odessasteps
Scrapple
   
   
    
   
 
Since: 2.1.02
From: MD, USA
Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 10 hours
|  #21 Posted on 24.11.09 0416.24 | Instant Rating: 6.38 | Originally posted by Kei Posiskunk
A few interesting things, from someone who was at the Giant Center.
Were any of the Bears at the game?
Mark Coale
Odessa Steps Magazine
ISSUE FOUR - OCTOBER 2009 | Spiraling_Shape
Toulouse
Since: 2.1.02
From: PA
Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
| #22 Posted on 24.11.09 0741.19 | Instant Rating: 0.83 | Originally posted by Big Bad
The total lack of mention of the DX/Harts history was baffling. When Cole was running through all of the Dynasty's familial connections, you'd think a token "...and HBK certainly had his battles with the Bulldog and Anvil and the whole Hart family over the years" comment was forthcoming.
I'm sure Vince (and especially Linda) just loved Ventura calling Dick Cheney a coward. Vince had an extra-long pause after that comment.
You read my mind X 2...I said the same thing both times...
Where was "Future World Champ" Drew McIntyre in the Breakthrough matches? Miz and JoMo left out? Matt Hardy?
Was this the first RAW of the Guest Host era to NOT feature Hornswoggle vs. Chavo in some fashion? It sure felt like it...
"Unless you did something unspeakable with a cactus, 'Shaqtus' is not a real word." - Santino Marella | lotjx
Knackwurst
Since: 5.9.08
Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 8 hours
| #23 Posted on 24.11.09 0805.05 | Instant Rating: 2.03 | I was there live and it was a great show. Miz/Santino for Superstars was damn entertaining and Santino is very over. Ventura's tournament idea came off really well especially with Kofi who is now supremely over. I love tournaments and battle royals, this made my night. I am concerned with DX now being the elementary kids' heroes. There were a lot of kids and a lot of kids saying stuff that they need a good slap for. I blame the parents more then Vince though, but still should they really keep targeting the kids?
I was also expecting something more then a glorified squash for DX/Hart Dynasty and it did seem that HBK peeked up when he heard Bret's music. HBK has been doing the little things of late with the white wristbands against Taker, super-kicking HHH and that move has been once again missing character continuity in wrestling. Ventura got less heat as the show went on, but I did love his whole conspiracy angle. A lot of people left after the battle royal where Kofi eliminating Orton was the pop of the night. People seemed confused with Sheamus winning and Ventura's rant. Yet, most of them were little kids whose parents' seem to almost run them out of the building when Ventura started making sense. I do think Cena not taking Sheamus seriously, Ventura's promo and the constant mixed reaction in a place that was 65% kids, teenage girls and MILFS, makes we wonder if they are going to turn him heel to face Taker. Vince in the tux was worth the price of admission, too bad we didn't hear the commentary. Even with less heat, Ventura has been one of the best guest hosts, so far.
(edited by lotjx on 24.11.09 0807) | dMr
Andouille
Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
|  #24 Posted on 24.11.09 0807.18 | Instant Rating: 6.64 | Originally posted by Peter The Hegemon
In a TLC match, tables and chairs are legal. In a ladder match, they aren't legal; you just can't get disqualified for them. What's the difference? Well, not much, but I'd argue that in a ladder match, if the referee has some free time on his hands, and there's a chair in front of him, he's supposed to remove it. In a TLC match, he's not.
Of late, ladder matches have featured an absolute shit heap of the things around the ring, so maybe table matches will similarly see the ring surrounded by tables and so forth and the TLC match will have lots of everything. Or maybe not.
I thought it was a fun enough show. They even get a pass from me on the DX/Hornswoggle angle for a while because last week the little lad ate a pedigree from a blase Triple H (which I'm ashamed to admit I found hilarious).
I'm honestly not sure there's this massive demand for new blood in the main event. The crowd didn't seem uber-hyped about the "no former champ would be eligible" stipulation, and ratings and attendances have held up just fine through the supposed tedium.
I wouldn't mind seeing something different, but when you're running a PPV every few weeks and your target audience has the memory span of a goldfish you can stand to run similar main events for a good ole time before the masses get uppity. Short-termist? Possibly, but we're in the middle of largest economic downturn any of us have ever seen so I don't blame them for playing safe and sticking with the established names. | TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan
Since: 2.1.02
Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
| #25 Posted on 24.11.09 0814.32 | Instant Rating: 2.13 | Originally posted by dMr
Originally posted by Peter The Hegemon
In a TLC match, tables and chairs are legal. In a ladder match, they aren't legal; you just can't get disqualified for them. What's the difference? Well, not much, but I'd argue that in a ladder match, if the referee has some free time on his hands, and there's a chair in front of him, he's supposed to remove it. In a TLC match, he's not.
Of late, ladder matches have featured an absolute shit heap of the things around the ring, so maybe table matches will similarly see the ring surrounded by tables and so forth and the TLC match will have lots of everything. Or maybe not.
There are no differences in rules between a ladder match and a TLC match. In practice they have been perhaps slightly different - though I don't really think so - but they're both no DQ, anything-goes and the winner is the first person to climb the ladder and capture whatever the prize is.
Going back to Peter's explanation, there IS a difference between a no DQ match and a hardcore match (well, back when they had hardcore matches). Hardcore matches are/were falls count anywhere. A match called no DQ, falls-count-anywhere would be the same as a hardcore match.
Anyway, it's not a huge deal to me if WWE wants to market this match as something flashier or whatever, but it did detract from Michaels' promo because his statement made no sense in kayfabe. | Matt Tracker
Scrapple
Since: 8.5.03
From: North Carolina
Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 8 hours
| #26 Posted on 24.11.09 0850.20 | Instant Rating: 6.67 | I hadn't seen this much of RAW for a while, and I enjoyed the notion of giving someone new a shot. I didn't like the equal split of four faces and four heels in the battle royale, however. I did object to Orton's involvement in the main event, but it gave Kofi another bragging right against him, and that's good for everyone involved.
Vince/Ventura was a nice idea hampered slightly by time apart. Or as Jesse says "the clock of time." But it wasn't Cole and King, and I consider it an improvement. I prefer the idea of guest announcers more than guest GMs for RAW.
Since I don't watch RAW often, I don't object to Shamus's title shot. I like Cena's attitude toward Shamus, and it would have worked better had Shamus given him more trash talk. Shamus can use a manager (and why not Jesse?), and I'm relieved that Cena has someone new to work against.
Loved Punk's face when Cena lifted him out of the figure four headlock. That's a showman.
The ending of the DX/Hart match was nifty.
Move Dolph to ECW and give Christian a new title rival. And let the man win.
"To be the man, you gotta beat demands." -- The Lovely Mrs. Tracker | redsoxnation
Scrapple
Since: 24.7.02
Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 8 hours
| #27 Posted on 24.11.09 0858.24 | Instant Rating: 4.88 | Sheamus getting a title match is no worse than the wannabe rapper Cena's push in early '03.
Someone should remind Jesse he got title matches against Hogan in '84. The thing was, Jesse was just a shitty singles wrestler. Good tag wrestler, mainly carried by Adrian, but shitty singles wrestler.
Since they were in Pennsylvania, they should have reunited the old Championship Wrestling announce team with Jesse, Vince in the Yellow or Blue Blazer and Bruno.
| dMr
Andouille
Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
| #28 Posted on 24.11.09 1014.17 | Instant Rating: 6.64 | Originally posted by TheBucsFan
There are no differences in rules between a ladder match and a TLC match. In practice they have been perhaps slightly different - though I don't really think so - but they're both no DQ, anything-goes and the winner is the first person to climb the ladder and capture whatever the prize is.
Oh quite agree. Rules-wise there's no difference, just saying lately they seem to have a ton o' ladders for ladder matches, so if they wanted an easy way of differentiating the matches then the equipment they give them to work with could serve that purpose.
