nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Random Wrasslin' thoughts.....

gimmick

So this is a thread for your musings which do not deserve an entire thread of its own.

For example

I just watched Card Subject To Change. Horrific to think that since its been made the following has happened -

Kamala has become an amputee

Sensational Sherrie, Paul Bearer and Trent Acid are dead

Had Kevin Sullivan and Nancy stayed together one of Wrestlings darkest moments would be completely different or never would have happened.

Lacey Von Erich almost became a diva. She is also crazy hot. Pure nom.

I also mused that even while Sherri was a dispicable heel while she was on tv she may well have been my first celeb crush.

All this in one lazy evening.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

gnfnrhead wrote: »

NXT doesn't have a great hit rate to date. The current NXT guys could just as easily be sent back to development or released altogether. Ability has little to do with it as Cesaro has shown. He ticks all the boxes and has proven he can get over but gets next to nothing.

Speaking of next top faces after Cena and Reigns, there's a man who could have and should have been in line. The organic support of the fans in early 2014 was cemented at the Andre Battle Royal at WrestleMania. Why oh why could they just not insisted have him going as tweener turning face with a gradual Heyman rift (if the Heyman thing was a goer). Perfect emergency feud with Brock right there. Idiots.

rossie1977

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Without that reputation, I think they could have taken huge steps towards catching up with WWE recently.

nah. tna are incapable of building stars, building matches or events people want to see or pay money for. even now we are 3 weeks away from bfg and tna haven't built or even teased a single match for that show, their so called wrestlemania.

the biggest thing they did all summer was putting dixie through a table and even that didn't resonate with tna fans like they thought it would.

nxt are far ahead of tna in those 3 aspects i mentioned and yet its still an internet/hardcore smark fad for the most part

gnfnrhead wrote: »

NXT doesn't have a great hit rate to date.

what hit rate are you expecting? personally i think if you can turn 25% of your developmental roster into main roster members (members not maineventers!) you are doing great. thats far higher than you get from minors to seniors in gaelic football or from youth squad to premier league e.g

ovw was tna developmental facility for 2 years and how many came through in that time..compare that with how many have come through nxt in 2 years. at mitb 2014 some 13 of the wrestlers on that card had come through nxt/fcw since april 2012 (14 if you include lana)

Reganio 2

I think some people expect too much from Next it's only been the show we know now for 2 years the time before that it was a challenge show with matches and the likes but it came across as a joke it's very hard to get over when you first time you are seen is making a fool of yourself.

Also it hasn't been going that long not many people come in as main eventers from the start they work their way up which usually includes parts were they are stale or not used and then they get something and run with it. Think it's to early to be giving out about NXTs success rate.

gnfnrhead

rossie1977 wrote: »

nah. tna are incapable of building stars, building matches or events people want to see or pay money for. even now we are 3 weeks away from bfg and tna haven't built or even teased a single match for that show, their so called wrestlemania.

the biggest thing they did all summer was putting dixie through a table and even that didn't resonate with tna fans like they thought it would.

nxt are far ahead of tna in those 3 aspects i mentioned and yet its still an internet/hardcore smark fad for the most part

Thanks for proving my point. I said without that reputation and you go on to use that reputation as an argument against it. People will gladly watch three hours of crap every Monday night but due to the bad reputation TNA have made for themselves (and it is 99.9% self inflicted) the majority will refuse to watch it, despite the fact they have produced several months of very good quality TV. This past week had two great matches and a couple of good matches but it is largely ignored due to that reputation.

what hit rate are you expecting? personally i think if you can turn 25% of your developmental roster into main roster members (members not maineventers!) you are doing great. thats far higher than you get from minors to seniors in gaelic football or from youth squad to premier league e.g

ovw was tna developmental facility for 2 years and how many came through in that time..compare that with how many have come through nxt in 2 years. at mitb 2014 some 13 of the wrestlers on that card had come through nxt/fcw since april 2012 (14 if you include lana)

Producing midcarders was never a problem. FCW did that for a lot less expense. Producing main event level talent is the problem. Who have NXT or WWE in general produced of that level in recent years? Daniel Bryan spent a couple of weeks in development to get match fit again. You can hardly credit them for him. Dolph Ziggler at a massive stretch?

A lot of people seem to be of the belief that once you join NXT you are almost guaranteed to end up a main event level star. That isn't the case. They have yet to produce a since main event talent. With the resources that have been pumped into NXT, that is a very poor return. FCW got almost nothing and produced roughly the same but was deemed a failure.

leggo

We've had this debate before and I think you expect way too much, too fast from developing guys. It takes time to get to main event level and it's almost always down to talent whether they make that jump or not. It's not NXT's or WWE's fault that Barrett has bad luck with injuries, for example. Or that Cesaro isn't doing anything particularly special to compel people with what he's given (how has he evolved from the generic Swiss character a few years ago, for example? Any catchphrases or gear changes or anything at all he's done to get over? Why should WWE Creative drop everything to make the character interesting to their audience when they have other people like Miz giving them stuff to work with?) Or that Adam Rose is a one-trick pony who never developed past the cool entrance on his debut.

People need to attribute blame to the right sources, and understand how much of a wrestler succeeding is on themselves, even if that means holding a wrestler they like responsible for their own downfalls. Sheamus, for example (so you see I'm not biased - I want him to succeed), had a lot of his early success given to him and is now responsible for his own midcard mediocrity as he just seems happy to have a job right now instead of pushing forward to that next level. Why should WWE give time and energy to a guy who won't meet them halfway?

The benefit of NXT, for WWE, is that they're getting in raw material guys and training them up exactly as they want them, while also having an outlet that they 100% control to give these guys some early, low-level exposure to their audience. They want to create an athletic environment filled with guys reared in the WWE ethos rather than picking up experienced talent from the indies who may have picked up years' worth of bad habits that they can't un-train (listen to Christopher Daniels on Austin's podcast for an example of this - it became crystal clear to me after listening to the wrong turns an immensely talented guy like him had made that meant he could never be a star in WWE, and those misguided beliefs were so ingrained in his beliefs about what wrestling is that it'd be easier for WWE to start from scratch with someone new) NXT's job is to give people the tools WWE need to push them onto the next level, not create main event talent. That process doesn't even start until they've graduated from NXT.

Insect Overlord

leggo wrote: »

Or that Cesaro isn't doing anything particularly special to compel people with what he's given (how has he evolved from the generic Swiss character a few years ago, for example? Any catchphrases or gear changes or anything at all he's done to get over? Why should WWE Creative drop everything to make the character interesting to their audience when they have other people like Miz giving them stuff to work with?)

In fairness, he was flying it when he introduced the giant swing and the suplex from the second rope. For some reason his popularity was seen as a negative so they took those elements away from him.

[Deleted User]

Yeah Cesaro got himself fairly over in the run up to Mania. He seemed over last night also. To say he hasn't done anything is unfair, he's been in MOTY contenders with John Cena on Raw and Sami Zayn on NXT, they're polar opposites. So he's working hard at both ends of the spectrum whether it's in developmental or main events. It's definitely the booking/creative at fault for his fall from grace IMO.

And he tweaked his ring gear last night with the killer towel over the head and robe look

leggo

The Giant Swing was a great addition, agreed, and I gave him credit as such around this time last year. However you also have to work with what you're given and WWE want him as a heel (fans didn't care enough to want otherwise to enforce a change, ultimately, too) so he has to roll with those punches. And, for the record, I 100% agree that he's best suited as a heel right now: his lack of charisma would leave him struggling as a babyface like Sheamus is now, whereas as a heel he can focus on his positives in the ring.

Ultimately, though, look at him now compared to in 2012 and you see exactly the same guy. I always say that it's easy to look good when you have creative pulling out the stops for you, but the real test is if you can remain so when they're not (and WWE will deliberately test guys in this regard by leaving them in limbo and seeing how they get on, they're doing so with Bray Wyatt now). Cesaro finds his spot in the midcard - a solid mechanic who can have a good match but doesn't offer much more than that - when the spotlight is off. CM Punk simply wouldn't ever have allowed that to happen, Dolph Ziggler is constantly working to raise his stock no matter what he's given, as is Damien Sandow. If you sit back and just do what you're told without offering more, you're gonna deservedly get put behind those guys in the pecking order.

To get this back on-point: look at how little NXT or developmental has been mentioned with regards to any people brought up in this debate. It's because it's not at all relevant to judging guys on this level.

Whosthis

The current/classic IC title belt is my favourite ever belt design. I marked like crazy when Cody Rhodes brought it back a few years ago.

I absolutely detest the US championship belt, it looks like a plastic toy.

If the WWE ever hope to return any prestige to their secondary titles the US belt needs a complete redesign.

D.Q

The 2000 Royal Rumble is pretty terrible.

[Deleted User]

Whosthis wrote: »

The current/classic IC title belt is my favourite ever belt design. I marked like crazy when Cody Rhodes brought it back a few years ago.

I absolutely detest the US championship belt, it looks like a plastic toy.

If the WWE ever hope to return any prestige to their secondary titles the US belt needs a complete redesign.

Wouldn't mind seeing Cesaro making it the European title and having the likes of himself, Sheamus, Barrett and Rusev all in the hunt for it. And if a yank wins it again, have them defend it as the US Title. Basically ya can represent whichever ya want.

Reebrock

D.Q wrote: »

The 2000 Royal Rumble is pretty terrible.

There were some cool moments in the match, but because it was such a blatant two man race the match felt like it was just running through the motions until the obvious last two wrestlers were left standing.

Riddle101

D.Q wrote: »

The 2000 Royal Rumble is pretty terrible.

Triple H Vs Cactus Jack and The elimination tables match made that PPV what it was though. The rumble itself was boring though. Not enough star power.

krudler

Riddle101 wrote: »

Triple H Vs Cactus Jack and The elimination tables match made that PPV what it was though. The rumble itself was boring though. Not enough star power.

Taz and Angle had a great opening match too.

Moneymaker

And the Dudleys and Hardy's had an awesome tag match.

The undercard made that show.

gnfnrhead

Reebrock wrote: »

There were some cool moments in the match, but because it was such a blatant two man race the match felt like it was just running through the motions until the obvious last two wrestlers were left standing.

The same can be said almost every year. One or two stand out favourites (Batista and Bryan in the most recent) along with a small number who have a small chance of the win but were never likely to actually do it (Punk and Reigns). Go through every Rumble and you'll find something similar, especially in recent years.

Moneymaker

Why in the name of Christ we are still seeing Kane wrestle in 2014 is beyond me.

It would be SO EASY to have Cesaro fill the spot as the Authorities muscle. A younger guy gets the rub, you have the potential for much better matches and you have a babyface turn which can happen organically down the line.

Really boggles my mind. Fast track Steen into the role. Anybody.

rovert

He's a nice guy and apparently other Wrestlers really like working with him. Neither things matter to fans though and he had a career worst performance last night on Raw. Looked really feeble.

Moneymaker

Yeah I like Glen Jacobs the man, he's had a great career but he surely knows its time to hang them up. You can still have him around in segments, chokeslaming and stomping on guys. He's rightly a popular guy, i'm not saying fire him or anything :pac:

He just can't go in the ring anymore though.

leggo

I'd imagine guys like Kane would be invaluable to have around on a full-time basis. At his peak, he was a guy who played a successful character wrestler and had years of success doing so. How many other gimmick attempts have we seen flop? If he's still willing to wrestle, even better, young wrestlers can directly learn off his knowledge even if he is past it in the ring. Often it's easier to see a guy at work directly, to deal with him in a practical basis and watch the cogs in his brain turn, than have him as an agent where he may not be as good at verbalising everything that made him succeed.

I'm not saying I'm a massive fan of his current situation, but that's likely why he's still around and why it's not a terrible idea either.

[Deleted User]

beakerjoe wrote: »

Go on..... Im unaware of the Kanyon story

He punked Kanyon out over his sexuality and also gave him an uber stiff and needless chairshot during a segment with Brother Love. Look it up, it's a dirty one. (Cant link from work)

I have to go with Taker though, not bringing outside politics/opinions into this, and even if we did, Big Sexy wouldn't come up smelling of roses anyway. Taker for longevity and the ability to reinvent himself numerous times eg American Badass, Ministry, MMA Striker etc. Also can have MOTY nominations, something Nash can't claim to have

gerrybbadd

After the discussion about Taker blasting Kanyon in the head with a chair over in the best big man thread - I wonder is Darren Young living in fear, in case he too is forced to betray Boy George and come out of a box, for Taker to tee off on?

CSF

gerrybbadd wrote: »

After the discussion about Taker blasting Kanyon in the head with a chair over in the best big man thread - I wonder is Darren Young living in fear, in case he too is forced to betray Boy George and come out of a box, for Taker to tee off on?

I honestly think it completely tarnishes Taker's legacy.

orestes

Omackeral wrote: »

He punked Kanyon out over his sexuality and also gave him an uber stiff and needless chairshot during a segment with Brother Love. Look it up, it's a dirty one. (Cant link from work)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS7r4GBwJms

It was Heyman, not Brother Love, but here's the segment (chair-shot is about 30 seconds from the end). Kanyon talked about it in his book, claiming the entire segment was pretty much a set-up for Taker to blast him because he was gay.

Necro

It didn't seem that bad tbh if you were unaware of the background. Suited Takers personality at the time too I would have thought. Sorry to get OT.

CSF

Necrominus wrote: »

It didn't seem that bad tbh if you were unaware of the background. Suited Takers personality at the time too I would have thought. Sorry to get OT.

Its pretty despicable really though. Could you imagine the media outcry if the same happened in a 'real' sport?

I just don't find it in myself to respect someone who thinks that physically punishing someone for being gay is an ok thing to do, in spite of their amazing accomplishments as an athlete

Edit - just realised which thread I posted this in. Kinda OT

[Deleted User]

CSF wrote: »

I honestly think it completely tarnishes Taker's legacy.

While I agree with your disgust, I don't think it will effect his legacy. I'd wager most people don't even recognise or remember it. It's brushed under the rug more than Austin beating on Debra.

gerrybbadd

Omackeral wrote: »

While I agree with your disgust, I don't think it will effect his legacy. I'd wager most people don't even recognise or remember it. It's brushed under the rug more than Austin beating on Debra.

Ya, Austin beat Debra like a drum, but it's not heard very often.

I remember watching that segment with Taker, not knowing what it was all about. It was only recently I actually discovered the reason for the chair shot.

Was a bit of a scummy thing to do in fairness.

Insect Overlord

Bring back Brad Maddox!

/random thought

grames_bond

An File wrote: »

Bring back Brad Maddox!

/random thought

has he got out of that cave yet?