MeeThinks 3.21.06: Primetime TNA (Page 2 of 2)
Posted by John Meehan on 03.21.2006
Reader feedback and GRAPHIC PHOTOS of one of WWE's most beloved Divas!
YouThinks Reader Mail And yes, those Torrie photos are below...
Reader feedback is back with a vengeance this week, so let's get right to it!
(Again, if you'd like to share YourThinks with Mee and the rest next time, shoot Mee YourThinks on this week's debate and we'll post it here next time!)
*Also one additional note here:
Over in the poll for The Great Positivity Debate, I noticed that one reader voted Team Highlights because (and I quote) "Meehan hasn't responded to my e-mail, so he's as good as pewp."
Articulacy aside
To this reader (and those of you that might have similar sentiments), my apologies if I've overlooked and or misplaced your e-mail. As you can see, I do my very best to get back to y'all by posting YourThinks right here in this section. If your letter doesn't make these pages, I'm usually pretty good about e-mailing just the same. So if you've submitted something and *still* haven't a) seen it printed here, or b) heard back from Mee my honest and sincerest apologies.
As outside of my time here on 411 I work as a professional writer for an organization with a published address available to every major news outlet (or spammer) remotely associated with the media relations industry, my inbox tends to get inundated with (no exaggeration) some three to four hundred e-mails a day. Since most of these are spamtastic (gotta love published e-mail addys, no?) my inbox filters are set to uber-high, and occasionally non-spam e-mails automatically get sorted into the old "junk mail" folder and I never see them.
G-Mail addresses, for some strange reason, tend to be lumped into the "junk" folder despite my repeated attempts to allow for them to be funneled into my inbox. So I've lost more than a few e-mails hailing from such sources (my room mate and my girlfriend both use G-Mail *not* a good thing to miss e-mails from either of them).
So anyhow
If you're e-mailing, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do Mee a favor and put the word "MeeThinks" somewhere in your subject line (or just click the "e-mail author" links below). That tends to catch my eye as I weed through the voluminous junk. "Hey Meehan" doesn't, as erectile dysfunction companies, Bank of the West, and scam travel packages love to send things titled like that (since my e-mail account is named "meehan").
So yeah not to be redundant here, but if you're gonna e-mail YourThinks and you'd like them to appear here (or if you'd like to ensure a reply), just .
First up new face MNicholson, who had this to say:
Hey there,
I think that you are one of the best writers on 411 and I love the positivity, keep up the good work. I agree with pretty much everything you say and this column is no different.
Candice V Torrie - I agree with your view, can't complain as long as the match isn't too long
Boogeyman V Bookman - Hopefully we can see some wrestling from Boogey, but I'm loving the build up and the segments have been damn funny
'Taker V Henry - I'll second what you said on this one
Edge V Foley - I'm still kinda hoping we will see Cactus or Mankind but the match should be great either way
Vince V HBK - Ref bumps, blood, run-ins, BRET HART run-in... should be damn entertaining
Money in the Bank - I think this match will be even better than last years purely because of RVD. I hope to see MNM and Matt Hardy from Smackdown (Lashley and Finlay in a singles match)
Trish V Mickie - I never thought about your suggestion that Trish might give Mickie some lovin'. Thanks for bringing that to my attention...
Tag Titles - Should be alright, Carlito rules and I quite like his partnership with Masters. At least we don't have to see a Master's singles match.
Benoit V JBL - i think this should be great, I enjoy JBL's matches and Benoit always delivers. Maybe Stone Cold could be involved somehow (enforcer) leading to a long JBL and Austin feud
Cena V Triple H - I agree that the fans will make this match, I can't wait to see the response to both men
Angle V Orton V Mysterio - Triple Threat matches are my favourite kind of match, and these are three of my favourite WWE guys. I have high expectations.
Thanks for listening to my views, and once again, great column!
- MNicholson
Thanks for writing dude. Since you spelled things out in a point-by-point manner here, I think your letter pretty much speaks for itself and doesn't need too much line-by-line running commentary. Two quick things, though:
1) JBL/Austin would be an AWESOME program. The promos alone would make the feud worth watching, and the obligatory drunkenness from at least one of them at any given point would just be icing on the alcohol-soaked cake. Not to mention the fact that they're both old-school "Texas brawler"-types in terms of their respective in-ring styles, and you've got yourself the potential for a string of matches that might just break the **** mark!
Too bad Austin has more or less reduced his performance load to "special guest appearance" status for the time being (and perhaps indefinitely). Dunno if we'll ever get to see these two go at it but again, it would be a great, GREAT idea all the same.
2) The Bret run-in. While I'm not counting on it, I'm certainly not ruling it out. There's a lot of web reports coming through that Marty is pretty much under house arrest, that Shane-O might be with his wife in a hospital, and that The Hitman "wants nothing to do with WrestleMania itself" this year but I'm still hoping that at least one of those stories is more "work" than "fact." Again, the Bret run-in is beyond a long shot at this point but you can bet that the fan response to the match will just about demand it (kinda like the "Goldberg" chants from when Steiner attacked Sting). Here's hoping, right?!
Next up -
Another first-time contributor named Andrew Hutchinson, who's got title shots and Money in the Bank on his mind:
Hey man,
First off let me say I really enjoy reading your MeeThinks columns. Your writing style makes you very fun to read and the content is great too. I must confess to not ALWAYS agreeing with your conclusions, I think sometimes it is OK to be negative about things. Fans letting promoters know that they don't like the product is the way said promoters are going to learn to improve the product, and further to this we are right to display our displeasure when our ignored. Anyway, although I don't always agree with your conclusions I think the way that you approach things that are generally crapped on is refreshing and interesting as it does shed a lot of light on all things wrestling and certainly serves to enlighten the keen but not very knowledgeable fan (such as myself).
I really liked your breakdown of Wrestlemania this week and wanted to ask a few questions. Particularly, about the hypothesis, which many have raised I believe, that Ric Flair may win the Money in the Bank Ladder Match and then cash in his shot at the end of the main event. It is my belief that he would NOT be allowed to do this. It was very clearly stated last year that the winner could take his shot any time from RAW the following night until the main event at the following year's Wrestlemania. The year in which the shot is valid includes only ONE Wrestlemania main event. Anyway that is a small point but I think it is more likely, if they want to pull a quick Flair win, that they do it the following night on RAW. As great as it would be for Naitch to win the title at Wrestlemania, I don't think they can.
Also I want to give some thoughts about the US Title match. Specifically what did JBL do to deserve the shot? He got a win over Lashley at No Way Out but Lashley had not been hyped as a US Title contender (of course if this match was a No. 1 contenders match then I'm wrong anyway but I didn't think it was...), and before that at the Royal Rumble, JBL lost in 3 minutes to the Boogeyman. This doesn't really say to me number 1 contender. Its not really a done thing for heels to come back and go after the person who injured them. Its much more common for the face to be injured and come back for vengeance and title shots. I can only presume that JBL's injury is legit and was not planned for in the spot in the match where it happened. Yes it will be a good match I believe, yes JBL and Benoit can put a good brawl on with Benoit's technical expertise thrown in the mix. I'm just not convinced the JBL is the guy who should be competing for the belt. They could use the US Belt to have veteran vs up and comer feuds and help develop talent. Anyway for a good Wrestlemania match this will work. I assume Benoit will win.
Anyway just a couple of little points. Great columns!!
Take care
- Andrew
Hi Andrew, and thanks for writing. You're right that the U.S. Title program does seem a bit rushed, but that said even though the storyline (or challenger order) leading up to it hasn't been all that stellar, I'm still going to applaud the E for giving us Benoit as champion against a believable opponent like JBL. You're right in noting that Boogeyman (or Lashley) technically would stand in line for a title shot before the Wrestling Gawd but then again, it might be a better idea to let either (or both) of those men have their chance to get a feel for the "Big Time" in an undercard match for their first appearance on a stage as big as WrestleMania before the company automatically plops them into a title match under the same high-pressure situation. I'll go out on a limb and say that Boogey or Lashley will likely be wearing gold by year's end but it's just as well that they don't rush either man into a title reign on the company's biggest night.
Now, as far as Money in the Bank goes
"Technically" speaking, I believe you're right. But in the world of WWE "technical" attention to detail doesn't often mean that you're "actually" right.
The first Money in the Bank title shot was, according to WWE canon, "a standing title shot that could be used at any time after WrestleMania XXI and before WrestleMania XXII." However, as this year's match boasts a few "tweaks" from the last incarnation of the bout (i.e. the interpromotional aspect as opposed to the brand-specific one), I guess it's fair to say that its not simply a re-hash of last year's contest with the whole kit and caboodle of the exact same stipulations and all. As such, I see no reason why a challenge for a world title on the same night that the title shot was won would necessarily be out of the question.
