Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Boards WWE Draft spectacular!

Options
1…2728303233…53

Comments

  • Options
    #872
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Vince still doesn't have net access so asked me to make his pick for him. Pretty good pick too me thinks.

    RebelRockChick is up next.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #873
    RebelRockChick
    Registered Users Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭RebelRockChick


    Have made my "Superstar" pick....

    Next up, b.ie curious


  • Options
    #874
    Fozzy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    Billy Graham's another of the big names that I thought would go sooner


  • Options
    #875
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Nice pick, RRC. Was surprised the Superstar didn't go sooner myself. Just made b.ie curious' pick there.

    I have to get something to eat now but I'll try and make my pick as soon as I can and maybe we'll make good progress this evening.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #876
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    OK just made my pick. Sorry for the delay but I was hoping for Youtube to sort itself out. It seems to be having problems.

    Hopefully it will correct itself later.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #877
    Fozzy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    Your second video is of DDP


  • Options
    #878
    Danger_Dave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 516 ✭✭✭Danger_Dave


    Fozzy wrote: »
    Your second video is of DDP


    Quick lets penalize him. Take his pick away ! :)


  • Options
    #879
    Fozzy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    Danger_Dave wrote: »
    Quick lets penalize him. Take his pick away ! :)

    I'm thinking about it. He seems to think that just because he set this thing up that he can flaunt the rules. He'll come up with some loophole now where he gets DDP too, just watch


  • Options
    #880
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Can you guys see the videos? I can't even access Youtube at the minute. :pac:

    Edit: OK I think I fixed it now. :)

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #881
    Bounty Hunter
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,647 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bounty Hunter


    Orestes was marked down as having pick the RnR express in the OP of the picks thread


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #882
    Fozzy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    Bounty Hunter wrote: »
    Orestes was marked down as having pick the RnR express in the OP of the picks thread

    Oh ****, I actually thought that I'd done that and went to check it but I didn't spot it


  • Options
    #883
    orestes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,972 ✭✭✭orestes


    Ok, I'm a teeny bit hungover from last night (just home from the impromptu beers last night, ended up in bloody Maynooth somehow) so I gotta take a nap and then I'll make my pick, sorry for the delay guys :o


  • Options
    #884
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Bloody hell orestes you're cutting it close. You've got less than two hours to choose or you'll miss your turn and you won't be able to pick!

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #885
    orestes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,972 ✭✭✭orestes


    Done now, man that was close! If they aren't recognised as a tag-team by the rules edit the pick and I'll take Malenko. Gotta run, late for work!


  • Options
    #886
    Danger_Dave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 516 ✭✭✭Danger_Dave


    Dean Malenko and Perry saturn tagged for nearly six months in the WWE in 00. Think they'd have to be considered a tag team.


  • Options
    #887
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Malenko and Saturn is a good pick. Didn't enter my thoughts at all.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #888
    Danger_Dave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 516 ✭✭✭Danger_Dave


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    Malenko and Saturn is a good pick. Didn't enter my thoughts at all.


    It did for me, but i was just hoping to pick Dean Malenko in a later round


  • Options
    #889
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,344 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I thought of them but didnt think they'd eb allowed (although i dont remember them being a two man team, i only really remember them as a foursome with Eddie and Chris)


  • Options
    #890
    orestes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,972 ✭✭✭orestes


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    Malenko and Saturn is a good pick. Didn't enter my thoughts at all.

    I just wanted Malenko to be honest, but figured Saturn could come in useful.

    I'm not sure how long they teamed up for but I definitely remember them being a team for a while after the Radicalz angle ended. Like I said, I'm not entirely sure if they count as an established team so if anyone has any objections let me know and I'll just take Malenko


  • Options
    #891
    michael.etc...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 937 ✭✭✭michael.etc...


    I guess it's down to MNG, but i would think they should be included and it would be harsh to discount them. i remember them being a regular unit with Terri as manager, around the time when Perry fell in love with Moppy.

    Jesus christ....

    I was suprised AJ Styles was allowed. Does that mean that anyone who wrestled in dark matches/as a jobber is allowed? That seems to be stretching it in my opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #892
    Bounty Hunter
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,647 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bounty Hunter


    michael.etc... wrote: »

    I was suprised AJ Styles was allowed. Does that mean that anyone who wrestled in dark matches/as a jobber is allowed? That seems to be stretching it in my opinion.

    cant remember who picked AJ but i thought that too, got me questioing the whole you get the wrestler at their peak thing, ie does their peak have to be in the WWE? cos i dont really recall AJ's WWE peak. would open up a lot of picks in my head also of people who only spent a short amount of time in WWE but were great elsewhere.


  • Options
    #893
    michael.etc...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 937 ✭✭✭michael.etc...


    ^^^ yeah surely if you picked AJ as a WWE guy, he'd only count as a jobber, because that's all he did there.

    But he was also never under any sort of contract if i remember, so like celebrities, he wasn't an actual employee.. Hmm confusing...


  • Options
    #894
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    With regard to the wrestler being at their peak thing, I was in favour of the wrestler's peak being strictly within WWE, but others didn't appear to want that much restriction so that requirement effectively went by the wayside. Bubs in an earlier round asked for:
    I kind of need to ask permission before I make this pick because I have a feeling I will probably have to revoke it.

    If I pick the Steiner brothers can I have the two of them from their time in the magnificent 7? They did certainly have a match at that time
    # March 5, 2001 - Nitro: Booker T & Diamond Dallas Page defeated The Steiner Brothers

    This was allowed and AJ Styles went on to be picked (whose prime was certainly not as a jobber in WWE).
    michael.etc wrote:
    I was suprised AJ Styles was allowed. Does that mean that anyone who wrestled in dark matches/as a jobber is allowed? That seems to be stretching it in my opinion.

    In the very first rule of the contest we allowed those who wrestled in dark matches/as a jobber to be eligible for selection. No objections were made then.

    I'm sad to see Sunny picked. I had her very high up on my list.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #895
    michael.etc...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 937 ✭✭✭michael.etc...


    Ahh right. Fair enough then. I think the peak not being in WWE/ Eligibility of jobbers doesn't quite sit right, but since it's within the rules, no complaints here!

    Sure the first time things are done, there'll always be little things up for tweaking next time round.


  • Options
    #896
    Machismo Fan
    Registered Users Posts: 6,943 ✭✭✭Machismo Fan


    I've been watching this for ages and I'm very surprised at some of the people who were picked before Dean Malenko.


  • Options
    #897
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Seeing as we seem to have a bit of a lull in the challenge while we wait for Justbringit89 to make his pick, I figured I'd put forward some ideas I've been having about determining the overall winner.

    These ideas are NOT final and are open to suggestions but if they meet general approval then great. Here's what I suggest...
      Once the final pick has been made in the challenge we will do a final draw to determine the order of our draft presentations.
      The idea is that our rosters will make up sixty minute TV programmes much like the shows from the old days (and ECW today). Each roster will be given a World Title and you can place that on whomever you want. You will also be given a secondary title (IC Title, US title, ECW it's up to you) and you place that on whomever you want. Tag titles, women's titles would be
    optional and NOT required.
      You outline the direction for your roster and your respective feuds. For example:
    "So-and-so will be my World Champion. I intend to have him engage in a feud with _____. I will have my IC champ be _______ and he can feud with ______."

    You can basically be as imaginative with it as you wish and can put in as much detail as you want.
      I think it was Minto who suggested putting together cards. I feel it would be quite interesting if we took the line that a big PPV event is about two months away and that we each have to put forward three matches for this event. So for example:
    "My main event feud will culminate at the PPV with my World Champion _____ taking on (insert name(s) here). I will have a match featuring ______ against _______ " etc.
      Adopting a similar tactic to Bounty Hunter's Around The Horn challenge, each participant will be allowed to make a post in which they query a roster but that they can do this only ONCE per roster. So for instance if I make my case for my roster, each participant can ask me questions - and I am entitled to respond to them - but therein ends that particular exchange. I think that's the best way to avoid this discussion thread being derailed into a flame war about why so-and-so is no use etc. So to sum up this point, each participant can query each roster but you can do so
    ONLY ONCE. You can respond to every query made about your own roster.
      When each participant has made their case for their roster, you choose your top 5 rosters (can't pick your own one obviously!). Roster number one will be worth 10 points, number two will be worth 7 points, number three will be worth 5 points, number four will be worth 3 points and number five will be worth 1 point. You PM me your lists and I will publish them on an agreed date in a full and frank manner to ensure fairness (and ensure my maths skills are accurate!) and we will crown the inaugural winner of the first Boards WWE Draft Spectacular.

    Thoughts, suggestions, criticisms all welcome!

    Edit: Upon reflection, a draw to determine the order seems like a step too far. We'll simply set a deadline for each roster summary to be in by.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Options
    #898
    Bounty Hunter
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,647 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bounty Hunter


    that sounds like a really good idea MNG, will make for some great reading after that final draw when everyone outlines the direction of their roster. Some people might not like the slight debate style of it but id give it a big thumbs up and think it would be a good way to end such a thread.

    btw dont think it makes sense as a sticky but hope the other thread sticks around for quite a while as it really makes for great reading/viewing.


  • Options
    #899
    Fozzy
    Registered Users Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭Fozzy


    Is there any need to do a draw for the final bit? Number one doesn't get any advantage over number 20 apart from maybe having their piece read first by most people. I don't see any reason not to just allow people to post their bit whenever they're ready. It would probably get done quicker too


  • Options
    #900
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,535 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Fozzy wrote: »
    Is there any need to do a draw for the final bit? Number one doesn't get any advantage over number 20 apart from maybe having their piece read first by most people. I don't see any reason not to just allow people to post their bit whenever they're ready. It would probably get done quicker too

    Well I wanted to make sure everyone got the opportunity to have their say but I think you're right actually.

    If we instead announce a deadline and tell people to have their summary in by then it would be a lot quicker and smoother so let's not do a draw.

    'It is better to walk alone in the right direction than follow the herd walking in the wrong direction.'



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #901
    michael.etc...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 937 ✭✭✭michael.etc...


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    • The idea is that our rosters will make up sixty minute TV programmes much like the shows from the old days (and ECW today). Each roster will be given a World Title and you can place that on whomever you want. You will also be given a secondary title (IC Title, US title, ECW it's up to you) and you place that on whomever you want. Tag titles, women's titles would be optional and NOT required.
    • You outline the direction for your roster and your respective feuds. For example:

      "So-and-so will be my World Champion. I intend to have him engage in a feud with _____. I will have my IC champ be _______ and he can feud with ______."

      You can basically be as imaginative with it as you wish and can put in as much detail as you want.
    • I think it was Minto who suggested putting together cards. I feel it would be quite interesting if we took the line that a big PPV event is about two months away and that we each have to put forward three matches for this event. So for example:

      "My main event feud will culminate at the PPV with my World Champion _____ taking on (insert name(s) here). I will have a match featuring ______ against _______ " etc.
    • Adopting a similar tactic to Bounty Hunter's Around The Horn challenge, each participant will be allowed to make a post in which they query a roster but that they can do this only ONCE per roster.

      So for instance if I make my case for my roster, each participant can ask me questions - and I am entitled to respond to them - but therein ends that particular exchange. I think that's the best way to avoid this discussion thread being derailed into a flame war about why so-and-so is no use etc.

      So to sum up this point, each participant can query each roster but you can do so ONLY ONCE. You can respond to every query made about your own roster.
    • When each participant has made their case for their roster, you choose your top 5 rosters (can't pick your own one obviously!). Roster number one will be worth 10 points, number two will be worth 7 points, number three will be worth 5 points, number four will be worth 3 points and number five will be worth 1 point.

      You PM me your lists and I will publish them on an agreed date in a full and frank manner to ensure fairness (and ensure my maths skills are accurate!) and we will crown the inaugural winner of the first Boards WWE Draft Spectacular.
    Thoughts, suggestions, criticisms all welcome!

    Edit: Upon reflection, a draw to determine the order seems like a step too far. We'll simply set a deadline for each roster summary to be in by.

    That all sounds sensible and fair to me. Well done on laying that out for us. A couple of questions though, which might be me being stupid...

    Do we post questions about each others rosters in this thread? And does this occur before, or during when we've sent you the final tally of points? We might need a deadline for posting the roster etc.. then another for any discussion that follows, then another again for the lists to be Pm'd.
    I'm just thinking, it might make sense to have a completed roster discussion thread? we could all make one post there, with our complete roster, and arguments, but then if anyone has any queries, they go here?
    Okay, confusing myself now..


Advertisement