Slasher

That has a lot to do with whatever built on audience the wrestler brings to theaters. It's not a coincidence that they usually transition to action and/or comedy because that's basically what wrestling is. It is less of a reach for people to imagine in that kind of role compared to being the dad on Kramer vs Kramer which requires a completely different skillset as an actor. I think it requires a legitimate once in a lifetime kind of wrestling talent to make a stronger transition into films. And even then, they have to shake off years of habits formed by Vince or his guys telling the wrestler how exactly they want their character acted. It's tough to break out of that IMO.

No one ever said the Rock was a Shakespearan actor in any way and even he himself hasn't claimed such talent. Like in wrestling we are not looking to have the Big Show work from underneath in a ground based European style catch match because that's not what Big Show is meant to be, the Rock isn't meant for that. In the 1980s no one would ask Sylvester Stallone or Arnold Schwarzenegger to do Terms of Endearment, because that isn't what they do. The Rock is an action hero/parody of said action hero in comedies. That's it. That's all people want from him.

Now this-I like a lot. New Day is talented, Big E has the size and the fans would actually want to see this.

Is this the only takeaway you got from my post? No I agree Braun Strowman isn't Bill Goldberg. Not even close. What I am saying is people are taking Taker for granted assuming he'd be available years down the line when Strowman "might be ready". On one hand people complain about not making stars, and that is a very valid complaint, the solution is to do Taker vs Miz. I mean, like...wha-? Miz is dead in the water. He is the goldfish floating on top of the tank. Flooding the tank with fish food isn't bringing it back. Miz trolling Taker before getting destroyed might be amusing for a minute and only a minute but then what? The fans aren't gonna get behind Miz going forward. Braun Strowman sucks as a wrestler but he fills a very key role on the roster- the suoer duper monster heel. Who else do they have that can do that? Kane is in his 40s and also stale. Ditto for Big Show. Luke Harper is nearly 40 himself and already damaged. Unless I'm forgetting someone that leaves Erick Rowan and Bray Wyatt (who isn't really a monster). Rowan is never gonna be the guy they want to push in that role and he is only marginally better than Strowman in ability. Bray has already had his Mania match with Taker. No one is thinking Strowman is gonna help put out a 4 star claasic but that isn't the point anyways. Like I said, it could be that Taker chose Strowman himself because he knows the future is going to need a guy like him and he sees the value in giving something back to the business that has treated him so well in the form of elevating this guy. Of course there will be issues of booking Strowman going forward after. Maybe the WWE feeds him too early to WWE champion Roman Reigns and sets him back or something but you can't sit there and try to tell me the fucking Miz deserves the spot over Strowman...or just about anyone else. Same for Sheamus.

If WWE fans were going to go see Rock movies, they would go even if he was no longer around. He is a bonafide legend in wrestling regardless of active involvement. His problems at the box office had nothing to do with him not being associated with wrestling and everything to do with him picking bad roles or good roles within bad movies that no one wanted to see. I don't doubt that his ex-wife suggested he go back to wrestling but only because it can't hurt getting extra income and giving back to the business that his family have been so deeply involved with for years.

It's more likely that Taker picked Strowman himself. It seems like Taker has the first opportunity to request an opponent and then WWE either accepts or makes a counteroffer. Taker has already beaten Bray Wyatt last year at Mania. It is very possible Taker respects Strowman as a strongman and thinks he has potential to be a monster heel. I doubt he cares about who makes a better match or who makes a dream match. Taker has never really shown an inclination to look out for his own interests moreso than the company's. He is the ultimate company guy who understands now is the time to do the match. People say "Strowman is not ready now. Maybe wait until 2018 to do it!" Well, why? There is no guarantee Taker is wrestling in 2018. Do the match when you have the opportunity to do it, not when the timing is right for one guy. If they operated like that, we'd never see Goldberg vs Rock. They rushed that too because they knew Rock was on his way out again and wanted Goldberg starting off strong. Same shit here. People suggesting the Miz and Sheamus has lost their minds. Really? The Miz??? Sheamus??? Wow.

Yeah I don't see why Rock would even want to come back to the WWE if it is just Triple H and Stephanie around. He likes Vince and he knows Vince had a big part in putting food on his table most of his life so he is indebted to Vince in that way but he owes Triple H nothing.

WWE has proven many times they don't give a fuck if their guy sucked or if they weren't "ready". Why change now?

I'm not sure Undertaker would decline. 1. He knows how pro wrestling works. You go out on your back and hopefully make a star out of it. 2. Braun Strowman visually is a good matchup for the Undertaker. It'd be monster vs monster and Taker has never had any problem with working those matchups. 3. His desire from the past 5 or so years of having workrate classics are no longer realistic with how broken down he is. Strowman would definitely help set a slower pace befitting a 50 year old. 4. Everyone worth a Taker match right now are guys who's on injury hiatuses. No one that is active and not already assigned different matches by now are guys with the credibility required to work a guy who up til recently had a 20+ winning streak at this event. I don't think its a gpod matchup personally and Strowman would generally fall in the same category as all the other active wrestlers who I just said wasn't ready for it, but obviously he has tremendous size that Vince likes and that usually helps Vince overlook his flaws and gp with the match planning. Besides, Undertaker already feuded with Bray Wyatt so I think Strowman is a logical offshoot of that feud. I can't imagine him wanting Owens, Zayn, Styles, etc. A tag match also doesn't make sense. Unless they kissed and made up that I didn't see, Taker and Brock are supposed to hate each other. Unless we are running a Russo staple (partners who can't get along) it just doesn't make sense. Finally, as just mentioned, they have had a serious case of the injury bug among tbeir workers. They have to find ways to stretch matches out to fill that 4 hour show.

Triple H had no beef with Bruno to begin with and I think the squash match thing with the Warrior was blown out of proportion so I don't think Triple H actively hated him. That's easier for him to deal with than the guy he sees as his greatest nemesis. That said, I think he will be obligated to keep him around for appearances' sake. I would believe more the idea that the Rock himself disassociates himself from WWE when Vince goes away. The hate goes both ways and Rock has less of a reason to stick around.

Sheamus IS a stiff piece of shit but yeah Bryan's issues aren't on him.

Fans? Yes. Television executives? No. Some blood is probably okay but not "buckets".

Man, I can just imagine how unglued the crowd would get if Vince and Triple H was gloating about their plan to maintain an iron fist over everyone only for the lights to turn off and the Wyatts' music hitting and revealing all four surrounding the ring for an epic beatdown.

I hope this doesn't mean that won't work at Wrestlemania.

When I posted about Jericho, it isn't so much the man himself and the quality of his work but rather asking why we should dismiss him out of hand because he is in his 40's. He can obviously have a 2 and half star type matches whenever he needs to, and that is probably his typical floor (though he can dip below that when working with untalented workers and himself being completely unmotivated and keeping one eye out at the door). Jericho has been working a part time schedule for almost a decade now, outside a two year stretch when he was working a full time schedule as the serious heel. His body isn't broken down like the average 40 year old pro grappler. And like mentioned, Vince trusts him. So I mean, he is certainly capable of being that guy. The only real problem with Jericho is that he's jobbed so much throughout his career that a program with him means jackshit for the fans. Beating Jericho hasn't really been impressive a feat since like 1996 if not earlier or ever. So all he is good for is herding a guy through a "decent" match per week and then fucking off out of there.

I am not seriously advocating this but why can't it be Jericho? He has less mileage on himself compared to the other 40+ year olds on the roster because of him taking months off since like 2005 or whatever year it was where Bischoff fired him and he was escorted out. If you meant week to week then yeah nevermind.

I can't disagree with you on that. I just have an inexplicable habit of trying to rationalize WWE logic. LOL.

Of course they have showed that they are not interested in putting the belt on Reigns and would go out of their way to try to prevent it but they have to maintain at least the tiniest semblance of being professional. Honestly though, you can ask that question about just about anyone they've had problems with. Like- why did they keep putting CM Punk in title matches throughout his career when it is obvious they didn't want him in that spot to begin with AND that he has proven to not being a "team player" at all. This is a guy that briefly feuded with a BABYFACE WWE boss Triple H. What about Daniel Bryan? They made it clear he wasn't the guy the company wanted headlining Summerslam with Cena and even going as far to having a plan in place if he happened to win. What did they do? Put him in main events for like 3 or 4 events in a row, then letting him have the opportunity to compete for the title at Wrestlemania. Batista vs Orton was the match they wanted and they didn't have to honor the stipulation if they didn't care about professionalism. Even Austin- Vince hated him so much he was featured in main events for like 3 years with plenty of title matches. They did all that because that was what was expected of a professional management who has to build good faith with the audiences. If they were always holding people down we'd be talking about Starrcade 2015 now.

