Technico Support Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It was a fun match. I couldn't get worked up over the finish because Sting doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It was a guest spot for a guy who is essentially done so who cares if he's "dead in the water" after? There is no "after." People argue that Wyatt should have won because he'll still be there tomorrow. Well so is HHH. Christ, I watched Sting beat Flair for the title in person, what, 26 years ago? This is like getting mad about your favorite band from decades past having their greatest hits CD not win Grammy. Finishes haven't mattered in WWE for a long time now. Doubly so for Wrestlemania recently. Getting mad about these finishes is like is like seeing a Michael Bay movie and being mad that it wasn't as good as Citizen Kane or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(BP) Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I'm assuming HHH wants to put Reigns over some time this year, so that would probably be his justification for beating Sting. It was weird because it was sort of like his normal epics, but it was also the best comedy match they've done since WeeLC. The whole thing was hysterical, intentional or not. Plus, everything that happened in it sort of took place in a seperate reality from the actual promotion and build. It was like a comic book crossover outside of normal continuity. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonzo Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Did pushed Wyatt sell one ticket? Unless you do a detailed survey of who each audience member came to see, you'll never know the answer. Every wrestler is somebody's favorite wrestler. Except Zack Ryder, am I right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fresh Posted March 31, 2015 Author Share Posted March 31, 2015 Did pushed Wyatt sell one ticket? Unless you do a detailed survey of who each audience member came to see, you'll never know the answer. Every wrestler is somebody's favorite wrestler. Except Jinder Mahal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustronaut Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Except Blackheart Johnny Vinyl 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick B. Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Bones Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Best show ever? I guess if it worked that well for you. Great! Still I've never seen a show overachieve to the degree this show did. All nit picks aside you got to hand them that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggulator Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 1) Lawrence Taylor was the most well-known player on a team that went to two Super Bowls. Something like 150-200 million people watch the Super Bowl annually. He was a much bigger name than Ronda Rousey could ever hope to be. Not that she's not a big name -- she is -- but she's the biggest star in a niche sport that doesn't have a lot of mainstream attention. LT has one of the most iconic plays in football history. He wasn't Joe Montana, but he's still a NFL Hall-Of-Fame player on one of the most popular and visible teams. Obviously it's different outside of America -- Wayne Rooney isn't pushing the button here. But trying to compare Ronda Rousey to any star-level football player is nuts.2) There is no bigger Bray Wyatt fan than yours truly. I'm completely fine with him losing to The Undertaker. Brock is the only person who has that trophy. Brock's the only "special attraction" wrestling has really had since Andre The Giant. A huge reason why Brock has become that is because of the uniqueness in beating The Undertaker. Bray beating the Undertaker makes Bray look bigger but does it take away some of Lesnar's shine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiji Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Though that doesn't seem to be a problem because of two things. He's Brock Lesnar and everything he does right now is special (doubly so because he is a part timer) and he's been booked so much stronger than anybody in WWE the past 20-30 years. He's no longer reliant on The Undertaker victory for aura. He's kicked everybody's ass he's been in there with since then. It would not do anything to taint Brock's legacy. Plus, they were clearly telling a story of Undertaker's diminishing physical state with him crawling around the ring and looking done for throughout the match. A Bray victory in part could be credited to the destruction job Brock did to him. Lesnar "broke" Undertaker. Bray needs protection and he hasn't received it (outside a few weeks to get him up to get back knocked down again by 'Taker) ever since the middle of the Cena feud. I can't imagine the reactions Undertaker would've gotten if he lost to Snuka and Jake in his first two Wresltemania matches. He wasn't a super worker back then and neither is Bray, so you need smoke and mirrors and the strong gimmick to get them over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MORELOCK Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It was a fun match. I couldn't get worked up over the finish because Sting doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It was a guest spot for a guy who is essentially done so who cares if he's "dead in the water" after? There is no "after." People argue that Wyatt should have won because he'll still be there tomorrow. Well