But more importantly
When Edge won the Money in the Bank match, he won it for what Bischoff said would be "a shot at the World Heavyweight Championship" (note the capital letters to indicate the proper name of the belt in question). However, when Batista swapped shows and took this same World Heavyweight Championship belt with him this left RAW with Cena (and the WWE Title), and Edge was still able to cash in his shot for this title instead.
So if we were being sticklers for detail, here -
Edge shouldn't have been able to challenge Cena for the WWE Title, as his title shot was for the belt that Batista had with him over on Smackdown. But since the E made an exception here (as the situation demanded), I see no reason why they wouldn't be willing to "bend" their own rules again this year at WrestleMania.
Will it happen and will Flair get a shot at the title and close out WrestleMania with a 17th title reign to his credit?
Probably not but "technically" speaking, it's a possibility.
Hope this clears things up a bit, yes?
Moving on -
Semi-regular Mark Satrang tries his hand at fantasy-booking and had this to say:
Meehan--
Good article on the WrestleMania card. As it's coming up I am actually getting anxious for it, and I love that is going to be more than eight matches like it was last year. This is WrestleMania, four hours, there's room for 11 or 12 matches as long as a couple of them stay short. I'm looking at an 11 match card, with 5 RAW, 5 SD! and the Money in the Bank inter-promotional. The RAW side is all set up as all it needs now is for Trish and Mickey to be made official, but its the blue side that intrigues me. I mean if they get five matches, that gives two yet undecided and three MITB slots for a solid mid-card.
I write this before the SD! taping so I'm going to fantasy book to think of the possibilities to fill the rest of the card. The most logical people for MITB are Booker T, Matt Hardy, Lashley, Finlay and an outside chance of Paul Birchill, Orlando Jordan or William Regal. Plus there's Boogeyman, MNM, all the cruiserweights and of course all the job guys. So I think they should put Matt, Booker and someone else like Burchill (or Chavo!!) in MITB. Let Finlay and Lashley blow off their fued and have MNM defend against the Mexicools and/or London/Kendrick, but that's just dreaming.
I don't really see Boogeyman wrestling, just making a zany appearance. Plus now that Helms' nose is all over his face and won't be wrestling that takes out a Cruiserweight Title match. Plus Road Warrior Animal, in Chicago, will probably make some appearance too. I just read on 411 today too that Shannon Moore (WTF?) got rehired so he and Matt could pair up to blow off the Matt-MNM fued. Basically this is why I'm liking SD! right now. With an actual credible mid-card and tag teams and cruiserweights it makes their side of the show very interesting.
Just a lot of rambling...but I had to throw in my two cents
Later...
Mark Satrang
Thanks for that, Mark. As you've probably seen by now, the Smackdown side of things has taken somewhat of a different shape than you and I might have expected (FINLAY!) but I wouldn't rule out WrestleMania appearances from Bobby Lashley. If Saturday Night's Main Event showed us anything, it's that there is still a few solid weeks' worth of mileage to be had from Boogey vs. Booker (I SO called this one, by the way). And Bobby Lashley will be at this year's Mania one way or another, mark my words on that one!
As far as Shannon Moore goes (or Test, or Charlie Haas, or Chuck Palumbo, or even Mark Jindrak or Good Ole' J.R.), since we're fantasy-booking here, I dunno if I would rule it out entirely that the E might not just saddle a couple of these guys into a "castaway" rogue sort of stable with an axe to grind against the company for having canned them in the first place. Could be cool, except for that *small* problem that they were all pretty much jobbers by the time they were released and we all remember how well "invading" jobber-squads have done (see: Hugh Morris & Lance Storm, The WCW Invasion).
Sigh
Speaking of "bad ideas" -
This next reader isn't sure that a "wrestling off-season" is necessarily the worst of them he makes a pretty solid argument, too so hear him out, yes? All you, Eric:
Hey Meehan, long time reader, great column.
I have something to add about a wrestling "season." I've thrown this idea up in the air for a couple other 411 writers to comment on but not a lot of people have talked about it.
My idea is to have a 9 month "season." After Wrestlemania, say Raw gives there roster a 2-3 month time off to heal injuries and to possibly go to OVW or DSW and help the new guys. Then while RAW is on break, have Smackdown take over RAW's time slot on USA, so that we can still have RAW and Smackdown on every week, it will allow feuds to be built up to SummerSlam and Survivor series. Then after 3 months off Raw comes back and Smackdown goes on break. To allow the Smackdown stars time to heal injuries and stuff.
There should also be a rule that allows stars in need of more conditioning to be on both shows during this time to get there skills refined, also this could help feel out possible trades and feeling out on how certain stars work with others. This would give a since of "I can't wait till comes back on ."
I just think that this would freshen up the RAW and Smackdown rosters for health issues and possible over exposure, while still having wrestling every Monday and Friday.
Let me know what you think i'd love to hear from others on this idea.
Thanks for your time.
- Eric
Thanks for writing, Eric. Your rotating off-season idea is definitely among the most fully realized of them that I've seen, but I still can't help but wonder if it still doesn't have a few noteworthy holes that need patching. Like, for example -
1) If we all know that (in your example) Smackdown will be going on break some three months after the Big Dance, the E will have to wrap up all of that brand's feuds *not* at WrestleMania, but three months later. This means that "blowoffs" might need to be delayed for three months beyond the natural "blowoff" date that is the Grandaddy of them All which could pose a major snafu in booking the thing.
2) Conversely, if RAW (in your example) gets off for three months beginning with the night following Mania, then all of that brand's feuds need to be conveniently wrapped up (or put "on hold" for three months) on the night that is WrestleMania. This could be a disaster for those feuds that have "natural" rematches with short shelf-lives (like Rock/Hogan II) with a very limited window of opportunity to draw big bucks. Sometimes, three months is simply too long for some fans to wait to see a payoff or return match (see: Trish/Mickie), and with the stakes being as high as they are this could prove fatal to a brand's momentum.
3) Even if there is a three-month "off cycle" for each roster, the other roster will have to pull double-duty to pick up the slack. And even though these guys perform on an average five nights a week, the added stress of taping two weekly television shows might just be enough to burn these guys (or their writers) out just as fast as their co-workers rest up. Sure WWE performers used to tape two shows a week but they (and their fans) have become accustomed to seeing each roster only once a week, which means that writers would need to work double-time to make things work. And if they can't get the job done, then rather than two "burnt out" brands each getting two hours of television apiece, you've got one "burnt out brand" churning out four hours worth of TV (or more) a week and that could be disastrous in the long run.
Still, an interesting idea just the same.
As always, reader feedback is appreciated, even when it openly dissents with what I've written on the topic. Like this one, from Steve Katz, for example who seems to think that the Nature Boy should hang up the boots once and for all
Meehan,
In your last Meethinks you seemed somewhat surprised at some people getting annoyed at Flair going over Carlito for the last Raw Money in the Bank participant. Being one of those people that were bothered by the decision, let me fill you in on four reasons why it's a bad booking move. Carlito is the one who proposed this year's match in the first place. He was getting a little bit of a push, showing some more versatility in the ring. Then, WWE Creative decided to completely and totally kneecap his push in every way possible.
First they have him lose to Flair. Sure, Flair's a legend, one of the best ever. But he's 57 now, and he simply can't wrestle anymore. Hell, Chris Masters has a more expansive move set than Flair does these days. It's not a knock on Flair's career or his ability to wrestle in his younger days, but he has no business in the ring if all he can do is kick, punch, chop, poke some eyes, strut and take a beating. That's all he does. The Figure Four has been completely devalued, because it doesn't finish anyone off these days. The Masterlock may be completely ridiculous as a move, but at least it's booked to be devastating. It's not good wrestling. If you take away the legendary career and just look at his current in ring skills objectively, you'll realize how terrible he really is.
So this man robs Carlito of a spot in MitB, despite the fact that Carlito would be excellent in that match and much better than Flair (The TLC against Edge was NOT a four star match. Not even close. Come on, now). That's annoying, but it could be worse. And, it turns out, it is. So Carlito's been forced back into a non-existent tag division with everyone's favorite whipping boy Chris Masters to work a meaningless and completely undeveloped program against Kane and The Big Show for devalued belts that no one cares about. Not to mention the fact that Kane and Show went over clean against Carlito and Masters a few short months ago. The crowd's going to be dead for this match. So not only do they kneecap Carlito's (however modest) push, they also spit in his face (ironic) and pushed him /back/ four or five steps in the process. Even if Carlito and Masters win the belts, it's not a push. They'll just replace Kane and Show as two slapped together singles wrestlers with the tag belts. Big difference there.
