411 Fact or Fiction 03.01.07: HBK/Cena, Test, Edge, Angle, More

Posted by Ashish on 03.01.2007

It's week ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN of Fact or Fiction with Stephen Randle, Brad Borchardt, and whether WWE creative only cares during WrestleMania time...

Welcome back to the little game we call 411 Fact or Fiction: Wrestling Edition! This week, 411 Wrestling writers Stephen Randle and Brad Borchardt go at it! Let's get to it!


1. The Shawn Michaes/John Cena WrestleMania 23 match is more anticipated than the Undertaker/Batista and Bobby Lashley w/ Donald Trump/Umaga w/ Vince McMahon matches.

Brad Borchardt: FACT: I almost said fiction on this one. It seems like the WWE and the media wants this match to be the most anticipated match. But as a wrestling fan, I do not think Umaga vs. Lashley will be a very good match and Batista vs. Undertaker could be a good big guy match, but John Cena vs. Shawn Michaels has the best chance to steal the show at WrestleMania between these three matches. It has also been built very good with people guessing if Cena or Michaels will turn on the other one.

Stephen Randle: FICTION. Same reasoning as Brad, different response. Mostly because it doesn't say who is doing the anticipating. WWE is anticipating Lashley-Umaga because they crave the mainstream media attention. "Wrestling" fans are anticipating HBK-Cena because it should be a great match. Undertaker fans are anticipating Batista-Undertaker because they're crazy. I kid, I kid. But really, when it comes down to it, I don't think any one match is more anticipated than the other. There's no blowaway "dream" matches this WrestleMania, no storyline that grabs you above all others. This year, it's selling on the WrestleMania name and mystique, and a handful of decent matchups. Which isn't bad, it just means I don't see any "huge" anticipated match.

Score: 0 for 1


2. With no major wrestling competition, WWE creative obviously focuses much more during WrestleMania time and it shows in their product.

Brad Borchardt: FACT: I remember that between 1999-2001, the WWF at the time, could put on a Match of the Year Candidate on almost any PPV and the build up for each PPV was so good that you felt if you missed a PPV, you would be kicking yourself on Monday. WCW got bought out and ECW folded in early 2001 and I think everybody has noticed the change in WWE programming. Now think to yourself, from April of 2001 to today, when have the most memorable moments in the WWE occur? Aside from a few good SummerSlams, ECW One Night Stand, and the Brand Extensions and Lotteries, the booking has been bad except for the months of January-April. Every year, WWE seems like they try and tune people out between April-December with horrible storylines and booking, but all of a sudden people start talking about the Road to WrestleMania and BAM!...everything seems to click. The build towards the Royal Rumble is good, we sometimes get a good No Way Out, and then WWE always makes sure that wrestling fans get pumped for WrestleMania. I believe if TNA was like WCW, WWE would be putting the magic on all year round.

Stephen Randle: FACT. It's so obvious that it hurts me to think about the other twelve months of the year when the writers aren't paying attention. WrestleMania, nearly every year, shows that WWE Creative can pulls their heads out of their asses and write big stories with good payoffs, and create a PPV with a magical feel. Then we go 30 days down the road, and it's Backlash, and they can't write their way out of a paper bag. What happened? The wrestlers are usually mostly the same, the writers are the same, what's different? Did they use up their few good ideas on WrestleMania? If so, why are they called "Creative"?

Score: 1 for 2


3. Thus far, TNA's use of Kurt Angle has been a disappointment.

Brad Borchardt: FICTION: Although I find him better suited in a WWE ring. Besides me thinking that the Samoa Joe/Kurt Angle feud was a bit of disappointment, I think TNA has been using him right. His feud with Joe, although disappointing, still had a couple of good moments, he has already had some great matches for TNA, and he has already challenged for the NWA Championship. I also believe he is one of the main reasons that TNA's ratings have been climbing. The only thing I find disappointing in TNA's use of Kurt Angle is he feels too one dimensional character wise. In WWE, Angle seemed more lively as a character wether is was intensity or comedy.

Stephen Randle: FACT. I think it is, really. They rushed him into the Joe feud. Yes, we all wanted to see it, but it happened so fast and burned out way too quickly, plus they're still pushing it on us after 3 PPV matches. Plus, like Brad said, they've made him too one-dimensional, and he's lost some of the admittedly goofy, but still entertaining, part of his persona that connected him with the fans. It doesn't help that they waffled on his heel/face dimensions for a while, but the main thing is, while he's still a great wrestler, he's not the Kurt Angle people know, just a mostly silent, intense guy who hates people. Kurt Angle doesn't hate. He'll beat you up and out-wrestle you, but he's not a hater.

Score: 1 for 3


---SWITCH!!!---


4. TNA should sign Test.

Stephen Randle: FICTION. And not just because Test has proved multiple times that he can't get over. Test adds nothing to TNA other than another angry ex-WWE employee, and they have plenty of those, half of whom aren't even being used in any significant fashion. TNA doesn't need to be making any roster additions at this point that aren't huge, huge, Goldberg/Hogan-level huge names that will significantly affect buyrates and ratings. They only have 1 hour of TV a week, and they're already scrambling to find screen time for the entire roster. Test would not significantly alter anything in TNA other than decreasing screen time for other members of the roster, and that's not good.

Brad Borchardt: FICTION. I do not mind Test, but what is he going to bring to TNA? The only ways I want to see Test in TNA is if they brought in Albert and reformed T&A (haha, that would be a nice little gimmick since they would be in TNA), or if he does something with Lance Hoyt, who has been joked about looking like Test for years. Other than those ways, he adds nothing to TNA. They have enough big men with Joe, Tomko, Steiner, and Nash, he wouldn't be able to compete in the X-Division, and he is just not World Title material, especially when you have Christian, Angle, Joe, Sting, Abyss, and Styles around.

Score: 2 for 4


5. Ending the brand extension would cause RAW, Smackdown, and ECW ratings to increase.

Stephen Randle: FICTION. Why would it? Would it suddenly make WWE storylines better and more attractive to casual viewers? Would it catapult some wrestler to Austin-like levels of popularity just because they were on all three shows now? If anything, it just might lower ratings as fans can watch one show a week and get caught up through "flashback" segments. Besides, the last few weeks/months have shown that the brand extension is more and more a thin tissue of lies.

Brad Borchardt: FICTION. Maybe it would increase ratings for a week or two just because of interest. But long term, either ratings will stay the same or as Mr. Randle was saying, the ratings would drop. When they had the regular roster for both RAW and Smackdown back from 1999 until the draft, it worked because they had guys like Rock and Austin that people were interested in and they had a writing crew that gave the fans two good shows a week. Now, they don't have the star power like they did with Rock and Austin, the writing crew has a hard enough time coming up with ideas for one third of the roster for each of the brands, and right now, the roster is too big and a lot of fans will be mad if they scrape certain guys. Unless wrestling reaches another boom period like they did from 1998-2001, they should keep the brands the way they are.

Score: 3 for 5


6. Edge should be wrestling more of a major match at WrestleMania rather than being in the Money in the Bank match again.

Stephen Randle: FACT. But there's really nowhere to put him, since he spent most of the last year feuding with Cena for the title already. Besides, the Money in the Bank match is becoming a traditional good match, and I can already see the storylines coming out of Edge losing the match: feuding with the winner since MitB is traditionally "his", and also because it will end his Mania undefeated streak. So while yes, I'd love to see Edge in the main event, because he's my boy, it's not like MitB is a minor match. After all, the winner guarantees himself a PPV main event match in the future, and the last two winners have won the title.

Brad Borchardt: FACT. This one hurts. Edge is my favorite wrestler and I was really hoping he would either be in a Fatal Four Way Match with Cena, HBK, and Orton for the title or that he would kick Orton's ass in a one on one match. Now I'm not saying the Money in the Bank Match is not a major match, but he's already won this match and he should be in matches that involve more of a storyline like last year against Mick Foley. It still should be a fun match though and I will be pissing and moaning when Orton screws Edge during the match and wins it for himself.

Score: 4 for 6


These two finish 4 for 6! Join us next week for more Fact or Fiction!