lazorbeak

I can understand not liking the idea of using the ECW name for a WWE product, but what are you talking about here? Muscle fetishists sucking wind? Did I blank and confuse ECW with a bodybuilding federation from 20 years ago? It's not like ECW was a place to regularly watch Shelton Benjamin, Christian, CM Punk, Chavo Guerrero and countless others a chance to go out and have strong wrestling matches, right? It was nothing but bicep flexing.

I don't know if I had a mild stroke this afternoon or what, but I actually laughed at a clip of those DB/Kane anger management sessions. I love when ideas that sound ridiculous on the surface actually turn out to be entertaining. Also, I know we're all past hating Triple H because it's not 2003, but seriously trips, the reason Foley, Flair, HBK, Edge, etc., can get a big, real reaction from a crowd that you can't is threefold. One, you're not as good as them on the mic. Two, you've based your entire character on being a super bad-ass or a funny super-bad-ass for the past 15 years, which kind of hurts sudden ploys for sympathy. Finally, everybody knows that unlike those other guys, who actually do have to move on and do something else with their lives, you're Vince McMahon's hand-picked successor and will almost assuredly be back in front of the camera in a few months and ready for a big match against somebody at Wrestlemania. So don't waste our time just because the Summerslam crowd didn't all spontaneously start weeping.

Hey everybody, I'm still not totally satisfied with everything, but I've got a playable version of this mod up. I would really appreciate it if people could give it a run through to see how it feels. I'm also sure there's still a few bios missing, personalities left blank, etc., that somehow slipped through the cracks. All constructive feedback is appreciated, thanks!

Well, he was a manager in 2012, so even if he was great, he'd still be in danger of being put on the shelf and never used (Armando Estrada). Not being talented just sped up the process.

First, it's not my point, it's Kevin Nash's. Second, That's why the movie versions are brought up. Because that's what he's talking about. You know, Captain America, Thor, the Hulk, etc.? They were in some movie this year? And I was really just pointing out how the Wolverine example doesn't particularly work since in the movies they made him look like a stereotypical action hero bad-ass, and he's not who Nash was talking about. Nash's point is that Thor, Hulk, Captain America, etc. (you know, the characters created by Stan Lee who were in the biggest movie of the year?) are "larger than life." A character not created by Stan Lee who was portrayed as 11 inches bigger than his apparent height (although no one draws him that short any more) in a movie isn't really a "fine dismantling" of anything. If anything, it shows that Hollywood didn't trust audiences to accept him being that short and still be the male lead in their X-franchise movies. Yes, because Nash was the heavy? Jane is listed at 5'11", but he's not really supposed to be the larger than life figure Nash was talking about when he was mentioning Stan Lee characters turned into movies, since Punisher was another one that wasn't Stan Lee's (Gerry Conway and Ross Andru created him) and doesn't have big flashy super-powers. Because real fighting doesn't have to work as hard to create the illusion of somebody being tough? Does this really have to be explained? That fake fighting has to be more theatrical than real fighting?

Except the joke is more about celebrity culture that completely forgives bad behavior than excusing, apologizing, or encouraging bad behavior. I think it's ridiculous to be fired over it in any era.

At the end of the day, they didn't trade Pau because nobody involved in the trade needed him to be involved as a potential deal-breaker. Bynum right now is the more valuable piece, even though his health and head are question marks, because he's still getting better, so there was no question he was getting traded, especially since Howard is a more natural replacement for Bynum. On the other hand, Pau's 32 and his numbers have been down for two seasons, so nobody was super excited about him being the #1 piece somewhere (even though Houston tried for him last year). The Lakers probably would've thrown him in if they had to, but since they didn't have to, they get to keep one of the top 4's in the league.

