Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Iron Moose

Members
  • Posts

    222
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Iron Moose

  1. rewatching: (I didn't care much for Sasha's attire here -- very busy. ) Sasha's sitting on the top turnbuckle, Bayley runs up with a forearm Bayley climbs to the top rope, (at this point Sasha has an arm around Bayley's leg) jumps as if to deliver a top-rope Frankensteiner, but: Bayley seems to overjump, misses getting her legs around Sasha's head, and at the same time Sasha: shoves or tosses Bayley a bit with her left arm, while she (Sasha) holds on to the rope with her right arm. I like Tracy's interpretation.
  2. The NO MEANS NO chant, directed at Blake and Murphy when they were sleazing at Carmella, is up there.
  3. You guys. What if Bayley loses?
  4. I could see it maybe main-eventing the December NXT Takeover, which it won't, because... reasons.
  5. Orton not waiting until the bell had rung on the cash-in was so, so dumb.
  6. The bigger problem there would have been that the fact Becky got the promotion and Bayley didn't would have telegraphed the answer there just as much- best case, it's clear Bayley's getting the win to keep the NXT Women's Title in NXT. Worst case, you have to really make the change and have endgame be "Dana Brooke or Eva Marie become the mega-heel by swooping in and taking the title shot, and thus the win, from under Bayley's nose", and give a firm chase that can either lead to Bayley winning the big one or prep the other to be the star for a Bayley promotion. I must respectfully disagree with Gregg as well. I think there's a lot of risk to both Bayley and Becky from setting up the story he's put forth: if we have Bayley and Becky coming at Sasha from two directions, Bayley's title shot more explicitly comes at the expense of the rematch for Becky. It hurts Bayley to stop us from Lynch-Banks II; it's also bad for Becky to get her rematch by having to get past Bayley to do it. I think the en passant is a better way to do it- lower stakes.
  7. A promo by Sasha that demeans NXT now that she's moved on up could also turn the crowd. Also, if she spends a few moments throwing shade on Bruce Springsteen, or if she brings out Naomi and Tamina as backup.
  8. I would be more interested in watching this if there would be a divas match. (My Summerslam fantasy booking is Sasha/Nikki as non-title champion / champion, but have Sasha lose at Takeover so she has storyline justification to win extra-vicious and set up a title match later on. )
  9. ...I think it might have been Rollins' flying knee from the turnbuckle.
  10. I'm interested to see how awkward the voiceovers get in next episode's main event.
  11. Disappointed that the NXT women were collectively dropped into the show by Steph Ex Machina. Would really have preferred a slower build aligning Naomi and Tamina with Fox and the Bellas before Sasha et al came up to wreck the place. (I get that Sasha's made enemies of the other NXT women, but I was hoping that NXT would serve as a sufficient bond to overcome that. )
  12. Two quick points: 1) I really liked Dana's sell of the Backstabber. Something about how she flipped and landed flat made it look much more devastating than usual. 2) Sasha recently did a twitter Q&A where she said her dream opponent was Sami Zayn. I'm pretty sure that would be an easy MOTDC?
  13. I was unhappy about how Cena was suddenly spry enough after that epic to AA Owens.
  14. Kidman/Mysterio v World's Greatest Tag Team was also great fun.
  15. Depending on her politics, you might want to avoid Banks/Charlotte. A lady-friend of mine watched it and just after the video package, asked if Charlotte's thing was "being creepy and aryan"... and then was not happy when she ended up retaining.
  16. I'd be reluctant to debut someone against Owens in the main, but I agree that the list of plausible candidates within NXT is limited to Balor. (Maybe with an assist from Riley?) I think that if they adopt a narrative of someone external stepping up for Sami, and are willing to pull someone from the main roster back down for it, Neville, Cesaro and Cena are the best candidates. They could also make it non-title and Owens could let himself be pinned early on since he can spin it as only caring about the title/wanting to stay 100% for the next real challenger. I also just find this situation fascinating. Do they end with something other than Owens? Do they record new voiceovers and backstage bits and recut the episodes they've already taped? Is there precedent for a live show that's two weeks out where two of the big players are out with two weeks of pre-tape to go?
  17. I'm a little sad that Alexa has debuted more of an edge -- my hopes for a World's Sparkliest Tag Team with Bayley are dashed. I also feel like she should have saved the Sparkle Splash for a harder-fought match with Sasha... oh well.
  18. I tied it at 45-45 with a vote for Neville. I deferred to a good friend of mine who doesn't follow any kind of backstage stuff, and her intuitions seemed to follow the emerging narrative of the thread, being "a few great matches outweighing a very high floor of competence. " Cesaro's booking didn't do him many favors this year, and Neville's completely plausible turns from bland flying technician to dickish competitor to furious avenging eclipsed Cesaro's meandering.
  19. What he's saying would/will be fine if/when someone actually steps up to call him out on it. That's historically the issue with HHH's promos, though; he says what a heel is "supposed" to say, and presents himself as the strongest, smartest, toughest, most iconic star in the history of the WWE...and then the face responds with, "all of those things are absolutely true, but I'm going to beat you anyway!" That's the biggest thing - HHH isn't a fucking icon. He'd like to think he is, but he isn't. And nobody has sat in their home fantasy booking a HHH-Sting feud. I'm sure the match will be good, but I could have lived with not seeing this matchup just fine. I'll probably regret asking this question, but.... if Triple H isn't an icon, who does fit your definition? Just curious. I know a lot of people hate Triple H - I'm not a huge fan either - but I generally find the way people minimize his contribution to the past 15-20 years kinda odd. I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that he carried the company while other stars on his level (Austin, Rock) went on to greener pastures, but a case can be made for that. It's not an crazy idea. The thing about HHH for me is a sense of unearned invincibility. Even when he loses, he ends up on top long-term; I'd go so far as to say his character cannot be defeated long-term thanks to his use of bureaucracy as a cudgel. It's something that diminishes the notion of him as an icon, in that others who would claim that status would perform at a higher level, thus seeming to earn it. Rock shows up, the crowd loses their shit and there's a palpable joie-de-vivre. Austin's glass shatters, and there's a simultaneous sense of righteousness and chaos in the air. 'taker was an unstoppable force that people bought into. Motorhead starts up, and it's deflating: Bryan beats HHH, then Orton and Batista, then Kane, then is out for a while and the closest anyone comes to knocking the Authority (HHH by proxy) down is Ziggler-via-McFiat, and a month or two later, even with Sting, they're back. The Shield takes down Evolution two shows in a row, and Seth breaks it up and joins the Authority. HHH is iconic in that he's been around the top of the card long enough to have a claim to it, but I don't really think longevity and card placement are sufficient- there has to be broader appeal. I think that HHH's narrative largely being unchallenged in the Sting build is severely hurting the match, and that the reason his narrative goes unchallenged is that his character has adopted a management position. Even if we feel it likely HHH would lose the match, it does not seem that this would cause the character to display a sense of loss, or development from the loss.
  20. I only started really caring about wrestling in 2001, so I don't have a lot of Sting backstory. Is there something stopping him from saying that he opposes "new world orders" on principle, and that thwarting the Authority is an extension of that? The whole WWE/WCW icons thing is really cutting the legs out from under him as some kind of avenging figure.
  21. It took me a few minutes to figure out, but that sounds eerily like (starting from about :30 or so. )
×
×
  • Create New...