Dre013 Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Ok, Flair's involved again...assuming Ziggler is the Flair (at his core a bump machine and dq waiting to happen), who are Tully, Arn and Windham/Ole? The Horsemen redux would be interesting if they didn't hotshot it. Much better than this Nexus crap you've been debating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Conn Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Dolph definitely is the Flair you can add Rybaxel in as the like an Arn and Barry Cesaro woud be a perfect Tully now a JJ thats a little more difficult Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cristobal Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Dolph definitely is the Flair you can add Rybaxel in as the like an Arn and Barry Cesaro woud be a perfect Tully now a JJ thats a little more difficult Flair, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spontaneous Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Who's the new McMichael then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool arrow Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 This isn't about tonight's Raw specifically, but just in general, what exactly is the difference between a no-DQ match and a no-holds-barred match? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dre013 Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Who's the new McMichael then? Mojo Rawley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEmanWITHnoNAME Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 This isn't about tonight's Raw specifically, but just in general, what exactly is the difference between a no-DQ match and a no-holds-barred match? Well theoretically, I would think a No DQ match would obviously be you can't get disqualified by means that would ordinarily get you disqualified (contact with the ref, outside interference, weapon usage, etc.) while a No Holds Barred match would be the same except moves and holds that are normally off limits (ie. barred) are allowed. But in WWE there really is no difference as they don't allow "banned" moves or holds no matter what the stipulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 This isn't about tonight's Raw specifically, but just in general, what exactly is the difference between a no-DQ match and a no-holds-barred match? I don't want to out your username, but did you just ask [redacted] the same question on Twitter like 20 minutes ago? Cause if not, what an incredible coincidence. Also, I liked that person's very characteristic answer hahah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Execproducer Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Who's the new McMichael then? Bo Dallas already looks like a mini-McMichael. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool arrow Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 This isn't about tonight's Raw specifically, but just in general, what exactly is the difference between a no-DQ match and a no-holds-barred match? I don't want to out your username, but did you just ask [redacted] the same question on Twitter like 20 minutes ago? Cause if not, what an incredible coincidence. Also, I liked that person's very characteristic answer hahah Nope. I barely use Twitter to begin with, and haven't at all in weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The theoretical difference is that in a No Holds Barred match, you can't get disqualified for any illegal moves/holds/etc, but still could for weapons/outside interference/etc, whereas in a No DQ match, you can't be disqualified period. In WWE universe, they are the exact same thing, so... yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagan Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 it's the illusion of choice. I imagine they don't want guys to start laying out 3 completely different matches depending on stips, thus they give the fans choices that would end up in the exact same match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 this is completely random - i think it's really cool how out of all the shirts in that store in Japan, my dad got me the shirt of my favorite wrestler from Japan without even realizing it. jun kasai 4 lyfe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra Commander Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 just gonna leave this here skimming thru it, they set everything up for 50 minutes and then start booking around 50min then we get Randy Orton/Rockstar Spud as a tag team managed by El Torito. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The problem with the No Holds Barred stip is that WWE doesn't have any kayfabe banned moves, just shoot banned ones... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nature Boy Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The problem with the No Holds Barred stip is that WWE doesn't have any kayfabe banned moves, just shoot banned ones... Aren't choking based moves banned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The problem with the No Holds Barred stip is that WWE doesn't have any kayfabe banned moves, just shoot banned ones... I need to see a "No Shoot Banned Holds Barred" match where dudes steal the rest of the card's finishers and exchange Tombstones for like 20 minutes while Locker Room Leader Undertaker looks on disapprovingly. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool arrow Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The problem with the No Holds Barred stip is that WWE doesn't have any kayfabe banned moves, just shoot banned ones... Aren't choking based moves banned? Hell's Gate is a choke, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustronaut Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 In WWF/E I always thought a "No Holds Barred" match should take place in the 8-sided ring from the movie. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raziel Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The whole "chokes are illegal" went out the door when Tazz came in, and Angle's appeal that the Tazzmission should be made illegal because its a choke was denied. Add in the popularity of the UFC and pro-wrestling adopting the tap out replacing the "I give up" submission, and you get a mix of some chokes "Tazzmission, Rear Naked, Hell's Gate" are legal, which the straight ol' wrap your hands around the throat are not. I still find it odd that the RNC is legal, but ref's check arm position on the Sleeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool arrow Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 I invented the Octagon, brother! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaedmc Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Who's the new McMichael then? Could be Shawne Merriman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The whole "chokes are illegal" went out the door when Tazz came in, and Angle's appeal that the Tazzmission should be made illegal because its a choke was denied. Add in the popularity of the UFC and pro-wrestling adopting the tap out replacing the "I give up" submission, and you get a mix of some chokes "Tazzmission, Rear Naked, Hell's Gate" are legal, which the straight ol' wrap your hands around the throat are not. I still find it odd that the RNC is legal, but ref's check arm position on the Sleeper. I think we're talking more about this sort of thing: There's absolutely no difference between No Holds Barred and No Disqualification, though. The two terms are interchangeable in WWE history. At least it wasn't a dance off. Though, Ambrose would be a huge natural at this: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MADCAP Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 "What? It's for charity." 12 hours later, and I'm still laughing at that line. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red is Dead Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Still waiting to find out who Rollins is going to nominate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts