DMJ

Slammy Awards 1994 on the Network (its just an episode of Mania). A few thoughts - 1) This Monday, I'd love the show to kick-off with a musical number the way Todd Pettengill used to do it. Those were so, so cheesy, but probably funnier than anything the writers have done in years. 2) Can't wait till the Network starts featuring more of the B-shows of the 80s and 90s. 3) Why didn't they upload all the other Slammy Award specials? EDIT - Also, they kept some of the advertisements from the sponsors in - which is excellent. The commercials for the Sega games and Magic Works toys are a real blast from the past.

I don't remember many of the details around it (I'm sure I could look it up, but feel lazy) - didn't Arn Anderson beat Hogan on an episode of Nitro at some point? (I'd also put the Luger title win over Hogan on Nitro in the build-up to Road Wild, I think, in 97', as a shocker and a bit of an upset considering Hogan had been champ for a good while by that point and didn't seem like he'd be dropping it - though, he did win it back days later if I remember correctly)

I'm one of those fans who left sometime after WrestleMania 16. It wasn't that it was offensive as much as that the entire industry had gone from something "outsider" and "niche" to the exact things I never wanted to be associated with - Kid Rock and Limp Bizkit entrance music, outright homophobia, sex-for-the-sake-of-sex (compared to, say, characters like Sensational Sherri and Elizabeth or even the little-bit-more-subtle Sunny in 96'). Not to mention that this is around when Austin got injured, WCW had been destroyed, and most of my favorites from childhood - Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, even Hogan - were retired or not on TV yet. Undertaker, another childhood favorite, was a Biker. At my school, wrestling had peaked in popularity around 99', so, it's not necessarily that I loathed that "the popular kids" were now getting in on "my thing." It was more that, by 2000, the popular kids had moved on because it was a fad to them. I moved on because wrestling had morphed into repetitive, ultraviolent nonsense with absolutely no underlying morality.

While I don't think he's a Top 10 in-ring guy, I do think some of his offense looks good (the crossbody, the chokeslam), so, on that point, I do think he has plenty of room to improve but isn't awful or anything. But whether you call it booking or producing, I don't think its "reductionist" to put the blame on booking. If he is going to be a special character, he shouldn't just be attacking faces and trading wins on PPV (I don't remember Taker doing that when he debuted). If he has no coherent motivations, the writers/producers need to help him develop them. For example, I'm one of those people that think he should've actually HELPED Ambrose beat Rollins - not to get a face pop, but to try to lure Ambrose into his camp. Similarly, I think the mindgames with Cena weren't actually hokey enough during the build to the match (and then got a little TOO hokey during their cage match). The feud with Jericho was completely meaningless. Bray Wyatt was exposed - on that point, I agree with you - but it was someone's decision to treat him like your average character instead of someone who could be a game-changer. That person dropped the ball in utilizing a talent and minimizing their flaws. Obviously Wyatt had at least a little "it" because he got good crowd responses (unfortunately, they were face pops). Still, it shows that the audience, initially, viewed the character as special.

Agreed. From what I read (and I could be way wrong), Nikki essentially cut a spirited promo about working harder than anyone ever gave her credit for and, despite all the trolls who have said she's just a pretty face that got lucky (reading between the lines here, but this whole thing seems to also be about who she may or may not have slept with to get to the top), she is now Divas Champion and she earned it. This got cheered. As it should've. Because it does kinda ring true. As far as I know, the Bellas work a crazy schedule and do tons of media appearances and, from what I've seen, Nikki has improved in a way that typically only comes with hard work. She may not come off as the kindest person alive on Total Divas, but the show doesn't make her look evil either (and, again, really just leaves you with the impression that being a Diva is a busy life, not all glitz and glamour). But she's supposed to be a heel and, whether or not the writers/producers acted upon it, had a really clear narrative direction her promo should've went in. She should be gloating about how she outsmarted AJ and the entire WWE Universe, how nobody gives her credit but she's actually the most talented and smartest WWE Diva ever. If she wanted to get extra "insider" heat, how about a line referencing how she has everything a girl could want - a sister who supports her, a man is the envy of every woman in the arena, and the Divas Championship. (Switch the word "sister" to father and you basically have a classic Steph promo) Not to mention that if Nikki were to go in an anti-Authority direction, it'd go against everything her character has done for the past 6 months (if not longer, I don't remember).

I'm actually in the process (somewhat, not sure if I'll actually go through with it) with writing a very comprehensive look at 2014. I do think that this year, with the Network, and the Batista/Punk/Bryan/Streak stories and the TV rights campaign being regarded by most industry insiders as a bit of a flop, is the most important year, both on-screen and off, since 2001, if not 96'-97', if not 84'. The amount of industry shake-ups between January and today is just incredible and much of it is not positive for the WWE. I don't think the "sky is falling" regarding the demise of the WWE, though. I think it is too profitable, too popular, and too big to sink...but I do think this year has, at the very least and in a weird way, put a spotlight on what things WOULD need to happen to possibly end the WWE, for example, if the Network subscriber base shrinks by 50% *and* ratings drop by another 50% *and* the next time TV rights come up, USA/NBC ain't interested *and* if the WWE fails to elevate anyone post-Cena or post-Lesnar *and* the US economy takes another major hit and it has a negative effect on house show gates and merch sales. Basically, all of these things (and more?) would have to happen which is pretty unlikely, but 2014 was the first year I think I saw (and maybe the WWE sees) that there is actually a set of dominoes that could (however unlikely) fall. (Not to mention the ridiculously overblown and meaningless reports about investors possibly buying out the WWE - something that could, if it were ever to happen [probably never, but maybe decades from now], put them in a similar position as WCW by making them just a "brand" under a parent company that would cut their losses much sooner than the McMahons would)

I'm glad Superstar Sleaze mentioned Seth Rollins because, while I'm not going to say he's the best heel in the business or anything, I *do* think that his turn worked well even though he almost should get more cheers because he wrestles a fan-friendly style (fancy moves), has the indy scene cred, and is regarded as fresh... But he turned his back on his best friend. He sold out. He took a shortcut. I think he's proof that you can still build heels based on simple premises, especially using the "chickenshit" route. I also think it helps when you take a heel and pair him up with a guy that's actually over as a face (Ambrose and Ziggler rather than Cena or Sheamus, who a portion of the audience vocally dislikes). If you put Lesnar against Cena, the crowd is going to be split...but against Ambrose, Bryan, Ziggler, hell, even Mizdow or Ryder, Lesnar's bullying will get heat.

Maybe not the nicest to everyone, but I met Kevin Nash through a radio contest a few years ago and he was really cool and easy-going. Hilarious too. Bobby Eaton was my first thought, though, just based on how many books he's been mentioned specifically as the nicest guy in the business. His name always comes up, even in books or interviews where the subject almost has no reason to bring him up or are asking about him directly - they just do because they feel he deserves mention. To me, if you have guys going out of their way to say Bobby Eaton is a nice guy, he must be a really nice guy. For example, I think Foley mentions him in his 1st book apropos of nothing.

I feel like they worked more for Ryback when he was kind of doing the more Terminator-esque/1-dimensional act. He was decimating jobbers. He was saying all of 5 words. He was a bit of a "throwback" character. He screamed yesteryear and the airbrush design just added to that "It feels like 1991" vibe for me. As he's grown as a character, the airbrush thing seems less fitting to me, but personally, I wouldn't want him to return to that 1-dimensional thing because I actually like his promos for how crazy they are and while I do think he was "exposed" a bit early, you can't put the cat back in the bag so to speak.

According to various sites, Khali got released today/didn't have his contract renewed. Not a huge shocker here, but looking back at his career, what surprises me is just how long his run actually was. They got everything they could out of him AND THEN SOME, it seems to me.

I just saw this match for the first time and enjoyed it a good bit...until the ending. The way Buffer screws up the call (was he told to make the announcements or not?) is just mind-numbingly stupid. Did Bischoff think that new viewers would be so unfamiliar with disqualification/count-outs that they would believe the title WOULD change hand, thus it was necessary to have Buffer declare Flair the winner and new Champion, only to be corrected later on? Was it just a gaffe on Buffer's part? Also, why did Buffer announce that Hogan lost by DQ when he lost by count-out? Ugh...why, again, did they not just have Flair win the title back here?

^ I like this (in theory), but am wondering how you would have Ryback face Lesnar before Cena when Cena is the number one contender?