Arguably, the worst thing about all of this has nothing to do with Carlito. It's the fact that Flair's going to /win/ the MitB match and parley it into one last world title run (this has been made completely obvious by Shelton and Coach claiming he doesn't have it in him anymore, which he doesn't, but they have to prove the nasty heels wrong). Part of me thinks this is Trips pulling strings again so he can both retire Flair and win the belt from him in one fell swoop to add to his growing legacy. But I don't care. Because regardless of the reasons, /Flair can't wrestle anymore/, and has absolutely no business holding any title whatsoever. So now he gets his one last title run, but manages to go over pretty much every younger talented upper midcarder in the process (RVD, Carlito, Shelton, 3 Smackdown guys still to be named as well) and makes them all look silly in the process due to his complete lack of in ring ability. Sure, Flair's insanely over. But so is RVD. And RVD really deserves a main event run so much more than Flair.
I'm not knocking the MitB match. I think it'll still be fun. Part of me really hopes they find some way to get both Lashley and Finlay in there just to watch them beat the living hell out of each other with ladders and not even attempt to go for the briefcase. My guess is Hardy'll be in, and I like the idea of Chavo switching brands to sneak in there, but no matter what happens, no matter how enjoyable it is, I will still have a bad taste in my mouth when Flair grabs the briefcase, knowing Carlito could have done so much more instead of being stuck in a dead end tag division with a no talent partner.
Dat's not cool.
~~ Steve Katz
Wow. Just wow, dude. Some solid points in there about the Carlito "de-push," but a) patience, and give him time, and b) on the whole I can't help but just totally disagree with you on the overall Flair argument. To Mee, wrestling ability means so much more than mere technical prowess. It's psychology, it's selling for an opponent, it's the ability to captivate the crowd, and it's the "total package" of getting the fans to hang on your every move.
Old age or no, I simply think that Ric Flair has "it" always has, always will, and (from my perspective, at least) once you've got "it" in the same way that Flair has, you can never lose it. Even when he was phoning it in through the dying days of WCW, Flair was still head and shoulders above some 90% of the roster in terms of his ability to entertain both in the ring and out of it. Guys like Foley, Funk, Taker, Hogan and Savage are much the same. Sure, their bouts weren't technical classics as the years went on or even really that expansive in terms of moves employed and the like but night after night, the old pros with that "it" factor kept Mee entertained no matter how run down they'd supposedly become.
Rock/Hogan was balls in terms of "technical merit" but it was off the charts on an overall performance based scale.
Hogan/HBK ran the gamut from "oversold cartoonish bafoonery" to "slow and plodding Street Fighter II-type slugfest," but I marked out like a champ when I saw every second of the thing live from the nosebleeds of the MCI center.
Flair/Sting from the final Nitro was run of the mill in terms of in-ring action, with the "same old, same old" spots and the same methodical pace that had really burdened the last days of WCW but thanks to the "it" factor of both of the men involved, they absolutely made the very last match in WCW history all the more meaningful (and engaging) regardless of the run-of-the-mill caliber of the in-ring skills that it showcased.
Point blank Triple H / Flair from the cage match at Taboo Tuesday was off the hook. And the last man standing brawl from the following month was no slouch, either. And though you'll disagree, Flair/Edge in the TLC match was an awesome, awesome contest. I'll grant you that **** might be a bit high, but a) I never really put too much stock in those self-important star ratings anyhow, and b) I know for sure that I *actually believed* that Flair could have actually won that thing on a number of occasions. Kinda like the ladder match between Jeff Hardy and The Undertaker on RAW from some four or five years back yes, it was crap in terms of its overall "style," "polish," and "technical merit" but damn if both of those contests weren't hella-entertaining (and all kinds of dramatic!) along the way.
With "old timers" who "don't have it anymore" playing integral roles in each of the aforementioned contests, I think it's more than fair to say that their declining in-ring abilities are more than compensated for by their inexplicable "it" factor, and by their overwhelming ability to "make so much out of so little."
That, to Mee, is what makes a quality performer. Though I totally understand your frustration with Flair's apparent success coming at the cost of Carlito's lack thereof give the devil his due, my friend, and try not to allow your (and my) love of da' Caribbean Cool to detract from the awesomeness that is The Nature Boy. Carlito will have his day, don't you worry and it looks like he keeps getting better and better as the months wear onward. But Flair is still one of the most entertaining performers on the roster today, And so long as Ric keeps Mee entertained with what little he's got left in the tank I will continue to herald him as one of the best *active* performers in the business, period.
(Insert "WHOOOOO!" here).
Random letter time from Chris, on Goldberg!?
