PeterHilton

February 23, 2011

From what I've read about it, its probably not part of the taping. It sounds as if its possible that they will do as video or something similar to end the show, to avoid spoilers. As well, they have apparently had a nasty trend of having the ratings drop during the final quarter of Impact, so this is probably also an attempt to curb that.

I'm sure you're right. Dixie's not the sharpest crayon in the box, but she's not that bad.

February 23, 2011

I've read the taping results,and there was only one RETURN.

I sincerely hope that is not what they're hyping and that it is some other segment or announcement.

February 23, 2011

I know Williams was running his mouth after they traded Boozer and Brewer away that he thought the Jazz were kind of taking a step back and said that's why he's got a short contract with them. Maybe he has been keeping that up recently and they had to do this to get him out of town? Who knows, something just doesn't add up with this one.

Yeah...maybe the ownership decided that there was no way Deron was coming back?

But then why not wait and get a better offer? If you wait til the end of the season, I think Orlando and Dallas (at least) would break the bank to land a big time PG.

ANd if they had decided to move Williams, then maybe it does make sense that Jerry leaves, because he's probably not in the mood to rebuild again, which is what this looks like it might be: they're blowing up the team and starting over

February 23, 2011

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6150419

Didn't really see that one coming. Deron Williams to the Nets.

Odd trade. I know that Deron was coming up on being a FA, and Devin sort of replaces him...but then you add Derrick Favorswho has been both unimpressive and a rookie and plays the same position as Paul Milsap and Al Jefferson.

Just...odd.

February 23, 2011

Either way, they are darned if they, darned if they don't. PPV's are going the way of the dinosaur for pre-scripted entertainment.

I can't disagree with anything youve said. Spot on, basically.

But because the E is publicly traded, because they got into the nasty habit of paying out dividends even when they didn't need to (which created certain expectations in their fanbase), and because they've been slow to take advantage of media outside of TV, they're tied to the PPV model for the foreseeable future.

February 23, 2011

I'm looking at it, and profits are down in "Live and Televised Entertainment", "Consumer Products", and "Digital Media", but up in "WWE Studios". They actually made a profit year 2010.

Oh... maybe it's the PPV revenues. I KNEW IT! But there isn't much they can do about it. That's one area where I can say there are going to lose money either way.

"We're going to lose money either way" probaby isn't the kind of financial analysis that the shareholders are looking for.

It's probably just a smoke screen, but when you have three bad quarters in a row, it's fairly reasonable that you respond by doing everything possible to hit a homerun with your biggest, most profitable, most visible, and most well known PPV

February 23, 2011

Not a Sting fan?

wocka wocka wocka

February 23, 2011

But Peter, I mean... the thing is... like... lazy storyline booking has been what we've been complaining about for the past few pages with Sheamus' push so far. Why should we criticize it with creating new stars, but not with selling PPVs? I am sick of people (WWE staff writers included) looking at the nose in front of their face instead of the road ahead.

Feel free to criticize. I think it's totally fair.

And for all we know plans leading into tis years WM was for Triple H to face Sheamus in a bloody brawl and for Taker to make Barrett look like a million bucks ala Randy Orton a few years back.

But the WWE is responding to a string of bad financial reports, they've brought back some Attitude Era stars to help boost viewers, and WM is the one PPV that absolutely NEEDS to be a giant success and Taker/Triple H at the top of the card would help

(plus..as amp pointed out...Barrett and Sheamus haven't exactly blown up)

IMO grabbing Sting would've been about 100 times better because I personally have zero interes in Hunter/Taker but that's the logic.

Because when it's your best friend reason and/or logic sometimes goes out the window.

I thnk it's a reach but I'm sure that's how it'll be written

February 23, 2011

I think both Sheamus and Barrett could get much needed rubs from this, and if Triple H is as high on Sheamus as rumours say, he could let him end his carreer.

But eh... maybe it will all make sense in the end.

Probably not.

Your idea makes sense and would be a logical extension of the current and past storylines. Unfortunately it would also leave two of the company's biggest names facing off against two realitively unknown commodities on the biggest show of the year.

So throw out storyline consideration; this is a grab for ratings and buy rates and nothing more.

February 23, 2011

I wouldn't say cookie cutter as much as less exposure to other styles.

That was why it was different. The crowds in Texas, and the crowds in Philly are what could mold wrestlers.