The fall of 2005 was an interesting time in the WWE. In the months after SummerSlam 2005, the Rey Mysterio/Eddie Guerrero paternity angle was long over, Hulk Hogan and Chris Jericho left the company, and Batista and John Cena's ascension to the top of the mountain was complete. As is typical for the WWE, September and October were relatively quiet months with fairly unremarkable pay-per-views. The waiting game until January's Road to WrestleMania had begun. And then Eddie Guerrero passed away in November in the midst of a friendship/rivalry storyline with real life buddy, Dave Batista. A couple months later, Batista, then-World Heavyweight Champion, suffered a tricep injury that led to him vacating the title (it was picked up by Kurt Angle soon after in a battle royale). My question is - how would WrestleMania 22 have looked had Eddie not passed? Had Batista not been injured? The show's actual main event, Cena vs. Triple H, seemed set-in-stone already as the two were purposely kept separate in the fall of 2005 (when Triple H returned from a bit of a hiatus IIRC), but what happens on the Blue Brand? Does Rey Mysterio still get the nod to capture the gold? Does Orton get that spot instead? What does Angle do? I'm curious to read fan theories as well as any other information people might remember from the tim about what direction the WWE might have been going.

I didn't see the battle royal, but to me, the division has actually, somehow, and most likely due wholly to the work of the trainers Vince and Triple H hired and put into position, become the best it has been in at least a decade. At Night of Champions and Hell in a Cell, Nikki Bella was fantastic. I wrote about this in my review elsewhere, but I don't care how much her matches are "choreographed/staged/scripted" - the fact is, if she rehearses just one good match a month and then has that match on PPV, I'm happy. Her match against Brie at Hell in a Cell was physical, structured simply and effectively, and made her look like a dominant heel. It had arguably more logic to it than the Ziggler/Cesaro match it followed and was more "personal" and engaging than the Tag Titles match that came after it. Brie has improved considerably as well, but as a scrappy babyface, I don't think she needs to do much but take bumps, sell, and have a few signature hope spots/offensive maneuvers. She's not fully there yet, but she's made a ton of progress. I'm more impressed by Nikki, but again, when you think of where both of them were a year ago, they have really come around in-ring. Alicia Fox has a great character, natural charisma, and has also made progress in-ring from where she started. Why she isn't challenging for the Divas Championship more is not clear to me. Considering Paige's age and that this is her rookie year, she's already achieved a lot and there is room for growth. Huge future for her. Not a Future Hall of Famer yet, but probably more well-rounded than Lita ever was. Emma is also a young rookie with lots of upside. The pieces haven't all fallen into place, but she's coming up to the main roster with considerably more experience and more natural athleticism than the models-turned-wrestlers that dominated the division for the past decade. AJ is the best "mic worker" of the whole bunch, but I wouldn't say she's the best wrestler. Others would disagree. She deserves to be holding the title, but those that put her "leaps and bounds" ahead of every other female talent are overrating her. Still, the fact that she didn't take her ball and go home with her husband and still works hard in the ring has only made me respect her more. Even if she leaves after her contract is up, AJ has only helped the division since returning. Elsewhere on the roster, you have a reliable hand in Natalya and another young (26), energetic talent in Naomi (Trinity on Total Divas). Not bad role players and the same could be said for Layla and Tamina, who probably won't last much longer but are serviceable, especially in non-wrestling/managerial roles. For example, having Layla take Emma or another NXT grad under her wing could be a fine angle as it plays to Layla's strength of typically being excellent in multi-person story lines like the LayCool stuff or being Low Ki/Kaval's mentor. ( I know they've done that a little with Summer Rae, but Layla would be better working with someone who actually has, y'know, personality.) With those pieces in place, plus Charlotte Flair in NXT, the WWE's Divas Division is actually one area where things actually make sense and wins/losses DO seem to count and matter. The "pecking order" is clear to regular viewers. The story lines have made sense. There are "issues" between the performers that lead to matches that lead to more matches. Can you say that about the IC Title or Tag Team Championships?