I have read many recent reports that Goldberg feels he was misused and underutilized in WWE....but as I remember he whooped Trips in their first encounter and then had his ankle shattered so he could take some time off but he kept the belt and in the rematch against Trips he came out like a beast...after this he wrestled with the company for nearly a year and I don't remember much that happened but I remember in the beginning he was just like WCW Goldberg just booked with smart storylines and against the top of WWE's card. So what did WWE and Vinnie Mac do so wrong?
With The Love of Christ,
- Chris
Thanks for writing, Chris. Though I don't fully believe Goldberg's argument on the case (since he did just about ZERO to help himself, of course) the case pretty much boiled down to this.
1) Goldberg is a byproduct of the "super political" days of WCW. As such, he's got a nasty protective penchant for "looking out for his spot" over "the good of the business." Since Goldberg and Triple H had a history of bad blood, it's not a surprise that he was uber-paranoid (and perhaps with good reason) that Trips was "out to sabotage him" and make sure that he was booked to look like a chump during his tenure with the E. Didn't help that Goldberg was booked into a program against Jericho upon arrival in the E (in an angle that was basically pitched as the kayfabe equivalent of "the match that Goldberg refused to fight in WCW," or so the story goes) which *definitely* gave fans all the more reason to suspect that Goldie was just as "selfish" as the web reports had hinted for so long.
2) Goldberg got a nice little hype video foretelling his arrival in the E some that began some two weeks or so before his debut, but that's it. No built-in storyline-upon-arrival (it was pretty much like "hey look, it's Goldberg" as opposed to "WHOAH SHIT IT'S GOLDBERG AND HE'S HERE TO KICK HUNTER"S ASS!), and alternately no "shock value" for his "big debut." It wasn't like the markout factor when Hall and Nash first appeared on Nitro it was more like a well-expected afterthought. By the time Goldie finally appeared on WWE television, we all knew he was coming, and we all knew that it was a good two years later than when it would have actually been as "shocking" as it could have once been. The guy's whole appeal was that he was originally a "no talk, just ass-kicking" beast. With the mishandled debut Goldberg (again, perhaps justifiably) believed that much of his "mystique" was shot in the foot from the word "go."
3) Even with the "mishandled" debut, Goldberg could have easily regained some heat by being booked as a monster with a capital "M." Squash matches, the win streak, very few words these are the kind of things that got Da Man over in WCW in the first place. But Vince and company weren't about to feed half of their roster to this newly-arrived "squash-monster" (since they'd pretty much were doing the same with Brock). So what does the E do? Plant the guy right into the main-event scene against Triple H, which meant less ass-kicking, more longwinded promo battles (at the height of Triple H's "boring" period), lengthier matches than the guy was used to (which pretty well exposed the lack of depth of his moveset), and a spotty win-loss record that made him look *WAY* too vulnerable (as opposed to the "unstoppable juggernaut" he was booked to be throughout most of his WCW run).
Now then, all that said Goldberg's argument pretty much falls flat when you consider the fact that many net fans caught on that the guy was "only in it for the money" and thus turned on him in short order. Riding out the duration of his exorbitant Turner contract certainly didn't help matters much, and all of his "crybaby" like antics whining about the company at just about every turn prior to his signing and since his release has definitely left many with that "oh get over yourself already" vibe. But again, as Goldie is the offspring of one of THE most "political" times in wrestling history, it's not all that hard to understand why the guy tries to blame everyone else (WWE, Triple H, Jericho, etc.) for his problems rather than simply accept the fact that fans just caught on that his heart just wasn't in the business.
This next letter comes from familiar face Andrew Critchell, who I could *sworn* would be writing in about the Divas this week. Surprisingly, not to be! Still a quality letter all the same, so here you go:
Hey John
As usual, I really enjoyed your column. I liked your breakdown of each rumored WM match and the positives that lie within. For me, Wrestlemania is Wrestlemania and always a must see. The WWE has been successful with this event way more times than they haven't and I think with all the new faces involved it could really be an exciting event.
Once again, they hypocrisy of the IWC raises it's ugly head; the WWE is looking to push new faces to the big event and people are upset that more "big time" guys are not involved yet this is the same crowd that always moans and groans whenever a guy like Hogan shows up to beat some Arabs. Anyhoo, I am getting WM for sure and am very much looking forward to it.
Have a good one!
Andrew Critchell
Thanks for writing, Andrew. You absolutely hit the nail on the head that the same folks who are griping about this year's "lack of star power" and "lack of larger than life' aura" are very much the same critics who are always so quick to slam the E for wheeling out the "established names" like Hulk, Rocky, and Austin (even Taker and Trips, to an extent) to pop a rating.
