DMJ

Oh, Marty. I can definitely see the "delusions of grandeur" thing with Marty too. But, in his defense, the WWE has also, historically, made him a huge deal - definitely more than other ex-tag partners of Hall of Famers/World Champions (Jim Neidhart, Matt Hardy, Stevie Ray, Lance Storm, etc.). The Barbershop segment is always hyped as HBK's "origin" story, as integral to his character as little Bruce Wayne witnessing the murder of his parents, so Jannetty matters there. His initial return on Monday Night RAW in the mid-90s was also considered a "classic moment," so much so that they brought it him out again in 05' (?). (Checked wikipedia - they also had him involved in segments in 07' and 09'). So if Jannetty has an inflated sense of his importance, the WWE created it.

I don't know if I totally buy the "fans have been programmed" bit as a leading culprit. While I wouldn't argue that the workrate/high risk style isn't more common than it was 15 years ago, I'm not sure if that stopped tomorrow - if Big E stopped spearing people onto arena floors, if John Cena didn't attempt Code Reds, if Seth Rollins wasn't trying to powerbomb Kane off the top rope, etc., the audience would all of a sudden turn their backs on the product. Look no further than the booking of the storylines over the past half-decade as proof that there is a large segment of the audience that is willing to sit through just about anything. Take out half the high spots on any given episode of RAW and I don't think anything changes in dollars-and-cents terms. So, I kind of put the blame for this on the agents, producers, and the people leading the ship. They are less patient than their audience. Just this week, AJ Styles busted out the Styles Clash on an episode of SD that few saw while, at the Rumble and RAW, they had built some serious suspense over when we'd finally get to see it. The answer was "You missed it" instead of them actually making it a moment at Mania. Again - the people in charge of the weekly episode TV series known as WWE are less patient than their audience.

I think the post above would've made more sense if, instead of that reading "Mizdow," it just read Miz. The Miz is one of the few guys that gets legitimate heat anywhere on the card. Sure, Sandow is an entertaining performer, but let's not forget, that whole run wouldn't have been seen as anything special if it wasn't for the fact that the fans (smark, mark, the average "IWCers," kids, adults, and everyone in between) genuinely despise The Miz and will probably never make him a babyface (which you can't say about an Owens, Wyatt, or Rollins). I can come off as a bit of a homer for the guy as I'm a Clevelander, but honestly, I'd love to see the case for The Miz not being a better all-around heel worthy of a top position over a Sheamus or Del Rio, who don't elicit half the response Miz does regularly and that the company constantly has to "rebuild."

EDIT - Not positing that Jericho be the mechanic, just some thoughts on him. Jericho has often told the story of how he was given "one last shot" to prove himself worthy of being in the WWE in a match against X-Pac because Vince told him something like, "If you can't have a good match with Waltman, you can't have a good match with anyone." While I don't think AJ Styles or Fandango were put against him because they were on any kind of thin ice (ditto for John Cena, whose first real feud and PPV opponent was Jericho), I do think Vince sees Jericho as someone who has proven himself able to have good matches with just about anyone and get the desired reactions out of the crowd. I know Y2J is nobody's favorite here, but I tend to agree that in terms of making fans care about the outcome of the match, making his opponent look good, and keeping himself over, Jericho is as good as you're going to find on the current roster. For another recent example, aside from the Cena debut, can anyone name a main roster Neville match that seemed "bigger" than his one against Jericho in Japan? He was also the only relevant singles opponent Evan Bourne had in his entire run too.

Cleveland and Cincinnati hate each other, so I doubt the audience will see Ambrose as a hometown favorite. Mind you, Reigns will still get booed out of the building, especially when he backdoors his way to a victory after the Wyatts take out Brock. I was at TLC 2014 and can say I thought Dean would get booed heavily there when, just a few hours earlier, the Bengals had trounced the Browns. The opposite happened. Aside from true hometown hero Dolph Ziggler and John Cena (who was immensely popular with the kids, of which there are typically many at Ohio shows), Ambrose was easily the most over babyface and even the announcement of his hometown didn't draw nearly the chorus of boos that it should've on that day. Lesnar is going to get huge pops. Ambrose is going to get huge pops. The best Reigns can hope for is that the younger fans somehow prefer him over Ambrose, but considering most young fans will cheer ANY babyface (for example, if this were Reigns vs. Cena vs. Lesnar, they may have a favorite, but would likely cheer anyone BUT Lesnar), I don't think this is going to solidify Reigns much as the "next Cena."

I didn't think of that at the time, but now, I think it would've worked. It also makes it much easier to explain why Reigns should be getting a title match aside from "rematch clause" as they could've played up the idea that Triple H didn't eliminate Reigns - that it was Vince and his goons - and that Triple H knew he couldn't take Reigns out himself, goading the Game into a match by questioning his greatness. Instead, I feel like Triple H won things fair and square, that Reigns deserves a shot no more than Ambrose (IC Champion and runner-up) or Lesnar.

Full review on my blog forthcoming, but some quick notes - * I definitely don't think Lesnar was booked as "just a guy." He tossed out Swagger in under 20 seconds. The Miz wouldn't even get in the ring with him. He turned the Rumble into Suplex City and blasted Braun Strowman so hard in the mush that I wouldn't be surprised he can't eat solid food for a few days. * What bothered me more than Lesnar's elimination (which didn't bother me) was BRAY WYATT's elimination. He was the one that was booked like "just a guy." They should've had Lesnar come back and toss him as the rest of the Wyatts were being forced to the back by officials. This "eye-for-an-eye leaves everyone blind" twist would've established that, like Lesnar only losing because the Wyatts ganged up on him, Wyatt only lost because Lesnar got to him alone. Instead, Wyatt was tossed by either Reigns or Triple H in a routine fashion that made him look like nothing special. * Equally stupid was the League of Nations attack on Reigns. The Rumble has one very basic, ultra-important rule. A rule that Vince McMahon knows well (considering he masterfully subverted it to win one a decade or so ago). The heels not actually eliminating Reigns was flat out dumb. After TLC, I was on board for Sheamus to get a bit of a second look as a major heel act and possible Taker opponent for Mania, but the League of Nations garbage and the stupidity displayed at the Rumble has me back to not caring about him. * People are overstating Triple H's babyface reaction. Yes, he got cheered when he came out...but there was a definite shift in fan responses as the crowd (correctly) recognized and became disappointed in what that meant for the outcome. Triple H was cheered for his entrance, but when it came down to him and Ambrose, it was obvious that the audience wanted Ambrose to win. The fact that Ambrose was positioned there also tells me that they knew exactly what the responses would be - that Reigns would likely get a mild reaction (and that his elimination would be cheered) and that Triple H would initially be viewed as a "savior" but that they could keep him heel by having him eliminate perennial underdogs/fan surrogates like Ziggler and Ambrose. * I'm going to FastLane so I'm eager to see how that card shapes up. In my mind, though, if this match was about building Reigns up, it seemed to do the exact opposite. I can name 4-5 guys that came out of this one with a fair amount of shine (Styles, Owens, Ambrose, even Jericho and obviously HHH), but Roman Reigns would not be on that list.

No complaints about AJ's elimination. Owens was the best possible choice, aside from Lesnar. AJ came in and seemed like a huge star from the first second he was on screen. The question is whether or not they'll lose that once he starts appearing on RAW every week. And here comes Zayn! Excellent.

Ain't too proud to admit that I'll check this out when it shows up on one of the millions...and millions of free porn sites out there. Also thought it was funny that the OP asked "Who is going to sit through this film?" If this is how people view hardcore porn on the internet, by sitting through entire 90-minute videos, I've been doing it wrong for close to two decades now.

Really enjoyed reading this. I had no idea of this whole story.

I think the idea is going to be that Charlotte needs Ric to help her cheat to maintain her title and will continue to do so...until Charlotte ends up turning on her dad, claiming she didn't need him all along and, by turning on her beloved old man, becoming an even bigger heel. Then Flair backs up whoever Charlotte's challenge is for Mania (maybe Nikki?). It won't make a lick of sense, but when has that ever stopped the WWE before? Its kind of a shame that 6 months after the Divas Revolution, I'm already kind of over this group and am eagerly anticipating the promotion of Asuka and return of Nikki Bella. Granted, Sasha getting injured definitely took some air out of things, but its not like the "revolution" was producing great TV before that. I blame myself for being naive enough to believe a roster consisting of the aforementioned women and Becky Lynch and Alicia Fox and Natalya and Paige could actually yield at least one engaging storyline.