I forget where I read it, but the President of Netflix (or whatever) was asked about account sharing and piracy and said that he didn't regard it as a problem because the value of Netflix outweighed the desire to pirate their shows, like House of Cards, Arrested Development, etc. I think in the same interview he said that Netflix doesn't actively pursue "account sharers." I think the WWE has even less to worry about. I know a number of fans who downloaded the PPVs after they happened and watched them last year...but when the Network began, they got legit accounts and love the service and are more than happy to pay $10 a month. Those fans who are still pirating will pirate no matter what - the WWE needs to say "fuck em'" for now and, in a weird way, actually just ignore them and hope their fandom grows to the point that they don't want to risk missing the next show. Is it really THAT much easier to pirate from the Network than it was from PPV? To the point that this should even be on their priority list? I kinda find that hard to believe as, in my experience, the same folks I know who hadn't paid for a PPV in years, were the first ones to sign up. I know that I didn't even bother pirating (I just didn't watch PPVs) and the WWE is on track to take $120 from me this year after receiving maybe the same amount over the past 4 years combined.

* Not as down on this show as some. I thought it was an improvement from the last pay-per-view, but that was probably because the last one was pretty dull throughout, and had not a single match I'd find any reason to rewatch (including Cena/Brock and Sheamus/Cesaro). * The match of the night, if not the main, was arguably the Bellas one. I really found that to be hard-hitting and, though obviously choreographed and planned out, was still really nicely executed. As actresses, the Bellas still have a long way to improve, but in-ring, Nikki Bella really turned a corner over the past few months, especially when it comes to PPV "big" matches. As I don't actively watch much RAW, I could care less if she (or really any diva) rehearses one match a month for PPV, wrestles that one match well, and then stinks up the joint 29 other nights out of 30. That seems like what we got here and it was an engaging, believable, physical 8-10 minutes. * I would've loved Rollins/Ambrose a ton more without the first table spot. It just wasn't the right way to start the match. When the actual match began, I thought we got to see loads of nice spots and intensity. Had that match started in the cage, gone through the same motions, and then maybe had an additional 10 minutes of back-and-forth, I think I wouldn't have minded the Wyatt run-in so much. It still would've been anti-climactic, but at least it would've felt like Wyatt had put an end to an epic battle where no man was going to come out alive. The way it came off, it just wasn't a MOTY candidate. I'd still probably say it was the best and most exciting bout of the evening, but much of that has to do with my personal interest and the crowd's interest in these three characters. * Ziggler/Cesaro was decent, but I don't get the "sweep" ending. I think the time I've spent on this forum has also begun to make me rethink just how great I thought Ziggler was over the past 4-5 years. I still think he is incredibly skilled, but some road agent needs to help him iron out the overselling and help him generate some more impressive hope spots. * Rusev/Show was pretty damn good. Not as great as Bossman/Vader or anything, but when's the last time you saw Big Show bust out as good a submission hold as he did here? Also, loved how Rusev looked dominant, but that it also made sense as he, from the very start, obviously had a strategy (get Show on the mat by attacking the legs) and then relied on that strategy the whole time. THAT is how wrestling maneuvers can be sequenced logically to make it completely conceivable that a 7'0 300 pound guy will lose to a considerably smaller opponent. Also, Rusev suplexed the motherfucker and I didn't expect that at all. Overall, not a 5-star classic, but I don't know if there was a single DUD on the show, which I think keeps it at average or above. I found the tag match to be the lowpoint of the show, but others have called it one of the highs. To each their own, but unless you really needed that last 5 minutes to be spectactular, I'm not sure if the other 2 hours and 50 minutes were bad enough to warrant anything more hateful than a "meh, it was okay." The chief complaint is the repetitiveness of the programs, which is totally valid, but my recommendation is, skip RAWs and SDs like I do and you'll be less tired of some of these performers.

My band is playing tonight, so I won't see this show till tomorrow (and likely Tuesday), but I am excited for some of the matches. I thought the last show was a little flat - nothing terrible, but nothing great the entire night (save for Ambrose's run in). I'm hoping tonight will be a different case and the show will actually feel meaningful.

