Interinactivity: 10.28.2011 – … But I’m Not Wrong

Come on in, everyone. No time to wipe your feet.


Bound For Glory Comments

Michael: Full Metal Mayhem = TLC.

Blair: Because tables are made of metal? Got it.

For the record though, Michael is right. I looked it up and this is what TNA calls their TLC matches. But tables aren’t made of metal. Brilliant.


Ed: Dude how can you say you didnt care about the knockouts match. I am so happy to see Velvet Sky get the belt instead of that skank winter. Velvet Sky deserves a championship run.

Blair: There are 2 Knockouts in TNA that can wrestle, and even they only have good matches when they’re against each other… sometimes. Those two people are Mickie James and Tara. Now, they have Gail Kim, so that means there’s 3 people. Everyone else is terrible. Different degrees of terrible perhaps, but still terrible. But, why didn’t I care about the match on Sunday? Because 3 of the people in the match are the terrible ones. 4 if you count Karen Angle. That’s why I didn’t care about it. Velvet Sky deserved a chanmpionship run based on what, exactly? Because she’s hot? Because she was one of the only girls who hadn’t had it yet? Because she has the biggest balcony? Because she has been booked as sympathetic? Because she works really hard at her second job that she had to get at Sunglass Hut because TNA pays their women wrestlers about as well as carnys? It certainly isn’t because she can wrestle well. Because she can’t. It certainly isn’t because she talks well. Because she races and can’t string a sentance together to save her life. Velvet and Angelina are the two worst “wrestlers” in that division aside from the one girl who’s music sounds like a Goo Goo Dolls cover band. Yeah, I get that she’s nice to look at. But what you should get is that there’s a ton of better ways to appreciate girls who look nice.


Kon: If they had the tag match instead of the Knockouts & AJ vs. Daniels, I might have classed it as a great show. It’s such a shame that they made the guys who delivered TNA’s match of the year back at Destination X carry out something worse than I could ever imagine. Half of JCW’s Legends show didn’t suck as bad as that match.

Blair: Yeah, that AJ / Daniels thing was hard to stomach. But Mexican America .vs. Ink Inc had the potential to be just as bad. It might have had a chance if it didn’t feature Shannon Moore, Jesse Neal, and Anarquia. So basically, it might have stood a chance if it were just Hernandez.


Kon: About the Hogan thing: Cornette talks about not liking The Wrestler in one of his shoot interviews, because it makes people thing that all wrestling is like that & older guys have to resort to staplers/thumb tacks/tables… just to stay relevant & he kind of has a point. Flair blades in every match & Hogan, well, it’s his first match in a long time, but the Australia tour featured him cutting all the time as well. It’s one thing for TNA to be like “OK we’re different from WWE because we’re aimed at a mature audience & don’t have strict rules against language or blood”, but on the other hand, look at flair’s forehead. It’s good that they knew what they could get away with & didn’t try anything that’d seriously injure themselves (like a leg drop, in Hogan’s case), & I’ll even admit that I felt like a little kid for about two seconds when he Hulked up, but are they seriously considering a babyface Hogan title run?

Blair: Well, not all old wrestlers need to do what the Micky Rourke character did. But, many of them do, and it’s sad and hard to watch. Flair’s forehead looks like it’s had a road map carved in it by Arn Anderson. But, remember that they’re not taking insane bumps or anything like that. Blading is a bit unneccesary for men their age, yeah, but it’s got to be less painful and less dangerous than them actually performing moves on those vile husks of what’s left of their bodies.


Owangotang: PRE RVD VS. LYNN: “Van Dam and Lynn have a nice video package. I guess Jerry Lynn is insane now, and he might be with Hogan and Bischoff? I hope they’re not getting ALL of the good matches out of the way early.” POST RVS VS. LYNN: “Wow, solid match. Again, it’s not 15 years ago, and how could it be really, but I never thought it’d be that good of a match.” Well did you think it was going to be a good match or didn’t you? What you wrote there makes no sense.

Blair: Sure it does. I don’t understand what you’re confused over. I italicized, bolded and underlined the important word for you. You’re welcome.


Owangotang: I’ll give you credit for admitting that AJ/Daniels sucked but really…REALLY…this was as good as any recent WWE PPV? I hope to hell you do not consider July recent.

Blair: Yes, really, and yes, I do. Money In The Bank had two good matches. Bound For Glory had more than two good matches. I found the TNA show as a whole to be more enjoyable and less boring. I was surprised too. Now, MITB’s main-event match was better than anything TNA did at BFG, but on the other hand, the only other decent match on that MITB PPV (Christian / Orton) was certainly not a show-stealer and was not as good as a couple of the matches on BFG. In terms of the best match on either show, yeah, I’d probably give that to Punk and Cena. But as a complete PPV, yeah, I’d put Bound For Glory ahead of Money In The Bank.


