C.S.

Sounds more entertaining than Raw has been in the past year... I'm almost not kidding either. :\

I hate the stupid talking point - parroted by Jericho, who should really know better, and others - that Demolition were "rip-offs" of the Road Warriors. Other than superficial similarities, they were very different acts IMO.

My cousin - who is super casual - loves Roman Reigns and the Superman Punch, and hates Bryan because he looks like an "ugly troll." So, Reigns does have his fans, but I still think WWE would be making a huge mistake pushing him over Bryan. I don't see the harm in giving Reigns another year. It's not like he's bursting with such momentum that they have to strike right this moment or risk cooling him down. He's not quite hot enough for that yet.

Understood. Honestly, not to bag on your suggestions, but I don't think Torrie Wilson or Stacy Keiber belong anywhere near the HOF. What did they ever really do? Trish, Lita, Sunny I can understand. They meant something. Torrie and Stacy not so much. If Stacy had married Clooney, however, she'd already be in. Sad but true.

Best Rumble: 1992, and it's not even close IMO. Never has more been at stake in a Royal Rumble match, with the WWE Title on the line, and it has arguably the most starpower of any Rumble in history. Best Undercard: I'm fond of 1992 for this as well, because just about every Rumble has at least one weak undercard match - but I'm sure I was happy as a kid just seeing the Bushwhackers lose, regardless of match quality - but 1993 and 1995 were probably a hair better. Others that I thought were good in my hazy memory fall apart - like 2003, for example, because only Angle vs. Benoit was really anything special there (and who even knows if that still holds up, Benoit discomfort notwithstanding) and that had utter dogshit like Trips vs. Poppa Pump.

So, Chyna wasn't a major part of the WWE during the Attitude era? She certainly had a bigger impact than Koko B. Ware, who was a perennial jobber. (I liked him, but let's get real here.) I won't pick on James Dudley, who I honestly know nothing about. Doubt he was just a limo driver though. Anyway, it's just annoying how Chyna's role in DX has been erased from history - almost like she's Benoit 2.0. That is BS. Just because she wasn't Lou Thesz doesn't mean she deserves to be deleted from existence.

If we're talking about women, Chyna deserves to be in the WWE Hall - certainly more than Torrie Wilson, Stacy Keibler, etc. They were just eye candy, but Chyna actually meant something and made an impact. It won't ever happen though, which is BS. Sable was just eye candy, but she drew money and probably would've drawn a whole lot more if the WWE wasn't such a good old boys club. You can't tell me some of the boys in the locker room didn't feel threatened by her superstardom. Like her or not, she deserves to be in the Hall too.

When the Shield turn first happened, I thought turning Rollins heel was a major mistake. He seemed like a natural face. But he proved me wrong. I think he does a fantastic job as a smarmy bitch heel.

Why do you say it's not working? He's a chickenshit bitch heel who gets heat. He doesn't have a World Title, so acting like he's already a true main eventer seems a bit premature to me. We've seen this same push a million times before, and while it does have a ceiling, I'd say it's working as well as these types of pushes always have.

Did you forget about Rusev? It honestly wouldn't surprise me if Jern won the WWE World Heavyweight Title back (which has already supposedly been "leaked") and Rusev wins the Rumble. It's vintage 1993 booking, which is where Vince's head seems to be stuck.

J.R. never got along with Randy Savage. Could that simple enough reason be why we never saw the Macho Man back in the WWE? J.R. was in charge of WWE Talent Relations at the time, and Savage did back out of a Mid South deal many years before. I never bought the Stephanie story. Always smacked of DVDVR "sleaze thread" bullshit to me.

Reposting my solution to the Firefox issue: I do have Adblock, but I'm not sure if that makes a difference. I had it when the issue happened.

Any reason TNA isn't on Hulu? You'd think Dixie would be smart enough to get something like that going. Or does WWE have the exclusive rights to current wrestling content on Hulu? (I say current, because there's some other wrestling organization on there, but nothing recent.)

Ziggler, Ryback, and Rowan looked like impotent morons not immediately beating the living shit out of Trips. They were "fired" so what did they have to lose? Just awful.