Now everyone it's all the same style everyone coming up goes through

How is that definition different than 'cookie cutter'?

February 22, 2011

That's pretty much it.

Now, I will say ONE positive thing about WWE's development... they have managed to have guys, at the very least, to be safe and understanding the basics in the ring. I have no issue with that.

What I do have an issue with, though, is these guys aren't very good at anything else. Yes, I know WWE isn't about ring-work, but even by their own standards, some of the guys they have are rather thin by modern standards when it comes to having more ring work. It's WWE 80's anymore.

And at the very least, if they don't have ring, their selling and psychology (not all cases) are subpar. Before anyone says there is no such thing as "psychology", watch a Jake Roberts vs. Ted Dibiase match, and then watch a Ted Dibiase Jr. match against John Morrision. Jake Roberts vs. Ted Dibiase is a much better match.

Both Ted Jr. and Morrison know more moves than Dibiase and Roberts do, so ringwork isn't the issue here. One may cite experience, but both Ted Jr. and Morrison have been wrestling for a while, so it's not a good excuse. The difference in the match is... psychology. Plain and simple.

I agree and disagree on parts of this, but I side with the direction you're coming from

Over-all, I just think the talent process has eliminated alot of individuality and true originality.

It's a cookie cutter structure that creates cookie cutter workers.

February 22, 2011

Yeah, but not only would no-one care but it would be a heel / heel match. At WrestleMania. You can get away with face / face when you put two Main Eventers against one another some of the time - try heel / heel with two midcard teams... not even WWE are that stupid, are they?

Depends on the build. I think quite a few fans dug the original Nexus group in a snarky "this is a young talented heel stable" kind of way and Gabriel/Slater w/Barrett in their corner would get quite a few supporters in a match against whatever 'new' members of Nexus would be thrown out there.

I really don't see it as being a bad possibility and at least a match wrapped around "Nexus bragging rights" would have some type of storyline.

February 22, 2011

And regarding the Tag Team titles, there's just no way it's going to just be Corre vs Nexus. No-one would care. You've got to throw in at least Santino and Koslov.

Although I wasn convinced that 'Taker vs 'H wasn't going to happen, so what do I know?

IIRC last year the titles were defended in by ShowMiz against RTruth and Morrison in a short, thrown together at the last second, opening match that literally did nothing for anyone involved.

"No one would care" isn't relly a reason for that match not to happen

February 22, 2011

The probelme with the Sheamus push WAS that he only took out jobbers.

If he'd beaten up a bunch of nobodies, and then followed that upby cleanly pinning ANYONE in the main event scene, he'd have been cemented as a legit top of the card guy.

But he got a bunch of fluke wins over Cena, cheated over and over (even though he was supposed to be a monster heel) , and then repeated that process against Orton.

Other than Trips, he didn't get a clean win over an established main eventer, then struggled through some midcard feud with Morrison.

And now that Trips is back, with no mention of the fact that Sheamus was the one who put him out, his push of last year is pretty muh pointless.

Now...that is just the write up for Sheamus...but amp is right: the reason the WWE is struggling with their main event is because they haven't really established any main event level stars since Hardy/Punk (and even Punk has been treated a little iffy since then).

And...(and this is one I tend to harp on) their talent evaluation and development hasn't worked out the way they hoped.

February 20, 2011

Bosh has a huge contract and Love doesnt so the Twolves would be dumb for taking on a huge contract when they have a bad team and are a few years from sniffing the playoffs.. For the record, I find them both very overrated as they are both subpar defenders. Love is a product of playing on a crap team. Put him in a decent team and hes a 14 point 12 rebound player that still plays horrid man defense because of his slow feet.

And your wrong I wouldnt get laughed at. NBA GMs are smart enough to realize stats dont tell the whole story. Bosh was putting up huge numbers when he played on a crap team just as Love is now.

He averages 0.3 blocks and 0.6 steals a game and he shoots 47 percent. You are making him out to be a top NBA player when all hes really great at his rebounding and hes a good outside shooter for a big guy.

Did you realize Rambis has had to bench him on more than 1 occassion in the 4th quarter because he cant guard athletic Power Forwards?

You're making lots of assumptions here...

--I'm not talking about contracts. I'm saying Love is better than Bosh straight up, regardless of what they're paid.

