OT WWE2k17

Comments

  • Andybelfast
    10956 posts Has That Special Something
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era

    This 100%. The matches every week on raw and snack down where ppv worthy some awesome matches wasn't such a thing as a boring raw or snack down. Was pretty unpredictable also back then.
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    I'm wondering which PPV they'll bring the Eilimantion Chamber match back in unless they name the PPV Elimination Chamber again which was pretty crap. When you name PPVs after gimmick matches you're inclined to have more than 1 match in the night using that gimmick even though certain feuds aren't good enough to deserve a Hell in a Cell or TLC match or else it feels like you're cheating the fans by making them wait for 2 and a half hours to actually see the gimmick match that the PPV has been named after.

    That another issue I have, the 'themed' PPVs. King of the ring and royal rumble fair enough, but there's no suprise when you know what the match is going to be, some matches were called the show before or on the night. Nowadays you know the main event a hell in the cell ppv will be hell in a cell no matter what
  • FRSM00
    5830 posts Big Money Move
    edited September 2016
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era
    I don't know about that. WWE were guilty of giving away any big matches between their top stars that aren't semi-retired on raw or smackdown before the brand split. If Rock and Austin were full time from 2012-2015 I guaranteed they would've faced eachother at least 10 times on raw or smackdown.
  • DoD_Jester
    26477 posts Player of the Year
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Yeah but the whole point of wrestling is you are meant to be pretending you are fighting the other person, it's always going to risky. Just like in any other sport, or even acting. It's not a big deal in acting because stuntmen are paid to do it.
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era
    I don't know about that. WWE were guilty of giving away any big matches between their top stars that aren't semi-retired on raw or smackdown before the brand split.

    On raw you never knew what was going to happen, unless you looked for it (due to it been taped)

    Any matches that were billed, fit into the story line, even the one ms that were billed way in advance, where as sort of when they got gimmicky with the PPVs, it was like well how do we turn this storyline in a hell of a cell match, or elimination chamber for the PPV.

    The PPVs were themed around the main storyline, like the in your house, DX, or rock bottom.

    If you look at people commenting on WWE now it is all people saying the exact same things.
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    edited September 2016
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows
  • DoD_Jester
    26477 posts Player of the Year
    edited September 2016
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    I'll try anything once man, and if that happens to be the case then win win

    Edit: as long as it's still entertaining I'll watch it, the 'd1ck measuring contests' were always more fun than the actual fighting anyway
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    I'll try anything once man, and if that happens to be the case then win win

    Yeah, one thing that was better than my memory serves, was the tlc match at wrestlemania 00 between, Dudleys, hardy and edge and Christian.

    That was a mid card match back then aswell.
  • Michael LFC 96
    3711 posts National Call-Up
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    Monday and Tuesday, Raw is 3 hours, Smackdown is 2. Backlash is on Sunday so I'd get the network if I was you. Then you can catch up or watch every PPV if you want :joy:

    They don't show raw or smackdown on the network, just the pre shows.
  • DoD_Jester
    26477 posts Player of the Year
    edited September 2016
    r
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    Monday and Tuesday, Raw is 3 hours, Smackdown is 2. Backlash is on Sunday so I'd get the network if I was you. Then you can catch up or watch every PPV if you want :joy:

    They don't show raw or smackdown on the network, just the pre shows.

    How much does that cost?

    And is it available (raw or smackdown) On Demand through my Tivo?
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    Even tho Raw and SD aren't anywhere near as good, this years Summerslam was easily one of the best PPV's i've seen in a while. Was amazing to see Balor win the big one. Awful to see it taken away from him 24 hours and all that momentum stalled.
  • FRSM00
    5830 posts Big Money Move
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Yeah but the whole point of wrestling is you are meant to be pretending you are fighting the other person, it's always going to risky. Just like in any other sport, or even acting. It's not a big deal in acting because stuntmen are paid to do it.
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era
    I don't know about that. WWE were guilty of giving away any big matches between their top stars that aren't semi-retired on raw or smackdown before the brand split.

    On raw you never knew what was going to happen, unless you looked for it (due to it been taped)

    Any matches that were billed, fit into the story line, even the one ms that were billed way in advance, where as sort of when they got gimmicky with the PPVs, it was like well how do we turn this storyline in a hell of a cell match, or elimination chamber for the PPV.

    The PPVs were themed around the main storyline, like the in your house, DX, or rock bottom.

    If you look at people commenting on WWE now it is all people saying the exact same things.
    I meant currently. From 2012 till April 2016 they would just give away matches between their top guys on Raw and so many times that you wouldn't want to see them in the ring together again. Besides them not making big enough stars to sell a WrestleMania on their own without the need to get Undertaker, Triple H, Sting, Rock, Lesnar to wrestle or do an appearance it was because they ran out of matches that the fans would care about because they've seen it all on raw and smackdown for free. If Austin and Rock were full time wrestlers in that period of time the crowd would've grown tired with the amount of matches they would've had together on just raw and smackdown. Rock and Austin have faced eachother 3 times at WrestleMania. Cena and Orton have never because nobody wants to see it. It's happened too many times on crappy PPVs like Bragging Rights or a Hell in a Cell match for the No.1 contendership for the WWE Title so it didn't deserve a Hell in a Cell match.
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    Monday and Tuesday, Raw is 3 hours, Smackdown is 2. Backlash is on Sunday so I'd get the network if I was you. Then you can catch up or watch every PPV if you want :joy:

    They don't show raw or smackdown on the network, just the pre shows.

    Are you on commission? lol. I'd rather go on YouTube and watch the rock dissing Perry Saturn for having wonky eyes lol
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Yeah but the whole point of wrestling is you are meant to be pretending you are fighting the other person, it's always going to risky. Just like in any other sport, or even acting. It's not a big deal in acting because stuntmen are paid to do it.
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era
    I don't know about that. WWE were guilty of giving away any big matches between their top stars that aren't semi-retired on raw or smackdown before the brand split.

    On raw you never knew what was going to happen, unless you looked for it (due to it been taped)

    Any matches that were billed, fit into the story line, even the one ms that were billed way in advance, where as sort of when they got gimmicky with the PPVs, it was like well how do we turn this storyline in a hell of a cell match, or elimination chamber for the PPV.

    The PPVs were themed around the main storyline, like the in your house, DX, or rock bottom.

    If you look at people commenting on WWE now it is all people saying the exact same things.
    I meant currently. From 2012 till April 2016 they would just give away matches between their top guys on Raw and so many times that you wouldn't want to see them in the ring together again. Besides them not making big enough stars to sell a WrestleMania on their own without the need to get Undertaker, Triple H, Sting, Rock, Lesnar to wrestle or do an appearance it was because they ran out of matches that the fans would care about because they've seen it all on raw and smackdown for free. If Austin and Rock were full time wrestlers in that period of time the crowd would've grown tired with the amount of matches they would've had together on just raw and smackdown. Rock and Austin have faced eachother 3 times at WrestleMania. Cena and Orton have never because nobody wants to see it. It's happened too many times on crappy PPVs like Bragging Rights or a Hell in a Cell match for the No.1 contendership for the WWE Title so it didn't deserve a Hell in a Cell match.

    So true
  • UpstartCaesar
    3172 posts National Call-Up
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    I'll try anything once man, and if that happens to be the case then win win

    Edit: as long as it's still entertaining I'll watch it, the 'd1ck measuring contests' were always more fun than the actual fighting anyway

    Don't tell your wife that
  • DoD_Jester
    26477 posts Player of the Year
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    I'll try anything once man, and if that happens to be the case then win win

    Edit: as long as it's still entertaining I'll watch it, the 'd1ck measuring contests' were always more fun than the actual fighting anyway

    Don't tell your wife that

    She's well aware

    I'll never look at a cucumber the same way again though
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    I'll try anything once man, and if that happens to be the case then win win

