DMJ

I was confused as to why they didn't have Gargano open up the shirt. On commentary over the replay, McGuinness noted that it was a #DIY shirt and that was clear to fans familiar with the context, but unless I missed it, they never had Gargano himself actually open up the shirt. I think it would've been a decent visual to have him rip it up after the loss. On my blog, I also had this at 3.5-out-of-5 and noted that it was probably the best Takeover showing I've seen from Almas (I don't watch NXT weekly so my knowledge is mostly Takeover based) and that probably has to do with how over Gargano is (compared to the guy he fought at the last special - Roderick Strong maybe?).

Its a shame Creative, Vince, Stephanie or whoever booked it this way. I don't think Id be too happy if it was me that got screwed out of a World Title when others past years got a legimate shot at the title. Not sure I'd call this an "Eric Escobar" situation just yet - for starters, after watching the clip, there's a few directions they can go and all of them bode pretty well for Corbin (at least theoretically). You could have Corbin complain that he had his shoulder up and whine about getting the briefcase back after SummerSlam. Seems like pretty easy heel heat fodder from an already unlikeable guy. You could have Corbin somehow cheat and beat Cena and shock the world. Its not the result I'm expecting at SummerSlam, but I wouldn't put it past the WWE to have Cena lose on an episode of SD soon after (maybe even in a MITB ladder match or something) to write Cena off of the Blue Brand as I believe the rumors about him heading to RAW are legit. You could have Corbin "spoil" the WWE Title match anyway, essentially playing the guy who says, "If you won't let me get another title match, then NOBODY gets another title match!" Even if they were to pull Corbin down a notch and have him feud with AJ Styles, I'd still not be so fast to write him off. I know the Andre Memorial Thing has 0 cred, but even before that, the guy had a slow-but-steady push in NXT that isn't vastly different than what's happened to him on the main roster.

Big Show certainly didn't look thrilled to be partnered with Enzothis week. And feuding with the Good Brothers? Talk about dumping all your unwanted eggs in one unwanted basket. Of the whole bunch, I feel worst for Show. He looked to be in tremendous shape for the potential of facing Shaq and when that fell through, the company barely did anything with him aside from that pretty good RAW match against Strowman. If they move him to SD, I'm not sure there'd be chemistry, but I wouldn't hate seeing motivated Show vs. Styles (could it be worse than any of the Styles/Owens snorefests?) or even Show vs. Nakamura (the clash of styles would be either a total mess or kind of entertaining).

She was kind of feuding with Charlotte, I think, but IIRC Sasha Banks was already pencilled in to have the extended feud over the title - and as the women's division was still only really presenting one feud at a time, I think she would've just been kind of floating around the periphery. Maybe a heel turn and rivalry with Becky Lynch would've been in the cards? I'm not really sure, but I definitely don't remember her being spotlighted at the time over the relative newcomers from NXT.

No reason to feel bad The Thread Killer, textbook cases are called "textbook cases" for a reason. When I was in college, I took a course called Treatment of Sex Offenders - it was fascinating for my buddies and I who were (and remain) pretty big fans of true crime/serial killer stories. Its grisly and gross to others, but whatever. My point is - we studied from an expert who had spent decades working in the field. We read about Peter Pan Syndrome. We read about the cycle of sexual abuse (the idea that the abused child can sometimes become the abuser adult). We read about "grooming." We read about exposure to inappropriate sexuality at an early age and the glorification of youth/cuteness. In the end, we all left that classroom believing that Michael Jackson had probably performed inappropriate sexual acts with children. You hate to make that judgment based on circumstantial evidence - but every box that could be checked for "future sex offender" could be checked for him. In this case, in their own words, they're confessing to a love "so passionate" that they want to kill each other one minute and then, 20 minutes later, are a happy couple. I hate using the words "normal" or "healthy," but I don't think I'm being too judgmental saying that their relationship is, too often, "unsafe." EDIT - I also agree that releasing her, as callous as it is, is the right move. (I'd also add that despite what she's saying, I get the feeling that its a situation where in reality, the WWE doesn't want her back in their lockerroom [who could blame them?] and she really doesn't want to go back but can't say that because she doesn't wanna muddle up the movie deal).

