eayragt

After reading the reports I'm not going to be happy if they run an Angle injury angle that leads to a vacated title, leading to Roode eventually taking the title. When I read about the post match unexplained "X" that was my first thought, and I don't see how that would be any better than... just giving Roode the title. Oh, and remembering that there are other moves in wrestling apart from submissions.

Top 5? Harder than I thought. 5 wrestlers who I'd happiily see wrestle anyone. I got: Punk, Bryan, Christian ... and then I got stuck. So two that I've been enjoying this year and I think will grow: The Miz, Sheamus You know, John Cena was damned close to getting on this list .

I don't mind what they've done with Punk. I don't see how they could have had him keep his momentum so high without destroying everyone else. Good to know this makes me a niave mark who doesn't understand wrestling or Sports Entertainment, and has no idea about what makes WWE money. I can't understand why some people on this forum aren't signed up to the WWE Creative Team to revolutionize the wrestling industry. Don't they understand that some people are more important to the industry than John Cena?

And I hate to say it, as Triple H is obviously a huge name, but how feud with Punk was also designed to elevate him. And he did need it. He hadn't wrestled for months... when he lost. He was in a storyline where his authority was in question. He needed a big introduction, and he got it in a feud with Punk. Is Punk as hot as he could be? No. But Triple H is hotter. Del Rio is hotter. The Miz is hotter. R-Truth is hotter. There's a bigger picture at play. If his next major feud is Del Rio then its setup as a much better feud now than it would have been 3 months ago.

That's the one. WWE, who have had celebraties and announcers wrestle on PPV, decided that professional wrestler Nathan Jones sucked too much to even wrestle a tag team match. They did let him come out to "hit" a spinning kick on Big Show... I say "hit" loosely as rarely have I seen a kick miss by that much.

To give him value. If he'd have lost he'd be back to being almost worthless. Now he's an asset. 'Cause he's amazing at the role. He's going to have to start winning in the next few months to give him any momentum when he cashes in, especially if it's at 'Mania, but at the moment he's doing an awesome job of putting people over. I'm a huge Bryan fan, but a few months in competitive matches putting people over before the results turn around giving him momentum into a title shot is frankly more than most people thought he would ever get in WWE.

Having had the benefit of only just watching Night of Champions and then finding out a rerun of RAW was on, I'm not quite so down about this PV as some. I think it's the perfect time to give Mark Henry the title. Not only is he on a pretty large wave of momentum, but he gets the title off Orton, which I'm always happy with. Also, is there anyone currently with the company who's served as long as him who hasn't had a World Title reign? I know that just proves how they handle the title nowadays, but if you're going to give it out to everybody and anybody why not Henry? And either Henry gets booked strong until Big Show and Kane are back (the preferable option), or he just loses it back to Orton at Hell in the Cell. I think there are some people who will moan at whichever of those outcomes occurs Unfortunately his win was a forebearer of Cena's. I can understand WWE thinking that having Henry and Del Rio as champions isn't the best way to draw ratings and sell PPV's. That's the trouble with the brand split - you know that if one half has a "weak" champion the other has to have a "name" champion. It's business. Better Cena to have it then Chavo, who seems to have forgotten that WWE is all about Sports Entertainment. Still, cena vs Punk vs Del Rio is nothing to be sniffed at for Hell in a Cell. And Punk Triple H was going to well, and then it turned into a TNA Main Event. Punk got buried - after all, what can you call a defeat where you are hit with four or five finishers and attacked by numerous different people ? However, after the match I realised I still enjoyed it, and was intrigued. RAW then gave a hint at what they were planning for Survivor Series, and now I'm happier with Awesome Truth's appearance (... apart from the fact that The Miz can't seem to shout "You Suck" with any kind of timing). So the question is still, who should have won at Night of Champions? The interference makes sense, but you could have continued this story with anyone winning. So, who needed the win more? CM Punk defeating Triple H would have been huge for him... but to be fair having defeated John Cena twice recently it wasn't vitial. Triple H is being rolled out as a special attraction, but to keep being able to do that he needs wins (remember, he lost his last match). Also, thinking about a future rematch I think Punk trying to get revenge on Trips is better than the other way round. At the end of the day it's close, but I can see why Punk losing makes sense, especially as he continues to be booked strongly since. And if Natalya doesn't win the Diva's Championship soon I've got no idea what's going on with that title.

