PeterHilton
-
Posts
4,281 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by PeterHilton
-
-
The PWTorch recap of Mania seems to think Orton is now positioned to be "the top heel on Raw." Surely after all this they're turning him face, right?
They're idiots. As long as the WWE doesn't mess with the way he works and turn him into a 'fan-friendly' character, Orton is the top face in the company after Cena.
-
HOLY **** Orton is over.
-
Are you almost ready to accept requests?Hard to say, as things are going right now it may be some time. As Ive said before, my personal time has become scarce as of late. You have my apologies for such. Ive also noticed that when I do get the time, my creative juice seems to be going more with making logos for the C-verse historic mods, I guess because I figure theyll benefit the community more as a whole. I suppose I really should push myself a bit harder to finish off the requests that are still outstanding.
Already asked and answered. Today.
-
Because it would be a mosntrous money maker and it's one of the last 'dream matches' the WWE has left...Cena vs Taker would be my guess as to how the streak ends.
-
No sir, I said JBL could have a great match with New Jack or Sandman two guys that are no where near as talented as JBL is.
HOLY SH*T! You know what the problem is...I don't think you understand how misleading your posts are or are misreading how people are responding. Let me explain:
This was the initial post
Many now a day would say like... JBL wasn't a good champ in 2004 either, and I would disagree. He's no Kurt Angle, he can't have a good match with anyone, but in his brawling element against the people he can have good matches with he's a tremendous worker.Remi responded that saying JBL was a good worker because he can be carried doesn't really make him a good worker.
Put simply, ANY worker can look "tremendous" if put in the ring with far superior workers. That doesn't make the worker tremendous though. No more than catching a pass from Peyton Manning makes you a first ballot Hall of Fame receiver.Your response completely ignored that and then mentioned two other guys who were poor workers (but they'd have a great match with JBL!) and then talked about him working with Batista.
And then strangely enough how somehow his matches with JBL (which were brawls) would suck because Batista needs to be carried (as if somehow Sandman and New Jack don't)
PUT JBL in the ring with guys like Sandman, New Jack or any other guy that knows how to brawl and what you'll get with is a great wild brawl. Put him in there with a guy like Batista, who needs someone to make him look good, and of course the match is going to suck. It's going to suck even more if you don't play to his strengths (brawling) booking 101 sir.If JBL is a knife, I'm not going to bring him to a gun fight. I'm going to bring him to a knife fight, why? Because he's a pretty sharp fn' knife! Your example is lame, sir.
DO YOU SEE WHY I'M FRUSTRATED TALKING TO YOU?
We should do a 2 player TEW game sometime, see who the better arm chair booker is Pete. lolNo. Because I hate you.
-
The List Now:
Men:
Abyss
AJ Styles
Alex Shelley
Amazing Red
Brian Kendrick
Brutus Magnus
Bubba
Chris Sabin
Consequences Creed
D'Angelo Dinero
Daniels It hurts..but I think it's obvious he's never going to be a major player in TNA and he'd have an epic return to ROH
Desmond Wolfe
Don West
Doug Williams
Dr. Stevie
Eric Bischoff
Eric Young
Generation Me (for some reason, listed as one person on the Roster page)
Hernandez
Homicide
Hulk Hogan
James Storm
Jay Lethal
Jeff Hardy
Jeff Jarett
Jeremy Borash
Jesse Neal
Jimmy Hart
Kazarian
Kevin Nash
Kiyoshi
Kurt Angle
Matt Morgan
Mr. Anderson
Nasty Boys (Again, listed as one person)
Orlando Jones
Raven
Rhino
Rick Flair
Rob Terry
Rob Van Dam
Robert Roode
Samoa Joe
Scott Hall
Sean Waltman
Shannon Moore
Shark Boy
Sting
Suicide
Team 3D (Weird. Wonder why Sabin and Shelley got separate pages, then...)
Tomko
Women:
Angelina Love
Christy Hemme
Daffney
Hamada
Lacey von Erich
Madison Rayne
ODB
Sarita
So Cal Val
Tara
Taylor Wilde
Velvet Sky
-
I think the hard truth is that to get the most out of the roster, you HAVE to cut some talent.
Not everyone can be a main eventer.
You want to book concise, straightforward, well thought out storylines then you probably have to get down to 30-35 active guys.
That means you probably have to release some long time favorites like Hernandez, Daniels, Joe, Team 3D, Rhino, etc...
-
I just read a report that said since January TNA has ballooned to SEVENTY wrestlers. That has to be close to what the WWE has on its active roster with three brands, three television shows and multiple house shows a night.
This includes high priced guys like Flair, RVD, Hardy, Kennedy, etc.
Plus they got the expensive of going live every night as well as apparently running ads during Monday Night RAW and doing advertising in Times Square.
With all of these expenses ratings are the lowest they have been in four years and there has been barely a noticeable bump in house show and merchandise sales.
Even if TNA is heading in the right direction creatively these are some valid points there is no way TNA should have an active roster of 70 workers.
I've saidthis before: they need to cut the roster. Maybe in half.
It's great to have all that talent, but TNA literally has too many guys for them to really focus on anybody for an extended length of time. They 're trying to pay attention to so much, that the booking of the whole roster suffers.
And yes..I know that if you cut 30 people or so you'd be releasing some very good, very talented individuals. But the storytelling would become more concise and the product would improve tenfold.
-
Thats why I'm saying to use them in their hardcore environments!!!!!!!!!!! What do you think? I send JBL and New Jack out there and say ALL RIGHT! ROH PURE RULES GUYS! FILL 20 MINUTES!
You missed the point: hardcore environment aside, you just said that JBL could get carried to a good match by two guys who were even worse workers than he was and had to be carried by wither their opponent or -more often - the type of match they wee in.
Jack and Sandman could really ONLY put on good matches in overbooked hardcore spotfests. (Which had their appeal at the time, don't get me wrong)
It sort of completely defeats your argument.
And it goes back to the point that it's hard to take your assessmentof TNA seriously. Because we just don't see the same things when we watch a wrestling match.
-
PUT JBL in the ring with guys like Sandman, New Jack or any other guy that knows how to brawl and what you'll get with is a great wild brawl. Put him in there with a guy like Batista, who needs someone to make him look good, and of course the match is going to suck. It's going to suck even more if you don't play to his strengths (brawling) booking 101 sir.
If JBL is a knife, I'm not going to bring him to a gun fight. I'm going to bring him to a knife fight, why? Because he's a pretty sharp fn' knife! Your example is lame, sir.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...WTF?????
-
Well, i mean, the IWC in general is never happy. Everyone's a great booker in their own mind (thats why we all like TEW hehe)
I was simply responding to the post about storylines in the WWE being watered down and predictable, not implying that the IWC doesn't hate on TNA as well.
The IWC hates every product to a degree, because it's never as good as they could have done
Fair enough. Although I wasn't trying to say the simplified storylines was abad thing. The WWE is doing straightforward and predictable...but they're doing it well and it's working.
-
I think the thing s m 82 is pointing out is that the IWC actually spends a lot of time hammering TNA for its storylines.
I mean..you're making great points overall, but i don't see the IWC leaping to defend TNA's stories in the way you've maybe implied.
-
crownsy, if I could rep you right now, I would.
Yup.
-
Clearly Vince is right, and proven so when you look at his company's balance sheet and ratings compared to TNA. 'The People' don't want 'pro wrasslin' anymore...the YouTube generation want things loud, fast and new.
There are so many options for entertainment these days between TV, games, internet, fresh air (LOL, just kidding!!)...if you don't keep peoples atention they just turn to something else. WWE provides short matches, quick transitions, flashy presentation etc. Sure, it's not pro-wrestling as we'd like to to be...but it's 'what the culture wants' these days.
Kinda sorta agree...except that if what they really wanted was short games, transitions, and a product directed towards short attention spans then TNA is IT.
It's seventeen things jammed into every quarter hour segment.
I think a simplified product and straight forward storytelling is where the WWE excels.
