Bix Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Randy Couture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Randy Couture. Randy = Real Sports Rocky = Fake Sports Which is Flair? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smkelly Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Flair = Vince's sport Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Flair = Vince's sport Then: Rocky = Stallone's Sport Same difference. Stallone has been as egocentric and loony with Rock (and the Rambo flicks, and others) as Vince has been with the WWE. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I really loved Momota's last big run. I imagine a Emilio Charles/ric Flair tag run and possible split in EMLL could be pretty spectacular. That said WWE isn't Noah or EMLL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I just don't get Flair Fan continuing to be delusional to the point they want the old fart to go out with a world title level push. Usually such ramblings are accompanied by that old chestnut that he could still cut killer promos and have very good matches with the right opponent if he was just given the opportunity darn it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Randy Couture. Randy = Real Sports Rocky = Fake Sports Which is Flair? If a 44 year-old man can be the best heavyweight real fighter (and a big box office draw), why can't a 58 year-old man in the exaggerated world of fake fighting get a big retirement push? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 Then why didn't Rocky Balboa make $423M last year like Pirates 2? Or $250M like Night at the Museum, released the same week? Or $167M like Casino Royale did the prior month? Or the $137M that MI-III did even with Cruse getting the nutter treatment from the press? How about the $80M that Nacho Libre did? That Randy and UFC are hot doesn't have an relevance to Flair, anymore than Pirates did to Rocky. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I'm not even sure what your point is. Flair was not going to be in the actual WM main event under this plan. It was going to be either #2 or #3 from the top at best (especially that given how the other plans are now, he probably would've ended up with the ECW title as opposed to the SD title). Wrestling is supposed to be ridiculous and the top star in what's basically the shoot version of pro wrestling is very old relative to the sport and his competition. Satanico was a draw at 53 with the right program. As much as you and Vince McMahon may want to think that Rocky Balboa is WWE's competition, it's not. UFC is. We get it. You think Flair's been an utter embarrassment for the last decade and a half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I'm as big of a Flair fan as just about anyone but he is not at the level of being in the World title hunt but he should at least get one more program to go out on a good note, just not a main event program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BilJim2 Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 I'm also not understanding the insistence of comparing Ric Flair to Rocky Balboa the movie. The movie by and large wasn't good, as in poorly made, directed, acted, etc. Flair above all else has the gift of gab and the charisma that can't be directed or creatively written in. The movie didn't make money because it stunk. There's a very clear group of paying customers who would spend their own money to see Ric Flair in a top or near top position in the WWE and treated with the respect that he's honestly earned in all of his years in the business. Yeah, he's past his prime, but he's got more than one person backing him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=rocky6.htm Production Budget: $24 million Worldwide: $155,595,239 It did make a good bit of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BilJim2 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 OK, it didn't make a LOT of money. I had checked imdb and saw the 70 million which these days isn't that great. I still don't get the insistence on the reference, do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Well, no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BilJim2 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Focusing on that distracts from things like people aren't looking for Flair to go out and win the title and beat everyone- people would just honestly like the guy to be given a respectful sendoff, however they come up with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 I love how much the "Rocky Flair" concept has taken traction and how folks think it's a natural that Flair get a monster push on the way out, even towards one of the World Titles. Do these people even realize the Rocky Balboa *wasn't* that big of a hit? $70M is chump change at the box office. Jackass 2 made more money. Eragon was thought to be a bomb, and it made more money and had a bigger opening. The Pink Panther was a bomb, and it made more money. Rocky Balboa was only a "hit" relative to the cost of making it, since Stallone went bare bones to make it. Other than that... it was only a modest deal to those of us like Dave who grew up in the 70s and were caught up in the original. Hell, considering how ticket prices have gone, it's not like a that many *more* people saw Rocky Balboa than saw Rocky V... which was a big bomb. I just don't get Flair Fan continuing to be delusional to the point they want the old fart to go out with a world title level push. John Man the "Flair Fan", "Bangs", et. talking points really need to be retired at this point as they literally are tossed out routinely with little purpose at this point. I'm not neccesarily a fan of puting the belt on Flair now or ever again. In fact I wish he had retired ten years ago. That said the idea that this view is some whacky view held only by a delusional minority of cult following "Flair Fans" is overtly ridiculous. Flair for all of his faults (and lord knows there are many) still gets big reactions at the shows consistently, which is more than one can say for most faces on the roster. There is a perfectly good argument for Flair not getting the belt because they ought to be building young guys or because it diverts the focus from other players or because nostalgia shots dont' really work out long term, et. There is no good argument for "Flair doesn't deserve to have a big run at the end because most fans think he is an old bastard that sucks", because the available evidence suggests otherwise (and yes I am aware that pops don't equate to drawing, but pops do generally equate to a level of interest, which is really the point). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 All the anti-Flair arguments (or, at least all of 'em that don't come from people who just plain hate Flair and always have) seem to be a variant on "it's not realistic for an old man to still be wrestling". My counter: it's the frigging WWE, since when has realism ever been a factor? This is the same company that announced last night that Vince has a little bastard leprechaun son that he never knew about. Having a 16-time world champ who's widely argued to be the greatest of all time win a few matches looks downright reasonable in comparison. Flair is still over, and can still be a draw, as the sales figures of his DVD showed. Seriously, as long as they didn't do something stupid to fuck it up (and once again, it IS the WWE...), what could it possibly hurt? And yeah, it's all a hypothetical fantasy booking scenario now, but I don't see why letting someone retire with a shred of dignity for once would be such a bad thing. Oh, and check THIS out for a larf: Ric Flair Finance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BilJim2 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 I see it as pops = level of interest which if capitalized on properly can = drawing money. Flair is like Hogan in the sense that everyone knows he's old and in Flair's case a shell of the worker he was, but no one cares. Calling people delusional is really narrow minded and ignorant since the majority aren't looking for the "world title push"- and trying to define everyone into one category as Flair Fan is really silly and shallow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 I still don't get the insistence on the reference, do you? I believe it may be because it was a Dave Meltzer talking point in the Observer a few months back. I don't believe putting a World title on Flair would do monster business, but in the current environment it could serve as some harmless nostalgic escapism where hardcore fans could lose themselves in the moment and believe for one second that all is right with the wrestling world. And it's not like anyone else is drawing on PPV at the moment, so it's worth a shot. If the title run doesn't take you can always pull it off him quicker than planned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Really, the whole complaint that Flair's last run won't draw really only matters if it's pushed as a main-event, money drawing feud anyway. Flair at this point is a glorified Family Gundan member. No one was complaining about how Haruka Eigen's retirement tour didn't draw. It wasn't important. It wasn't expected to. They had main event matches to take care of that. Flair vs. whomever against Mania isn't going to drag down the buyrate when the focus of the show is on whatever combination of Cena/Batista/HHH/Michaels/Taker/Kennedy/Lashley/Khali/Edge/Orton/Rey they decide to go with in the main event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=rocky6.htm Production Budget: $24 million Worldwide: $155,595,239 It did make a good bit of money. Here's the worldwide for 2006: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/...2006&p=.htm #33 We don't know what the advertising budget was - not small given the blitz here, and don't forget the he was down in Aussieland when they found the performance enhancers on him. But it did have a terrifically low production budget. It was a very profitable movie. But Borat was probably twice or three times as profitable. Perhaps the WWE would be better off finding their Borat than their Rocky. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 OK, it didn't make a LOT of money. I had checked imdb and saw the 70 million which these days isn't that great. I still don't get the insistence on the reference, do you? As best as I can recall, I first started seeing it in the WON by Dave, around the time Rocky came out and was a "hit". Someone who reads the Torch (kjh?) could say if Bruce was pushing it as well. Dittos Fig-4 if there are readers for it. I thought it was a goofy reference, and chalked it up to the Usual Flair Fan Suspects grasping at another straw for Ric to have one more gloriuous run before hanging it up. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 As much as you and Vince McMahon may want to think that Rocky Balboa is WWE's competition, it's not. UFC is. I don't think Rocky is the WWE's competition. I also didn't think it was a good storyline for Ric. I don't really think UFC is the WWE's competition either. If the WWE had good product that connected with the fanbase, it really wouldn't matter how well UFC is doing. We get it. You think Flair's been an utter embarrassment for the last decade and a half. Only "mostly an embarrassment". John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Oh, and check THIS out for a larf: Ric Flair Finance. God... as fucked up financially as Ric has been over the years, who in the hell would be stupid enough to trust Ric with cash? Is this just another way to fleece the marks? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 There is a perfectly good argument for Flair not getting the belt because they ought to be building young guys or because it diverts the focus from other players or because nostalgia shots dont' really work out long term, et. That actually would be my point, and one that I've made a lot over the years about the continued pushing of stars of the past rather the the company focusing on how to get the most out of a Rey Jr. or an Eddy when they were red hot (as opposed to torpedoing everyone like that). I've and everyone else has made that point so many times for the past decade that, like much of the same old very valid criticism of the WWE (and WCW) that we've made over the past decade, it's fucking tiring to rehash. Talk about "retiring" old spot - wasting time analyzing the WWE being a fucked up company is older than "Flair Fan" and "Bangs" talk. It's also always been a bigger topic of discussion, and even now when interest in the WWE is low, it still is a bigger topic of discussion. Christ... much of the discussion that's come out due to Benoit is a rehash of what people have been talking about for years, just with more focus because it's such a horrific event. So, rather than rehash the old, so obvious that anyone can re-write it again analysis, it's far more entertining simply to say: There is no good argument for "Flair doesn't deserve to have a big run at the end because most fans think he is an old bastard that sucks", because the available evidence suggests otherwise (and yes I am aware that pops don't equate to drawing, but pops do generally equate to a level of interest, which is really the point). But he *is* an old bastard who sucks. John 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.