so is HHH. Christ, I watched Sting beat Flair for the title in person, what, 26 years ago? This is like getting mad about your favorite band from decades past having their greatest hits CD not win Grammy. Finishes haven't mattered in WWE for a long time now. Doubly so for Wrestlemania recently. Getting mad about these finishes is like is like seeing a Michael Bay movie and being mad that it wasn't as good as Citizen Kane or whatever. There is most certainly an "after" if they're going to try to sell a single PPV using Sting ever again - especially Sting-Taker. Never understood or cared for the attitude of "appreciate this shit for being the shit it is instead of wishing it were better." WWE can do better than Michael fucking Bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Natural Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It was a fun match. I couldn't get worked up over the finish because Sting doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It was a guest spot for a guy who is essentially done so who cares if he's "dead in the water" after? There is no "after." People argue that Wyatt should have won because he'll still be there tomorrow. Well so is HHH. Christ, I watched Sting beat Flair for the title in person, what, 26 years ago? This is like getting mad about your favorite band from decades past having their greatest hits CD not win Grammy. Finishes haven't mattered in WWE for a long time now. Doubly so for Wrestlemania recently. Getting mad about these finishes is like is like seeing a Michael Bay movie and being mad that it wasn't as good as Citizen Kane or whatever. There is most certainly an "after" if they're going to try to sell a single PPV using Sting ever again - especially Sting-Taker. Never understood or cared for the attitude of "appreciate this shit for being the shit it is instead of wishing it were better." WWE can do better than Michael fucking Bay. They don't want to be better. You're in the minority. Why watch something and wish it was better? You're eating at McDonald's and are pissed it's not Ruth's Chris. Only wrestling fans and followers of bad sports teams put themselves through this. If a TV show sucks, just watch a better show. There's too much awesome wrestling out there to waste your time pining for the days when WWE was consistently good. Actually, those days never existed; you just got "smarter" as a fan and your expectations grew. I'll never understand these fans for whom WWE does nothing but they still watch. You're right; their week to week booking is garbage and I can't stand it. So I just watch NXT, Lucha Underground, ROH, PWG, etc and I'm happy. Is hindsight, I probably enjoyed Mania because it was the only WWE show I've watched in months aside from maybe 2 matches from the last PPV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Mann Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Brock is about to be able to buy what land in Saskatchewan he doesn't already own just off his SUPLEX CITY merch royalties. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick B. Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 That's a good way to look at it. I don't know if it was just lowered expectations or what, but I was good with Mania for the most part. There's enough enjoyable-to-me wrestling out there that it doesn't faze me as much when other stuff doesn't suit my tastes. I watch a ton of different wrestling products nowadays, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MORELOCK Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Is hindsight, I probably enjoyed Mania because it was the only WWE show I've watched in months aside from maybe 2 matches from the last PPV. That does explain a lot, actually - you're unaware of the build and why that made the finish suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Can't find the post, but wanted to say this on Brock: Brock never needed Taker's streak. He already was a legit monster and a beast, they just needed to push him that way. They could have booked him the same way without the streak. They just preferred that he lose to Cena in his first match back then get into a boring feud with HHH where he also took a loss. I also know we all hate saying Brock go away, but the more he is the around, the more they will blow it with him and the less special he will be. I honestly wish every wrestler came and went like he did as everyone would be fresh and more likeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It was a fun match. I couldn't get worked up over the finish because Sting doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It was a guest spot for a guy who is essentially done so who cares if he's "dead in the water" after? There is no "after." People argue that Wyatt should have won because he'll still be there tomorrow. Well so is HHH. Christ, I watched Sting beat Flair for the title in person, what, 26 years ago? This is like getting mad about your favorite band from decades past having their greatest hits CD not win Grammy. Finishes haven't mattered in WWE for a long time now. Doubly so for Wrestlemania recently. Getting mad about these finishes is like is like seeing a Michael Bay movie and being mad that it wasn't as good as Citizen Kane or whatever. There is most certainly an "after" if they're going to try to sell a single PPV using Sting ever again - especially Sting-Taker. Never understood or cared for the attitude of "appreciate this shit for being the shit it is instead of wishing it were better." WWE can do better than Michael fucking Bay. They don't want to be better. You're in the minority. Why watch something and wish it was better? You're eating at McDonald's and are pissed it's not Ruth's Chris. Only wrestling fans and followers of bad sports teams put themselves through this. If a TV show sucks, just watch a better show. There's too much awesome wrestling out there to waste your time pining for the days when WWE was consistently good. Actually, those days never existed; you just got "smarter" as a fan and your expectations grew. I'll never understand these fans for whom WWE does nothing but they still watch. You're right; their week to week booking is garbage and I can't stand it. So I just watch NXT, Lucha Underground, ROH, PWG, etc and I'm happy. Is hindsight, I probably enjoyed Mania because it was the only WWE show I've watched in months aside from maybe 2 matches from the last PPV. The reason is this: Like soap opera's and GoT, WWE and wrestling is not about having the focus on one character or storyline. There's 30+ guys on the roster. Even if you don't like the storylines for one or two guys or you don't them like as wrestlers, there's a TON of other people who you might like and might make you want to watch. Also, not every show or angle is going to be great or bad. WWE did good with some stuff at Mania, but they also did some bad too. If i didn't watch, I would have missed the Sting/HHH debacle but I also wouldn't have seen Rusev in a tank or Brock and Roman have a good match(until the finish). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Is hindsight, I probably enjoyed Mania because it was the only WWE show I've watched in months aside from maybe 2 matches from the last PPV. That does explain a lot, actually - you're unaware of the build and why that made the finish suck. Oh no, I keep tabs on it. I listen to the Metlzer podcasts and read a quick recap on Tuesdays, I just know it's not worth my time every week, even with fast-forwarding. I understand the buildup. Though maybe my lack of investment in it keeps me from caring too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I also want to clarify what standards I'd look for to rate a show as the best ever: - Multiple MOTYC's - No bad matches or at least multiple great matches to make up for the one bad one - Almost all of it making sense and having logical booking with it I didn't see that here, which is why I was bothered by it being called the best ever. I don't see anything wrong with calling it fun, good or maybe even great(though it is stretching it), just anything more is a hard bargain. Best ever is extremely hard to say when you think about WM 17, some of the classic All Japan Women's shows or the last few years of NJPW's dome. If this show was the best ever, then what becomes of those? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fresh Posted March 31, 2015 Author Share Posted March 31, 2015 Except Blackheart Johnny Vinyl I heard that's why that worthless fuck quit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Dude, Fresh already admitted he titled the thread while the show was still happening and was super excited. It was harmless hyperbole. Nobody's bothering to defend it being the best show ever because no one literally feels that way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Eh, Mania X-7 (not 17 but ECKS SEVEN because that is XTREME) had more stinkers than this show, fwiw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Even if you think it did, which it didn't, the best matches were still better than the best matches on this show. You are literally the only person who I've talked to about this in about 3 different boards who thinks this show was superior to WM17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Which show is better? Who cares? I just think X7 gets a lot of undue praise for a card that had Eddie/Test go 8 minutes for a worthless belt with a horrible botch where a dude got literally stuck in the ropes on the biggest show of the year, Raven/Show/Kane stumble around hardcore fuckery, RTC vs APA and Tazzzz, a Chyna singles bout and a battle royal where the winner had to be the guy who couldn't take a bump. Oh and was that the card that had HHH take a bump on an obvious crash pad? Neat. And holy shit, you want to talk bad booking as your metric for show quality? Mania X7's main event and post-match booking killed the company's hottest period in history. That's a million times worse than "the wrong guy won a world title which is essentially meaningless today." The better matches of X7 are better than the good matches on Wrestlemania (Play Button) but this year's show's "lows" (Sting should have won I guess?) are far ahead of the low points of X-7, so I'll be charitable and call it a push. Also LOL @ "I'm on 3 wrestling message boards and nobody agrees with you." That is fucking beautiful. You have made my day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 You know what, earlier I said X-7 was still the best WM. I actually don't think that can be the case because even I, as time has gone on, question the quality of that show more and more. I still think it's great, but maybe it's not the best WM. I do have a soft spot for 23, but that's because I attended that show and it was pretty damn awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts