Slasher

Just asked my wife this same thing a few days ago, she is from Central America and grew up watching Lucha. Her answer was "Probably because they are drug addicted rapist pieces of shit". There's probably a better answer out there... Seems appropriate for me to steal Bill Simmons's line in his mailbag columns, (Afraid to say anything...)

If we are to assume that Bugs is the franchise of the WB umbrella, I would imagine WCW bringing in Fred Flintstone, Barney Rubble and George Jetson form an outside faction called HBWO, and their peak is burying Bugs in the desert somewhere.

Late to the party but throwing my two cents regarding Meltz and Goldberg... I just don't buy his apology, or at least his explanation for how it came to end up read that way. I am a journalist myself, and it is constantly pounded over our heads to be extremely careful of what we say and how we say it. This is just simply an example of Meltzer's diminished focus on his product for whatever reasons (stretched himself out too thin or wanting to be home to see his family or whatever etc) coming back to bite him in the ass. Hopefully he will get that proofreader or at the very least UNDERSTAND what the hell he is trying to say. No more wink wink references or "read between the lines" crap.

Bugs did it for the rabbits. He did it for the Easter Bunny.

Was going to ask this question in the Meltzer thread since it is currently on the track of discussing lucha but this is Comments, so Im asking here. What is with luchadors naming themselves after random things... Black Homes/Houses or 100 Bucks. I mean, guys like El Santo has the perfect wrestling monikers. But its just gotten bonkers in the past twenty or so years.

Not a big proponent of the whole "heel turn for Cena" movement, but if they were ever going to do it, that night or immediately after was the perfect time to do it.

I don't even recall his second reign and I am completely no-selling the third. It was pretty obvious they did not want to have Cena run through a tournament and win the belt back as if nothing happened. Would have reinforced Punk's issue with Cena and the WWE didn't want to do that. Plus it gave them an excuse to blow through a money Cena/Rey match on free TV...

The only thing that gives the Chavo story any credibility is the fact Rey was booked so godawfully bad after winning the title. Very much so presented as undeserving and only winning title matches by flukes while getting destroyed every way otherwise. I can imagine this being what they intended a world champion Chavo to look like. Then again, the WWE is run by idiots who has an obvious grudge against Rey, so yeah not buying it either.

On this board you can't say "it's there, and if you can't see it, I don't know what to tell you!" If someone asks for clarification on your comment, the prudent thing is to cite specific examples of sequences or segments where Brody exhibited great mat prowess. Otherwise your opinion is liable to be dismissed fairly quickly.

Yeah that comment got my head to figuratively explode. I obviously got a bit petty with my reply but yeah. Crazy stuff there. It just seems like these people don't want to recognize Cena because he has this certain stigma to him, like he's still this annoying white thug wannabe rapper/marine character and he's not cooler than the face painted surfer/movie character ripoff guy. I know I am probably underselling their issues with him but that's what I feel it all boils down to.

Honestly I have given up on the thread for the most part. People are reducing themselves to flat out lying about Cena just to prop up Sting somehow.

To me, Mike Boyette will always be the guy Mick Foley loathed being compared to, as told in his first book.

In theory and if done right, a televangelist gimmick is just about one of the most logical choices to host an interview segment. Prichard just sucked and the character sorta fails.

He had a PPV main event against Brock Lesnar

Isn't this basically the same thing as the Most Outstanding Award or am I misreading you? Most outstanding would be WITH the frills included. Who has been the best worker in the past year as far as wrestling, connecting with fans, etc. Basically Technical Wrestler would be best WRESTLER whereas Most Outstanding is best WORKER.

I understand the idea of best technical wrestler being something that could potentially yield a varied set of different candidates being that the definition falls closer to subjectivity than objectivity, but it would or should be naturally understood what Meltzer in specific and/or the WON awards in general look for when crowning best technical wrestler- that being a worker that puts on more good matches as a wrestler than anyone else, without the crutches of the other frills that a worker is afforded, like charisma, showman skills, audience interaction, so forth. Generally awarded to a guy like Chris Benoit and most recently Bryan Danielson.

I don't think anyone really refers to a career when referring to someone as a main eventer or midcarder or jobber... At least I don't think they should. However I don't see the harm in using these terms to describe the current placement of a particular wrestler or if speaking of a retired/deceased wrestler of the yesteryear, speaking in specific term of the placement in which the specific work is being done. Calling Tito a career midcarder would be wrong, agreed. But calling Kofi Kingston a midcarder isn't I think.

Renegade being one of the top 5 most screwed over by the booker guys in pro wrestling history is... well... pretty crackers. John If anything he got a juiced up (pun somewhat intended) push based on his look and Hogan's need to have a Warrior character for an inexplicable reason. As far as I recall, he was nowhere ready for the push and was not really a good worker at all. Not to sound overly unsympathetic, but it isn't the bookers' fault his mental makeup was so weak he had to commit suicide because of his failure as a pro wrestler.

Pretty much agreed with the definition here. A midcarder to me is a status thing, to describe someone who is either on the back burner in terms of pushes but kept in the public eye. Someone who has a semi-guaranteed role on the main shows but not in the main storylines. Someone who will win a fair share of their matches but not be put in position to win the main event titles. Someone who might job to the true main eventers but beat the lower midcarders. Kofi Kingston is probably a good example of a midcarder, but at the same time you have different tiers of midcarders. I suppose you can divide it up to upper midcard, midcard and lower midcard. The upper midcarders are mostly guys who are either on the rise or are essentially JTTS, used to give a main eventer a credible victory without wasting potential. Midcarders are guys who are just warm bodies on the shows but kept relatively strong in terms of push, and would be given wins 50% of the time. Lower midcarders are guys like Heath Slater.

Most franchise level babyfaces aren't portrayed or want to be portrayed as horndogs. Well except for Rock, but it's Rock.

It is generally assumed that Rock would win the title at the Royal Rumble and bring it to Mania to defend against someone like Cena, but I am wondering how that would work? Is Rock going to all of sudden appear weekly up to the show? It would be disappointing if the champion resumed the rare appearances that the Rock has been doing.

I know this, but in the past years we had future opponents teasing their matchups with Taker. Shawn at the Slammy, HHH offhandly remarking how he beat Taker into his hiatus, etc. Now? Nothing.

Because Taker doesn't really make a lot of Raw appearances aside from showing up for his Mania programs with HHH and Shawn, and even then, that Raw 1000 appearance did not feel like he was setting up a future program. He was just doing a thing with Kane that culminated in a Brothers of Destruction vs 3MB (ish, I know it was Reks, not Slater in there) segment. I hardly think an angle vs Reks or McIntyre or Mahal is in the cards for the Phenom. His appearance was no different than the legends showing up to beat up Slater.

It seems like Taker has become completely irrelevant now. In the recent years you had Shawn and HHH throwingpotshots at Taker to keep that program barely semi-active, but now? Maybe I missed it but nary a peep.

I like mat based wrestling. Chain wrestling sequences. Submission dominant wrestling. A person working on a body part and coming back to it throughout the match, building to the finish. I like a thinking man's wrestling match. Stylistically I don't blame people for digging Morton and the MX, but I think I've had enough of extended FIP segments or even HIP, in some cases. It is just boring to me to see a man get his ass beaten for ten minutes only for a long drawn out tag sequence nearly wipe that work away. I mean logically if your partner is known to fall prey to long beatdown segments, why would YOU as a wrestler want to tag up with such an obvious weak link, in kayfabe? Edit: for that matter I should probably note as a general rule I don't love squashes either. So perhaps my thing is I like seeing an evenly wrestled match by two participants, or a give and take exchange.