Edited from my blog - just saw this for the first time... John Cena taking on Kurt Angle. The lead-up to this match looks like it was fun (at one point Kurt Angle dressed as Cena and let loose with a rap on SmackDown). In the ring, though, things are all business from the bell, the rivals locking up with the Olympic Gold Medalist outwrestling Cena early. There is an audible "Let's Go Cena" chant (noted by the commentators). Angle continues to control as the match devolves into brawling until Cena escapes a corner and Kurt runs full speed into the post. I usually dislike that spot based on how often its used, but at least in this match Angle had used it successfully minutes earlier (which explains why he'd use it again). Cena takes over and drops Angle with a reverse neckbreaker and, over the next few minutes, a variety of moves - some dropped over the years, some still very much a part of his game. An even louder dueling chant breaks out before Cena lands a big spinebuster. Angle is bleeding profusely out of his mouth, though I'm not necessarily sure from what. Cena attempts his legdrop from the top rope, but Angle shuts him down with a dropkick straight to the shin. Its a risky cut-off that I'm not sure I've seen too many times since (if ever) - a wise choice by Cena because its also a spot that is more risk than reward. Angle hits a Russian Leg Sweep and then uses Cena's momentum against him to lock in an Ankle Lock. Cena grabs the ropes and heads to the outside, but Angle follows him out with a baseball slide that shoves Cena into the announce table. Angle teases a German Suplex off the apron through an announce table, a spot that woud've been absolutely sick, but Cena escapes and basically DDTs Angle into the apron instead. Cena hits the guillotine leg drop as Angle tries to get back in the ring for a close two count. Angle somehow gets up and hits a German Suplex, but Cena cuts him off again with a dropkick to the leg and then "The Throwback" (a rolling neckbreaker). Moments later, Angle busts out the hat trick of german suplexes for another 2 count - the type of sequence that Angle's critics love to note makes so little sense in this point of a match where he should be, ostensibly, running on fumes and selling more. Cena busts out a buckle bomb! Damn, didn't know that was in his arsenal back then. Cena sets him up for the F-U and connects...but Angle kicks out at two! Hmm...maybe its not a new phenomenon that a single F-U never gets the job done. Angle is back on his feet and this time its his turn to finish his ineffective finisher, Cena taking the Angle Slam but kicking out at two. Cena makes his way to the corner and grabs his trademark chain, but Jimmy Korderas takes it away. Cena has him outsmarted, though, because he's got the gold medals in his hands! Cena levels Angle with a big right, but again, only gets 2! Angle with a backslide for 2! Angle with a victory roll into the Ankle Lock and Cena's in trouble! Cena nears the ropes but Angle pulls him back and grapevines to force the submission! This match has plenty of flaws - in fact, if you're not a fan of his and were looking for a match that maybe exemplified everything wrong with Kurt Angle's in-ring style, you could base your entirely argument on a match like this. Angle sells only sporadically and there's little to no psychology in his attack. All the drama comes from finishers getting kicked out. The "Wrestler vs. Street Fighter" backstory is dropped almost instantly. Still, if you're like me and can actually just sit back and almost enjoy Angle for his absurd use of high spots, this is a pretty riveting watch. For starters, the crowd is absolutely hot - not just for Angle, but for Cena, giving this match an interesting twist as a 2017 viewing. Second, yeah there are a ton of false finishes, and yes that's a kind of cheap way to build suspense, but it works. Third, the storytelling and pacing may be flawed in a traditional sense, but Angle's "go-go-go" style prevents this match from ever slipping into tedium. Watching 6 matches in a row where this is the speed and style is very difficult and all too common in 2017 - but on this card, this match follows an "attraction" bout (Vince vs. Steph), some tag team shenanigans (APA vs. Bashams), the (hate to say it) "spectacle" of Zach Gowen vs. Matt Hardy, a big vs. little match in Benoit vs. Albert, and is followed by Eddie Guerrero vs. Big Show. Context maybe helps explain how this match could stand out as particularly entertaining when you think of what else the live and PPV audience had seen and would see that night. I'd say this is a fun watch that is worth checking out if you're a fan of either guy and haven't seen it before, which is what pushes it from a 3-and-a-half rating up to a 4.

