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

[Nathers7]

<p>Yea, I don't get why WWE creative had The Rock rock bottom a guy who just lost to Cena not long after giving such a great promo, strange booking decision there.</p><p> </p><p>

Jericho-Punk gets better every week, both guys on top form and Jericho wasn't even in the building. </p><p> </p><p>

I feel like that Taker - HHH promo was same old, same old though they're doing a good job keeping it interesting by leaving Michaels' motives unclear.</p>

[Tha Black Phenom]

<p>hasn't Rocky bottomed Cena like the past three times? eh, I'm fine with that.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="cappyboy" data-cite="cappyboy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Funny. Because to me it's the other big non-title match that I'm not fussed about. Cena vs Rock = YAWN. The Rock was fine in his time. But I'm sorry. His act is old and tired and I'm over it. The boots to asses and the Fruity Pebbles junk and all his "clever" history lessons. Spare me. Dude's trying WAY too hard to be funny. I honestly fast forward or shut the show off before his appearances now. Rock should just stay Dwayne and stay in Hollywood now. His usefulness, at least in Cappy Land, is done.<p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Them's the issues of booking a year-long feud.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Raw was packed. matches = short as hell, but I didn't expect otherwise on mania's eve.</p><p> </p><p> Side note... this was the one Raw since he returned that he or by connection, him and Cena, haven't really been the focal point of the show. Had one segment, showed up, Rock Bottomed Henry and left. They didn't replay his promo or hype him all night, which was a nice break from the past eps putting attention on other feuds.</p><p> </p><p> Thinking a movie star could be able to pull that for like five minutes' attention, to me, is crazy. These guys tour worldwide, yknow? It just made me think when Rock said "The Rock's gonna get in his car and roll down over to Belfast Arena" Just a funny tidbit to realize due to all the bad rep he gets.</p><p> </p><p> Plenty of reasons to dislike him, his old act or his crazy stupid tattoos(I like the style though, no lie) but yeah.</p><p> </p><p> Btw, when is Sheamus going to do anything interesting? Take notes from Miz and make somethin' happen, son.</p><p> </p><p> Punk/Jericho is indeed golden, favorite feud of them all. I don't know what Punk said at the end, but either way it came across solid.</p>

[bigtplaystew]

<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>WWE.com ran an article about this story, and the fact they felt the need to respond at all is pretty telling.<p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> In case we've got the usual suspect(s) eager to go all, "LOLZ DIRTSHEETS R RONG!!!", (too late) I'll point out that:</p><p> </p><p> 1) Triple H is all, "We're not closing down FCW" but then is all, ""I can't comment as to whether or not we will relocate developmental". So, which is it? You're not closing them down but you can't say whether or not you're moving developmental?</p><p> </p><p> 2) Take out the copy and paste sites who edit and rephrase things, the story from the main news sites was that WWE were moving developmental. Which the WWE.com article all but says is exactly what is going to happen. It was the copy and paste sites, and not the main news sites, that claimed FCW was shutting down.</p><p> </p><p> 3) But let's presume it's all nasty lies and FCW is not closing down. Why cancel their only TV? Why not keep it until they've moved elsewhere in Florida?</p><p> </p><p> 4) WWE themselves told the station carrying FCW that they were pulling out and moving things to Stamford.</p><p> </p><p> 5) If it is all a giant mix-up, you know what would stop stuff like this happening? Being a bit more open with the main news sites. Not the copy and paste places who turn an innocent comment into "Brock Lesnar is quitting the UFC for WWE" that the gullible believe without taking the time to check the facts on. But the main ones who are, despite what the fingers-in-their-ears crowd desperately want to believe, right more often than they're not.</p><p> </p><p> But let's not stop the usual people from being all self-congratulatory about being brave souls and disbelieving those nasty 'dirt sheets (Is is 1996? We're still using an archaic term like that?).</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> WHO SAID IT WAS ALL LIES?? </p><p> </p><p> Lol who are you fighting with? This is such an angry post... I'm so confused.</p><p> </p><p> The sites reported FCW was closing, then WWE said it wasn't closing. It's not a big deal, man.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Why the need for the thinly veiled-insult-laden temper tantrum that is this last post?</p>