Owangotang: I don’t understand how anyone could compare anything TNA does to WWE.

Blair: Because they’re both wrestling companies? Again, your confusion perplexes me. TNA and WWE are both wrestling companies who are on TV and PPV. Yeah, they do a lot of different stuff, but they also do a lot of the same stuff. Hell, a lot of the stuff TNA does is ripped directly off of WWE. Above, we talked about comparing TNA PPV’s to WWE PPV’s. TNA, a wrestling company, runs PPV’s. WWE, a wrestling company, runs PPV’s. Isn’t it pretty natural to comapre them?


Owangotang: Didn’t this company spend an entire Summer building up their Bound for Glory series, only to job out its’ winner?

Blair: Didn’t the WWE spend that same summer building up CM Punk, only to job him out to Triple H and Alberto Del Rio before becoming Triple H’s “foxhole buddy” and tag-team partner? Didn’t they also spend an entire spring building up Christian, only to job him out to Randy Orton, the same guy they job everyone else out to, before they fed him to SHAEMUS?


Owangotang: Didn’t this company build up Gunner only to not include him in a match on their biggest PPV of the year?

Blair: Didn’t the WWE let Daniel Bryan win Money In The Bank only to not include him on SEVERAL of their PPV’s afterwards?


Owangotang: Isn’t this the company where one of the leaders (Hogan) believes drugged-out skeever Jeff Hardy is the future? The same Jeff Hardy that forced a PPV main event match to last only 2 minutes or so because he was in such an altered state?

Blair: Isn’t WWE the company that made that EXACT SAME DRUGGED-OUT SKEEVER a huge superstar and a multiple-time World Champion, despite years of wellness violations and a truly jaw-dropping amount of other red flags?


Owangotang: I really do want a second top-tier promotion in America but if this is the best TNA can do then they are much closer to ROH than they are to WWE. I guess if that’s your cup o’ tea so be it.

Blair: Just because I considered a TNA PPV to be good, doesn’t mean I think that TNA is on WWE’s level. They’re not. So yeah, no argument there. But that doesn’t mean they’re not comparable, because they’re both wrestling shows. I could compare JCW to WWE if I wanted to.


Asian Stereotype: Not to nitpick, but complaining that the ref is doing nothing about weapons and interference in a no DQ match is kind of silly, Blair.

Blair: ASIAN STEREOTYPE!!! You can nitpick with me all you want, buddy. Was it a no-DQ match?!?! See, I thought it was, but I didn’t hear them mention it, then near the beginning, with Flair choking Sting with the jacket and what-not, Hogan had the referee’s attention turned. There was another instance too. So I just assumed I was wrong about it being No-DQ.


Red: Where did the PPV cut-off? Being there live, the ref signaled “x” and trainers and Temple staff came out to help Angle (who did not go off via the ramp). Looked like his ankle or knee was pretty hurt. Not sure if that resulted in the match ending early.

Blair: I didn’t see the ref throw up the “X”. Kurt Angle being hurt could explain why they gave the title to James Storm.


Red: Glad they decided to rip off the Summerslam finish. Crowd gave Roode a nice hand after the match and show went off the air.

Blair: How was this ripping off the SummerSlam finish?


Umar Ahmed: “There was once a Mad Magazine when I was a kid, like in 1996 or so, that had a parody of something wrestling-related. It was set like 15 years down the road (so 2011) and had Hulk Hogan fighting Bret Hart, both in the rings with canes. Geezer Ramon came from behind with the walker and took one of them out, and The Undertaker showed up and put one of them in a bodybag. Gorilla Monsoon said that it was a tragic ending to WrestleMania 28.” That was actually the Beavis and Butt-head Get Old spoof in Mad. My mind immediately went to that spoof when I saw Hulk Hogan come out with crutches at the end of last year’s Bound For Glory. Thumbs in the middle show for me. Lynn-RVD was match of the night, in my opinion.

Blair: Yeah, that was my favorite match too, it surprised me with how good it was. And YES, now I remember the Mad Magazine thing more clearly. If you needed any more proof that Hulk Hogan has literally become a caricature of himself, this is it. I wish I knew what year that article was from. A shiny new donkey for anyone who can track an image of that panel from the magazine down.


LBD Nytetrayn: “Then he starts eating Sting.” …the hell?! I hope that’s a typo, but it’s TNA, so…?

Blair: Not a typo. Hogan started biting Sting. He became so senile that he thought Sting was food.


CB: For the record, American Horror Episode 2 and Walking Dead, Season 2, Episode 1 >>>>>>>>>>> TNA BFG

Blair: What, was this even up for debate? Not on my watch, it wasn’t. Who shot Carl?!?! I’m hoping they run into Merle soon.


Sideshowbob: Hell CB I watched walking dead twice in a row and have zero regrets.. With commercials even..

Blair: I watched the walking dead too, in a way… Hogan, Sting and Flair baby. That’s right CB, I stole your joke. That’s what you get for throwing Walking Dead in my face.


Interinactivity Comments

Wally Kovacs: Actually, I was referring to Christian/Sheamus in the Botchamania thing (although I do think he did mention Botchamania twice). My fault for not point out which one I was refering to, but either way, it’s still a non sequitor basically. “Of course it’s a bad match, because of something that in no way indicates whether it was good or not”. Not necessarily arguing with the conclusion, but the argument put forward to support it.

Blair: Oh. Well, Christian and Shaemus was a lot better than Mark Henry’s match, but that’s sort of like saying that someone who isn’t a midget is taller than a midget. As long as you agree the match was bad, then one less child in the world will go hungry tonight.


Wally Kovacs: Wrestling is less popular now. That is true. Wrestling sucks, that’s a matter of opinion, but let’s say it is. Correlation is not causation. If wrestling stopped sucking, it wouldn’t suddenly become popular. And, there is plenty of stuff out there that sucks, and is popular, or that doesn’t suck, and yet it isn’t. The WWE is in the position of being in a safe slump. It’s making money, and no matter what it does, they don’t fluctuate wildly in either direction. However they seem to be in a bit of a panic mode (or it may just be the PPV schedule) as they try something and change directions quickly when it is just a blip on the radar. So anything good they do goes unrewarded, and anything bad they do goes unpunished.

Blair: Yes, WWE is in a safe slump. There’s no arguing with that. I wouldn’t even say that they’re in panic mode, what realistically do they have to panic about? But, what other reason is there out there that they’re less popular, if it’s not that they suck a lot more now? No, if wrestling stopped sucking, it wouldn’t suddenly become popular again, but if it got better, and stayed better over a period of time, then also over time, yes, it would become popular again. Realistically, “sucking” is a matter of opinion – either it appeals to the masses or it doesn’t. What you can’t argue with is the numbers.

Wrestling used to appeal to a lot of the masses. Now it doesn’t. That’s not an opnion. That’s math.


Wally Kovacs: As for the whole gimmick thing, I was just trying to explain what other people had been saying. Everyone, especially columnists, have a niche. A genre if you will. When someone clicks on your column, they know what to expect. You seem hung up on the label of gimmick, but gimmick doesn’t equate to inauthentic. I’m not going to ‘guess’ why you come across as defensive about it, because all I can go off is my impression of how you come across. It just seems weird that you are fine with being the ‘guy who hates nearly everything’, but it’s the gimmick label you need to repeatedly refute. Some people who brought it up may be accusing you of insincere trolling to get page views and whatnot, but they didn’t come across that way, and I know that my only intent was to try to clarify.

Blair: Right. Except that “hating everything” (which isn’t the case, yes I know that’s not what you’re saying, I’m just pointing it out) isn’t a gimmick because it’s not permanent. At least, it doesn’t have to be. If wrestling suddenly got good again, I wouldn’t feel like watching it is such a massive waste of my time. Same as with the other millions that have tuned out. Again, pretty simple.


Wally Kovacs: I’ve always been a bit verbose when the mood strikes. I have hardly been offended by the attacks on Mark Henry, or the other stuff, it just seems that some of the arguments were a bit lacking. And, it takes more to convince people to reevaluate their opinions than just telling them it sucks, that it’s obvious it sucks, and that anyone should be able to tell it sucks, when you believe that 95% of what they put out sucks. Whether or not it’s true is beside the point … you aren’t going to sway opinion much without at least making a proper argument. Maybe you don’t care about swaying opinion, that’s fine, but then it’s just preaching to the choir and trolling the marks.

Blair: No one should assume something sucks just because I say it does. Man, I think American Idol sucks, how many people do you think agree with me there? The difference between that and wrestling is, I can look at American Idol and say why I don’t like it, but that I understand why a lot of other people do. With Mark Henry, I can look at that and tell you, honestly tell you, I don’t know why anyone would find that enjoyable. Mark Henry is actually literally the perfect example of that.

Mark Henry is also a perfect example of why wrestling seems incapable of taking anything away from the UFC / MMA phenomenon that has completely eclispsed the whole industry. Mark Henry would get murdered in a UFC ring because he can’t move. I don’t know why, a piano could stand on those legs, but how and ever, he just can’t. You want a strategy for facing Mark Henry? Just make him walk around. That’s literally it. He’s going to get winded in about 2 minutes. Then, finish him off if his heart doesn’t beat you to it. Simple. So to anyone who’s ever seen a single one of those, I can see why it would be hard for them to understand why someone doesn’t just do that to Mark Henry.


Wally Kovacs: Also, Taker is coming up to his 20th. So, unless they keep him off the card this year, this one will be his 20th (so I’d expect them to make it count instead of just getting it out of the way to set him up for another year later).

