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

[lazorbeak]

Actually, I find Remianen, a bit different from you. While I do disagree with his conclusions sometimes, I cannot dispute his facts. He's also better at presenting an opinion that's not... well... entirely dismissive.

 

Even if that's true, I don't see how that justifies fatallylost's behavior at all. Even his edit is extremely disrespectful.

 

But it's not my intent to be dismissive, but to have a debate. Sorry if it comes off otherwise. I presented an opinion, and clarified it with evidence. The rest is just tone, which is open to interpretation.

[ampulator]

I didn't justify his behavior. I disagreed with how he went about it.

[Tag01]

Smackdown was very... TNAish this week. I was left wonder "What's the point of this?" after nearly every segment.

[Guest canyoudothecancan]

Smackdown was very... TNAish this week. I was left wonder "What's the point of this?" after nearly every segment.

 

I didn't watch smackdown tonight.

I take it you didn't enjoy the show?

[djthefunkchris]

To all that it concerns. Sometimes when we post, or read a post, it comes off entirely different then how we meant it to sound, or how they meant it to sound. I find myself making the same mistakes/judgement calls, although I really do try to practice what I preach.

 

I find these boards for the most part, objective and mature. Unless someone is obviously a troll/troublemaker, most likely NEW or recreated to get back on the boards, we should take posts in the most positive way possible. As I said, I've taken things wrong, and said things wrong myself, so it's not like I think that's easy to do.

 

On topic: I watched Smackdown, and found it interesting. Possibly our new champ was in too many segments, but I think I liked that. Kind of makes me think he might not duck and dive everyone. Also liked that most people didn't even try to mess with him, when he was obviously messing with them (Liked the Hart Dynasty thing that he interrupted for example).

[Hyde Hill]

Smackdown was very... TNAish this week. I was left wonder "What's the point of this?" after nearly every segment.

 

Except TNA had more wrestling last week then RAW and Smackdown combined lol.

[Self]

I wasn't a huge fan of Smackdown either, finding myself yearning for a nice wrestling match to break up the shenanigans. I liked Dolph taking out Khali. I liked how Punk gave Gallows and Serena a chance to talk. I still love Drew McIntyre's music. I didn't see the last segment, with Swagger reading a prepared statement, but if it's anything like how Lance Storm did it back in the day I'm sure I'd have liked that too.

 

... but on the whole, not a fan.

[Linsolv]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hyde Hill" data-cite="Hyde Hill" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Except TNA had more wrestling last week then RAW and Smackdown combined lol.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> There's wrestling on RAW? I just watch to hear Randy Orton talk about punting VKM, and see The Miz.</p>

[PeterHilton]

<p>I don't want to jumpm too far into this, but I really don't think lazorbeak saying that it's easier for bigger guys to get over or that's more prevalent is that much of a stretch. </p><p> </p><p> I mean..we can ALL name exceptions to the rule as it were, but we could also if we tried list hundred of guyys who's size was an asset and who - in fact - probably only had a job BECAUSE of their size.</p><p> </p><p> It's a part of the industry. It is. Bieing bigger helps in wrestler. Hell, it's a part of TEW. Wrestling nerds should just come to terms with it.</p><p> </p><p> It doesn't mean smaller workers can't succeed; it just makes it tougher. </p><p> </p><p> The one thing I did want to disagree with is this examplelazor used:</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> I'm not really saying anything controversial here, so I don't know why people have a problem with this? To take a related example from another sport, anybody who knows anything about boxing can attest to the fact that heavyweight fighters generally aren't the most talented or the most scientific of boxers, but who draws the big money and attracts all the casual fans, Mike Tyson or Oscar De La Hoya? It doesn't matter that Oscar was a better pure fighter, people believed Tyson was a bad-ass and would pay money to see him.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Tyson was actually considered small for a heavyweight. He's a actually a great example of a guy who was intimidating because of his ring presence and performance made him a bad ass. </p><p> </p><p> And De La Hoya was a phenomenal draw and in fact was a bigger draw than Tyson over the length of his career. De La Hoya/Mayweather is the standard by which all boxing/MMA PPVs will be measured for years to come.</p><p> </p><p> I know your over-all point was that the heavyweights draw more than the 'more talented' middleweights classes (which is incredibly debatable in today's boxing) but the example was iffy.</p>

[TommyDreamerFan]

I don't want to jumpm too far into this, but I really don't think lazorbeak saying that it's easier for bigger guys to get over or that's more prevalent is that much of a stretch.

 

I mean..we can ALL name exceptions to the rule as it were, but we could also if we tried list hundred of guyys who's size was an asset and who - in fact - probably only had a job BECAUSE of their size.

 

It's a part of the industry. It is. Bieing bigger helps in wrestler. Hell, it's a part of TEW. Wrestling nerds should just come to terms with it.

 

It doesn't mean smaller workers can't succeed; it just makes it tougher.

 

I agree with this 100%

 

A guy like Big Show wouldn't be nearly as over if it wasn't for his Size. Hell he may of not even had a job if it wasn't for that (I clearly recall post-wrestlemania 2000 when homeboy was jobbing on Heat)

 

For a smaller guy to get over, he has to compensate for his lack of Big Man aura by being ultra-talented and charismatic... Like Chris Jericho.

[Slim Jim]

Big Show is great for a guy his size. Bits the heck out of Khali or Giant Gonzalez, or other freakishly big attractions like Yokozuna from way back when. There was a time when Show could perform a moonsault, or so I've heard through wrestling folklore

 

Being massive/impressive looking makes it much, much easier to get over initially. Staying over long term isn't that much easier though. Once someone overcomes an unstoppable force, that aura often fades. Khali, Umaga, Goldberg even. That's why I think it's worth putting the effort into getting someone like Daniel Bryan over, because he has the in ring talent to sustain the highest level without some sort of weird mystique, unlike Khali, who faded pretty spectacularly once he'd been beaten a couple of times because people realised 1) he's beatable and 2) he's pretty damn poor.

[BurningHamster]

Being massive/impressive looking makes it much, much easier to get over initially. Staying over long term isn't that much easier though. Once someone overcomes an unstoppable force, that aura often fades. Khali, Umaga, Goldberg even. That's why I think it's worth putting the effort into getting someone like Daniel Bryan over, because he has the in ring talent to sustain the highest level without some sort of weird mystique, unlike Khali, who faded pretty spectacularly once he'd been beaten a couple of times because people realised 1) he's beatable and 2) he's pretty damn poor.

 

I agree with this which is why it is important to get some smaller guys who can go in the ring over. Once they are over, few people remember how many times they lose because they are entertaining and nobody expects them to win all the time whereas your big giant guys with limited talent pretty much live and die based on their win/loss record.

[Tag01]

I wasn't a huge fan of Smackdown either, finding myself yearning for a nice wrestling match to break up the shenanigans. I liked Dolph taking out Khali. I liked how Punk gave Gallows and Serena a chance to talk. I still love Drew McIntyre's music. I didn't see the last segment, with Swagger reading a prepared statement, but if it's anything like how Lance Storm did it back in the day I'm sure I'd have liked that too.

 

... but on the whole, not a fan.

 

I liked those things as well, just not the whole picture in general. It just seemed like they were trying to reset the disposition of half the roster. And really, that's not a big deal every once in a while. It's only annoying when TNA does it every week.

 

The thing with Kane vs. NXT was awful though.

[ampulator]

What happened to slow-build pushes that WWE used to? Have they forgotten that's how they succeed with Stone Cold Steve Austin, and to a much lesser extent, John Cena?

[Tag01]

What happened to slow-build pushes that WWE used to? Have they forgotten that's how they succeed with Stone Cold Steve Austin, and to a much lesser extent, John Cena?

 

I don't know. And I don't mind the occaisonal fast riser, but they JUST did this with Sheamus, and are in the process of knocking him back down the card already it seems.

[jwt13]

Well its nice to try to haves some new blood with the belt but really Swagger? The man who had won three matches the whole three months before this and I belive lost to Santino a few times. I thought Vince knew how to produce new talent but these last few times hes fell flat its almost like hes desperate but Sheamus could have been a monster with proper build up and Swagger with proper build up would be good to but just winning it out of the blue like that makes no sense. I could name three people who are young on Smackdown that could be better champions, Shelton Benjamin, Morrision, and I even think Shad would be good

[The Shape]

Well its nice to try to haves some new blood with the belt but really Swagger? The man who had won three matches the whole three months before this and I belive lost to Santino a few times. I thought Vince knew how to produce new talent but these last few times hes fell flat its almost like hes desperate but Sheamus could have been a monster with proper build up and Swagger with proper build up would be good to but just winning it out of the blue like that makes no sense. I could name three people who are young on Smackdown that could be better champions, Shelton Benjamin, Morrision, and I even think Shad would be good

 

lol. First of all Shelton is 34. To mention Shad when an argument against Swagger is he hasn't been pushed until right now is ridiculous. And Morrison is surely an example of the slow build that the above poster is looking for. Same with Kofi. Playing the face, it takes longer, and it should. Swagger can work a good match, has star written all over him, and he's not amazing on the mic but nor are any of the guys you listed and that'll improve with time, especially working with Edge and Jericho. And besides right now he doesn't even need to be great in that respect.

[Self]

I really don't like WWE's usual low-rise-to-the-top method of "making stars". MVP. Morrison. Shelton. Many others. Their pushes stop, start, gain momentum, lose momentum, it's awful. By the time they reach the top, they've become stale and boring (to me at least). Jeff Hardy is an example. I love Jeff. Always have, always will, but by the time he got the belt, I'd already seen everything he can do.

 

It's similar with MVP. I was really into him a while back. If they put the strap on him then, I would have totally marked out. Now? Wouldn't care. Morrison's the same. In 6 months, Miz will probably be the same.

 

Obviously, the Sheamus/Swagger super-sudden push isn't right either, but I'd prefer WWE pushed guys to the top faster. Vladamir Koslov was the wrong guy, but I loved how long it took him to go from squashing jobbers to main eventing with Triple H. When he got his title shot I was still interested in him.

[crownsy]

I don't know. And I don't mind the occaisonal fast riser, but they JUST did this with Sheamus, and are in the process of knocking him back down the card already it seems.

 

Feuding with HHH is down the card?

 

Since when?

[Linsolv]

Feuding with HHH is down the card?

 

Since when?

 

That seemed to be the reaction from everybody when he lost his match with Hunter.

 

That he's getting pushed back down, I mean.

[Tag01]

Feuding with HHH is down the card?

 

Since when?

 

Let's see where he goes after getting beaten at WM. If they keep the HHH fued going, sweet. I just have a feeling he's out of the limelight shortly.

[jesterx7769]

Let's see where he goes after getting beaten at WM. If they keep the HHH fued going, sweet. I just have a feeling he's out of the limelight shortly.

 

I agree. For Triple H it was just a way to start solidifying him as a singles main eventer again (if HBK stays gone for awhile)

[PeterHilton]

You guys missed the attack on Trip while he was saying goodbye to HBK last week?

 

This goes at least one more PPV.

 

EDIT: Also, Unless Trips turns, they needs Sheamus to continue his main event run. Batista is supposedly taking time off which leaves RAw with a HUUUUGE need for heels. And even if Trips turns, Sheamus could work extended programs with Orton and Kofi...I'm not a huge fan of the guy but I don't think he's moving down the card any time soon. Out of necessity if anything.

[The Shape]

Belfast Brawl ftw.

[TommyDreamerFan]

http://www.wrestlecrap.com/newinduction2.html

 

Remember the Hogan chant that broke out during the Goldberg/Lesnar match? FINALLY AN EXPLANATION!