But like you, it really makes no odds to me what they market it as, for whether I watch or not will have hee-haw to do with that. | JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
| #29 Posted on 24.11.09 1238.09 | Instant Rating: 8.51 | See, in a TLC match they also build those table-chair spreads around the ring. In a ladder match they just set up a ladder in the aisle and if you want a chair, then get it yourself, dick, because this is merely a ladder match.
Originally posted by redsoxnation
Sheamus getting a title match is no worse than the wannabe rapper Cena's push in early '03.
Really? I remember wannabe rapper Cena being really well-received and everyone wanting him moved up. So, the opposite.
Originally posted by Amos Cochran
Online fans: "Give us someone NEW in the main event, WWE!"
*WWE pushes Sheamus*
Online fans: "No, not THAT someone new! Someone ELSE new!"
Point is well-taken, but I don't think it's just wanting someone new, but that people have some affection for certain midcard guys. So it's be annoying to wait and hope for someone to get a break and then when someone finally gets to break through, it's a guy who hasn't shown much one way or another, while MVP gets jerked around, Swagger gets lost on Raw, Miz wasn't competitive with Cena, etc. | The King of Keith
Lap cheong
Since: 4.11.02
From: Winchester, VA
Since last post: 54 days
Last activity: 2 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #30 Posted on 24.11.09 1254.33 | Instant Rating: 3.97 | Cena/Sheamus has a Rocky/Clubber Lang feel to it. Sheamus, playing Clubber, is an unstoppable monster and is destroying people left and right. Cena as Rocky is disrespecting him and not taking him seriously.
I like Sheamus. He got over with the crowd really quick at Survivor Series when he murdered Finlay with the boot. I hope this works out for him.
Am I in Horseville? Because I'm hearing nothing but naysayers! | CajunMan
Boudin blanc
No longer registered
Since: 2.1.02
From: Give me a Title shot!
Since last post: 583 days
Last activity: 382 days
| #31 Posted on 24.11.09 1304.15 | Instant Rating: 1.23 | | Sheamus push gives me flashbacks of Goldberg being pushed as the undefeated one in WCW. Funny is that they(Cole inc.) actually were selling that Sheamus is undefeated. | hansen9j
Bierwurst
Since: 7.11.02
From: Riderville, SK
Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 15 hours
|  #32 Posted on 24.11.09 1311.55 | Instant Rating: 7.53 | Originally posted by JustinShapiro
Originally posted by redsoxnation
Sheamus getting a title match is no worse than the wannabe rapper Cena's push in early '03.
Really? I remember wannabe rapper Cena being really well-received and everyone wanting him moved up. So, the opposite.
Cena vs. Brock era (Backlash) was too soon (but was at least a logical progression, given Cena's promos). I don't think it was until Cena vs. Taker that he was fully loved and appreciated.
It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects.
Let's Go Riders! (10-7-1, 1st West Division, going to the Grey Cup!)
Go Pack Go! (6-4, 2nd NFC North) | John Orquiola
Scrapple
Since: 28.2.02
From: Boston
Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
| #33 Posted on 24.11.09 1335.15 | Instant Rating: 5.16 | Originally posted by The King of Keith
Cena/Sheamus has a Rocky/Clubber Lang feel to it. Sheamus, playing Clubber, is an unstoppable monster and is destroying people left and right. Cena as Rocky is disrespecting him and not taking him seriously.
Except Rocky was the underdog. Cena is not. Rocky's manager Mickey went to his grave fearing that Rocky would be crippled if he got in the ring to face Clubber. There are no fears that Cena cannot overcome Sheamus.
(edited by John Orquiola on 24.11.09 1135) | geemoney
Scrapple
Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 6 hours
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #34 Posted on 24.11.09 1344.24 | Instant Rating: 7.64 | | The nice thing about Sheamus vs. Cena in a Tables Match is that, unless I'm mistaken, one loses once he goes through a table. So he can lose to Cena without being pinned, thus still looking like a monster (even though he isn't technically undefeated). | kentish
Andouille
Since: 19.8.05
From: My Old Kentucky Home
Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 14 hours
| #35 Posted on 24.11.09 1356.14 | Instant Rating: 4.50 | Originally posted by JustinShapiro
Originally posted by Amos Cochran
Online fans: "Give us someone NEW in the main event, WWE!"
