Bound For Glory (Spoilers!)

[DaMegaFish]

Raisha-"Why are you here?!" Mick Foley-"Im just trying to fill in..." Raisha-"IT DOESNT MATTER WHY YOU ARE HERE!" Mick Foley-"I think that is gimmick infringement, The Rock wouldnt like that Ive got him on speed dial." Gimmick infringement lol I am loving the Mick Foley segments where its like he is meeting all the people for the first time. The Beautiful People Blue M&Ms was also pure gold in my book.

[scorpion]

I'm done with TNA. They took what was an awesome main event match between Joe and Sting and completely ruined it. Its not just Russo who needs to get fired its anybody who thought that finish was a good idea. Oooo, Nash turns on Joe, didn't see that coming. stupid stupid stupid.

[justtxyank]

I agree. I think Sting going over Joe was the right move to make, but the ending was kind of a weak way to do it. It's sad that every WCW...er...TNA ppv main event has to end with a screwy finish.

[The Stallion]

I thought the PPV was good overall, but I thought Joe should have kept the Title and beat Sting. I mean, you build up this unstoppable champion for the past several months and then on the big stage you have him drop the strap to a guy who, while still good, is well past his prime. Joe put on a great match and just destroyed Sting almost the entire match. To ruin his run the way they did dissapointed me. Plus the match made Sting look weak, which would not have been that big of a deal if Joe would have won (see how much of a bad ass he is). But you put the strap on a guy who just spent the past 15 minutes getting his ass handed to him was a mistake. Plus ending it with the Nash thing was a joke. I mean this is Bound For Glory, the main event should be a clean match unless it really meant something and this did not. Why not just have Nash attack Joe after the match? Why not have Sting hang with Joe and beat him clean? I love the TNA talent but sometimes they just upset me to no end. The rest of the PPV was good though, Mick Foley was comedy gold as usual. The Creed vs Bashire match was pretty solid and the crowd was behind Creed all the way. The womans match was a little short but still good. That spot with Abyss going through the flaming tables was just sick. Jarrett vs. Angle delivered. Over all the PPV was good, but the ending to the World Title match just made TNA take 1 step foward and 2 steps back.

[Guest Ransik]

Scorpion... if a bat shot from Kevin Nash setting up a feud makes you hate TNA... than I honestly don't know what to tell you! I thought it was a very solid PPV. I was very disappointed Roxxi didn't walk away with the Knockout Title since they built her up so much, and having her pinned by a crappy German Suplex was even worse. The Asylum was a spot fest like I expected... but they had TONS of awesome spots so I didn't really mind them. I hope Abyss is alright... he was on fire for WAY too long... and Mongo looks like a fat Eric Bischoff now. *shudders* Not happy Booker won but the last few moments of that match was just plain awesome so once again... I don't really mind. Was Jarrett ever that good in the ring? I saw him bust out stuff on Angle I've never seen him use before! Didn't mind Mick's interference at all since it was set up so Jeff had the clean win before Angle bumped the ref. The one-ups that Joe and Sting kept playing on each other made that match damn impressive, especially when they used and no-sold each other's finishers. Anyone dumping on the finish need only reference any time Batista has ever won a PPV Main Event, and this looks like the best finish of all time. And since everyone thought Joe would win, I think the angle can only get better now since Sting can boast about it. Aside from the Knockout and Tag not changing hands (which IMO is sorely needed) I think this was a damn good PPV. Even the 6 Inter-Gender Tag had some good moments, especially that set-up for the Gore on Kip where he caught him in the middle of going for the Famouser!

[justtxyank]

I agree Ransik that Sting winning was the way to go storyline wise, but I just wish TNA could finish a title match with something other than a "controversial finish." His feud with Booker was a bunch of bogus finishes as well. I'd have rather had Sting win somewhat cheaply, but not outright cheaply, then have Nash and Joe bicker on Impact. Then give us a Sting Joe rematch on the next Impact that sees Nash finally turn and the match ends cheaply.

[scorpion]

[QUOTE=Ransik;506652]Scorpion... if a bat shot from Kevin Nash setting up a feud makes you hate TNA... than I honestly don't know what to tell you![/QUOTE] For the record, I don't hate TNA, I've just tired of spending my time and money, only for them to give me crappy booking. [QUOTE=Ransik;506652]The one-ups that Joe and Sting kept playing on each other made that match damn impressive, especially when they used and no-sold each other's finishers. Anyone dumping on the finish need only reference any time Batista has ever won a PPV Main Event, and this looks like the best finish of all time. And since everyone thought Joe would win, I think the angle can only get better now since Sting can boast about it. [/QUOTE] And this is what really hurts, that match was awesome, I was on my feet excited as Joe no sold, then Sting no sold. I wanted them to go hard at this point, and honestly I couldn't have cared who won, I would have been happy. Instead, I get Joe arguing with the ref for what seemed like ages, killing the momentum of the match, Kevin Nash slowly making his way to the ring. And when Nash took that bat from Sting, I knew he was going to turn. If they wanted to set up a feud, do it after the match. But it seems like expecting a clean finish from TNA is like expecting a dog not to eat the food sitting right in front of them. And for the record, this isn't a TNA vs WWE thing. I stopped watching WWE after they pulled a bait and switch with CM Punk. I will gladly watch either company again, but not until I hear that they are doing things right and being entertaining.

[ACCBiggz]

Been at the past three Bound for Glory's... and same things over and over. Constant run-ins, Sting wins title, etc. It's boring, it's stupid, and I probably will never go back to a TNA event again.

[DaMegaFish]

[QUOTE=ACCBiggz;506799]Been at the past three Bound for Glory's... and same things over and over. Constant run-ins, Sting wins title, etc. It's boring, it's stupid, and I probably will never go back to a TNA event again.[/QUOTE] How many run ins were there actually during the night? I missed parts of it. The main event had a run in yes, and Devine went in on Monsters Ball but that wasnt a huge match changing run in, it was there to set up the table spot. Why cant Sting win at BFG when Undertaker wins at EVERY WM?

[justtxyank]

I'm a Sting mark so I'm glad he won, but I just think their booking is screwy. I don't like the way he won it, and I think it's going to be dumber if they take the belt off of him within 30 days again.

[CQI13]

It's always been by the next PPV that he loses the belt, right? Though not sure if it was here, but I think I mentioned Sting would probably win to continue his BFG run. Sabin had something similar, except he lost the first Xscape match at Lockdown, but I thought he'd won them since.

[justtxyank]

[QUOTE=CQI13;506847]It's always been by the next PPV that he loses the belt, right? Though not sure if it was here, but I think I mentioned Sting would probably win to continue his BFG run. Sabin had something similar, except he lost the first Xscape match at Lockdown, but I thought he'd won them since.[/QUOTE] I think he's held the belt less than 30 days every time he's won it. I stopped paying after the Booker T vs Samoa Joe wrestlecrap ending in Houston. I won't pay again. And it's not a WWE thing either, I hate the E now and would only watch for a promising Shawn Michaels match at this point.

[Franchise22]

so for 3 straight bound for glorys sting has won the title........will he keep it more than 2weeks to a month!?!?! doubt it......

[Franchise22]

[QUOTE=DaMegaFish;506814]How many run ins were there actually during the night? I missed parts of it. The main event had a run in yes, and Devine went in on Monsters Ball but that wasnt a huge match changing run in, it was there to set up the table spot. Why cant Sting win at BFG when Undertaker wins at EVERY WM?[/QUOTE] because hes won the title each time....not just win a match. big difference.

[ACCBiggz]

[QUOTE=DaMegaFish;506814]How many run ins were there actually during the night? I missed parts of it. The main event had a run in yes, and Devine went in on Monsters Ball but that wasnt a huge match changing run in, it was there to set up the table spot.[/QUOTE] Ok, so what... two run-ins, 2 special enforcers (including Foley getting involved), however many gimmick matches... So maybe not all run-ins, but TNA should be A LOT better with the amount of talent there, but they seem content on the wrestlecrap they produce. [QUOTE]Why cant Sting win at BFG when Undertaker wins at EVERY WM?[/QUOTE] Does The Undertaker headline every Wrestlemania and fight for the title? (And in order of fairness to The Undertaker, his streak just kind of evolved and now it's a storyline onto itself come Wrestlemania time. Whereas the Sting situation is different and tiresome.) Exactly.

