Killagy Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Sam Roberts interviewed Roman Reigns 2 days before the Royal Rumble. "Fans have to realize that as opinionated as they are and the way you want it, the company is the same way and they are gonna do what they wanna do...hopefully, at the end of the day, I'm the one getting rich." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Well, may I be damned... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoganRodzen Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 This is from Rajah.com: WWE has made a new rule that talent and office people and talent and production people are not allowed to date each other. They do not want talent and staff interaction past a professional level. I'm curious if this was a new rule made by Stephanie McMahon and Triple H? Bunch of hypocrites! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuba steve Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 This is from Rajah.com: I'm curious if this was a new rule made by Stephanie McMahon and Triple H? Bunch of hypocrites! So they're cancelling the E! show? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milamber Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 http://botchedspot.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2015/01/2015-01-28-roman-strong1.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakerNGN74 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 So No more Cena and Nikki Bella I guess, my world has been shattered... Seriously the dumbest rule they could have made. What about couples within WWE that are married to one another I.E. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon (already mentioned) and Daniel Bryan and Brie Bella. WWE is seriously nuts in their decision making skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Swanton825 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 This is from Rajah.com: I'm curious if this was a new rule made by Stephanie McMahon and Triple H? Bunch of hypocrites! Unless I'm misreading it, I think it actually refers to wrestlers not being able to go out with people who don't work on-screen. I.E. Cena couldn't dump Nikki for Vince's secretary. Either way, it's cute how WWE tries to convince people they're a "professional" company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packerman120 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 So No more Cena and Nikki Bella I guess, my world has been shattered... Seriously the dumbest rule they could have made. What about couples within WWE that are married to one another I.E. Triple H and Stephanie McMahon (already mentioned) and Daniel Bryan and Brie Bella. WWE is seriously nuts in their decision making skills. You are misunderstanding this. Talent and talent can still date, but talent can't date production people. Unless Cena or Nikki are in production, they're fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammoth Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I wonder if it includes on-screen workers who aren't wrestlers (commentators, interviewers etcetera) because weren't there rumours that WWE didn't like the fact that Dean Ambrose was/is reportedly dating Renee Young? I believe I read somewhere that either Vince McMahon or Triple H thought she'd distract Dean Ambrose when he's in a position to become a real star in the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killagy Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Sam Roberts interviewed Roman Reigns 2 days before the Royal Rumble. "Fans have to realize that as opinionated as they are and the way you want it, the company is the same way and they are gonna do what they wanna do...hopefully, at the end of the day, I'm the one getting rich." Well, may I be damned... Yeah, as much as I hate to admit it, Roman just made himself this era's Kevin Nash as opposed to the next heralded face of the WWE with his comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayW Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Yeah, as much as I hate to admit it, Roman just made himself this era's Kevin Nash as opposed to the next heralded face of the WWE with his comments. Kevin Nash helped usher in one of the biggest boom periods of professional wrestling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitarzu Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Kevin Nash helped usher in one of the biggest boom periods of professional wrestling... Diesel! Diesel! Diesel! Speaking of this year Royal Rumble, the latin motto "Errare humanum est, perseverare autem diabolicum" fits perfectly. It means making mistakes is human, persisting is diabolical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderz Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 So the Network is free for February then; didn't see that coming...... Source: they emailed me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammoth Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Anyone else heard the rumours (not from gossip websites, just general chatter amongst wrestling fans) that The Undertaker is going to return tonight, on the live episode of Smackdown? I think it all stems from the fact that Daniel Bryan will be facing Kane in a Casket Match tonight and although Kane has made the match as equally famous as The Undertaker (although he obviously hasn't been "The Devil's Favourite Demon" for a while now as he's been "Corporate Kane") it's The Undertaker who is most famously associated with the casket. Although it does seem to be a bit of a strange decision for a match stipulation, I don't see why The Undertaker would get involved unless the WWE are leaning towards either Daniel Bryan Vs. The Undertaker or Kane Vs. The Undertaker at Wrestlemania and I don't understand how either would work for a variety of reasons. Daniel Bryan Vs. The Undertaker doesn't make sense in that they're both babyfaces (and it's rumoured it's going to be Daniel Bryan Vs. Dolph Ziggler anyway, right?) and it's about five years too late for the final chapter of Kane and The Undertaker's "brother" storyline because the match would just be awful. To be honest, I'm not sure if there will/should be any more Taker matches in the first place because it's just not going to be that spectacle any more and unless it's Brock Lesnar Vs. The Undertaker in a rematch that Taker wins in retribution (which obviously won't be this year and Taker will be 50/51 next year) the match itself won't mean much. Anyway, I just thought I'd bring the conversation over to Grey Dog and see what y'all think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownsy Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Anyone else heard the rumours (not from gossip websites, just general chatter amongst wrestling fans) that The Undertaker is going to return tonight, on the live episode of Smackdown? I think it all stems from the fact that Daniel Bryan will be facing Kane in a Casket Match tonight and although Kane has made the match as equally famous as The Undertaker (although he obviously hasn't been "The Devil's Favourite Demon" for a while now as he's been "Corporate Kane") it's The Undertaker who is most famously associated with the casket. Although it does seem to be a bit of a strange decision for a match stipulation, I don't see why The Undertaker would get involved unless the WWE are leaning towards either Daniel Bryan Vs. The Undertaker or Kane Vs. The Undertaker at Wrestlemania and I don't understand how either would work for a variety of reasons. Daniel Bryan Vs. The Undertaker doesn't make sense in that they're both babyfaces (and it's rumoured it's going to be Daniel Bryan Vs. Dolph Ziggler anyway, right?) and it's about five years too late for the final chapter of Kane and The Undertaker's "brother" storyline because the match would just be awful. To be honest, I'm not sure if there will/should be any more Taker matches in the first place because it's just not going to be that spectacle any more and unless it's Brock Lesnar Vs. The Undertaker in a rematch that Taker wins in retribution (which obviously won't be this year and Taker will be 50/51 next year) the match itself won't mean much. Anyway, I just thought I'd bring the conversation over to Grey Dog and see what y'all think. I was holding out a fools hope until #29's music hit that #30 was going to be taker, who would win and face Brock on the way out at WM to regain the belt, have one last mini-run to retire, and drop the belt to Rollins. But honestly, with him not even showing up via spooky video, I'm pretty sure we won't see taker again, at least in the ring as a competitor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hashasheen Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 http://whatculture.com/wwe/ultimate-...s-career.php/4 Vince offered Warrior a 5 year contract back in December 1997, with 750,000 per-year, 35% on merchandise (over everyone else topped at 25%), working only 14 days a month. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuba steve Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Thoughts? Does that mean we're 5 years away from Vince overpaying to bring back Punk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moon_lit_tears Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Does that mean we're 5 years away from Vince overpaying to bring back Punk? It will never happen, I doubt Punk will return no matter the pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownsy Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 It will never happen, I doubt Punk will return no matter the pay. I don't think it's likely, but considering even Bret got over it, I think there is always a chance. Though Punk on the surface seems like he will be smart with his money, which of course is the number one driving force for if guys who left on bad terms with management can suddenly "bury the hatchet" later. Honestly, as much of a fan as I am of CM punk, I hope he doesn't come back. would be nice to see a guy get out while financially stable and with his health. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teh_Showtime Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Does that mean we're 5 years away from Vince overpaying to bring back Punk? If some company was also making Punk an offer while destroying WWE in every form of business then maybe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packerman120 Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 So I watched the live tape delay SmackDown. It was pretty good, if I must say. Lots of sexual humor though, which surprised me. For example, Triple H talked about balls... and John Cena said 69 and ho. Not complaining as I laughed a bit but it was a tad strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milamber Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Smackdown was OK. About all you could expect with Show and Kane in the 2 main matches. Rollins was the best part again and he didn't even wrestle. Trips was in full damage mode in the opening segment. NXT was the best show this week (I'm including the Rumble). Kidd vs Neville was good and the Zayn/Owens contract signing gave me goosebumps. Sami's doing great work on the mic and the crew are helping by not giving him cheesy babyface promos. Owens was more menacing than any other heel in the company standing still and staring at Zayn. You can't teach that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitarzu Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Smackdown was OK. About all you could expect with Show and Kane in the 2 main matches. Rollins was the best part again and he didn't even wrestle. Trips was in full damage mode in the opening segment. NXT was the best show this week (I'm including the Rumble). Kidd vs Neville was good and the Zayn/Owens contract signing gave me goosebumps. Owens was more menacing than any other heel in the company standing still and staring at Zayn. You can't teach that. Next will be the first time ever KENTA-Devitt or Itami-Balor. It gives me a certain grade of annoyance knowing it's done in a developmental scene, rather than being a major show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milamber Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 http://i.imgur.com/jpRTItS.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Self Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Watched NXT again this week. Yay Network. I still don't 'get' Baron Corbin. The booking is great. Guy wins fast. Awesome. What I don't understand is the commentators constantly going on about his 'aura' and 'presence'. I don't see it. His hair is thinning. His stomach looks like a face. His real face is wholly inexpressive. His wrestling is fine for developmental. I'm not discounting him, but I've yet to anything too special, besides the booking. Show was good. I like Blake & Murphy (although one's clearly better than the other. Murphy, I think) and Tyson Kidd is the best wrestler in the world. I'm not loving Kevin Owens yet. The indy-mark in me loved the contract signing, because history, but he doesn't convince me as a main-roster ass-kicker. At least not in this segment, where admittedly, there was no ass kicking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.