Interinactivity: 10.14.2011 – Everyone Is Entitled To My Opinions

Welcome to Interinactivity! Lots of controversy over the last one of these I did. Lots of stuff I could say to some of the comments and denials that were written to me, but the truth is, everyone knows what they implied. Heavy is the head, ladies and gentlemen, so let it rest, and let’s move on. We’ve got more important stuff to take care of this week. Like, for example, Swayze is back!

 

CB: Blair, here’s my question for you, just to make your head explode: If your DREAM MATCH of Mark Henry vs. Matt Morgan ever happened, what do you think would happen and how would you book it?

Blair: Oh man, can anyone imagine? The UNSTOPPABLE(y booked) monster of WWE versus the UNSTOPPABLE(y booked) monster of TNA. I don’t really know what kind of booking you could possibly use to get this to any kind of success. I guess I would try to illustrate both their weaknesses as much as possible in an effort to get them both fired or injured, and these guys have a good track record between them of that happening when they’re performing at their PEAK. Which isn’t really difficult given that if you’re booking it, they both need to talk and wrestle, which both are really, truly horrible at. I would have Mark Henry come out and breathe heavily into a mic and have people call it an amazing promo. Then I would have Matt Morgan come out and explain the storyline that they are involved in and Corey Yuen could talk about how awesome Jeff Jarrett is even though he’s not involved at all.

As soon as the actual match hits though, really all bets are off no matter how you book it. They can both do some axe-handles. Mark Henry can try to jump on him I guess, if he can get him down from the axe-handles? Matt Morgan will have to come back strong with his constipated-looking corner elbows and spinning clotheslines. Maybe he can give Henry a side-slam and pump his chest a bit? Henry can… axe-handle him again… and go for a Vader Bomb? I don’t know. The important thing is to book it as long as possible, because as time goes on, the odds go up that one of them injures themselves or the other person, or that Mark Henry’s brain eventually won’t be able to get enough oxygen. And I think we can all agree that that’s a situation where everyone wins.

Swayze: CB, I expected a little more from a varsity letterman.

 

Kon: All this Henry stuff… Does anyone honestly want to see Henry v Sheamus at Wrestlemania? To be honest, from the “news” flying around about ‘Mania, I don’t think any of the matches sound that great. Punk v Austin? Maybe 10 years ago. Cena v The Rock? Not unless Cena is a heel & Rock comes back pre-Rumble with something more than “I was big 10 years ago, I should be able to walk into main events”. Taker v someone is a given as well, so that’d be 3 “legends” type matches. Four if you count Henry (maybe Guys from the Attitude Era is a better description than “legends”), given that he’s been with them from the mid-90′s.

Blair: I am still interested to see The Rock wrestle – between Punk and Rock, Cena has had a tough year looking like he can get over people. Still no idea who ‘Taker will wrestle, but I’m guessing they’ll try their best to get him through this last one until his 20th ‘Mania match, where he will either lose or get his last win. ‘Taker isn’t far from crippled these days, so they’ll need to protect him to get him there. And Henry is quite obviously the furthest thing from a legend on your list, which is one of the many reasons why no one answered your query as to whether anyone REALLY wants to see Shaemus fight him at WrestleMania. Same reason no one answered my question on Glazey’s article on whether they think he’s being de-pushed already.

 

Corey Yuen: Good to see Blair back. I actually missed the complaining. Now, With Hulk Hogan remaining with TNA, it turns out that ESPN will have a plethora of interviews with Hogan next week all over the place. Wow, ESPN promoting a TNA wrestler? What wrong with them? Don’t they know that TNA is a “joke” according to Blair? And please don’t ban me. I am not a troll. I like coming here and reading Blair’s strange anti Jeff Jarrett rants. They make my morning dew!

Blair: Corey, you’re more entertaining than the TNA show itself, so never fear that anyone will ban you. I would never let that happen. But if you were reading the article, you would have noticed that I didn’t mention Jeff Jarrett once. Also, I said that the Bound For Glory card looked pretty decent and also some other nice stuff about what TNA is doing currently. Here is a fun fact, did you know that it’s possible to criticize a company for doing things you think are silly while still also acknowledging what you think they are doing right? Did you also know that you don’t have to have enjoyed TNA when it sucked to enjoy it when it’s half-decent? Go ahead and tell me all the ways that TNA has grown in the two years that Hulk Hogan has been around. They’ve gone from an unknown fed to an unknown joke of a fed. It was actually better when Jarrett was booking it, which I can’t believe, but it’s true. Although, TNA has a hodge-podge of bookers at any given point, and it’s not exactly written in stone who has the book at any given point since it involves multiple people, so maybe that’s not a fair statement.

So instead, here’s a fair question. You’re a Jeff Jarrett guy. I don’t understand it, but you are. So, if you can do so without tripping on your clown shoes, which I doubt, answer me this – as much as I don’t think Jarrett had any idea what he was doing with booking the future with TNA, Hogan and Bischoff have proven over time to be much, MUCH worse than Jarrett and whoever it was at the time that was helping him ever were, which I didn’t even think was possible. So, even though it’s not as cut-and-dry as this, don’t you think it would actually be a step up for TNA to LOSE Hogan? Because even Jarrett can do a better job than whatever mess of people is in there currently. Thoughts?

Korey, everyone knows that people named Korey spell their name with a K, not a C. That’s just silly. Spell your name properly or we will all be forced to dismiss any of your nonsensical thoughts. But to answer your questions, 1) Yes I believe Hogan did an interview with ESPN. Don’t know what the ‘Wow’ was for. Also, it seems you already knew the answer to this question so I don’t know why you asked it. 2) I don’t know ‘WHAT WRONG WITH THEM’, my mentally challenged friend. Maybe Hulk Hogan’s people called them and they thought it would be cool to talk to Hulk Hogan. 3) No, ESPN probably doesn’t know TNA is a joke, because they probably don’t follow pro wrestling that much. They don’t cover it on their network. The only place that DOES cover pro wrestling are sites like this. You idiot. 4) FIST PUMP! 5) What the fuck, Korey? Get the fuck out of here!

 

Daniel Gianni: Ahem.. Cody Rhodes?

Blair: Yeah, I don’t get it either. I’m guessing some of you guys like him because HIS BOOKING has been strong, even though he himself is as terrible as he ever was. 2 years ago where he was wrestling matches so bad that fans demanded he be fired. Not a single thing has changed. Literally anyone can be booked well. But, hey… reconstructive mask. So he must be improving.

Yeah…Cody Rhodes. His dad was a legend. He is not very good. In fact, he’s kind of creepy. I remember first seeing him teamed with Bob Holly, and people were not into him. Then he teamed with Ted Dibiase’s kid, and people chanted ‘BORING’ at them. He was doing some promo with Orton and he kept telling him ‘You know, you’re that guy…’ and the crowd would just interrupt him with ‘SHUT THE FUCK UP!’. Then I stopped watching wrestling. Then I tried watching and he was doing beauty tips. It was like Silence Of The Lambs. All this time, he’s never actually had one memorable, or even good match. Then he did this mask thing. It’s kind of funny. See, he was saying he couldn’t wrestle because his looks were damaged, even though they really weren’t. Because fans don’t care about wrestling, just looks. And you know what? He was apparently right. Because Cody didn’t wrestle for like two months and now he has a big following. With this stupid mask thing. I don’t know, it’s kind of like Dr Doom meets Phantom Of The Opera. I guess people like those two things. Certainly more than they like wrestling, since Cody sucks. And he also needs kneepads.

 

Jeremy Spoke In: You can absolutely use a complex story line and even great matches to get kids to watch a product. I was a NWA/WCW back in the day and I remember watching the sixty minute iron man match between Ric Flair and Ricky Steamboat on Clash of the Champions and I wouldn’t leave the TV I was captivated by the match. And the subsequent story line that followed with Terry Funk piledriving Ric Flair into the table – made me hate Terry Funk probably more than I’ve ever hated a wrestler. I was a young kid and matches that told a good story and angles that were basically about all out revenge were enough to get me hooked on wrestling. Point is you can definitely market to kids by using quality matches that make sense and slightly violent somewhat complex story lines.