While I may not "second" the last bit of hammerva's comment, I do think he's on the money about Mahal/Corbin being a plausible, good idea as a main event in India, especially as I expect Mahal will be cheered in his home country. Does that pairing mean that fans in India will be subject to a match that maybe wouldn't earn many stars in the Observer or whatever? Yeah...but its not really all that different from the countless shows and promotions that have, over the years, put super-popular babyfaces that weren't great workers/past-their-prime (JYD, Ultimate Warrior) against other not-so-great/past-their-prime workers in main events because the crowd responses would mask what would probably be pretty basic, unremarkable in-ring action.

I really liked the debut at MITB, but I agree that him losing his first PPV match is a bad, bad sign...which is kind of a shame because I always thought Maria was good in her various roles and that there is place on the SD roster for their gimmick (especially if you have them built up just to get them slopped by a pig farmer or forced to eat worms by a guy in Darth Maul make-up with a clock in his mouth). I wrote this earlier in this very thread but I'll extrapolate a bit - even if I hate an act, even if I think someone is talentless, it is bad planning/management/booking to debut someone just to lose. Case in point (for me): Umaga. Man, in 2005 (I think) when he debuted, I thought he was terrible, one-note, a stereotype, a blatant "repackage" of a guy that hadn't done anything good in his previous run. I didn't care about his pedigree - I just felt like he sucked and then they had him pretty much taking out guys I respected like Flair and HBK and it felt like they were just forcing him down our throats. Then he had some pretty good matches against Jeff Hardy and, later, Cena. I grew to really like Armando Estrada as his hype man. The act, which I originally believed was some sort of anti-Samoa Joe rib (it was a dumb belief in retrospect, but it was one that had some traction on the internet at that time), ended up delivering. Umaga never became my favorite worker, but I'm sorta glad the company got behind him and, despite general indifference at first, stuck to their obvious plan to push him as a relevant character. For every Umaga, there's a Tensai who flops hard, but at least Tensai can't blame his initial win/loss record. Bennett, on the other hand, wasn't even given a token cheap win in his first major match.

Maybe they'll have weird CGI dragons fighting CGI worms projected onto the mat? Fans loved it at Mania, if I remember correctly...

edited from my blog... Harlem Heat vs. Public Enemy - The use of the toilet lid is particularly pleasing to Dusty Rhodes, whose commentary is one of its strongest selling points. In terms of "suspense," this match has absolutely none - you are basically just watching guys waffle each other for 10+ minutes, which, at first, pops the crowd, but then bores them...Booker [is a] much stronger character and worker than anyone else he's sharing the match with...There's a table spot towards the end that sees Rocco Rock come flying with a somersault legdrop while Johnny Grunge just delivers an awkward and lazy back splash (really he just falls over) onto Stevie Ray...Rhodes commentary carries this match into watchable territory. (2.5/5)

Quick thoughts I haven't seen mentioned. Full review on my blog - Styles/Owens - For how much Owens gloats about his heel work on Twitter, if the ref goes down (even inadvertently), why not actually try to take advantage and cheat? Grab the belt, grab a chair, do something. Also, what this match needed was someone actually working a limb. It wasn't as bad as the "Your Turn/My Turn" movez-crazy match I was expecting, but it still lacked a solid thread. Cena/Rusev - Didn't hate it and the added rule of the finish at least led to a really fun-albeit-cartoonish last third. This was the WWE microwaving a feud from 2015 and just like if you were to microwave a steak that's been in your fridge since 2015, the result wasn't great. Credit should be given, though, to Cena and Rusev taking such a stale match idea with such an obvious result and getting easily the best reactions other than the opener. Zayn/Kannelis - The Power of Love thing is a "TV midcard" act with a ceiling...but I still believe that you don't debut a guy just to have him lose his first major appearance. For all the appreciation there is on this forum of 80s gimmicks, I'm a bit surprised at the derision to them here. To me, there's money in annoyingly romantic heel couple feuding with lovable pair of "normal"/"ugly" babyfaces (think The Boogeyman feuding with Booker and Sharmell) and while we may have seen it a million times before, on a TV show, it would be fine. Zayn wasn't the right foil and, even though I'm a fan of his, didn't gain anything by winning. So, the Breezango reveal, which was mildly hyped on WWE.com as actually happening didn't happen. This wouldn't be so bad if the rest of the show was better - but it wasn't, so, yeah, I'll gripe about it. A minor bait-and-switch is still a bait-and-switch. Orton/Mahal - Again, a table bump by a Singh brother is the best spot of a Orton/Mahal match. I find it interesting that there are people that are willing to defend Mahal as a "fresh" champion. I get it - Orton is super dull. But you don't have to like "Shitty Wrestler B" just because you've seen him less than "Shitty Wrestler A." This was actually the best match these two have had that I've seen - the gimmick being so ludicrous and contrived that the match at least seemed like an exotic spectacle. I'd love to hear the argument that a 3rd one-on-one singles match would've kept my interest more than this because nothing these two did in their first matches was better than just decent. Finally, I've reviewed and rated 90+% of the Network shows since its inception. The only shows I haven't reviewed were ones I attended with friends and got drunk enough to enjoy just by being there. This show was, by my math, the absolute worst Network Special ever. The other lowest scorers in my database are No Mercy 2016, which was salvaged by a good triple threat for the World Championship and a solid Ziggler/Miz match, and Survivor Series 2014 (a crowd-pleasing main event featuring Sting's return and a fun garbage match between Ambrose/Wyatt nudge it slightly above last night's show).

Jinder Mahal vs. Randy Orton - Expecting Mahal to retain. I read that the WWE will be in India in September, so I'm guessing he'll drop the title in October, but between then and now, I'd really love a more interesting challenger. When the smoke clears, Orton will need to be taken off TV for at least a month to get the loser stench off him. Then again, they'll probably just insert him into a feud with Owens and blame KO when fan interest is tepid. John Cena vs. Rusev - This reminds me of when Triple H returned at SummerSlam 2007 to beat King Booker because Triple H needed a win over a respectable opponent, even though it ended up causing more damage to Booker than it actually helped Triple H. I see the same thing happening here. I get that Cena needed a special return match, but Rusev as the sacrificial lamb? Ugh. One step forward for Cena, two steps back for the Bulgarian Brute. Shinsuke Nakamura vs. Baron Corbin - This is either going to be surprisingly great with Nak stepping up to lead Corbin through a solid match that is nice and stiff and keeps both guys over or a total mess that will expose both men (but that redditers will entirely blame Corbin for). To me, this is a make-or-break Nak match because if you can't produce passable matches against your Corbins and your Kanes, you can't be a top guy. Sami Zayn vs. Mike Kanellis - I'm more excited for this than for Owens/AJ, which will no doubt be filled with better and more movez but will probably lack any story beyond "you're turn/my turn." Zayn/Kanellis should at least offer a clear good guy/bad guy dynamic.

Jeff Jarrett built a boat, The Carters filled the tank, AJ and Joe kept it afloat, But Russo made sure it sank.

Is the endgame here Jordan vs. Angle? Or Gable vs. Jordan in a fight for who Angle's real son is? Like so many of the other convoluted "family" stories (except, oddly, that the most convoluted one - Taker & Kane - has actually maintained some integrity) that the WWE has produced, I expect that this will all be forgotten in a year or so and become a running gag for "smart fans" to chuckle about.

Its obviously Monday Morning Quarterbacking or the benefit of retrospect, but I recall the chatter about Del Rio always centering around the idea that Vince was high on him, that his push was a top priority (hence having him beat Punk in 2011), that he was a critical piece in bringing in Hispanic viewers as "the next Eddie" or "the next Rey" or whatever. All of these things, in retrospect, support the theory that if Del Rio was partying hard back then or if there were questions of his character, they would've been swept under the rug a bit. Even with Angle, the details of issues seemed to come to light when he went to TNA as the DUIs racked up and the reason for his departure became common knowledge. Is the bigger conspiracy question, though, whether or not this is actually a recurring page of the "future endeavors" playbook? I mean, Tully Blanchard comes to mind too here.

