lazorbeak

I just have a hard time buying that if Orton was as bad as dirtsheets made him out to be in 2004 or so, that he would have a decade of continuous employment, as I can think of plenty of "names" that didn't last in WWE this decade because of their behavior or they had reputations of being difficult to work with: Chyna, Jeff Hardy, Hogan, Scott Hall (lasted less than 3 months), X-Pac, Sable. Even Austin was sent home at one point. So while maybe he does get some amount of preferential treatment, I doubt WWE would keep him around for a decade if he was really all that terrible to work with, and every shoot interview I've heard from people that weren't specifically mad at him (Kennedy) indicates that he's generally well-liked and doesn't carry himself like he's better then all the boys in the back.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Fantabulous" data-cite="Fantabulous" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Orton breaking Punk's nose isn't a firing offence but it did get me thinking about what it would take for Orton to get fired. Orton has done enough to get fired at least twice, probably more, but he's a star and stars get breaks that rank-and-file roster members don't. And I think short of physically assaulting a member of staff, Orton can probably get away with anything he we wants.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> What are you talking about here? Can you link to any story after 2007 that links to any behavior problems with Orton at all? You make it sound like he's got ongoing behavioral issues, but I'm pretty sure if that was true, WWE would in fact send him home instead of keeping him in the main event for years. I mean, Jeff Hardy was WWE's top babyface through most of 2009.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Fantabulous" data-cite="Fantabulous" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Wrestlemania used to be the one WWE PPV of the year I'd actually order, although in later years it was done purely out of habit and last year I got it solely for Bret vs. Vince. This year, I can't see anything on the cards, either provisionally or potentially, that would make me want to buy it this year. Sure, Sting vs. Undertaker would tempt me but it wouldn't be a sure thing to get me to buy. <strong>The guest host, whoever it is, would have no bearing on whether I'd buy WM or not.</strong></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Not even if it was STING?!?!?!</p>

I think it may be a bit premature to say there's nothing on Wrestlemania worth seeing a solid 2 months before the show goes to air, before any of the matches are set and before we know who this "guest host" is supposed to be. You may be right but I think you're jumping the gun right now.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Blackman" data-cite="Blackman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Watched the Rumble last night, and without spoiling it, I think they made a big mistake letting this man win. Seriously, a midcarder? I'm not watching WWE much these days, so I could be missing him.<p> </p><p> and that link of CZW is frickin' AWESOME</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> How is he a midcarder? He just won a main event title match at Wrestlemania, weeks after beating Rey Mysterio to cap off a major feud that saw him go over Rey on several occasions in the main event spot on Smackdown. </p><p> </p><p> Also I think we can say Alberto Del Rio won the Royal Rumble. It happened 7 days ago and three WWE TV shows ago, and has been on WWE's site since Sunday.</p><p> </p><p> And I don't watch Smackdown often, but what I have seen of Del Rio indicates he is the total package. He's a believable tough guy thanks to his size and MMA experience (his finisher ties into that), he's got an incredible look, is a solid hand and is a third generation guy who understands and respects the business, and he has some of the best heel facial expressions I've seen in years.</p><p> </p><p> Absolutely good for WWE for taking a chance on somebody that hasn't already been established for years and trying to create a "next big thing" type guy.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>TNA's pacing is something that has often bothered me, though I try not to think about it too much. One thing that has always bothered me about wrestling is that almost everything seems to happen on camera, except for big surprises... nothing seems to happen backstage that we don't see, so it's like everything is happening in a bubble.<p> </p><p> If there was some actual feeling that people had a life outside of wrestling then things would be better, but it's rare that I get that feeling at all on the TV shows. There should be constant reminders throughout the shows that the roster is always on the road, always travelling, that they might never get to see each other apart from at Impact... that when everyone gathers in one place everyone is jostling for position, trying to get things done, wanting matches, pushing for time... that only some people can make it on to Impact and that everyone we don't see is on Xplosion, vying for the chance to make an Impact. That every week, dozens of things are happening backstage that we never get to see or hear about, instead of getting to see and hear apparantly everything that goes on.</p><p> </p><p> Sometimes jumping from one thing to another is fine, but that needs to be delivered within a framework that actually pushes that it NEEDS to be done because so much is going on. I know I'm kinda rambling a bit, but if I were to try and sum it up in a sentence it would be like...</p><p> </p><p> "I feel like I'm being pushed along a railway line... there's only one path, but I wish it felt like I was driving along a road where I could take any turn I want and there would be something there."</p><p> </p><p> That probably makes no sense... but it's my last thought for the night in here. And I agree that WWE feels too slow, but that's a lot of other thoughts wrapped together for another day entirely.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This is an interesting thought, it reminds me of Jim Ross' old sit-down interviews in the early Attitude era and before, where he'd really get into why a character acted the way he did, and what motivated him, etc. I always thought it made the characters seem more relateable because here they'd sit down and basically be a toned down but in-character version of themselves, and could explain why they did what they did, and it was just the character explaining their lives, not seeing them shopping for groceries in costume or anything ridiculous. </p><p> </p><p> I'd love to see somebody do a sit-down interview with Hogan and have him in-character talk about his fear and insecurities, his legacy, how he thinks he will be remembered for his time in TNA, that sort of thing. Then his on-screen persona can be like "brother I didn't mean any of that, you took it out of context!" I mean this is the same tactic that got Vince McMahon over at the #1 heel in the industry when he sat down and talked trash about a guy that was already out the door, in part because it felt so real.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The bigger issue is... Cena and Orton just have plain out bad matches at worst... boring by-the-number matches at best. Even the markiest Cena fans are sick of seeing them against each other.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah Undertaker/HBK worked because we hadn't seen them wrestle in a decade. Hogan/Warrior worked because they had never worked against one another. Orton/Cena have wrestled each other 400 times, as recently as one year ago. The crowd was more interested in the Cena/Kofi staredown.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="thommohawk" data-cite="thommohawk" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Okay I would like to get a show of hands on this, going back to my original points, just to see what the majority feel on this one....and to see if I'm the only one that sees it this way - overzealous hating of TNA product and it not as bad as it's made out to be ? Mr Anderson evoking stylistically of The Rock slightly in a good way ? Kurt Angle being decent-good on mic but not great like the HBK's, Rock's and Jericho's of this world ? To me all of this is obvious based on my open minded observations of the wrestling I've watched, obviously my stating this is an opinion in itself but just wonder if everyone else sees this ? Or if lazorbeak and the other guy are correct in their opinion or statement in that it is just me ? <p> </p><p> Not trying to cause trouble or instigate a thing, I am legitimately curious as to if the majority of wrestling fans are seeing what I see ? On the one hand I'm like probably not, but on the other hand I'm of the opinion of how can one miss it and is it not obvious ? Because I scratch my head sometimes at how people miss it. Legit post. I hope people understand where I'm coming from....</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I didn't say you were wrong, I said there was evidence that Angle was very good on the mic: namely, that in 2002 he won an award for "best talker" that has gone to Chris Jericho, The Rock, and Steve Austin, three of the best talkers in the past 20 years.</p>

Edited to avoid more off-topic stuff

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> @ thommohawk: <strong>You are just dealing with the biggest trolls on the site in Peter and Lazorbeak</strong>. If you want just put them on ignore.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Are you joking? Not only did I not instigate anything, all I did was present a fact and cut a promo on Hilton after he said something about cutting a promo. Seriously have I ever said anything this rude about you, ever? If I have some beef with you that I just don't remember, I certainly apologize, but I have no idea what I've done that's justified that reaction in the least.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="PeterHilton" data-cite="PeterHilton" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Maybe. But I try not to state it as if the other guys is a complete a-hole for disagreeing with me. <p> </p><p> "why am I even bothering stating my point of view or even arguing my case as reality proves on a weekly basis that I'm correct. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it."</p><p> </p><p> Why are you cutting a promo???? Why? You have an opinion and it's worth being discussed. Fantabulous even gave some merit to your opinion. BUt as soon as I said I didn't agree with the way you stated it or that I didn't think he was worse than Triple H we get to hear that. </p><p> </p><p> C'mon....it's an opinion based discussion about wrestling.</p><p> </p><p> Calm down.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> PETE... HILTON... [heavy breathing]</p><p> </p><p> WHEN I LOOK UPON THE SPIRITS AND HEAR THE VOICES CALL OUT TO ME, YOU WILL KNOW THAT YOUR END IS NEAR! [turns back to camera]</p>

