Wrestling 2005

[Dragulf]

My all time favorite match turned into a two parter 1 month apart. Carlos Colon (Carlito's father) VS. Ox Baker. Ox put Carlos in the hospital for a month with his heart punch and later Carlos returned the favor. I remember watching that on TV in Puerto Rico as a kid. I'll never forget the interview with Ox after he almost killed Carlos "I like to hurt people."

Abdullah the Butcher (had a long war with Carlos Colon) with blood streaming down his face screaming like a mad man. He'd 'fork' himself.


Oh and the Hardy's are pretty good.

Edited for consistency. Wikipedia showed me my memories were partly false.

 

[FlipStar]

All time favorite match? Mine would have to be Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat vs "The Macho Man" Randy Savage at Wrestlemania III. The story, the technical expertise...that match had everything.

2nd fave would have to be Hogan vs Andre, also at the same 'Mania. That whole card just cemented my love for sports entertainment.

Also a big fan of The Rockers, Shawn Michaels and Marty Jannety. Been a big mark for Shawn his entire career, pretty much. When they were going after the tag championships in the AWA, back when it was on ESPN in the afternoons, that was AWESOME.

And just to show how out of it I can be sometimes, why has it taken Jericho so long to come back?

 

[phynix]

Jerico had to go and do his music and acting thing turned out that he's ok at both but he's better at wrestling and from what I understand the money he's geting from WWE is gonna set him up for life!

Wow what an amazing responce from you all to such a simple question but with such a difficult answer! All of those matches have high quality moments that have made wrestling but can anyone think of a high quality wrestling moment from the last 12-18 months?

 

[nekkid]

Now THAT is a tough question. Just moments? Matches?

Here are some matches:

Cena vs. HBK on Raw following 'mania 23

Any match with Kandrick and (can't remember his partners name) while on smackdown.

Morrison vs. Punk on ecw

Moments. Good and bad?

Obvioulsy Benoit

Anything with Vince has been terrible the last year and a half (Mcmahonism, Vince dying)

New ECW very very bad (I think I'll stick to the good ones, it a much tougher list to make)

DX re-uniting was alright

Angle going to TNA was the biggest holy shit moment for me since the MNW's

RVD beating Cena on one night stand ruled

One night stand 1-2 ruled

Another good suprise was JBL announcing skills. I think it would be interesting if they paired hime up with Joey Styles or JR for a while just for a different dynamic.

But just not enough moments to captivate the average viewer, which I think was your point.

 

[Dragulf]

JBL is very good as a color commentator. I was surprised also.

 

[nekkid]

Ya I always liked the JBL character (Not so much Bradshaw) I just didn't like him in the ring. I can't believ he is the longest reigning smackdown champion. BUt to me winning the smackdown championship is like winning the NIT tournament in college basketball, the best of the rest. I mean how many MAJOR stars have been champ on smackdown other than the undertaker. It seems like as soon a someone gets over on smackdown they go to raw (cena, Kennedy, london and Kendrick, and lashley from ecw). So I guess JBL being champ for that long isn't all that suprisisng.

So JBL on color is great as long as we don't have to see him wrestle.

So new topic. What do you guys think of the brand extention? Should they keep it? Is it needed? Do you like it?

 

[Stingray]

If the brand extension were handled a little more smoothly, it'd be great. As things are now, I think it's worthwhile & -- when they have a fully healthy roster -- necessary to utilize the girth of personalities in the company. It needs a considerable overhaul, though. Given the opportunity, here's what I'd do:

--For starters, unify the WWE & World Titles. The idea behind having 2 was mainly to make it easier on the then-rookie champion, Brock Lesnar. As all the folk in the title picture are well-weathered these days, maintaining the split only creates in-company comparison as to which champion is most deserving/which title is better. Unify the belts and there's no comparison. The best man for the job is definitively the best man for the job. It also promotes the occassional brand switch as the champion would alternate defenses, with the losing champion going to the winner's show to fill the hole.

--What about the ECW title? Leave it. I said it before, I'll say it again: Utilize ECW as a seperate entity. Showcase them on the big 4 PPVs, and one of their own, but beyond that, pretend they don't exist. ECW is a monster unto itself if left to its own devices, but interaction with the WWE demolishes the brand's uniqueness. Let ECW work as it was originally intended, as a seperate entity with a hardcore base, shoot interviews, and relying on match strength rather than storyline, and you've got a winning product.