Blair: Wally. Buddy. First you proved me wrong about that Botchamania video that Mark Henry was in. Now you’re proving me wrong about Undertaker’s win count at WrestleMania. If you’re going to keep this up, then I’m just going to have to invent opinions for you and aggressively mock you for them. Is that what you want? HUH? IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?!?!


Wally Kovacs: I think that wireless internet is a passing fad. It will never last.



That was surprisingly satisfying.

… what? Oh right. Undertaker’s streak. Right. Okay, if this is his 20th, whether he wins or loses is an issue of itself, but before you can debate that you need to figure out the bigger issue – the name they put him up against. Then you can decide whether he should win or lose. Taker’s 20th has gotta be a big one. Shaemus, Mark Henry, Cody Rhodes, John Morrison, The Miz, R-Truth, Fake Batista, Fake Kurt Angle, Fake Billy Gunn, and anyone else you guys label NEW VADER before then simply isn’t going to cut it. That would be laughable. Christian MIGHT, MIGHT, MIGHT be able to pull it off but that’s doubtful, and if he does get it, he needs to lose. The only names on the regular roster that will REALLY fit that bill are John Cena or CM Punk. Undertaker has already beaten Randy Orton at WrestleMania once and Triple H at WrestleMania twice. Regarding someone they could bring in, I think Stone Cold would be a nice fit. The Rock would be a nice fit, but that’s not going to happen. Maybe he can murder Mick Foley again for our amusement?


Corey Yuen: It’s not that I like Jeff Jarrett, I just think it was wrong to call him pathetic because he started his own promotion because the WWE did not want him.

Blair: That’s not why I called Jeff Jarrett pathetic, I called Jeff Jarrett pathetic because he blackmailed his employer and that was one of the reasons they didn’t want him back. (That, and he wasn’t a draw.) Also, Jeff Jarrett didn’t start TNA, Jerry Jarrett did. There are a ton of other reasons as well. All the reasons in the world that I’ve called Jeff Jarrett pathetic are at your fingertips, and you had to make one up?


Corey Yuen: Like him or hate him, Hulk Hogan is a media attraction. The guy has been all over ESPN this week (SportsNation, SportsCenter, Michelle Beadle Podcast, WFAN am in NYC) promoting Bound For Glory. It’s not Alex Shelley, AJ Styles or Christopher Daniels doing those interviews, it’s Hogan. Hogan has a name value that can help TNA. It takes time. Jarrett was too old school in his version of TNA. That is all.

Blair: Holy shit, are you stalking Hulk Hogan? And Jeff Jarrett was too old school in his vision of TNA? As in, more old-school than Hogan?

Hulk Hogan put The Nasty Boys on TV.

In 2010.

And of course Alex Shelley, AJ Styles or Christopher Daniels aren’t doing the media events, because that would be fruitless, because no one knows who those guys are. That’s the point, Korey with a K. Do you think that I’m saying that Alex Shelley is a bigger star than Hulk Hogan? Because that would be idiotic, and idiotic comments are your department, not mine. If all Hulk Hogan did was go around and do interviews saying how awesome TNA is, and how good the stars of the show were, then that would be great. How cool would it be if Hulk Hogan came out and said “Brother, tonight we’ve got Robert Roode and James Storm, and those guys are gonna tear the house down. This is what’s happening in professional wrestling today, dude.” Something along those lines, EVEN if he were promoting guys like Ken Anderson, who sucks, would be good for TNA. But he’s not doing that. Hulk Hogan isn’t helping to make any stars.

The best moment of the TNA PPV… was Hulk Hogan. I can’t believe it, but it was. And that’s all well and good, but are they really planning on basing the promotion around Hulk Hogan? Because that’s not building a long-term future for the company. The idea that Hulk Hogan can’t help TNA is never something I’ve put on the table, what I’m saying is that Hulk Hogan isn’t helping TNA right now, and hasn’t since he’s been there. Have they gottten some attention? Yeah. How much of that have they managed to use to their advantage? None. That’s why Impact’s ratings are lower, and why TNA has nothing to show for Hogan being part of the company

On Hogan’s first episode of Impact, AJ Styles and Kurt Angle tore the house down, and Hogan came out and immediately said that they were the best wrestlers in the world today, and that this was what we can expect to see on Impact every week. That’s an example of how you put over some talent without even having to get in the ring with them. If they had kept going with what they said they were going to keep going with, I mean. Because as we all know now, that never happened again.

Swayze: Korey, I’d like to read and ponder upon your comment this week, however you didn’t spell your name with a K. I’m afraid I’m going to have to penalize you for this. I’m sorry, but don’t worry. You can make up for it in the bonus round, and it’s not like you had a fair point anyway.