    Edit: as long as it's still entertaining I'll watch it, the 'd1ck measuring contests' were always more fun than the actual fighting anyway

    Don't tell your wife that

    1273%20-%20kane%20mask%20sunglasses%20undertaker%20wwf.png
  • FRSM00
    5830 posts Big Money Move
    edited September 2016
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    Monday and Tuesday, Raw is 3 hours, Smackdown is 2. Backlash is on Sunday so I'd get the network if I was you. Then you can catch up or watch every PPV if you want :joy:

    They don't show raw or smackdown on the network, just the pre shows.
    They don't show it live but they do have raws and smackdowns from a month back.
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Alright screw it imma give it a go

    The weekly shows still Monday and thursday (shown on Friday and saturday)?

    Don't do it. You will turn off after 10 mins and end up on you tube watching over all the old shows

    I'll try anything once man, and if that happens to be the case then win win

    Edit: as long as it's still entertaining I'll watch it, the 'd1ck measuring contests' were always more fun than the actual fighting anyway
    Smackdown is a lot easier to watch than raw and better imo. 3 hours is suicide despite having raw quite a few great moments that Smackdown haven't been able to match.
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    Watching Raw live is work. Real hard work. :joy:
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Yeah but the whole point of wrestling is you are meant to be pretending you are fighting the other person, it's always going to risky. Just like in any other sport, or even acting. It's not a big deal in acting because stuntmen are paid to do it.
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era
    I don't know about that. WWE were guilty of giving away any big matches between their top stars that aren't semi-retired on raw or smackdown before the brand split.

    On raw you never knew what was going to happen, unless you looked for it (due to it been taped)

    Any matches that were billed, fit into the story line, even the one ms that were billed way in advance, where as sort of when they got gimmicky with the PPVs, it was like well how do we turn this storyline in a hell of a cell match, or elimination chamber for the PPV.

    The PPVs were themed around the main storyline, like the in your house, DX, or rock bottom.

    If you look at people commenting on WWE now it is all people saying the exact same things.
    I meant currently. From 2012 till April 2016 they would just give away matches between their top guys on Raw and so many times that you wouldn't want to see them in the ring together again. Besides them not making big enough stars to sell a WrestleMania on their own without the need to get Undertaker, Triple H, Sting, Rock, Lesnar to wrestle or do an appearance it was because they ran out of matches that the fans would care about because they've seen it all on raw and smackdown for free. If Austin and Rock were full time wrestlers in that period of time the crowd would've grown tired with the amount of matches they would've had together on just raw and smackdown. Rock and Austin have faced eachother 3 times at WrestleMania. Cena and Orton have never because nobody wants to see it. It's happened too many times on crappy PPVs like Bragging Rights or a Hell in a Cell match for the No.1 contendership for the WWE Title so it didn't deserve a Hell in a Cell match.

    I don't think people would have got bored of rock v Austin.

    Each wrestlemania they fought they were different character/reasons.

    They fisrt started out when stonce cold starting becoming big and the rock was at the nation, over the intercontinental belt,

    Rock then joined the corporation and that led to the first match at WM, stone cold as the biggest star of WWF against the rock the main heel in the corporation who dissed everyone.

    Fast forward two years, although stone cold stayed the same (as I don't think stone cold had the ability to change character like the rock) the rock has completely changed, and they were neck and neck as the stars of the company of not wrestling. That led to the second match, which half wanted stone cold and half wanted the rock. (Although stone cold turned heel that night)

    The next match at wrestlemania Austin was back face again and the rock was yet again a different character. A hollywood sell out.


