Candyman
-
Posts
860 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Candyman
-
-
Les Thatcher has reported who the surprise is. Go to pwinsider so you can post it here.
Or someone tell me how to do spoilers so I can start doing them.
Just make your text white. Like this: according to pwinsider, Tommy Dreamer will be at Slammiversary tonight. (DO NOT QUOTE THIS! It will show the spoiler.)
On an unrelated note, I'm never going to pwinsider again. Ads f**king time you click on a link, ridiculous.
-
i really dont think wwe writers have the intelligence to put this kinda thing togetherAnd just think, this from a company that gave us Katie Vick, people being set on fire, someone being runover, and many more similar angles...
...and the company that gave us the HBK/Undertaker fued, the Triple H/Randy Orton buildup to Wrestlemania, the Edge/Matt Hardy fued(this is the important one, remember how many people thought Hardy attacking Edge was a shoot)...you name me 5 bad angles/storylines, and I'll give you 50 good to great ones. The idea that the WWE writers somehow aren't the best in the world at what they do(seriously, just watch TNA if you think WWE writers are bad), or are suddenly incapable of brilliance, is ridiculous.
I am still willing to bet money that it is a work...........he is not going to show up on raw......or anything till bennet takes on cena for the title.Yep. They're putting so much work into making people buy it(even letting Bryan do indy bookings, as of the latest reports), it's setting up for a huge return. I've yet to see even the slightest hint of evidence that this is legit.
-
If this was a work how can you be "fired" from a company you were never a part of? He lost NXT so last I checked he was unemployed so idk its interesting but not that interesting.
That helps prove it IS a work. If he was "never a part of the company," why would they announce he is released?
-
Edit: My 666th post; thus it's completely cursed.
Posts here don't add to the total...your lucky post was somewhere else.
Just noticed the infamous choking incident was editted out of the re-air on Smackdown. And I'm still amazed by the number of people buying it...WWE is doing a great job here.
-
I'm truly stunned people believe this is legit. Honestly. Whatever the WWE is doing backstage is convince all the "insiders" that it's real, you have to give them a TON of credit.
Now, keep in mind he probably won't be on Raw this Monday. If they're going to all this trouble to make people buy it, his return has to be at a HUGE time...like, I don't know, a Cena vs. Barrett WWE title match on pay-per-view.
-
Clearly a work, he's going to come back as Bryan Danielson. Saying "winds of change" (Barrett's, and by extension the whole faction's, slogan) on his new Twitter locks it up for me. I don't know who Donna Goldsmith and Michelle Wilson are, but they appear to have been worked.
(Edit) Update: tried to find his release on WWE.com...and it's not listed on their news page. It's still on the website, you can get there with the link, but there's no mention of it on the real news page (the page that mentions releases, like Carlito and Tony Atlas recently) as far as I can tell.
-
Punk already has his own faction he doesn’t need another one.
I would prefer the whole NXT group to have masterminded it themselves, though if there needs to be an outside mastermind the only 2 people I have heard suggested that wouldn’t bother me are Jericho and JR.
Not me...I'll be pissed if it's anything but the NXT group on their own. Well, that was until 30 seconds ago, when I read the rumor OmniWarrior posted(it's not a spoiler, but I won't repeat it just in case anybody doesn't want to know). That would be AWESOME.
-
Is CM Punk turning face and are all the NXT Rookies now heels because heel just dosen't work for Heath Slater but i must say i'm shocked with Justin Gabriel being a good heel .
NXT Season 1 super faction coming up
CM Punk's not a face (the attack was about Cena, Punk was just in the way), but it would seem all the rookies are heels. I agree about Gabriel, he looks good as an intense heel. But I think we need to let this play out a little more before we start jumping to conclusions about who is what.
Yeah, we've all gotten used to the creative team, we know what they're capable of(in the negative sense)... but heck, this is a magnificent sighting for once, so this time around let's be positive on this one. If they fail to capitalize on it, at least we'll remember that memorable segment, even if it'll be followed in our minds by what "could've been".True...it's funny, the most similiar segment on Raw to that was probably the Raw where WCW and ECW aligned with Stephanie being revealed as the ECW owner..and that definitely turned into a "what could've been" moment. But regardless of what happens, that was a great segment. And, ultimately, it did it's job - for the first time in a long time, I'm really looking forward to next week's Raw.