I was a mega-mark for Kevin Nash and Alex Shelley's skits in TNA, though, it kinda got worse the more other X-Divisioners got involved. Probably the only TNA I would put on this list, but I'll admit I hardly watched the promotion regularly at any time.

Here's hoping he's right - I've got tickets!

Couldn't agree more with the post above. At the time, it was cartoonish and silly and eye-rolling stuff...but I almost think it would be pretty over now. Would Stardust not benefit from delivering his backstage promos from some weird B-movie sci-fi setting? Or think of whether The Ascension would be more enjoyable if they had wacky Kevin Sullivan as a mouthpiece and really acted like they were legitimately from a dystopian future, cutting promos from a cheap Mad Max-ian post-nuclear desert wasteland. On my rewatches of WCW PPVs and Clashes from 95', when I rated stuff, I typically gave their segments bonus points for the simple fact that it put a smile on my face as I was watching. The beauty of wrestlecrap means something to me as a fan and the Dungeon of Doom is a great example of it (compared to, again, The Ascension or Stardust, which is just crap because it doesn't even bother to go "all the way" with the ham factor).

Anyone else dig the cage match between DX and Vince/Shane/Big Show from 06'? Haven't watched it since the night it aired, but I rememer having a blast watching it at a bar with my buddies back then. On that same note, I dug the WM22 match between Vince and Shawn. It was a blatant retread of the matches Vince had 4-5 years earlier, but in 2006, after a bit of a gap in Vince's in-ring action, it was really fun to see him out there, bumping and bleeding.

Not that it is a small detail, but I think this only affects the rumored Cena/Taker match (which I do believe/suppose was the plan). I still think Brock/Reigns II was the main and I expect it will still be that way. "Who does Taker face?" is the major question because from a marketing standpoint/drawing ability, I do think he still has an aura that makes his match the second most important of the night - but he needs an opponent worthy of that. I'm not sure there is one on the current roster because Wyatt certainly wasn't one last year and I'm not sure Sheamus or Rusev fit the bill either. I kinda like the off-the-wall thought of Ambrose being a "lunatic" who wants to challenge the established legend to make his own name. Even in a loss, Ambrose wins. (This is also why, in the summer of 2014, Ambrose/Lesnar would've been the hottest ticket the WWE could've produced) I'm crossing my fingers that HHH's match is some sort of Ownership of WWE stip and that it will be used to "end" the Authority angle (in wrestling terms that means no Authority for maybe 24 months). If that is the stip, Triple H can wrestle a box of unsold DX DVDs and I'll be happy as long as he loses.

I wasn't a fan at the time and don't know much about the WWE Confidential program, but didn't the WWE air the Lex Luger/Miss Elizabeth 911 call? I don't even know what the context of that was and I don't care how newsworthy it is - airing it just seems really classless to me. I'm not saying the WWE is completely reformed, but it strikes me as somewhat of an improvement in that I don't think the Network or WWE.com posted photos from Hulk Hogan's sex tape or clips from his racist rants.

I'm really surprised about the Balor talk. To me, he's about as main roster as you can get. Ridiculous entrance? Check. Offense full of crowd-pleasing high spots? Check. Overdramatic kickouts that made Dolph Ziggler an IWC darling for years before everyone got kinda sick of him? Check. Guaranteed pops for his debut if its in a big post-WM or SummerSlam town due to his NXT/indy background? Check. Dashing good looks? Check. I'm not a massive fan of the guy or anything, but I'm amazed that there is any question on whether or not he's going to get over. He's pretty much everything the WWE wants and needs in a babyface character right now (which, I'll remind everyone, the main roster is sorely lacking). If Balor doesn't click on the main roster, Sami Zayn should probably retire because skinny Seth Rogen who likes ska music is not gonna work either. Bayley is a tough one. Tremendous potential, hard worker, and, to me, has shown incredible range over the past year - maybe even a hair more than Banks due to a more varied list of opponents (I thought her match against Nia Jax was reminiscent of a Sting/Vader match). I definitely am worried, though, that unless they restart her story arc, she's going to get lost in the shuffle. Her character is just so not what a typical WWE diva, even a babyface one, has ever been. Honestly, when's the last time the WWE promoted a white meat, non-sex-based female diva? Molly Holly? Alunda Blayze? Bayley has almost no footsteps to follow - she will be charting her own course entirely. (One could point to Natalya or Paige, for example, as second gen-ers like Charlotte, or, if you're willing to stretch, look at AJ Lee as what Sasha Banks could be due to the somewhat anti-Barbie look but undeniable charisma). I feel like even the NXT Creative team looks at her success and asks in admitted astonishment, "What did we do again...?"

Am rewatching SuperBrawl VII right now and thought this was pretty good. I'm not a fan of the finish, but I feel like this is a better match then the Guerrero/Syxx Ladder Match from the previous month. Malenko brings more character and fire into this than in most that I'd seen from him prior and Syxx's offense is just on point throughout. Thought these guys showed good chemistry and given an additional 2-3 minutes and an actual clean finish, this would be much better regarded.

I'm not even that big of a Shawn Michaels fan, but three that came to mind... Would've loved an HBK/Punk feud during his Straight Edge Soceity run. There was a ton of history for Punk to base his promos on and I have no reason to believe Shawn would've shut it down. I also think, money-wise, it may not have been a "big money" match, but like the Jericho/HBK series, I think it would've done well critically and helped anchor some otherwise blah PPVs. HBK vs. Eddie Guerrero is another one that, in-ring wise, I would've liked to see. I heard a rumor once (post-Eddie's death) that it was a possibility for WM22, which made it an even bigger "I wish they would've done it!" thing for me. Last and most crazy/personal, in 96', when Warrior came back to WWE, I was 12 and thought we were going to get Warrior vs. Michaels for the title at Survivor Series or the 97' Rumble. Now, this is hardly an example of money being left on the table (I'm not sure anyone else was as invested in this potential match-up as my pre-teen self), but it is a little bit fun to think about 96' WWE with the thought of "What if...The Ultimate Warrior came back, got red hot again, and stayed with the company for 12 months instead of 2?"

I'm 50/50 on it. For sure, Undertaker's Streak mattered a ton and the question of who/when it would be broken was always a huge, if not *the* biggest factor, but I do think there is a bit of revisionist thinking going on that the Streak was the only thing that mattered. Let's remember, nobody (or very, very few people) believed Edge, Michaels, Triple H, or CM Punk were going to end the streak and, while I wouldn't call them all masterpeices, I personally liked a number of them and definitely would've called a few of them Match of the Nights, even when you consider that their finish was very predictable. So, with that in mind, Cena/Taker still works for me because, at the end of the day, we're talking about whether or not they can deliver a quality, WWE-style spectacle main event match, if Taker has one more left in him and if this will be a character-changing match for Cena in the longterm. If none of those things interest you because "you do your signatures/I do my signatures" matches bore you and WWE's overdramatic "epics" make your stomach turn, I get it. I get it 1000%, especially around these parts where people have so much knowledge of and access to the best stuff ever that they don't need to settle for what the WWE offers. EDIT - If someone wants to move all these comments elsewhere, it might not be a bad idea. Looking at the heading of this thread and I'm not sure we could go off on a bigger tangent if we tried.

Just saw this match for the first time yesterday and loved it. As someone who really only watches the Network, I know my list of Matches of the Year is incredibly skewed and uninformed, but I have this as my Number 7. Not as emotionally powerful as Bayley/Banks (my actual MOTY), but definitely a remarkable match that, as the OP states, cemented Sasha Banks as not just a breakout star, but THE breakout star of 2015 for me. Loved the number of arm submissions she locked in, loved the character work (her ability to go from irritated early in the match to irate with the referee to arrogant jerk and have all these emotions come out naturally is uncanny), and loved that Becky's retalliatory (sp?) offense was logical and also, as the commentators pointed out, stuck with her original plan to attack Banks' arm/shoulder (for example, Lynch doesn't just hit her with some nifty neck-centric suplexes, she makes sure that they target Banks' shoulder by tying her arm up behind her back). The little details made this an easy choice for my top 10.

