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

[UkWrestleFan]

Edge?

 

Ah yeah, how could I forget?

[PeterHilton]

Super Bowl is for American Football. The World Series is for Baseball (right?). Two sports very few outside of the US cares about. Their entire identities are rooted in Americana, therefore the American national anthem is very appropriate. WWE on the other hand... I dunno, maybe they're going for the same American-heavy vibe, but I figured they were trying to project a more global image.

 

 

Why would you figure that? Not being xenophobic or sarcastic, but I really don't get where you'd see that in the WWE product...heavy on American character archetypes, American pop culture references, based in America, most of their revenue comes from American venues and American PPVs

 

It's nice as a company to broaden your appeal so you can gain some market share and be able to broadcast internationally (which is why the World Series and Super Bowl are broadcast worldwide) but realistically, the E makes most of its money by appealing to it's fans in the states.

 

Any of their global appeal is icing on the cake so to speak.

[Remianen]

I'm willing to deal with negative hyperbole from other people but c'mon Remi...how many lapdances are you REALLY getting for $55? One? One and a half? lol

 

Two, with $5 left over for a Tom Collins unusually high in the H20 department.

[PeterHilton]

Two, with $5 left over for a Tom Collins unusually high in the H20 department.

 

Holy economics!

 

A lapdance in CA is $40 a song..and we can't have alcohol if the club is fully nude.

[justtxyank]

Wow man.. You gotta be kidding me. That might have just been (and probably is) the best match I have seen in my life. No, not your Kobashi vs. Misawa, not your Japanese Wrestler #1 vs. Japanese Wrestler #2 matches, but Taker vs. HBK. Epic. Just. Epic.

 

 

Are you serious? You thought last night's version was the best match you've ever seen? I'm stunned.

[PeterHilton]

Wow man.. You gotta be kidding me. That might have just been (and probably is) the best match I have seen in my life. No, not your Kobashi vs. Misawa, not your Japanese Wrestler #1 vs. Japanese Wrestler #2 matches, but Taker vs. HBK. Epic. Just. Epic.

 

Y'know it wasn't the best match I've ever seen, but I know it definitely was not as bad as you described..

 

2) Taker vs HBK. Not a good match. Not even memorable really. Taker is spent. Very disappointed that this match was so lame feeling. There were a few good spots but all in all it did not feel epic.

 

Not a good match? I mean..not even a 'good' match?

 

To each their own, but in a spectrum my opinion is closer to Snoop's than yours.

 

Again..not the best ever but definitely not osmething i'd describe as 'not good' or 'not memorable.'

[Fleisch]

I'm going to say... average, and considering this should be the biggest Show of the year, it should be a hell of alot more than average. I've seen lesser PPV's that were better than this.

 

Saving grace: Edge vs. Jericho. However by this point i was really losing the will to live!

 

Not going to say anything more other than... HBK vs Undertaker 1 (last year)- Legendary

HBK vs Undertaker 2 (this year)- Diabolical in comparison and a real let down.

 

My opinions.

[justtxyank]

Y'know it wasn't the best match I've ever seen, but I know it definitely was not as bad as you described..

 

Not a good match? I mean..not even a 'good' match?

 

To each their own, but in a spectrum my opinion is closer to Snoop's than yours.

 

Again..not the best ever but definitely not osmething i'd describe as 'not good' or 'not memorable.'

 

I just didn't think it was anything special at all. I say that as a huge HBK fan, someone who has called him the greatest ever and will probably not order another ppv of the E's now that he is gone. (if!) I just didn't get anything out of it.

[brashleyholland]

you and i have different expectations for an elderly gentleman and a guy who had a major stroke and is himself no spring chicken then.

 

No, we probably have very similar expectations of what they can do in the ring - not a whole lot.

 

My expectations were regarding the 'segment' rather than the match. Hart getting his revenge on Vince should have been an epic moment, instead it was an overly long, awkward mess.

 

The Hart lumberjacks thing was stupid. Out of the blue, made no sense at all. Brett clearly is in no condition to perform, which is fine - it's not his fault. But then why have him perform at all? Why not have Brett and Vince as managers for Cena and Batista? You can do the 'Brett beats down Vince and puts him in the Sharpshooter' spot during the match when the principles are laid out or otherwise occupied. It would have gotten the same, if not more pop and would have added something to Cena/Batista.

 

Even as a stand-alone match, they could have done so much better. Brett roughs Vince up, throws him to the lumberjacks, gets him back, hits him with the chair, puts him in the Sharpshooter. All done in a couple of minutes.

 

Brett kinda looked like a bad guys at some points during that needlessly long beatdown...

[FlameSnoopy]

I'm going to say... average, and considering this should be the biggest Show of the year, it should be a hell of alot more than average. I've seen lesser PPV's that were better than this.

 

Saving grace: Edge vs. Jericho. However by this point i was really losing the will to live!

 

Not going to say anything more other than... HBK vs Undertaker 1 (last year)- Legendary

HBK vs Undertaker 2 (this year)- Diabolical in comparison and a real let down.