Blair: You are absolutely correct. Now, is it more difficult in this day and age, with everything that’s already been done in wrestling? Absolutely. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. If this is a form of entertainment that can’t survive, I’d be surprised. Can wrestling have another boom period? You’re damn right it can. As for John Cena, as people age, I imagine it’s a LOT more embarrassing to be a fan of his. In most high schools I can think of, wearing a John Cena shirt will get you your ass handed to you. Elementary, not so much. Junior High, who knows, probably depends on the school. It wasn’t embarrassing to be a Hogan fan in the 80’s, nor a Stone Cold or Rock fan in the 90’s. 2000 to now has yet to find that person, and it sure as hell isn’t John Cena or Randy Orton. Could a CM Punk shirt be looked at in a junior high or high school as less grounds for a beating? Certainly compared to Cena or Orton. Kids AND adults like Punk. That’s the difference.

 

Jeremy Spoke In: I agree with you that today’s product would be the height of a kids fandom relatively speaking, the problem is will it keep these kids coming back into their adult years. Flair/Steamboat/Four Horsemen etc. were good enough to make me a wrestling fan for life. Will Mark Henry make the kids watching now come back and watch into their adult years absolutely not. Hate him or love him John Cena will make the kids want to come back and watch the product in the future – the same way Hulk Hogan did for many of us back in the day. After all I don’t know too many kids who are now adults saying man I really miss the days when Macho Man Randy Savage and Sid Vicious/Justice were running wild in WCW. But so many people comment still to this day on the NWO because if you were a child at the time this angle was huge – it probably got you hooked on wrestling for life. The same with Stone Cold or the Rock… Mark Henry will never capture the kids imagination like these people have, and due to this wrestling will continue to decline unless they can build larger than life stars.

Blair: I still say nWo was the best storyline of the 90’s. Again, I don’t think the 2000’s have had that good a storyline. If the WCW / Invasion had been booked differently, I think it could have surpassed nWo, but those days are long gone either way.

 

Rhett Davis: As for why you didn’t have this attack when you solely recapped TNA, I may have an idea. There was no one willing to step up to the plate and cover TNA and even you stepped down after awhile. Not that I blame you. However, no one really cares when you make fun of TNA because TNA gives you reasons to laugh. They are considered the comedy relief in the world of Pro Wrestling. WWE is considered the Major League and until TNA turns it around… they will always be the laughing stock of Pro Wrestling.

Blair: I agree with you about TNA, but I’d argue that WWE is, or at least should be, held more accountable, for the state of the industry today than TNA. Hell, WWE has like 90-95% market share, and that’s what’s so disappointing about TNA, is that given the number of times that WWE has disappointed the fans in the past few years, TNA could have solely existed on JUST the audience that turned away from WWE and done way better than they’re doing now. But TNA has no idea how to capture or to hold that audience if they actually do manage to capture some of it. So the state of the industry is way more WWE’s fault than TNA’s.

 

Sideshow Bob: So on the subject of mark Henry, when the inevitable 3dvd set comes out, which matches would you like to see included? Which skits? No, not counting the obligatory documentary covering his awe inspiring career starting with his legendary save of Jake Roberts from the hands of an angry king through his epic encounters with Randy Orton…

Blair: I can’t think of a single Mark Henry match, promo or other moment that I care to see again. Not a single one. Not speaking figuratively here. And this is not my “gimmick”. I legit can’t think of a single Mark Henry match or moment I’d really put any effort into seeing ever again. I’m sure some of you will come up with some stuff that you’ll pretend to want to see again. Him busting Shaemus through that barrier, for example. That was pathetic. Him not taking the RKO. WHAT A MOMENT!!! Yeah, I guess I’d probably choose to view all the gazillion times he’s injured himself or some of the OVW matches he’s had after the gazillion times he’s been sent there to work on his “ring work” and “conditioning”. I’d also like to get out ahead of his next injury and say that I’d like to see that on there too. Maybe we can hear him say “ah cayn’t compare dis payne to any udda payne” like on that WWE “Don’t Try This At Home” advisory.

I wouldn’t buy a Mark Henry DVD set. But I guess maybe they can put that one time he fought Undertaker at Wrestlemania, that sucked, and he lost.

 

Jack Newbury: I was all set to start typing about how right Jeremy Spoke In was with his point about the Flair/Steamboat stuff being for both kids and adults…but, that Hogan/Cena point he next made I think is a bit off the mark. Hogan wasn’t exactly a draw in that WCW time period before the nWo. He had to completely re-invent himself to transition from kids to Adults. Cena will have to do the same thing. Kids aren’t going to grow up and like Cena. They’re going to grow up and think “I can’t believe I liked that fucking guy.” Which is what was happening with Hogan before the nWo.But, the original point you made is good. Whenever I watch those Steamboat-Flair matches it impreses me with how the audiences are comprised largely of screaming kids, but, there are always lots of adults in the front following things and the wrestling definitely serves both audiences. Which is a problem WWE has always had. Have they ever been able to successful cater to both children and adults? The Attitude era completely cut kids out of the picture and before that (and now), adults were completely cut out of the picture.

Blair: LITTLE kids probably didn’t watch the Attitude era. But kids certainly did, whether they were supposed to be or not, whether it was targeted towards them or not. High schools were all over it at the time. So were junior high schools, although less so. Elementary, probably not so much, but still, your point stands. You can have a storyline that appeals to both kids and adults. Remember when they had that storyline that appealed to Canadians and Americans by pitting them against each other? Doing the same with kids and adults could be fun. Just spitballing.

 

Joseph Hargrove: Major props for bringing this Interinactivity column back to Inside Pulse. It’s a fun read to see and your complaints are always hilarious. Question: What do you think of Bruce Pritchard replacing Russo as head writer of TNA? Once again, welcome back, Blair.

I don’t know what Blair thinks of that, but I kind of don’t care. At all. 

Blair: Thanks Hargrove!. Regarding Brother Love, I kind of touched on this above, but Russo has only been replaced as HEAD writer. He’s still writing for the show. As far as I know, a LOT of people are writing for the show or have some pretty strong input. I don’t know who every single person is, but to be honest, it doesn’t really matter. I don’t know that even if Prichard WANTED to change how stuff is getting done at TNA (which remains to be seen in itself) that he would have the clout, stroke, whatever, to actually get it done. The only way to know how it goes is to see how the next few months play out. If stuff changes, good, it might not even be because of Prichard though. With TNA’s booking team, it’s basically impossible to tell. It’s a problem that TNA has always had. But, for crying out loud TNA, as a favor to me, please keep him off camera.

 

Wally Kovacs: How exactly does being featured on Botchamania equate to being a lame match? And it was featured … as an example of how ridiculous Booker T is on commentary. So, apparently nothing about the match was actually ‘worthy’ of Botchamania (which isn’t really about lame wrestling, per se, but about botches, goofy commentary, technical glitches, and the like). But, if the argument was “it made it onto Botchamania, therefore it is lame”, which is pretty weak already, it ONLY made it into Botchamania by virtue of the horrible commentary of Booker T, which got every match on the card into the video. Now Sin Cara vs. Sin Cara got ravaged in that video, but Sin Cara : Botchomania as Vince Russo : Wrestlecrap, it’s the gift that keeps on giving. But being in a Botchamania isn’t in and of itself a sign of poor quality.

Blair: I was told by someone else that Henry botched all over that lastest version, but when I saw this I had to check, and, you’re right. This is me issuing an apology for not actually watching it before saying that. By way of apology, I personally invite you to look at all the Botchamania’s Mark Henry HAS been on for his wrestling. And in my defence, it’s hard to tell the difference between a Mark Henry move and a Mark Henry botch. Sin Cara is like a human Botchamania reel, but no one’s saying that the match is bad JUST because it made it on there, BUT, quite often, that is EXACTLY the case.

Wally, I love you man. I do. But what the fuck, my dude? Randy Orton vs Mark Henry? I had to ask Blair what the fuck match you were defending so adamantly, and I couldn’t believe it when he told me. I’m still stunned. We are talking about Mark Henry vs Randy Orton here. It’s not lame because it was on Botchamania. It’s lame because it’s Mark Fucking Henry vs Randy Fucking Orton. FIST PUMP!

 

Wally Kovacs: On the subject of wrestling ratings. Ratings for just about everything are down. PVRs, online availability, more channels, more alternate forms of entertainment, etc … ratings is a poor evaluation of viewership. PPVs are down, but it’s more than just a simple case of the product is bad so people stopped watching. They’ve priced themselves into a less is more situation, making more per buy instead of trying to get lots of buys for less. (Also throwing more than 12 PPVs a year). There are scores of reasons that people have left wrestling. The Attitude era took advantage of jaded Hogan era fans reaching an age where they wanted Wrestling again, but marketed to them instead of kids. Now Wrestling has to try and create for itself, out of seemingly nowhere, a new Hogan like boom, one that can’t simply be fueled by a population that grew up on wrestling. Comics are in the same position, they’ve been sort of living off the fans who grew up with comics market for a while, and are trying to get to a new generation and/or people who grew up comic characters in other media. WWE doesn’t really have that (I would pity the child who grew up with The Marine and Knucklehead looking to relive their childhood through watching the ‘E, of course, they would love it, since the ‘Es main product is a million times better than it’s movie.

Blair: Oh, boo hoo for wrestling. Ratings are just one example I used, but that’s a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. Wrestling used to be pop culture, or, if you won’t buy that, then fine, but it was DAMN close. Now it isn’t. That’s all there is to it. There’s no argument here to be had, Wally. Wrestling is less popular now because it sucks a lot more now. Period.

 

Wally Kovacs: As for the whole ‘gimmick’ thing, perhaps schtick might be a better word. It’s not a Kane mask, but it’s the ‘real’ gimmick that most wrestlers do. Take your personality, and turn it up to 11. I doubt it’s an affectation, it would be hard to fake it, but there is likely a degree of hyperbole and exageration at play. You don’t like what you don’t like, but the extent to which you don’t like it (and make sure everyone knows it) seems a bit over the top at times. Which is obviously done (in some cases) for the purpose of entertainment. The TNA recaps were hilarious as a result. However, when the main thrust of most of your articles (and comments) are all sort of following the same idea of “How can you guys like this shit?” … Well, you become the “how can you guys like this shit” guy. It’s your gimmick, your persona, your schtick. Whether it’s genuine or not doesn’t change the fact that it is what you, as an Internet Personality, shows. Everyone on the internet (except for the SpamBots) are real people, but their online personas rarely provide an accurate a full picture, it’s mostly only what they want to show, accetuating some things, leaving out others, and some even manufacturing or distorting some stuff.

Blair: I got no problem being the “how can you guys like this shit” guy. I don’t think you guys are dumb for watching it or anything, and I’m certainly not trying to insult you, but the issue is more that I find about 5% of wrestling nowadays to be worth watching. That’s not an exaggeration. 5%. Any one of you were standing right in front of me, I’d happily tell you in front of anyone the same things I’m telling you here now. If it happens to improve (and I’ve acknowledged whatever I thought was an improvement whenever it happened in the past) then I’ll happily say so. So, it’s not a gimmick.

Wally? Two comments Wally?!? Well, that comment was kind of long, but I guess you are saying that Blair is the guy who writes ‘Hate this guy!’ articles, really he’s the guy who writes the ‘Interactivity’ articles and answers your questions. Sometimes I get to answer them as well. FIST PUMP! Anyway, yeah. My guess is that you didn’t like one of Blair’s columns because it disagreed with your viewpoints, and somehow this upset you. But it’s about pro-wrestling. So don’t let it keep you from sleep or anything, my dude.

