A thought on Barely Legal 97
By Scott Keith on 18 October 2013
Always thought this,
I wonder why they had Taz beat Sabu on this show? I mean, the big angle coming out of the show was that Bill Alfonso screwed Taz and joined up with Sabu and RVD. Wouldn't it have been a stronger turn if it had led to Sabu winning via chicanery rather than just doing it at the end of the match?
It's not like a loss in that fashion would have hurt Taz. It would have kept him strong but also given a new dimension to Sabu's character (He didn't believe he could get it done on his own so he instead made a deal with the devil to win)
Sabu beat Taz a few months later at Wrestlepalooza 97 anyway, so it wasn't like they had a Taz streak to protect or anything
Thoughts?
Mike
Here's the thing with Paul Heyman that everyone always overlooks when discussing his booking: He does fantastic work with the buildup, but he's shit at nailing the landing. The whole Taz-Sabu feud was built for MONTHS as babyface Sabu coming back to get his revenge on Taz and end the monster's streak, and then he just…lost. It was a really terrible way to pay off the feud, especially since Taz then got into a chase of Shane Douglas that lasted WAAAAAAY too long and was also a disappointing payoff.
But yes, your idea would definitely have been better for business, I think.