PeterHilton

November 22, 2010

and it dawned on me. Barrett said if he lost, he'd fire Cena on the spot. Since he was run off with the Nexus post match, he technically never did. So essentially everything that happened post match was unnecessary, on top of being lame. lol

To me,that just means they'll run the actual angel where Cena is fired on Raw

How about the most unoriginal one possible? They make it that Cena is fired from RAW so he shows up on Smackdown to boost the ratings there at their new home. Cena vs Edge and Kane vs Taker for WM. Orton vs HHH on the raw side.

Terrible. But no less unoriginal than the way the show ended

SS is usually supposed to be one of the BIG 4PPVs of the year, but that card didn't look that hot to me and -reading results - I realize that it wasn't the card, it's jut that the WWE is soooooo frickin predictable/boring that it's damn near impossible to get excited about anything they do

There were several ways to end that Cena/Nexus storyline; the WWE picked the least interesting.

November 19, 2010

I'm surprised my Shad and Gallows. Both guys had good size and I thought Gallows was very solid on the mic as a part of the SES and Shad always seemed more comfortable showing his personality than JTG.

November 19, 2010

At any rate Sting, Nash, Foley, Team 3D, They all do nothing for television ratings and just cutting those names alone would free up a good sized amount of cash. I know 3D aren't going anywhere but a guy can dream.

I.e. old guys like Nash and Foley would be great assets for TNA, but surely not as wrestlers. Doing commentary, managing younger guys or being authority figures would be great roles for them in addition to creative and agent work. I can't understand why they don't get these great assets to work in the way best for the company. Of course the money paid in current contracts would be hard to take them out of the ring and in to the backstage, but Nash doesn't have a contract so he could come back with a new role and a different contract.

I agree with Bus and UK Wrestling Fan mostly. Alot of these nostalgia acts have a place though some do not. An example of this is one of my favs of all time Foley. He has no place in the company right now and shouldn't be given any backstage role simply due to being able to get another to do the same job for much cheaper. Another is Jeff Jarrett. How much air time TV&PPV's has this dude been given in the span of the last couple months? And he is winning, constantly. Not putting over anybody or giving anyone a rub by being in a program with them that aren't already more over than he (Angle, Joe).

I disagree with some of this. Jarrett could be a gateway to the main event kind of guy. Only he needs to lose some matches against guys. Flair has been too much of a focus for air time. He overshadows Fortune a lot and it bugs me. He shouldn't be the main focus of the group.

Also I wouldn't get rid of all those guys. Amazing Red, Brian Kendrick (whom I DISlike), Magnus, Rhino, Shark Boy, and Stevie Richards I would keep. Red, Kendrick, and Shark Boy all could be in a good X-Division with Rob Eckos as Rob Eckos... not Robbie E. Doug Williams could also have a place here.

Stevie Richards and Rhino both have a place. Stevie Richards is the gateway to the midcard, and Rhino is a gateway to the upper midcard. Both of these guys should be used like Jarrett in their positions on the card though.

I'm not going to debate any specific list, because a "Who Would You Cut?" type deal is always more of an opinion than anything (I will say I seriously have no idea how Rhino, Magnus, Or Stevie are any more useful than Kaz or Kiyoshi)

But the over-all idea that they need to cut some dead weight is something I totally agree with. And the nostalgia acts..they need to go. I'm not delusional enough to think Jarrett will ever be let go, even though I'd LOVE that. TNA could definitely stop throwing him in the main event and making him the focus of 3-4 segments a show, but people have been saying that for years.....er, since TNA opened it's doors.

But Nash, Foley, 3D, EV2...Sting...I'm so tired of hearing how they can be "gateways to the main event" or how they'd work great "in a different role." TNA needs ratings. That's it. If those guys aren't drawing viewers - which is what they're paid to do - they should be gone. No one with a name value like Nash or Foley is going to take a smaller contract to be a road agent. And look at TNA's booking..since when has there ever been a planned out structure so that a guy is a "gateway" to anything?

Cut them loose. All of them. Even ting has worn out his welcome because his appearances/returns/retirements are no longer really that special because he's done them so often.

If they can't draw, and they aren't reliable workers, then they shouldn't have a job. TNA has enough 'established names' and talented younger workers that the nostalgia deal is totally unnecessary.

November 19, 2010

Personally I would love to see Greg Oden as a Cleveland Cavalier if he is healthy due to his free agency his first choice would be his home state team the Pacers but they have Hibbert so I don't see that working out while the Cavs need a big post threat to battle in the East and a healthy Oden could reach the likes of David Robinson, Bill Russell and many other legends and the opposite comparison would be Sam Bowie...