[cappyboy]

<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><p> </p><p> </p><p> Them's the issues of booking a year-long feud.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Actually, no. I pretty well recognize it's just me. For most of the crowd he's just as good as he ever was and they are having as much fun as ever. I just don't care for his shtick. I went with it in the character's prime because it was new and different. But now every time he opens his mouth I feel like I've been there and done that. If it were someone else, somebody I were more inclined to enjoy it wouldn't be an issue. The length of the feud has nothing to do it. It's Rock's presence in the feud that turns me off. I just can't stomach him anymore.</p>

[Candyman]

<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>You mean A-Train lied? But that would mean those nasty evil dirtsheets were telling the truth? But that can't be true; they're nasty and evil and only spread lies.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Good point. I mean, they right on the money when they said it'd be an Undertaker/Triple H/Shawn Michaels triple threat at Mania, when they said Cena/Rock would be for the title, when they said Brock Lesnar would be wrestling at Mania, when they said Shaq would be wrestling at Mania, when they said Randy Orton would win the Rumble, when they said Brock Lesnar would be in the Royal Rumble, when they said Triple H and Undertaker would be at the Royal Rumble, when they said John Cena was going to be at TLC, etc etc.</p><p> </p><p> They're right about everything! How dare they be questioned?</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>WWE.com ran an article about this story, and the fact they felt the need to respond at all is pretty telling.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> What, exactly, does it tell? Based on your misguided views of dirtsheets, I'm guessing you're trying to imply that it's somehow telling that there must be some truth to it, which would make no sense of course.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>In case we've got the usual suspect(s) eager to go all, "LOLZ DIRTSHEETS R RONG!!!", (too late) I'll point out that:</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Why do you seem so surprised that dirtsheets are wrong again? Are you equally surprised when you don't win the lottery?</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>1) Triple H is all, "We're not closing down FCW" but then is all, ""I can't comment as to whether or not we will relocate developmental". So, which is it? You're not closing them down but you can't say whether or not you're moving developmental?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If you're going to quote somebody using quotation marks, at least try to attempt to remotely represent what was actually said. Since you were so far off from anything that he actually came out of his mouth, I can only assume that your second quote was meant to represent this:</p><p> </p><p> “There are plans in the works, but nothing definitive I can discuss right now,” he said. “Shortly after WrestleMania, there will be a major announcement about our developmental system.”</p><p> </p><p> Putting the fallacy of your quotes aside, you do realize that "closing down" and "relocate" mean two different things, right? It's not a "which is it" situation. It can easily be both.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>2) Take out the copy and paste sites who edit and rephrase things, the story from the main news sites was that WWE were moving developmental. Which the WWE.com article all but says is exactly what is going to happen. It was the copy and paste sites, and not the main news sites, that claimed FCW was shutting down.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> And those are the dirt sheets, genius. You can't "take out" the very thing you're talking about.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>3) But let's presume it's all nasty lies and FCW is not closing down. Why cancel their only TV? Why not keep it until they've moved elsewhere in Florida?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That's your argument for the dirtsheets getting it right about FCW closing down? Really? Here's a few possible reasons off the top of my head:</p><p> </p><p> 1.Their contract with Brighthouse Network was up and the station didn't want to renew for just a few weeks.</p><p> 2.They had to notify Brighthouse Network the show was ending by a certain date, like today, or they'd be on the hook for X number of more episodes - a higher total than they were willing to commit to.</p><p> 3.Since it's still going to air on Brighthouse for three more weeks, maybe that's when they plan on announcing whatever changes they're going to make to the developmental system. You know, since Triple H said they'd announce something after WrestleMania. They may well be doing exactly what you said about keeping it until they move. They can easily move in the next three weeks.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>4) WWE themselves told the station carrying FCW that they were pulling out and moving things to Stamford.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No they didn't. They told the station that the show was ending. I don't know where the Stamford rumor started, but one thing for certain is that it didn't come from a conversation between WWE and Brighthouse.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>5) If it is all a giant mix-up, you know what would stop stuff like this happening? Being a bit more open with the main news sites. Not the copy and paste places who turn an innocent comment into "Brock Lesnar is quitting the UFC for WWE" that the gullible believe without taking the time to check the facts on. But the main ones who are, despite what the fingers-in-their-ears crowd desperately want to believe, right more often than they're not.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> ??? Who is this "fingers-in-their-ears crowd" you're ranting about?? The people who take joy in pointing out all the idiotic reports that originate with dirtsheets? Again, the problem with dirtsheets IS the copy and paste places, which make up a vast majority of dirtsheets. I don't even know what the hell you're talking about.</p><p> </p><p> And no, no matter how much you cover your hears and scream "I can't hear you, I can't hear you, la la la," there is no site that gets it right more often than not. That's the nature of the business. Most honest reporters would laugh at a statement like that.</p><p> </p><p> </p><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>But let's not stop the usual people from being all self-congratulatory about being brave souls and disbelieving those nasty 'dirt sheets (Is is 1996? We're still using an archaic term like that?).</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Again, what the hell are you talking about?</p><p> </p><p> You need to accept the fact that dirt sheets - and no, just like most things that are 16 years old, that term is not archaic - are mostly copy and paste places. And most of the ones that aren't copy and paste places are worse than copy and paste places, they're places that make things up own their own without talking to anybody outside of their basement. You can't just "take them out" and act like dirt sheets are reputable, honest sources of information. The "main ones" are few and far between. And, for the life of me, I can't figure out why the hell you think those are the sites people are talking about when they talk about what jokes the dirt sheets are.</p>