You can tune out for a few weeks, come back, and you know exactly where you left off. It's brain candy. TNA demands that you tune in ..and I don't know if you have that large a dedicated audience any more.
-
“We’re in different businesses,” Mr. McMahon said. “We’re in the entertainment business and they’re in the ‘pro wrasslin’ business. It’s different markets. When they moved to Monday nights they threw the kitchen sink at us and only did a fraction of our audience. It doesn’t speak well for the type of product they’re trying to present with the tawdry, blood-soaked action. I don’t think that’s what the culture wants these days.”
Hilarious.
-
I hope he comes back to wrestle. Why bother making a lot of noise about using his likeness? Goldberg needs to wrestle. I admit to being a mark for Goldberg so this is what I want to see. I want a Goldberg/Undertaker feud.
Not a huge fan of Goldberg but I agree, his return is pointless unless he gets in the ring. And if he's pushed right...using lots of his WCW run footage...I think he's a draw, too
You could headline a PPV with Goldberg/Cena pretty easily.
-
Still, what they would pay both would never probably be the same as they would pay Flair or Rhodes. So there would still be some profit. Even if a Tag get's really over, they never get a ME push while together (at least not nowadays) wich means that what they get paid (combined) will never be the same as ME.
Ummmm..the interviews I've seen about that time period would say that yes, their combined checks would've been more.
But that was a rare case.
My point is that for what you pay two guys, the return on investment didn't justify it. A solid well-known even semi-main event tag team doesn't draw any more fans thatn a solid well-knwon semi-main event singles guy.
All i'm sayin'
:D:);):) <---- so no one takes this too seriously -
Same could be said about Hardy or any number of other workers. But given where they were at (TNA), he was big enough there. Should he headline WM? No. Should he headline Bound For Glory? Absolutely.
Hyde said it best...
Having Jarrett in the main event that time. Not a problem. Having Jarret be the only main eventer at that time by a mile = big problem.Jarett as an established heel was fine. When he completely dominated the company for years, even after no one gave a rat's ass what he did any more? That was moronic.
-
Not pushing their main talent was indeed the biggest mistake. But they had to bring in some 'big names' to draw the crowd. Their problem was that those 'big names' took up all screen time, leaving little to none for the X-division stars to ply their trade.
Looking back on it now though, those big names didn't draw a crowd. So it was all pointless.
I actually enjoyed what I saw of it (only through PPV DVDs). I still remember when he fought Rhyno (not sure if it was when he won the belt or not), Jarrett is set up to be hit by the gore. The crowd is going nuts, and at the last minute, Jarrett busts out the guitar and breaks it over Rhyno's head. Crowd totally deflated, lots of booing. And what does Jarrett do? He starts mocking them! I found that to be hilarious.Jarrett could be a fun heel in portions. It was the fact he dominated the storylines for years and years even after the crowd had turned on him...
I'd even argue that after Christian signed, he still played the "I'm the bigger name" card. Because a lot of those episodes of Impact after Christian's title win were still focused on Jarrett and the feud with Sting.
By the end, he'd completely worn out his welcome and he was getting a lot of bad heat from the crowd.
-
Love this conversation...
Just wanted to throw in that, from a cost standpoint, a company is paying two guys to get the same revenue that a really over singles wrestler can give them.
Take the Road Warriors for instance: legendary team, proven draw, headlined shows for JCP, AWA, promotions in Japan...but did they draw twice as much as someone like Flair? or Dusty Rhodes?
Because they made around as much and you had to pay BOTH Hawk and Animal.
From a cost effectiveness stadnpoint, focusing on midcard names and using the tag division to develop younger guys makes more sense (similar reasoning is why manager aren;t around as much).
It sucks because we'll probably never see a really great tag divsion again in the WWE. But that money is a big driver.
-
Okay, name something in 2004 that was crappy that was the fault of TNA? The only two things I remember was DDP refusing to job to Monty Brown and the idea of using Macho Man... at all. *shudder*
The only thing wrong with TNA back then is that they didn't have any storyline then JJ is the champ, TNA is his world. Here comes someone from WCW/WWE! They nearly win the title but Double J narrowily escapes defeat. And I should state, I'm a fan of Jarrett, I've been a fan of him since his match against Monty Brown where he made Monty look like a complete badass. Maybe he used politics to stay on top or not, I don't know, I do know is I can't think of anyone on the roster in 2004 that should of had the belt EXCEPT maybe Raven. Which really, they were about equally talented back then so no bid deal.
