|
|
Post by soug on Mar 16, 2006 18:57:26 GMT -5
...just another guy being fed to Taker!!!!zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by JED-SE on Mar 16, 2006 20:33:51 GMT -5
Here's the problem... Everyone know Taker's gonna win! When his streak wasn't so high, it may not have been as predictable to have this match. When Taker wrestled Orton, I though Orton was going to win, especially after his old man hit him with the cast (that was classic) I guess taker deserves to keep his undefeated streak at wrestlemania, due to his loyalty to Vince. At this point, Taker is not going to lose to anyone at wrestlemania, therefore, you don't need any match at wrestlemania with The Undertaker... Well unless he faces Edge next year... Nah, he probably won't job out to him either
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Ingersoll on Mar 17, 2006 9:53:10 GMT -5
Allow me to play Devil's Advocate here:
If we weren't getting Taker/Henry, what else would the two of them be doing on the card?
See, we do need this match, if only to keep Taker out of the Main Event and Henry from doing anything else.
Also, the writers have at least planted the seed of doubt about the outcome by making it a Casket Match. We all know how half the locker room likes to empty out to screw Taker on these.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephenvegas on Mar 17, 2006 10:14:39 GMT -5
Doesn't Henry's contract expire soon? If so, I thought maybe this casket match might be the way they finish off his character sort of like Undertaker did to Hassan at last year's Great American Bash. I'm certain Undertaker will win and would prefer that he be placed in a match where the outcome was at least a liitle more doubtful. But since I'm not much of a Henry fan, I ultimatly won't mind this match too much if it means the end of his time in the WWE.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimSteel on Mar 17, 2006 11:51:31 GMT -5
Yes Henrey's contract is set to expire I think next month or soon after so its more likely this is his last match in the WWE
|
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 17, 2006 13:39:36 GMT -5
Personally, I'm not impressed in the least with UT "undefeated streak" at WM...it's a joke.
Show me a list of opponents like Hogan, HBK, Savage, Dibiase, Rock, Austin, and Mankind along with Kane, Flair, HHH, and Orton and yeah...I'll be impressed...
show me Snuka (10 years past his prime), Giant Gonzales, A-Train, and Mark Henry...and it means nothing to me but a big fat joke.
I'll never understand this guy...he takes on nobody each year at the biggest show of the year, all to protect his image, when in turn, all it really does is tarnish it.
|
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 17, 2006 13:43:04 GMT -5
Allow me to play Devil's Advocate here: If we weren't getting Taker/Henry, what else would the two of them be doing on the card? See, we do need this match, if only to keep Taker out of the Main Event and Henry from doing anything else. LWPD is always harping about what a draw Taker is, or is supposed to be...so if that's true, why not put him in the Main Event? Make it a four way, UT loses...put Henry vs. Lashley or Burchill... I'd have more resepct for UT if he actually fought quality opponents at WM and lost, vs. fighting nobody and winning. |
|
|
|
Post by gatekeeper on Mar 17, 2006 14:11:37 GMT -5
Personally, I'm not impressed in the least with UT "undefeated streak" at WM...it's a joke. Show me a list of opponents like Hogan, HBK, Savage, Dibiase, Rock, Austin, and Mankind along with Kane, Flair, HHH, and Orton and yeah...I'll be impressed.. The only exception to this is at WM 18 (I think, or maybe 17) UT did fight HHH. UT pinned him even after taking a sledgehammer to the head. *ugh* To Chris I., We don't need this match. We all already know the outcome and WM would be much better off without it. Nobody even cares about that storyline anyway. It was poorly done. What would they be doing if not booked in this match? Well, let's see.....watching it like all the rest of us! ;D Henry should get in the ring, lay down, and let UT pin him, then get out of WWE. That would be hilarious! |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Ingersoll on Mar 17, 2006 16:18:14 GMT -5
