PeterHilton
-
Posts
4,281 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by PeterHilton
-
-
I noticed it said for season 1. Meaning that they go through the "program" and then get assigned to a brand? Intresting if that is how it works.
See..if that's how it works, I'm on board. Because that seems genuinely interesting. I'm worried it's going to be like the last round of Tough Enough where everyone was already playing a character and it was "worked-reality"
-
see you are saying that based on stats, remember defense? Thomas was never considered a top 15 first basemen defensively
But I can think of many 1B
Jeff Bagwell, Mark Grace (not a power guy, but all around good player).
But once again this isn't mean knocking Thomas, stats wise he is in but the Hall doesn't just look at stats anymore, they look at everything. To me Bagwell was a much better player than Thomas ever will be.
From his swing (a very sweet swing) but look at the stats
Bags: AVG. .297; HR 449; RBI 1529, Walks 1401; SO 1558; OBP .408; SLG .540; SB 202; CS 72; Triples 32; Doubles 488; Hits; 2314; plus a gold glove and MVP
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bagweje01.shtml?redir
Now before I tell you Thomas' stats, Frank and Bags were actually born on the same exact day and year, so they are the same age. For Fairness I will cut them both off at 05 to compare their stats next to each other up to the time Bags retired
Thomas: AVG: .301; HR 440; RBI 1435; Walks 1420; SO 1108; OPS .419; SLG. 555; SB 32; CS 23; Triples 12; Doubles 495; Hits 2077;
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/thomafr04.shtml?redir
Great stats by both but to me Bags was the better athlete, better glove, and a better 1B then Thomas
P.S Truly odd they had the same birthday, also they both won their first MVP at the same time but Bags was the ML MVP as well as NL, didn't know that was an award
Great argument. I would say that shows that Bagwell should definitely be a HOFer too.
-
So with ECW closing tonight and NXT debuting this is apparently the roster:
http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/130047/Roster-For-WWE-NXT.htm
Roster For WWE NXTPosted by Larry Csonka on 02.16.2010
See who is set for the show…
- According to Pwinsider.com, the following talents are scheduled to be on the roster for WWE NXT:
* FCW Champion: Justin Angel
* Daniel Bryan
* Kaval
* Skip Sheffield
* Joe Hennig
* Brett Dibiase
* Darren Young
* Heath Slater
* Michael Tarver
-
The flaw he's got going for him is that neither Cena or the Nasty suck as badly as people tend to want to believe.
Oh no..the Nastys really are that bad.
In their prime, they were an acceptable midcard brawler tag team that didn't bring anything to the table, but certainly didn't embarass themselves out there.
But that was literally decades ago.
RIGHT NOW every second they are on TV is an insult to the viewing audience. Moreso than Bubba the Love Sponge they are an example of Hogan stacking the card with his friends for his own selfish purposes.
Remember this when they beat Morgan & Hernandez for the tag belts.
-
the only thing I think that will knock on Thomas is he was never the best at his position
also (and I hope it doesn't come off like I'm taking a personal shot at you lol)
I would really like to see who was a better 1B from 1991-1997 than Frank Thomas. Seriously..who was better?
-
Plus even with steroids you still have to hit the ball
This argument has been disporven quite a bit over the years.
Steroids also improve the fast twitch muscles which create reflexive reactions. Sprinters get out the block faster, hurdlers and high jumpers can start their jump attempts a step later, and batters can swing faster and later in the pitch.
Steroids and HGH most definitely help you hit a ball farther, harder, and more consistently.
The idea that steroids don't help you hit a baseball is a lie the athlete's have told to cover their own asses.
Now..if you don't see why it's wrong for artificially improve their performance, that's a separate issue.
-
Frank Thomas should be first ballot but he won't be. He'll get in without a doubt. He's one of the greatest hitters of all time.
Statistically he's a monster. I mean, realistically he should be unanimous first ballot HOFer based on his numbers. He's going to retire as one of four players in mlb history w/a .300 batting average, 500 home runs, 1,500 RBI, 1,000 runs and 1,500 walks (along with Mel Ott, Ted Williams, and Babe Ruth)
He has two MVPs and four silver slugger awards.
Plus, his HR totals never flared up dramatically and the levelled off and dipped normally so you almost assume (although you never know for sure) that he did it clean.
Definitely in the HOF
-
Well Raw just ended with Sheamus destroying the two biggest faces in the company. And the heat was exactly what I would call 'deafening'
So, no...it's not coming across on TV.
-
What's so bad about Sheamus? Is he not over as a heel?
No. He isn't.
I mean..he's marginally over in that the audience knows they "should" boo him, but not really..
The Pope however IS over and TNA should ride him for all he's worth because, with their booking, that won't last long.
-
Pete, don't bother arguing with it: just view profile, add to ignore list, and move on.
I like the move to Mondays, but I just have to wonder what TNA does differently than WWE at this point. Yes they have some great workers, but their product gets more similar to WWE by the day.
I don't know that they need to be different to be successful. Not 'reinvent the wheel' different, anyways. That seems to be part of the problem with the writing team actually; they're trying to do too much.
Sure they killed the six sided ring, and the X Division is a joke but they do have one thing going for them that means a lot to me as a fan: If you line up the rosters side by side TNA has more guys I'm willing to pay to watch wrestle.
That's huge. If they could present a coherent product TNA could be very successful on Monday nights.
-
I've given the Hogan-era the benefit of the doubt. They are just doing very little to convince me. As I said, its not all bad. But there's just so much that bugs me. Did we really need 3 Mr. Anderson promos last night? Not only did the Nasty Boys match get 12 minutes, but they went over, meaning we get another one down the road. I just don't see things "improving"... and again, realizing that my idea of "getting better" won't be the same as yours or the next person, and obviously not the same as Hogan and Bischoff.
I actually feel very similarly. I actually like big chunks of what they're doing. I agree with most of who they've decided to push ( Dinero, Morgan, Wolfe, ), I like AJ with Flair, I love that Angle is being used as a real central part of the shows..
but the "mistakes" they've made are just so glaring that it stops me from being invested.
-
I don't like the move to Monday night but I understand why they are doing it. They know they aren't going to knock WWE off but they are hoping the "war" will generate ratings and get them to the point they can make money off their shows. However WWE is trying not to acknowledge them at all but TNA keeps poking hoping WWE will mention them which will help TNA more than hurt since the people that dont know TNA wil go online and look them up the moment Vince talks about them in a press conference/release
Here's the thing:
The test run on Monday night seemed to show that there's an audience out there that will ONLY watch a Monday Night War type set-up. It seemed like a lot of the old time fans came back just for the one-off.
If you can get those people watching on a regular basis, TNA wins viewers just by showing up on Monday.
-
Oh shut up, if Cena's rap gimmick was such a roaring success then why did they change it ? Exactly. Stop splitting hairs just to big yourself up like you know jack all, you like to think you do but you really don't. You just like to talk a good game. See that's the thing about smarks they think they know the lot about wrestling and yet they aren't the ones producing and promoting wrestling oustide of their little TEW games I said it before, it's laughable.
I also said Cena got his monster push because of the brand extension creating opportunities for workers that otherwise stood no chance, Bradshaw is another success story too. But both had no chance in the Attitude Era. Bradshaw actually proved this as he was far from main event or entertaining back then, yeah he had the APA thing going on with Farooq but he wasn't nearly as entertaining as he was as the JBL character.....don't you feel like an insignificant ass now ? Yes, you do - you probably look like Zak Gowen in the real too, I'd feel significant if I looked like you as well. But of course I'm a smark too so I'm perfect, I don't think I know everything and I don't claim to be holier than thou - see the irony ? LOL.
Awesome.
The gimmick changed after he won the world title because they were transitioning him to be the face of the Raw brand. He needed to be more marketable. His superman push coincided with the family friendly thing.
He became Vince's new Hulk Hogan. Similar push. Similar character. Similar marketing.
He became the world champion with the rapper gimmick. You couldn't sell t-shirts to little kids with that gimmick, though. Simple as that.
The gimmick worked fine. You're mistaken.
-
Back on topic...I love the move to Monday Nights.
The announcement today was a geek out moment. Not because i expect them to 'beat the WWE' , but because of the incredible amount of trust Spike is showing in the company. It's a great sign for TNA.
-
Seems funny how people say oh the rapper gimmick would have worked yak yak yak, the rapper gimmick clearly didn't work this time around so what chance would it have had back then? And besides it doesn't mask the fact that Cena isn't a talented main eventer and is nowhere near the stars of that era, though it's the WWE machine hard at work again....had Cena been the rapper in the Attitude Era if he hadn't been released he'd have maybe been a midcarder at best. Though I don't believe he'd have been given the opportunity whereas that's one good thing about WWE being the only horse in town at the time and the brand extension initially, it gave them an opportunity to give workers a chance to shine who may not have had it otherwise - Bradshaw and Cena being the 2 biggest profits of this move. You might not like me but credit where it's due what's right is right and no amount of fanboyism can change that.
You are literally clueless.
There is not a single factual statement anywhere in this mess. If the rapper gimmick didn't work, how did he get over? Why was he getting as much fan support on SD in his feuds with Angle and Lesnar as those two - despite the fact they were far more established than he was?
The reason Cena GOT HIS MONSTER PUSH IN THE FIRST PLACE was because the gimmick worked. How do you not realize that?
I hate derailing the thread over and over, but you are making anti-Cena/WWE statements that have literally zero basis in fact. Zero. This is like something you would read on tnawrestlingnews forums. I don't even particularly like John Cena but these posts are frickin stupid and I can't help myself.
-
Dinero is a stud and they should run AJ/Dinero for at least two PPV's because Pope/Flair promos would be epic.
Oh yeah and to the people who doubted me before about my comments on Cena and the Attitude Era, come on people, he barely floated to the surface in recent history so what chance would he have had when The Rock and Stone Cold were running the show and most other mid carders were well in their prime and much bigger draws than Cena? He'd have sunk quicker than Just Joe at WWF Mania taping and you all know that's true, so I have to ask what Attitude Era the current WWE fanboys were watching, because I lived it and loved it in my early teens.You have to remember that back then you had Kane, Edge, Gangrel, X Pac, Val Venis and Triple H in the mid-to-upper midcard and all were either in their prime or just reaching their peak and all were a lot more interesting characters to watch than the blandness that is John Cena - he gets tolerated now only because women and children love him and Vince shoved him down our throats, but back then he'd have been eaten alive and spat out the back door end of story. Wrong guy, wrong time had it been 1998 and as hypothetical as it is you all know I'm right on that one.
You're being ridiculous.
One, you have to sort of assume Cena wouldn't play the same character he is now specifically BECAUSE the generic, bland, good guy was either never used or used as a comedy character during that time period. So this version of Cena wouldnt be what we got...he'd be something else entirely.
And based on his early work as the white rapper and during the first stages of his face turn, he'd fit in fine if they used him as an anti-hero type.
Also...by what possible measure most other midcarders during that time period bigger draws than Cena? He's been the biggest star in the US for what...5 years? 6 years? I get that YOU don't care for the product, and I think Super Cena is boring as hell, but you can't just toss the man aside and say 'o well he would never have drawn back then' because based on everything we've seen of his career, you're completely wrong
When his career is done, Cena - for better or worse - is going to be seen as one of the top 5 draws in WWE history. There's not a single midcarder that was around during the Attitude Era that would get a whiff of that.
-
Y'know..I've ordered the last four but there's absolutely no way I'm ordering this one.
There are possibly some great matches in that tourney, but there's no way I'm throwing money at a company with a PPV that has Team 3D vs The Nasty Boys.
No ****ing way.
-
True, but, if he uses Bryan Danielson, doesn't that mean WWE own the rights to the name? Not sure, though. Do they now own the CM Punk name?
No. And no. You can't own the rights to a name if it's A)their real name or b) a name they used before going to the WWE (unless the wrestler were dumb enough to signa contract that specifically turns those rights over).
-
Who knows what Khan has instore he's lived in the STL area for the last 40 years, he owns a company in IL, he went to school around here, has family here. Maybe he'll pick up and move but would LA really want a 1-15 football team.
It has nothing to do with that record.
The company i work has a good relationship with AEG and the LA Live/Staples Center complex and whenever their executives talk about getting a team into the stadium in Carson, they don't talkin terms of talent or record, they talk about revenue.
The developers are making as much if not more money from the commercial and retail developments springing up around Staples. Their vision for the land around the Carosn stadium is this insane, massive commercial complex with million dollar condos sitting atop the commercial centers, each condo with a view of the stadium field . They literally think it will be abigger attraction than Disneyland.
And none of that happens without a team. They don't care what the franchise looks like ...and if the hard cap goes away they are prepared to spend like the Yankees to get LA fans to buy in.
-
Peter there are very few guys I just always agree with and you seem to be one of them man. Once again I couldn't have said that any better myself.
Thanks. Ditto.
It agitates me, it's like saying "He's not like the other ones". I know that's not the way he probably meant it to sound, but that's how it sounded. It's like the guy that says "I'm not prejudice, I have lots of Black/Mexican/Oriental friends", and in reality they are just people he personally knows. "That's my Mexican friend, he's cool, he's not like most Mexicans!", "He's more Americanized!" Canada and Mexico is both "America" but whatever.You can substitute Mexican for whatever, but you get my point.
Ampulator, I'm not trying to pick on you at all, you said it was a "Friends" way of putting it. I'd bet they would have answered a bit differently then you did. I have aquaintenance's like that as well, as most people do. On a board like this though, it's nice not to have to worry about it, or should I say put up with it.
I honestly don't think amp said anything wrong. Like I said, i just dislike the concept. I don't know what amp's background is so his perspective and experiences may be very different than mine. Plus, it's always a decent conversation to have as long as it's done thoughtfully
-
But your point, and PeterHilton's seem to be different, at least to me. You understand what I'm saying (even though you disagree), and, I believe, I understand what you are saying. But I'm not entirely sure he understands what I'm saying, or he's accidentally misconstrued my post to what it wasn't. I honestly don't understand how the post could have offended him. In fact, I don't think he should have been. I can see he is, but I don't see why he should be.
I'm not going to make a huge deal out of it, but the idea of being 'Americanized' is just incredibly stupid to me.
Obviously people who grow up in different countries have different cultures, but only in a few ethnicities is it seen as a stigma to be 'more American' than what is considered 'typical.'
Saying that Chavo wouldn't be believable acting a certain way plays into a stereotype. Which, in wrestling, isn't a big deal (or more exactly, it happens so often you sort of get used to it). But it does bother me to hear about this idea of what it means to be 'Americanized.'
So is Chavo not an All-Mexican Mexican? What would make him more Mexican? What qualities would he need to show on screen that would make him a more believable Mexican?
When people answer those questions, more often than not, it's about stereotype.
I don't think your post was offensive, but the entire concept is bad news.
When you define someone like Chavo culturally by what he isn't (he doesn't act very Mexican) then by default you are also defining what it means to be
Mexican. And by definiing that identity within such strict parameters, you limit that culture as a whole.
I could go on, but it touches on much greater issues in entertainment today.
-
And as for Chavo singing Tejano... well, like with Mark Henry, I won't be offended. Just made very uncomfortable. It seems so un-Chavo like. Chavo is very, as my mexican friends would say, "Americanized". He doesn't really seem to be part of that culture.
WTF?
This is an idiotic and very limited view of cultural identity.
As an American of Mexican descent who served in the navy, has never been part of a gang, speaks with zero accent, and has been extremely successful in a large corporate environment, I would question your "friends'" idea of what it means to be "Americanized" (and by the same token, what exactly their criteria of Mexican is? Should he wear a sombrero, talk like Speedy Gonzales, and sport a giant Pancho Villa like moustache?)
Chavo is a member of one of the founding families of lucha libre and his grandfather was as famous as El Santo in his prime. I think it's cool for him to be considered Mexican.
-
How about this, who cares about the WWE HoF since it represents NOTHING? After all this is a storylined form of entertainment so its basically a "Who we gave the right gimmick to and pushed to moon" hall of fame if you want to try judge peoples criteria.
I think that's an unfair attitude to have considering the amount of physical punishment these guys take and the amount of legitimate talent it requires to get yourself over.
I mean..you don't honestly think it's as simple as "great gimmick who got pushed to the moon"?
-
To my knowledge, he never wrestled in the WWWF, WWF, or WWE and it seems Vinnie Mac is stepping over hid boundaries when it comes to the WWE HoF these days. I understand putting this guy in there because he's a legend of the sport. It's there HoF and they can do anything they want with it, but shouldn't they release some type of criteria for entrants?
Perhaps I'm just upset that Savage still hasn't been inducted.
We did the whole 'criteria' debate in another thread a few weeks back, so I won't go too much into it, but there are quite a few performers who either a)didn't work for the WWF/E b)worked there, but not during their prime or c) worked there but weren;t what most people would consider "stars" (ala Koko B Ware)
Based on what the WWE is doing with their HOF, Inoki is certainly no less worthy than quite a few of the other entrants.
The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread
in The Dog Pound
Posted
Yeah, I think you answered your own points.
I don't make allowances for an act that I wasn't that interested in when they were in their prime. And I don't really see them as representing a better period in wrestling.
I don't see them as a benefit because the fact that they're going to go over any of the teams on the roster will send a negative message. Both backstage to the wrestlers who have to put over those two (now) talentless mounds of goo and to the fans watching. Because there's really no way to convince me that the number of 'Nasty Boys-nostalgia fans' outweigh the number of people who see them as an utter joke.
Also..I may have missed it, but what do you think of Ken Anderson? You're being a little subtle imo