I just watched the "DX Confidential" interview and, again, the thing comes off as such a revisionist history of things that it is almost unbearable at times. For those posters who detest the WWE's overhype of HBK, steer clear because it will largely enrage you. The Pros: - At least some credit given to the originality of the Chyna character and how important she was at getting Triple H over. - Footage of Shawn Michaels "retiring" at the post-WM14 press conference. Basically, all you see is him getting held back by Shane McMahon and then storming out of the building. I'd never seen this footage or really knew about it as I always figured Shawn left quietly without incident. How foolish for me to think he'd be so classy in 97'. The Cons: - The continued WWE push of DegenerationX as a truly revolutionary stable in professional wrestling when, the fact is, while they sold a ton of merchandise over the years, they didn't really "create" much new. You can really sum up their actual landmark moments into just a handful (Rude appearing on Nitro and RAW on the same night, the Mike Tyson storyline [which was really more about Austin], and the X-Pac "shoot" the night after WM14). Everything else was sketch comedy and dick jokes and much of it really wasn't THAT original (for example, the nWo parodied the Horsemen in 97', almost a year before DX parodied the Nation). I'm not saying they weren't popular or that the whole DX marketing campaign hasn't been a huge seller for the company for going close to 20 years, but in terms of actually changing the face of a wrestling promotion (and arguably the national wrestling landscape), I'd rank DX well behind the Horsemen, the Freebirds, the nWo, the Hart Foundation, and probably even the Dungeon of Doom and Moondogs. When you throw in international stables (which I admittedly know nothing about) and others I'm forgetting, I'm guessing DX barely rank in the top 10 of truly game-changing stables. - Very little mention of the Outlaws and X-Pac. The 98' version of DX was arguably more important and prominent than the original 97' group, so, I felt like it would've been nice for, at some point in the interview, Road Dogg or Gunn to make an appearance via Skype if they couldn't be there in person.

Savage comes to mind as a real-life cartoon. I mean, wacky clothes, wacky voice, wacky facial expressions. I'm not saying he didn't come off as human at times, but man, there are horses of different colors, but Macho was like a horse from a different planet (The moon? The stars? Venus?).

I might've said this in another thread, but I'm really proud of the thought so I'll shamelessly write it again here. They say that, on Saturday Night Live, you have years where the writers carry the show and years were the performers carry the show. I think the WWE is somewhat similar, especially in the modern RAW era of the past 20 years. For a good part of the early Attitude Era, the in-ring talent was kinda weak (especially compared to WCW), but the writing/production/presentation made the show seem "hip" and "must see" (The Godfather, Val Venis, and New Age Outlaws certainly didn't get over 'cuz they were putting on mat classics). Today, it's the opposite - Sheamus and Cesaro have been booked horribly, their characters are completely bland, and they have no direction, but bell-to-bell, they deliver. The same could be said for a number of other guys too, including the Usos, who sell tons of merch despite the fact I'm not sure they've been involved in a single genuine, layered with actual dramatic twists or turns to it. I mean, did Harper & Rowan ever actually make things personal? We're in a "performer driven" era of RAW right now, but I'm not sure thats because the performers are great, or because the writing has just been so consistently terrible over the past few years.

Having watched a whole bunch of 92'-94' WCW pay-per-views this past summer, I must say one of the things I took away from that was just how good Orndorff still was at getting crowd reactions and, though his in-ring work probably couldn't be considered his peak, he still has quite a few solid outings against Steamboat and at least one fairly good brawl with Cactus Jack in there. Also, he consistently had those Paula chants following him every time he was on screen, so, when I got to 94' and it seemed like the Paula chants were going away, it is genuinely surprising and kind of sad.

People who wrote Austin/Goldberg in 98', I have to ask - what about Austin/Hogan in 98'? To me, that would've been the biggest match possible at that time and, arguably, at any time after. In 2002, Rock/Hogan brought in (estimated) 850k, but I'm thinking, 3-4 years earlier, wrestling was even hotter, Hogan was still much more protected as a performer, and the InVasion hadn't happened and died yet. At the same time, though, in 98', the WWE's reach wasn't as global as it would be a decade later, which is why I think, looking at WrestleManias 20 and on, you have considerably higher buyrates (upwards of 200-300k more buys) even when domestic TV ratings and general American "mainstream buzz" is obviously not what it was before WrestleMania 20. So, yeah, if you could take TODAY's WWE brand and reach and then take the magnitude of heat Austin and Hogan could generate in 98', you'd have the biggest PPV match of all time (which I'd say would still probably max out around 1.5 million buys).

