WWE

[WS_Jack_III]

Oh also, food fight 🙄

[WS_Jack_III]

Why did Asuka jump on all the women, she was a floor up already and had a head start. Why didn't she then ride the elevator all the way to the top? 

I duno, I know they aim it at kids but even kids should pick up on the lack of logic to all of it.

[Andre91]

I can’t stand Otis. His face winds me up. I think it’s the colour of his ‘tache which makes it look non-existent and his squinty eyes. I don’t get what is funny about him just saying ‘Oh yeah’ in a weird voice repeatedly, either. 

There’s no chance he cashes in on a world champion. He’s going to cash in on a tag team with Tucker. 
 

I don’t like Asuka either (or her constant screaming) but they’ve built her up well and she makes sense as the MITB winner / champion now. 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Andre91

[The Nal]

10 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Speaking of taker, the doc is good.

And highlights how he should've packed it in after Lesnar at WM. Taker a classic old school guy who doesn't know when to hang up the boots.

[CRW5252]

10 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Okay i'll break it down.

 

• Why did Dana not know it finished on the roof when it had been reported for two weeks that's where the briefcase is?
• why the f*ck did Corbin try and stop Asuka?
• Why did none of the other women make it to the roof, they wouldn't have known the match had ended for them.
• Why were Vince and Steph sort of mad with the superstars for being there/wrecking the office. They booked this match.
• Not as sure on this but pretty sure AJ won, did he have the case in his hands? 

 

Boneyard dumb bits were literally the dumb taker things that we've had for years, like teleportation and shooting fire.

 

Speaking of taker, the doc is good.

Wrestling isn't realistic in the slightest so I think it is silly to act like it is. You could pick out several points in every match questioning why fighters did things. All that really matters is they tell a good story inside the ridiculous world that is wrestling. 

Wrestling would lose its audience if it tried to be realistic. There's already organisations for that and it is actually real. Wrestling is at its best when it is over the top and epic. Think Mick Foley versus Undertaker in hell in a cell, did any of it make sense if you were comparing it to a real fight scenario? No. Was it great? Yes. 

[DareToDibble]

I'm going to watch the Taker doc now. I've heard nothing but good things. I'm assuming they're releasing a new one weekly?

[pink_triangle]

18 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

Wrestling isn't realistic in the slightest so I think it is silly to act like it is. You could pick out several points in every match questioning why fighters did things. All that really matters is they tell a good story inside the ridiculous world that is wrestling. 

Wrestling would lose its audience if it tried to be realistic. There's already organisations for that and it is actually real. Wrestling is at its best when it is over the top and epic. Think Mick Foley versus Undertaker in hell in a cell, did any of it make sense if you were comparing it to a real fight scenario? No. Was it great? Yes. 

I think there is some balance.  The Brett Hart v Steve Austin is my favourite angle of all time and I would argue that was quite reality based.  There were moments such as the Pillman gun incident, but mainly it was just 2 people with a grudge and the audience moving away from the whiney babyface to back the rebellious heel.

[WS_Jack_III]

3 hours ago, The Nal said:

And highlights how he should've packed it in after Lesnar at WM. Taker a classic old school guy who doesn't know when to hang up the boots.

yeah and it's interesting to hear him saying what we've all said but on the trail for episode two he clearly wasn't happy with his "Last Match" and wanted to prove he was better than that, unfortunately the Goldberg match was even worse. Wonder how they're gonna tackle the Saudi stuff as well and not say it's literally for the money.

3 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Wrestling isn't realistic in the slightest so I think it is silly to act like it is. You could pick out several points in every match questioning why fighters did things. All that really matters is they tell a good story inside the ridiculous world that is wrestling. 

Wrestling would lose its audience if it tried to be realistic. There's already organisations for that and it is actually real. Wrestling is at its best when it is over the top and epic. Think Mick Foley versus Undertaker in hell in a cell, did any of it make sense if you were comparing it to a real fight scenario? No. Was it great? Yes. 

A good story is one that makes sense and follows some sort of logic, at least to me. I'm mostly not actually mentioning "Real fight scenarios" here just the pure lack of logic taken by the characters. It would make more sense to equate my complaints to that of something like Star Wars or Game of Thrones here. Why are those characters doing stupid things? Lazy writing, direction and production.

[jump]

14 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Okay i'll break it down.

 

• Why did Dana not know it finished on the roof when it had been reported for two weeks that's where the briefcase is?
• why the f*ck did Corbin try and stop Asuka?
• Why did none of the other women make it to the roof, they wouldn't have known the match had ended for them.
• Why were Vince and Steph sort of mad with the superstars for being there/wrecking the office. They booked this match.
• Not as sure on this but pretty sure AJ won, did he have the case in his hands? 

 

Boneyard dumb bits were literally the dumb taker things that we've had for years, like teleportation and shooting fire.

 

Speaking of taker, the doc is good.

Corbin and Asuka were getting in each others way so Corbin being a heel decided to attack her rather than cooperating like a babyface would.

The other women were knocked out and the other match was only a few mins longer, they could have turned up after cameras went off.

AJ fumbled it, its the person who takes controls of it wins like in yankee football or the tag match at 'mania.

11 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Why did Asuka jump on all the women, she was a floor up already and had a head start. Why didn't she then ride the elevator all the way to the top? 

I duno, I know they aim it at kids but even kids should pick up on the lack of logic to all of it.

The starting point was the ground floor so she couldn't start til she was on the ground floor and the elevator doesn't go to the roof.

You're over thinking it imo, it was dumb fun like it was meant to be. To me things that make far less sense is why are there kendo sticks under the ring, why do the wrestlers run when they it the ropes, why do wrestlers act like the cameras are invisible when they are backstage etc.

[WS_Jack_III]

38 minutes ago, jump said:

Corbin and Asuka were getting in each others way so Corbin being a heel decided to attack her rather than cooperating like a babyface would.

The starting point was the ground floor so she couldn't start til she was on the ground floor and the elevator doesn't go to the roof.

You're over thinking it imo, it was dumb fun like it was meant to be. To me things that make far less sense is why are there kendo sticks under the ring, why do the wrestlers run when they it the ropes, why do wrestlers act like the cameras are invisible when they are backstage etc.

First point is absolute rubbish 🤣 sorry but it is, the cases were on either side, they both could have just won there, the spot just didn't need to be there at all.

The elevator doesn't just go up one floor though. Apparently there's is only 4 floors at Titan towers, why did she only ride it up one floor?

 

Your bottom point brings up something else I hate from wrestling, when they do that rope run and hop over and duck under thing, don't know what it's called but it seems like wrestling 101 and i've always found it to look fake.

[CRW5252]

10 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

A good story is one that makes sense and follows some sort of logic, at least to me. I'm mostly not actually mentioning "Real fight scenarios" here just the pure lack of logic taken by the characters. It would make more sense to equate my complaints to that of something like Star Wars or Game of Thrones here. Why are those characters doing stupid things? Lazy writing, direction and production.

The MITB match was intentionally silly and not to be taking in a similar vain to Star Wars or Game of Thrones. It wasn't designed to be some sort of story telling masterclass,.You critiquing it in the manner that you are is the equivalent of watching South Park and complaining about its lack of continuation. 

For the record, I think the WWE creative team are awful most the time. I just think credit should be given when it is due. They do get it right sometimes or we wouldn't all keep watching.

[WS_Jack_III]

1 hour ago, CRW5252 said:

The MITB match was intentionally silly and not to be taking in a similar vain to Star Wars or Game of Thrones. It wasn't designed to be some sort of story telling masterclass,.You critiquing it in the manner that you are is the equivalent of watching South Park and complaining about its lack of continuation. 

For the record, I think the WWE creative team are awful most the time. I just think credit should be given when it is due. They do get it right sometimes or we wouldn't all keep watching.

Exactly, hence it was crap.

Edited May 14, 2020 by WS_Jack_III

[CRW5252]

7 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Exactly, hence it was crap.

Fair enough, if that isn't your taste. I don't think everything has to be serious in wrestling though. 

[pink_triangle]

4 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Fair enough, if that isn't your taste. I don't think everything has to be serious in wrestling though. 

I gave up a year ago and haven't been tempted back.  To me wrestling works best when you have a mix of different types of wrestlers, different personalities, mix between serious  and not serious.  I think whenever you try to make it more uniform the product suffers.

[WS_Jack_III]

4 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Fair enough, if that isn't your taste. I don't think everything has to be serious in wrestling though. 

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the comedy spots here and there, think R-Truth has been ace these past few years but to have your main event be just complete nonsense doesn't sit right with me.

Edited May 14, 2020 by WS_Jack_III

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the comedy spots here and there, think R-Truth has been ace these past few years but to have your main event be just complete nonsense doesn't sit right with me.

In general I agree, but unless something has happened in the last 12 months (when I gave up) nobody is over enough for people to care about a serious feud. I can also understand that with no fans in attendance, the old rules dont necessarily apply.

One positive thing is the shorter ppv. If 3 hours worked 20 and 30 years ago when wrestling was more popular, not sure why the model needed to change to the bloated events of recent years. I'm not convinced attention spans have got longer.

[WS_Jack_III]

39 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

In general I agree, but unless something has happened in the last 12 months (when I gave up) nobody is over enough for people to care about a serious feud. I can also understand that with no fans in attendance, the old rules dont necessarily apply.

One positive thing is the shorter ppv. If 3 hours worked 20 and 30 years ago when wrestling was more popular, not sure why the model needed to change to the bloated events of recent years. I'm not convinced attention spans have got longer.

There's evidence out there that it have got shorter with media.

To your point on nobody being over, MITB is the specific PPV to build someone.

[jump]

Getting over is easy enough, WWE struggles to keep their top babyfaces over as they force the basic babyface formula onto them once they get there. It's like they forget what made them over in their first place. 

[pink_triangle]

42 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

There's evidence out there that it have got shorter with media.

To your point on nobody being over, MITB is the specific PPV to build someone.

3 hours PPV were good enough when wrestling was at it's peak, see no need to change the formula that worked. 

I am not convinced there will ever be another wrestling peak. However if there is, I suspect its more likely from them trying to be different, than a focus on in ring talent.

[jump]

15 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

3 hours PPV were good enough when wrestling was at it's peak, see no need to change the formula that worked. 

I am not convinced there will ever be another wrestling peak. However if there is, I suspect its more likely from them trying to be different, than a focus on in ring talent.

The wrestling peak is now. Those TV deals has made WWE the richest it's ever been and that's without being able to run live shows (traditionally their biggest source of income) and shilling a weak product.

 

Double or Nothing is looking quality. Archer vs Cody and the Stadium Stampede in particular should be great plus I like their idea of basically a Royale Rumble ladder match. I'm hoping Pac wins as his matches with Moxley have been great in the past.

[NerdsNatterings]

 

Any thoughts on this? Think British Bulldog, William Regal and Drew McIntyre are all definitely on there for me, I'd probably pick Paige for the fourth.

[mcshed]

6 minutes ago, NerdsNatterings said:

 

Any thoughts on this? Think British Bulldog, William Regal and Drew McIntyre are all definitely on there for me, I'd probably pick Paige for the fourth.

Big Daddy? Giant Haystacks? 

[NerdsNatterings]

Just now, mcshed said:

Big Daddy? Giant Haystacks? 

Honestly I've really only heard a little bit about them from my uncles and my dad and I can't really comment on how much of an impact they had. They could very well be worthy of a spot there, personally I didn't feel like I could include people who I've never watched and know very little about.

[jump]

Depends on if it's 4 wrestlers who happen to be British or 4 who contributed to British wrestlers. It's quite sad thinking about it as I know very little of UK history, I literally know more about Japanese and Mexican wrestling history.

My four would be the British Bulldog as his main event win at Wembley is probably the pinnacle of British wrestling, Dynamite Kid who has contributed loads to the modern style, Paige as she was a major player in how women's wrestling is seen now maybe more so than the 4 horsewomen and I will throw a punt on Will Ospreay who is probably the best wrestler in the world right now.

[Andre91]

British Bulldog, Dynamite Kid, William Regal & Paige. 
 

Big Daddy and Giant Haystacks are the wrestlers people like my Mum talk about because it’s all they know, just like how my boss at work calls anything that is remotely heavy ‘thrash metal’ because that’s the only term he knows    

Edited May 18, 2020 by Andre91