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I guess Stephen Strasburg lived up to the hype tonight! Striking out 14 batters in his debut! In the words of the immortal Phil Rizzuto, "Holy Cow".</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No walks, either. That's a great game for anybody, let alone a 21 year old in his first game. If he started the season in Washington like he should have, he'd be a legit Cy Young contender. In the words of the immortal Harry Caray, "Stephen Strasburg spelled backwards is nehpets grubsarts."</p>
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="CQI13" data-cite="CQI13" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I just remember that donkey from the Braves minor league team. What was it, like a 15 minute delay? Ridiculous. Thankfully he got fired like a week later.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> After the season he was reasigned to a different minor league team...they won the championship his first year there, lol. A friend of mine is playing for him this season.</p>
-
So, I just watched Kane's funeral promo for Undertaker from Smackdown yesterday. Best thing WWE has done in a long time. I really hope they elevate Kane to full fledged main event threat and gets a go at Swagger now.
I agree...I rolled my eyes after Teddy's announcement, but that was an excellent promo by Kane. Hopefully this is a sign of big things to come for him.
-
You forget that HBK is a nick mane. Shawn Michaels isn't exactly a "chantable" name. All you have to do is give a guy a nickname and honestly chantable names don't make money so I'm not too worried about it from that aspect. Its names that are easily pronounceable and roll off the tongue and thats where this one falls short.
Easily pronouncable names are not even a little more important than chantable names. They both matter a little, and only a little. It's what a guy does on TV when he's on TV that matters. If Hulk Hogan was named Longfellow MacGhilleseatheanaich, he still would have been a superstar.
-
I think it's fair to say that the secret to success in the WWE is having a two- or three-syllable name.
"CE-NA." "OR-TON." "H-B-K." People like chanting things. McGillicutty is a FIVE SYLLABLE NAME. Mike is a ONE syllable name. Neither is chantable, unless you go for like a "Let's go Mike."
On the other hand, Lucky Cannon seems perfectly suited for chanting. As does Low-Ki; not entirely sure if "Kaval" would work because the separation between the syllables is a soft vowel.
Having something to chant certainly helps...but you can make up the lack of a chantable name with an easily chantable nickname, like HBK or Y2J. Or even a finisher, like Spear and RKO.
All of this talk reminds me of when a expansion sports team announces their nickname for the first time...everybody goes crazy over analyzing it, puts waaay too much thought into it, and then two years later you're used to it and couldn't imagine them being called anything else. Once Hennig/McGillicutty has wrestled about two matches, nobody's going to think about his name ever again. At the end of the day, a guy's going to get over (or not) based on what he does with a mic in his hand and between the ropes.
I don't know enough about the rookies to really rank them, but based on the promos I saw I'm really looking forward to seeing about four guys: Percy Watson and Alex Riley because they both seem very charismatic and I like charismatic wrestlers. Kaval, because I've never seen him wrestle and I want to see how good he really is. And Eli Cottonwood, because he has so much potential based on his size alone...if he can talk and/or go in the ring at all, he could be a superstar.
-
Willis simply lost control of his pitches. He forgot how to throw strikes, just like Steve Blass. Last year he got pulled in a game against the Red Sox without giving up a hit...he gave up 5 runs with nothing but walks and wild pitches. He's not a servicable long/middle reliever, he's no more effective against lefties than righties. Every 4 or 5 games he might return to form and dominate a team (usually a bad team), but the rest of the games he won't get to the 5th inning. He'll be just as useful to Arizona as a pinch hitter than as a pitcher.
In unrelated news, Armando Galarraga just had a perfect game stolen from him...blown call on the last out of the 9th inning.
-
You're definitely not alone. For all this talk of Otunga having "charisma" and "it factor", I thought the guy was boring as hell.
I agree completely. I never saw anything remotely special about his promos, or his in ring work, or even his look...ok, he's in good shape. He was also 6' even and 240 lbs.
No, Britain is just England, Scotland, Wales from what I know. The Irish Isle is only included if you say The British Isles. But Drew is British, no mistakes about that. Just not Finlay and Sheamus.This is correct. There's nothing British about Ireland. People from Scotland are technically British, but depending on their political view a Scot may either be proud or offended by being called British. The closest North American comparison that I can make would be Quebec in Canada...technically they're Canadian, but usually they're referred to as a Quebecer or French Canadian because some (not all) don't consider themselves Canadian. I have no idea where Drew stands on this issue...
But I believe Finlay is from Northern Ireland(I know he was billed from there...no idea where he was actually born), which would mean he's technically British as well, since Northern Ireland is part of the UK.
-
I do not buy into the train of thought that the players today were leaps and bounds better than the players of the past. If that was the case why has nobody hit .400 since Ted Williams?