[BurningHamster]

<p>Kudos to The Miz for saying Little People instead of Midgets I guess. </p><p> </p><p>

For a company that is so heavily involved in all the B A STAR anti-bullying stuff, it's about time someone sent out a memo to stop using derogatory terms.</p><p> </p><p>

Or you know ... WWE could stop being pansies and let heels display as much bullying, socially-unacceptable behaviour, bad language, etc as they want since they are bad guys and meant to do things that are not good.</p><p> </p><p>

Either way, it's best to be consistent one way or the other as it just makes them look like massive hypocrites otherwise.</p>

[djthefunkchris]

<p>I'm not sure I'm going to get this Wrestlemania after all... Thought for sure I would since I have been doing it for a few years now.</p><p> </p><p>

The only feud right now, that is making me want to watch is CM Punk/Jericho.... and to be honest, it would be the first time I ever bought a PPV for Jericho (I have for Punk a few times now).</p><p> </p><p>

Just don't know if it's worth the investment right now. They better do something quick... because The Rock is boring me, and Cena is only looking halfway decent because of that fact. This match just doesn't seem to matter anymore, far as outcome... Possibly because I've heard Rock is already scheduled for next years Wrestlemania, possibly because I don't see a reason for either of them to have to win anymore. It's like a toss up for nothing but bragging rights for a year, which doesn't really interest me right now. </p><p> </p><p>

I might be alone, but Taker/HHH isn't interesting to me at all either. Don't know where they went wrong, because I actually wanted to see that before it started happening.</p>