Show me a list of opponents like Hogan, HBK, Savage, Dibiase, Rock, Austin, and Mankind along with Kane, Flair, HHH, and Orton and yeah...I'll be impressed... show me Snuka (10 years past his prime), Giant Gonzales, A-Train, and Mark Henry...and it means nothing to me but a big fat joke. Snuka (past prime) Jake Roberts (leaving prime) Gonzales (no talent, stupid DQ victory) Bundy (past prime) Diesel Sid (world champion at the time) Kane Bossman (HIAC) HHH Flair Big Show & A-Train (handicap) Kane Orton and now Henry Let's compare that list to, say, HBK's: w/ Janetty, loses to the Twin Towers w/ Janetty, loses to the Orient Express (by count-out) w/ Janetty, beats Barbarian & Haku beats "El Matador" Tito Santana loses to Tatanka by count-out loses to Razor Ramon in IC Ladder match loses to his buddy Diesel (unsuccessful title shot) beats Bret Hart for world championship in 60-minute Ironman match (barely) loses to Austin (world title loss) beats Jericho non-factor in finish of Triple Threat world title match w/ HHH and Benoit (techincally a loss) loses to Angle and of course, Shawn's top-shelf opponent for WM22: VINCE MCMAHON Heck, let's try Hogan: w/ Mr. T, beats Piper and Bob Orton Jr beats Bundy in a steel cage (title defense) beats Andre (title defense) double DQ w/ Andre (title tournament) beats Savage (title win) loses to Warrior (title loss) beats Slaughter (title win) beats Sid (by DQ) w/ Beefcake, beats Money, Inc by DQ (tag title match); beats Yokozuna in a stupid impromptu title match (title win) loses to Rock beats Vince McMahon Those don't look like much higher average quality (than UT's) to me. The only real difference is that UT is 13-0. As far as "nobody caring about this match" goes, I daresay that could be said about half of the card, so that's hardly an argument. |
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 17, 2006 16:54:21 GMT -5
Show me a list of opponents like Hogan, HBK, Savage, Dibiase, Rock, Austin, and Mankind along with Kane, Flair, HHH, and Orton and yeah...I'll be impressed... show me Snuka (10 years past his prime), Giant Gonzales, A-Train, and Mark Henry...and it means nothing to me but a big fat joke. Snuka (past prime) Jake Roberts (leaving prime) Gonzales (no talent, stupid DQ victory) Bundy (past prime) Diesel Sid (world champion at the time) Kane Bossman (HIAC) HHH Flair Big Show & A-Train (handicap) Kane Orton and now Henry Let's compare that list to, say, HBK's: w/ Janetty, loses to the Twin Towers w/ Janetty, loses to the Orient Express (by count-out) w/ Janetty, beats Barbarian & Haku beats "El Matador" Tito Santana loses to Tatanka by count-out loses to Razor Ramon in IC Ladder match loses to his buddy Diesel (unsuccessful title shot) beats Bret Hart for world championship in 60-minute Ironman match (barely) loses to Austin (world title loss) beats Jericho non-factor in finish of Triple Threat world title match w/ HHH and Benoit (techincally a loss) loses to Angle and of course, Shawn's top-shelf opponent for WM22: VINCE MCMAHON Heck, let's try Hogan: w/ Mr. T, beats Piper and Bob Orton Jr beats Bundy in a steel cage (title defense) beats Andre (title defense) double DQ w/ Andre (title tournament) beats Savage (title win) loses to Warrior (title loss) beats Slaughter (title win) beats Sid (by DQ) w/ Beefcake, beats Money, Inc by DQ (tag title match); beats Yokozuna in a stupid impromptu title match (title win) loses to Rock beats Vince McMahon Those don't look like much higher average quality (than UT's) to me. The only real difference is that UT is 13-0. As far as "nobody caring about this match" goes, I daresay that could be said about half of the card, so that's hardly an argument. This is a good post, and well thought out, but I still stand by my statement... While Hogan and HBK took on top guys in the fed at the time (and I'm not counting the Rockers matches, just singles) UT routinly avoided big names, and Main Events...maybe this was by design, maybe by his own request...of course I don't know... |
|
|
|
Post by pikemojo on Mar 17, 2006 19:12:49 GMT -5
HBK's does look about as impressive as Undertaker's but Hogan's looks pretty good to me.
