Matt D

I think the best logic is that Trips only offered the deal once he got desperate after the Shield beat them so definitively. Before that, the deal wasn't on the table. Hell, maybe even Rollins went to Hunter on his own after Sunday and Rollins' plan all along was to push him to the point where he'd TAKE the deal. I think having Rollins be the one behind it all and that he architect-ed himself a shit ton of money and the new "Face of the WWE" role would be seen as not giving Hunter enough credit (or heat) though.

I think Brad Armstrong could have been bigger than he ever got.

It is smackdown.

I can't imagine anyone who posts here seeing that match and not loving it. It's just that no one's seen it. It should have made a Schneider comp or something at some point. I'm pretty sure I pushed for it on the yearbook but it didn't make the cut for one reason or another. I might have pushed too late or there wasn't a good enough copy.

He's got really fun stuff vs Manny in 85, and the Eaton series in 91 and a couple of Windom matches I love, including the 91 WCW Pro Chicago match. I imagine there's some good stuff in his 95 TV Title run too on the syndi shows.

The big problem with Paige lately is that she rocks back and forth between surly and screaming and happy-go "in on the joke, isn't this great?" smiling. That wasn't the case at all for most of her NXT run.

To be fair I watched what I did of the show with the thing on mute and closed captioning on.

Yeah, I'm with Will. Once it picked up(and yeah, it took a while) it was a great callback to the Shield dominating through the numbers game getting a taste of their own medicine, and the announcers even picked up on that which is a minor miracle, and everything from the three on one with Reigns and especially Rollins' dive off was some pretty good WWE Cinematic stuff. Also, Will's post was his 15000th post. (Unless he has his post count rigged but I don't think that's the case. I believe he has that many.)

Why is Batista wearing Jeff Hardy's arm things?

I just came on mid Cena vs Bray. I don't think the Fox/Paige match really went anywhere. Is the idea that Alicia made the crazy mistake of tossing her out instead of going for the pin and paid for it? Maybe Regal would have put that over?

"Everyone knows it hurts to have your senton splashed." - Bobby Heenan

Neville would be best as Kidman-in-the-Flock/Gabriel-in-Nexus role, where he got to just hit his big spots during group beatdowns.

I stopped watching at the Four Horsemen at 4, just because I wanted to pay attention to that and I didn't have time to do more than listen, and in my head I couldn't figure out who the hell was slotted in there. There was NWO and DX, obviously, but who the hell else? I figured it was probably the Shield and they did a late insertion to get them in there. The Brood is so much more surreal. I think it gives you an interesting idea of the amount of Attitude Era fans involved in this though? Maybe?

Rogers' recovery during the Malenko/Kikuchi match after Kikuchi falls off the ropes is one of the smoothest things I've ever seen watching wrestling. The match itself is insane, both in the good way and the bad way.

I think he's been fine. He has a familiarity with the product and it shows.

I'm always glad to hear people talk about the Dangerous Alliance on WWE show. It also made me want to see a Cesaro/Ambrose/Nattie Dangerous Alliance for some reason since they were the talking heads they used.

This is why Dave gives Dylan so much crap obviously. It's the pyramid of screaming.

Some of these are fluff, but this Joey Mercury: Where are they now? WWE Article is well worth reading. http://www.wwe.com/classics/wherearetheynow/where-are-they-now-joey-mercury-26309214

I think the main reason he didn't make the roster is that they asked him to do something and he didn't do it. They could have asked him to cut off his pinky or drink more cabbage smoothies. It's WWE. He was a developmental guy.

The cool thing about Sami is that he manages to seem like he's in on the joke with the crowd without demeaning the joke, if that makes any sense. He's very good at portraying "Hey, this Tyler Breeze guy is pretty nutty, huh? Is he for real? Is this really happening" without making it seem like "Mattias Clement is sure portraying Tyler Breeze in an entertaining but goofy way, isn't he? He's doing interesting stuff with the writers' material!" I know they're totally different, but someone that I'd point to who connected to the crowd in his promos in a similar way was Sting. You always had the sense of Sting being in a strange and outlandish situation and relating to the crowd, whether he was up against Avalanche and Big Bubba or against the Black Scorpion or what. Obviously, Sami can manage this by just talking to them and not screaming and woo-ing, but that's what it made me think of.

Does this apply to when you're praising matches or when you're criticising them? I mean, if I praised Flair/Kerry would he tell me my praise means nothing because I wasn't there? If I praised it without understanding the context would he tell me I don't know what I'm talking about? Or is it only when people criticise a match for being dated or not holding up that he plays the context card? Is it okay for us to praise French catch, or should we not do so because no-one's ever done so in the past? Or can we praise French catch so long as he don't use hyperbole like "French catch was the best wrestling in the world in the 60s"? Dave has said it works both ways, yes. I also don't think saying Dave's focus is on moves and spots is entirely correct. He likes matches with hot crowds unless they involve Hulk Hogan. It's really interesting to go back to 84 and look at Dave's enthusiasm at the start of the Hogan WWF run. It's generally interesting to look at some of those old issues in general, especially when he ranks all the wrestlers.I always say that what he likes is "action," more than moves and spots.

In everything but JBL and Cole show, which is the best thing WWE does every week. And maybe how he comes out before smackdown tapings which we got to see due to the leak last week.

It's one reason why it's so cool to watch Goldust work in 2014, because he can be in a headlock and get the crowd into a match like no one else on the card.

It's really much more about admitting and embracing your biases, I think. "These are the elements I think are important. This match hits them well or doesn't. I like it or I don't. It also manages to do these other things well or it doesn't, which are things I do not value as much but other people might. I think it is or isn't a good match." Add in some context(!) and a funny road report story and that's a good review right there. It's better than most of the ones I manage.

I think you need context to watch ANY match well, frankly. I just watched 7 matches leading up to an apuestas match from a few months ago and got a hell of a lot more out of it than I did when I watched it blind the first time. I also don't think obtaining context is all that hard. It's certainly not an impossible task. Maybe we disagree in what we think "context" is?