Here's the thing
I will totally grant them that the "old timers" shouldn't be stealing the spotlight from the "up and comers," but then again you really can't complain that a show lacks the "Big Time" feel when the company is obviously trying to give a whole crop of "new" main eventers their shot on the big stage (Rey, Lashley, Finlay, Masters, Carlito, etc.). Yes, the E could have done a better job of pushing these guys as "believable" main-eventers in the past year, but on the flipside, when they try to push new guys, IWC'ers are often just as fast to jump all over their cases for having tried to do so in the first place (see: Masters, Chris).
It's a tough balance to strike, and basically what the "ideal" situation we're looking at is pretty well boils down to "IWC fans want wrestling companies to push the guys that we like." Not necessarily the ones that the average "mark" fans will like (or the ones that the average "mark" will pay to see), but the ones that WE like regardless of how popular or unpopular they happen to be with the "average (non-smark) fan."
Benoit, Eddie, Stevie, Al Snow, Daniels, Jericho, Finlay, Angle each of these guys have found substantial net followings despite being "too small," "too bland," or "too old" by traditional fans' standards but damn, could they go in the ring! True, each of them have achieved substantial success with hard work and perseverance, but in time they've all seen their stars eclipsed by more "conventionally popular" superstars in the traditional "main event, larger than life" wrestler mold. While this is substantial cause for frustration on our part, we do have do recognize that being a pro wrestler means that you're putting yourself out there for ALL of the fanbase to either accept or reject and the "mark" fans are simply more prone to buy those scads of beer coolies, t-shirts, key-chains, foam fingers, and other craptacular merchandise that is the company's biggest money maker of all.
So getting back to your point:
Yup, the IWC'ers can be pretty darned hypocritical when we want to be. But if we wanted to be fair (which most of us don't) we have to accept the fact that the wrestling fanbase is much bigger than the IWC, which means that companies simply have to push more performers than the select few that we've chosen to embrace. Again, as the web audience grows the E (and TNA, etc.) will eventually come around to our sensitivities and whims but it's gonna' take some time, so we'll need to be patient along the way.
Ok after all that talkin', I'm gonna need a pit of photo respite. Perhaps this next e-mail will be of some help, yes? You're up, Manu Bumb:
"while I'm not a particular fan of either of the ladies involved (I likes ta' callz em "Sandpaper Face" and "Spinner Chick," respectively) "
Sandpaper Face? Torre Wilson is SANDPAPER FACE? First I must ask what you even mean by that, because she has the smoothest skin this side of mickie james' butt. Secondly I must ask how can you say such a horrible thing about such a beautiful woman? how???? Granted, I prefered her look back when she was more of a fitness model and less of a starving little girl, but you can't deny her beauty.
When you refer to the boogeyman, and "performing," I am assuming you're speaking strictly of his character aspects, not of his in-ring prowess, right? Not that I'm saying he cant wrestle, just that i havent seen him do anything for more than 2 minutes. and that pump-handle slam by him is so weak. Its like Lashley's dominator - both moves were designed to be whiplash moves (lashley...whiplash....it could work) in that you lift your opponent up, and before he has a chance to realize he's up there, BAM! you slam him back down. I have no problem with either man performing a move slowly, just think it shouldnt be one that was meant to be performed with impact. Pick a move that allows for a pause, like anything involving a front facelock (ddt, swinging neck breaker, eye of the hurricane/test drive/rolling the dice/big show thingie), or a gorilla press slam - picture lashley holding mark henry over his head rotating a 360 for all the crowd to see, then dropping him onto his sholder and power-slamming him, ala goldberg).
"In other words so what if the match won't be a technical classic? "
Okay, as long as we're on the same page...about that...
well, looks like im going to keep responding, so I'll do it match by match:
UT vs Henry
Its not so much that he's not up to par, considering takers list of crappy WM opponents, its just that...his career might not go on forever, and with each passing WM, the end draws closer, and at the end of his career, he shouldnt be facing mark henry at WM, he should be facing sting. the casket match stip will help, but about as much as the hell in a cell helped vs the bossman. plus, didnt we see a casket match in october? shouldve made it a buried alive match, or something.
plus, there's always the chance that the wwe will f' with us and let henry win....sorry, just threw up in my mouth a little bit...
