Slasher

Angle is an Olympic wrestler... who's also considerably bigger than Danielson.

Supposedly it happened at a bowling party for a mutual friend of Vince and Deford's. If I recall correctly, it was Vince and maybe Pat Patterson who made off with Deford AND his wife's shoes, forcing them to walk back to their car with only one shoe each. Vince was, reportedly so, of course drunk.

Look, Brock was established as being able to fling a referee one handed back in the ring from the arena floor. He was established as being too strong and heavy for Cena, who is known as being able to lift giants or giants and some (Show and Edge in an Attitude Adjustment at the same time?), that Brock could just pound into the mat. In normal circumstance, what Rey has over others is that he can fling himself into Brock and escape serious shit situations quicker. Get Brock on top of Danielson JUST once, and you're seeing blood pudding spilled all over the mat. And I think even if Danielson manages to latch onto Brock's body parts for a submission attempt, Brock would be way too strong as to just deadlift him and smashing him into the mat or the post to shake him off. If Triple H can lift the Undertaker off the stairs while in the Hell's Gate...

It would be difficult to pull off though. Rey is portrayed as quicker than most heavyweights, obviously, so he can get to the ropes or top turnbuckle to do damage to his opponents. Danielson is a little different. His game is capitalizing on mistakes and wearing people down with holds. I think it would be harder for him to get over on top of Brock like that. Not saying it's impossible though. Edit: I mean back in Brock's first run, they could barely book Benoit over Brock. And this is after establishing Benoit is arguably the greatest technical wrestler of that time. And Benoit was slightly bigger than Danielson. And Brock less experienced then than he would in theory be now.

I didn't expect it to be that bad, but honestly, I did not expect it to be great either. This is ONE month after the huge Rock/Cena and HHH/Taker HIAC show. There was nothing else that would help support that main event, especially as people already started to tire of the Punk/Jericho feud by then.

I know the WWE is a company filled with micromanaging OCD level paranoids, but WHY are they not letting Cena loose in terms of the stick? He's such a company man I don't think he would ever knowingly embarrass them if left to his own devices.

Thanks. I think I am cleared up now on that.

I don't want to get painted the wrong way here. If anything, I would pick Cena over Hogan, because I think he is a better worker than Hogan, but the sense I get is Hogan was able to manipulate the crowds to react a certain way. Look at the ending of his match with Warrior. I am sure the crowd was supposed to root for Warrior, but Hogan did his "defeated but noble warrior king" act and garnered great sympathy from the crowd. Didn't help that Warrior was soon exposed as not being as good a champion, but regardless... I don't know if Cena has that ability to flip a switch completely on the crowd reaction like Hogan was able to. He gets great reactions, but it seems like it's a static reaction, if that makes sense.

I started this thread about 19 minutes after you posted in the Cena-Hogan thread. And I do not mean to sound like I am trying to criticize your post to begin with. I am just curious about the whole thing, that's all. Edit: This is the post I am referring to:

No one in wrestling gets the heat Cena does. How can you say he doesn't connect with a crowd? I think he means in the context of getting the "right" kind of reaction in relation to his character alignment. Even if nowadays, "any heat is good heat", getting booed by half the crowd while playing a babyface is not necessarily a good thing. Cena gets exactly the reaction he is booked to get. WWE has marketed the divisiveness, acknowledged it on television and programmed him against every top babyface they could find over the years. When a top guy isn't over, people just tune out. Look at all the wrestling companies that have died because the guys on top turned people away so much that they couldn't pack arenas anymore. WWE is down from their peak, but they can still do 10,000+ for a show. When I think main eventers getting the wrong type of reaction, Cena is pretty far from the someone I think of. I think of Kevin Nash, Randy Savage and Sid sinking the main event scene in the summer of 1999, getting zero reaction and driving business down. You can't compare Cena to that with a straight face. I'm not trying to compare these scenarios at all. Once again, I think it goes back to "any heat is good heat". In this era, I think the WWE would latch on to anything that gets a reaction. Do you really think when the whole anti-Cena movement started, that the WWE wasn't trying to manipulate the situation back into their favor? Who remembers U.S. Olympian Kurt Angle announcing to the crowd that USA sucked? How about turning Jericho heel to try to deflect the reversed crowd reactions to Cena and Christian? After a few years, the WWE gave in and made it seem like they INTENDED for these reactions for Cena. It does not mean Cena is a great babyface. It just means Cena is a great character, in a way. It reminds me of these statements I would hear about how heels are not doing a good job if they were getting cheers. How is this not the same thing?

Well I will be fair and point out the real push for me to start this topic was reading in the Hogan/Cena thread on how Cena produces better matches, and Loss cited the Lesnar match as a better match than anything Hogan had put out. If the match was merely a spectacle, wouldn't that mean it does not rate above spectacles like the Andre match or Warrior?

No one in wrestling gets the heat Cena does. How can you say he doesn't connect with a crowd? I think he means in the context of getting the "right" kind of reaction in relation to his character alignment. Even if nowadays, "any heat is good heat", getting booed by half the crowd while playing a babyface is not necessarily a good thing.

Ok, I've seen the match get praised everywhere. I even ordered the show on demand due to the praise. I felt a little let down by it in general, which I think I mentioned in a thread somewhere here recently. However, I want to keep an open mind, so please... anyone/everyone, sell me on the match's greatness. What am I missing? I thought the spectacle of it was awesome, but the actual in-ring work I felt was very lackadaisical, so have at it.

If we are debunking it as a bullshit excuse, my guess for the real reason is that it isn't a babyface move to do. They are behind Orton as a franchise face over on Smackdown, and to have him kick guys in the skull would go against that, even if his character is a rogue wildcard one.

Aww, that's a shame. Bar none, the punt kick is my favorite finisher in WWE these days. Edit: I will however point out that the logic behind banning the punt citing concussion awareness is weird, considering one could argue Show's WMD knockout punch could induce concussions, especially seeing how boxers routinely suffer long term head damage getting punched over and over in the head through the years. You could also argue for other finishers as well as having potential concussion effects.

You don't really want any of your characters in a publicly traded company pushing a pro-alcohol agenda, even if as a heel. It's easier to do the sanctimonious anti-alcohol heel act. At least you can deny any support for alcohol if any politicians or media comes sniffing around.

Now I wanna see Chikara or someone do that. Even put together a Big Bad Wolf gimmick to boot.

Honestly this won't be a popular statement, but I felt that the Brock/Cena match has gotten overrated quickly. It was a very good spectacle, but as a match? Not so much. There was a lot of stalling in a way and Cena had Brock in front of him for the most part, so he can somewhat anticipate what Brock would do. Try getting blindsided by a 500 pound giant who dabbled in boxing, and see if it does not knock you out.

The show has usually overrun by 10-15 mins. You also have to account for maybe two more ad breaks. That gives them roughly 25-30 mins of air time to worry about. If you give a few more minutes per match they book as they do now, it fills out the time quickly. It's not really that much of a stretch when you think about it.

Or maybe... instead of more house shows, give the guys more time off to rest their bodies and keep their sanity? Just a wild idea, I know...

I figured he was losing to Danielson anyways even before Monday.

Only if she walked around on a plane with an open robe.

I did not think that Paul Heyman should have been associated with Brock this time around, but when they announced that his legal representative would be there to give a statement, I figured they would bring out one of those typical boring nondescript actors in a suit so it was actually a real nice surprise when it turned out to be Heyman. I also thought he came across as really low key compared to his character in the past, almost like he WAS a nondescript actor, which I thought was brilliant.

What Nash stuff?

That would have killed Miami dead.