Survivor Series was #FreeFreeFree, and WWE holds the traditional PPV purchasing audience in contempt. But yeah, The Authority's comeback has sucked. Not gonna get too carried away though, because no one really got fired and they won't be gone more than a week or two anyway.

LOL, yeah, and that makes for a pretty terrible non-character. Shawn Michaels said the same kind of stuff too, but he had an actual character on top of that.

I'll have to catch the second match. Sounds like a fun combo. My feelings about Dolph in general: + Fun in the ring + Hard worker + Sells really well - But maybe oversells? Might need to be more selfish? - Stupid name. I remember him saying he chose it, so that's on him. - No character whatsoever. Who is Dolph Ziggler? I have no clue. The last point is the killer. Everything else can be overcome.

Same thing can be said for Meltzer, honestly. I've felt that way for years. His heart doesn't seem to be in pro wrestling anymore. He much prefers UFC, which is why half the newsletter is littered with that junk. (Sorry, I don't give a fuck about UFC, except when it's relevant to pro wrestling - Brock, CM Punk, etc.) Not that I'm comparing CSS to Meltzer...I'm just saying. Anyway, I like CSS. They can come across as overly snarky, I agree, but I disagree that they're burned out on wrestling. If anything, they seem to be having a lot of fun over there. What you call markishness, I call genuine enthusiasm. Then again, maybe we're reading different people on that site? What is the story here? This is the first I've heard of Lance Storm's chairshots being evaluated. Are they really bad? I honestly can't remember what they looked like. If it's not something he did often, I can understand why they'd look terrible. Maybe he was trying too hard to be safe? Gonna look for some YouTube footage now. EDIT: Found this. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x37dva_ecw-rvd-vs-lance-storm_sport 10 minute mark. The chairshots look...okay? Maybe a bit hesitant and soft, but I don't have any real issue with it. Is there another chairshot in that match that I missed? (I was only skimming to look for the spot.) Another video had this in the comments section: "No no no....this by no means is not as funny as Lance Storm's "ahmm" chair shot on RVD at Barely Legal '97 I believe . To think it happened in ECW, in Philly. Ya , the fans let him hear it." The Worst Chair Shot Ever (not about Storm).

I'm wondering that right now. It was one of the worst matches of the year IMO. Yes, I get that people are going gaga because it was so unique, but so were the Cena/Wyatt matches and everyone shit all over those (I defended them at the time because of their uniqueness, but I wouldn't call them great from an athletic or artistic standpoint). Cena/Brock at SummerSlam was just plain boring (IMO, of course). A thousand German suplexes - or so it seemed - isn't my idea of a compelling match. At least the Cena/Wyatt series had a fun WTF trainwreck appeal about them - not that those were MOTY candidates (or anywhere near) either, of course. Then again, I may be biased - I consider Brock one of the most overrated and overpushed guys ever.

I always thought Brad Armstrong deserved a bigger push. I was glad to see him get it with the Light Heavyweight Title and awesome Pillman angle.

He still felt fairly new by Beach Blast, from what I remember of my own impressions at the time. Remember, wrestling moved a lot slower back then. A big signing in February was still new and fresh in June or July.

*Groan* Where was this announced? I can't find it on WWE.com.

But what did it mean after? Nothing. WWE has always been better about making their big moments matter, not only at the time, but for years after the fact. 1-2-3 Kid became a huge star because of it, and it's constantly touted as a great Raw moment, etc. Iaukea is barely remembered today. I think that's why no one else is jumping on Iaukea/Regal as any kind of big deal, because it ultimately wasn't.

So, nothing should be a surprise anymore because they might lose money? Yet, wrestling has done fine for the past hundred years by having surprises. It's one of the best parts of watching, especially in the internet age, where true surprises are harder to come by. There is merit to what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but does that mean we should never have surprise returns again because it might affect the bottom line? This kind of thinking is exactly why the WWE has become such a bland, sterile, corporate, and completely unwatchable product. They're leaving money on the table now by being that way. EDIT: Just saw your edit. Yeah, I probably went overboard in my wording. But the lack of surprises, the lack of fun, has just really weighed the product down. Everything is pre-planned, pre-packaged, homogenized, bland.

Yep. If it was so "FUCKING DUMB," Grimmas, how come it worked so flawlessly for Cena?