    If you look at cena for the last 10 year, he's been well John cena, the family friendly hero.
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    Rock Austin faced like 4-5 times over 3 years

    Cena/Orton have had 11 + PPV matches

    Think that's what FRSM00 is getting at. Austin and Rock would be forced in today's era.
  • FRSM00
    5830 posts Big Money Move
    edited September 2016
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    Yeah but the whole point of wrestling is you are meant to be pretending you are fighting the other person, it's always going to risky. Just like in any other sport, or even acting. It's not a big deal in acting because stuntmen are paid to do it.
    Peter69hc wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    FRSM00 wrote: »
    Just don't want WWE to become a niche company that only cares about having good workers. It's got a lot less people with personality. Too many people with the I've been doing this for 10-15 years on the indies finally got in sob story who are just happy to be there kind of thing. There's a reason why Heath Slater is more popular than Apollo Crews.

    True but for the first time in a while i'm very excited for the future of the company.
    If any era is going to top WrestleMania X-7 as the best of all time this one has the highest chance. But there's a lack in character, personality, selling and and psychology in the ring. I don't need to see a buckle bomb on the barricade to make the match great. Brand split was the right thing to do though. Looking forward to Backlash, which is the day after we find out whether Punk gets pummeled or wins.

    Although wrestlemania has alway been a big deal, in the late 90's I didn't value wrestlemania much higher than any other week.

    The only real PPVs that felt different were the royal rumble and King of the ring, because of the format of them.

    Now that's not to mean the wrestlemanias were any worse back then, but it was a testament to how good it was to watch, wether it be raw, smackdown, in your house it felt as if they were all as good as each other.

    Sorn matches they had on raw back then they would save for wrestlemania in this era
    I don't know about that. WWE were guilty of giving away any big matches between their top stars that aren't semi-retired on raw or smackdown before the brand split.

    On raw you never knew what was going to happen, unless you looked for it (due to it been taped)

    Any matches that were billed, fit into the story line, even the one ms that were billed way in advance, where as sort of when they got gimmicky with the PPVs, it was like well how do we turn this storyline in a hell of a cell match, or elimination chamber for the PPV.

    The PPVs were themed around the main storyline, like the in your house, DX, or rock bottom.

    If you look at people commenting on WWE now it is all people saying the exact same things.
    I meant currently. From 2012 till April 2016 they would just give away matches between their top guys on Raw and so many times that you wouldn't want to see them in the ring together again. Besides them not making big enough stars to sell a WrestleMania on their own without the need to get Undertaker, Triple H, Sting, Rock, Lesnar to wrestle or do an appearance it was because they ran out of matches that the fans would care about because they've seen it all on raw and smackdown for free. If Austin and Rock were full time wrestlers in that period of time the crowd would've grown tired with the amount of matches they would've had together on just raw and smackdown. Rock and Austin have faced eachother 3 times at WrestleMania. Cena and Orton have never because nobody wants to see it. It's happened too many times on crappy PPVs like Bragging Rights or a Hell in a Cell match for the No.1 contendership for the WWE Title so it didn't deserve a Hell in a Cell match.

    I don't think people would have got bored of rock v Austin.

    Each wrestlemania they fought they were different character/reasons.

    They fisrt started out when stonce cold starting becoming big and the rock was at the nation, over the intercontinental belt,

    Rock then joined the corporation and that led to the first match at WM, stone cold as the biggest star of WWF against the rock the main heel in the corporation who dissed everyone.

    Fast forward two years, although stone cold stayed the same (as I don't think stone cold had the ability to change character like the rock) the rock has completely changed, and they were neck and neck as the stars of the company of not wrestling. That led to the second match, which half wanted stone cold and half wanted the rock. (Although stone cold turned heel that night)

    The next match at wrestlemania Austin was back face again and the rock was yet again a different character. A hollywood sell out.