It can be explained away as the Authority attempting to remain professional about their handling of a guy who looks like he has all the tools to be a star and loaded with potential. In sports oftentimes a coach doesn't just bench a star player because he answers to the owner and front office who would be displeased the team was being handicapped by a grudge. The analogy isn't anywhere close to perfect but hopefully it's close enough that it is logical in a sense. Before anyone asks who they are trying to please by keeping Reigns, that would be the stockbrokers who in kayfabe you can reasonably expect them to go "Wait a minute. Im lining your pockets with cash. What're you doing with Reigns?"

Triple H is the boss who respects Brock Lesnar. I'd imagine Triple H forks over the belt to Brock if he won the triple threat. He just booked him there because he wants to make sure it isn't Reigns who wins and having Brock kick Ambrose's ass as well is probably only the icing on the cake for Triple H. It seems pretty logical to me.

Okay, I feel like I have to respond to this. I've been mulling it over, and I've come to the conclusion that Ambrose winning would've been really cool. It's been drummed into my ears so many times by Michael Cole: "On any given night, anything can happen in the WWE." The whole gimmick of the Rumble is that it's the biggest opportunity of the year to catapult yourself to stardom. Why not prove that? You could still keep the heat on Reigns/Hunter by having them brawl to the back (leaving Ambrose to pose and point to the sign, and whatever) and you've still got Fastlane to get the belt off of him if he can't handle the top spot (or he won't be as big of a draw as you need); have Trips go ape on him take the title and "injure" him and have Roman Reigns avenge his brother (if we really must see Triple H versus Roman Reigns). Let's face it, they've lost so much star-power for Mania that I doubt there's much of a downside. What, would Ambrose/Hunter be so much less of a draw than Reigns/Hunter that Brock's match couldn't make up for it, or that you couldn't paper over it? They're getting a hundred thousands fans in their by hook or by crook. Maybe I'm just losing my mind, though. Don't get me wrong, I definitely would have liked to see Ambrose win and run with the belt, but if they are hellbent on it being Triple H vs Roman Reigns for the title, the last thing you wanna do is muddy up the waters with yet another convincing challenger even if it only lasts a month. You don't want a guy to connect with the audience on a certain level as a champion and then take it off to put on one of the two guys nobody wanted to see. It would only demoralize them further to do that. My point was that under neutral circumstances and if they didn't have a vision set in stone for Wrestlemania that it would have been something that could have made a guy overnight/pretty quickly if they had him win a LMS match for one belt and then win the Royal Rumble for the top prize all in the same night. I do believe firmly that the whole double duty aspect helped get Daniel Bryan (2014) and Bret Hart (1994) over even more because they went through grueling (as well as Bill Goldberg on Nitro in WCW) challenge to cement their place in history (even if Bret did actually lose his first of two matches). It is a concept that would have worked tremendously well for someone that the WWE would have been comfortable running with for a good length of time. Obviously that wouldn't have been the case with Dean Ambrose.

In this case no you probably don't do it but it shouldn't be the automatic rule for everyone who is in the position to do it. If there is the right guy at the right time, why not? That is all I am suggesting. Again, with the plans being what they are and Ambrose being where he is in the company, no he shouldn't do it.

I am not disputing that and I realize logic doesn't have a place in wrestling but I am just saying it kind of insults the fans' intelligence a little if we pretend that Triple H resorted to nefarious means to ensure his participation. He is one of three people that can decide to enter as #31 as a surprise if they desired to, let alone enter at #30.

Thing is Im not sure he should be doing that stuff either. You don't want to set the fans up to expect a 38 years old guy to move around like a 28 year old guy week in and week out on television.

It is condescending and people who know him knows how old he is but you don't want to make it clear your newly minted star is a guy whos not much younger than the guys the fans want out the door either.