 

Arkady Joyblood: Blair, I have to say that since I first started reading your column back when you were still doing your weekly on TNA, I made a decision that you were my absolue favorite columnist here at The Pulse. Your opinions, while not always agreed with, were at the very least honest and could never be seen as “pandering to the masses”. Even if people agreed with you, it was about what YOU thought and that was the bottom line. As a person who has been watching wrestling since I was 2 years old (I am now 27, btw), I can honestly say that I, as a fan, am grateful for the transformation taking place right now in WWE. So long, I have felt force fed by the crap (with some spots of 5 star cuisine), that I got so used to it, that I watched out of mere allegiance for a product I have legitimately loved since I was a baby. I remember seeing legends like Ric Flair, Jimmy Snuka, Andre The Giant in small, $15/ticket venues. Not legendary matches, but simple shows, but they were epic to me as a young child. Then sitting through the sometimes sludge that was the early ’90s. I remember using all my allowance to watch Shawn Michaels boyhood dream come true. I remember the Million Dollar Champion, “The Ringmaster” Steve Austin rising to become “Stone Cold”. I remember the transformation of the “Blue Chipper” Rocky Maivia to the “Great One”. I remember the shock of watching Rey Mysterio Jr being tossed like a lawn dart by Kevin Nash and the shock of The Outsiders storming WCW and Hogans outrageous heel turn. I remember that and much, MUCH more. But as a fan, there came a time when it felt like wrestling just became…well…generic and over the hill. Mind you, through all those years, I was a mark and had no idea of this little thing called the “IWC”. I watched just for the wonderment and enjoyment of seeing these titans and supermen appear on my screen and take care of business. Sadly, for the past few years, I have watched a business that I legitimately love and would be a part of if i could, seemingly go down the drain in a great many ways. Don’t get me wrong, there are flashes of greatness here and there, but it just felt like there became a formula, a basic guideline that was rarely strayed from. That is why I am so glad to see some of things that are going on now. Mark Henry is what it is. Triple H is what it is. But what I am liking is seeing the new crop begin to rise. and yes, that includes CM Punk. I guess my main point here is that, while things are certainly no valley of daisies, they have definately been worse. The good eras had to start from a low point to get to greatness and I think we may be seeing the start of a new era of greatness in WWE. I am willing to wait more than a couple months to see it, though. I have been watching for 25 years, I intend to watch for another 25. Thank you for the ability to air my views here, Inside Pulse and thank you for your time and opinions, Mr. Blair Douglas. Have a great week everyone!

Blair: First of all, thank you for the extremely nice comment. Second of all, you have a name that should really be used as the name for the next James Bond villian or TNA Crimson or Gunner-like character. Third of all, I absolutely understand what you’re saying, and I admire your ability to both admit how bad things have gotten and your willingness to admit that you’ll watch it through the sludge to get to the good stuff. Me, I don’t have that determination, I’ll just read recaps until it sounds decent. I don’t need the show to be 100% fantastic, but I don’t think at least 75% is too much to ask for. And no, this isn’t the WORST time in wrestling right now, I remember the start of the brand expansion being particularly bad for RAW, but I think that was also around the time that SmackDown was really, really good. And yes, there have been flashes of greatness over the last couple years (HBK / Undertaker, Batista’s final heel turn and last few months in WWE, Chris Jericho’s heel work, and a couple other little nuggets) but the sheer volume of garbage both companies have turned out during that time were impossible to sit through for me.