Bundy, Piper, Andre, Warrior, Rock, Savage, Slaughter, Sid, Money Inc, Yokozuna. Those are all pretty big names in my book. They all pretty much stayed at the top no matter where they went.
|
|
|
|
Post by LWPD on Mar 17, 2006 20:13:43 GMT -5
Taker is better used at/near the top on SD single brand PPV's than dual brand shows because those are more difficult to get across to the audience as worth buying. This is when you're more in need of a 'big gun' like Undertaker in the main event. For example the February SD single brand show has always been a very difficult sell because it's sandwiched between Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania. Having UT work a program with Angle (or the HITC ME with Randy Orton at the previous SD single brand show) is more effective for the company than running the same matches as a main event at WM because that event is already an easy sell that's loaded with star power and core dual brand show recognition.
At Wrestlemania over the years Taker has been most effective in a recurring role booked _OUTSIDE THE MAIN PROGRAMS_ with the 'undefeated streak' used as an ancillary selling point. It's a booking prop that's similar to defending a belt because it has a built in consequence. It's also a part of the show that appeals to the interest of casual fans without taking away from those working at the top of the card. Having two main draw title matches (one from each brand) in addition to side gimmick matches (TLC, MITB) and whatever else mixed with the annual UT 'winning streak is in jeopardy' angle works well for what it is. There's no reason to change a formula that works for the larger audience the show is geared toward just because a minority of adult hardcore/internet smark fans are bored with it.
This reminds me of the great Fatal Four Way between Bret Hart, SCSA, Vader and Taker and just how weak the WWE talent crop has become over the years. I wouldn't be surprised if any or even all of the 3 names mentioned are part of a future roster spring cleaning. Taker is here to stay and should never lose to any of these guys under any circumstance much less Wrestlemania.
I'd have much less respect for Vince's business acumen if he ever fell for this line of thinking. Having UT lose at WM would kill the successfully established 'Undefeated Streak' selling point that has worked for years...while also missing out on an opportunity to create much needed 'new' winning match content for a future Taker DVD's. Since both 'the streak' and UT DVD's help to _MAKE MONEY_ for WWE...doing something like this is nothing more than a way to flush Vince's money down the toilet.
Maybe this is true in bizzaro world...but here on earth Undertaker has a track record pf working House Show Main Events and PPV Main Events...many of which established revenue records which still stand to this day. Most notably he was Stone Cold's most recurring foil during the very height of the late 90's pro wres boom (only The Rock drew more per program).
Far from 'avoiding' big names Taker has worked with virtually every 'big name' who's ever had a run with Vince: SCSA, The Rock, Mick Foley, Bret Hart, HBK, Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, Nash, Sid, Vader, Angle, on and on. With each name mentioned he's 'traded' both wins and loses which flies in the face of the myth that he 'doesn't put guys over' when it makes sense business wise to do so.
That said either as a face or heel it always made for a better fit with his character to be booked as near unbeatable at the semi-main level...but not as 'the man' for any extended period of time. This is just as true of how to best utilize him today...and in the years to come! At this year's Wrestlemania Mark Henry will do just fine in this regard.
Like Watching Paint Dry (UT is one of Vince's most enduring and successful creative concepts...one who's rate of unwavering longevity will be difficult to ever replicate)
|
|
|
|
Post by pikemojo on Mar 17, 2006 21:11:03 GMT -5
One positive thing I will say about Taker is that when I went to a house show here in MN he was the only one who actually went out there and put on a good match. Even Mysterio looked lazy that day. I gained alot of respect for him that day.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatekeeper on Mar 18, 2006 1:18:58 GMT -5
The point made about UT losing at WM would 'lose Vince's money' seems a little over the top. People don't buy WM for $50.00 to see 1 guy.