You would think with the pitching mound being lowered, some players being on roids, pitchers being in the major leagues that would never have made it to the majors even twenty years ago, that someone would be good enough to hit .400.
And yet nobody has. So to answer your question, I think Babe Ruth would have been just as good now as he was before. Is there any way to prove such a statement? Well no but with sports there will always be a what if. What if Rocky Marciano fought Ali, who would win? There is just no way of knowing.
You have to look at the entire picture, not the very best of the best...that's just a silly and meaningless fact. But to answer your question, there are no more .400 hitters because players overall are better today. I know it sounds strange, and in fact contrary to the argument you just made, but it's 100% true.
Throughout baseball history, the average player hits about .260. MLB has gone to great lengths to make sure that stays the same, changing rules whenever it starts to go too far in one direction.
Now, back in the early 1900's, the average player wasn't very good. I don't think you can argue this, if for no other reason than the talent pool was just so small. The population was miniscule back then, and a smaller percentage of that population was dedicating themselves to baseball as a profession. So when you had great players like Ty Cobb and Ted Williams come along, they were thus much better than average and it showed.
Today, it's a different story. There are many more players playing, training and practicing year round, devoting their lives to becoming professional baseball players...so, the average player is much better than they were a century ago. On the other hand, greatness has its limits - there's only so much a human can do. Ichiro and Pujols are at that limit, just like Cobb and Williams were, but the average player is much closer to today's greats. And since the average player is still hitting .260, the greats' batting average has to be lower. Now it makes sense.
Incidentally, this also touches on the topic of how players of this era compare to older players...the great players of any era are at the same level. But the further down you go, the better the players of today are. A very good player back then might only be average today, and an average player back then would have trouble making the league today. If for no other reason than there are so many more people playing baseball and playing it seriously that it raises the bar.
Think of it like high school football teams...granted, I'm going to greatly exaggerate here to make my point. Think of a small school in a small town with a 40 man roster where everybody who tries out makes the team. And then think of a powerhouse with 100 guys on varsity and a JV team that has to turn people away. The small school likely has some very good players, guys that could easily hold their own on the big school...but they wouldn't look nearly as good in comparison.. Just like the best players on the big school would likely look much much better on the small school. But are any of these players actually getting better or worse by switching teams? Of course not. Well, the small school is Ty Cobb's era, and the big school is today.
And, rant over. Can you tell I've put a lot of thought into this?
-
So then this has nothing to do with Cena lacking psychology as much as it has to do with you don't personally like Cena. You think his character comes across fake while I'm sure others think it comes across as just him. His character to me seems like its him amped up a bit in the niceness department. It sounds like to me the wholesome baby just isn't your type of character and thats fine. I don't like death matches and you don't like clean cut babies nothing wrong with that but I woudln't say thats much of a flaw in Cena's ability as much as its just not what you like.
As far as him not having kryptonite thats completely out of his control thats the writing team. Although btw didn't they just do a WM program with Batista having beat Cena everytime they had been in the ring? Who could say they had never lost to Hogan two years after their initial program? Nobody. Also Sheamous was his kryptonite and he still hasn't gotten a solid win over him.
So I'd argue that Batista was his kryptonite for atleast a year or two having beaten him everytime they were in the ring together. That was the entire base of their feud "you can't beat me Cena I'm the guy you can't beat". So yeah they JUST had his kryptonite feud two months ago so thats not a very sound argument. He still hasn't pinned Sheamous one on one or at all for that matter has he? So Cena's got guys he hasn't beaten and again its a moot point since thats not a knock on his ablities for better or worse thats a knock on the writing of his character.
You hit the nail on the head with the first sentence here. It sounds to me like this person just really doesn't like Cena and that has blinded them to reality. Cena's not a good wholesome face, he's a GREAT one - the best since Hogan and maybe better, all things considered. The idea that Cena is only liked by kids and not adults is just silly, IMO. He simply wouldn't be in the position he is if that were true. And maybe some people out there never believe he's going to lose, but I'm sure there were plenty of people that felt the same about Hogan...obviously a lot of people out there do believe Cena will lose, or at least enjoy watching him persevere and win against all odds, considering how often they put the title on him and put him in those storylines and matches...
It's one thing not to like the guy...that's completely understandable. But to just blindly ignore the facts and pretend he's just this guy who's average in the ring and on the mic and is only popular with kids is just silly.
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Stennick" data-cite="Stennick" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Is there a reason for the strange picture of Danielson other than it being a strange picture of Danielson?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Is there a reason for this question other than it being a question?</p>
-
"I would like to address the most traumatic, the most unprofessional thing that has ever happened to me" -- Michael Cole has blocked out the time when he got bitch slapped by Mr. Stone Cold.
Forget that, isn't this the same guy that was once raped by Heidenreich?
Still, a great segment. I loved when Bryan punched Miz. I loved the fact that everything Cole said was true, and Bryan's face showed he knew it. It doesn't seem so much like a heel turn anymore, though I'd still love to see him join SES eventually.
Surprised it's ending next week, and kind of sad. This week was the first time I actually looked forward to the show since about the second episode.
Once again, I cannot get enough of Jericho at ringside. Screaming at the announcers to talk about Barrett, it's all great. By the way, WTF happened to Barrett getting his own entrance theme after winning that competition two months ago? And it would have been nice to get some kind of explanation for Carlito being gone.
-
NFL Loses Big
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5214509
The case hurt, but what it really does is give the players leverage again in the CBA meetings.
Hopefully with this done we will here more talks of a CBA being ironed out
That was the biggest case in Supreme Court history that nobody ever heard of. It would have changed the face of sports - not the NFL, every professional sport - beyond recognition. (this is why every league and every players' association hired the best lawyers in the world to represent them) Thankfully the Supreme Court gave the only sane ruling they could.
College OT is a joke. I like watching football - with defense - not some cartoony NFL Blitz amalgamation of football.And I like watching football where the best team wins, not the team that makes the right call on a coin toss. To each their own.
Yes it will be in New York. Won by 4 votes, New York has a lot to live up to in this. First I like this idea because simply it will be a test. If this turns out to be a horrible game and people don't go to the city and hold events (much like what happened in Detroit the two other times. People still came to Florida to do events and just watch the game here, or go up there the day of the game) then this could be the last time there is an open stadium in the cold.Personally I hope the game does well. It would be exciting to watch snow during the Superbowl. I just hope it isn't two south teams that go lol
What? Detroit was PACKED the entire week the Super Bowl was here the last time. If people went to Florida, it's because there was no room for them here. That's why all the media raved about what a great week it was and the NFL was talking about how Detroit will probably start getting Super Bowls more often.
But it's probably going to be the last open air cold Super Bowl anyway...they don't really venture outside of New Orleans and Florida except for when a team gets a new stadium (Arizona, Dallas, Indy), and no northern team is that close to getting one. The Vikings keep asking for one, but they're just as likely to get it in LA and Minneapolis, plus it'll probably have a retractable roof.
I can't stand college football OT either. Yes, sudden death can be unfair, but you still have to play the game. It creates tension and drama that college OT doesn't even approach.You mean the coin toss? I guess that's dramatic...other than that, it doesn't come close to the excitement of college football - which, I don't care what anybody says - is every bit as real football as the NFL's sudden death nonsense.. Trying to win a coin toss, hit a big pass or two, run the ball up the middle a couple times, and kick a field goal...that is NOT football. At least in college football, you're trying to score.
I have always wondered what would happen if a team made it to the Super Bowl and the Super Bowl was being held at their home stadium. Doesn't the NFC and AFC alternate home field every other year?What would happen if the Giants or the Jets were to make it to a Super Bowl held in New York and it is a year where their confrence is the designated away team. That would just be odd being the away team in your home stadium.
The AFC (Jets) will be the "home team" in that Super Bowl, so if the Giants get to the game they'll be in the visitors' dressing room...which wouldn't be THAT odd for them, since they do that when they play the Jets and the Jets are the home team. But yeah, it would be odd...but considering it's the Super Bowl, in your home city, I have a feeling some players wouldn't even notice lol.
It will be the coldest SB in history. Currently, the Dallas/Miami game (outdoors in New Orleans) has it at 39 degrees at kick off. Isn't the average high on Feb2 in NY lower than that? Then again, with global warming, we might luck out!The average high is actually 40 degrees, so it could easily be warmer than that...not likely, though.
Yes.Because every single person in the business of football who's done both has said so.
I've never heard one single person - let alone every single person - say that, and the reason for that is THEY HAVEN'T. Different? Yes. Easier? No.
And as Bigpapa said..that article says specifically in several different ways that the NFL is tougher. Not just different. But tougher.Different? Yes. Tougher? Not in the least. It's a different skillset, a different job. So different, in fact, that it would be downright silly to even attempt to argue that one is harder than the other. It's apples and oranges. What might be harder for one person could be easier for another. There's nothing about the NFL that makes it inherently more difficult to coach than college.