Are you high? That's one of the worst comparisons I've even seen on a message board,...And i used to write a sports column for 411mania, so I've seen some really BAD comparisons.

Even healthy, Oden has barely averaged 11 pts and 8 reb and just over 2blks. You just compared him to two of the best centers in the history of the NBA and maybe the greatest "winner" in any sport.

If Oden ever does get healthy, he'd be lucky to have Sam Bowie's career.

November 18, 2010

I just hope someone working with those teams has enough common sense to shoot a lot of those down..or that they are an experiment for one game and then get shot down.

Even the helmets bother me because I don't like inverting the team colors, I don't like a lot of the white helmets, and I thought the black helmets didn't 'make sense' for some of the teams (like the Jets).

Even the Raider felt a little off because the design is SO iconic. Not terrible, but a little off.

November 18, 2010

Yeah they look like something a 12 year old would design if they're building a franchise in Madden.

November 17, 2010

They look like those uniforms the teams in 'Any Given Sunday' wore...too much of the team identity is stripped away.

Off the bat, I don't like: the Niners, the Cards, the Chiefs, the Bengals, the Jags (terrible), the Eagles, the Steelers (especially awful), the Titans, the Vikings (i think everyone in Minnesota and all real life vikings should be offended by these atrocities), the jets, the Pats, the Dolphins (i had to stop myself from punching the monitor) the Ravens and the Broncos

Basically, any time they deviated significantly from classic team design, I thought it sucked. Also, I'm not sure these are 'official' since there's nothing on the Nike website about new team designs.

November 17, 2010

I think the Chargers is the easy one to see moving; i also still see there being two teams moving to LA.

November 17, 2010

Not gonna post any specific spoilers but after reading through those here's my initial thoughts:

--They spend a LOT of time on Bubba/Devon.

--They spend a LOT of time on Jarrett. I mean...a LOT

--The Morgan push continues and looks like it's making sense

--AJ is a total afterthought

--Weird to say, but they are under-utilizing Bischoff, Hogan, and Hardy. I mean, The Immortals are your big heel stable and that is supposed to be your central storyline but most of the big heel segments are carried by Jeff Jarrett and Ric Flair (with Fourtune in the background). SO what's the deal? I thought the whole point of this taping schedule was to make it more attractive to workers who wanted to work less dates. It should be easier to get your BIG names on TV but if you read those spoilers it's like they're building towards a PPV main event with only one side really driving the story.

TNA's schedule means that -at most - these guys are being asked to work what?...5 or 6 days out of the month excluding house shows. If they won't even commit to that, what's the point ?

November 17, 2010

Spoilers for the next three weeks. Nov 18 and 25th <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hashasheen" data-cite="Hashasheen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Spoilers: <a href="http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/tna-spoilers/tna-impact-taping-results-november-9-2010.php" rel="external nofollow">http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/tna-spoilers/tna-impact-taping-results-november-9-2010.php</a> <a href="http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/tna-spoilers/tna-impact-taping-results-november-15-2010.php" rel="external nofollow">http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/tna-spoilers/tna-impact-taping-results-november-15-2010.php</a></div></blockquote> And then Dec 2nd <a href="http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/162395/Complete-TNA-Impact-Taping-Results-%28SPOILERS%29.htm" rel="external nofollow">http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/162395/Complete-TNA-Impact-Taping-Results-%28SPOILERS%29.htm</a>

November 16, 2010

From wrestlezone.com:

I guess we are not the only ones talking about it.

So everyone's assuming that's the list and the ranking?

And lol at JR backtracking so quickly.I'm sure he got the word from corporate not to badmouth the release and not to mention Hogan as being under-ranked.

November 15, 2010

Speaking of HOFers: <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="411mania.com" data-cite="411mania.com" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>WWE has sent out letters to cities, announcing that they would be accepting bids for cities to host their physical Hall of Fame. It is noted that WWE is looking for a location partner that would help offset the cost of building and maintaining the facility. They are very early in the process, and according to a source in the company, they are looking at 2012-2013 at the earliest for the project. There is also the idea that they could regularly tape footage and wrap-arounds for the potential WWE Network at the location.</div></blockquote> <a href="http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/162067/WWE-News:-More-On-WWE-Hall-of-Fame,-Lawler-Update,-WWE-Promoting-Rocks-Next-Film,-More.htm" rel="external nofollow">http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/162067/WWE-News:-More-On-WWE-Hall-of-Fame,-Lawler-Update,-WWE-Promoting-Rocks-Next-Film,-More.htm</a> Interesting. I'm sure it will be torn apart by hardcore wrestling fans -and deservedly so, the WWE's HOF criteria is a bit of a joke - but it would probably be worth visiting.

