Current WWE

[goc]

Batista isn't good enough to turn himself face by mic work alone. I was actually pretty intrigued by what they did with Randy Orton trying to get in Batista's head about getting booed for his return. I thought it was nice that they actually incorporated reality into it, but it seems like they are going to try to work the fans into cheering Batista. They could do that if he wasn't in the title picture. But they seem determined not to change that, for whatever reason

 

It really seems stupid to put the title on Batista for movie promotion, if that is really the whole reason they're so stuck on it. It didn't do shit for them when it was THE ROCK! And he is The Rock, he's actually famous for being a big time movie star. Batista is famous for being a wrestler. It's the only reason he's even in that movie to begin with.

[The Chief]

Batista's I

 

LOVE.

 

THIS.

 

BUSINESS!!!!!

 

was embarrasing. He can personally hand each fan at Mania $100 bills and I still think he'll get booed.

[rvd356]

Batista isn't good enough to turn himself face by mic work alone. I was actually pretty intrigued by what they did with Randy Orton trying to get in Batista's head about getting booed for his return. I thought it was nice that they actually incorporated reality into it, but it seems like they are going to try to work the fans into cheering Batista. They could do that if he wasn't in the title picture. But they seem determined not to change that, for whatever reason

 

It really seems stupid to put the title on Batista for movie promotion, if that is really the whole reason they're so stuck on it. It didn't do shit for them when it was THE ROCK! And he is The Rock, he's actually famous for being a big time movie star. Batista is famous for being a wrestler. It's the only reason he's even in that movie to begin with.

Nice finally got a big box to write in, thanks Loss I guess?

 

Anyway didn't Rock bring the buys, like wasn't WM29 the most bought show in history?

 

I like the idea of the double turn with Orton/Batista. Mostly becauSe Batista as a heel is just gold, and Orton as a heel just doesn't compare to his 2007-2009 run where he was kicking everyones head off.

[Jmare007]

I just hope Hunter goes full heel next week in Chicago. Make the crowd and Bryan force him to admit he's been screwing DB since Summerslam or whatever. Get some real fucking heat and not the passive aggressive "shades of grey" troll bullshit the Authority has been doing for months.

 

I don't think D-Bry is gonna wrestle for the title at Mania, but they could book HHH saying the only way he wrestles him is with the stipulation of Bryan never fighting for the title again if he loses. Then you make Hogan or Vince come out and announce that if Bryan wins, he's in the title match.

[DMJ]

Great points brought up all around.

 

Adding Bryan to the main event at Mania DURING WrestleMania seems silly because, by that point, the Bryan fans who are against purchasing this are not going to have bought it on the hopes that he'd be inserted during the show. This is why I feel like the Rumble buyrate may not be super high (I know I had no interest in spending $60 on the off chance that Bryan was added to the Rumble in the 25th hour) and why certain PPVs headlined by Bryan may have been under-performers in the fall (as most predicted he would get screwed during the main event anyway). If the WWE wants to pull in the Bryan supporters, they'll need to telegraph things by having the stipulation that if he beats Triple H he gets into the main event (or challenges the winner) CLEARLY stated WEEKS in advance.

 

Of course, it's silly to even be talking about buyrates considering the Network was launched yesterday, but again, there is still international purchases to worry about. I'm not sure of Bryan's drawing power outside of the US, but I would imagine, based on the overseas popularity of guys like Bret Hart in the 90s, that the international market may tend support CURRENT stars more than the legends. Maybe because it is the current, active stars, not the Lesnars or Takers or Rocks, that end up doing the overseas dates more often???

 

Finally, Batista was "heeling it up" quite a bit last night and the announcers DID make the comment that fans were booing him because he had "taken Daniel Bryan's spot." This, to me, was a planted line directly from McMahon as I don't recall that being the company line a month ago. That being said, I do think Batista could be turned face after Mania if he starts doing things that a face could/should do - for example, rescue Daniel Bryan from a beat down or power bomb Triple H. The problem is, they've had him going up against Del Rio (basically a tweener because the audience doesn't even bother to boo him) and, at the Rumble, Roman Reigns (who the audience is dying to cheer for). They also had him, on his first night back, hug the Authority, whose been screwing Bryan over for months. Everything the man has done has been at least a little bit hellish and he's done NOTHING to make even the young fans like him.

[Strummer]

Just re watched the Bryan/Hunter segment from last night and damn does Stephanie look old for 37. Par course for the wrestling business

[W2BTD]

Dave is reporting that the plan now is not to turn Batista heel, but rather to turn him babyface. He's supposedly doing a promo acknowledging things on Smackdown that they want to "turn the people with him" because they are determined to make him a cheered babyface by Wrestlemania. I'm curious to see what they're going to try, but I don't see anything that can work.

 

They tried this on RAW, and he was still shit on.

 

Is the Vince the only promoter ever who consistently sticks with his guns to this level when things clearly aren't working? Is this his biggest flaw?

[sek69]

If it ends up just being Bryan-HHH and Batista-Orton with no 3 way switch, it would be just soul crushing in the sense that this company is just too stubborn for it's own good. At least the title match will end up providing trainwreck appeal if they make it the last or second-to-last match at Mania.

[Russellmania]

here's a thought....If Batista does indeed have the title win at Mania in his contract could they be planning to technically honor that by letting him beat Orton and then have someone call for an impromptu match with Bryan where Batista immediately drops the title?

[Matt D]

MITB works so much better at Wrestlemania, at the very least as a way to get guys on the show.

[Guest The Jiz]

 

Dave is reporting that the plan now is not to turn Batista heel, but rather to turn him babyface. He's supposedly doing a promo acknowledging things on Smackdown that they want to "turn the people with him" because they are determined to make him a cheered babyface by Wrestlemania. I'm curious to see what they're going to try, but I don't see anything that can work.

 

They tried this on RAW, and he was still shit on.

 

Is the Vince the only promoter ever who consistently sticks with his guns to this level when things clearly aren't working? Is this his biggest flaw?

 

 

There are good and bad sides to practically anything, and Vince's stubborness is on the bottom slope of diminishing returns. However, the alternative is a promoter who has no consistency or letting a segment of the audience dictate the flow, which I might add was the worst part of the Attitude Era imo since the two promotions often hot-shot booked. So it's as much a strength as a weakness. In this case, he has no reason to have Orton headline over Bryan. Even if Bryan isn't drawing, his reactions are so mesmerizing that it will generate some interest in the long-term.

[Guest The Jiz]

As the new guy here I want to clarify my own personal stance a bit before the meat of this post - I'm a lifelong WWE fan, and avid fan of the current product, but readily acknowledge many faults it has and I don't think people are lame for not liking it. What I've found is that sometimes, if you fill in the gaps and background for yourself a bit, their angles work a bit better. For instance, I'm not really down on the seemingly inevitable Bryan/HHH, Cena/Wyatt. Batista/Orton, Lesnar/Taker card as others. Here's why:

 

Bryan-HHH

 

I kinda already talked about my theory on this one. The past few years WWE has definitely shifted into a more meta storytelling in WrestleMania season, I assume to appeal to the group of casual fans that wander in for this period. The main event of the show tends to resolve around something meta, not necessarily the title, even when the title is a prop like Rock-Cena. That was about who is "the big dog" more than who is the champ, even if they worked the title in. This year, I think the main event is definitely going to end up being Bryan-HHH. They have a portion of the audience legitimately shocked and angry that Bryan isn't the champ, and I think people have unknowingly bought into an angle that I'm not even sure WWE knew they were booking. But if they get it now, they have a match where there's going to be legitimate fear that Bryan will lose his "big shot" at the COO, and that's gonna make for a good environment. In theory, beating HHH establishes Bryan in that upper tier of title contenders - which, arguably, is more important than any specific title win for the way modern WWE works.

 

Kane's turn kinda works in this context as well - he saw potential in Bryan during their time together, and joined The Authority to give him a test. He wanted to see how Bryan reacted to losing a teammate and friend, and unleashed his "monster" on him to push him to a higher level before he takes on HHH, who (whether we like it or not, and I don't really) is still presented as some sort of GOAT in WWE. That's why I say the belt is actually a negative to the Bryan angle - his story is about cracking into the inner circle of main eventers, not necessarily winning the title right now.

 

Cena-Wyatt

 

I don't really have a big problem with the way this is presented. Cena has been talking about being the guy to beat to prove yourself for some time, and Wyatt clearly wants a name for himself. I agree that they should have built Wyatt more as a single threat if they want this match to really click, but I never tried to say WWE is perfect. I'm interested to see how this plays out over the next month - I think there's a slight chance you get to see some sort of Cena/Reigns pairing at some point during this that is aimed to giving Reigns a big rub from saving Cena's bacon.

 

Orton-Batista

 

Are we sure they don't want the crowd to crap on this match? There was a lot of rumors around the past few months about truly moving beyond "face" and "heel" in the traditional sense, which is something I'm sure we've all heard before. But if they truly want to evolve the product more into a UFC style where most guys are both heel and face to various segments of the audience (basically turning everyone into Cena with the dueling crowds) this is an interesting way to help push it along. If they were to push this as the two best, whether people like it or not, I could get interested. It wouldn't work as a show closer but in the middle that could be good, especially if they deliver with a good match. The problem here is I don't buy Batista as the best, but they've got a couple weeks to kinda turn that around.

 

Lesnar-Undertaker

 

Not sure there's much to explain or defend at this point. I included it because I wanted to mention that I think bald, old, Aryan Nation looking insane Undertaker might be even scarier than his other incarnations - if I was a 6 year old last night, UT slamming a pen into Lesnar, ripping off his hood to reveal that freaky haircut and weird face while screaming, and then chokeslamming him into the table would have kinda terrified me. Looked like a psycho prisoner attack.

 

Conclusion

 

I think there's a lot of mental gymnastics necessary to get great storytelling out of WWE, but I think that's semi-intentional. The booking seems to have two sides to me - the straightforward kayfabe interpretation, and lots of allusions/veiled references to the backstage "new kayfabe" universe, where making a name for yourself and being a "star" is something equivalent to a title. I think that's at least semi-intentional - reading through casual fan twitter remarks and talking to the people who watch occasionally, they don't as easily see through stuff like Bryan/HHH being a total work - there's definitely a belief out there that HHH really doesn't want Bryan to win anything or be a star, and I don't think his placement on the shows or prominence in the "universe" backs that up.

 

Or, maybe I'm just trying to justify spending three to five hours a week watching current WWE.

 

Wow, good post.

 

Remarks: I'm not writing it in stone that Bryan will best HHH, though that's what should happen for reasons I don't care to explain, crowd reactions aside.

 

I'm not sold on Cena and Wyatt, though it's not a bad move either. Wyatt just hasn't been booked as a player on the level of Cena, not even close. So it's not a match in itself that will sell as to who the better man is. Cena gets nothing out of beating him, and Wyatt winning will frankly be awkward. So it's best for Cena to go over but in a 20-minute war of sorts to estabish Wyatt as a guy who can at least hang with the top guys.

 

It's interesting you make that remark on WWE moving into a more progressive style of working. I'm not convinced it'll work, however, until the WWE style changes since it's predominantly traditionalist in the sense that the psychology and storytelling are classic face/heel. In sum, the working style must complement the overall direction. The benefit of this is clear: With an extremely high supply of television and a limited roster depth, the main event scene will be more diversified. I also think the heat will be much better overall in giving the main event a big picture feel. However, again, I think the working style to execute this is much more complicated and will require a lot more imagination than the corporate WWE upper brass are willing to churn out at the moment, i.e. the range of the working style is significantly smaller than the directional projection, in math lingo.

 

Lesnar and Undertaker is the only match that has me excited. I expect Lesnar to win. Undertaker is getting old, and he had to be dragged out of bed to do the match last year against CM Punk. Lesnar will be around in the long-term, whereas Undertaker won't be around for much longer. Imagine the heat for a rematch next year?

 

This year's Wrestlemania should symbolize WWE's will to move into the future with a new set of stars. That can be done, and I think the timing is right to do that since the general interest and simultaneous discontent of the fanbase (something I've been feeling for years) reflect that this New Generation transition will be rooted organically - contrary to, for example, someone like Vince Russo who loves pushing young guys but in the most clumsy, inorganic way possible that makes no sense.

[dexstar]

 

 

It's interesting you make that remark on WWE moving into a more progressive style of working. I'm not convinced it'll work, however, until the WWE style changes since it's predominantly traditionalist in the sense that the psychology and storytelling are classic face/heel. In sum, the working style must complement the overall direction. The benefit of this is clear: With an extremely high supply of television and a limited roster depth, the main event scene will be more diversified. I also think the heat will be much better overall in giving the main event a big picture feel. However, again, I think the working style to execute this is much more complicated and will require a lot more imagination than the corporate WWE upper brass are willing to churn out at the moment, i.e. the range of the working style is significantly smaller than the directional projection, in math lingo.

 

 

Totally agree that this style, if it's even a real move, would be hard to pull off. I think there's potential with the Network and the pre/post shows to allude to the depth and "real story" behind the angles without alienating your fans who are watching for a traditional product, while giving some meat to people more inclined to dive deep into whatever they are doing. The upshot is, if you get people viewing like this, there's ample room to paint within the outlines they give you, and you can somewhat create your own story to accompany everything that happens.

