Mr Harms

I can always rely on DVDVR to tell me who sells the most merch and why that means they won't turn someone heel. like heels don't sell merch and the guy that takes his face spot won't sell any either.

it BEGINS!

I saw Danny Mills say Robert Pires brought diving into English football. However untrue it might be, it's still more than Danny Mills ever contributed to English football.

Mine was fine.

they give Heath Slater a mic every time he goes out there, they can't hate the southern accent that much.

Let's be honest, when something does get over organically and WWE tries to capitalise, they fuck it up and go overboard like they did when Fandango's music got over. "LOOK EVERYBODY, ITS CALLED FANDANGO-ING, ITS REALLY COOL AND RAD!"

He was the former champion and he is entitled to a rematch, like every champion has had since forever.So to give him his rematch and still screw him, the Authority put Roman in a match with his best friend and a killing machine. It's pretty simple stuff The rematch clause is for a rematch for the world title, not a three-way where the winner gets a title shot. I think for the purposes of this "storyline" we are supposed to be working under the assumption that Reigns isn't getting a "rematch clause" for whatever reason. The Authority's goal is to isolate Roman, like they were saying in their opening monologue, they want him broken, beaten, and disheartened. They want him cut off from any support, on an island (Samoa?) unto himself. To do that they need to drive a wedge between him and his closest ally, Ambrose. So obviously the most sinister plan would be to pit the best friends against each other, and then throw a wild BEAST in between them and watch hilarity ensue. And based on kayfabe, those 3 guys had arguably the best Rumble performances...so it seems pretty logical and straight forward story telling to me. Just because people here don't like it doesn't mean it's not perfectly fine pro-wrasslin scripting, and entertaining to the masses. This is all well and good. But it still doesn't explain why they're giving title shots to a guy they don't want as champion. They could put him in a tag team with Sandow and have them open Smackdown every week. Put him in ridiculous 10-man gauntlet matches. Make him and Ambrose fight over a chicken sandwich. But why give him title shot after title shot and still go "DAMMIT HOW IS ROMAN REIGNS OVERCOMING THESE ODDS?" Well, stop giving him bloody title shots and he may not be so motivated.

He was the former champion and he is entitled to a rematch, like every champion has had since forever. So to give him his rematch and still screw him, the Authority put Roman in a match with his best friend and a killing machine. It's pretty simple stuff They own the company and make the rules up as they go along, why would he be entitled to a rematch and why would they be obliged to give it to him?

This is what I was talking about in the rumble thread. Go through all that trouble putting Roman in the rumble at #1, set up Triple H to come out at #30, win and become the champ - all to screw Roman out of the title. Then the NEXT NIGHT announce he's getting another shot. Try and swing it however you like in all kinds of convoluted directions but it just doesn't make sense.

"contractually obliged rematch" - why on earth, if they're that intent on screwing roman PUT THAT IN THE GODDAMN "CONTRACT"? please, it wouldn't make any sense. Why would there even be a contract? Why am i bothering?

The things is though, where do they go from here? After all this screwing, why on earth would triple H give reigns a title shot? For a guy who's supposed to be hated by the authority, he sure does get a lot of title shots. And we've had a couple of tournaments recently, they can't go that route again. Well, they can, but it'd be fairly boring/repetitive, especially if reigns overcomes the odds AGAIN. So, yeah, it'll happen.

Thanks for the explanation, I hadn't even noticed.

What changed? English guy with limited knowledge here

Looks like St Totteringham's Day might be quite late this year.

It's funny, I said to my friend "does that look like a snake or a big dick?" And he said "what is wrong with you?"

I was looking for some retro wrestling shirts recently and couldn't really find what I was looking for. So I decided to make a few myself instead. I have no idea how to resize images so sorry about that. But I just thought I'd share them you guys in case you wanted them too.

I'm not saying it's interesting.

Come on, it's a work.

I'm probably one of the first to groan when I read fantasy booking on here, BUT... What if Triple H eliminates Reigns - they fight at WM Owens eliminates Brock - they fight at WM then EITHER Undertaker comes back and wins the rumble, eliminating Bray OR Bray wins the rumble and Taker shows up at the end. So then you get the Mania in Texas with Taker vs Bray with Taker's life-force on the line. Bray wins, and Mania ends with Taker walking back down into the abyss with the souls of his victims pulling him down. like this, but after...

No, definitely paranoid.

I said "in post". I didn't suggest they piped in sounds at the live show.

It's not unheard of that they would edit audio in post for a Royal rumble. '92 ring any bells?

You should read Bret Hart's book where he does the exact opposite a lot "...a big, black guy..."

I always find it strange that people feel the need to point out how pale someone is.

Ozil has to drag us to the top kicking and screaming.