[BHK1978]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="djthefunkchris" data-cite="djthefunkchris" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm not sure I'm going to get this Wrestlemania after all... Thought for sure I would since I have been doing it for a few years now.<p> </p><p> The only feud right now, that is making me want to watch is CM Punk/Jericho.... and to be honest, it would be the first time I ever bought a PPV for Jericho (I have for Punk a few times now).</p><p> </p><p> Just don't know if it's worth the investment right now. They better do something quick... because The Rock is boring me, and Cena is only looking halfway decent because of that fact. This match just doesn't seem to matter anymore, far as outcome... Possibly because I've heard Rock is already scheduled for next years Wrestlemania, possibly because I don't see a reason for either of them to have to win anymore. It's like a toss up for nothing but bragging rights for a year, which doesn't really interest me right now. </p><p> </p><p> I might be alone, but Taker/HHH isn't interesting to me at all either. Don't know where they went wrong, because I actually wanted to see that before it started happening.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree with you fully on this, but then again I cannot even remember the last time I have watched a Wrestlemania live. The last one I clearly remember getting was the last one that Brock took part in. I am not sure if I have gotten one since.</p><p> </p><p> The WWE and I guess wrestling in general just does not do it for me. I mean I watch TNA and try to catch RAW every week but I just feel that they are both blah for me. The Rock concert was just another reason why I am not a fan of the current landscape of wrestling. </p><p> </p><p> Mark Madden wrote a good article about it on WrestleZone, he basically said what was the point of it (talking about the Rock concert). How is having that segment on television going to sell the pay-per-view? How did that segment add anything to their feud?</p><p> </p><p> Like you said the only match that interests me is the Punk/Jericho match. That match in and of itself is not enough to make me want to part with fifty dollars or whatever ungodly amount they are charging for Wrestlemania this year.</p>

[BurningHamster]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="djthefunkchris" data-cite="djthefunkchris" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> I might be alone, but Taker/HHH isn't interesting to me at all either. Don't know where they went wrong, because I actually wanted to see that before it started happening.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm with you on that, not sure when or how but they definitely dropped the ball somewhere in there as I'm finding myself really bored by the whole Trips/Taker/HBK stuff right now.</p>

[Tha Black Phenom]

<p>I'll tell you why, because they are generally men of action. Either you have Undertaker doing his supernatural ish(the videos were a nice touch I thought) or you have Triple H.. he's heavy on the vocal side but has always been seen ready to throw it down as well. And the last few weeks have had the intensity stall, with them just getting into the ring and.. talking. Milking HBK for all his worth isn't enough, maybe if they didn't hype every week like "HBK and Taker in the ring at the same time!" it would've come across better. Since HHH muttered the words "Hell in a Cell" there's nothing that's jumped at you from them in a "wow" manner, they're trying to tell a hell of a story through their promos but the momentum's going downhill. No kicks, no beatdowns, just mic work and staring. I'm sure the editing team are in candyland when it comes to their eventual video package though.</p><p> </p><p>

Rock/Cena almost got to that point but they've switched it up a bit and kept things entertaining(IMO), but of course some people will still be bored because of several factors, for one the usual hipster syndrome, not wanting to care about the match everyone talks about. Or the length, or... well they haven't been spectacular on the momentum aspect either.</p><p> </p><p>

That's why through all that, I'm still hoping for Sheamus to do something worthwhile. Something to complement Bryan's awesomeness or just show him up in some way, more than a brogue kick.</p>

[BHK1978]

Rock/Cena almost got to that point but they've switched it up a bit and kept things entertaining(IMO), but of course some people will still be bored because of several factors, for one the usual hipster syndrome, not wanting to care about the match everyone talks about. Or the length, or... well they haven't been spectacular on the momentum aspect either.

 

For me it is not even the hipster syndrome, I like both the Rock and John Cena (Yes I am a John Cena fan, how can you hate on someone who helps out Make a Wish as much as he does.). I am just thinking that wrestling might be passing me by. I do not enjoy the lame skits and stupid catchphrases that need to be repeated over and over again. I do not care what is trending on Twitter; to me it does not sell the feud.

 

Like I said maybe because I am older but this stuff just does not connect with me. To be honest I was not a huge fan of the Attitude Era either because at the time I saw it as Vince’s way of trying to be like ECW. Yes I have always been a fan of the Rock, Austin, and Undertaker but I have not really been able to get into the WWF/E for a long time.

 

I am not trying to be too cool for school when I say this, this is just my opinion. I guess my tastes have changed. The same thing happened to me with the NBA, from when I was a kid in the mid-80’s until around say 1998, I was a huge fan of the NBA. I followed it religiously and could talk on almost any topic in regards to the NBA. However, I have since lost interest in the NBA, there are very few players I like who are currently playing. Heck I do not think I have watched a whole game this season. So perhaps my feelings about wrestling are going the way my feelings for the NBA went.

[milamber]

For me the problem is the long build-up to Mania. As of last week, it's felt like they're just spinning their wheels on Raw and SD. Only the Punk v Jericho and HHH v Undertaker (with Michaels) feuds moved up a gear (and the segments for the latter for me have been hit and miss). Rock v Cena hit it's peak 2 weeks ago. I think it's a really strong card this year but I just want to see the damn matches before I lose interest.

[BHK1978]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="milamber" data-cite="milamber" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>For me the problem is the long build-up to Mania. As of last week, it's felt like they're just spinning their wheels on Raw and SD. Only the Punk v Jericho and HHH v Undertaker (with Michaels) feuds moved up a gear (and the segments for the latter for me have been hit and miss). Rock v Cena hit it's peak 2 weeks ago. I think it's a really strong card this year but I just want to see the damn matches before I lose interest.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That is actually a very good point it does seem that the problem could be the long build ups. I wonder why that is the case though. I mean wrestling in the past had what, about three or four months to build up to the next PPV (I am talking about when there was only the big four PPVs.), they did a good job back then. Yes back then there was not two weekly television shows and most of the buildups were done via angles and promos. It just seemed that it was done better back in the past. Maybe it is me wearing my rose colored glasses when looking at the past but to me it was done better in the past.</p><p> </p><p> I think the problem could very well be overexposure, they have too much time to fill. Now I am not saying put an end to Smackdown I am just saying that it would be better if they just had RAW to worry about.</p>

[20LEgend]

It does seem that we have great matches which could've happened 3 weeks ago but with the same heat for me. The big 3 matches will be awesome, but the booking hasn't been so it's a good job they have the name attraction really.

[juggaloninjalee]

<p>The Rock Conert gave us the line about Cena being married and making out with Eve. That was the best part. Should have been followed up though with Cena going crazy on the Rock. Didn't Kane force Cena to embrace the hate going into Mania?</p><p> </p><p>

HHH and Undertaker would have been more interesting if HBK super kicked Undertaker. Then the following week kicked HHH. It would be good because everyone would think HBK is going to help HHH. Then the next week he swerved everyone and now they thing he is neutral. Would have been better than these staredowns.</p><p> </p><p>

Jericho and Punk are having a great feud heading into Mania. I like it and am really excited for the match.</p><p> </p><p>

Bryan vs Sheamus is looking like a good match I think. I actually could see Bryan winning somehow but wouldn't mind if Sheamus won since his amazing push.</p>

[b0shey]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="juggaloninjalee" data-cite="juggaloninjalee" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The Rock Conert gave us the line about Cena being married and making out with Eve. That was the best part. Should have been followed up though with Cena going crazy on the Rock. Didn't Kane force Cena to embrace the hate going into Mania?<p> </p><p> HHH and Undertaker would have been more interesting if HBK super kicked Undertaker. Then the following week kicked HHH. It would be good because everyone would think HBK is going to help HHH. Then the next week he swerved everyone and now they thing he is neutral. Would have been better than these staredowns.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well then it would reveal Takes bald head and since WWE wants to seal it until Mania that wont happend.</p>