I saw on reddit that Max Landis started a petition to bring back Talking Smack already. Also, Renee Young and others have gone on twitter basically saying how sad that they are that it was cancelled. I still don't fully understand the reason for cancellation. I get that ratings would matter to USA, but this is a Network show - but the cost of producing Talking Smack, I'm guessing, is pretty low. I mean, especially compared to producing 205 Live. I know its even cheaper to just air old WCW and WWE PPVs after SmackDown, but I thought the reason they weren't doing that was because they want the Network to provide new, relevant content and not just be "the vault"? My only theory is that Vince felt like doing RAW Talk and making that the "flagship" talk show is more important to him than having a comparatively more successful SmackDown version be seen as "the original" and the "better version." I say this because, as far as I've heard, there's no plan to cancel RAW Talk and, if there were, I don't think anyone would give two shits because if Talking Smack's ratings were low enough to be cancelled, I'd imagine RAW Talk's are even lower. Having the hard numbers would be really helpful, but I know those won't ever see the light of day. Aside from those, I feel like I'd need strong evidence beyond "RAW has higher ratings than SmackDown, so it does a better post-show number too" to convince me RAW Talk gets more viewers, especially when you look at the popularity of the post-shows' respective hosts, how "buzz-worthy" they are, and the fact that, before 205 Live got shoveled in, one show took place after fans had just watch a 3-hour show and another after a more digestible 2-hour show.

Yeah, its weird. I remember watching this show at the time and being upset with the finish at age 14, probably because I was a Flair fan, but probably also because even as a 14 year old I was of the belief that at the annual "biggest show," the faces should come out on top. Re-watching it years later, I'm kind of struck with the exact same feeling - even when I'm not remotely as invested as I was back then. Plus, as Pete mentioned above, Curt Hennig is the one that does the run-in? As I was watching, I thought it'd be David Flair (that turn must happen later) and I almost feel like even though that would've made absolutely no sense, it would've at least been wacky and outrageous. Having it be Hennig is not a swerve - its precisely what one could've predicted. Similarly, when I was a kid, I feel like I remember Hall being gone prior to Starrcade, but no, I watched World War 3 and Halloween Havoc and there he is and at the start of Starrcade he comes out and states very clearly that he's got "something to prove." So, its almost the same thing with the main event finish - we're supposed to see Hall's interference as a swerve (I think), but you'd have to be a 14-year old mostly watching RAW and bootleg ECW tapes at this point not to have seen Scott Hall screwing Goldberg a mile away.

I wonder what the reason is/was. It can't cost that much to produce, right? Was there issues with travel for talent and staff? Do the numbers show that Talking Smack does worse than putting on a random PPV in terms of live Network viewers?

Lesnar vs. Test from King of the Ring 2002 is kind of a hidden gem - but not a diamond, more like a topaz or kyanite or something else that would make for a fun piece of costume jewelry? Point is, yeah, I could be convinced Test has a little over a half-dozen matches worth watching.

I'd be curious to know how many of those people that care about her from WWE are still in communication with her and how frequently. This whole situation is so f'd, if I were WWE (and I'll admit, its kind of a heartless thing to do), I'd cut ties with her the same way they did with Angle. Was it the best thing for Angle's health? Probably not...but if the shit ever hits the fan (and I hope it doesn't), its going to be on the company to explain, "Well, she was under contract with us, but hasn't been on TV or touring in over a year, and she failed two Wellness tests, but she was also recovering from injury, and her friends and family advised her to leave her husband, but..." It is sometimes a really cold thing to do to let someone hit rock bottom or to let someone make a choice that you know could be really dangerous and harmful - but what other option does WWE realistically have? Is there really a chance that if they, say, made her RAW GM and had her touring with the company, she'd actually show up? I get the impression that things are very icy between the two sides, there's little to zero communication, and there are no plans to bring her back for the time being, healed or not.