CB: In other news, WWE still wins by a landslide over TNA, BUT the buildup for Robert Roode leading to Bound For Glory has been outstanding. Now, that doesn’t mean TNA won’t screw this up on Sunday by adding 10 ingredients and 20 swerves to the mix, but *IF* Angle vs. Roode truly stays one-on-one, and *IF* Roode wins cleanly on Sunday, then this just may end up getting my TNA wrestling moment of the year come December.

Blair: Yeah, for a lot of people, this was the wrestling equivelant of getting that pony for Christmas. Some people actually thought they’d do it. I didn’t, just based on their track record. And I’m not a huge Robert Roode guy, but it would have been good, and Roode is a LOT better of a choice than who they’ve been putting in there lately.


CB: I am pretty sure Punk at MITB already locked up my overall wrestling moment of the year, which saddens me even more as to how WWE completely erased all of the good will they built up by mismanaging the post-MITB fallout (almost) worse than Samoa Joe during the BFG series.

Blair: Punk at MITB IS the wrestling moment of the year, without a doubt. But let’s bust a myth here. Joe, good as he is, and he IS good, has been dead in the water since long before the BFG series was ever thought up. He’s been dead in the water since early last year when they shut him down. He wasn’t getting anywhere near the top of that tournament. I wouldn’t have thought they’d have bored him that deep into the hot liquid magma core of the Earth neccesarily, but here we are.


CB: It’s one thing to talk about how Mark Henry has created ZERO memorable moments that you’d want to see again, and that’s understandable given his track record before this resurgence for him started.

Blair: As well as after the “resurgance” for him started.


CB: It’s another level of awful-ness, however, for WWE to take a guy like CM Punk who does nothing but create memorable moments and completely saddle him with horribly mismanaged booking. Punk has an ability to overcome this type of thing — he’s done it a lot over the years — but at some point you would think WWE would figure out that nobody cares about CM Punk vs. Kevin Nash or CM Punk and John Cena having “mutual respect” for each other. Are you kidding me? Is this really the best they can do? It’s PAINFUL to watch.

Blair: Yes, it is. That’s why I don’t watch it. If they decide to turn it around, I will watch it, and I can YouTube anything I miss in the meantime. It seems that they’re doing this to keep the spotlight on Cena, so it can still be on him when The Rock gets back. That’s the closest thing resembling logic I can assign to the whole thing.


ASGurl: Also, I read Wheeler’s RAW report. Is Mark Henry everyone’s fat bitch again now? Do they make him lose to Shit-mus right away? They should give it to D-Bry since Shaemus sucks.

Blair: No, they won’t make Henry lose to Shaemus right away. After their epic Money In The Bank encounter, WWE is smart enough to know that match is only to be given away on one of the big 4 PPV’s. That’s WrestleMania material right there. How’d you like to see those two guys on the poster? Scary, no?


ASGurl: And where is Swayze’s login?!?! FIST PUMP MY DUDES!!!

Blair: Yeah, they’re really screwing the pooch over here on that one.


Corey Yuen: In Shawn Micheal’s book, he considered Jarrett to be a good wrestler and consider his match Jarrett at In Your House 95 to be one of his favorite matches of all time.

Blair: Uh… yeah. And? What is this supposed to illustrate?


Foxxxy: Awhile back I made a bold prediction Brock Lesnar would challenge Undertaker at Wrestlemania. It came on the heels of Triple H and Dana White’s comments. Now Brock is going to be in THQ game. So my question is what are the odds of you seeing this happen? This year is already pretty loaded so if not this year how about next year?

Blair: I really, really don’t see what UFC or Brock would stand to gain from sending him back to WWE to do WrestleMania in any type of a match situation. Brock being in the THQ game makes sense for both sides because that’s just cross-promotion and a real fighter can be in a video game with fake wrestlers and still have it make sense because it’s all apples on that kind of a platform. A UFC fighter, whether he used to be a wrestler or not, in the ring with another wrestler is an apple against an apple juice assembly line.

Brock said in the article you mentioned that first and foremost, he’s an Ultimate Fighter. And the only way I can see it working for both sides is if Brock was leaving UFC. Otherwise, Brock and Dana White should only do it if they had something to gain from it. And no one respond to this with something like “publicity and cross-promotion is what they would gain!!!” because the damage to their street cred would be far more staggering. Brock being in the ring with a wrestler, Undertaker or not, win or lose, means UFC loses, because what UFC has over WWE is that’s it’s real and wrestling is fake. So I really don’t see why they’d even entertain the idea of making it look like a fake wrestler even has a chance against a real UFC fighter. It’d destroy the credibiltiy that UFC has built up, on a few levels, wouldn’t it?

I’m not saying I wouldn’t like to see it, I’m just saying I don’t see why they’d do it.


Limodriver: I think some of the Sexual Chocolate skits were so bad they became good and might be rewatchable.

Blair: Mark Henry himself is rewatchable on a “so bad it’s good” basis. For about 5 minutes, anyway.