Except it is a substantial upgrade. Bynum had the best year of his career last year, averaging 19 points, 12 boards, almost 2 blocks, half a steal, and shot 56%. Howard had a down year and still posted 20 points, 14.5 boards, over 2 blocks, and 1.5 steals a game while shooting 57%. That's better in every category, but it ignores the fact that Howard is slightly smaller and significantly more athletic. Unlike Bynum, Howard runs the floor well and is a far better help defender. He's also the single best pick and roll big man in the game as of last season, and he's now teaming up with one of the best point guards in the league. When you look at teams that have beaten the Lakers the past two seasons, the problem was a lack of athleticism, especially on defense, when it came to matching up with guys off the dribble. Bynum was horrendous in that Mavs series two years ago at guarding guys off the pick and roll because he was just too big and slow to step out. But even if all of that isn't convincing, the biggest factor is that Bynum had his first injury free season since he was 19 last year (in part due to the fact that his weight puts a big strain on his feet and knees). He's missed 28, 17, 32, and 47 games in the preceding 4 years. Even including this year, where he was healthy, he's averaging missing 1/3 of every season over the past 5 years. By comparison, Dwight's missed 19 games over the past 5 seasons, and twelve of those came this year. As good as a motivated Bynum could be at times (witness his 10 block, 13 rebound game against the Nuggets), he also has a bad habit of taking plays and sometimes entire games off; not hustling down the court, not playing help defense, generally making his team's defense worse. You never know when you'll get "mopey" Bynum, who had 4 rebounds, 10 points, and no blocks in 35 minutes that the Lakers got in game 5 against the Thunder. That the Lakers, already a top 3 team in the west just with Nash and their existing team, make a trade where they improve in every way and lose nothing, just doesn't seem fair. But as a fan, I'm still excited to watch Nash run a championship caliber offense after the past few years of him carrying a bunch of scrubs in Phoenix.

Other than the dumb "Punk should go to the gym more," I don't disagree with Nash for much. Short of radically changing his diet or taking something, Punk is not going to get any bigger. He's talked about it a million times how even when he does put all his effort into looking like his video game self for Wrestlemania, he doesn't look that much better. But one of the things I miss about pro wrestling from 15 years ago and beyond is the dudes who would never be world champions but were legit bad-asses in the Mark Henry vein. Jim Neidhart, Haku/Meng, LOD, Rick Steiner, Scott Norton, etc. None of these guys were ever going to be singles champions because they didn't have abs and couldn't cut a promo (or sell anything), but all of them looked like they could wreck somebody. I think the problem has less to do with size and more to do with everybody having the same body type. Guys with great physiques would stand out even more if WWE had a few workers that didn't have great abs for them to match up with, but at the moment the only guys who can get away with that are guys that weigh over 350 pounds. Where are those crossover athletes with thighs like tree-trunks? Wolverine debuted as an Incredible Hulk villain in the mid-70's and was created by Len Wein, and since Nash is talking about movies, Hugh Jackman is 6'1"-6'2" and ripped. Maybe not the best example? Pretty sure a guy built like Chris Hemsworth could find work in WWE pretty easily, too. But movies also have the ability to make a guy seem bigger through camera angles and casting. I mean Arnold claimed to be 6'2" for nearly all of his acting career. After it became obvious he was shorter than guys who were 6'1" during his political career, he now only claims to be 6'. But the perception his movies created was that he was 6'3" or bigger, because he's a massive dude compared to pretty much any actor he was working with. WWE can certainly control perception in the same way by surrounding wrestlers with small refs, interviewers, etc.

Pretty bold prediction. Seriously it's not even fair that the Lakers were able to assemble a team like this so quickly after the lockout. I mean they had to dump Odom to deal with luxury cap issues, but their starting lineup next year is likely to consist of FIVE former all-stars. Granted, MWP is far from all-star form and Steve Nash is old enough to have grandchildren, but this is still ridiculous. Nash won't even have to try to stop people from driving off the dribble; all he has to do is put a hand in the face of three point shooters. It also makes the Lakers effectively double-team proof. Nash is a huge perimeter shooting upgrade, and is also still a top 3 passer. Not only will he make Howard and Gasol's lives easier, he pretty much guarantees that Kobe will have to be guarded one on one no matter what. If the team chemistry comes together, there's no question but that they're the favorites to get back to the finals. I mean Kendrick Perkins would be slaughtered by Howard even before you factor in Steve Nash running the offense.