--You're saying that Bosh put up huge numbers on bad teams, but even in Toronto, he never rebounded at the level Love is now. And you dismiss that outside shooting thing like it's nothing but look at that more closely: he shoots 47% from the field because he takes so many threes. But if you adjust for the fact that a 3 point shot is worth more, his 'true shooting percentage' (TFG) is almost 60% (.595)

To put that in context, that's the same percentage Kevin Durant is shooting through the All Star Break

--"Put him in a decent team and hes a 14 point 12 rebound player that still plays horrid man defense because of his slow feet."

Soooo...a 14 and 12 guy? On a title contender? Those would be excellent numbers. Plus he can shoot from the outside, he's a great passer, and he's better than average at the line? And the only negative is that he's not a great athlete and he's better as a team defender than on his own?

You're describing a more productive Robert Horry. Or a less-likely-to-get-thrown-out-of-a-game Bill Laimbeer

I don't think Love is an elite Top 5 talent, but he would be a huge contributer on a title team and I don't hink Bosh can. He puts up soft numbers and disappears when it counts.

February 18, 2011

I know where you're coming from. Perhaps I'm wrong in this assumption but I believe that the internet is a larger percentage of wrestling fandom than the percentage of internet fandom in those other mediums. Which is why I said what I said in the manner in which I said it. Again, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

It would be hard to prove. I think in either case, they net fans tends to be the 'vocal minority.'

And in both cases, they ( the net fans )wrongly assume - as you've stated in the past - that the majority of 'casual' fans feel the way they do.

When it comes to sports, that's a completely different animal than any other form of entertainment so I chose to exclude it. The emotional investment that goes into sports rivals that of political affiliation. For example you never would hear a fan yelling "we won!" when Mad Men wins an Emmy.

Fair enough. I just use it as an example because they are forms of entertainment.

A good point but I don't believe that the principle cause of the whining aimed at TNA is because they care about what the IWC thinks.

No. Neither do I. I just think - and again this would be hard to prove - is that the TNA audience has a larger percentage of "internet wrestling nerds" than the WWE does.

So it's easier for those fans who are happily entertained by what TNA does to be drowned out by the complaining of those who pick apart every segment.

February 18, 2011

Not right away and for the same reasons that Daniels didn't go right to the main events. ROH attracts the type of fan who isn't going to accept a TNA dropout as top star until he's earned his way back to the top.

Maybe. Joe had an epic run in ROH...

BUt to be fair let's say they expect him to "earn his way to the top."

That's not the same as "they wouldn't pay to see him" which is what that article was claiming; that the booking on Impact was so bad that TNA stars were literally losing indy dates.

And I doubt that. Which was my point.

February 18, 2011

Regarding your rant

There are many wrestling fans who hate wrestling, that is unless it's presented the way they think it should be presented. You don't get that in many other entertainment mediums, in other mediums if you dislike it you just turn it off and quit bitching. When wrestling is being presented the way they want it to be they can do no wrong, all the great leaps in logic and bizarre booking is ignored. When it's not what they want they can do nothing right and all the issues with the booking become huge problems that are killing the company.

I totally disagree. If you go to music or movie or TV or sports websites and fan forums, you get the exact same kind of feedback.

The more invested/hardcore the fan, the more likely you are to hear that kind of analysis and negativity

EDIT: keep in mind, I wrote an NFL column for 411mania and have written for Walterfootball; so I have first hand experience on that sports deal. I was physically threatened on a weekly basis lol. Just go to any SEC fan fourm: the amount of time spent breaking down the most minute of details and the over-all sense of " nothing makes me happy" completely blows wrestling sites out of the water

I sorta went on a rant here on a subject that I usually go on a rant on. It's nothing new for me but I'm just tired of the constant childish bitching about booking and the assumption that the 2 million+ people who watch Raw and not Impact do so because of what they say is wrong with TNA.

And again - to be fair - TNA tends to attract a much larger percentage of the snarky smart fans. WWE makes it's living on the mainstream, so realistically as much as smart fans complain, they aren't who the E is marketing to.

Not so with TNA; they try to go after the net fans, so they are going to get more negative feedback because they care so much what the IWC thinks

February 18, 2011

But will they go "I was going to pay to go to this show...but TNA didn't book the co-main eventer well so...not gonna go now"

Probably not. I don't think they completely disregard it and I think a lot of it has to do with that talent's particular reputation to begin with.

