Some of Todays Wrestling News and Rumours (Possible spoilers) ***NO CHAT***

Riddle101

It's so lame that even now, some higher ups think Daniel Bryan still isn't over. Politics I tell you. Bryan probably will get knocked down a peg eventually though, because from what i see, the guys who do play politics and have egos are the ones who get the stay in the spotlight and keep their positions. The ones who don't have much of an ego and don't really play politics like Daniel Bryan and maybe Chris Jericho to an extent get thrown to the side. That's not a negative on Daniel Bryan, it's a negative on the business and how politics works in the wrestling business.

But Daniel Bryan definitely is over, and it's not because of the chants either, That sounds like something the IWC would say. He's genuinely over and loved by the fans, the yes chants are just a small part of that popularity.

takamichinoku

The Yes chant is far more over than Danielson is, but Danielson is over and very much liked to the point that a sizeable portion of WWE fans are defensive of his ownership of the chant. The chant happening at other events is not at all indicative of DB being over. They're probably overstating the importance of the chant to his being over at this stage though.

rovert

jaykhunter wrote: »

I thought Batista had signed on for a year or so, house shows, the lot?

Two years with breaks to do PR for his film(s).

Riddle101 wrote: »

It's so lame that even now, some higher ups think Daniel Bryan still isn't over. Politics I tell you. Bryan probably will get knocked down a peg eventually though, because from what i see, the guys who do play politics and have egos are the ones who get the stay in the spotlight and keep their positions. The ones who don't have much of an ego and don't really play politics like Daniel Bryan and maybe Chris Jericho to an extent get thrown to the side. That's not a negative on Daniel Bryan, it's a negative on the business and how politics works in the wrestling business.

But Daniel Bryan definitely is over, and it's not because of the chants either, That sounds like something the IWC would say. He's genuinely over and loved by the fans, the yes chants are just a small part of that popularity.

In fairness they are feeding Bryan a 7ft Monster tonight and he will beating Orton all across Europe on the shows over there.

Soft Falling Rain

jaykhunter wrote: »

WWE seem quick to forget they gave New Year's Baby Big Show the YES chant around November. Embarrassing; died a death. Or that they went with Batista in January instead of Bryan, and that died a death. Are WWE officials ignorant enough to expect people to care about Kane, or Kane/Bryan?

In any case the best thing about Bryan is that he's an excellent wrestler and personality, so no matter what garbage they throw at him, he'll always succeed in the end.

They also tried to give it to their darling AJ and it died a death.

Anyway, I find it hard to believe they would have given Bryan his dues at WM if they thought that was true. Maybe that's what they thought at one time, but Bryan has since shown them what's what.

mrkiscool2

As per F4WOnlne

As previously reported, WWE is still looking to convince Batista to work a program with Daniel Bryan for the main event of the upcoming WWE Payback pay-per-view. If those plans fail, WWE already set the stage for their alternative option.

WWE’s “plan B” for the Payback show is to have Daniel Bryan vs. Kane in a Buried Alive match. WWE set things in motion to go that direction at Extreme Rules, as that was said to be the reason that Kane sat-up at the finish of last night’s main event. The feeling was that they needed that last scene in case they are forced to go in that direction.

Very interesting!

Moneymaker

If the rumours that Kane is looking to retire are true that'd be a good way to do it.

Riddle101

So if Batista actually does agree with work with Daniel Bryan then that would have rendered the ending of Bryan/Kane irrelevant. They might have waited before doing something like that.

takamichinoku

So Batista doesn't want to put over Bryan or something? Very weird.

It was so odd that they had him tap at mania, the obvious next feud to me was against him up until he has to leave for the summer.

gnfnrhead

Pretty embarassing that they dont know what the main event will be in less than a months time.

Ape Lincoln

takamichinoku wrote: »

So Batista doesn't want to put over Bryan or something? Very weird.

It was so odd that they had him tap at mania, the obvious next feud to me was against him up until he has to leave for the summer.

Nah, the issue isn't about putting Bryan over. Batista isn't happy about the pay and the title situation ie. he wanted the world belt. Meltzer on the post-Extreme Rules Observer Radio intimated that Batista might not return. As noted here before, his deal was time off in June for Guardians of the Galaxy promo and I think he would've been allowed more time off if he got offered a film. Apparently there's a lot of consternation about the payoffs in WWE atm.

Fwiw, Batista was very generous to Bryan back in a 2010 Raw match where he let Bryan get in more offense than others would've given him.

Mr.Saturn

Ape Lincoln wrote: »

Fwiw, Batista was very generous to Bryan back in a 2010 Raw match where he let Bryan get in more offense than others would've given him.

Then promptly buried him on Twitter following Bryan's first WHC win.

Moneymaker

I don't know how true the rumours are considering Tista tapped clean in the middle to DB when WWE has its biggest audience of the year.

And he jobbed clean in the middle last night too.

No smoke without fire but i'm not sure on this one.

Rjd2

Moneymaker wrote: »

If the rumours that Kane is looking to retire are true that'd be a good way to do it.

Not a dig at you, but I have seen other people saying Kane may soon retire, my understanding has always been Kane is happy their and knows this is where he makes very good money. I'd be surprised if he was not here in 12 months.

JP Liz V1

http://whatculture.com/wwe/batista-unhappy-wwe-refuses-daniel-bryan-match-payback.php

WWE have been trying to convince Batista to wrestle Daniel Bryan at the Payback PPV, reports Wrestling Observer Radio.
The match is in doubt however as Batista isn’t keen on sticking around for the next few months. Reportedly, he is unhappy with how plans changed over the Wrestlemania season and pay being lower than he expected for main eventing the show

I'd prefer a Bryan V HHH rematch

DM_7

I imagine Batista would like to work a programme that sees him get the win in the long run, after his Rumble win he ended up losing at mania and then lost against the Shield.

Moneymaker

He's 45 years old, he should realise his job is to be a draw and put over the guys who will be the future of the company. All while being paid a ton of money to do it.

He shouldn't be winning any titles.

DM_7

Moneymaker wrote: »

He's 45 years old, he should realise his job is to be a draw and put over the guys who will be the future of the company. All while being paid a ton of money to do it.

He shouldn't be winning any titles.

He won't be much of a draw if he keeps losing though.

jaykhunter

DM-ICE wrote: »

He won't be much of a draw if he keeps losing though.

If you are talented and have great matches it wouldn't matter. Like The Rock or Shawn Michaels for the last decade. As long as you're showcased as a big deal you'll be grand!

leggo

I guarantee it's more to do with money than the losing part. A fan added in the losing bit to spice things up and get some anti-Batista sentiment going.

gnfnrhead

leggo wrote: »

I guarantee it's more to do with money than the losing part. A fan added in the losing bit to spice things up and get some anti-Batista sentiment going.

I'd say he was told he was getting the title but obviously that is now highly unlikely.

Mr.Saturn

gnfnrhead wrote: »

I'd say he was told he was getting the title but obviously that is now highly unlikely.

I don't get why he would've been ever slotted in the A+ babyface role after a 3 and a half year hiatus. I mean, it's a role he's virtually never fulfilled for a prolonged period, being shipped off the the B-show as soon as the HHH business finished up, and whatever 'welcome back' sentiment could've ever existed with the crowd would've long since dissipated by the time 'Mania rolled around.

takamichinoku

I presume the heel turn meant his merch sales were terrible for the whole Mania period too.

It's not his fault if the WWE decided he was worth way more than he was and lured him in with promises which they've broken.

leggo

gnfnrhead wrote: »

I'd say he was told he was getting the title but obviously that is now highly unlikely.

Even then, he didn't get over so he has to know that's how wrestling works.

The pay thing sounds legit: paydays would be down since his heyday anyway and the Network switch involved everyone taking a short-term hit so it probably wasn't what he was anticipating. Add that to a general, "I'm a movie star, I don't need this ****" vibe I'd imagine he has and it sounds credible.

If he does walk, though, I can see that being the last we see of Big Dave.

DM_7

jaykhunter wrote: »

If you are talented and have great matches it wouldn't matter. Like The Rock or Shawn Michaels for the last decade. As long as you're showcased as a big deal you'll be grand!

Well he is neither of them and losing/ putting people over will put an end to him being a showcase talent. Batista imo should be leaving for his movie promo break strong to have any value upon his return. No sign of that at the moment.

JP Liz V1

Batista's return this year has been a failure imo especially him winning the rumble

Ape Lincoln

Just on the pay thing: the first Network show was Wrestlemania and those paychecks aren't expected for at least another month as it's 90 days after the event they get paid when the PPV money is freed up. The issue the workers are not happy about is apparently with house show payments as house show profits are down.

leggo

Ape Lincoln wrote: »

Just on the pay thing: the first Network show was Wrestlemania and those paychecks aren't expected for at least another month as it's 90 days after the event they get paid when the PPV money is freed up. The issue the workers are not happy about is apparently with house show payments as house show profits are down.

Cool, cheers. I'm playing catch up on the whole story, just getting bits and bobs in work all day.

krudler

Ape Lincoln wrote: »

Just on the pay thing: the first Network show was Wrestlemania and those paychecks aren't expected for at least another month as it's 90 days after the event they get paid when the PPV money is freed up. The issue the workers are not happy about is apparently with house show payments as house show profits are down.

Are the wrestlers on a pay by play basis or do they have guaranteed money? I imagine the bigger names are on fixed figures and dates but say newer guys or lower card performers, there must be a few being paid to do sod all as well who you never see on tv.

Ape Lincoln

krudler wrote: »

Are the wrestlers on a pay by play basis or do they have guaranteed money? I imagine the bigger names are on fixed figures and dates but say newer guys or lower card performers, there must be a few being paid to do sod all as well who you never see on tv.

They have what is called a downside which is a guarantee of sorts. As someone said elsewhere video game money and the Mania paycheck is a big part of your pay - Kevin Nash said he was on something like $500 a week at one point and until you got the Mania check you couldn't plan your year financially. Then there's house show dates/appearances, home video royalties and merch money as well. Afaik PPV pay was never a scientific method but rather allocated based on your position on the card etc. JTG who hasn't been on TV in ages shows up to TV, does nothing, goes home, gets paid his basic downside and likely little else as he's not on TV or promoted in anyway.

Jim Ross spoke about this in detail on a podcast recently. Can't remember which one though, either PWTorch or The LAW. (think it was the former).

gnfnrhead

krudler wrote: »

Are the wrestlers on a pay by play basis or do they have guaranteed money? I imagine the bigger names are on fixed figures and dates but say newer guys or lower card performers, there must be a few being paid to do sod all as well who you never see on tv.

Everyone gets a guaranteed amount assuming they meet certain criteria. Anything after that is extra depending on how many dates you work, merchandise sales etc. Punk, for example, apparently filled his criteria and as such was able to leave without being sued.