I think that's a legitimate shout - that's what I though would happen when I saw his speech. Which assuming Cena doesn't have the title at 'Mania would give us: Rock vs Cena Punk vs doofus World Heavyweight Title match WWE Championship Match Undertaker streak match (assuming he's not in a title match) However, they would have to build up someone strong for the RAW match, as Cena's dominated the brand so much for the last few years at WrestleMania title match without him, Orton, Batista, Triple H, Shawn Michaels doesn't hold much glamour at the moment. But who knows - maybe by then they can build up John Morrison vs Alberto Del Rio as a huge match. Yeah, okay, Cena's probaly going to have to title then. But I sooo don't want him to. The only reason for him to have it is to sell the match as the "biggest match ever". Which it still wouldn't be.

After he loses again he wont be. But he has been for a few months, and he could be again in the future (rather than a forever midcarder like he was before he got injured).

I'd be massively surprised if Christian beat Randy Orton. I'm a big Christian fan (I'm an even bigger Punk fan), but in WWE as it is today Christian should not be beating Orton. I believe the aim of this feud was to try and make sure Christian doesn't slip back into the midcard after losing the title. If that happens, WWE have fulfilled there aim. I think it's wrong to accuse the WWE of dropping the ball every time they build up a new challenger well and tehn don't give them the title. There's a lot of difference between being a legitimate title threat and World Heavyweight / WWE Champion. Christian is the former, he doesn't have to be the latter.

It doesn't, but there's only so much you can hold one of the top 2 titles, and this is an indication of what else he's been doing. And I was as frustrated as anyone else by his third straight ppv loss to Orton, but it hasn't hurt Punk in the slightest as he's still involved in the hottest storyline going. Sure, he hasn't been treated like Cena, Orton, Rock, Austin, Taker, HBK and Triple H... but that's about it, he's been treated as well or better than everyone else in the last 6 years. Although someone will let me know who I've missed from that list, but I wouldn't say he's been treated any worse than Kane, Big Show, Mysterio or Jeff Hardy. Maybe Edge, yes, he probably should also be on the list.

I feel really sorry for CM Punk. ECW Champion, Intercontinental Champion, Tag Team Champion, 3 time World Heavyweight Champion, 2 time Money in the Bank winner, 3 year running Slammy award winner, staple in the Main Event for the best part of the last few years... he's been really hard done by. That isn't a dig at Punk, that's a counterpoint to all the people arguing how badly he's been treated. Sure, he's lost a lot for a Main Eventer (memorably in his feuds vs Mysterio, Big Show and Randy Orton), but he's being booked better than 90% of the roster. He's hardly a missed opportunity.

Sorry, the Internet fans are not the most important fan base. First is the kids. Next are the teenage / young adult males who will hold a ppv party and have little idea about other wrestling promotions. Then there's young fathers, to buy the ppv to watch with the kids. Then finally its us, who if WWE are lucky will pay for a ppv rather than find a stream to watch. And if there're really might buy a dvd once a year.

I'm going to disagree with a lot of that. Although hot stories can propel midcarders to the Main Event, they don't have to be to be successful. To be successful, a story needs to sell PPVs. The Invasion I'll kind of give you - for wrestling fans POV it was a disaster - but WWE only really cared about pushing Booker T and RVD from the Invaders. Both did fairly well out of it. It would have been a lot better with more workers, but it wasn't to be - the angle was actually doomed from the start. Hardy / Edge / Lita. This was a really hot angle for a month, but the Edge / Lita "relationship" continued going forward, and Edge was barely out of the Main Event after that point. And Matt Hardy has shown the ability to not be Main Event material, so I'm not quite sure what more you'd want from this angle. ECW revival. Yeah, you can have that one too. Nexus. Completely disagree here. WWE could have left Barrett in the Main Event by having him go over Orton, but chose not to. That's fine. No new Main Eventer. But what they did have was a hot storyline that lasted months under really difficult conditions (having to temporarily fire their best worker, losing Sheffield and Tarver to injury, ditching Young to him not being ready) with complete wrestlers who were unknown (to WWE fans) at the beginning of the year. They sold PPV's at a reasonable rate (they being WWE, not Nexus), and by the time the angle was over The Miz was ready to step in as the company's Number One heel. The stable slipped down to midcard - but that's where they should be. Barrett will make the Main Event, but it doesn't have to be now. I'll admit, he's lost to Jackson 24 times in a row, but that's part of him no longer being the leader of a gang (which he's played for a year now). It doesn't mean permanent burial, see: Sheamus. Also, you see that list of World Champion's who weren't treated as top stars - what's the link? Easy - they're all talented wrestlers. And that's why they aren't "treated" as top stars. They don't have to dominate like Cena or Orton to remain relevant, because their skills do that. If Cena or Orton lost as much as Punk has this year they'd slip down into the midcard pretty quickly, but Punk's avoided that, because his talent has kept him up. And like it or not, Orton and Cena sell more PPV's than Punk (although Punk's doing his bet to disprove that), so you need them established in the Main Event. And you do that by putting them over people like Beniot, Guerrero, Jericho and Punk. It's a mark of respect to those wrestlers that WWE know they can have them lose often and remain relevant (or have the ability to re-establish themselves really quickly), whereas they can't afford to do that to Cena and Orton. They are extremely valuable, but in a Sports Entertainment company Cena and Orton are also valuable, and their value needs more work to keep up.

Never has an angle reminded me so much of Matt Hardy attacking Edge. And the speculation that came afterwards. For all those who think this was Punk going off base, let me ask you this - how do you think Raw was meant to end this week? Even though he was allowed to do it, Punk still rocks.

Oh, it's not going to work as well as it did six years ago. It just can't - the original was perfect timing, this one whatever the conclusion is has already been predicted. Probably closer to the time there will be a little more certainty as to what Punk was doing, while back in 2005 everyone thought the Aries match was Punk's last, and then no-one knew what his true last match was so expected a title change any time. Now, we've got three options: 1) Cena wins. Punk leaves. Zzzzz..... hopefully if this does happed Punk just takes a few months off and comes back quickly to face Cena, rather than disappearing. 2) Punk beats Cena. Punk leaves. Possible - leavers winning on their way out (e.g. RVD over naughty Orton) is not unknown, especially as WWE want Punk back. Gives an excuse for a tournament / multi-man match when there's a new belt (giving the excuse to put the belt on ADR or Morrison), or an excuse to go back to one WWE World Heavyweight Champion. 3) Punk beats Cena. Punk stays. Punk could stay regularly, Punk could "reluctantly" appear time to time, Punk could extend until he's defeated a la 4 years ago and then take time off. That's the basics of the results of the storyline. No-one had those as the options years ago Hoping for some form of 3, as that still leave for several options going forward (and more importantly more Punk). Think it's more likely it'll be 1, which I'll accept as long as ADR takes the title off Cena at SummerSlam. Although I think 2's unlikely, I'm not ruling it out.

There's not a lot wrong with WWE recreating a storyline that came off fantastically well years ago that most of their fans aren't aware of, especially as there are several outcomes to the story. There are a lot of worse places to go.

I'm very much meh about this, considering 19 months ago they threw the three of them together with no build. I suppose 19 months is a long time in wrestling, but given that I've spent more time not watching TNA than watching TNA in that time it doesn't seem too long ago to me. It's actually less time since we saw the end of that match since the never-ending Cena/Orton feud last finished.