If UT were to lose at WM, do you think people would say "Man, UT sucks now. I was gonna buy his DVD but forget that now."
The streak is a selling point I'll admit, but most would still buy WM I'm sure. I don't think that is the make-or-break point IMO.
UT fighting Mark Henry is pretty much a worthless match and isn't garnering much interest. He should fight Angle is he's gonna be aligned with SD. At least the outcome would be in doubt.
|
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 18, 2006 1:19:03 GMT -5
LWPD writes the following:
1) There's no reason to change a formula that works for the larger audience the show is geared toward just because a minority of adult hardcore/internet smark fans are bored with it.
2) I wouldn't be surprised if any or even all of the 3 names mentioned are part of a future roster spring cleaning. Taker is here to stay and should never lose to any of these guys under any circumstance much less Wrestlemania.
3) I'd have much less respect for Vince's business acumen if he ever fell for this line of thinking. Having UT lose at WM would kill the successfully established 'Undefeated Streak' selling point that has worked for years...while also missing out on an opportunity to create much needed 'new' winning match content for a future Taker DVD's. Since both 'the streak' and UT DVD's help to _MAKE MONEY_ for WWE...doing something like this is nothing more than a way to flush Vince's money down the toilet.
4) Maybe this is true in bizzaro world...but here on earth Undertaker has a track record pf working House Show Main Events and PPV Main Events...many of which established revenue records which still stand to this day. Most notably he was Stone Cold's most recurring foil during the very height of the late 90's pro wres boom (only The Rock drew more per program).
Far from 'avoiding' big names Taker has worked with virtually every 'big name' who's ever had a run with Vince: SCSA, The Rock, Mick Foley, Bret Hart, HBK, Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, Nash, Sid, Vader, Angle, on and on. With each name mentioned he's 'traded' both wins and loses which flies in the face of the myth that he 'doesn't put guys over' when it makes sense business wise to do so.
_________________________________________
1) You just proved my point. If Wrestlemania, of all events, is not geared for the adult/hardcore interent fan, then that is F'd up...Wrestlemania should be, and usually is, a long awaited "gift" to exactly these fans who most of the year have to deal with the over-the-top BS Vince puts out each week to attract the "casual fan"...
2) you are not reading what I wrote...I implied UT should be in the MAIN EVENT (really, the whole point of my post you responded too) in a 4 way with Angle, Orton, and Rey...
3) This makes no sense. Are you saying if UT should lose at WM his DVD would not sell as well?
4) again, you are either not reading the post or you are in too much of a hurry to spill your smart-ass rebuttal to read it correctly...
I'm not talking about house shows...I'm not talking about any other PPV's...I'm talking about Wrestlmania.
Swarm
|
|
|
|
Post by gwffantrav on Mar 18, 2006 1:32:02 GMT -5
This is actually one of the best posts I've read on board.
But I really don't think Taker will EVER lose at Wrestlemania. The reason is he, along with Triple H, were the most loyal employees Vince had during the Monday night wars. This is probably something Vince will do to reward Taker's loyalty.
Whether I agree with this assumption or if it's even true, who even knows.
But I'd rather eat glass than watch Taker vs Henry at WRESTLE-FREAKING-MANIA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bazzy on Mar 18, 2006 2:44:15 GMT -5
Chris Ingersoll asked "What would they be doing , if not involved in a match ?"
Mark Henry there is not alot you can do with him . Contract expiring soon and his style of wrestling (?) . Maybe v Lashley (but he is involved in a feud with Finlay) . Maybe Boogie Man v Henry .
My problem is with the Undertaker . Come on he has had his best days now surely . Why not put someone over and loses that winning record . What harm would it do him ? . They CALL Triple H for been selfish , he at least let Undie beat him at WM . Look where Triple H is now ? . Who has Undie let beat him ?
|
|
|
|
Post by LWPD on Mar 18, 2006 8:57:20 GMT -5
Actually _ALL_ of the WWE content is and logically _SHOULD BE_ geared toward a casual mainstream audience because that constitutes the vast majority of the fan base. It's no different than the marketing of any product...the goal is to net the broadest possible audience by appealing to the largest areas of commonality of interest among the target group. This is why WM traditionally brings in celebrity guest spots, live music and 'name legends' for one shots. Wrestlemania has always been about mainstreaming the product and cashing in big. Every year it works more so than the other events.
