Slasher

I think if they changed the rules of MITB that the champion has advance notice of the match (ie. RVD announcing he would cash at the ECW event), it would go a long way in establishing MITB as a legitimate prize to be had to establish the holder's value. Right now it is just too easy for a midcarder to grab the briefcase in midst of chaos and then cashing in at the "opportune" times of a fallen champion. It does nothing for the title, the new champion and even the former champion. Again it really seemed like RVD was the most legitimate of MITB challenges because he was man enough to tell Cena when it was going down. They almost did that with Daniel Bryan insisting he would cash in at Wrestlemania but either the WWE changed their minds and incorporated the cash in for his heel turn or it was a red herring all along.

No. The only guy in the WWE that would have gone for it is a retired guy (Mick Foley). Well I can imagine Dean Ambrose in it, but point is I don't see anyone wanting to do it. They already have enough high end gimmick match types to satisfy the appetite of blood feuds.

I actually agree with Loss that Becky Lynch is exactly who the management wants on their television screen. It reminds me of that time where people were ripping on AJ Lee for what she is doing and Triple H of all people came to her defense saying that AJ is much better than we think and that she is just doing exactly what they wanted her to do, nothing more.

I would like to see Triple H talk about how the Authority isn't too worried about who the next champion is...he has a Plan B (similar to the Rollins turn) but having Ambrose be the plucky Mankind and Reigns revealed as the next anointed heel champion. Then when Rollins returns he can be a babyface if needed or remain heel and doing tbe Orton/Rollins tension deal.

Also to address Benbeech, Jeff Hardy vs Taker worked so well because the ladder match was Jeff's signature gimmick match. He refused to lose to Undertaker because he knew exactly how to power through the pains of tbe ladder match having done so many spots in ladder and TLC matches. Couple that with that it was Jeff's first legitimate shot at becoming the world champion, it was all about him throwing everything he could against the bully heel who happens to be less experienced in this gimmick match. He just refused to die because the match was all about him. If he can't win in his own gimmick match, how the hell would he ever be taken seriously as a title contender? It was just great. And it is something they couldn't have translated as well in a cage, even if it would have probably been a better match technically.

Actually that was a great match and I accept that as an answer. It doesn't have to necessarily be before the ladder is introduced. I was just thinking of a possible storyline where two guys who are not willing to do the car crash style spotfest, they work a complete wrestling match where the objective is to wear each other down to point of exhaustion or pain that they are physically incapable of climbing the ladder. However I would understand why that match never happened (it would be too boring for those expecting a batshit spotfest). But when you look at the history of Hell in Cell, they have escalated spots from Shawn falling off the sidw to Foley getting thrown completely off the top and then in a different match getting backdropped through the ceiling. Then you see Taker vs Brock which was as violent and brutal and they never leave the cage IIRC (talking about the one in 2002, not this year's). I would like to see gimmick matches kinda get brought back down to earth a bit. The matwork ladder match is just a possible idea for the ladder match.

Yep. Scott Hall vs. Goldberg, Souled Out '99. It sucked. I never saw that match, so I don't speak with authority about it, but Hall and Goldberg do not strike me as guys capable of making the matwork interesting or even functional. I assume Hall was the one to try the tactic, but there is nothing about him that screams technician. When I asked the question, I was thinking more like a Benoit, a Ric Flair, even a Daniel Bryan or a Bret Hart- someone who knows how to make it look good and that has commanded the fans' interest in that sort of thing. But I should check out the Hall match regardless.

Problem with "death" finishers is that, like Jingus alluded to several times, if someone has a move that is a "death" finish, what stops them from busting it out as soon as the bell rings? I do think they need to protect their finishers better (less epic your finisher then my finisher sequences) but I think you can go a long way in establishing those regular finishers as "death" finishes if they were allowed to win matches using lesser moves. If you can lose to a Five Knuckle Shuffle then naturally logic follows that the Attitude Adjustment would be of a higher caliber and thus near death finisher level.

Didn't Bischoff intend, after buying WCW with Fusient, for a Steiner/Goldberg match concluding with Goldberg going over and building Sean O'Haire up for a big Starrcade match? That would have given Goldberg a solid 6-8 months as champion. Then of course it fell through and Vince bought out WCW.

Isn't Vince usually referred to as WWE Chairman (of the board)? I don't think I have ever heard Vince be called CEO in kayfabe, so that reasoning would be unnecessary if true.

Stephanie is usually referred to as WWE owner, so in the corporate world, it would appear that they want to position her above her husband who is merely the COO. I also assume he is not anything more because they want to keep Vince included in the hierarchy of TV authority figures and Triple H has to be slotted below him.

The thing is...he spent over a decade building up his character to be this unstoppable cerebral badass. I don't think it is insecurity as much as it is that he believes that Triple H is who the COO Triple H is. He has never shown weakness. Why start now?

Now I wanna see if the Dudleyz can manage to 3D Braun Strowman through a table.

Has there ever been a ladder match where the match strategy was to disable someone's legs via extensive matwork before introducing the ladder?

Look at the WWE. They have a great babyface ace, they have a bunch of good babyfaces, they have some great heels, it is being booked by a guy who has been a great booker for decades plus his son in law who is churning out quality stuff down in NXT. Yet people don't like the product.

If you get tripped up in a match against Rey Mysterio, try to find a way not to land yourself draped over the second rope.

Might be their intention but I doubt Lesnar wants to do this for 15 years even with his sweet deal. I always imagined him being completely secluded in the woods somewhere by the time he is 50. He hates being out in public and hates his celebrity status. 15 years is a big stretch for him I think.

Isn't it obvious it has to involve the Undertaker? What with how HIAC ended?

Considering the roster they have, it is really sad. We could be getting some phenomenal, new match-ups & instead get three month block rehashes. It's depressing, really. I guess WWE see Brock as above making new guys though, since he's making so much. Worse yet is that there really is no reason for the WWE to think that way. They have already changed their business model in terms of revenue. The big pay per view money isn't there anymore. There really is no incentive to run big time Lesnar matchups if they are making back the same money month in and month out regardless of who Brock is facing, or even if he shows up or not. They should definitely be more adventurous in finding opponents for Brock beyond the stale handful of guys on their roster who are tip top main eventers. However, they have shown a willingness to incorporate two of the three Shield members in matches against Brock so I can imagine someone like Bray Wyatt getting a turn but yeah all of his return stint has been a waste of potential.

At least without a plan to catch his foot mid-kick.

Lesnar/Reigns and Lesnar/Rollins and Lesnar/Kingston weren't rematches.

Interesting but I don't think that weakens my argument that Goldberg was never intended to be the top babyface, at the moment, regardless of him winning the belt or not.

Although there were good indicators suggesting they had something big in Bill Goldberg, I do think the Nitro match is something that stands out more in "hindsight" than something that was clear in "foresight". I do sincerely believe that they were never planning to push Goldberg any more higher than they did at the time. I think it was always supposed to be Hulk and celebrities at the top with Goldberg toiling in the midcard. I think that Goldberg was planned as an US champion level guy in that period. If they really thought that Goldberg was ready to run with the ball, I think they would have put him in DDP's spot as the babyface challenger in the Hogan and cwlebrities angles. Of course it doesn't mean the WCW bookers were any less stupid for any of this.

Whatever happens, if Reigns wins the title, he needs to be holding it for past Wrestlemania. If he is to be the next ace, he needs a signature Wrestlemania victory and what better way than walking in the big main event and retaining the championship against just about the biggest threat a WWE wrestler could ever face in Brock Lesnar? This being said, I really hope they don't run the rematch. I want to see Lesnar against someone else and Reigns possibly defending against both Shield teammates in a triple threat.

I have this feeling Taker/Brock will have an inconclusive finish, not to carry the feud further, but to set Lesnar (and possibly Taker) on their own paths towards their Mania opponents. I just can't see them jobbing out Taker when they are going to count partially on the idea Taker might have his last match and he shouldn't lose on his way there BUT having Lesnar lose again is idiocy as well.