d_w_w

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="milamber" data-cite="milamber" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Best segment on Raw was Heath Slater. Good on Heath but that doesn't say much for Raw. And they gave away DemonFinn (stop with the Demon King that sounds like Demon Kane) and a great Rusev vs Reigns match on a go-home show for a big PPV <img alt=":confused:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/confused.png.d4a8e6b6eab0c67698b911fb041c0ed1.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I absolutely love where they are doing with Slater. No idea if they can move forward in a good direction, but for now, it's great.</p>

Picked up This War of Mine ($4.99) and The Banner Saga 2 ($15.99, only 20%, so not a great deal, but I really want to play it, so <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />) on the steam summer sale. Any other great deals out there folks are grabbing?

I wouldn't mind Brock losing to Bray, but I really wouldn't want to see Bray beat him cleanly or even close to cleanly. I think they've done a good job of making Brock look nearly unstoppable, especially in matches, to the point where it would be weird for me to see him lose to anyone who hasn't been booked like a juggernaut. And Bray hasn't. They've clearly been making Bray a bigger deal and placing more emphasis on the Wyatt Family, but I think he works quite well as a charismatic and intelligent leader. To me, that type of character doesn't need to be, and, honestly, to me, shouldn't be the best or toughest wrestler, but should be able to consistently beat them through the use of the Wyatt family to interfere, intimidate, cheat, etc. Just my 2 cents though.

Putting aside the (to me) rather unimportant issue regarding whether we should respect Hogan's work, this issue and the WWE's response are pretty straightforward. Race relations are a hot button topic in the U.S. right now (they often are, but now even more so) and the use of the N-word (especially the "er" variety) is exceptionally taboo (see Paula Dean). The WWE anticipated substantial press about the issue and moved to distance themselves from Hogan. Was the response appropriate? Of course it was, it was the strongest possible response they could make and they were obviously confident that whatever losses they took (in terms of merchandise or ratings) were smaller than the losses associated with a smaller given response. Anything weaker and they would be subject to the critique that they did not take the issue seriously enough. The question of whether what he did is worse or comparable to what other pro-wrestlers did is pretty much irrelevant, as these other transgressions aren't currently in the media spotlight. And the question of when Hogan went on this tirade is also a non-issue, the only thing that matters is that it's being discussed now. The WWE's response is far more oriented in public relations and business, than it is morality. In that sense, the hypocrisy complaints are swings and misses. An inconsistency charge would only hold value if there was another WWE figure currently embroiled in a similar issue and they treated them differently than Hogan (and even this is a stretch, as a big part of the issue here is that this is Hogan and that he is well known enough to be National Inquirer attention worthy). Past issues regarding race that aren't currently news topics are fundamentally different in that they lack the key character of the Hogan incident (that being that it's getting a large amount of public attention right now). To me, the only way to make a hypocrisy (and I'm not even sure this is about hypocrisy) charge against the WWE here is to argue that they're more interested in how they are perceived than by what Hogan actually said. But that only makes then similar to pretty much every large corporation beholden to stockholders and dependent on consumers. They want our money and so will move to put themselves in the best light possible to do so. There are plenty of reasons why we might think the WWE is a bad company, but this isn't a fair one, as far as I can see.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="The Swanton825" data-cite="The Swanton825" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I have one simple question to people who are on the fence about the CK2 deal. Have you ever wished there was a game that simulated the medieval politics like in Game of Thrones? If so, pay the 20 bucks now! Crusader Kings 2 is one of the best strategy games ever made and the DLC only makes it better.<p> </p><p> On another note, anyone else here a fan of the '08 Prince of Persia? I think it gets too much crap for being "easy", it's not like the Sands of Time games were much harder to begin with. And besides, the story is still great and the characters are still likable, which is more important for a PoP game than difficulty IMO.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Bah, I just got a humble bundle, but I think you've got me sold.</p><p> </p><p> Curses: too late.</p>

Banner Saga is $25 on Steam for me, so $15 isn't bad. Might pick it up, tbh (I've been looking for an excuse).

Will pass. I give them too much of my money as is.

Thoughts on the Alvarez situation? As a fan, I think I'd prefer to see him in the UFC, just because some of the matches are interesting. In terms of the legal details, I don't really have the background to how things should pan out though. Aside from the outcome, I find the details of his offer pretty interesting: http://www.mmajunkie.com/news/2013/01/eddie-alvarezs-ufc-offer-includes-immediate-title-shot-pay-per-view-cut

If I can get tickets, I'll drive down to Anaheim for 157.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="brashleyholland" data-cite="brashleyholland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm gonna be starting a blog soon where I'll record some of my CW/MMA experiences - I'll stick a link up here when I get around to it, if anyone is interested.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Will definitely follow your blog.</p>

I'm not sure how popular this will be, but I'd honestly prefer they do something radically different with Bran in the show. His story arc in the books is my least favorite thus far.

So... random question. Anyone know of a tablet that works well with Marvel Digital Comics Unlimited? Apparently the iPad doesn't do it. The Android tablets should have the potential, but I've heard mixed reports. Decided to take the plunge and buy a tablet, but not going to buy one that doesn't support MDCU.

