WWE TV - Election Week

[C.S.]

Yeah I keep hearing people on other sites/shows go on about there not being any buzz for Takeover, and it puzzles me. On paper at least it's a solid show at least and the only match I'm not really super jazzed about is the women since I'm already kind of over the "Asuka vs the person with no chance to win" storyline.

 

Compared to past shows, there really isn't.

 

Everyone wants to see Mickie, but no one believes she has a hope in hell of winning. No matter how talented Asuka is in the ring, her entire reign has been a colossal bore and her "dominant" presence has been a massive buzzkill over the once important and now floundering NXT Women's Division.

 

Nak vs. Butter Tits for the 20th time also isn't compelling.

 

Revival vs. #DIY (what a stupid fucking name) should be awesome, but the Dusty Classic final sounds like shit and Roode vs. Dillinger isn't interesting because they haven't bothered to build Dillinger up (should be fun bell to bell though).

[Grimmas]

 

 

Everyone wants to see Mickie, but no one believes she has a hope in hell of winning. No matter how talented Asuka is in the ring, her entire reign has been a colossal bore and her "dominant" presence has been a massive buzzkill over the once important and now floundering NXT Women's Division.

 

Nak vs. Butter Tits for the 20th time also isn't compelling.

 

Revival vs. #DIY (what a stupid fucking name) should be awesome, but the Dusty Classic final sounds like shit and Roode vs. Dillinger isn't interesting because they haven't bothered to build Dillinger up (should be fun bell to bell though).

 

 

I have loved Asuka's reign. What is wrong with someone dominating? The Bayley matches were great. Loved the stuff with Nia Jax and the whole Emma/Donna program. Sure Mickie has no chance of winning, but neither did Trish (the original plan). It's nice to see them bring in a "legend" and have the new star beat them, unlike the main roster.

 

Butter tits? Seriously? Joe is fucking awesome, and no matter what he looks like he is certainly a great athlete.

[sek69]

Joe's reign of terror has been one of the best parts of NXT tv most weeks so I don't get how it's not compelling, but "shruggie emoticon".

[Coffey]

 

Butter tits? Seriously?

 

Yeah, that was monumentally fucking stupid. Yikes.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Butter Tits sound delicious. I'd buy some Nabisco Butter Tits.

[C.S.]

Insult me all you want, but Joe's woefully miscast in his "badass" role. I don't buy it for a second. The story itself would be good with someone who fits the part. He doesn't, and hasn't for a decade. (Same issue I had with Raven - never believed that character for a second.) I agree that Joe works hard and does the best he can with his now more limited toolset - he's not Booty Man/Zodiac/Disciple or anything like that - but the fact is, he's past his prime, period. He's no slug - he holds up his end - but I don't find his presence compelling, and I haven't enjoyed him hogging the NXT limelight for as long as he has. I'm more than ready to see Nakamura take on fresh opponents.

 

As for Asuka, nothing wrong with a dominant champ, but when the rest of the division is in severe shambles and a far cry from its "glory days" - only a year ago - forgive me for not caring. It's not all her fault - she has nothing to work with - but she hasn't connected with me as a character either. Her in-ring is good, but that's only part of the overall package - at least for me.

[cpst]

I have loved Asuka's reign. What is wrong with someone dominating? The Bayley matches were great. Loved the stuff with Nia Jax and the whole Emma/Donna program. Sure Mickie has no chance of winning, but neither did Trish (the original plan). It's nice to see them bring in a "legend" and have the new star beat them, unlike the main roster.

I don't think Asuka's had a truly great match since becoming champ. My favorite Asuka match was probably the Emma match in London. The first Bayley match was a lot better than the second, although I don't think that's necessarily Asuka's fault.

 

A dominant champ is okay in the abstract, but it can be counterproductive when you're trying to rebuild a depleted division.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Insult me all you want

I plan on it.

[C.S.]

 

Insult me all you want

I plan on it.

 

I'm happy to discuss the merits of Joe with any of his fans - I always enjoy a good debate - but I have nothing to say to a post like this.

 

I don't think Asuka's had a truly great match since becoming champ. My favorite Asuka match was probably the Emma match in London. The first Bayley match was a lot better than the second, although I don't think that's necessarily Asuka's fault.

 

A dominant champ is okay in the abstract, but it can be counterproductive when you're trying to rebuild a depleted division.

This!

 

Though I think I liked the second Bayley match more (maybe because I was delusional enough to think she was regaining the belt and becoming the first 2x NXT Women's Champion), but neither of them were barn-burners IMO.

[Ready_Willing_Gable]

 

Nak vs. Butter Tits for the 20th time also isn't compelling.

 

It's their second match. One plus one equals two. Butterbrain.

[C.S.]

Gonna take this from the other thread since it's about this one (no need to clutter up two threads with the same argument):

 

I am getting heat in another thread for my utter disdain for Samoa Joe from Johnny Sorrow and the like.

You're "getting heat" (fuck outta here) cause you called him "butter tits" like a goddamn child.

 

And yours and other responses to my lighthearted jab to Joe has been beyond childish. Grow up! I will not engage you, Sorrow, or Ready_Willing_Gable (despite his awesome username) any further on this topic.

