The fight put WWE management in a sticky situation

sephy37

*giggles immaturely*

In some ways, I agree, yes they really are.  In other ways, 1995 was still worse.  The most important one to WWE, finacially, they are far from at their worst.

Misuse of talent, poor writing, and terrible booking seem to be at an all time high.  However, WWE still shows flashes of greatness and both the average and highest match quality are significantly higher than 1995.  However, 1995 doesn't have Vince McMahon publically masturbating week in and week out, either.  It does have his ****ty announcing, though.  Its bad, but, and this terrifies me, we may not have hit rock bottom yet.

The_Dude14

Heh, come on now, Vinnie Mac's announcing wasn't THAT bad. I was watching the Iron Man match from WM12 earlier and he had some pretty decent insights. He nailed Shawn and Bret's strategies pretty well and seemed to have his head on straight. He failed to call a Tope (which was incredibly well executed by Bret, the first time i had ever seen him pull one off) correctly, but other than that little dark spot, i was fairly impressed with his announcing. Gotta love his voice, too. As much of a tool as Vinnie Mac may be, i've always admired him for his shameless hamming.  And still do, guiltily. Yeah, he had a tendency to ridiculously oversell things, but at least there was some continuity in his commentary, unlike Bischoff. Bischoff always sounded like he was doing an infomercial.

[QUOTE="_Muta"][QUOTE="The_Dude14"]

Neither one of those shows sound very good at all.  :?

BATMAYNE

Big surprise. It's TNA.

That's what i've been saying for a while.

Great minds think alike.

Neither one of those shows sound very good at all.  :?

The_Dude14

Big surprise. It's TNA.

Who are the Blackjacks?  I'm not remembering them at this moment.icytower38

Exactly. :lol:

In all seriousness, they were a fine tag team throughout the 70's and are certainly induction worthy. However, they certainly don't take precedence over guys like the Ted, Steamboat, Jake, etc.

Inducting Tony Atlas and the f**king Blackjacks before Ted, Steamboat, LOD, The British Bulldogs, and Jake is a total disgrace.

On a positive note, Mean Gene totally deserves it.

  Fair point but RVD can work with the crowd with psychology with his taunts...etc. During the triple threat match on RAW this past week, he got a loud "RVD" chant right at the start of the match when he was just standing watching Hunter and Show go at it. Although he may not be as over as he was a couple of years ago, he does still manage to get himself over with the crowd, regardless if they're "cheap pops". At least they're not recordings played over to get certain superstars over like some stunts WWE have pulled lately.  hbk91

He can get himself over, sure, but in his case that doesn't make him a great worker. That's all i'm saying. When i say his formula is boring, that's my personal opinion.

Anywho, I think you're totally exaggerating RVD's ability as a wrestler. Sure he's no Jack Evans but like the WWE would allow RVD to thrust out half of his ability in such a way. RVD's not the common grappler let alone much technical, but he's precise just doing loads of striking combos, using the ring environment along with his general aptitude that is implemented in his matches. I personally feel that alone is good enough to classify him as a good in-ring worker. hbk91

To some extent, yes, i am exaggerating. He's not the worst guy on the roster, but comments like "RVD is a better worker than HHH" are just irritating. RVD is a spot monkey, plain and simple. That doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, but it's different than being a worker. Spot monkeys don't work the crowd, hence they're not workers, and are usually limited in the ring.

You pretty much defined the majority of the WWE roster. They've all got formulas.hbk91

I never bashed RVD for being a formulaic worker, but rather the formula itself. It's simply dated.

I disagree though with some of your statements. RVD is one of the best in-ring workers on RAW right now. His limitations, although may seem repetitive, are executed in such a way that still gets his ability over regardless of whether he does something new or not.hbk91

What makes a good in-ring worker is someone who can work the crowd through psychology, build, etc. Someone who can tell a story that engages the crowd. What RVD does isn't work. It's flipping and flopping that gets cheap pops. While it may have been fun to watch a few years ago, it's just boring now, especially when you have guys like Jack Evans. I'll give RVD his due for one thing, though, and that's his selling.

Oh and the whole debate between Hunter and RVD is controversial. Survivor Series 2002 is a perfect example of this debate. Both guys participated in the first EC match and their performance were equally incredible in their own way. Triple H is one helluva worker in the ring no doubt about that but so is RVD. Although we might not be able to see him work to his full potential, he is talent and his ability can be assessed against HHH with some advantage over him too.hbk91

It's not controversial at all. I can count more **** + Triple H matches with my fingers. Facts are facts. Like I said before, with a good worker, RVD can produce a great match. Other than that, he's just mediocre. HHH has gotten decent matches out of many poor workers like Batista. How many people has RVD successfully carried? HHH is the better of the two.