Oh no question, Brock was pushed to the moon and stars, but the idea that the three of them were concurrently equally big names at the same time while on the same roster is pretty much the opposite of what happened. If anything, Brock and Cena (and Orton and Batista) were rushed into the positions they were (Cena less so, other than the move to Raw), because of a vacuum of top names on the day-to-day roster, not some desire to share the spotlight.

Wait, what? Brock Lesnar debuted in April of 2002. There was no time the three of them were all on the active roster, and my point was that the only reason Rock became the #1 name in the company was Austin was gone for extended periods of time.

Quick fact-checking: WWE never had a healthy Rock, Austin, and Brock on the same roster. They appeared on exactly one card together, in Austin's last match. And I don't think there was ever any doubt that Hogan was #1, Savage was #2, and the only reason Rock became the #1 was Austin's health issues. Only one guy can be "the guy" at any given time.

Thanks, Leeall, but as I mentioned in my intro post on this mod, I'm already using classicmarvel and the associated indexes published by TSR in the 80's. While Ben Riely's page is a good resource for modern characters or non-marvel characters, it doesn't really help me much on a project like this. But thanks for the link.

I'm not sure if there's anybody still playing this game, but I've recently had time to work on modding again, after a few months of not really having the time to touch anything. My Marvel mod is looking really fun after a few test runs with different character types. I've done a ton of research on bronze age characters and have tried to represent the era both with the big names and plenty of lesser known characters that were around in the 70's. Ideally this will give me a base to make it really easy to build similar mods set at other times in the MU, since for the most part it will just be a matter of adding new characters. As mentioned in the first post, most of the characters people associate with the MU, including nearly every movie plot, comes from this era or the Silver Age. Only the X-Men universe has had major new characters show up post 1980. I've got 52 playable heroes and anti-heroes. Right now I'm finishing up picking which villains to bring in and balancing the different locations. As far as how it plays, I can say I haven't seen a mod that plays out the way this does. The biggest difference is I've used different power levels far more freely. If you feel like fights are too slow in the default data, this might fix some of those issues for you. Almost every "super" character has a "big" attack that does significant damage. As much as possible, I tried to give characters attacks you'd expect to see in a comic.

I don't think the guy who won the main event of Wrestlemania this year and is perhaps the biggest draw in wrestling can be fairly compared with David Arquette. It's more comparable to saying Hogan shouldn't be WCW champion while working a reduced schedule and shooting 3 Ninjas: High Noon at Mega Mountain. I mean there's a point to be made there as far as it being bad for business, but the Rock is still a big deal.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Moe Hunter" data-cite="Moe Hunter" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I don't recall Billy Gunn or Curt Hennig ever being world champion, and Ziggler looks more like them than anyone else....<p> </p><p> But I get what you're saying.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Except Hennig would have assuredly been a WWE champion if he had worked in this era, instead of a time period where <span style="text-decoration:underline;">only</span> the top guy was given the title. I mean Rick Rude, Roddy Piper and Jake Roberts never won world titles either (in WWF at least). And while I sort of see the resemblance to Gunn, Ziggler's better in most all respects, and Gunn's a guy that had a ten year run with the company, was given about a million chances, and won 10 tag team titles, based primarily around him having a valuable look.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="djthefunkchris" data-cite="djthefunkchris" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Daniel Bryan is a legit Main Eventer, and I can't imagine Ziggler being any different, at this point of their carreer's... However, although I think Bryan is going to stay relevant for a good while, there is the possibility his mainstay won't "stay".... He's not as solid as Punk yet. I'm hoping he gets there though.<p> </p><p> However, Bryan is better then Ziggler on all fields IMO. <em>I can't think of anything Ziggler is better at</em>. Bryan is at ease on the mic, has timing, and I don't feel Ziggler does (but I also believe this is something that will come over time/practice). In ring, I don't even have to go there.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> He's bigger and has a better physique? He looks more like a stereotypical champion?</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="The Final Countdown" data-cite="The Final Countdown" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>WWE obviously agrees, but I sure as hell don't. Cena vs. Rock or Cena vs. Brock? Absolutely, that needs to headline. Cena in MITB or Cena wrestling Johnny freaking Ace? No way.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah I can understand it in some circumstances, but this is just ridiculous. Absolutely no reason for a multi-man MITB match to main event over a title match, even if the title match is bafflingly <em>not</em> the culmination of a feud.</p>