-
Not his release, that I know. I'm talking when they were reported going to push him as McMahon's son. I only imagine that was true, cause who the hell would have thought Hornswoggle McMahon was a good idea? I doubt even Vince was truly that high on meth.
This is correct. He was going to be McMaohn's son until he showed up on a steroids list and was suspended for 30 days...on screen, suspended for trying to say he was McMahon's son. This was going to be the storyline where they revealed on screen that Triple H was part of that family, and it would've culminated in a Triple H vs. Mr Kennedy match at Wrestlemania.
-
I don't know if this is considered a spoiler, but just in case...
Various sites are reporting Orton legitimately broke his arm against Edge. That's at least two months healing time, depending on the severity.
-
See, the first month or two of losses, Bryan had an excuse for. He faces Chris Jericho, has a serious injury (in kayfabe, at least -- and I don't care what the WWE says, busted ribs are serious enough), and then suffers 3 or 4 losses while he SHOULD be out recovering. Now he's down 0-5, and things go downhill from there. That's a relatively standard sports story. But when did Wade Barrett go against the World Heavyweight Champion? Skip Sheffield? Perhaps, for the sake of argument, Daniel Bryan was purposely handicapped by facing someone that nobody else was expected to face so early on.
From a purely kayfabe position, I feel that I just presented an argument that Vince knowingly, maliciously held down Daniel Bryan for over a month. Is it the most believable of all time? No. Did they pre-package that concept for me? No. But it's good enough for me to overlook the faults.
EDIT: regarding Danielson's drinking/smoking habits, I don't think veganism affects that, but it also doesn't effect soda, and he doesn't do that. If soda's too hard of a substance for you, why would you smoke or drink?
Yeah, he definitely had an excuse for his early losses...I never really paid attention to the fact that he was winless until he lost to Tarver (I think) a couple weeks ago. I remembered expecting him to win that match and finally start rolling. That was really the first time I thought to my self "What are they doing with him?"
Good point on him not drinking soda, I forgot he said that in that challenge. Definitely seems like he'd be a natural fit for the SES, and a friendship with Punk in general...even beyond having a similiar lifestyle(if they actually do), Danielson and Punk both had a fairly similiar career track on the way to WWE that they could play up as well.
-
Assuming that they're indeed writing this **** (I think someone a few pages back said it seemed like Striker was surprised at what Bryan was saying) I am sort of confused about Bryan's character. The first "shoot"-style promo, he almost definitely hinted that he was scripted to lose. I'm kinda surprised nobody complained about him breaking kayfabe there.
I've always assumed that's just good acting on Striker's part. I mean, it's not like it's live (especially the backstage interviews), so they could easily say "Hey Bryan, we're going to shoot that interview again, and this time you're NOT going to mock our booking decisions and say your real name and you ARE going to stick to the script. Thanks."
I tend to think their going to make him a heel. The guy was 0-whatever in NXT. He said he should be eliminated and then came back and flew off the handle claiming he was better than the tag team and U.S Champion and then beat up an announcer. All the while CM Punk and William Regal two of the biggest heels in the company blatantly agreed with him.Yeah, I said a few pages back that this smells like a heel turn. He also had Jericho agreeing with him when he said knows how good he is. Plus, I mean, that's the only way you can justify attacking an announcer. That's just not something a face does. Sure it's sweet at the time, and you laugh at Cole, but then it's like...wait a minute, a wrestler just pushed and slapped an announcer? Really? Umm...ok.
EDIT: The other problem I have is, who's Bryan got to feud with? He's got the Miz, Michael Cole (lol), and maybe Wade Barrett. All heels, except MAYBE Barrett, who's just associated with one of the top heels in the E.Yeah, I don't know what they're doing with Cole. He had always been a face on Raw up until right after the Bret Hart match, when all of a sudden he decided to start ripping him(even going all the way back to his match at Wrestlemania, which he had never mentioned before). It's like Vince McMahon, or whoever was in his ear, decided at that very second he wanted Cole to be a heel. It was the strangest thing I've heard in awhile. Up until that point, I would've said they could have Danielson continue his fued with Cole on Raw.
But isn't the obvious answer here, if they want him to turn heel, have him join the SES? He could interfere in the Punk/Mysterio match tonight. I don't know if he drinks or smokes in real life (I don't think being a vegan affects either of those), but it's not like that matters.
The Official WWE / NXT Discussion Thread *May Contain Spoilers*
in The Dog Pound
Posted
Yeah, if they mention his release on air we'll know it's 100% work. I'm sure they won't though, because they know that. It'll be interesting to see where this is going.