This is one I don't feel super strong about, but one that I think would've been pretty cool. After SummerSlam 2013, CM Punk entered a feud with Paul Heyman and his newest client, Curtis Axel. Despite a strong attempt to repackage Axel, fans still viewed him as nothing more than a minor henchman like the ones Batman routinely knocked around in the old TV show. At Night of Champions, though, Punk was forced into a 2-on-1 handicap match. Outnumbered, Punk had at least a slight reason to worry. This is where my fantasy booking comes in. At the actual show, Heyman debuted yet another client - Ryback - who was, like Axel, a bit cool when he was given the spot as the next "Paul Heyman Guy." Within a matter of weeks, Punk would vanquish all three in a feud that featured some entertaining promos, but little else, and based on how rote and unremarkable it was, it probably even helped make Punk rethink how much longer he wanted to stick around the WWE. What would have been better? I say, at Night of Champions, Axel and Heyman should have gotten the advantage through some chicanery. Punk then gets beaten down by not only Heyman and Axel, but maybe the Real Americans with Zeb Colter as well. With a 3-on-1 advantage AND Heyman and Zeb laughing at the carnage, you would no doubt be hearing the Cena chants. Cue the music of Punk's former tag team partner and real-life buddy Kofi Kingston! The high flyer from Ghana runs out, cane in hand, which leads the Real Americans, Curt Axel, and their managers to clear the ring...only for Kingston to turn on Punk! At this point, Heyman enters the ring and Kofi hugs him. The next Paul Heyman Guy is noneother than the grinning, charming devil, Kofi Kingston. I know this sounds crazy, but hear me out... 1) The Punk/Heyman angle had peaks and valleys, but ultimately, especially after SummerSlam, was too predictable, too unremarkable, too meaningless. But Punk has a history of working better with his real-life friends and having that "steal the show" attitude when he is in the ring with someone else he feels is as "underutilized" as himself. Kofi Kingston probably fits that description when you consider that, from what I read, Kofi is one of Punk's best friends in the company (and was his travel buddy on Punk's personal bus). 2) There's not a million great reasons or ways to turn Kofi Kingston heel, but in this instance, it would've worked marvelous. Why not have Kofi complain about Punk's ego? About how, when Kofi was injured, Punk never called? Or about how, when Punk became World Champion, he never gave a shot to his "best friend" Kofi? About how selfish Punk is? That Punk had the chance of a lifetime to be a Paul Heyman Guy, but he turned on Paul Heyman just like he turned on Kofi, and his issue with CM Punk is that while he calls himself the "Best in the World," the truth is, when it comes to friendship, he's the worst. To me, you get THAT build and you get a CM Punk working hard to help Kofi get over (which I believe he would've done out of respect and friendship) and you have a really great feud that could've propelled Kofi up the ladder (and, speaking of ladder, what about Punk/Kofi in a Ladder Match at TLC?). I'd also be willing to wager that Punk didn't want to put Ryback or Axel over (and shouldn't have), but might have actually gone to bat for Kofi to steal a win over him just because of how much it would help solidify him as a top heel. So, who should've been the next Heyman guy after Axel? I say Kofi. (( Also, who should've been the next Heyman guy INSTEAD of Axel? Cesaro. ))

I re-watched the whole show this week. In context, this match really suffers. The opening contest is a hardcore match. Then, you get an ultra-sexualized Trish/Steph match. After this match, you get a Triple Threat Tables brawl. Then, even more shenanigans with the Rock/Angle main event. While this match is definitely more engaging and exciting than any of the other matches I've mentioned, it hurts the "specialness" of a match like this when you surround it with other heavily gimmicked matches (to me, at least). Out of context, I think this match would seem incredible because of how unique the stipulation is and, to be sure, Austin and HHH work really hard and pull off three distinct contests. I actually think the finish is well-executed (though, when you look at the post-WM17 storyline, you wonder why it was the finish unless they thought Austin vs. HHH would headline SummerSlam?), but I understand the argument that the wrong guy won.

This board is awesome. For years, I contributed to another (I won't say the name because I think that'd be poor form) and felt like one of the only posters who had actually witnessed wrestling in the 90s and could write fairly confidently about American pro-wrestling of the past 20 years. Then I found this place and realized how little I knew. I am so appreciative of the fact that for some odd reason my login still works as, if there was bullying to be done, surely I would be one of the easiest targets here. But the fact is, I'd rather be the dumbest guy in a room full of intelligent, well-versed, knowledgeable wrestling fans than the smartest guy on a board populated by fans who, much of the time, subscribe to a "flock-like" mentality of what is good and what is bad and can't even really defend it. Here at PWO, you'll find posters that praise Bunkhouse Buck and others that call him the drizzling shits and that is much more interesting to me than reading redundant "Turn Cena Heel" arguments.