 

My opinions.

 

 

HBK vs. Taker last year wasn't nearly as good as this years in my honest opinion. When I actually thought HBK was going to win the thing (unlike last year) that is HUGE. And it just had the epicness and intensity right from the beginning.

[UkWrestleFan]

Why shouldn't they have had Hart destroy Vince for 10+ minutes. He's meant to hate his guts. He's wanted revenge for 12 years and on the night he gets it he's expected to finish him off in a few minutes? No way.

[Wrestling Century]

Mr.UkWrestleFan, I didn't like it because I actually started feeling sympathy for Vince in that match. I am assuming that the crowd felt the same way because after a few minutes they went dead.

[Fleisch]

 

HBK vs. Taker last year wasn't nearly as good as this years in my honest opinion. When I actually thought HBK was going to win the thing (unlike last year) that is HUGE. And it just had the epicness and intensity right from the beginning.

 

Your opinion. Dunno why you needed the smiley... maybe you thought it gave your reply credibility.

[PeterHilton]

Why shouldn't they have had Hart destroy Vince for 10+ minutes. He's meant to hate his guts. He's wanted revenge for 12 years and on the night he gets it he's expected to finish him off in a few minutes? No way.

 

Because as a storytelling device, you are supposed to ROOT FOR THE GOOD GUY

 

And in that match, the good guy had an unfair numbers advantage, took no punishment (not his fault, i know, but still there's a reaosn why the 'face in peril' is such a standard part of wrestling), used a series of weapons, and then twice refused to finish Vince off when he had the chance.

 

Take away the storyline, and that is a standard issue bad guy beatdown.

 

And the people who I was watching with, who didn't really understand the screwjob, all sympathized with Vince. Especially because the way the Harts came off - like a bunch of bloodthirsty jackals

 

It was poorly booked.

[FlameSnoopy]

Are you serious? You thought last night's version was the best match you've ever seen? I'm stunned.

 

Yes I did. I haven't seen anything or any match reach a five star minus before, now came a full five star.

 

And Fleisch, of course it's my opinion. How could I, say, provide facts about this? I didn't even have to write "my opinion", because of course it's my opinion. If you people want to provide me with points what made last years better than this years, then go ahead.

[UkWrestleFan]

Because as a storytelling device, you are supposed to ROOT FOR THE GOOD GUY

 

And in that match, the good guy had an unfair numbers advantage, took no punishment (not his fault, i know, but still there's a reaosn why the 'face in peril' is such a standard part of wrestling), used a series of weapons, and then twice refused to finish Vince off when he had the chance.

 

Take away the storyline, and that is a standard issue bad guy beatdown.

 

And the people who I was watching with, who didn't really understand the screwjob, all sympathized with Vince. Especially because the way the Harts came off - like a bunch of bloodthirsty jackals

 

It was poorly booked.

 

I really didn't have a problem with it.

 

For me, Bret hates Vince's guts, Vince hates Bret's. Vince screwed Bret in Montreal and since Bret's return, he showed zero compassion for what happened. He's had Bret beaten up off of Batista, spat in his face and insulted his Dad. Of course he's going to give Vince the beating of his life.

 

I see what you're saying about people not understanding the screwjob. I'd imagine there are a lot of fans today who don't have a good understanding of what happened in 1997. If this was how they intended the match to be when they brough Bret back in then maybe they should have told more of that story.

[CQI13]

Because as a storytelling device, you are supposed to ROOT FOR THE GOOD GUY

 

And in that match, the good guy had an unfair numbers advantage, took no punishment (not his fault, i know, but still there's a reaosn why the 'face in peril' is such a standard part of wrestling), used a series of weapons, and then twice refused to finish Vince off when he had the chance.

 

Take away the storyline, and that is a standard issue bad guy beatdown.

 

And the people who I was watching with, who didn't really understand the screwjob, all sympathized with Vince. Especially because the way the Harts came off - like a bunch of bloodthirsty jackals

 

It was poorly booked.

 

Or maybe he will actually turn heel? I know a lot of people sided with Vince in the beginning anyway (after the JR interview ages ago). The tide turned when he became Mr. McMahon.

 

As far as the National Anthem/America the Beautiful...don't they alternate it? Or has it always been America the Beautiful?

[FlameSnoopy]

I really didn't have a problem with it..

 

I didn't either. Most of the fans do know the Montreal Screwjob. All the talked about during the storyline (it seems) was Montreal Screwjob. Bret screwed Bret. Vince screwed Bret. Whatever. Bret Hart wanted to get revenge on Vince's action, and he wanted to screw Vince. He did it, and he got revenge.

[PeterHilton]

For me, Bret hates Vince's guts, Vince hates Bret's. Vince screwed Bret in Montreal and since Bret's return, he showed zero compassion for what happened. He's had Bret beaten up off of Batista, spat in his face and insulted his Dad. Of course he's going to give Vince the beating of his life.