*WWE pushes Sheamus*
Online fans: "No, not THAT someone new! Someone ELSE new!"
Point is well-taken, but I don't think it's just wanting someone new, but that people have some affection for certain midcard guys. So it's be annoying to wait and hope for someone to get a break and then when someone finally gets to break through, it's a guy who hasn't shown much one way or another, while MVP gets jerked around, Swagger gets lost on Raw, Miz wasn't competitive with Cena, etc.
It is a little discouraging that we have all been wanting fresh faces and stars, but instead of picking the scrappy, smaller guy who is way over, we get the muscle-head no one has had time to care about either way. So he "retired" a JTTS that I didn't even know still had a job, and kicked the King? How does that warrant a title shot? Why should i care about Sheamus, because he was given an undeserved title shot? Because WWE tells me to, I suppose.
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
-- Mahatma Gandhi
| KJames199
Knackwurst
Moderator
Since: 10.12.01
Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
| #36 Posted on 24.11.09 1418.41 | Instant Rating: 7.05 | Originally posted by geemoney
(even though he isn't technically undefeated).
He's already been pinned (by Goldust, on ECW) (not that anyone watches ECW).
I really don't like it when they lie about stuff like that. You should be rewarding the people who pay the most attention, not telling them that what they remember doesn't count and/or never happened.
To be fair, I wouldn't have remembered the loss to Goldust if I hadn't been at the taping where it happened (and even then, it was hardly memorable), but if they're going to say Sheamus is undefeated, someone out there will be obsessive enough to point out that it's untrue and that hurts what little credibility they have.
JK: LJ, FB, T | geemoney
Scrapple
Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 6 hours
| AIM: | |
| | |
| #37 Posted on 24.11.09 1424.05 | Instant Rating: 7.64 | Originally posted by KJames199
Originally posted by geemoney
(even though he isn't technically undefeated).
He's already been pinned (by Goldust, on ECW) (not that anyone watches ECW).
Yeah, that's why I wrote that he isn't technically undefeated (though he is undefeated on Raw). | JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
| #38 Posted on 24.11.09 1435.05 | Instant Rating: 8.51 | Originally posted by kentish
It is a little discouraging that we have all been wanting fresh faces and stars, but instead of picking the scrappy, smaller guy who is way over,
To be fair, that is Kofi Kingston, and they did pick him. | Tenken347
Andouille
Since: 27.2.03
From: Parts Unknown
Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 16 hours
| #39 Posted on 24.11.09 1447.41 | Instant Rating: 5.03 | Originally posted by JustinShapiro
Originally posted by kentish
It is a little discouraging that we have all been wanting fresh faces and stars, but instead of picking the scrappy, smaller guy who is way over,
To be fair, that is Kofi Kingston, and they did pick him.
And I think we're all loving Kofi's push - which is why I was way behind him to win that battle royale. Now, I get that he's already in a program with Orton, but I still think Kofi would have been a way better pick here than Sheamus, especially since he'd be getting that title shot at the expense of Orton. | geemoney
Scrapple
Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 6 hours
| AIM: | |
| | |
| #40 Posted on 24.11.09 1451.42 | Instant Rating: 7.64 | Originally posted by Tenken347
Originally posted by JustinShapiro
Originally posted by kentish
It is a little discouraging that we have all been wanting fresh faces and stars, but instead of picking the scrappy, smaller guy who is way over,
To be fair, that is Kofi Kingston, and they did pick him.
And I think we're all loving Kofi's push - which is why I was way behind him to win that battle royale. Now, I get that he's already in a program with Orton, but I still think Kofi would have been a way better pick here than Sheamus, especially since he'd be getting that title shot at the expense of Orton.
But the problem is, if you want to push Kofi as a top face, I wouldn't put him against Cena- he's always going to be pushed as THE top face, and you don't want to have to make the kids choose, because they'll probably choose Cena. | | Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Thread rated: 5.27
