Slasher

He is supposed to get the CURRENT angle with the title unification over. It made no sense, really, to reference Daniel Bryan the way he did. He can throw in an aside remark about Bryan deserving the spot, but he pulled him out of the crowd and did a five minute angle with him on the spot when it really was about Cena vs Orton. Sure, Cena gets what the fans really wants to see, and what the fans don't care about, so he highlights the better part of it, but that's not really what he should have been doing. Especially considering, if we are going to assume that it was improvised or added in at the last minute, it did not mesh well with the story told five minutes later where it was all about Cena standing tall with the Authority with Orton grounded on the mat. Every crowd is going to be insanely pro-Bryan, and while yes, it was in Bryan's somewhat "hometown", in reality Cena pretty much took a dump on the angle he was supposed to be selling hard. It doesn't mean much in the big picture because the match was only six days away from that point, but they really were served better if they focused on the real task at hand.

"It" isn't rocket science then, is it... Cena can do or say what the fuck he wants out there. Just because somebody like Sheamus or Cody Rhodes may not have had the confidence to deviate from script (big presumption, for all we know they may have discussed the likelihood of something like that happening in DB's hometown) doesn't mean they don't get "it". "IT" Cena "gets" being a pandering tool who uses another popular wrestler to push his agenda? Kinda like how Triple H is legendary for attaching himself to the hot fad vehicles? Is that the "it" you're referring to? Cena did a good job in the segment but if I would have cut anything out, it would be him pandering to the Bryan marks. It does nothing but serve a point that Cena has nothing on his own merit to stand on when trying to get his own pops.

Make an argument for Bret. My rough draft had over 400 names on it and Bret was one of them. But as I was going through the list pairing it down, guys I had assumed would be locks or have strong chances of making the list starting falling off early. When I look at Bret I see a guy who was the ace of a company doing okay not great. Sometimes things were pretty bad under his watch, but he had some good gates and runs. He was never a massive draw. Never even really a "very good" draw. He had about seven years as a top star in wrestling, but a couple of those years were in free falling WCW, and another chunk of time was on the shelf in 1996. Actually Bret's peak as a star closely coincides with the low point of U.S. based wrestling in the modern era (not his fault, but pretty hard to argue against). In his pre-prime he was in a tag team that I don't rate all that high, and which no one thinks was a draw and was one of a few guys consistently booked on top in Stampede, a promotion that was less successful than the often dismissed Portland. To me the idea that Bret is a "gimme" for a list like this is silly. What on earth did he ever do to be an obvious pick for something like this? I certainly could see him on the list. He's not a bad pick. But an obvious "he has to be on" type of guy? Why? I actually think Bret ended up finishing comically high on the list when you actually look at his career. I do think his placement on the original list (44 or something) was a bit too high, but it is hard for me to make a list of the 100 best wrestlers in history and not see Bret placed SOMEWHERE in there. He was consistently considered one of the best technicians in WWE history and he certainly had a run on top and was a key player when the WWE turned the corner after the WWE New Generation thing. A big part I am willing to admit though is I've never really bothered to take a look at names that doesn't register in the era in which I watched, or near it. So guys like Farmer Burns, Yvon Robert, etc. doesn't grade at all with me, but I am willing to accept that it is my problem not you guys'.

I can't take anyone's list that leaves out Bret Hart. Don't care where he places, as opinions vary but he needs to be there SOMEWHERE. Also, are we ignoring Chris Benoit completely due to his actions or do people really think him not as good? (edit- nevermind, found him)

Cena was really good but it was odd how he pandered to the crowd by pulling Daniel Bryan out of the crowd and getting him involved in the segment intimately. It was almost, to me, as if Cena was building the meritocracy of his winning the title by establishing that Daniel Bryan worked hard for what he got. It was like "Uhhh that's great John, but what does that have to do with YOU?" Everything else was great, and I loved how CM Punk finally made his presence in the angle clear, assaulting Triple H.