 

I see what you're saying about people not understanding the screwjob. I'd imagine there are a lot of fans today who don't have a good understanding of what happened in 1997. If this was how they intended the match to be when they brough Bret back in then maybe they should have told more of that story.

 

Or done a better job of recapping the last few months? Or just booked it so Bret didn't have such a huge advantage? Or possibly do the "i bought off the Harts" and then reveal the double-cross a little later in the match.

 

Or maybe he will actually turn heel? I know a lot of people sided with Vince in the beginning anyway (after the JR interview ages ago). The tide turned when he became Mr. McMahon.

 

See..if it leads to that it'd make more sense.

[PeterHilton]

I didn't either. Most of the fans do know the Montreal Screwjob. All the talked about during the storyline (it seems) was Montreal Screwjob. Bret screwed Bret. Vince screwed Bret. Whatever. Bret Hart wanted to get revenge on Vince's action, and he wanted to screw Vince. He did it, and he got revenge.

 

ummmmm...I think that might be a reach. This is not the same fanbase. WM draws a lot of casual fans and Bret left the company more than a decade ago.

 

People know "of it" but I don't think most viewers really understand the impact.

[UkWrestleFan]

Or done a better job of recapping the last few months? Or just booked it so Bret didn't have such a huge advantage? Or possibly do the "i bought off the Harts" and then reveal the double-cross a little later in the match.

 

 

See..if it leads to that it'd make more sense.

 

That's the thing I found most odd, Vince "buying" The Hart's. As soon as that happened it was just obvious there'd be a double-cross. If it was just The Hart Dynasty, maybe that would've worked better, I dunno. They were/are heels anyway.

 

It'd be amazing if Bret turns heel.

[thommohawk]

For me this being a Wrestlemania I thought it wasn't a particularly good one, which isn't saying much since that's been WWE's creative problem for years now....though some things they've done absolutely right, Jericho and Punk's current personas for one, though how much of this is down to booking or talent is one for opinion either way they're the best talents WWE has right now in my honest opinion.

 

I thought the Hart vs McMahon thing was good, it was bittersweet for me this Wrestlemania since Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels are/were my favorite wrestlers of all time growing up and last night may well have been the very last time I'll see them in a wrestling ring. Though it was nice to see Bret in the ring and hook the sharpshooter on Vince after all these years.

 

On a final note about Wrestlemania, my honest opinion about the Michaels vs Taker match - 1) it wasn't anywhere near as good as last year's, though that wasn't to be expected. 2) Michaels deserved bigger build and a better send off considering the send offs that Flair and Trish got, unless of course he wanted it that way somewhat low key on the biggest stage of them all taking his bow. I thought the finish to the match sucked too, with Flair vs HBK it was spot on, but it didn't suit Michaels in my opinion - maybe a better thing would have been some kind of set piece sick bump type thing followed up by a tombstone finish after Michaels is still twitching trying to fight but body can't do it and Taker tombstones him to hell anyways and gets the inconsequential three count after the fact - then give Michaels a Ric Flair type send off on Raw the next day which I still hope they do as he deserves it too. Obviously HBK is straight in the HOF next year and deservedly so!

[Hyde Hill]

yet if Christan had won, people would cry that it was terrible because it was so predictable.

 

The WWE and TNA can't win with the Smart marks, no matter what they do. Swagger will most likely be the first guy to cash in the MITB and lose, that's been overdue to happen storywise for about two years.

 

Christan will probably win the MITB PPV shot, and get to actually use it. Swagger is going to cash in like an idiot and lose to cena.

 

WWE is always predictable, to a point on PPV's. and that's not always a bad thing, despite what some people think is good storytelling.

 

See our TNA thread discussion, TNA will be much, much better off once they start telling good stories, rather than booking the swerve for the sake of the swerve and to try to appease the IWC (who hates on them anyway, for of course, not telling a story well enough).

 

I'm sure the IWC will immediately label them as "predictable crap" too once they start doing what the crowd wants too though.

 

Good, but not great WM. Much, much better than some of the posts in this thread give it credit for. Some times the expectations of the IWC amuse the hell out of me. If wrestling was half as epic as they claim every match should be, it would be the #1 pass time in the world

 

I think the E and TNA tend to be on both sides of the spectrum. The E is overly predictable and TNA is over swerving, turning, shocking for shock. Its about finding a good balance imho.

[PeterHilton]

I think the E and TNA tend to be on both sides of the spectrum. The E is overly predictable and TNA is over swerving, turning, shocking for shock. Its about finding a good balance imho.

 

What's funny is that the E is only overly predictable to the wrestling geeks (like, say, people who would pay to own a text based wrestling simulator ) because the casual fan who watchs the shows without thinking too hard seem to follow along an enjoy it well enough.

[Hyde Hill]

I think but can't be sure that even for a casual who watches for 2 to 3 years it becomes kinda predictable and stale. I am not saying one is superior to the other, actually the E's is atm, but that they both have their flaws. TNA is becoming less all over the place though it seems.