Grimmas, sek69, and cpst have disagreed or agreed with me (or both) about Joe and/or Asuka in a mature, rational manner. Thank you for that.

 

Putting "Butter Tits" aside, I think I've crafted a pretty coherent argument as to why Joe and Asuka don't work for me. Others disagree, which is to be expected, but the ones who are actually posting the reasons they like Joe and/or Asuka have raised equally reasonable points.

 

Bottom line: I dislike the top two champions in NXT right now. To be honest, this is probably the "worst" NXT has ever been since the WWE Network began and the least interested I've ever been in the brand. But there are still awesome things happening (Revival vs. #DIY was one of the best matches in TakeOver history, Bobby Roode has been great fun, etc.), so I just have to wait out the aspects I don't like. I wasn't a fan of Finn Balor's reign either, so other than Nakamura's brief run, the NXT "World" Title picture has been dry to me for a good year now.

 

They've really bungled up the Women's Division too IMO. They literally had no one to replace The Four Horsewomen, Alexa Bliss, Nia Jax, Dana Brooke, etc. with. Part of that IMO is booking. Why can't they be doing more with, say, Billie Kay, Tessa Blanchard (although I don't think she's signed), etc.? I'm not sure what happened with Blue Pants, but someone like that would have been useful in a transition period. Would she have given Asuka a great match? No. But she was really over and would have been a fun first challenger in the plucky underdog role.

 

I realize NXT is somewhat in rebuilding mode though, so I hope it's firing on all cylinders again in a year. With that said, I'm sympathetic to the challenges of running a developmental fed - anyone who is "too good" eventually gets called up - but maybe they called up too many people too quickly? Nia Jax, Dana Brooke, and a few others like that aren't exactly lighting the main roster on fire. I think they should have gotten another six months in NXT. Hindsight is 20/20 though.

[Coffey]

Well, that's great if you have talked about Joe in detail before. I was replying to your dismissive, throwaway one liner about him here, in this thread, that I read, that I saw. So you can "not engage me" all you want, you're still a fucking idiot.

[C.S.]

Triple post. Please delete.

[C.S.]

Triple post. Please delete.

[C.S.]

Well, that's great if you have talked about Joe in detail before. I was replying to your dismissive, throwaway one liner about him here, in this thread, that I read, that I saw. So you can "not engage me" all you want, you're still a fucking idiot.

 

I will not stoop to your level and call you or other posters "fucking idiots."

 

Anyway, I'm having a problem multi-quoting, so I'll spare everyone the ordeal of reading through everything that's already in this thread anyway. Yes, my original post about Joe was a "dismissive one-liner" - agreed - but I followed it up with my detailed thoughts about Joe (and Asuka). They're right here in this thread if you ever want to read them instead of willfully ignoring them.

 

Again, I appreciate the posters who disagreed (or agreed, or both) with me civilly and actually mounted coherent defenses for Joe and/or Asuka.

[Grimmas]

It wasn't that it was a dismissive one liner. The issue was it was fat shaming and using that to say it ruins Joe's character. Joe's body type and weight has no effect on his ring or character work.

[C.S.]

It wasn't that it was a dismissive one liner. The issue was it was fat shaming and using that to say it ruins Joe's character. Joe's body type and weight has no effect on his ring or character work.

 

I'm glad you brought that up, because it will allow me to clear up any misconceptions: I have nothing against "fat" wrestlers. I've loved a ton of them over the years - probably a lot more than the average fan, if I had to guess. Mick Foley is my avatar after all. Okay, Mick isn't fat-fat, but you get my point - he's not Batista either. Kamala is one of my all-time favorites, I thought the Natural Disasters were a fun as hell tag team (and Earthquake in particular was really good at the little things), was a huge fan of Yokozuna as a kid, and I think those are enough examples for now, lol.

 

Joe's weight and body type have nothing to do with why I don't find him believable as a "badass" or enjoyable in the ring. I do agree that "Butter Tits" sounds like an anti-fat comment, but that was not my intention and I apologize for the misunderstanding. Truthfully, I was just being silly and it spiraled into this. Joe could look like Batista and I still wouldn't buy him in his current role - the same way I never bought Perry Saturn as a tough guy even though he was chiseled like granite. I used the example of Raven earlier - I never bought into his "tortured soul" character or whatever it was supposed to be. It always felt to me like a guy who was playing a part.

 

Maybe Joe (or Saturn or whoever) is the toughest guy in the world in real life. That would make no difference to me. Even though Mike Graham supposedly beat up Sid in real life, I'd still cast Sid as the imposing monster, not Graham. The actor Donal Logue went to Harvard, but he gets cast as "blue collar" types. Why? Because that is what he can convincingly play, despite his Harvard pedigree.

 

I guess what it comes down to for me is Joe's "personality." To me, he doesn't come across as a "badass" but more of that dickish fratboy, jock, football player type. He can handle himself some of the time - he's no pushover, but he isn't the king of the hill either and can easily get toppled if he crosses someone who actually is big and bad. As a face, same thing, except in a more positive underdog Rudy sort of way. (Rudy might be the wrong example, because Joe is certainly more skilled and imposing, but I can't think of a better sports movie analogy right now.)

 

Now, if you do buy Joe as a "badass" (or Donal as Albert Einstein), great. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. I'm simply stating my own opinion on the matter.