I am interested in what they do with the Shield as far as the break-up is concerned, but they have already seemed to cast Ambrose and Reigns in specific roles in the angle, so right now I am more interested in what happens to Rollins, as he would certainly have to be the wild card in all of this. I also agree that Ambrose is currently positioned to be the standout in the angle, carrying the key moments, but I also agree that Reigns seem to have put things together faster and as a result, he looks more like the star in the end game.

In a way having all that footage and having the production team they have had at their disposal has been some of their biggest and best tools in training their wrestlers. It has given them a special kind of focus and sharpened their sense of the kind of wrestlers they should be instead of aimlessly grasping at the notion that cosplaying video game matches=5 star outings. If you aren't a world class versatile talent the WWE will help you find what it is that you are.

I would imagine swinger. You have to keep your coordination for the entire swing and not accidentally hit anything with your opponent's body. The swingee has to take a leap of faith that he'd be taken care of by a guy rapidly losing his balance.

I feel like they are being the opposite of natural in pushing Reigns. Up til Survivor Series he worked within the framework of the Shield stable and doled out spears at opportune times and now he is just spearing everyone out of their boots like he is addicted to it all of sudden. It is ok to build him up as a dangerous entity separated from the Shield while keeping him within the stable without needing to be so hamhanded about it.

This is something that really should be a straight up match. Feels wrong having a gimmick overshadow it, I mean, this should be a REALLY big deal. Probably thought they were getting the WMX ladder match effect for it with both men having to climb the ladder to get it. I agree it will likely end with one of them grabbing one title before getting knocked down and the other getting the second title. Maybe even with them switching ownership of the belts and the authority being conflicted whether to allow marketing of Cena as the face of WWE or elevating the World title to that status?

The ironic thing in comparison- tonight's football game between the Broncos and Patriots was billed as Manning-Brady XIV. These guys have "matched up" 14 years out of a possible 16, missing two due to season long injuries to both men. Nobody was going "Ugh. Been there done that." It will probably grade out as the highest rated game of the year... why can't that sentiment be created for wrestler matchups? Cena and Orton (Orton moreso) have gone through storyline progression that added facets to their characters by each meeting. First it was franchise babyface vs legend killer sadistic heel, then the polarizing babyface vs anti hero heel and now the wounded never say die hero vs the "chosen one" heel. But no one is buying what they are selling. So be it.

Look, I like Orton as a worker but not as a guy pushed in the position he is. This said, it is obvious they want the guy there. If positioning the guy they really trust as a draw (Cena) against Orton, who EWR updates gave the fitting gimmick of "the chosen one" btw, nothing you can do about it. They seem so fucking convinced they are the golden boys, so like the JCP fanboys who had to watch Hulk Hogan in the 80s, we either watch or not. Makes no difference to them.

Ok you talked me into seeing your point.

Umm seriously? Yes? The main event is the main event. The last match on the card. This is pretty universal EXCEPT in cases like the old 'before intermission' Hogan main event, or a MITB cash in coming after the main event, or a 'double main event' card, or SNME cards, those kinds of examples where the match that is built and sold and named as the main event doesn't go on last. But a main event isn't suddenly not a main event because there are other matches on the card that have bigger stars or turned out better or stole the show from the actual main event. Jericho vs Hunter was the main event of WM18. Rock vs Hogan was the bigger match with more star power in it, and it also turned out to be the more heated and better match. That still doesn't magically make it the main event, because it wasn't. Cena vs Orton vs Hunter at WM24 wasn't the main event. Edge vs Taker was. Even if you possibly want to argue that a match on that undercard was more important than Edge/Taker was, then that match is Floyd/Show. And then Shawn/Flair. Orton's match on that card was third from the top in terms of importance, at best, and in no way was the main event. This is partly an issue with current-day WWE marketing style, because they often try to call three or four matches on the card "main events". But unless you want to actually buy into that and any match given the "one of the main events!" tag is a main event, I don't see why main event should be such a nebulous term. You are right normally but I am buying what the promotion is selling because its their product. If they want to call the curtain jerker the main event, that is one thing but a match second or third from top? Sure.

Umm seriously?