[djthefunkchris]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>That is actually a very good point it does seem that the problem could be the long build ups. I wonder why that is the case though. I mean wrestling in the past had what, about three or four months to build up to the next PPV (I am talking about when there was only the big four PPVs.), they did a good job back then. Yes back then there was not two weekly television shows and most of the buildups were done via angles and promos. It just seemed that it was done better back in the past. Maybe it is me wearing my rose colored glasses when looking at the past but to me it was done better in the past.<p> </p><p> I think the problem could very well be overexposure, they have too much time to fill. Now I am not saying put an end to Smackdown I am just saying that it would be better if they just had RAW to worry about.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> ... I mean that as a pause as I ponder what it is exactly that I want to say. Ok, here goes...</p><p> </p><p> I know how far back you go (just as much as myself). Your talking about two different era's, where the "Main Attractions" weren't as visible as they are now... SURE, they were on every week, but the thing is, alot of times (talking 80's and earlier) it was "re-runs" of what had happened. </p><p> </p><p> Back to the present. I understand the point about having one show instead of two show's, but it really boils down to use of time. Mania is close upon them, and they are going to give the main feuds the most time. Trouble is, they aren't evolving them as much as we would like to see. Two show's or not, I have a feeling we would get the same amount of time devoted to them, which means half the other stuff we wouldn't have seen at all.... and that might not mean much in the here and now, but for the future it means quite a bit, or it should.</p><p> </p><p> NOW me... I think you touched on what has been bugging me. Instead of doing the same bits week after week, I would have enjoyed things more had they focused on something else, and just did the old "Re-Run" thing... because to me, that is bassically what they did, just did the same thing again instead of showing the re-run... well, I guess they showed the re-run too..</p><p> </p><p> For me what it boils down to is use of time more then anything. They have two shows that I'm guessing they are trying to keep rated well. So they give us everyone they can in those two show's that have proven to help ratings. I understand what they are doing, and I understand why that would make a bunch of people go "You know... They might as well just have one show!" Because really, that is what they have... One show. The WWE show, which has two parts, Monday is part 1, Friday is part 2. The time they spend on the Main Event or Main Characters, no matter the night, makes it feel like they don't have "enough". What I would rather see is them make use of the undercards more then they do. IF they centered the show around the people trying to "Make It" to the big gold, and used the Upper card to promote only the PPV's and not have them dominate the shows, I think it would really increase the main reason they have a split roster to begin with....</p><p> </p><p> I'm not saying don't have Raw roster members on Smackdown, or vice versa, I'm saying center the show around the middle-lower cards, and use the Main Characters of both shows to kind of highlight it.... The foundation needs to be the lower card, the top should stay at the top til they drop.</p><p> </p><p> See, I told you if I thought about it I would make it completely understandable! (I know I didn't, but I really did try to).</p>

[Fantabulous]

I do love the idea of Shawn pointlessly turning on both Undertaker and Triple H and removing one of the key selling points of the match, that being the suspect impartiality of the referee and the danger that puts the streak in. Why not just have an impromptu Triple H/Undertaker to main event Raw while you're at it and have Undertaker win right in the middle, so you can swerve the internet fans into thinking Triple H has to be winning now so he gets his win back?

[milamber]

<p>Oh Danny Boy! Bryan is my favorite wrestler right now. Followed closely by Punk and Jericho. Bryan and AJ are even making the SD Divas segment watchable.</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>The WWE show, which has two parts, Monday is part 1, Friday is part 2. The time they spend on the Main Event or Main Characters, no matter the night, makes it feel like they don't have "enough". What I would rather see is them make use of the undercards more then they do. IF they centered the show around the people trying to "Make It" to the big gold, and used the Upper card to promote only the PPV's and not have them dominate the shows, I think it would really increase the main reason they have a split roster to begin with....</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well I've noticed micarders like DiBiase, Hunico and Gabriel have disappeared on SD as they focus on guys like Bryan, Sheamus, Show and Rhodes heading into Mania. And they're stretching out the Teddy vs Johnny build-up way too long. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what the final teams will be.</p>

[bigtplaystew]

<p>"Daniel Bryan is a great lover..."</p><p> </p><p>

lolz</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>

And btw.... Zack Ryder seemed to m to have the biggest pop of the night. Maybe they should, ya know, give him something decent?</p>

[Jaysin]

 

John Morrison blatantly rips off Epic Rap Battles of History, but some of it's pretty funny.

[ChrisKid]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> <div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo"><div><iframe width="200" height="113" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/SpFAMI3odNM?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" title="HHH vs Undertaker Battle Rap"></iframe></div></div><p> </p><p> John Morrison blatantly rips off Epic Rap Battles of History, but some of it's pretty funny.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Pretty awesome</p>

[jsnypade33]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ChrisKid" data-cite="ChrisKid" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Pretty awesome</div></blockquote> laughed my beer belly off

[juggaloninjalee]

I didn't think that video was very good. I mean it was funny but only a little.

[Blake Trask]

I'm starting to look at Cole and Booker T as a RL example of bad chemistry between announcers.