I knida disagree. Feud them, point out it's been almost been two years since they were having one on one matches for the title (I might be wrong, but I think Bragging Rights October 2009 was the last time... although they had been facing one another for months previously). Both are massive draws. The PPV would get a great buy rate. And then the match would suck. So yes, it would suck, but WWE aint just about wrestling and people would want to see it. I'm just trying to work out how Punk can take the title off Cena before his match with Rocky. Cena and Punk have had a wierd little feud this year which has always been in the background and never been the focus (it was most in focus at the beginning of the year, but the big PPV matches were the multi-man Rumble and Elimination Chamber). I really think that towards the end of the year they could have a massive, proper feud to move the title across (as there's no need for Cena to have it at Mania). The main problem? Punk's an easy 45 minutes in the Rumble, and WWE are lacking people who can easily pull a shift like that. So if he doesn't have the title then, it's a switch at Elimination Chamber. Which I hate, because it gets so obvious (like when 'Taker lost the title so Shawn could have his rematch). Over thinking again, I know.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Tha Black Phenom" data-cite="Tha Black Phenom" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>That's a point I can agree on with. Everything can have an use at a certain degree. Such as during that Rock birthday party special, Rock did his thing, entertaining the crowd with his mic skills.. then they had to get someone to spar with him so they could kick off on a good note - couldn't be a wrestler so that people wouldn't endlessly speculate further, Cole was the perfect guinea pig.<p> </p><p> Alex Riley's face turn, the generic way of going at it would be Miz ranting at how he's done everything for A-Ri, but that'd be too straightforward, that's where Cole comes in.</p><p> </p><p> A lot of smarks tend to believe what they find annoying is by all means wrong, and those lines need to be separated a bit. Granted I did want to see Cole out of my TV but if it came down to himself, I'd say he's doing a splendid job with what he's given. Redeeming himself for all those years of chuffy commentating, he got the idea of putting it all out in the open.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Exactly. Alex Riley got a huge face pop when he turned face, and he did this my attacking Cole, not The Miz. That segment elevated Riley before The Miz came out, and that is the purpose that Michael Cole serves. There may not be a huge number of examples where he has a positive effect, but you only need a few... and that was a huge one.</p>

I'm a sad panda. Finally got around to watching Over the Limit. Highlight was Kane already being angry at the Rapture not happening comment, finally beating his Kanenites promo with Rock as his funniest ever promo... and no-one's mentioned it!?! And WWE, I take it back. You are giving Christian the chance to have awesome matches with someone who's matches normally bore me to death. Instead of one PPV title defence, you've let Christian prove how great he is with his title loss and PPV rematch. Now I want to see him still in the Main Event in six months time. Please.

Not one to want to defend TNA too much (having lost most of my reasons for watching them in teh last few reasons), but getting a Main Event rub does not equla being pushed as a Main Eventer.

I think we need to give WWE the chance on this one after watching Smackdown. We have to understand Christian was never meant to be champion. He was never going to have a reign of a couple of months, of the question was how to take the title off him. He could have lost in at Over the Limit, sunk to the midcard and be given the Intercontinental Title later this year. Instead WWE took the title off him now - but they've built it up as a shattered dream. The voiceover at the beginning of the show, Christian's promo, Christian's forlorn exit after the match. They didn't just take the title off Christian, they've recognised it as a huge blow to the man. They've given Christian a story (his old story was injured by ADR, Edge's mate - that's not a Main Event story), they could do something with this and leave Christian in the Main Event for... longer than Mark Henry stays there. This has potential - I would rather Christian had a 5 day reign and stayed relevant for longer than a month or two reign then sinking fast. Now sure, it means that WWE have to do something with this, but lets see. Smackdown was well done, lets just see if they continue with this. In other news, will Big Zeke be a face now, or a heel not aligned with the Corre? I'm guessing a face, with feuds with Barrett and then I guess Sheamus. I'd actually be interested in that.

Good for him. But it does make you wonder why WWE had him wrestle as CM Punk in the first place - it's not as if getting wrestlers in under new names is something new (it's been what... 8 years since WWE went on it's massive trademarking campaign).

However, in an unrelated note, it looks like Kharma wont be able to flash us if she wrestles in that gear, which is a good thing.