That is a heartbreaking image. A hot summer angle once again squandered so they could have a motherfucking soulcrushing return to a painful status quo. They have NO competitors. None at all. Why are they so petrified of experimentation with new main eventers???

I get that. I just can't support that. Anything that refers to a heatless Triple H vs Chris Jericho match over The Rock vs Hulk Hogan as the bigger main event is a no go. Therefore for Wrestlemania, a main event is simply a match that gets more than enough play in the promotion of the event. Of course this implies Bobby Lashley and Umaga was a main event but hey, can't win them all.

Not to us but it was billed as one. It also featured Triple H and John Cena. You don't think they got paid like main event slotted wrestlers that night?

So you have put that Triple H vs Randy Orton main event out of your memory huh. As someone who saw it live, you are so lucky I had to look it up because I remembered they had a WM match but was hoping it wouldn't go on last. Boy, was I wrong. Surely that triple threat with Cena and Triple H has to be considered a main event as well?

I think Del Rio is a very good worker, but it's hard to argue on his behalf at this point as his character is completely flat and the booking only makes it worse. Of course I feel like that about a lot of guys, including Punk who has been change the channel level horrific as a promo/character for the majority of this year Like, I can't even argue! He's so talented. He should have been huge... just bad booking, man. Build him up as this big star then he loses in the curtain jerk of 'Mania after winning the biggest Rumble ever. He's been heel/face multiple times already, has nothing but rematches, been champ multiple times already...they burned through an entire wrestling career in like two years. Poor guy. Now he doesn't even have the stuff that used to make him unique, like the cars or Ricardo. ??? He has only turned babyface ONCE, and had a run for about eight months before turning heel but it never felt like they explored everything they could with the babyface character. An uninspired patriotic Mexican run constitutes all they could do for him? Hell his heel character hasn't even been explored beyond the caricature.

Don't get me wrong because I love Reigns but it is disappointing they only strap the rocket on the big guys.

Do you really think they care? Bryan had crowds in unison shouting YES! and did dick all with him in the end. They had the crowd taunting a fallen hero Triple H at Summerslam 2012 and still pushed him in a return program against Brock at Mania, even having him take that match. Once they have a direction they want to take, they have tunnel vision.

The only reason Extreme Rules get play is it is typically the Wrestlemania rematches card, so you still get what is seen as major matches booked on the show. The only recent exception is when they hotshot Goldberg vs Rock (and that is only because Rocky was on his way out) and Brock Lesnar vs John Cena (probably the only true example of a major Mania quality one off match in the show's history in the past 10 years). While they have built MITB as a solid performer in its own right. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if it overtakes Summerslam in a few years. What I am trying to say is I don't see Extreme Rules as a show they consciously try to book as important or as a major priority. It is just a sloppy seconds show to the main event of the WWE calendar. Easy to load up with zero care.

Not anymore, no I think Elimination Chamber is probably #4 now, with Backlash #5. They put so much more effort into that Rumble-Backlash "WM season". They've had Brock wrestle on the Backlash show the last 2 years, though maybe it's just part of his deal that he doesn't work during hunting season I'd actually argue that MITB has become more important than Survivor to them as well The one thing I'd say for Survivor is they put it in major cities. Boston this year, MSG 2 years ago, Miami in 2010, DC in 09 etc. I'm not even sure how important that is, but it's something. The card this year is terrible, and I'm not sensing any buzz beyond people talking about how terrible it is. Not a single match on the show that I'd pay to see. Psst... Backlash doesn't exist anymore. They have renamed the April show Extreme Rules. My guess is the order of importance goes: Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble, Summerslam, Money In The Bank/Extreme Rules (tied for now but give MITB a few more go rounds and it probably pulls ahead), Elimination Chamber, Survivor Series, HIAC/TLC, everything else.

Which is weird because Big Show got over as a guy people wanted to see snap and KO the heels into hell. It is like the WWE misfired on attempting to reconcile both the fans' interest in the babyface vs the big main event heel program and their desire to have that guy be a bigger than life presence. Too bad for them. Maybe they shouldn't have killed Daniel Bryan dead and only give him a weak concession of taking out Shawn Michaels.