Owangotang: Blair I get it now. My acceptance of the whole Mark Henry experiment is based on my belief that this is what WWE should have done with him from the start. Couple that with the fact that I believe he is a genuinely decent fellow (based on his appearance on Celebrity Apprentice to help Maria raise money for Make-A-Wish, as well as anecdotal evidence) and I just kinda like seeing him get his chance. Those past 14 years happened though and they matter, obviously. I get it. Of course I now think it is all being screwed up, like most of WWE’s booking since MITB.

Blair: See, I don’t really understand the idea of putting someone in a position where they’ll do terribly just because they’re a nice guy. And I also don’t understand the idea of putting someone in a position where they’ll do terribly just because they have seniority or tenure or whatever. That’s a very “union” mindset and whatever your opnion is on unions, that concept has no place in entertainment. Not in my opinion, anyway. If this is what they should have done with Mark Henry from the start, then now you see how that would have turned out.

Swayze: Woah, Owangotang. Still going on about Mark Henry? It’s Mark Henry! It’s great that the show is so bad that Mark Henry is the only thing to get excited about. He’s a champion for the people. You win!


Owangotang: Moving on, Blair I’d like to know what you think of Rock/Cena. I’m intrigued to see what happens at Survivor Series with Rock and I’m hoping against all of me that knows better that WWE will turn Cena, instead of Punk or HHH, at SurSer. There has never been a better time to pull the trigger on the turn. MITB proved a lot of fans want to see Cena lose. CM Punk now outdoes Cena on merch, plus WWE has Punk, Orton, Rock, HHH, and Sheamus all booked as huge faces right now. WWE needs a mega heel and the four I’ve just mentioned have all done that before. What would you think of a Cena turn leading to face Rock v Heel Cena at WM?

Blair: You make some good points here. The only thing I’d say is that just because CM Punk just started outselling Cena in merch doesn’t mean that John Cena doesn’t still sell an ASS load of merch. So that, and the fact that they may want to wait and see just how long CM Punk can outsell Cena for, may make them reluctant to make the turn. You’re right that this is a good time to do it, but, let’s be honest, after the sheer amount of years we’ve been crushed under Cena’s Superman routine, ANY time is a good time to turn him because the reaction from the crowd would just be batshit insane.


Daniel Gianni: I had posted this in one of the earlier missed it Blair, I think you’ve been a tad harsh on Cody Rhodes. He’s gone from being the generic second generation Hardcore Holly protege to the likely to be mid-card for life/future endeavored third wheel in Legacy to someone the WWE in its infinite wisdom *cough* is high on. After Legacy imploded into becoming a stepping stone for Face Viper (sorry Ted) he looked certain to fall into midcard limbo with his “Uncommon son of a Common Man” moniker. But an innocuous little poll on kicked off a chain of events that will likely culminate in atleast one WHC title run. The Divas were asked to pick the most handsome superstar, and shock,horror Cody won. This led to him following in the footsteps of Ravishing Rick Rude, Marvelous Marc Mero and other pretty boy gimmicks of yesteryear. However this being the 21st century an all, Cody incorporated elements of the metrosexual man, with vignettes on proper usage of moisturizer,face packs, waxing and what not. The thing is , between the fact that the guy possesses slightly simian facial features and some really well done scathing promos on Smackdown audiences’ appearances (“I can HEAR you getting fatter”) the guy earned good heat. Seriously, I think a lot of people didn’t get what was so DASHING about Cody and his nose ring ( Dashing Drew McIntyre would have fit better…shame he’s Scottish and has to play the evil foreigner heel). Hence his vain narcissism and the ample promo time he was given on SD, made him an effective midcard heel. His ring work was decent and he was booked well, with occasional clean wins on strong faces. However it was definitely not a main event gimmick, so as fate would have it ,when Rey Rey broke his nose in a match he got the chance to upgrade to a more top level gimmick. Now returning from “Facial Reconstructive Surgery” an almost unchanged Rhodes(+mask) was horrified at his own disfigured face( though as the translucent mask shows..hes practically the same). This much more darker persona got him a win against Rey Mysterio(who apparently asked to work a program with Cody leading to WM).He’s added a kinda cool Victor von Doom-esque Hoodie-jacket combination and speaks with a nasaly, deranged voice (which i think you disliked) and been booked even more strongly with wins over Orton and clean wins on Big Zeke(who?) and other depushed faces. The guy is clearly small, and his wrestling matches see him being 30% cowardly heel,50% intelligent tactician and 20% gets the job done when it counts guy. He’s looking to take the IC title back to its halcyon days, even bringing back the white belt. The sheer fact that his character has evolved through the ages and has been booked consistently makes it interesting to see him rise to main event status. With the Great Whi..forget it Sheamus looking set to face World’s Strongest Chocalate for the title, it looks like Cody will get a program with Randy ‘punt to FCW’ Orton. If he emerges from that feud with a shred of credibility and less than five pounds of dirt (because he’s buried ..get it!), he’ll be the next heel champion on SD. Plus his entrance theme is Badass..and putting paper bags on the crowds’ head is the new taking the sign away..

Blair: Did you quit your job to write this? Won’t this adversely affect those dependant on your income? I’m kidding, it’s nice that you took the time to write that, but that should really be Cody’s Wikipedia page or bio or something.

Okay, I’m just kind of going to point-form my thoughts on this. An involved question deserves an involved answer, but what you’ve basically done is given him credit for how he’s been booked. And the guy isn’t booking himself, so all that credit goes to whoever’s in charge of booking him. Which I’m guessing over the years has been several different people. So yeah, good for them for giving him some kind of consitency. That has nothing to do with Cody. We had this debate regarding Mark Henry where everyone submitted to my un-argueable point before conceding theirs and realizing the fallacy of their thinking. And the point of that debate was this – anyone can be booked well. Literally anyone. I don’t want to see a guy who’s JUST booked to be good. Booking is part of it of course, but I want to see a guy who actually is good on his own as well.

Regarding the stuff that has to do with Cody specifically, anyone can get heat trashing a crowd for being ugly. “I can hear you getting fatter” is a David Spade quote from a movie that’s like 15 years old. Maybe he’s got some more clever lines than that and you just used that as an example, I wouldn’t know because I honestly can’t remember a single Cody Rhodes promo or interview that my brain didn’t immediately start forgetting after it happened. But maybe you know if he’s had more clever lines than that or not.

His ring work was decent? Against Rey Mysterio he did okay, but that’s the only one I can think of, and everyone’s ring-work is good when they’re aganist Rey Mysterio. That’s why Rey is invalueable to the WWE – the guy is perpetually over and his most valueable feature is that he’s made a career there out of carrying guys who are terrible to some decent matches.

I will give you that the gimmick he’s got now is more “main-event level” than what he was working with before. I like the “putting bags on the crowd’s head” stuff. I don’t remember making a comment about the nasaly voice, and beating faces who are de-pushed is designed to give a character credibility but not in and of itself impressive. See, that’s what I don’t get. You mentioned Drew McIntyre being a better fit for Cody’s gimmick. And every single thing you described, Drew could have done just as well as Cody. I’m fairly certain anyone could have done those things just as well as Cody. Or better. That’s the thing with booking – it’s important, but really, anyone who ever got big, they had to have something on their own. Not just anyone could have done what The Rock did when he became an mid-card heel. He was over instantly. That was due to two things – the booking and The Rock himself. What’s going on with Cody right now is the result of booking, from what I can tell. Nothing to do with Cody himself.

He’s working a program with Randy Orton now – unless Orton is jumping to RAW to take part in the huge storyline over there, I can’t imagine they’d put Cody over him. And if they don’t, then he’s hit the glass ceiling, but to be honest, I’m shocked he even made it as close as he did. But hey, I never thought they’d put Fat Albert over Randy Orton either, so what do I know?

Swayze: Cody kind of needs kneepads.


Finn McInnes: What I am curious about is this mythological time where wrestling TV shows were “awesome.” I have watched a lot of wrestling over a long period of time (thanks to satellite dish back in the 80s, my friends and I were watching wrasslin’ before the Rock-n-Wrestling era) and I’d say on the whole anywhere from 75 to 99.999% of any given wrestling TV show from any given wrestling company in any given time frame is bad to awful. For the sake of this discussion, I am only talking about TV, not Pay-Per-View – that’s a different dynamic entirely. And I’m talking any period. I subscribe to WWE On Demand 24/7 or whatever the hell it’s called this month. So I get the benefit of watching things like Prime Time Wrestling, WCCW and the Monday Night Wars. There’s one for you – posters on this site and other talk about how great everything was during the Attitude timeframe or from the Monday Night Wars. Really? I think if the WWE put on a show of the average RAW or Nitro of the time, it was be eviscerated by you folks. Ditto for the average WWF show from the golden age of Rock-n-Wrestling. I’ve watched shows from MSG that were so excruciatingly boring, the only highlight was listening to Bobby the Brain and Gorilla Monsoon banter about fat chicks in the audience. Shows from the Philly Spectrum suck…always. I know that the old NWA World Championship Wrestling from the Super Station TBS is a favorite of Scott Keith’s, but honestly, there’s more talking and less wrestling than your average TNA show – and all of the matches are squashes. Same with the Mid-Atlantic Championship Wrestling show that 24/7 carries – nothing but interviews and squashes. Prime Time is another thing. By and large, it’s great to watch the Gorilla and The Brain segments from the studio or on set somewhere, but the matches…actually let me put that in quotes…but the “matches.” Wow. Not so much. Sitting through several segments on consecutive shows of the epic The Shadows versus The Young Stallions is a whole lot like simultaneously hearing fingernails on a chalkboard and watching paint dry. I personally can barely sit through the poor quality and jump editing of the ECW Hardcore Wrestling show; That shit could give a guy a seizure. Don’t get me wrong I like a lot of wrestling and I watch it . But it’s like panning for gold, you have to sift thought a ton of sludge to find a nugget of goodness. And even then I make judicious use of the fast-forward on my remote.