The example the article gaveof Samoa Joe, for instance: I thnk it's ridiculous to think there's less demand for Joe on the indy based on his TNA run. If he left TNA today he'd be a headliner for ROH (or PWG etc) the instant he set foot in their ring. After all, the same thing happened with Daniels and I don'tthink his TNA run was expecially noteworthy.

So what I'm saying is: Indy fans probably DO care about TNAs booking. But they probably DON'T care enough to not go to an event

February 18, 2011

The people you describe are casual fans and most casual fans are satisfied with what they see on TV. Generally speaking, they don't go to an Indy. The fans that do to see Indy wrestling are mostly the ones who care about how people are booked.

Yup

For the most part, the same fans who will go to an indy are EXACTLY the same fans that wil tear apart a TV show based on smarky ideas like 'work rate.'

So while I agree that a lot of indy goers will just disregard TNA's booking, I also think it's definitely something they notice.

February 18, 2011

If TNA makes a wrestlers pay not worthy enough then shouldn't an Indy guy go to TNA and then when the original hopefully short contract runs up go back to the Indys since they can now use it as a boost to their value?

The short answer is "yes" but no one rally knows how long the contracts are.

Plus, I'm sure every indy guy who goes there hopes to make it big and become a TNA star (although god knows how long it's been since TNAmade an indy guy a main event level star)

And (and this is the bit about the article i dont really believe) I guess some people are claiming that being poorly booked by TNA decreases their value..but its hard for me to think that Samoa Joe (the example they used) isn't still in demand by indy groups now, despite the relative misuse by TNA

February 18, 2011

jbergey: I definitely agree with you that the 90's are not identical in all ways to the current situation. But my point is you have the advantage of hindsight over the 90's. While it was happening, the perception was that WWF was in trouble, because they had lost all their proven draws. And nobody could have predicted in 1996 that the Ringmaster would be one of the all-time greats or that Rocky Maivia would be going over Hogan at Wrestlemania within 6 years' time.

The biggest problem though is that as you say, all of WWF's big stars (except the Rock), gained significant experience elsewhere. The industry in general was far healthier so you had a lot of guys who worked up the ranks by gaining experience in smaller promotions, including WCW in the early 90's when it was a distant #2. Now, even if Sheamus or Jack Swagger have the potential to be big names, they lack the years of experience that any midcarder in WWE would've possessed as recently as 12 years ago.

Agree with jbergey and with what lazorbeak is putting here.

I say this roughly every 6th post, but the WWE has spent so much time attempting to eliminate the 'unpredictability' of the talent development process, that they've also cut out a good bit of the raw creativity.

There's no place to work up the ranks, they try to avoid hiring indy workers unless they fall into strict 'WWE guidelines' ...maybe the hiring of Mistico is a sign of things to come where the only 'proven commodiities' they will work to aquire will be stars from other countries.

February 18, 2011

Didn't we do this argument a few months back? Based on a report written on the exact same site? And the TNA defenders used the old "hey we can't believe anything written on the internet because we have no proof" deal?

Just wanted to be sure before this ball gets rolling again...

I think TNA is right to assume that they are adding value to their talent. I'm sure there are quite a few guys on that aroster that would get bookings based solely on their TV appearances for TNA. But if you hinder the process, or make it so costly that other promoters won't bother, and then pay so little that even working TNA's vaunted "house show circuit" doesn't leave you with a livable wage, then being a part of the TNA roster really is worthless.

February 17, 2011

It's not about putting on great matches, true, but it's a good idea to at least be capable. She is far from that. If she was terrible that would be an improvement from where she is now. Whether it takes longer for big guys to not stink up the place is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there is a place to learn to not stink up the place and it isn't on prime time cable television. Putting someone that bad on your TV only makes the promotion look bad.

While that is certainly true, it's never stopped TNA from doing it in the past.

February 16, 2011

Speaking of rumours:

- TNA World Champion Jeff Hardy returns to court this morning in Moore County, NC. He is expected to finalize his rumored plea agreement, which is related to his September 2009 arrest on various drug charges.

followed shortly by

The new TNA World Heavyweight champion, Jeff Hardy showed up for court this morning, only for his case to receive yet another continuance.

This time his attorney is to blame. James Van Camp was busy representing a client in a murder trial, which made him unavailable.

The next case is set for March 16.

So a delay in the court date, but a possible plea deal? Maybe the plea includes no jail time, which is why TNA pulled the trigger?

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Articles

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by PeterHilton