Personally, I don’t see what you see happening in WWE right now. I just don’t. The one nice thing is, they’re trying. I don’t think it’s working particularly, with ANY of the young guys they got outside of CM Punk, and that’s more in spite of WWE than because of it. I don’t see anyone buying into these guys for anything other than a flash in the pan. The only exceptions I can think of are Miz and R-Truth, I found myself getting behind them as this wacky buddy-cop-like duo through this whole “getting fired” thing. Will that last with them being brought back so hastily? Probably not. But, regarding the whole “bringing the roster into one giant angle” thing, that can help to get guys over in the exact way that it did with Miz and R-Truth, if done correctly. I’m still in the “wait and see” category regarding all that, but to me it doesn’t look good at all. But “waiting and seeing” doesn’t have to mean actually sitting through the show, necessarily. If you can do it though, my hat is off to you.

 

Owangotang: Blair let me say that I have crazy respect for the time you took to respond to all the comments. You said that Henry lost last year to Wade Barrett so that means that Barrett could come out of nowhere and beat Henry, correct? I truly do not understand that mindset. Even in MMA fighters lose fights to lesser competition and then go on crazy win streaks. I don’t understand why Wrestling has to follow some oversimplified wrestler a-beat wrestler b-so-a-is-always-better-than-b logic. I like Mark Henry as unstoppable monster champion. He sweats when he breathes, he has questionably bizarre mic skills, he is a less than average worker, and he has never had a memorable match. He is also getting his first shot at being truly booked as a monster heel. This day and age Andre would be no more revered than Big Show because of the spastic booking. BIG guy like Andre, Vader, Umaga, Henry, etc absolutely need to be protected more than anyone because they are so big. They need to have long periods of dominance otherwise they become afterthoughts.

Blair: Thank you sir, and nice to see Umaga on that list, he is the one exception that I can think of in the last few years that WWE brought in, pushed right away, and made it work. Yes, I know he was in WWE before that, but not as the same character. I disagree that Andre wouldn’t be the star he is today completely, because Andre was just special in how big he was. Vader, you may be right, but I even question that a bit. Also, I’m not saying that Barrett should beat Henry every time just because he beat him a bunch last year, the point I was illustrating was just how dominantly they had Wade beat Mark, multiple times, and moreso, just how long Henry has been doing that sort of jobbing for. If he had lost just a bunch of matches over a year or so, then sure. But to shoot from THAT to being World Champion, let alone in no time at all because of one over-rated match (yes, I know you don’t agree with that) with Shaemus? That’s the mindset that I don’t understand.

 

Owangotang: Hey I was not blowing smoke up your ass. I really do think it is neat that you take the time to really respond to so many different voices. I’ve been a silent member of the IWC for a decade plus and it is the INTERACTIVITY of this site that has really taken my enjoyment of Wrestling to a new level. I enjoy dominance. The heel runs you mention, Kozlov and Khali, are examples of aborted test runs. Those sorts of things, in retrospect, are easy to dismiss. Even as they are unfolding, as Henry’s run is now, it is easy to dismiss. When it’s done right though, as it was with Vader, Andre, Goldberg, Hogan from WM3 to 6, and even Cena, dominance is utterly captivating. It makes you feel as if you are seeing something special, something that is not the ephemeral throwaway RAW but something that actually matters. I was at MITB this past Summer to see CM Punk overcome Cena’s dominance and cleanly pin Cena 1-2-3 in the middle of the ring. I’ll never forget it. If Cena was not built up as SUPERDOMINANTCENA though I doubt it would be as memorable. That’s what dominance does, it gets our attention and allows us to wonder just when and how it will be toppled.

Blair: Mark Henry’s run has lasted less time so far than the “test runs” of Kozlov and Khali. After Monday’s RAW, it certainly sounds like that could be an even faster abortion, or maybe just on the downswing, at least the “dominant” part of it. (Although that remains to be seen.) Yeah, Punk beating Cena was special (would have been moreso if it was less of a screwball victory) because of how LONG Cena has just been WWE’s unbeatable guy. But does anyone honestly believe that they’re going to give Mark Henry THAT kind of a run? (Albiet as a heel.)

Not. A. Chance.

And let me be clear on something. I’m not complaining that Orton lost clean. Not at all. Having Cena lose to Punk, screwball victory or otherwise (although it had just about as much impact as a clean one) made perfect sense due to the crazy amount of momentum Punk had, and how quickly people rallied behind him in his anti-WWE anti-Cena tirade. I was really surprised that they did it, pleasantly surprised (although not at the screwball part). I was equally surprised by Henry beating Orton, but with Punk beating Cena the reaction from people seemed to be “WTF?!?! That’s awesome!!!” while the reaction from Henry beating Orton was like “WTF?!?! Seriously?!” Maybe the issue is for me is just how recent Henry’s bitch days are, and how those bitch days took up 14 of the last 15 years of his career. (This includes time he’s spent injured, which is a lot, and the 1 year remainder comprises of all the mini-pushes he’s had, including the run he had which led to him getting buried by Undertaker.) Maybe that’s why it’s hard for me to get behind this whole “HE’S UNSTOPPABLE!!!” thing. I guess my mind just goes too quickly to “Zuh? Heath Slater beat him last year.” Again, thanks for your nice comments.

 

Jeremy Spoke In: @Jack Newbury – you kind of made my point for me – Hogan was able to cater to both kids and some adults in the 80′s and to later cater to those kids who were now adults in the 90′s by becoming Hollywood Hogan. I’m saying that John Cena has the opportunity to do the same – he is appealing to the kids now – and lets face it the only way he’ll be able to stay interesting in the future to these kids as they grow would be for a massive heel turn – ie. (Hulk Hogan). Hell he could use the exact same formula that Hogan did. But really WWE can cater to whoever they want and it won’t matter – the days of wrestling seeing HUGE ratings are long gone because there is no way the majority of adults will ever choose to watch a fake wrestling show over a real UFC show. And the NFL (Monday Night Football) will always keep the majority of adults during fall and winter from ever watching a full live showing of Monday Night Raw.

Blair: People would absolutely get behind a Cena heel turn, although it wouldn’t sell as much merch, which is sort of the issue. It’s funny that people think now that just because Punk sold more merch than Cena, they they’re going to turn Cena heel. Not saying that’s been specifically said on this site to that degree, but I do see it lots of places. People are neglecting to remember that even if Cena is behind Punk, that Cena is still selling an absolute assload of merch. I’d think they’d be inclined to wait until that tapered off quite a bit before they’d be willing to pull the trigger on a Cena turn, as cool as I think that’d be. If he played it up properly, it’d be a monster.

 

Dave Dubya: I got two mentions this week. That means I’m going to have to troll a lot harder this time to get three mentions next time. Mark Henry should get his own WWE Films production, just like HHH and Randy Auton. He could be a Texan diner chef by day, but by night he could fight crime as a vampire. @KON “Does anyone honestly want to see Henry v Sheamus at Wrestlemania?” I do. Especially if it’s a cage match with Teddy Long suspended above the ring.

Blair: The main event of WrestleMania will be Mark Henry’s Weight .vs. Mark Henry’s lungs. His heart can interfere.

 

That’s it for this week. Before I go, Swayze has one more thing to say:

The people have been demanding that I have a log-in for Insidepulse.com, so that I may humbly write for this excellent site. However, one has not been issued to me. Was it something I did? Something I said? Did the words not come out right? Well, in any event, I no longer want just any log-in. I want Patrick Sphor’s log-in info. I specifically want his log-in info so that I may not only post what I may, but delete any of his ramblings, or better yet, just change the password so that he would hopefully be locked out. Unless he has, like, hacking skills that I don’t know about or, something.

But yeah, that’s the deal Pulse. And my, ahem…eeen-gray antern-lay oney-may? Hurry up on that.

– The Man They Call SWAYZE

 

I didnt do Impact this week, I decided I’d rather save my recapping energies for the PPV on Sunday. It actually looks like a decent card, and how can I NOT recap Hulk Hogan facing Sting? That article writes itself. The week after that, I’m still planning to do the Mark Henry Power Hour known to some as SmackDown.

Thanks for the questions. Have a great weekend! I’ll be in my trailer.

– Blair

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,