[DaMegaFish]

[QUOTE=ACCBiggz;507059] Does The Undertaker headline every Wrestlemania and fight for the title? (And in order of fairness to The Undertaker, his streak just kind of evolved and now it's a storyline onto itself come Wrestlemania time. Whereas the Sting situation is different and tiresome.) Exactly.[/QUOTE] You said you've been to the past BFG events, so let me ask you, Does Sting headline every BFG and fight for the title? Nope. At the first Bound For Glory it was Jeff Jarrett vs Rhino for the title. Exactly.

[justtxyank]

Undertaker has won the world title at two straight Wrestlemanias,

[MattitudeV2]

[QUOTE=DaMegaFish;507069]You said you've been to the past BFG events, so let me ask you, Does Sting headline every BFG and fight for the title? Nope. At the first Bound For Glory it was Jeff Jarrett vs Rhino for the title. Exactly.[/QUOTE] Because Sting was not signed to TNA at that point ever since then that is all Sting has ever been doing.

[Guest Ransik]

[QUOTE=MattitudeV2;507101]Because Sting was not signed to TNA at that point ever since then that is all Sting has ever been doing.[/QUOTE] Ok... so we only argue when Sting challenges at BFG and wins... but we don't when Taker wins at WM.... Triple H headlines and defends the WWE Title at every PPV... when Kane loses yet another PPV match or isn't even booked... when Hogan comes back and refuses to... oh wait we do complain about that one don't we? I just don't see the big deal in a legend winning a World Title at a big PPV. *shrugs*

[djthefunkchris]

[QUOTE=Ransik;507113]Ok... so we only argue when Sting challenges at BFG and wins... but we don't when Taker wins at WM.... Triple H headlines and defends the WWE Title at every PPV... when Kane loses yet another PPV match or isn't even booked... when Hogan comes back and refuses to... oh wait we do complain about that one don't we? I just don't see the big deal in a legend winning a World Title at a big PPV. *shrugs*[/QUOTE] In all honesty, I don't have a problem with it either. I have a problem with him NEEDING help though (which I didn't see, so I'm objective to how it actually happened. Didn't see it, so I'm just throwing out what I wouldn't like). I have always thought of Sting as TNA's Undertaker, so I think that's not a bad comparison. From what I've heard in the thread, it's not the win as much (by most, not all) as it is "How" he won. I can agree with it as well. The Awesome thing about not seeing it though, is that it won't change how I think of TNA when I watch it on TV. I will be oblivious to it all, and just go "Hey, Sting has the title!" So I guess I'm starting to enjoy TNA better then other's lately. I still think they have too many run-in's, and spotfests, but some of the stuff is just downright entertaining, and I can't/won't deny that fact. Part of me thinks that's why WWE is getting better. I dissagree entirely about the HHH complaints, as I think he's doing a hell of a job making people more and more ready as well as giving time to "Test" that they aren't going to make any dumb mistakes before giving it up (Jeff Hardy, I'm looking at you). He has made so many people look good, It's amazing he gets the heat here that he does.

[Guest Ransik]

Joe's a younger, complete badass who can do things that Sting could never do in his prime. Plus... TNA is trying to push Sting as a heel. If he had pinned Joe clean he would've been a super face. The fans were split the whole time and it sounded to me as though they were more behind Sting. I just think in this instance because turning Sting heel is damn near impossible that having anything but a tainted finish wouldn't have worked at all. But yeah... Sting himself should've been the one to use the bat on Joe, at least it would've made HIM look more like a heel instead of Nash. Personally I would've gone with Sting using the bat to win... then Nash coming out for the save only to turn on Joe... but then again Joe's Title reign was just not going anywhere and the fans were starting to turn on him.

[FINisher]

