goodhelmet Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 Yeah, I am really interested in this Samoa Joe hate. I won't fight you on AJ, Daniels, or Punk but Joe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 Styles-Joe was an MMA match? OK....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 I guess it's time to add Joe to the list of people who are hated in proportion to how successful TNA gets.... Yeah, it'll be interesting to see how much the Joe hates rises as he climbs the ranks in TNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Noah Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 He's just garbage... He should go to Japan or UFC or some place, where they consider that "talent"... Cuz in this specific match, he hardly did any wrestling moves.... He's just a fat over-rated fucking turd IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 He's just garbage... He should go to Japan or UFC or some place, where they consider that "talent"... Cuz in this specific match, he hardly did any wrestling moves.... He's just a fat over-rated fucking turd IMO Well one man's trash is a world's treasure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 I caught a tad bit of RAW last night for the first time in a while. Along with his other health issues, is Kurt Angle missing some teeth too?? EDIT: Never mind. Someone told me he's wearing a gum shield. Still, looked really bad, especially with that graphic on RAW of his. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 If and when Stephanie gets pregnant, I wonder how long before things like hormonal mood swings and maternal instincts start to reflect in the booking. Say it with me... Shelton's Mama: WWE Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 I fear the day whatever spawn of HHH/Stephanie is old enough to wrestle. You just know if it's a boy that he'll be winning the WWF Title about 20 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted January 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 I figured Steph would take a lot of time off when she gets preggers. So, I'd be more worried about someone else having too much say. Kevin Dunn or whomever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 You kidding? Steph will be telling the writers to come up with more suicide angles and stereotypical gimmicks while little Vincent Hunter Paul Shane James Kennedy (KENNEDY~!) McMahon-Levesque is pushing his way out from betwixt her labia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 When did the net become so bizarro world towards what good booking is. I've seen endless complaining about the Impact squash matches and the fact that Sting isn't going to appear on tv before the PPV. Who in their right mind would give Sting away for free on tv before his big PPV match? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Very much in agreement with you on making Sting's first appearance be on ppv. Some people tend to forget that it's a business. (unfortunately, some of those people are in high positions in wrestling) A lot of the 'net are marks for the pop and not marks for the business. I don't have a problem making people pay for Sting, I just have a problem with how they are promoting it with the fake Sting skits. At least they are going with something as opposed to doing what they did with Christian and not promoting it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 What amuses me is one of the chief complaints about WWE used to be that it's hard for new guys to establish themselves now that they don't have squash matches anymore. TNA does that and people complain about *that* too. Everyone knows WWE and especially WCW gave away too many money matches on free TV, and now they want TNA to do it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted January 4, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Well, I want to see Sting on iMPACT! before paying thirty-bucks for him to no-show again. I got the last PPV thinking Sting was going to be there. I've already got burned once. When Sting was doing the whole "Crow" thing in WCW, I bought Starrcade because I wanted to see Sting Vs. Hogan. Had all the Sting run-in's and Scorpion Death Drops not have happened, I wouldn't have cared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Well, I want to see Sting on iMPACT! before paying thirty-bucks for him to no-show again. I got the last PPV thinking Sting was going to be there. I've already got burned once. When Sting was doing the whole "Crow" thing in WCW, I bought Starrcade because I wanted to see Sting Vs. Hogan. Had all the Sting run-in's and Scorpion Death Drops not have happened, I wouldn't have cared. But there is a difference in environment for Sting vs NWO and Sting now. Sting was already a regular in WCW who's character was going through changes. Sting isn't a regular in TNA, so his return could mean money. I don't know what the rating is for NYE shows, but if it's back to around .9 or even breaks 1.0, then you can point that there is a little outside interest in Sting and you should make people pay for him from a business standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Not to mention that at the rate they're paying him, they better squeeze every penny they can, since it's going to take some major mathematical creativity to make it seem like hiring Sting for that price was a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted January 4, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Sting's already been on TNA more than once. Not only that but isn't Spike paying part of his salary? Why wouldn't he be on TV? I would've agreed with you about having Sting show up on PPV if this conversation was happening before the last PPV. Now it's like they're dragging it on too long. You can only see a scorpion logo on a jumbotron so many times before you lose interest. I'm thinking, Sting will make more people watch the TV show. If more people watch the show, more people will buy the PPVs. If the same number of people watch the shows, Sting showing up on PPV isn't going to matter. Maybe that thought process is flawed, I dunno. I know how I feel though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 I guess this is what you have to live with when most of the current online posters