Thats to bad he is just a babyface. Because if he wins the title and stays on Raw whos he got to face besides HHH and Edge. If he went as a loner we'd atleast get more fueds for awhile till HHH just won it back.
Originally posted by Big DThats to bad he is just a babyface. Because if he wins the title and stays on Raw whos he got to face besides HHH and Edge. If he went as a loner we'd atleast get more fueds for awhile till HHH just won it back.
Has this "loner"/"tweener" character who has feuds with both heels and faces ever existed in pro wrestling? It seems like an idea that goes against the very nature of wrestling, which is all about the fight between good and evil.
If the WWE really wanted to build heat on Bastista as an evil heal, and retain credibility for Evolution, have him lie down for HHH's finger poke of doom - 'spose it was all staged so HHH could walk away from Mania as champ...
Then, the fallout might be enough that Bishoff decides to trade Batista to Smackdown for anything he could get. This would introduce a strong heel to Smackdown and let HHH retain, maybe HHH gets to destroy Cena next.
Originally posted by King Of CrapBecause we all know nothing bad could come from a fingerpoke of doom.
In the main event.
Of the biggest show of the year.
That people are paying up to $50 for.
If you're suggesting that's what WCW did, you're wrong. The WCW fingerpoke happened on Nitro on Jan. 4, 1999 (It's easy to remember the date because it's also the same night that Foley's first title win over the Rock aired). Starcade 1998, like two weeks earlier, was headlined by Nash beating Goldberg for the belt via Hall's interference with a tazer.
Besides, it's not like WWE would do anything so blatantly stupid. Their fuck ups and sick sense of humor are more subtle and gradual.
If the WWE even ATTEMPTED a Fingerpoke of Doom finish on the biggest card of the year in front of their largest audience, with tickets selling in the hundreds, it would provoke an honest-to-god riot from the fans in attendance.
Originally posted by Big DThats to bad he is just a babyface. Because if he wins the title and stays on Raw whos he got to face besides HHH and Edge. If he went as a loner we'd atleast get more fueds for awhile till HHH just won it back.
Has this "loner"/"tweener" character who has feuds with both heels and faces ever existed in pro wrestling? It seems like an idea that goes against the very nature of wrestling, which is all about the fight between good and evil.
The most recent I can think of is a short period of time in late '95 where Sandman in ECW was defending against faces and heels. Lawler and Flair have done it where they are faces in one territory one night, heels the next etc. for multiple years. Bruiser Brody is someone who could do it, and the Road Warriors in late '84/early '85 also fit into the category of 'will kick anyones ass'.
Originally posted by Big DThats to bad he is just a babyface. Because if he wins the title and stays on Raw whos he got to face besides HHH and Edge. If he went as a loner we'd atleast get more fueds for awhile till HHH just won it back.
Has this "loner"/"tweener" character who has feuds with both heels and faces ever existed in pro wrestling? It seems like an idea that goes against the very nature of wrestling, which is all about the fight between good and evil.
Austin, maybe? He is the first name that popped in my head after reading your post.
January 4th 1999 - The day WCW injected itself with 10 gallons of Liquid Anthrax...AKA...The day Hogan "Defeated" Nash to win the WCW title in front of 40,000.
Originally posted by TheBucsFanStarcade 1998 was headlined by Nash beating Goldberg for the belt via Hall's interference with a tazer.
Tazer my ass, it was a cattle prod, no matter WHAT they called it on camera. And damn if my dad wasn't laughing along with me when it happened because he said his brother used to use one on the farm they had for wrangling cattle and he said those things could lay out any person if it was really working.
My dad's exact quote was "...so Goldberg's stronger then a cow and just as smart?"
Cerebus: RIP 1977-2004.
"What do you think it's like being created by a manic-depressive, paranoid schizophrenic, hypochondriac, misogynist with delusions of grandeur and a messiah complex?"
Really, despite stunnering lots of people, Austin was still an absolute babyface after his turn. He was just a badass. But Kevin Nash stayed friends with Shawn Michaels while feuding with Bret Hart and Undertaker at the end of '95, although that was only for about two months before he totally heeled. "Tweeners" are stupid though. I know there's this comic book mentality for some people where they want things to be all complex, but if Batista is the most popular guy, why shouldn't he be a babyface provided he maintains his coolness?
Originally posted by Big DThats to bad he is just a babyface. Because if he wins the title and stays on Raw whos he got to face besides HHH and Edge. If he went as a loner we'd atleast get more fueds for awhile till HHH just won it back.
Has this "loner"/"tweener" character who has feuds with both heels and faces ever existed in pro wrestling? It seems like an idea that goes against the very nature of wrestling, which is all about the fight between good and evil.
The most recent I can think of is a short period of time in late '95 where Sandman in ECW was defending against faces and heels. Lawler and Flair have done it where they are faces in one territory one night, heels the next etc. for multiple years. Bruiser Brody is someone who could do it, and the Road Warriors in late '84/early '85 also fit into the category of 'will kick anyones ass'.
I don't remember '84/'85, since I was just a tyke back then, but did they really FEUD with both heels and faces? It's one thing to be a face who's a dick (like Eddy Guerrero) or a heel who wins cleanly (like Gene Snitsky or Kane when he was a heel), but a true "tweener" would be actually feuding with both faces and heels, and being a heel to the faces and a face to the heels. Has this actually ever happened? In the same promotion/territory?
Not quite the same thing, but Bret Hart was a face in Canada and a heel in the states. He fought faces when he was in the US, and heels when he was at home.
Is Shawn really burying talent when the talent he faces still have respect for him and were just happy to face him? Is he really burying talent when his opponent got the bigger win at the PPV? When his win is simply following the oft used wrestling logic of faces winning the blow-off matches(pleasing the crowd)? When his win over Edge furthers the story of his character's growing frustration over being screwed and overshadowed all the time? When logic also dictates that the wrestler who has the major program coming up(as opposed to the opponent who doesn't) should be made to look strong with a win? I'm sure that the result would have been the same with just about anyone else in Shawn's position, but since its Shawn its gotta be politics? Why does Edge need both wins? So Shawn returns to the job to Jericho but its not good enough because Jericho didn't win the PPV match. Now the situation is reversed and its still just as bad? Is he just supposed to lose all the time? I may sound repetitive, but this is just my take. If I'm missing something, then honestly, let me know.
Incidentally, about that "F*** the FCC" sign. Isn't Raw beyond the domain of the FCC? Did the security really need to try to cover it up? I don't know for sure, but I thought cable tv was safe, for now.
NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Thread ahead: Smackdown/Velocity spoilers for 3/4 Next thread: Saturday Night Smackdown? Previous thread: WWE signs Wisconsin indies' Kamikaze Ken Anderson