This past week on Velocity, during the entrance of Jimmy "Akio" Yang, Josh Mathews made the following comment (may not be 100% accurate): "Here comes Akio, a Korean film legend, starring in such films as "Enter the Yang" and "The Flying Elvises."
That's the first reference to TNA's existence, on television or otherwise, WWE has made if I'm not mistaken.
"I got it. I'll just write 'deceased' and where it says 'Sex:' I'll put 'No, thank you, I'm dead.' It's bulletproof." -Peter Griffin
Josh did this last week too. It's not a reference that actually means much to you unless
a) You already know that he was a flying Elvis b) You realize that the Yang joke is based on his part gimmick and figure out the rest based on context, which probably doesn't get you buying Wednesday PPVs
They don't monitor Velocity too closely so Josh can (and has) do whatever wacky stuff he wants. It's part of the atmosphere.
Originally posted by leggoUm, okay I'm not sure if that's a sorry attempt at humour, but if not care to explain why?
I don't know what would be humorous about saying it would be really stupid to think HHH was talking about freaking NWA-TNA when he said "that paper champion on another show." Really, what on earth would lead you to believe there's even a possibility of that? TNA isn't their competition and the idea was pretty obviously to build up the rivalry between Raw and Smackdown.
Triple H's whole schtick is that he's the absolute best, and calling the other champion, which was Lesnar at the time, a paper champion, was simply to have him say he's better than Lesnar, too. He was not talking about AJ Styles. The vast majority of WWE fans do not care about TNA and many may not even be aware of its existence, even now. They are not a major promotion and I don't think WWE sees them as any sort of threat that needs to get run down on television with sly remarks.
For the sake of argument, if they DID think that (and they don't), do you think ANYONE would think he WASN'T talking about Brock Lesnar?
At the time there was no real heat between RAW and SmackDown, unless you count the build to the Royal Rumble which I believe was the upcoming PPV at the time of the comments. Even if it was a ploy to build to the Rumble, why would the champs take shots at each other when they weren't even involved in the one inter-promotional match on the card? While I'll admit you're right about logic suggesting that he was referring to Kurt Angle, there was never anything made of the comments so you can't possibly verify them. Thus, there is a case to be made that that comment was a thinly veiled shot at TNA. Can you possibly tell me Hunter wasn't trying to put down WWE's closest rivals with a comment? No you can't so despite a gap in logic, it's hardly inconceivable to hear where I'm coming from, let alone 'stupid', as you so nicely put it.
In fact, the possible TNA reference I'm referring to is more likely than the subject matter here.
"Can you possibly tell me Hunter wasn't trying to put down WWE's closest rivals with a comment?"
TNA is WWE's closest rival in semantics only. The show is so far behind the fed that it's not even funny, and I doubt Hunter had anything to do with them in mind when he made the reference. It seemed more to be a poor attempt at selling the Goldberg-retires stip as something halfway-legit by floating the notion that if he lost he wouldn't have been able to go to SmackDown, which could be the case if someone was "fired" from the show (see Foley's fake-out shitcanning streak in December, and Bisch's angry reaction). Far far FAR more logical than H suggesting that 'Berg was going to head to TNA if he lost at Unforgiven.
Oh yeah, you're right, it was during the Goldberg feud.
As I said, I know it sounds more logical that he was talking about SmackDown and I never really stated that I believed he WAS referring to TNA, just saying that calling me 'stupid' over throwing the possibility up there is pretty ignorant considering no one can verify what Hunter was thinking, despite the fact that logic would point one direction.