November 15, 2010

I understand why he's left out. I also get that going back gets tough. But Bruno's heyday was the 70s. Which in truth wasn't that different from the better part of the 80s in terms of how promotions functioned, the use of TV, the definition of a "draw"... Yeah, things get tougher as you go further back - the industry is a bit different and there is far less footage. But I do think that putting a cutoff point at the start of the 80s seems rather arbitrary.

The business side of excluding Bruno makes sense. It does. But it annoys me because it becomes pure revisionist history. I'm honesty not a huge Bruno fan in that sense, but I have a tremendous amount of respect for his place in the history of the business.

I guess part of why it bothers me is that Vince Jr built his success on the back of Bruno in a way. Not directly. But the success of Bruno Sammaritno in the 70s helped ensure New York was and remained a prime territory, profitable and appealing to talent. Take that away and I doubt that Vince Jr finds the same degree of success in trying to take things national in the mid 80s. The more I watch of old Sammartino footage, the more I believe that the Hogan babyface hero mold was based on him.

Great post.

The 70s is probably as far back as I can look in doing comparisons and even then some of the southern regional stuff gets a little dicey..

But I completely agree with your main point about Bruno. It's the revisionism. And Vince needed NY..so again I agree with how important Bruno was.

And again..that unstoppable babyface hero..not only was it the mold for Hogan (like you said) but it's what they tried to re-create with Warrior and more successfully with John Cena. It's like Bruno is John Wayne in a world that seems to think that action movies started with Sylvester Stallone.

November 15, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think he's an okay guy, but some of why he's unregonized is caused by himself.</div></blockquote> I think it's actually totally his fault. Bruno is obviously pretty bitter about the industry passing him by and he was critical of what the WWF became (which was ironic because in his prime he was criticized for being EXACTLY the type of worker Hulk was) but I guess i just have an issue with him being erased the way he has. Yeah...they have no reason to build him up.But the man DID carry your company; it's pretty cheap to pretend it never happened. Like Shaq and the Lakers; he's been a tool ever since he left LA, but what do you do? Take the banners out of the rafters?

November 15, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Bigpapa42" data-cite="Bigpapa42" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>It saddens me that Bruno Sammartino gets so forgetten, relatively, anymore. The guy was Hogan before there was Hogan. When selling out areas was the primary measure of workers success, he owned the single most important arena in the wrestling world. He made fans care. He sold out Shea Stadium with a feud and he wasn't even champion. Obviously I understand that he was before our time for many of us, but the same can be said of Hogan for a lot of fans, yet the way that the WWE held (maybe not so much know that he's in TNA) Hogan in high regard helped the younger fans know. Because of Bruno's issues with Vince, that doesn't seem to happen in his case.</div></blockquote> QFT That's it really...the WWE presents wrestling historically as if it started when the WWF went national and the Wrestlemania Era began. I've said myself that it's incredibly hard to go back much further than that and make a fair comparison of the industry (that's why I just ignore Thesz references) but the E really should mention Bruno. He carried that company for the better part of a decade. It really must be a personal vendetta when guys like Harley Race (who, while great, did very little for the WWF)are brought onto TV as legends of the industry and Bruno never even gets a mention.

November 15, 2010

Tremendous post.

Even if my top 5 isn't your exact top 5, that's my reasoning.

Wrestling is a work; the one criteria that really matters is the ability to make money. That list that's being done on these boards is going to look like one of those lists that Rolling Stone magazine does of 'The Best Bands of All Time' where the top 10 are mostly really famous and then there's one wildly obscure act no one heard of.

Other things matter...there are personal favorites i have that weren't great draws..but if people didn't pay to watch you then you weren't really doing your job

November 15, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Austin deserves that spot too, but I don't think, as much as Hogan does. and I LOVE Stone Cold. But Hogan's pre-WWF career was way more storied, and he literally helped Vince make the WWF what it was in the 80's. Austin did something similar, but it's hard to say his post-WWE or pre-WWF career was all that impressive. He was a journeyman wrestler until he became Stone Cold Steve Austin. Hogan had a lot more success before the WWE and after it. Again, I have to say this... I prefer Stone Cold over Hulk Hogan. But Hogan's just that important. He was one of the key, if not, the key wrestlers that changed the definining product of wrestling. Instead of focusing on old-school, traditional style of wrestling, it ws transitioned into a more "sports entertainment" style of wrestling more digestable for the masses (at the time). That's not something even Austin can claim to do.</div></blockquote> Totally agree with this. Austin may have drawn bigger house and PPV numbers at his height, but if you look back at it now...he's had nowhere near the lasting effect that Hogan did and he had nowhere near the impact on pop culture and the mainstream that Hogan or even The Rock did. Austin was awesome but as time has passed he looks more and more like his popularity was a fad