 

With regards to the working style, for this squishy new style to work, the kayfabe/reality parallel lines theme can continue through how the matches are worked - for example, in the traditional mode, you're watching Daniel Bryan/HHH to see Bryan get the best of the Authority and be a winner. But in the deep/reality/whatever side, you're watching to see how Bryan performs in that spot, what kind of match he can do, how they set him up, etc. Extend that to someone like Cesaro - you're watching from a traditional standpoint to see him win, but if you are a fan, you are rooting just as hard for him to pull off a great match. Like the Cena/Cesaro match - that's a win in the traditional sense since he hung with the top dog, and it's a win in the "reality" version of the storyline too because he did his part to deliver a really great match that jacked up the crowd.

 

Part of the intended or unintended brilliance of this meta-booking is that I think it potentially draws your "smart" fans into the matches more emotionally, as they are going to react with real feelings for a guy like Cesaro/Bryan getting their fair shake.

 

I don't mean to stuff this forum with my half-baked theories on some complex double universe scheme WWE may or may not be attempting, especially since I don't have the terminology or specifics in any firm manner, but it's how I've been watching WWE ever since the "Pipebomb" and it really enhanced my enjoyment of their booking and overall product. Maybe that's how everyone has always watched wrestling and I'm just late to the party, though

[anarchistxx]

Wrestlemania card looks horrible. Probably the worst combination of those eight guys they could have come up with. Presuming they will be running Ambrose vs Reigns as well, which seems too soon. Either than or The Shield beat down Hogan and Reigns makes the save and turns face.

 

Not sure if I can even bring myself to watch it; I just know I'll be waiting with baited breath all night to see Bryan somehow get a title win, and end up ridiculously deflated once again.

[Russellmania]

well if Cena's knee is legit fucked up then at least we'll get a genuine blowoff to the Shield/Wyatts feud.

[Cross Face Chicken Wing]

Putting Orton/Batista on last at Wrestlemania would be like playing the Pro Bowl 5 minutes after the Super Bowl finishes.

[Guest The Jiz]

well if Cena's knee is legit fucked up then at least we'll get a genuine blowoff to the Shield/Wyatts feud.

 

It was a work AFAIK.

 

 

 

 

 

It's interesting you make that remark on WWE moving into a more progressive style of working. I'm not convinced it'll work, however, until the WWE style changes since it's predominantly traditionalist in the sense that the psychology and storytelling are classic face/heel. In sum, the working style must complement the overall direction. The benefit of this is clear: With an extremely high supply of television and a limited roster depth, the main event scene will be more diversified. I also think the heat will be much better overall in giving the main event a big picture feel. However, again, I think the working style to execute this is much more complicated and will require a lot more imagination than the corporate WWE upper brass are willing to churn out at the moment, i.e. the range of the working style is significantly smaller than the directional projection, in math lingo.

 

 

Totally agree that this style, if it's even a real move, would be hard to pull off. I think there's potential with the Network and the pre/post shows to allude to the depth and "real story" behind the angles without alienating your fans who are watching for a traditional product, while giving some meat to people more inclined to dive deep into whatever they are doing. The upshot is, if you get people viewing like this, there's ample room to paint within the outlines they give you, and you can somewhat create your own story to accompany everything that happens.

 

With regards to the working style, for this squishy new style to work, the kayfabe/reality parallel lines theme can continue through how the matches are worked - for example, in the traditional mode, you're watching Daniel Bryan/HHH to see Bryan get the best of the Authority and be a winner. But in the deep/reality/whatever side, you're watching to see how Bryan performs in that spot, what kind of match he can do, how they set him up, etc. Extend that to someone like Cesaro - you're watching from a traditional standpoint to see him win, but if you are a fan, you are rooting just as hard for him to pull off a great match. Like the Cena/Cesaro match - that's a win in the traditional sense since he hung with the top dog, and it's a win in the "reality" version of the storyline too because he did his part to deliver a really great match that jacked up the crowd.

 

Part of the intended or unintended brilliance of this meta-booking is that I think it potentially draws your "smart" fans into the matches more emotionally, as they are going to react with real feelings for a guy like Cesaro/Bryan getting their fair shake.