are ignorant of anything pre Attitude era. It would be funny to see their reactions to wrestling television in the 80s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Sting's already been on TNA more than once. Not only that but isn't Spike paying part of his salary? Why wouldn't he be on TV? I would've agreed with you about having Sting show up on PPV if this conversation was happening before the last PPV. Now it's like they're dragging it on too long. You can only see a scorpion logo on a jumbotron so many times before you lose interest. I'm thinking, Sting will make more people watch the TV show. If more people watch the show, more people will buy the PPVs. If the same number of people watch the shows, Sting showing up on PPV isn't going to matter. Maybe that thought process is flawed, I dunno. I know how I feel though. It's called building to a PPV. Everything's so on-demand these days people want instant satisfaction and quick payoffs for everything, and that goes against the business model proven to be the best money producer for pro wrestling. I doubt the bulk of today's fans could sit through an entire episode of Prime Time Wrestling or Saturday Night, my god...2 hours of jobber matches! The horror! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 I've also seen a lot of whining about New Japan ::gasps:: building Lesnar up by having him go over established talent in short matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Dude, I just converted over a year's worth of WCW TV. Hell, they would go weeks without having a feature matchup... and when a matchup between 2 contenders occurred, there wasn't even a guarantee the matches would be good. That is why it is such a shame that Bill Watts went out of business. His Mid South/ UWF TV was some of the most compelling TV around while always featuring premium talent against each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 About Kane's movie from the Observer... An an interesting marketing approach, Lions Gate announced today that the Kane movie "See No Evil" will be its first movie ever released both on DVD and in theaters on the same day. I'm telling you, the story of 2006 may be how much money WWE Films loses or makes. As far as this approach to the movie, I don't think it'll work. Since it hasn't been done before, I can't definitely say, but something tells me there is a reason for this and it isn't because the movie kicks ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 5, 2006 Report Share Posted January 5, 2006 It amazes me how many people are screaming to take the belt off Cena because of the crowd reaction. He isn't adversely affecting ratings or buyrates, and his merchandise is still moving quite well. There's no reason to take the belt off of him anytime in the near future. Also, I have to laugh when I come across people who make comments about Angle not having ever tapped in the Olympics and winning with a broken neck. You can't "tap" in amateur wrestling and from everything I've heard, the broken neck story was either severely exaggerated or is totally worked. Finally, Steve Austin having "shit" matches in 1998-1999 is another laugh a minute. Austin was past his physical prime, yes, and he wasn't at the level he was in 1996-1997, but he was still a great worker who had Rock's best match period up until that point at Backlash '99 and had what I feel is an underrated match against the Undertaker at Summerslam '98. As for the Foley match, the formula is beyond stale now, but at the time, it was great fun and got major praise. Austin was far from Gene Snitsky levels in 1998-1999. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Report Share Posted January 5, 2006 Angle's broken neck comes from people's lack of knowledge about anatomy. You can actually break your neck or back and still operate normally. Angle could've easily just had an extreme case of whiplash and technically had a broken neck. Austin again comes from most online posters having no knowledge of wrestling pre-Attitude era. I'm constantly stunned by how few people have actually seen his work as Stunning Steve Austin. I still get a kick out of the people that act like Evolution was the greatest stable ever. It wasn't even as good as the Million Dollar Corporation and it was still pretty bad. But there's no way that Evolution is even near the level of the nWo or the Dangerous Alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 5, 2006 Report Share Posted January 5, 2006 It amazes me how many people are screaming to take the belt off Cena because of the crowd reaction. He isn't adversely affecting ratings or buyrates, and his merchandise is still moving quite well. There's no reason to take the belt off of him anytime in the near future. Also, I have to laugh when I come across people who make comments about Angle not having ever tapped in the Olympics and winning with a broken neck. You can't "tap" in amateur wrestling and from everything I've heard, the broken neck story was either severely exaggerated or is totally worked. Finally, Steve Austin having "shit" matches in 1998-1999 is another laugh a minute. Austin was past his physical prime, yes, and he wasn't at the level he was in 1996-1997, but he was still a great worker who had Rock's best match period up until that point at Backlash '99 and had what I feel is an underrated match against the Undertaker at Summerslam '98. As for the Foley match, the formula is beyond stale now, but at the time, it was great fun and got major praise. Austin was far from Gene Snitsky levels in 1998-1999. With Cena, they should (and will) stay the course. Even though half or more of the crowd is reacting negatively, it is a reaction and he is still the top draw in the top promotion in the world. You take him down once he stops drawing money. I know Angle's neck was broken, but it wasn't broken like his life was in danger or anything. He had a bone in his neck that was chipped off or something and while it must have sucked to wrestle with it, it wasn't something that couldn't be worked through. You'll have to point out the Austin stuff because I haven't seen any warranted Austin bashing in awhile. Then again, I stopped visiting a lot of message boards regularly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts