in recent memory, IMO. Edit: And now I've just figured out you were talking about the Legends of Wrestling Round table. I hadn't read the thread the entire way through and saw discussion about past Rumbles and figured that was the current topic. Regardless, not a great way of starting on a forum. Anyway, yeah. The discussion that's there is pretty interesting, but it's easily the most heavily edited show they've ever done.