--Draft the cruisers to one show & the in-wring competitive divas to another. Having a bunch of in-ring capable divas on Smackdown is idiotic. Eye candy's nice, but if they're competing, let them have a go at the women's title. That, or let those two specialty champions switch-hit, just like the World Heavyweight Champion.

--While we're at it, unify the Tag Belts and let them switch hit as well. They're just isn't enough heft to the tag ranks to justify 2 titles.

--The IC & US titles should remain where they are. This gives a show-centric title for everyone to fight for, while still leaving higher room for potential world title contenders to work.

--So far as individual competitors that don't fit in the women's or cruiser divisions, full-on draft. Except for ECW originals. Those who based their career (at least initially) in ECW, and haven't accomplished a major title outside it, should go back to ECW. This applies, for instance, to Super Crazy and a handful of others that have since been let go. (Al Snow, Sandman, etc) Those that don't exactly fit the ECW mold should leave there too. For example...Boogeyman fits, in his own weird way, but the Miz decidedly does not. Raw & Smackdown should have a full, even draft, though. Put both shows on a level, and leave them that way. The switch hit title changes will continually breath new life into the rosters, and the ECW faithful will have their monster back as well. The morale on the roster goes up because everyone's getting their opportunity to do something different, and everyone wins.

 

[FlipStar]

I like it...

I like the idea of a unified heavyweight champion and having the U.S. and IC Champs stay on their respective shows. IMO, I think they should pull a page out of the old N.W.A. playbook and make those respective champions the #1 contenders on their particular brands. I think it would add to the prestige of the titles and make for some interesting storylines. Imagine if the IC Champ is constantly having to defend the title on RAW just to insure he gets a shot at the unified champ? And what if that brings heat from the U.S. Champ on Smackdown who feels he's more deserving at getting a shot? Could make for some interesting cross-promotional storylines, especially around the time of the Big 4 PPVs. Also, it wouldn't look like a "step down" in prestige for a former World Heavyweight champion to go after either the IC or U.S. Heavyweight title. Just a thought...

 

[phynix]

I'm not ig unifying the titles is the right way to go as I feel that this would lead to thee being less room on rosters for the bigger stars! Would it be esy if the champ was free to move between Raw and Smackdown to challenge whom every he feels is suitable or worthy! This way work for tag and women titles as well

As for ECW I couldn't agree more it should be left to its own devices with its own set of matches, interviews and opinions with no inclusion of those that are WWE.

SS was a solid PPV that I enjoyed, I havea great more respect for The Miz after what I tought was a very good ECW title match. HBK had one his matches of this year and I bwas left in shock after seeing the crossface. All other matchers were how I thought they would be but I thought Edge would screw Batista?? Edge to win Rumble and go to Mania!!!

 

[nekkid]

Those are all good ideas. I just think in the end they need the brand extention simply because they have too many wrestlers employeed in the company now. If you think about it the wwf absorbed 2 full rosters in early 2000's ecw and wcw. I think if there was only one belt, that there would be a TON of backstage politics like the old wcw and we would only see champions like HHH, HBK, Undertaker ect (Those with all the political power), but if there is another belt or two then we can see guys like cm punk, lashley, cena, orton, batista and edge get a chance to run with the ball.

Also, I went to 'mania 23 in detroit and I got to see 2 world championship matches AND a high profile celebrity match. Both championship matches FELT like championship matches also. Would anybody have really cared about UNdertaker and Batista if smackdown didn't get its own belt? I don't think so.

I do believe however if they have brand splits that they should keep it that way. LIke many of you said that ecw should be its own just like raw. UNless its a ppv all wrestlers should only appear on their respective shows.

So IMO as long as Vince employs almost 3 full rosters of wrestlers then the brand extention is needed. However I think the main problem with the wwe right now is that there are way too many wrestlers, way too many storylines, and way too many belts. It is just simply too confusing for the average casual fan. I think that a big reason why the wwe did so well in the attitude era was because Vince didn't have a huge roster and the audience got to see character development when they saw the same charcters week in and week out. Quality not Quanity.

