User Post (22 total)
dMp Knackwurst Since: 4.1.02 From: The Hague, Netherlands (Europe) Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 18 hours # 21 Posted on 5.8.05 0237.29 | Instant Rating: 5.58 I don't know what you are talking about. Brock's character was just fine and dandy. The fact that he was a bad-ass ass kicker yet outside of the ring he could seem rather laid back (after all he only cared about the ass kicking) made him a great character. In the end of his 2004 run, when he first went a bit nuts when dealing with Eddie and then Goldberg added a new dimension as well. So there was nothing wrong with Brock Lesnar, the character. I still hope we are being worked. *sigh* Why bother?
CHAPLOW Morcilla Since: 14.5.04 From: right behind you Since last post: 985 days Last activity: 222 days # 22 Posted on 5.8.05 1337.33 | Instant Rating: 1.85 Originally posted by Matt Tracker Originally posted by CRZ Or...MAYBE it means exactly what it says. Occam's razor and all that. This is a shocking lack of cynicism from The Chief. My perception of reality is all dizzied up. Hm... maybe he's in on the work! EDIT: Seriously though, Id take anything that would pump some life into Smackdown, I almost fell asleep watching the last half of it this week. (edited by WhoTookMyHonor? on 5.8.05 1143) Woot Toot Toot Woot Wooty Tooty Lemon Cookie Pages: Prev 1 2
So, Triple H is also going to be a part of Smackdown when he loses the title. Can the two shows be anymore lopsided in terms of star power? I still think RAW is the better show. The wrestling and stoylines are better.
The W message board ZimBoard ©2001-2017 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.483 seconds.