November 15, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Here's the problem, though, with that listen. Steamboat above Flair? Really? If you are talking about drawing power and money, then Flair made people more money than Steamboat did. And I love Steamboat, and I prefer him over Flair. but even I recgonize that he's above Steamboat... and John Cena. Does he draw money? Yes. But comparatively speaking, what he's done is unimpressive to me. Even when comes to drawing money. He needs to be drawling a lot more to impress me.</div></blockquote> I didn't say anything about the list posted ..i Said MY top 5. Steamboat wouldn't even crack my top 15. And i don't know what to tell you on Cena. You've pretty much proven you're a "crazy internet smark" with previous posts; if you're not "impressed" by someone who's been the biggest draw in wrestling for the last 6 years, it's really not that surprising.

November 15, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>All except John Cena, I would say. There's no way he's above Flair overall.</div></blockquote> Listen, I love Ric. He's a world beater in the ring, one of the greatest performers of all time, and easily on of the most entertaining talkers I've heard in any form of entertainment industry. But Cena's been THE biggest star in wrestling since like 05...he's been a headliner at six straight WM's...he's generated more revenue for the company in merchandise alone than some of those guys (like Bret, Nash, Guerrero) did as complete draw... when he's done the "height" of his popularity will have lasted longer than everyone except for Hogan and *maybe* Taker (depending on how you judge his height).. Just MO...but wrestling is a work which means the most important criteria for judging a talent is Can They Draw? And Cena has been the biggest draw in the WWE for a very long time and that counts for more - to me - than any kind of critical acclaim Flair gets

November 15, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Stennick" data-cite="Stennick" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I think there is more evidence of Hardy owning that belt than there is of that statement Peter <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote> Now, now...just because he has the word "juggalo" in his screen name..<img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> But honestly, I've read his posts on other parts of the board and JNL seems like a good guy. He's taken a TON of grief for his posts about TNA but he's always responded civilly. I don't want him to think it's a personal attack. He's a big fan of wrestling in general and I get that. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hyde Hill" data-cite="Hyde Hill" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Thanks mate. And I actually do still have many of those opinions and do still see a lot of good in TNA. Like Papa wrote earlier that is why a lot here write about TNA because they care about TNA and criticise it. Its not just to bash but to look for improvement.</div></blockquote> No problem, and there's nothing wrong with liking TNA. Hell, there's a lot about TNA that I like when they have things going good. I still like some of the stuff they do now (And as a for instance: I've said a couple times I don't think the belt going in the trash was a bad idea, and that the design makes total sense when you see it as a custom belt for Hardy's character) But - and I know you know this , Hyde, I'm speaking in general - it's a lot easier to talk to someone who will say "yeah maybe it's a bit of a rip-off of the nWo but if they perform their parts well and there's an actual pay-off at the end of it, then what's the problem?" rather than "OMGZ! how come every time TNA runs an angle you haters say it's a rip off of the WCW/WWE???" One is a totally valid opinion with a very realistic hope for success and the other is like sticking your hands over your ears and going LALALA as loud as you can.

November 15, 2010

First off...if it's in order it's a total joke.

Hogan shouldn't drop below 3rd; without him the WWF doesn't have nearly the same amount of success as they did in the 80s.

And these WWE DVDs always have wonky criteria so I can totally see them excluding Sting because he never worked there.

And unless it's a list that leans heavily on "work rate" and "in ring" Flair really doesn't deserve to be in the top 5...from a popularity/drawing power/household name standpoint the top of the list should be some mix of Hogan/Andre/Taker/Rock/Austin/Cena with Ric just outside that.

November 14, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="juggaloninjalee" data-cite="juggaloninjalee" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> I do agree TNA is doing a lot of things I am not a big fan of but I also want all things wrestling too succeed so I defend all things that are wrestling too. </div></blockquote> This is a "Discussion" thread..not a "blind fanboyism" thread...whether you like it or not it's not our job as fans of wrestling to agree with everything that every promotion does. People who defend all of anything only encourage mediocrity. Your "Jeff Hardy bought the title belt" defense was just plain ridiculous..so it's hard to value your opinion or take what you say seriously when you defend everything no matter what. Hyde used to catch flack for being the TNA homer but at least you could always have a fair discussion with him because he admitted faults and was reasonable, even if people didn't share his opinions. But if you're going to post in a way that you blindly defend everything TNA does with no real logic or reason behind it, you kind of have to expect that people are going to tear your posts apart. Which is too bad because it seems like when you think your posts out you have some stuff worth listening to.