Just as a shameless plug of my blog, here are my scores from the past few WWE PPVs (not counting NXT, which tend to score higher because they have fewer matches and math is involved)... Great Balls of Fire - (3.06/5) Money in the Bank '17 - (2.58/5) Extreme Rules '17 - (2.50/5) Backlash '17 - (2.37) Payback '17 - (2.44) WrestleMania 33 - (2.80) FastLane '17 - (2.89) Elimination Chamber '17 - (2.86) Royal Rumble '17 - (3.30) Roadblock: End of the Line - (2.50) TLC 2016 - (3.00) ...and I could go on and on. But, at least from my records, the last non-NXT/non-"Big Four" show that I thought was as consistently good as GBOF would have been Money in the Bank 2016 (3.13 out of 5) thanks to good matches in AJ/Cena, Reigns/Rollins (I can't imagine enjoying a Rollins match now), a fun MITB ladder match, and a better-than-expected Apollo Crews/Sheamus match.

Overall, I found the show quite watchable. Full review on my blog. A few notes for conversation's sake: - Disagree with the comment that Miz's entourage is unnecessary. Found their involvement (and Maryse's) to be the only remarkable thing about the Miz/Ambrose match and an element that helped it stand out. Plus, as others have pointed out, Miz's batting average is really high at getting himself and his partnerships over (see his work with Morrison, Big Show, Sandow, Riley, R-Truth, etc.) and even if it doesn't do anything for Bo or Axel in the long run, its not like we're talking about two undeniable blue chippers getting held back. It's Bo and Axel. - Wasn't as big into the Ironman match as others but am willing to chalk it up to this sort of stipulation match just not being "my thing." It wasn't a bad match (I rated it above average), but it won't make my short list of MOTY contenders. - What might've made that list (at least until the finish) was Bliss/Banks. From beginning to end, I was hooked in this match and found that it may have been Banks' most seamless match in awhile. It helps when the internet is buzzing about "shoot" heat and then you see a match where both performers are not only laying their shit in, but looked like they were actively competing to be "the star" (this was Banks as The Boss in a way she never got to be against Charlotte while Bliss looks and work like she legitimately savors the championship and how it places her above her jealous opponents). Others may have seen the dislocated elbow bit before, but it was new to me, so, yeah, I loved it (and didn't find that it happened "too early" in the match at all as it actually would've been even dumber to have that as your finish knowing that it had been used before). Tack on a better ending to this match that sees Bliss cheat to win and keep the awesome post-match spot and I'm probably at 4-stars for it. - If there was a moment in the Braun/Roman match that screamed "babyface" to me it was Braun shrugging off chair shots. Just awesome. The post-match angle and commentary definitely put some heat on Roman, but I don't think the WWE is halting production on Reigns gear any time soon. I think they've come around to the idea that Roman is not going to be "the next Cena," but maybe they see him as the next Lesnar or (and I'm puking in my mouth as a type this) Triple H in that Roman will get whatever reaction he gets depending on who he's facing and will maintain his main event position/credibility because he'll be the "cornerstone" of the company the way Triple H was from say 2001-2005 (as mostly heel, but also face at times). With Cena, his challengers were almost always heels throughout his run, but Reigns is currently a different case as he's gone up against increasingly popular new guys like Strowman, "smart" fan favorites like Joe and AJ, and "casual" fan favorites like Lesnar and Taker. With Reigns, I think the strategy makes some sense - the more intriguing question to me is how it will work with Strowman. Braun gets cheered when he's tossing Roman around or when he's going face-to-face to Lesnar. I think he'd get cheered for beating on Wyatt. But against Balor? Against Ambrose? There's some interesting dynamics to consider if they ever do decide to "lighten" Braun's monster side and have him actually become a full-fledged "good guy."