 

I don't mean to stuff this forum with my half-baked theories on some complex double universe scheme WWE may or may not be attempting, especially since I don't have the terminology or specifics in any firm manner, but it's how I've been watching WWE ever since the "Pipebomb" and it really enhanced my enjoyment of their booking and overall product. Maybe that's how everyone has always watched wrestling and I'm just late to the party, though

 

 

Yes, and WWE's audience is in perpetual civil war between its smart fans, who largely reject its direction while clinging to the hope that someone like Bryan will become the next big thing, and marks, who largely cheer or boo whoever WWE pushes. It's an interesting formula and one that has worked well, despite WWE's approach being seen as a big opportunity cost (which it is to some extent). If only WCW could have executed this type of formula...you know, the marks largely buying into WWE's crap while a vocal fanbase cheered on Benoit, Mysterio, Guerrero, or any guy who had the appearance of being able to work. Mix the two divergent fanbase desires into the main event, and you have a real, volatile mix that does generate interest when done right, without sacrificing either the guys marks go for (e.g. Hogan) and the guys smarts go for (e.g. Benoit). If nothing else, the heat is always interesting and worth discussing. The problem in this scenario - something WWE does not do right for the most part - is when to break that equilibrium by booking and then acknowledging some chosen smart wrestler is actually part of the in-, mark circle. WCW obviously never tried this mix except in maybe 2000 and did a terrible job at that.

 

WWE has been doing this mix well with actual entertainment, but its mediocre execution stems from not allowing for a paradigmatic shift, i.e. Orton and Big Show headlining in November, which shows a stunning lack of imagination that makes me simply not want to watch the product at all (and I basically don't, even in Wrestlemania season, because I personally lack the necessary consumer confidence to invest time in a teased paradigm shift and being left disappointed month after month). And on that parenthetical note, I'll note that partly why WWE has difficulty growing as a product with respect to casual viewers like me is they cater to their hardcore base too much, in that they'll eat shit for years, whereas I won't watch for more than three months (like most normal people) to see status quo antebellum reign.

 

Basically, the company needs to make gradual, progressive changes organically by making continuous, i.e. over time rather than in one swoop, stories for the fans of who will break out next into the elite team. Do Bryan in March. Do Wyatt at SummerSlam, if he's their guy now. Or do Reigns, but not both. Basically, every quarter, they should attempt to have one guy breakout, should he prove himself capable, into the elite, instead of pussy-footing pushes. People in general love those types of stories anyway of the comeback kid, rather than Dolph Ziggler playing comeback kid in May and then being a jobber by July. But that also requires vision, timing, not caving to ratings pressure, and most of all not being petty. And that's honestly too much to ask of WWE, hence lack of consumer confidence.

[shawmic]

There has to be a weird ego thing involved with their stubbornness on Batista vs Orton. Batista & Orton are HHH & Vince's hand picked guys and they are just never going to accept that people would rather see a short independent wrestler over them in the title match at WM. Plus you have the whole deal where HHH in his mind probably believes he made Batista and Orton top guys (in Batista's case he did, in Orton's case he did serious damage to his career in 2004 and 2009) and it's some kind of ego trip to have them in the title match at WrestleMania 30. They control their own history and years from now when they do the next ridiculous Triple H documentary or his Hall of Fame induction they'll be talking about how Batista and Orton were HHH's proteges at WM20 and then they headlined WM30. Dave brought up a good point today that they ended WCW because of one night of bad crowd reactions and this is over a month of bad crowd reactions and they won't budge.

[Loss]

It's sad that this idea will just have to stay in my head:

 

Randy Orton vs Daniel Bryan with some type of gimmick to make it unique compared to previous PPV offerings and Bryan saying if he doesn't win the title he will shave his head and his beard, give up Yes chants forever and never ask for another title match again. As part of the build, they could shoot vignettes where DB travels to the Broken Skull Ranch to get tips from Steve Austin on how to singlehandedly take on the WWE powers that be.

[flyonthewall2983]

Aaron Paul on RAW next week in Chicago.....so Jesse Pinkman from Punk's favorite TV show Breaking Bad is in his hometown

 

I was thinking about this last night. If what you're suggesting happen, happens they could absolutely salvage Orton/Batista if they put Punk in and have it be a Triple Threat match.