It was a huge hit with the mainstream. Definitely helped further Rock's career. Less notable, though, was the impact it had on Big Show's carer. IIRC, Big Show's comedic chops inspired the WWE to turn give him the ol' "gimmick stealer" gimmick, where Show began to come out as other characters (including Hogan). Just like for Charlie Haas and Damien Sandow later on, it was a dead end creatively and only further tarnished Show's reputation post-WrestleMania (I believe he started the new comedy gimmick a few weeks after). While Show's credibility took a hit, his work on SNL did inspire the WWE and multiple TV shows (mostly on the USA Network) over the years to give him a shot in comedic roles. I'm not sure that would've happened without his scene-stealing work on SNL - I mean, it certainly didn't happen for many other WWE stars.

Two days ago I would be the last guy to say that Sheamus matters, but after TLC and RAW, I kind of hope he still does in April. When the WWE was pushing Cena post-WM21, they had him beat Jericho and Angle, but neither really did the trick as the Cena hate began to mount up. In my mind, it was the feud with Edge (a guy the fans really hated and who served as Cena's best foil in 06'-07') that helped solidify him as not only "The Choice" but also a consistent main event caliber performer that fans had to begrudgingly expect. Sheamus, to me, stepped up as the Edge to Reign's Cena. I'm not saying we need them to rematch every week for the next 15 weeks, but just like Edge came out fairly hot after WM21 by feuding (and beating) Foley in a hardcore match (and going through a flaming table IIRC) at Mania and then again at ONO 2, I would really like to see Sheamus get tied up into a feud with a fresh, over babyface that he eventually beats before going after the belt again. Who is that fresh, over babyface? That's an unfortunate question because the only ones I know of are mostly guys that Sheamus has already feuded extensively with (Ziggler comes to mind) and wouldn't be fresh. Maybe Sheamus gets the position of facing some celebrity? Maybe he retires Big Show (hardly fresh but what else could would you do)?, Maybe you bring Mark Henry back and try to heat him up as a good guy between now and then via a bunch of Rumble eliminations? There's always Kane? The outlook doesn't look good and I don't see Sheamus/Brock. (I'm expecting Brock/Reigns 2 for the record)

While its definitely possible, at this point, I think Roman Reigns knows the answer to that dilemma, though: hit hard, lean in, and sacrifice. I haven't watched RAW just because I'm always a day behind on these things, but I did finish TLC last night. Going into the main event, I wasn't sure what to expect. I'm not a huge Reigns fan and I'm not huge into Sheamus. That match worked on me the same way it worked on the Boston crowd, though. At first, I must admit to feeling some glee hearing the crowd chant "We Want Cena," thumbing their nose at two guys that the WWE has, justified or not, "force fed" to us (Reigns being pushed as The Next Cena and Sheamus in the unenviable position of living in ho-hum midcard purgatory for the past few years and then getting thrusted into the main event absolutely cold). But then they started hitting eachother with chairs...hard. They started clubbing eachother with forearms and punches...hard. I've said for months that one of Reigns' overlooked talents is his selling, which was on full display here, giving the match a more meaningful and suspenseful pace than any other all night. Before I knew it, I kinda cared. Then the big spots came out (White Noise through the table, the Samoan Drop through the ladder), and they were devastating and treated as such by the competitors. Plus, instead of scrambling up the ladder at every opportunity, these two guys beat the crap out of eachother, seemingly wrestling more for the respect of the audience than for the title itself. It was impossible not to respect. Even before the post-match, Reigns was getting cheered, and the chants for everyone from Seth Rollins to Daniel Bryan to CM Punk were quieted. I don't think we've heard the last of those reactions, but Reigns has proven his ability to answer them by doing the simple things right - hit hard, lean in, and sacrifice. Ditto for Sheamus.