November 14, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="juggaloninjalee" data-cite="juggaloninjalee" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I am saying he had a belt made. Then they worked it into a storyline after Hardy ordered it more than likely. I dont think Hogan and Bischoff or whoever writes storylines said... lets make a belt just for 1 guy so that we spend the money on 2 new belts in the next year. 1 for this guy and 1 for a TNA World Title. If they couldnt get a new TV belt made in place for the legends belt why would they be able to get a personalized belt and a new world belt approved? Do your bosses at your jobs work that way? I highly doubt it. </div></blockquote> Two totally different cases..the Legends/TV belt is a midcard title that no one pays attention to We've already seen evidence that the Immortal storyline was planned far in advance. This is obviously a priority to them. Hardy is their guy. This angle is going to play out for months...it makes total sense to get a new belt. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hyde Hill" data-cite="Hyde Hill" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Huh? This makes no sense. Order of events: 1. Old belt is busted up. 2. To get heel heat and replace old one decision is made to unveil new belt for the heel stable champion. 3. Said champion (helps) pick who makes the belt as it will be a personalized belt. 4. TNA ok's the design and after completion pays for the belt. 5. TNA runs the angle. What you are saying Hardy went and ordered a belt for himself just for kicks. TNA found out about it and then decided to make it into an angle to replace the old one? </div></blockquote> Exactly. And again..TNA has actually shown that they booked this in advance so who's to say they didn't plan this from the get go? Eric is re-living the nWo era...one of the more iconic images from the Monday Night Wars was the WWF Women's Title being put in the trash can. So he probably thought: Why not do it again..but go even BIGGER??? <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="juggaloninjalee" data-cite="juggaloninjalee" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Jeff Hardy COULD have ordered a belt from that company. ... He could have suggested the idea to the bookers. Wrestlers do that all the time. I know most don't get their own ideas approved but they obviously like him so maybe they approved that idea and made something with it. I still think it is possible that Hardy paid for it. </div></blockquote> <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="juggaloninjalee" data-cite="juggaloninjalee" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>WWE has a lot of money to spend. TNA doesn't so them doing it seems like a mute point. Plus this is a different company with completely different people in charge.</div></blockquote> This whole argument started because you said that Hardy MUST have bought the belt because - if TNA bought it - it would show "bad taste." That was you defending TNA because no matter what, you defend TNA. Which is totally fine...you're a fan and it's your right. But we're talking about logic and reason and simple common sense. Sure it's POSSIBLE Hardy bought it, but TNA still would've had to approve it and it seems incredibly unlikely they would've turned it into a major angle after the fact. So it's POSSIBLE...but only in the sense that it's also POSSIBLE the title was a gift from Zeus so that JEff could battle the mighty Krakan and save us from Hades. What's more likely? That TNA approved of and purchased the belt as a way to push their big star in their biggest angle and re-live a seminal moment from the Monday Night Wars? Or that they saw the belt after it was made, never approved it, but then ran a giant angle as soon as they saw it because it looked so darned cool?

November 14, 2010

So you all know I was right about Jeff Hardy actually paying for that belt. He bought it from the same guys who made Shannon Moores title Top Rope Belts.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/topropebelts

TNA didn't pay for the belt.

You're ridiculous. Seriously. All that link showed was the guy who MADE the belt.

Think about what you're saying: TNA is the second largest wrestling promotion in the US. They have over a dozen national corporations as sponsors and a TV deal on cable network.

but you're saying that they had their world champion go out and design a title ON HIS OWN - without anyone's knowledge - and then what? He showed up at Impact (not a live show mind you) and they just decided at the last second "y'know..we didn't want this belt but why don't we go ahead and run a 10 minute angle to open the show where we throw OUR OWN title in the trash??"

Is that what you think? Because that's stupid. I know you like defending TNA every time someone criticizes it...but that's just stupid.

Be reasonable: I'm sure Jeff helped with the design, but someone in charge at TNA discussed and eventually approved the design. And yes, they paid for it. Performers don't get to go out and make their own gear to wear on TV to represent the major company they are working for w/o getting approval.

That's not the way the world works.

November 12, 2010

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Que?</div></blockquote> I'm going to say he's commenting on that last play where the defender tried to put his hands on White and Roddy extended and basically pushed him to the ground. Maybe it's O Pass Interference, but they never call that and more than what Roddy did, Baltimore blew the coverage. You could tell from the DBs reaction he expected safety help. Atlanta marched 80 yards in under a minute. That's B'more's mistake...calling foul on that last play is cheap imo

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Articles

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by PeterHilton