    If you look at cena for the last 10 year, he's been well John cena, the family friendly hero.
    Evolving your character once in a while is great but that doesn't matter for the match. It could be Hollywood Rock, Nation of Domination, Corporation or current in 2012-2016, if they face eachother too many times it leads to over exposure. Character is one thing but unless The both of them would like to change their move set every time they face eachother match by match the crowd will become less and less vocal about their matches. There are probably 2 people in the current roster who have faced everyone. Dolph Ziggler and Cesaro. They gave Ziggler a chance by him being the no.1 contender for the WWE Title at Summerslam. The crowd was dead for it. I felt like I had seen the match a million times and I was predicting the next move in my head. Definitely wasn't good or big enough to go on last and I think the majority would describe it as it felt like you were watching a raw main event. Orton and Lesnar went on last btw. No title on the line, not really much of a storyline since Lesnar is barely around and Brock just suplexes people for 10 minutes before he pins them but somehow that goes on last because of that problem that WWE has with over exposure.
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    hoban95 wrote: »
    Rock Austin faced like 4-5 times over 3 years

    Cena/Orton have had 11 + PPV matches

    Think that's what FRSM00 is getting at. Austin and Rock would be forced in today's era.

    Ah right lol. They faced each other a lot from my memory, but they did have a lot of alternatives
  • Peter69hc
    2170 posts Fans' Favourite
    By the way. Does anyone play TEW16 or any previous?
  • SupaNoodle1990
    26033 posts Player of the Year
    Just wondering

    I stopped watching when I was about 14 when it was The Rock, Stone Cold, HHH, Undertaker, Masked Kane, Kurt Angle ect(around 2000 I think), what 'era' does that come under? Some of the PPV events were absolutely savage iirc

    And whats the main draw nowadays as far as talent? Might just start watching it again if I can work out what's what lol

    Same here, the tag team TLC matches were brilliant between the dudleys and the hardys
  • CornishLad
    23938 posts Club Captain
    @Eddie I'm buying the NXT edition just for Shinsuke and his signed picture that comes with it
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    Just wondering

    I stopped watching when I was about 14 when it was The Rock, Stone Cold, HHH, Undertaker, Masked Kane, Kurt Angle ect(around 2000 I think), what 'era' does that come under? Some of the PPV events were absolutely savage iirc

    And whats the main draw nowadays as far as talent? Might just start watching it again if I can work out what's what lol

    Same here, the tag team TLC matches were brilliant between the dudleys and the hardys

    edge-spears-jeff-hardy-gif.gif
  • UpstartCaesar
    3172 posts National Call-Up
    hoban95 wrote: »
    Just wondering

    I stopped watching when I was about 14 when it was The Rock, Stone Cold, HHH, Undertaker, Masked Kane, Kurt Angle ect(around 2000 I think), what 'era' does that come under? Some of the PPV events were absolutely savage iirc

    And whats the main draw nowadays as far as talent? Might just start watching it again if I can work out what's what lol

    Same here, the tag team TLC matches were brilliant between the dudleys and the hardys

    edge-spears-jeff-hardy-gif.gif

    best matches ever
  • hoban95
    49422 posts FIFA Cover Star
    hoban95 wrote: »
    Just wondering

    I stopped watching when I was about 14 when it was The Rock, Stone Cold, HHH, Undertaker, Masked Kane, Kurt Angle ect(around 2000 I think), what 'era' does that come under? Some of the PPV events were absolutely savage iirc

    And whats the main draw nowadays as far as talent? Might just start watching it again if I can work out what's what lol

    Same here, the tag team TLC matches were brilliant between the dudleys and the hardys

    edge-spears-jeff-hardy-gif.gif

    best matches ever

    Some unreal spots in those matches
  • UpstartCaesar
    3172 posts National Call-Up
    hoban95 wrote: »
    hoban95 wrote: »
    Just wondering

    I stopped watching when I was about 14 when it was The Rock, Stone Cold, HHH, Undertaker, Masked Kane, Kurt Angle ect(around 2000 I think), what 'era' does that come under? Some of the PPV events were absolutely savage iirc

    And whats the main draw nowadays as far as talent? Might just start watching it again if I can work out what's what lol

    Same here, the tag team TLC matches were brilliant between the dudleys and the hardys

    edge-spears-jeff-hardy-gif.gif

    best matches ever

    Some unreal spots in those matches

    never looked at their faces too close tbh
Sign In or Register to comment.