That said the interests of a thirty year hardcore fan who works in some sort of boiler room by day while spending an inordinate amount of time trolling a pro wres card game message board on the Internet just isn't the target. In other words _YOU_ haven't earned any 'gifts' from WWE. Your interests are _NOT_ of primary importance to Vince because _YOU_ are not the target audience.
I respond to what is written exactly as it was written. I couldn't care less about your backtracking and goofy implications. Regardless I already explained why there is no logical reason to use Undertaker in a WM Main Event...especially one that would end up with him 'losing' because it would kill the recurring selling point of the streak shtick.
If UT loses at Wrestlemania it's one less future victory to be put on his next DVD project (which has been proven to sell) while at the same time it would kill the 'Undefeated Streak' selling point forever (which is a proven benefit each year). It's short sided booking and a complete waste of Vince's time and money.
While it's unlikely to ever happen...learning to focus and 'write specifically what you mean to post' would help you tremendously. Everything I posted was/is factually correct. In the face of these facts your 'opinions' leave much to be desired...which of course is nothing new.
Like Watching Paint Dry (who always gets a kick out of Swarm making a goof of himself...and only posts on these threads for the benefit of others willing to learn or think more comprehensively about pro wres)
|
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 18, 2006 12:42:41 GMT -5
Actually _ALL_ of the WWE content is and logically _SHOULD BE_ geared toward a casual mainstream audience because that constitutes the vast majority of the fan base. It's no different than the marketing of any product...the goal is to net the broadest possible audience by appealing to the largest areas of commonality of interest among the target group. This is why WM traditionally brings in celebrity guest spots, live music and 'name legends' for one shots. Wrestlemania has always been about mainstreaming the product and cashing in big. Every year it works more so than the other events. That said the interests of a thirty year hardcore fan who works in some sort of boiler room by day while spending an inordinate amount of time trolling a pro wres card game message board on the Internet just isn't the target. In other words _YOU_ haven't earned any 'gifts' from WWE. Your interests are _NOT_ of primary importance to Vince because _YOU_ are not the target audience. I respond to what is written exactly as it was written. I couldn't care less about your backtracking and goofy implications. Regardless I already explained why there is no logical reason to use Undertaker in a WM Main Event...especially one that would end up with him 'losing' because it would kill the recurring selling point of the streak shtick. If UT loses at Wrestlemania it's one less future victory to be put on his next DVD project (which has been proven to sell) while at the same time it would kill the 'Undefeated Streak' selling point forever (which is a proven benefit each year). It's short sided booking and a complete waste of Vince's time and money. While it's unlikely to ever happen...learning to focus and 'write specifically what you mean to post' would help you tremendously. Everything I posted was/is factually correct. In the face of these facts your 'opinions' leave much to be desired...which of course is nothing new.
Like Watching Paint Dry (who always gets a kick out of Swarm making a goof of himself...and only posts on these threads for the benefit of others willing to learn or think more comprehensively about pro wres)you wrote noting here to back up any of your original points. This whole post is a mess. |
|
|
|
Post by gatekeeper on Mar 18, 2006 12:44:29 GMT -5
Not really LWPD,
There's no "proof" that UT's win streak is a "selling point" of WM, or that a loss at WM would "hurt DVD sales."
If UT loses and there's 1 less win to put on the DVD, so what? The guy's been in the fed since WM 8 (I know he debuted at Surv. Ser. the year before). 1 less win is meaningless.
I think Vince is rewarding him for his loyalty during the MN War era and, fair enough.
I just wish he had a more formidable opponent for the biggest PPV of the year.
And like it or not, there are several people who don't care to see UT ever again.
|
|