<p>Honestly, I think that GSP has never been a strong finisher. As someone in the thread noted noted, he doesn't seem to have a ton of that 1-shot stopping power and he seems far better at getting position for submissions than finishing with them. </p><p> </p><p> If you look at his career - yes, he finished 6 of his first 7 opponents. But these weren't really world beaters with the biggest names being Parisyan (decision), Spratt (known more for being in the UFC than for being a dominating opponent), and Hieron. Since then, his stoppages have been over: Sean Sherk (lightweight), BJ Penn (lightweight), Serra (lightweight), Hughes twice (Hughes had already had over 40 fights by their first encounter and over 45 by the time GSP beat him), and Trigg by rear naked choke (Trigg has a history of being finishable). </p><p> </p><p> I don't feel like he's necessarily timid when he fights. He damages his opponents, achieves dominant positions, goes for ground and pound, works for submissions. He's just more technical (in terms of his jab and positioning) than he his powerful, I think.</p>

My current top five (coming from a very casual fan - I remember that Raw is on about 50% of the time and when I do remember it's on, I give it partial attention (football season)). 1. CM Punk 2. R-Truth 3. Alberto Del Rio 4. Mark Henry 5. Sheamus

Off to Denver tomorrow for a hopefully nice extended vacation weekend, including UFC 135. Anyone going to be there?

I thought I saw Maryland on there? Or did you mean that his stereotype was way off?

Me too. I don't really think Tito can win the fight and I'm not really sure that I want to see Jones (or Jackson)/Tito, but the comeback aspect is pretty compelling. If Tito could win this match and get a shot at the title, it's almost like the story was made for a movie. Brash kid rises in the UFC, falls, then has a moment of glorious comeback. He wouldn't even need to win for the story to feel complete.

So good. Fighting-wise, I'm not even that big of a Sonnen fan. But talking and hype - he's the man.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="brashleyholland" data-cite="brashleyholland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26660" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I can see it fine, logged in or not....anyone else?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Same.</p>

And it continues. Be a great night if the main card can keep this up

Yeah, fun stuff so far.

In general, I think you're right - this could be a great opportunity for the UFC to build up a number of lightweight stars. Honestly though, I don't know how it will play out. Part of Penn's appeal (beyond the fact that he was fun to watch fight ... Uno anyone?) was that he was pretty dominant as a lightweight (only has lightweight losses to Pulver and Edgar, I think?). I don't think that a fighter has to be that dominant to get support and popularity, but I wonder how fans will respond if the belt gets traded with any regularity. Either way, it'll be interesting to see how it plays out. Related topic: This is an impossible question (due to the draw result in the second fight and the fact that the 130 card is shaping up to be better than 125), but do you think that Maynard / Edgar 3 would sell better than the previous fight? That is, if we could wash away the fact that this is a re-match off of a draw and wash all of the sales from 125 and 130 that are related to other fights, do you think that the 3rd fight is more a draw than the 2nd fight? In other words, how much have Maynard and Edgar's stock risen given the performances they put on in that fight, given the fairly mediocre PPV numbers that the event pulled in? For me, I kind Maynard and especially Edgar are going to be much easier to sell in the future, starting obviously with the upcoming rematch. I'm a habitual PPV buyer, so I would have bought 125 either way. However, I saw 125 in person (if a large MMA event is near NM, good odds I'll go), and while attendance looked a little smaller than normal, the people that were there were pretty captivated by the main event. As people left, it seemed like they were disgruntled about the result, but excited about the fight. I think these folks are likely to buy/attend Maynard / Edgar 3 and are likely to tell their MMA-inclined friends that they should buy/attend that event as well. This is kind of a minor thing of course, as there was only so many people in attendance. But I think this trend was reflected in the post-fight mma media coverage, where a lot of commentators describe the fight as exciting and such. I believe/hope that this, plus the post-fight discussion on various mma forums have made Maynard/Edgar 3 a much more sell-able fight than Maynard / Edgar 2. Thoughts?

Same plan. Will DVR both of course.

A shame, but not surprising. Loved the concept. The execution and quality, especially over the last few episodes, was kind of a let down (given what they had started with). Some questionable marketing choices too. Blah.

Based on what I saw/heard at Jackson's, Akiyama didn't really follow through with Jackson's advice, but I think it'd be a stretch to say that Jackson really gave him a game plan (Akiyama worked on cardio [which I guess was maybe slightly better?], on leg kicks with Winklejohn [which he didn't really use] and using aggressive flurries when Bisping circled to Akiyama's right and/or backed into the cage [which he didn't really do either]) Edit: To be fair, I wasn't there all of the time (work and all), nor do I make it a habit to try to listen in or anything. But it still seemed pretty clear what they were working on during the afternoon sessions. And from my perspective, it seemed like Akiyama just wanted to go out and try to land a big one punch KO, which didn't seem to be the focus of training, and the folks that I watched with generally agreed. And to say that Jackson is a bad game planner seems, IMO, a bit silly, as is the idea that you can neglect Jackson's role in GSP's fight planning (GSP keeps him around and speaks highly of him, so he must buy into it, yes?). I'm a bit bummed out when he gets more credit/grief than the actual fighters, but the fact that he has been able to pull together the group that he has (that is, fighters seek him out), the fact that most of them speak highly of his coaching, and the overall success and win record for Jackson's fighters kind of speak for themselves, I think.