[dexstar]

 

 

WWE has been doing this mix well with actual entertainment, but its mediocre execution stems from not allowing for a paradigmatic shift, i.e. Orton and Big Show headlining in November, which shows a stunning lack of imagination that makes me simply not want to watch the product at all (and I basically don't, even in Wrestlemania season, because I personally lack the necessary consumer confidence to invest time in a teased paradigm shift and being left disappointed month after month). And on that parenthetical note, I'll note that partly why WWE has difficulty growing as a product with respect to casual viewers like me is they cater to their hardcore base too much, in that they'll eat shit for years, whereas I won't watch for more than three months (like most normal people) to see status quo antebellum reign.

 

Basically, the company needs to make gradual, progressive changes organically by making continuous, i.e. over time rather than in one swoop, stories for the fans of who will break out next into the elite team. Do Bryan in March. Do Wyatt at SummerSlam, if he's their guy now. Or do Reigns, but not both. Basically, every quarter, they should attempt to have one guy breakout, should he prove himself capable, into the elite, instead of pussy-footing pushes. People in general love those types of stories anyway of the comeback kid, rather than Dolph Ziggler playing comeback kid in May and then being a jobber by July. But that also requires vision, timing, not caving to ratings pressure, and most of all not being petty. And that's honestly too much to ask of WWE, hence lack of consumer confidence.

 

 

I agree with pretty much all that. I tend to be somewhat forgiving with WWE booking because they have to walk a lot of different lines with their product and goals - maintaining a steady financial side, keeping the kids happy, reeling in casuals when possible, doing the bare minimum to keep hardcores buying stuff, namely - that is naturally going to make big shifts in presentation and talent difficult to pull off with the speed the internet wants sometimes. They've got a giant ship to turn around these days, so I understand, to an extent, why they try to make something like Batista-Orton work rather than pull the plug because of a rocky start.

 

I absolutely understand how frustrating it is to watch the start-stop-start-stop-bury cycle most new talent goes through and think that the focus you suggest would be a big boon. There's already two distinct "seasons" in WWE - the leadup to Mania and the leadup to SummerSlam - and those are the times when the most casual eyeballs are on the show and should naturally be when they try to really elevate one guy (or team) each time around. The Orton-Big Show thing was a farce and, if I had to guess, the Bryan momentum caught them off guard and they decided to wait to continue his push until the bigger 'Mania season (which, I have no idea where that was headed if Punk/HHH was the direction...) and that's the best they came up with. Agreed it was a really odd, boring pairing at a time when they seemed to be heating up.

 

From the WWE perspective, I often wonder how much they really think they can retain casual fans like yourself in the first place - or if they feel that putting emphasis on WrestleMania season and the "summer angle" and keeping you around for 3-6 months of the year is a win for them. This all does relate back to Mania XXX, because it feels like Bryan is the first guy to go through one of these (at times) half-assed pushes but keep building momentum and fans, so at the very least I'm intrigued to see if they give him some sort of breakthrough, for real, or if it's a setup to return to the dreaded status quo after a feel good moment. I, of course, hope that they are playing on this fear with the angle at this point and plan on delivering Bryan to the inner circle, but have doubts it'll happen. Which is part of the reason they'll get my money for the show...

[peachchaos]

It's sad that this idea will just have to stay in my head:

 

Randy Orton vs Daniel Bryan with some type of gimmick to make it unique compared to previous PPV offerings and Bryan saying if he doesn't win the title he will shave his head and his beard, give up Yes chants forever and never ask for another title match again. As part of the build, they could shoot vignettes where DB travels to the Broken Skull Ranch to get tips from Steve Austin on how to singlehandedly take on the WWE powers that be.

 

Orton vs. Bryan - Title vs. Beard, should absolutely happen at Extreme Rules.

[Russellmania]

Imagine if they went through with that stipulation...how fun would it be watching Bryan in the subsequent months trying to keep his personality restrained when he desperately wants to do the YES! chants...HHH egging him on to do it so he can fire him...the payoff would be when he finally just says 'fuck it' and does the chant...the crowd would be more into it than ever.

[Zoo Enthusiast]

Plus he can shave before his wedding that way.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Just saw RAW, Hogan remains the man and Taker was awesome. And Internet Hero Bryan vs The Internet's Greatest Villain since Hitler at Mania makes perfect sense. I was saying over at DVDVR that to me the build up since SummerSlam has pointed to HHH vs Bryan, and that the plan to have it be Punk/ HHH didn't make sense, like it was going to interrupt the long term story they were telling. And I agree with the folks who've said that somehow or another, Bryan ends up in the title match. They even had the announcers and Orton talk on RAW about how Batista is getting booed and Heyman talking about how it's obvious that no one is excited about Orton/ Dave.