MitB ladder match:
And if, by some chance, Flair pulls off the miracle upset and wins the title shot who's to say that the 16-time World Champion won't just decide to cash the thing in by the end of the night? Not to fantasy book too much here but say, if Triple H beats Cena for the WWE title in the main event, old Naitch suddenly comes strolling down to ringside just as the confetti is about to drop to close out the show, looks Trips in the eye and says "as far as I'm concerned, we're 1 and 1 apiece. Let's finish this once and for all, fat boy."
Sure it's a stretch but to see Ric Flair holding a world title to close out the biggest pay per view of the WWE's calendar year? "
And now you have the one reason I'm ordering the ppv. Ever since flair got into the match, this is what I've been calling for. Usually, the wwe will sell something that would be amazing (think Mick Foley telling HHH that if HHH won at NWO 2000, Foley would retire, but if he lost, Foley would defend the belt at the main event of WM and HHH would sit at home and watch...I thought to myself "how can he not win the title after saying that???" and of course, he didnt), and part of me is afraid that all this talk about ric flair having "one last run" in him is the same thing. However, with HHH idolizing flair, this could very easily be ric flair's night.
"Who will the Smackdown competitors be? Smart money says "Matt Hardy" a seasoned ladder match veteran himself, and the two remaining spots could easily be filled by a number of qualified midcard candidates ranging from "rookie" sensations like Bobby Lashley, The Boogeyman (though doubtful) and the re-born Fit Finlay all the way to old pros like Booker T and the rest. Unlike RAW, Smackdown is just brimming with a midcard of believable challengers for a world title so the blue brand will most definitely serve up a solid offering no matter who they decide to put forth!"
Worst case scenario - Tatanka, Animal, and Hardcore Holly. Best case scenario? Hardy, Super Crazy, and Paul London. Yet somehow, finlay gets into the match. Don't get me wrong, I like finlay, its just he should be having a match with lashley at WM, not being in a ladder match.
- Manu Bumb
Thanks for writing, Manu. Since you pretty well covered everything point-by-point (and it looks like we agreed on most of these things), I'll simply pick one of your points and beat it to death, deal?
Here goes
"while I'm not a particular fan of either of the ladies involved (I likes ta' callz em "Sandpaper Face" and "Spinner Chick," respectively)"
Sandpaper Face? Torre Wilson is SANDPAPER FACE? First I must ask what you even mean by that, because she has the smoothest skin this side of mickie james' butt. Secondly I must ask how can you say such a horrible thing about such a beautiful woman? how???? Granted, I prefered her look back when she was more of a fitness model and less of a starving little girl, but you can't deny her beauty.
Sorry to have to do this to you, Manu but it's high time we all had ourselves a heart-to-heart and told the truth about the "lovely" Miss. Wilson. My apologies in advance, readers and you're more than welcome to stop reading now if you've got a weak stomach.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
Seriously.
Ok then so "Sandpaper Face" Wilson why the epithet, you ask?
Two reasons, actually:
1) It is a well-known fact that Torrie Wilson has notoriously bad skin. There was even a story from some years back that Shane Douglas got himself in hot water with WCW management for calling Torrie out on her blemishes on an episode of Nitro while he was cutting a promo on Kidman. It's one of those few "serious taboos" that performers are just expected to steer clear of (kinda like Bret's alleged tryst with Sunny). Bottom line is that she's rough, dude and most folks who've ever seen her live and without the "studio polish" of post-editing, air-brushing, and loads of make-up you'll find on TV or a promotional appearance will be able to tell you the same.
2) Avert your eyes if you must, but these pics are photographic evidence that, as Mick Foley might say, Torrie Wilson's flawless complexion "is faker than wrestling!"
Sadly, those are actual photos that have not been digitally altered in any way, shape or form (unlike those which you'll find in magazines, WWE publications, or other licensed web photos). Hence, "Sandpaper Face."
If you'd like to see the rest of the batch, make sure your filters are up (spyware on this page is a BEAR) - there used to be a whole crop of them hosted over at this page (though the link appears to be down). And you can thank Thomlison for that link, by the way, so the "lack of positivity" here isn't so much either of us being negative it's just a sad, sad recognition of fact.
So, with that said...
With That, I'm Outta' Here
That'll do it for Mee this week. Thanks again for reading, and check back next Tuesday afternoon for some more net-gativity-bashing, a new crop of YourThinks, and the next installment of glossary entries, with any luck!
Thanks again for reading, enjoy these first few days of spring (and these last few days leading up to WrestleMania), and always stay positive!
