Jump to content

The Official WWE / NXT Discussion Thread *May Contain Spoilers*


Adam Ryland

Recommended Posts

I hope not Lesnar Vs Reigns was terribly booked last year and sucked, we need something new and fresh, not a rematch of a terrible Wrestlemania main event.

 

 

 

I hated it when Reigns was booked into those situations. I never liked him and I never will. Dean Ambrose could be pushed to main event Wrestlemania if they wanted too. Have Sheamus win the title back then drop it to someone like Ambrose or Ziggler at WM. Maybe do an Elimination Chamber match at Fast Lane to determine the number one contender. If he could still go I would say Daniel Bryan and have him get revenge for WM28. It sucks that likely won't happen, would be a hell of a lot better than Reigns Vs Lesnar II. WWE should book the League of Nations as a dominate heel stable, like Evolution.

 

War, I don't really care for reigns either, though I don't share your abject hatred, but how are you going to say that WM M/E was crap. Was one of the better M/E in the last 5 years, come on man, your better than that.

 

Anywho, caught smackdown today and I'll jump on the marco bandwagon, I thought he was great. He really does add a big match feel, particularly to the semi M/e and M/e. Interested to see where he goes from here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

War, I don't really care for reigns either, though I don't share your abject hatred, but how are you going to say that WM M/E was crap. Was one of the better M/E in the last 5 years, come on man, your better than that.

 

Anywho, caught smackdown today and I'll jump on the marco bandwagon, I thought he was great. He really does add a big match feel, particularly to the semi M/e and M/e. Interested to see where he goes from here.

 

I also want to credit him for not falling into the trapping of calling Dean Ambrose The Lunatic Fringe...thank you MR!

 

 

Edit: I just finished Smackdown and I want to say that I enjoyed it from top to bottom! That little change in flavor surprised me in how much I could enjoy the show. I haven't liked an announcer this much since Joey Styles!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really loved Mauro's commentary. I never watch Smackdown, but I was curious to see his style. I wasn't really paying attention until the women's match and man was he great. I heard moves called and Charlotte described as a heel and Becky as a face. It was beautiful. It turned a decent match into a really good match. Only thing I didn't like was when Owens took a powder when Ambrose tried to give him Dirty Deeds and Mauro described it as Owens was regrouping. That's a good guy term.

 

When a heel takes a powder, it's getting too hot in the kitchen, Mauro!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crownsy you said it yourself Warhawk has blind hatred for regins and nothing he ever does will be acceptable. He could pull a 5 star match out of Kali and Giant Gonzales and warhawk will either say it was still crap.

 

Yep, I was one of the guys who learned that the hard way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over last night and this morning I went back and watched the 06, 07 and 08 Rumbles and one thing I've never understood from a psychology standpoint is why people stop another guy from being eliminated. Unless you're tag partners with someone, why would you purposely go stop someone from eliminating someone else. The goal is to win the damn thing and main event Mania.

For example, if HBK was in the process of eliminating Ric Flair, had him teetering on the top rope etc why would The Undertaker then come at HBK with a forearm to the back? It seems foolish and is one thing I've never been able to understand. Again, that wasn't a real scenario, just an example with names eveybody knows.

It seems the only time this doesn't happen is when a guy like Big Show or Viscera used to come in. Damn near immediately everybody would stop what they were doing to eliminate the giant because the biggest guy realistically would pose the biggest threat.

 

Anybody have any insight on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over last night and this morning I went back and watched the 06, 07 and 08 Rumbles and one thing I've never understood from a psychology standpoint is why people stop another guy from being eliminated. Unless you're tag partners with someone, why would you purposely go stop someone from eliminating someone else. The goal is to win the damn thing and main event Mania.

For example, if HBK was in the process of eliminating Ric Flair, had him teetering on the top rope etc why would The Undertaker then come at HBK with a forearm to the back? It seems foolish and is one thing I've never been able to understand. Again, that wasn't a real scenario, just an example with names eveybody knows.

It seems the only time this doesn't happen is when a guy like Big Show or Viscera used to come in. Damn near immediately everybody would stop what they were doing to eliminate the giant because the biggest guy realistically would pose the biggest threat.

 

Anybody have any insight on that?

 

Yeah that's always annoyed me too. It happens in Elimination Chambers and other multiman matches as well. Drives me insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over last night and this morning I went back and watched the 06, 07 and 08 Rumbles and one thing I've never understood from a psychology standpoint is why people stop another guy from being eliminated. Unless you're tag partners with someone, why would you purposely go stop someone from eliminating someone else. The goal is to win the damn thing and main event Mania.

For example, if HBK was in the process of eliminating Ric Flair, had him teetering on the top rope etc why would The Undertaker then come at HBK with a forearm to the back? It seems foolish and is one thing I've never been able to understand. Again, that wasn't a real scenario, just an example with names eveybody knows.

It seems the only time this doesn't happen is when a guy like Big Show or Viscera used to come in. Damn near immediately everybody would stop what they were doing to eliminate the giant because the biggest guy realistically would pose the biggest threat.

 

Anybody have any insight on that?

 

 

One of those logic defying we're supposed to suspend our disbelief moments that WWE has relied on way too often lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over last night and this morning I went back and watched the 06, 07 and 08 Rumbles and one thing I've never understood from a psychology standpoint is why people stop another guy from being eliminated. Unless you're tag partners with someone, why would you purposely go stop someone from eliminating someone else. The goal is to win the damn thing and main event Mania.

For example, if HBK was in the process of eliminating Ric Flair, had him teetering on the top rope etc why would The Undertaker then come at HBK with a forearm to the back? It seems foolish and is one thing I've never been able to understand. Again, that wasn't a real scenario, just an example with names eveybody knows.

It seems the only time this doesn't happen is when a guy like Big Show or Viscera used to come in. Damn near immediately everybody would stop what they were doing to eliminate the giant because the biggest guy realistically would pose the biggest threat.

 

Anybody have any insight on that?

 

When it comes to the rumble and battle royales in general I assume that it's because people have friends/enemies that they place higher value on trying to get rid of than others and also have their own feelings about. Most people would generally want to get rid of the Miz because he's so annoying, but if you're a babyface and you see a babyface you've teamed with many times in trouble then you may want to at least try to take advantage of the heel trying to eliminate him before you deal with the babyface.

 

Personally, I'd always be a heel so I'd just be opportunistic and do what I could. I suspect I'd end up being the Miz in that situation. :p

 

Yeah that's always annoyed me too. It happens in Elimination Chambers and other multiman matches as well. Drives me insane.

 

While you could try to apply the same logic above here, I HATE seeing this jsut as much. The IC title Elimination Chamber match was awful for this reason (and many others). :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over last night and this morning I went back and watched the 06, 07 and 08 Rumbles and one thing I've never understood from a psychology standpoint is why people stop another guy from being eliminated. Unless you're tag partners with someone, why would you purposely go stop someone from eliminating someone else. The goal is to win the damn thing and main event Mania.

For example, if HBK was in the process of eliminating Ric Flair, had him teetering on the top rope etc why would The Undertaker then come at HBK with a forearm to the back? It seems foolish and is one thing I've never been able to understand. Again, that wasn't a real scenario, just an example with names eveybody knows.

It seems the only time this doesn't happen is when a guy like Big Show or Viscera used to come in. Damn near immediately everybody would stop what they were doing to eliminate the giant because the biggest guy realistically would pose the biggest threat.

 

Anybody have any insight on that?

 

For the same reason it takes more than 20 seconds to climb a ladder or exit a cage early in a Ladder/Cage match when neither guy is gassed yet :) They have to unrealistically pad the matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...