For example, my girlfriend and I had this conversation (she only watches because I do)

(We were watching raw)

GF: Where is that HUGe weird guy with that gigantic chin? (Khali)

Me: He is only on friday shows.

GF: Why?

Me: They do it because of too many guys, there was a draft, umm.. long story.

(Khali apprears on raw with dx)

GF: Wait there he is. Why is on the monday show?

Me: Well, sometimes they just show up.

GF: That is stupid.

Me: Ya I know.

 

[phynix]

Am I the only person who now want more conversations from Nekkid and his Girlfriend?

Y2J returns tonight new look new moves new Y2J - He'll still have the walls right??

Carlito asked for his release last week so expevt him either gone soon or sooner.

 

[Static2093]

ok............who is ur guys Favorert of all time wreslter? i say TaTanka

 

[Stingray]

Because I suck at recoding things properly, all my responses will be in green.

Those are all good ideas. I just think in the end they need the brand extention simply because they have too many wrestlers employeed in the company now. If you think about it the wwf absorbed 2 full rosters in early 2000's ecw and wcw. I think if there was only one belt, that there would be a TON of backstage politics like the old wcw and we would only see champions like HHH, HBK, Undertaker ect (Those with all the political power), but if there is another belt or two then we can see guys like cm punk, lashley, cena, orton, batista and edge get a chance to run with the ball.

Ironically, though, none of the power-players are champions now, nor look to be regaining any of the big titles in the near future. Power plays have never been that big of an issue in WWE (by comparison), and I can't see that being the case if they were to unify the titles. Especially given the importance of a singular title in comparison to a divided & devalued championship like the pair they're working with now.

Also, I went to 'mania 23 in detroit and I got to see 2 world championship matches AND a high profile celebrity match. Both championship matches FELT like championship matches also. Would anybody have really cared about UNdertaker and Batista if smackdown didn't get its own belt? I don't think so.

I couldn't disagree more with this. There were dual/triple Main events going on at Mania long before there were dual titles, with those matches playing just as big a part. Yes, this year's were exceptional bouts, but I can't say that for the vast majority of years there have been dual title bouts. Most of the time one of them is great & the other one is awful.

So IMO as long as Vince employs almost 3 full rosters of wrestlers then the brand extention is needed. However I think the main problem with the wwe right now is that there are way too many wrestlers, way too many storylines, and way too many belts. It is just simply too confusing for the average casual fan.

I don't think its a matter of too much of anything, but rather not enough focus on what's going on at any given moment. The writers waffle the storylines too much, and half the time don't adhere to whatever guidelines it looks like they've set up. As a result, storylines go on too long or stop too abruptly, pushes vanish overnight, and tag teams start & end like someone turning off the kitchen faucet.

Quality not Quanity.
True, but only to an extent. Think about it if the roster were halved. With injuries to Lashley, Rey, Undertaker, Edge, HBK, HHH, & Cena, plus Big Show, Angle, & RVD leaving the company pretty much all at the same time (not to mention Benoit) that leaves a HUGE hole in the top of the card, and only about 3 guys capable of filling it convincingly. Match quality goes up, risk factor goes up, injury/physical wear goes up, which means in the long run productivity goes down. With the high physical wear in the business as it is nowadays, a big roster is almost a necessity.

 

[nekkid]

Am I the only person who now want more conversations from Nekkid and his Girlfriend?

QUOTE]

haha. Very compelling stuff. huh?

 

[nekkid]

Well Stingray the powerplayers were all injured until recently that is (probably) why they weren't/aren't champions recently. HHH, HBK, 'taker, all just came off injuries. Power plays never been a problem in the wwe? This is always a problem in ANY organization. There may have been less problems in the wwe than wcw at one point but the wwe has had MAJOR political issues... Bret not wanting to put over hbk and vice versa, Austin not wanting to put over HHH, Austin not wanting to work with Jarett, Hogan not wanting to lose to HBK, HBK not wanting to put Austin over. I could go on. There has been less it seems as of late with more titles.


I agree mostof the time the matches in previous ppv's and wrestlemania's since the brand extension had one superior title match (usually raw) but that takes time to build. It took a while for people to accept 2 belts. I think it has worked.