You just asked me to name something wrong with TNA in 2004 then named about 5 different instances where they screwed up.
Raven NOT winning the belt back then after the feud they had and how over he was with the crowd was one of their biggest mistakes.
Seriously.."Maybe he used politics to stay on top or not.." ? Does anyone honestly have any doubts about that still?
And that "Jarrett was the only one worth giving the belt" excuse is a pile of crap and it always has been. you can't KNOW he was the only one worth giving the belt to because nobody else ever got a push. Sort of a circular logic isn't it...
As Remi pointed out earlier, maybe if TNA had pushed their talent back then they'd have have become BIGGER NAMES NOW.
Daniels, Abyss, AJ Styles, Monty Brown, Jeff hardy..they were all on the roster. Maybe if you push them in 2004 and don't use a glorified midcard nobody like Jarreett as a crutch, then you don't have to constantly bring in washed up names and competition cast-offs in 2010.
I'm sorry..but you are awful to have a conversation with on this because you have total blinders on. You're even a Jarrett fan...there's no way for you to have any kind of objective opinion about what this company is doing.
EDIT: that last sentence probably sounds like more of a personal attack then I meant..but dammit how do I talk to someone who even defends the Planet Jarrett Era?
-
Sorry missed that when I first posted it. Don't agree though as this is a new regime.
Fair enough. But then that brings up the history of this new regime and whether - based on that - they deserve any benefit of the doubt.
No that is not being overly negative and I meant it more in general on the IWC then specifically between you and Shaga. It is also more the tone of things and the way things are talked about that factor in. Sorry I didn't make that clearer in the first post.Again..fair enough.
-
I also disagree w/the crap booking for 7 years comment. If they were really that bad no one would be watching all this time and since they've been on Spike (in any time slot) their ratings have stayed pretty close. They used to have good stuff going on just didnt have any big names or stars, their tag division used to be awesome, the X division used to be awesome, and they had some good characters.
If we were to go back over the history of TNA - especially during the Planet Jarrett Era - and actually go over the storylines and how the played out, I would say that the majority of the time what you would see is A LOT of crap booking.
I'll use the classic anti-WWE argument: "just because people watch doesn't mean it was good."
TNA fans are notoriously loyal, there's always been a segment that watch specifically because it's not the E, and the viewers for both the weekly PPV shows and the stuff on FSN were both incredibly bad.
TNA has failed upwards.
Seven years of crappy booking highlighted by brief flashes of brilliance.
-
Hmmm I like the TNA product and have been defending it but moreso because the whole IWC seems to always want to point out the negatives in anything. Sorta playing the "Angels advocate" but when they do something bad in my eyes I am very critical of the product at the same time. That is not blind loyalty its plain loyalty at best and there is a big difference.
The 'blind loyalty' remark was to Slagaholic and his idea that it was irrational for people to make decisions based on a company's past.
This 'benefit of the doubt' concept seems to be a running theme amongst TNA supporters.
In any other line of entertainment I can imagine, if I were to make a critical comment about a company's future prospects of delivering a good product based on the failures of the past ("Why would I buy the next Madden? EA only ever updates the roster..") it would make perfect sense.
In wrestling, that's being 'overly negative' and I'm supposed to believe the better approach is 'c'mon guys..LET'S GIVE IT A CHANCE!'
:D:)
The Official WWE / NXT Discussion Thread *May Contain Spoilers*
in The Dog Pound
Posted
Tag match was TV worth, but they needed a hotter opener.
I liked the Legact three way if only because of how insanely over Orton was
MITB was a letdown to be honest. Not horrible, but only a couple of memorable spots.
Trips/Sheamus was a slow starter, but ended strong. I though that the match could;ve really gotten Sheamus over if he'd kicked out of at least one Pedigree.