Blair: Good comment. Okay, to start off, obviously there’s no such thing as a 100% good wrestling show or any other show, so let’s just get that out of the way right now. I agree with some of what you said and disagree with some of the rest of it, but let me see if I can accurately paraphrase you – it seems to me what you’re saying is, and correct me if I’m wrong, is that all wrestling shows are 75-99% awful. So why then, has wrestling had those two (or three, but I say two) boom periods? Why have the shows been so successful during those periods if they were just as bad as they’d ever been? It’s a good question.

Regarding the Rock N’ Wrestling era, I was too young to watch that so I can’t comment there. The old ECW show is a bit sketchy, but decent action beats out production values for me every time. That’s a matter of preference, of course, but do I find ECW better than trying to pretend that Shaemus is awesome now? You’re damn right I do.

Me personally, in terms of a show that was mostly decent from top to bottom, I go back to the old WCW Nitros from the mid-late 90’s. Some technical, some hardcore(ish), some high-flying, and some matches that I’ll just call old-school. You had a bunch of storylines centered around one main New World Order storyline, which, for at least a year and a half to two years was a storyline with suspense, surprises, intrigue, and a slow-build. You had other stories alongside it with the Horsemen and you had a new batch of stars in Jericho, Guererro, Benoit, Malenko, Mysterio, and others, who tore it up every time they set foot in there. You had the Raven’s Flock storyline. You had the possibility that someone else from WWE was going to jump over literally every single week. You had a mix of estbalished stars, some who had never worked together before, who had their weaknesses shielded by being in a good storyline for a lot of the time. Now obviously, that show and company had a host of problems backstage regarding how to integrate the past stars with the new stars and how to move forward as a company, but those were not apparent on-screen and the internet was not what it is today. WWE’s show once they started coming back had a much better show from top-to-bottom as well, but certainly neither show was ever without their flaws.

The last part of your comment is what I wonder about. You have to sift through a lot of crap to get to good stuff these days. That would be true, IF you had to actually sift through it. But that’s the thing. You don’t. Because the internet exists, you can read about the show in 3 minutes rather than sitting through it for 2 hours with commercials. Then, if you see something that sounds good, you can look it up on YouTube or go through your PVR to find it. That’s one of the reasons that wrestlng is suffering today – the vast availability of stuff that’s available online that you can look at instead, or just pick and choose what you want to see without actually having to sit and watch the entire show.


Sideshowbob: I hear ya Finn.. I laugh and remember the tbs supershow or whatever it was always running out of time for their main event and going off the air halfway thru it just to get people to tune in next week for the conclusion..

Blair: Nitro did this all the time, and they almost put RAW in the ground.


Wally Kovacs: On the “Hogan is good for TNA” hypothesis: It would be hypothetically good for TNA to have a famous guy that can go out and shill their company and maybe draw some eyeballs. The problem is, bait is useful if you don’t have a hook. Having Hogan as a ‘draw’ is useless if the product you put out will just push people away with it’s awfulness. In fact, it may be worse, as someone that tries out TNA because of Hogan, and doesn’t like it will be more skeptical of both TNA, and Hogan, in the future. Having someone like Hogan (or, in the WWE’s case, the Rock) come back is a way to get a temporary bump in ratings. However, the goal is to try and take advantage of that bump, put out your best product, and try to keep those new or returning viewers in the long term.

Blair: Yes. Yes, this is absolutely correct, Wally. Thank you. You want to hug it out?


Dave Dubya: I hear that TNA has plans to give AJ Styles a southern sheriff character and to team him up with Samoa Joe as his ethnic sidekick. Any news or thoughts on this?

Blair: Christopher Daniels could be the bumbling villian who they always thwart. “I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren’t for that meddling Samoan!” It would be better than what TNA is doing with those guys now. And clearly, TNA has no problem being racist. Don’t argue with me on that one guys. It’s not like it’d be hard to find another picture.


That’s about it for this week, ladies. Thanks again for all the comments, make sure to leave some more. I’ll be recapping SmackDown tonight, thereby completing both the Interinactivity Returns Tour, and my work release agreement. And if you haven’t done so already, you need to check out my man Jack Newbury’s hilarious article on Bleacher Report, located here. Boy, what a hack, huh?

I’ll be in my trailer.

– Blair

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

Join our newsletter

never miss the latest news, reviews, live event coverage, audio podcasts, exclusive interviews and commentary for Movies, TV, Music, Sports, Comics, Video Games!