As far as the guys getting hurt. I mean ya, it happens. And when it does it seems they all happen at once. But that is the nature of the business. Vince has actually taken steps to do less high flying and dangerous in-ring stuff so I think "now-a-days" the guys get hurt less. When a guy gets hurt someone else steps up and carries the ball. I thought Vince put out his best product when he had his thinnest roster ever in the late 90's. In 96 he didn't really have enough guys for the royal rumble. Matter of opinion I guess.

 

[nekkid]

Well its been 10 years since the old montreal screw job. I was wondering what you guys think looking back at it now (I just watched wrestling with shadows on youtube) do you guys think the whole thing was a work? and why?

 

[Stingray]

Well Stingray the powerplayers were all injured until recently that is (probably) why they weren't/aren't champions recently. HHH, HBK, 'taker, all just came off injuries.

Granted, but all have been all but eliminated from the immediate title picture in the last 2, 3 months as well, with new angles leading them away from the title picture. (at least for the time being)

Power plays never been a problem in the wwe? This is always a problem in ANY organization. There may have been less problems in the wwe than wcw at one point but the wwe has had MAJOR political issues... Bret not wanting to put over hbk and vice versa, Austin not wanting to put over HHH, Austin not wanting to work with Jarett, Hogan not wanting to lose to HBK, HBK not wanting to put Austin over. I could go on. There has been less it seems as of late with more titles.

And how many of those issues were dealt with & done anyhow? Hart & Michaels traded wins for over a year, as did Austin & HHH. Nobody wanted to work with Jarret -- pitfall of working for daddy when you start is that you never have to lose. Kinda makes you full of yourself. -- and Hogan's ALWAYS been *that guy*. Austin & Michaels did their share of working together as well. I can honestly say that with the exceptions of some of the Rock-n-Wrestling era guys (Hogan in particular), I can't think of a single politicking matter that's prevented an angle from moving forward in WWE, particularly in a title scenario. That's not to say it hasn't happened, but unlike what we've seen in the only real comparitive market (WCW) it hasn't been a hinderance to the show in any degree. I can't see how that would change in the modern era if there was a singular title again.

I agree mostof the time the matches in previous ppv's and wrestlemania's since the brand extension had one superior title match (usually raw) but that takes time to build. It took a while for people to accept 2 belts. I think it has worked.

I'm not saying the dual title thing hasn't worked. It's worked fine. I just don't think it's necessary any longer. I think having 2 (3 if you count ECW) world titles devalues the concept of the world title. And with the number of main event stars now, it would be easier to have a more varied series of programs for the title & maintain a longer reigning champion now than it was when they divided them to begin with. (Especially since, looking at Cena & Batista, the company seems to be favoring longer reigns again.

As far as the guys getting hurt. I mean ya, it happens. And when it does it seems they all happen at once. But that is the nature of the business. Vince has actually taken steps to do less high flying and dangerous in-ring stuff so I think "now-a-days" the guys get hurt less.

I disagree. I think we're seeing more injuries now than we ever did prior, &/or those injuries are far more lasting/serious than they used to be. I don't think it's the fault of any policy or anything, I just think it's the progressive nature of the business. Put on a bigger show, get more opportunities. Bigger show = bigger spots = bigger risks = etc.

When a guy gets hurt someone else steps up and carries the ball. I thought Vince put out his best product when he had his thinnest roster ever in the late 90's. In 96 he didn't really have enough guys for the royal rumble. Matter of opinion I guess.

Yeah...see, I thought the stuff in the late 90's, exception of the main event scene, was pretty much garbage, but we've had that discussion here before. I think....or was that the wrestling board I hit, where I was going on about the Butterbean v. Marc Mero/Factions Galore/Ron Simmons in the foam Gladiator outfit stuff?

 

[Stingray]

Well its been 10 years since the old montreal screw job. I was wondering what you guys think looking back at it now (I just watched wrestling with shadows on youtube) do you guys think the whole thing was a work? and why?

Honestly? I'm as indifferent to it now as I was then. I think it was mishandled on both ends, and in the long run, affected next to nothing.

 

[Dragulf]

10 years later, Brett is a whiny bitch and Vince is a jackass. Nope, nothing has changed...

 

[reiko_sawamura]

At least things between them are better than what's between Vince and Randy Savage