Hive

You don't think it's a bit of a stretch to say he's doing "well" then?

Wasn't it Hunico who portrayed Mistico in the match against Heath Slater, which they had to do 2½ times because of botches?

Yeah I watched a video of Matt chasing hist "ghost" with a revolver last week. I had a hard time deciding whether to laugh or whether to feel sorry for the guy.

Moving on, even though it's a tad off topic for the WWE thread (though both are former employees): how about them rumors saying that Goldberg and Batista will fight a match in Congo, Africa of all places...?

Are Matt and Jeff having some kind of sick contest to crown which one is the most messed up of the two?

Woah, watch your language there champ. Take yourself seriously much and can't take a joke? Mmm? This is a joke, right? Your first 2-3 posts on the matter in no way conveyed what you were trying to say. Or maybe I just didn't get it because of the language barrier, can't rule that out of course. Either way, I still don't get why you decided to take an exception to me trying to cut an age-old argument short by suggesting that Bret and Shawn might *both* have been acting up, instead of just picking a side and viewing it all as black and white. Like some others tend to do.

Yeah it's pretty amazing how they managed to mess that up. I mean, the guy had CRAZY babyface sympathy due to the Montreal Screwjob and was insanely over. One would imagine the logical thing would then be to book him as an important babyface. But noooo.... he became insignificant nWo henchman #14. I'd like to have been a fly on the wall for that decisionmaking.

He constantly cheated on her with a variety of women when on the road with WWF. He admitted it himself. But don't tell anyone that I told you, because then VTial will come down on me for saying something about Bret Hart that is not "he is a lovable unicorn".

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="moon_lit_tears" data-cite="moon_lit_tears" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Maybe he didn't feel the need to put her through more hell by outing it.<p> </p><p> Looks don't mean a thing when it comes to abuse. My aunts ex husband was abusive. He weighed about a buck sixty when wet, was pretty much a wuss (I've seen him fight) yet he beat my aunt who was in training to be a body builder, who can fight.</p><p> </p><p> Don't get me wrong. I don't know if she did or didn't do anything, I'm just saying that you can't just say oh he did that to her. </p><p> </p><p> Anyway I won't say anymore on this because it's not really the place for it.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I just really don't feel your need to protect Bret. What we know: Bret cheated on his wife. Constantly. All the effing time. He said so himself. And based from that, I think it's fair to say that he is/was kind of a jerk. But you feel a need to go all "but the poor thing is probably a victim of his evil wife's nasty doings", and that I really really don't get at all. There's no basis for suggesting that his ex wife did anything to deserve it, not even Bret himself has hinted at that. And why would he keep quiet about it if true? As Fantabulous said: then he would probably have kept quiet about his own part in it as well. And it's not like Bret is the kind of guy who decides to keep quiet if he thinks someone did him wrong.</p>

If she had cheated on Bret, don't you think he'd mention that when mentioning his own adultery? Even so, I don't really see "x cheated on me first so now I can cheat on x all I want" to be a valid course of action. Solve your differences, break up or agree to an open relationship - in which case it can no longer be considered as cheating. But that's just how I feel. Also, have you seen Bret's ex wife? Are you seriously suggesting there's even a remote possibility that she was abusing him physically? Anyway... I like Bret a whole lot more than I like Shawn, for the record. But that doesn't change the fact that he, at least to me, comes off as being egoistical, selfish, arrogant and extremely full of himself. At least back in "the days".

I personally have a hard time imagining anything his wife could have done to make her deserve the treatment he gave her. I still don't understand your point at all or why you decided to address me.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="moon_lit_tears" data-cite="moon_lit_tears" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I can't agree with this.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Fair enough.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>What basis do you have to call them jerks?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You're kidding me, right? Have you ever watched a non-scripted interiew with either? Ever watched a documentary featuring either? Ever read or heard anything said about them by other wrestlers?</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="VTial" data-cite="VTial" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If this were Shawn and some other person you wouldn't be saying that.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Uhm that would depend on which person that would be. Mother Theresa, for example, I would probably not say that about. What's your point with this? You really want to open up yet another dicussion on Shawn's attitude mere weeks after we had a several pages long discussion on that very subject? For what purpose exactly?</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="SaySo" data-cite="SaySo" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>On topic and dirt sheet material:<p> </p><p> Credit: PWTorch</p><p> </p><p> Booker T says his in-ring days are not over and to "stay tuned" on a possible return to the ring. Booker, who wrestled Jack Swagger on Raw TV two months ago in an unhyped singles match, tweeted on Wednesday: "Q. Why am I not wrestling now. I feel great, I still train daily I'm going to finish it, so just stay tuned." Booker also picked up where RVD left off in TNA claiming the Young Bucks (Generation Me in TNA) disrespected him at TV this week. Read Booker's tweets at Twitter.com/BookerT5x.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> When I heard about Nash returning to feud with Punk, I was thinking "why not use Booker as well then? At least he can still go a bit in the ring".</p><p> </p><p> And him bashing the Young Bucks a couple of weeks after they had a WWE tryout, even going as far as saying that a Harlem Heat reunion vs. the YB would be awesome... well, maybe they have stuff planned.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Wrestling Century" data-cite="Wrestling Century" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The problem with autobiographies is that the view is always biased based on that person's life. Bret might be a jerk in real life, Shawn might be, they both might be or maybe neither of them are. You don't know exactly what really happened, as they both hated each other. They could be overexaggerating.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Can't we just all agree that both Bret and Shawn are jerks in their own right and move on?</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="angeldelayette" data-cite="angeldelayette" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Some people may not like it but Sting versus Ric Flair? I'm excited!</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Meh, it can only dissapoint. Last time they faced off, in 2001, they were both too old to put on an interesting match... not to mention the fact that they had both reached the "I have to wear a t-shirt" stage of their careers. And now it's 10 years later.</p><p> </p><p> I mean, if they insist on keep putting legends that really should just stay in retirement down our throats, at least give us something new and different... we've seen Sting vs. Flair. We've seen Sting vs. Hogan. We've seen Hogan vs. Flair. But what have we not seen EVER? Sting vs. Flair vs. Hogan. So why not just give us that, if you absolutely have to put those old geezers in matches? Maybe the added resting time in a 3-way would actually make them last more than 5 minutes as well then.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="brashleyholland" data-cite="brashleyholland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31920" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I see your Iron Man and raise you How The Dark Knight should have ended!<p> </p><p> </p><div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo"><div><iframe width="200" height="113" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/seBpXt8_6xs?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" title="How The Dark Knight Should Have Ended"></iframe></div></div></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> When I bring How Thor should have ended to the table, you'll both fold.</p><p> </p><p> </p><div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo"><div><iframe width="200" height="113" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/1DTgNkkX2eU?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" title="How Thor Should Have Ended"></iframe></div></div>

I think Punk vs. Nash and Cena vs. Del Rio (unless they are going with Rey vs. Del Rio... again) are exciting feuds, if nothing else then because they are new and fresh.

<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>Whatever gave them that idea...<p> </p><p> <span>http://www.lionsdenu.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/hulk_brookehogan.jpg</span></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Good question.</p><p> </p><p> <span>http://cdn.sescoops.com/wp-content/uploads/brooke-peta.jpg</span></p>

Hell has no fury like a woman scorned. I don't buy it. Though I do agree that if it's true, it would explain a lot.

I did not know that. Crazy stuff. The conspiracy theorist in me can't help but consider that Marvel is trying to make the old "Fantastic Four" brand lose value so that Fox won't do more movies untill the rights revert to Marvel, at which point they'll bring back The Human Torch and re-launch... /me puts on tinfoil hat

I think this is a result of Cena seeing so many people booing him and cheering Punk instead because Punk is being "cool" due to him saying stuff that appeals to the IC. So Cena's trying to introduce some of the same here and there. But I think it's a mistake for his character as it is.

Attack of the wall of text! No offense, man... but half of your posts are lengthy essays. You need to learn to epxress yourself in fewer words.

That is probably somewhat true. Didn't Vince try to phase out Hogan and replace him with guys like Bret Hart, though? With Hogan fighting it and insisting on the silly Yokozuna thing, reportedly, because he wouldn't let Hart go over him?

Uhm... but it's wrestling. It's supposed to be subjective. If we were only to discuss "facts", what would there be to discuss at all? The color of their trunks? Their birthdays? The brand of their cars? Talking about "facts" in something as clearly subjective in nature as wrestling is pretty silly. Their victories/losses and pushes does is not determined by their athletic ability (at least it really is), so whether or not someone is "good" is nearly 100 % subjective. What we see on screen is not a result of wrestlers being objectively "good" or "bad", but is a result of booking - which is furthermore often determined by things that happens backstage. So I repeat: of course these discussions are subjective, they should not be any other way and they can not be any other way.