New-ish documentary on Netflix called Nobody Speaks. First half is all about Gawker/Hogan and was pretty good. I, for one, after watching the documentary and seeing what's been going on with Trump's attack on the media have kinda switched sides a bit - In 2016, I didn't really care about the specifics of the case and just looked at it as Gawker/TMZ getting taken down a peg because they'd violated a celebrity's privacy and that sex tapes aren't newsworthy because, hey, what's the difference between this and "The Fappening"? Don't celebrities deserve the right to seek justice when their private pics and videos are leaked? But the documentary, which is imperfect (especially in its 2nd and 3rd acts), made a convincing argument that the threat of censorship is real and that the 1st Amendment and a free press are more important than Hulk Hogan's embarrassment or Paige's embarrassment or Jennifer Lawrence's privacy. This is also why, as a poster asked above, we should care that a billionaire like Theil was secretly behind the case. Even if you believe Gawker acted shamefully by outing Theil (to which, again, the documentary offers a reasonable counterpoint - that the article in question was not only complimentary towards Theil but was really about how even in "liberal" Silicon Valley, LGBT VCs feel the need to remain closeted), do we really want the richest 1%, with bottomless resources, to be able to piggyback onto whatever civil suits choose just so they can win petty disputes? Again, I hope others - especially those who were maybe like me and actually felt sympathy for Hogan - take a minute to watch the first 40 minutes of the film. After viewing, I actually have sympathy for Hogan in a different way. I feel sorry that he was treated like a total pawn and that his name is tied to a case that was really about Theil and the powerful anti-media Right trying to take out an independent press. I think Hulk Hogan thought was fighting for celebrity privacy when, at the end of the day, this case had almost nothing at all to do with that (arguably) noble cause. And as long as I'm on a rant, if you still think the case was at all about "making Hogan whole" and not eliminating Gawker (and putting sites like it on alert), think of the judgment. Even the biggest Hulkamaniac would probably agree that $140 million is quite a settlement when you compare it to your state's average wrongful death payout. I mean, Hulk Hogan deserves $140 million because it got leaked that he said racist stuff and slept with Bubba's trophy wife, but Ferguson settles the Michael Brown suit for $1.5? Castile's life was $3? Eric Garner is choked to death for selling loose cigarettes and NY pays out under $6 mil? If we used the Gawker case as our baseline, we'd be bankrupting municipalities every 3 months, but the LIFE of someone is worth less than Hulk Hogan's untarnished reputation? $140 million wasn't about doing right by Hulk, it was about putting a scare in the media and the fact that you can tie several of these right wing billionaires together makes it even scarier.

I'm sure there's multiple reasons he requested a release, but from a fan perspective, I can see how he might've viewed his WWE run as disappointing and not looking like it was going to get any better. With 205 Live being its own "brand" in a sense, I can see Aries feeling like he's been pigeon-holed (meanwhile, the 190-pound Finn Balor is crowned Universal Champion within a couple months of his main roster debut) and that a ceiling was placed on him fairly early (even Aries' debut match seemed more about getting Corbin more over than heralding the arrival of a potential NXT Champion and main roster player, which is the level I'm sure he believes he should be at). I can see the same frustrations eventually getting to Neville and others. I know its been said a million times already, but the problems with the cruiserweight division concept in today's WWE is not just "they don't get stories" or "they need more air time" - its that when you've got Seth Rollins doing the Pheonix Splash and big men like Luke Harper doing suicide dives, the 205 guys aren't giving the audience anything they haven't already seen.

I kinda hate to admit it, but I cried at the end of Bayley/Sasha from Takeover Brooklyn 2015. The pre-match video promo hit me, the crowd was super live for it, the emotion of the finish and post-match. I don't know, sometimes the corniest crap gets to me. Case in point, I fucking wept at the awful Adam Sandler movie "Click." It is one of my most embarrassing moments that my wife loves to bring up in front of company for a laugh and, at a recent dinner party, we were joking about it and another guest admitted they cried too - which made me feel better for falling (and falling HARD) for such melodramatic BS. I kinda feel the same way for Bayley/Sasha - it was designed to make fans tear up and they succeeded. Honestly, I'm surprised they didn't have Bayley celebrate with a puppy who survived cancer. So, anyway, if anyone wants to make me feel better, they can say they cried after Bayley/Sasha too. EDIT - Just as I posted this, Benbeeach made it okay!