Chess Knight Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 I would have much preferred Cena lose to actually, well, keep him interesting. He lost to the Rock and it was a big loss, he lost to Bernard and it was an upset, if he lost to Lesnar and took time off, there could have been a really great 'does this guy have it anymore?' story with him. Could build up to another match with Dwayne at, like, SummerSlam or something which he could win. Plus Lesnar could be ridiculously cocky and run around boasting 'haha I beat ya top guy, cunts.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slickster Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 There are a lot of people who hate Cena and for some reason think he is always booked incredibly strong. I have no clue how anyone watching over the course of the last year could come to that conclusion, but they do.It is weird how many people hate on Cena because "he never loses" or "he always comes back like Superman" or other similar statements. It's become a pretty solid consensus opinion in a lot of corners of the IWC. Why is that? He's nowhere near as protected as, say, Austin or Hogan were during their big runs. Cena usually does more clean jobs in a single year than those guys did in their entire championship reigns. Have modern fans just become so impatient, or so used to even-steven booking where everyone loses all the time, that they expect even the biggest stars to lose more frequently? Those fans don't want Cena to lose, they want him to lose and not no-sell losing the next night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 So, you've got : _THE Invasion _Starrcade 97 _Nash beats Goldberg and ends the streak _Hash beats Takada just a few months after Takada got the IWGP belt _Lesnar losing his first match back to Cena in a post WM B-PPV _David Arquette, WCW champ _fucking up Bret vs Vince with stupid overbooking You forgot Hash-Ogawa. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Booker-HHH WM XIX. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 So, you've got : _THE Invasion _Starrcade 97 _Nash beats Goldberg and ends the streak _Hash beats Takada just a few months after Takada got the IWGP belt _Lesnar losing his first match back to Cena in a post WM B-PPV _David Arquette, WCW champ _fucking up Bret vs Vince with stupid overbooking You forgot Hash-Ogawa. John No, it was awesome. Ask around. Booker vs HHH really had no big effect other than killing Booker for a while, but "Racist heel kills off black babyface" is indeed mind-blowing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 It pretty much killed Booker's chances of ever being a guy who would break into the top tier. I liked the King Booker stuff, but that was a few years later, and really felt like a secondary title run Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 I never thought Booker belong as a main eventer anyway, not as a worker nor as a character, it's not like Booker would have been a big draw. But yeah, effective HHH bury job, with the bonus of being really offensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Well you aren't really going to get an argument from me since I think Booker is overrated in just about every respect, but he was a guy who had a chance to break through with a win and instead the whole storyline and match felt like a prolonged hate crime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Wrestling X Posted May 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 I wonder if Michael Hayes was involved in the booking of the Booker T/Triple H storyline back in 2003? WWE had the right idea with Booker T when he first debuted - interfering in a match and attacking Austin and being allowed to look a threat to The Rock (although that didn't exactly work out...) but it was the booking that followed that really broke down the main event level that Booker T had reached during the end of WCW. You know, Booker T was pretty much the face of WCW in 2000-2001 and really stepped up to fill the holes that had been left with the departure of Hulk Hogan, etc. To be honest, I saw the King Booker push as WWE rewarding him for years of hard work and not complaining about his position in the company. Yeah, they could have done so much more with him and it would have served WWE in the long run because Booker is a good worker who can protray either face or heel to a high standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 What about Starrcade '96? Hogan becomes the hottest heel in wrestling, leading the hottest stable in wrestling, and loses to a part-timer in a non-title match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 What about Starrcade '96? Hogan becomes the hottest heel in wrestling, leading the hottest stable in wrestling, and loses to a part-timer in a non-title match. Nah. Starrcade 96 was a great card, tons of really good wrestling up and down the card, and Hogan showing ass for Piper and losing clean was the great feel-good moment that was supposed to happen after months of him bullying everybody. The fact that Piper was a part-timer excuse the fact it was non-title. Starrcade 96 is the apex of the nWo era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackToBionic Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 If Brock was coming back to work 200 shows a year, then yes this was unquestionably one of the worst decisions ever. But the guy's already gone again for an indefinite amount of time. I really think WWE is just hedging their bets with Lesnar. They want to use his name to bring some more eyeballs to their product, they don't want to hand him the keys to the company by letting him work twice a year, destroying their top guys. That doesn't help anyone, except Brock who is already walking away with $5 million, so why should he care? We all already know that Brock could "really" beat Cena...or Sheamus...or Bryan or whoever. They need to establish an air of unpredictably to the Brock character that maybe he won't win every match. This is especially important if they really are planning on building Wrestlemania around him. If he beats Cena and 1 or 2 other top guys between now and then, who gives a fuck about who he would wrestle (bar, maybe the Undertaker)? And besides all that, there's the elephant in the room that this is a guy who will flake out on you in half a second. His wife probably doesn't love the business, she's had well-documented problems with you in the past, they've got several children...numerous reasons for him to not want to be there for too long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 I don't think Booker going over would have made him break through. Most of the focus would have been toward building up Goldberg regardless of who won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 IRS over Greg Valentine at Summerslam 1991. Just stopped Greg's babyface push in its tracks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cox Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 What Greg Valentine babyface push? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Jackson Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Yeah, I'm not sure how much of a "push" it was, let alone a WTF were they thinking? moment. (or was it sarcasm, Jerry?) I will say I was surprised when watching the SNME DVD how hot the crowd was for Valentine during the battle royal in 91 where he was the last eliminated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 IRS over Greg Valentine at Summerslam 1991. Just stopped Greg's babyface push in its tracks.I have no recollection of this match whatsoever. Despite the outcome, was the work any good? EDIT: The whole thing is on YouTube. I just watched it. I don't remember that match at all for a reason. Very forgettable. With really bad commentary too. I don't remember Piper being that bad! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Wasn't he essentially out of the company after that IRS match. Valentine wasn't getting a push of any kind. Total JTTS. He got squashed pretty hard by Earthquake at Wrestlemania that year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Wasn't he essentially out of the company after that IRS match. He did work the Royal Rumble 92, then left for WCW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slickster Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 What about Starrcade '96? Hogan becomes the hottest heel in wrestling, leading the hottest stable in wrestling, and loses to a part-timer in a non-title match. In typical WCW fashion, they never said it was a title match or a non-title match until SECONDS before the match began in order to bait-and-switch people into ordering the PPV. Also, the angle was that Piper demanded this match and chose the stipulations - meaning he apparently requested a non-title match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Guys, just a little joke from me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 As you see, give us Greg Valentine in 91 and we get all excited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 Michael Hayes beating the Russian Assassin at Chi-Town Rumble '89 just killed the Russian Assassin as a draw. Notice the NWA was never able to run Moscow after that. This is fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 I think what hurt Valentine more than anything was dying his hair black. He was always a huge draw among blonds, but they felt betrayed by that angle and tuned out in droves. The WWF realized this and made him blond again after a few months, but the damage was done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregor Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 I thought that the Gladiators were going to be something special, but instead they were jobbed out to the Mulkey brothers, of all people, and you can't really recover from a debut like that. They could have been the tag team of the '90s, and in fact you might be able to trace the decline of American tag team wrestling in the 1990s to the mishandling of the Gladiators. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.