<p>You'd think the Zach Ryder US title reign or the current Santino reign would be enough of a clue that you can't really be a comedy champion without making your challengers look bad. It's Carlito running into a wall in miniature; how can a fan take a heel seriously when the heel can't even beat up a comedy act? How do you sell Bugs Bunny-style outwitting and a deliberately weak babyface champion without changing the fundamentals of wrestling entirely (or just having ratings nose-dive)?</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Not to disparage Santino in particular or comedy wrestling in general, but it has its place, and that's not in the main event. It gets a big pop because seeing Santino as a potential fluke royal rumble champion is fun for the crowd the same way it was fun the first time Mysterio wrestled a big guy in WCW. But once the novelty wears off, what's left isn't particularly viable.</p>

Yeah I really can't see why Santino'd ever be a world champion. Yes, Cena has been the "funny guy" at times, but he was still built like a video game character and was never portrayed as goofy or cowardly in the ring. Santino's a small comedy wrestler that's over as an underdog. How quickly do you think fans would cool on his shtick if he actually won a world title? It would make Rey Mysterio's title reign look like one for the ages. How is he still a comedy underdog if he's champion?

Yeah having watched his '99 WWF work semi-recently, I can confirm that Giant was still pretty green, even then. He has improved hugely as a worker since then, even if his physical skills have declined somewhat. He had a tendency to just look lost in the ring, and some of the stuff he sold for was ridiculous (X-Pac punches). As for Jericho, he had a lot more of an adjustment to make, as he was phasing out the lucha/junior aspects of his work to settle into a less risky style. Not really the same thing as Big Show going from being a giant in WCW to a giant in WWF. It's not like he was taking back suplexes left and right in WCW.

Of course they'd lose some money if they lost a major draw, the same way they lost money when they talked Savage into color commentary and Hogan into retirement. But is the only other option really putting Bret Hart defending the title in the semi-main while Hogan wrestles a big monster heel in a cage something people wanted in 1993? I just don't see why it has to be that way, especially since Cena isn't in the physical state Hogan was at the time. Re: DJ No idea what this: has to do with anything. What's being ignored? Why is "choose" in quotation marks? Is someone not really choosing something? What links leading to facts? Who is even saying that the world is wrong? Cena was given the ball and ran with it in 2005 because everyone else was either injured (Austin), unavailable (Rock), or lacked some piece necessary to be the top guy. And so he was given a near continuous 15 month run as champion that made the public see him as the face of the franchise. It wouldn't have been possible if Cena was constantly defending his title in the midcard while Triple H and Undertaker worked every main event against one another in some combination.

I'm sorry, that's just circular reasoning at its finest. "Cena has to be treated special from everyone else because he's so unique" is a closed loop. Cena is in this position precisely because you absolutely can force someone down the audience's throat. The Cena boos start just after the period Hunter mentions, when Cena in short order was put over Chris Jericho, Kurt Angle, Shawn Michaels, all in a lead-up to his match against Triple H, where Triple H was nominally the face for everyone over 18. It's completely the product of WWE being able to push whomever they want, and using the positive and negative reaction of the fan-base accordingly. I don't think anybody's talking about Cena going on another break to shoot a movie or re-knit his bones, Wolverine-style, but how does it hurt to showcase someone else as the featured attraction, especially on a b-list PPV? I mean would WWE have been the same if Austin doesn't get hurt in '99 and Rock never gets a run as the promotion's top babyface because Austin is undisputed #1 forever? Wouldn't that get old?

This is true, but it also ignores that Trish's biggest angle as a manager was working with Vince in the whole lead-up to Shane vs. Vince at WM XVII, not managing a mediocre tag team that had a company named after them. Really? I mean, Punk is the WWE champion and gets huge reactions. I guess I don't see this gaping chasm between the two.