See, a "fact" would be something like "Kurt Angle won the Wrestling Observer Award for best interviews in 2002, an honor he shares with The Rock (1999-2000), Steve Austin (1996-1998), and Chris Jericho (2003, 2008-2009)." While it might be an opinion (specifically an inference) to say that many people consider Angle to be an elite talker, because he won an award that other elite talkers have won, it's an opinion supported by actual fact.

Cagematch has results for a June 2000 show that featured Kurt Angle, Bull Buchanan, Mark Henry, Al Snow, D-Lo Brown and Kane, so it's a safe bet that by June 2000 they were established as WWE developmental.

Wiki is your friend: "In 2000 OVW became part of the World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) developmental program, of which it was a member until February 7, 2008." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_Valley_Wrestling

Say what? Sting hasn't been on a nationally televised program with anything near WWE's ratings in a decade. And in that decade, WWE has consciously marketed to young fans, fans that would have been between 0 and 5 when Sting wrestled Flair on the last Nitro. These fans don't watch TNA for the 2 months a year he shows up, and they likely know nothing about the character other than what they've heard from older fans. So no, he didn't lose credibility with that, very, simple statement. I think he makes a good point.

You are all forgetting the 5 star classic that was Undertaker/Mark Henry!

I agree, Pete. While I wouldn't debut Sting by having him wrestle the Usos or whatever, I don't see how putting the guy on TV "cheapens" anything. If anything, it strengthens the feud because it tells you "hey, this guy is in shape to compete!" It tells the audience what they're getting without relying exclusively on special effects gimmickry.

People on other forums have pointed out that if they want to introduce Kong, it makes more sense for her to steamroll Eve first, then feud with Natalya and/or Beth. Hopefully that's where this is going, because I can't see them seriously devoting time to a program between Eve and anyone.

Um, what? It's a simple observation that you can't please everyone all the time. There will always be a contingent that isn't pleased no matter what. "Oh, you're pushing new guys, well it's the wrong new guy," etc. It's not some personal attack or labeling anyone. In fact, it's me going out of my way not to argue with anyone. I think you completely misunderstood my point.

Haters gonna hate, I guess. Good for WWE for taking a risk with a new guy that has all the tools to be a huge deal.

The prophecy has been fulfilled.

No, that is not a straw man, and yes, you used the term incorrectly. A straw man is when you make a facsimile of someone else's argument and then shoot it down, which is not what Fantabulous was doing at all. "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position." He's not refuting anyone's proposition, so he's not making a straw man argument, regardless of whether you agree with what he's saying. Like I said, it's not even that I disagree with you, I'm just letting you know that you're using terms incorrectly and adding unnecessary assumptions.

First, even if it's a bad argument, that's not a straw man argument, and second, what on earth does your fourth assumption have to do with anything? I don't even necessarily disagree with you: I think they're jumping the gun here by crapping on a storyline before its gotten rolling. While I think it looks like a bad idea on paper, maybe it'll work itself out.

I'm talking about from a story perspective. It's incredibly easy to build a story around somebody wanting the title: it's pretty much the only story Batista was ever in after his rise to the top. It's harder and takes more skill to get people to care about a top level program that isn't for the title. People get fatigued from seeing a guy constantly in the title picture 12 months a year. Cena taking a six month break from constantly being in title matches has been great for the character. It's flat out boring from a story perspective if everybody in the company just generically goes after the belt. Main event level grudge matches have always been an attraction, and good for Cena that he has enough heat to pull a former complete unknown like Barrett into a top heel spot. Don't even know how to address the "nobody's worthy" stuff, so I won't.

Except that 1) he has a built in feud with Sheamus, 2) he's already won it, 3) he's not a very good top of the brand babyface, and 4) he probably shouldn't be built as the top guy at age 41. I would be pleasantly surprised if the winner doesn't end up being Punk or Cena, but right now that feels like what they're building towards.