[QUOTE]Samoa Joe and Sting started out as a no disqualification match on the fly as both took the action to the crowd. I did not have a problem with the action spilling out to the fans as it helped sell the storyline. Sting and Joe worked well together with Joe looking the best that he has looked since winning the title back in April. [B]Kevin Nash ended up coming out and hit Joe with Sting's baseball bat which allowed Sting to hit a Scorpion Death Drop and get the win and the title from Joe. I am 100% against taking the title off Samoa Joe, especially in a match against Sting at Bound For Glory. Sting went over Kurt Angle to win the title at Bound For Glory last year and went over Jarrett to win the title back in 2006. Why the same boring predicable outcome three years in a row? Sting is 49 years old and is not going to hold the title for any length of time so why does the company feel compelled to consistently put him over? Last night should have been the night where the ball was passed to Samoa Joe and his title reign was legitimized. I understand the argument that the younger workers should be chasing but I felt that TNA gave Joe a very lackluster title reign that they spent two years developing. Kevin Nash and Sting are two old WCW guys that are way past the primes of their careers. It's mind boggling to me why they end the show as the focal point. The finish made TNA look even more minor league and to me was a couple of steps backwards from where they need to be going.[/B] In conclusion Bound For Glory was a solid pay-per-view. I would not say that it was the best TNA pay-per-view of the year nor do I feel that it was worth the five dollars extra. The pay-per-view had a lot of good things with very little bad but it still did not have the "biggest show of the year" feel. The crowd was ultra hot so props to everyone that attended but there were some [B]questionable booking calls. TNA made a mistake by taking the strap off of Joe and they could have had at least one title change in the undercard. TNA has arguably the most talented roster in the world yet they continue to put guys like Sting and Kevin Nash in front of people like AJ Styles and Samoa Joe. It doesn't make sense to me, especially if TNA wants to be around for another six years.[/B][/QUOTE] R. Gray's report [URL]http://rajah.com/base/node/13832[/URL] Also from rajah.com: [QUOTE]Coming off the heels of last night, Sting has won TNA's World Heavyweight Championship at Bound for Glory three years in a row. In 2006, he defeated Jeff Jarrett for the belt in a career vs. belt match. Last year, Sting overcame interference by both Karen Angle and Kevin Nash to pin Kurt Angle after a Scorpion Death Drop. And of course, last night he pinned Samoa Joe after Kevin Nash hit Joe with a baseball bat. It should be interesting to see if Sting loses the belt in a hurry for a third consecutive year. Last year, he lost the belt back to Angle within two weeks on an episode of Impact. In 2006, he lost the belt to Abyss at the following month's pay-per-view, Genesis. He was disqualified after clotheslining referee Rudy Charles. For his match with Abyss, the rules stated that the title could change hands on a disqualification.[/QUOTE]

[tristram]

I'm as big a Sting mark as any, but ... I don't know, I just can't buy him being the World Heavyweight Champion anymore as much as I cringed when people wanted to give Flair one last shot as if to give a dog a bone before sailing off into the sunset, much the same as I didn't appreciate Hollywood Hulk Hogan continually main eventing WCW main events. For me, this is Joe's time. Even if Sting has to win, don't have a nonsense finish. Nash isn't needed in the main event. He's gone, past it. Good for the stick, that's about it. I just hope that this is a more long winded twist, that unlike WCW, the Millionaires Club isn't taking over the world and completely killing off the New Blood group when they needed the rub to set up the next five years of WCW. I ... I just don't buy it, or get it. It's extremely perplexing. I can understand Sting and co being used for name value and to put over Joe at the moment in particular, but this is just a bit weird for me. TNA shouldn't sell itself on being a WCW follow up, you know, a hot undercard with hellacious wrestling, and then the big run in at the end of the night for the old boy to stay victorious. That's what sent WCW into the hellhole in the first place.

[G-Prime]

Everyone keeps mentioning the flaming table spot, but what about Hernandez's cane shot a couple of minutes later? That looked so fricken sick.

[eayragt]

I think one of the main reasons why Sting's consecutive title wins is being criticised is because the title runs themselves have been so short. There's a difference to Undertaker winning a title and then running with it for months - he's justifying himself as the number one man. However, as Sting keeps losing the title quickly his title reigns don't justify him as the "Number One", but he's being booked as such at Bound for Glory. If Sting's previous runs (if they can even be called that) were longer lasting and booked better I don't think we'd be having this discussion. I know Sting doesn't work a full time schedule, but I can see that's what will annoy some people - he swans back in before BFG to win the title. If Sting has a long, well booked reign (and doesn't take a break as soon as he loses the title), I think this argument can be ignored, however if he loses it soon, it'll be a valid argument. I think that Sting will get a reign of at least a couple of months, and he should have it. I know he doesn't need the title (Joe vs Sting could have happily Main Evented without the title at BFG, with Booker/Cage/AJ for the title (although that goes against my belief that title matches should headline)), but while he's got it, he should run with it. I just hope when he drops the title it's not to Booker/Jarrett/Angle, it's to someone like Cage or AJ, who, although established stars, could benefit much more from the big win.