— page 2
Personally, I think they should have had the WWE Title on Hogan for his match against Kurt Angle. That way Hulk could tap the belt away to Angle in clean fashion and they could spend the rest of the year building Angle as nearly unbeatable all the way to Wrestlemania. They could have had Angle and Benoit trade the belt once along the way to really play up how hard it is to beat Kurt, then have him carry the title into Wrestlemania to job it to Lesnar.
No way, the way they did it was just fine. You knew Rock was gonna put Brock over like gangbusters whereas Hulk is a wild card at the best of times. If anything the mistake was taking the belt off him prematurely for the babyface turn against Big Show. I think if anything they should have just let it ride with him as a world-crushing monster until the Angle feud, when they could have Kurt outsmart him to get the belt.
Random question but do you remember the thought process behind not repacking Vader when he came to WWF in 1996? Around that same time WWF acquired Foley, Simmons and Austin and repackareged them all.
Vader and Pillman were the only two WCW guys who got to keep their gimmicks more or less. Pillman makes sense because he had a lot of buzz with the whole "loose cannon" worked shoot he was doing but I'm surprised Vader didn't get a Vince inspired name change. Do you think his fate might have been different had he been given a more WWF-esque gimmick?
Thanks as always (especially for reviewing mind numbing 3 hour Raws) and keep up the great work on the blog.
I don't know the specifics on the answer, but if I was to guess I'd think that Vader didn't want to jeopardize his name value in Japan by becoming Chesty Laroux: Fat Male Stripper or whatever they would have come up with for him, and probably demanded to stay Vader (or as close as they could get without getting sued by WCW or Lucasfilm).
This is sooooo hysterical. LOL Listen for the money line.
———- Forwarded message ——- Hey Scott, I am giving away a copy of WWE 13 for the Xbox 360. I figured your viewers may be interested. Here is the link to the giveaway's guidelines. http://www.examiner.com/article/wwe-13-giveaway
In the thread on Chikara from a few days ago people mentioned many zany things about the promotion, but they missed the craziest thing of all. The way the company shifts gears from wacky parody too deathly seriousness, having Kingston cut one of the most emotional promos you're going too hear in this modern era-and then having an incredibly serious main event to crown their first champion. I just thought it was only fair to highlight Kingston's work here after claims that Chikara is never serious about anything
They invented all these "gimmick" pay-per-views to make the fall pay-per-view season more interesting: Night of Champions (last year's main event: not a title match), Hell in the Cell (one Cell match, but whatever) and TLC (which at least has a tables match, a ladder match, a chair match and a TLC match). But when they get to Survivor Series, which was the original gimmick pay-per-view, it's more or less a normal card with one "VINTAGE SURVIVOR SERIES" match.
I don't get it? I love the first two Survivor Series (especially those 10-on10 matches with the tag teams), so why not do a bunch of elimination matches instead of the same old thing. Otherwise, what exactly makes a Survivor Series? My thoughts: Team Cena/Ryback + others v. Team Heyman (4 or 5 man teams, I don't care), Team Sheamus v. Team Barrett (here I'd want Cesaro and the three man band with Barrett), Daniel Bryan's team v. Kane's team (I'd break up all the tag teams and put a member on each team, with the winning team winning his team the right to be the "Captain" of Team Hell No), Randy Orton's team v. Alberto Del Rio's team. And a ten-chick match, if they still have ten chicks (I guess they always throw Ryder in there).
I just think a bunch of elimination tag matches, especially with some creative booking (like captains getting eliminated and whatnot) would be more fun then the standard junk. Also, if Barrett, let's say, pins Sheamus in an elimination match, wouldn't that set up a title shot for him the next month instead of some stupid Smackdown Battle Royal?
FYI: Someone within WWE told me Lawler wasn't aware of Monday's angle until he was at Gorilla, and had a huge problem with it.
Don't know if that changes your line of thinking or not, but there you go.
I just published the RSPWFAQ app on Google Play. This is my first app
published on Google Play so you should feel honored. 🙂
Obviously, it's free for Android users. Your links to Amazon and such
should still function as they would. It will take a few days for it to
be approved. I'll shoot you another email once it becomes available.
Thanks and keep up the great work,
Seen this yet? From 3 years ago Not the whole match but I was killin myself. Pretty fuckin funny.
Let's say Daniel Bryan wins the Royal Rumble and beats Dolph Ziggler for the World Title at WrestleMania. The Rock beats CM Punk for the WWE title, but loses to John Cena at WrestleMania. Cena uses the help of Wade Barrett and whoever else to get the title from Rock, because – like Austin with Vince – he doesn't think he can do it on his own. Could Daniel Bryan, Sheamus, and Ryback carry the company as the top faces if Cena turned heel? There was a time where turning Hogan heel sounded crazy, but it ended up making WCW a gazillion dollars.
Was the Wrestlemania VII match with Warrior ever going to be Randy Savage's actual retirement match? Was it always just going to be a one-off gimmick, with Randy returning later, or was he really going to hang it up?
There was never any plan for Savage to actually retire that I'm aware of. He basically wanted to take six months off and try to salvage his marriage (which then turned into the on-screen wedding angle) and then come back again as a babyface. I don't think any of my marky-mark friends at school even thought it was anything but a short-term deal at that point, either.
I posted my idea to have AJ Styles circumvent his BfG ban by trading in the X-division tittle and people seemed to like it, so my question for you-The all mighty guru of wrestling Scott Keith-is
A) does the idea have any merit to you
B) If you are in charge and are running the storyline do you have AJ win the tittle quick then defend it for months so he is strong going into the match, chase it for months on end not quite winning it (screw jobs or bad luck) just to capture it in time for the payday of 2 subsequent chase angles
Anyway 2 questions for you and the bloggers:
1. (this has probably been asked before, but I can't remember) If you had to book the ideal Survivor Series card, traditional 5 on 5 or 4 on 4 matches with a WWE title main-event attached what would you book? Ideally you can use any star from any era and promotion.
2. Can Superman out-run the Flash?
1. Survivor Series has never been a particular favorite of mine as far as concepts go, although I did enjoy the goofy camp of the 1990 format. I think ideally you'd have a 10-team opener with Rock N Roll Express/British Bulldogs/Road Warriors/Steiner Brothers/Hart Foundation v. Midnight Express/Demolition/Tully & Arn/Freebirds/Edge & Christian and give that 45 minutes. Maybe a couple of concept matches like RANDY'S VIPERS (Orton, Jake Roberts, Cobra, and Santino) v. DEL RIO'S MILLIONAIROS (ADR, Ted Dibiase Sr and Jr, and Bobby Roode) and then Bret Hart v. Shawn Michaels in a best 2 out of 3 screwjobs title match.