The Steve Austin Show

[NikoBaltimore]

I'm still not used to hearing interviews like this on the Network.  I could only imagine after HHH said he'd attempt to manipulate Stone Cold and such what the average viewer thought.  If they didn't follow internet news and they heard him say Daniel wanted to lose they'd maybe go "Wait, what?"  It went into a lot more than I expected.

 

HHH came across a LOT better than Vince did, that's for sure.  His passion for NXT and the people there really shone through.  It seemed he had issues with some of Vince's decisions, but said it in a way to not be obvious.  And while asking about Punk can beating a dead horse, it was good to finally get his thoughts.  He was definitely uncomfortable about it, but did as well as possible.  And it was nice hearing him want to go back to two hours.  I want to give this another listen because there was so much to cover.  But I felt pretty satisfied with his answers.

 

As for Chyna, no way in hell she'll ever go in the hall.  There's sound reasoning for that.  If you ask her she'd probably agree.

 

And I hope the NXT women feel glad to know HHH is championing them.  They don't have to wait for the callups to get longer womens matches on Raw/SD.  There's enough talent with Paige, Natalya, etc. to let them do that.  That way when the NXT women come in it won't appear to be a 180.

[Tromatagon]

there probably isn't a concrete standard for talent and non-WWE porn/fetish film careers, but i'll note a potential WWE signee (recently tried out in Orlando) who you could figure out on clues was in some POV wrestling films, some of which mysteriously aren't being sold by that provider any more.

Shhh....the less said about One Night in Steen, the better

Zoo enthusiast indeed

[JohnnyJ]

Solid interview. HHH came off really well. 

 

HHH does sound like he's in touch and his vision is in line with the audiences. You're going to have to expect some lip service.

 

I did think that Austin let him off the hook a few times. There's such obvious hypocrisy in the Reigns thing.  You can't preach that main event players need to have a long list of skills. Then use that as a reasoning why certain talents aren't prominently featured.  Then when you're questioned whether or not someone like Reigns is ready, you get a response like "you're never ready."

 

With the Chyna stuff, I'm sure the porn stuff didn't help her case, but c'mon now, I'm sure HHH really wants to open that pandora's box.  

[The Z]

I'm still not used to hearing interviews like this on the Network.  I could only imagine after HHH said he'd attempt to manipulate Stone Cold and such what the average viewer thought.  If they didn't follow internet news and they heard him say Daniel wanted to lose they'd maybe go "Wait, what?"  It went into a lot more than I expected.

 

HHH came across a LOT better than Vince did, that's for sure.  His passion for NXT and the people there really shone through.  It seemed he had issues with some of Vince's decisions, but said it in a way to not be obvious.  And while asking about Punk can beating a dead horse, it was good to finally get his thoughts.  He was definitely uncomfortable about it, but did as well as possible.  And it was nice hearing him want to go back to two hours.  I want to give this another listen because there was so much to cover.  But I felt pretty satisfied with his answers.

 

As for Chyna, no way in hell she'll ever go in the hall.  There's sound reasoning for that.  If you ask her she'd probably agree.

 

Definitely. A lot better. Now I can wait even less until Triple H takes over. Everything he said was perfectly logical and well thougt out. Nothing that made you completely furious like Vince's brass ring comment about Cesaro.

[JonnyLaw]

I did think that Austin let him off the hook a few times. There's such obvious hypocrisy in the Reigns thing.  You can't preach that main event players need to have a long list of skills. Then use that as a reasoning why certain talents aren't prominently featured.  Then when you're questioned whether or not someone like Reigns is ready, you get a response like "you're never ready."

 

The one thing that he said that took me out of it a little early was how no one gets over with every part of the crowd, yet it seems pretty apparent Daniel Bryan does.  Maybe they're looking at something we're not paying attention to, like merch sales or house show draws, quarter hours, or whatever, but watching Raw/Smackdown/PPVs, Daniel is that guy.  If you think no one gets over with everyone, why wouldn't you take full advantage of the one guy that does. 

 

This would probably be getting into too many sorts of details they would want to avoid even with the "kayfabe is dead" talk at the start, but I would love to hear why the things Cesaro is missing seem to be more important than the things Reigns is missing.  Maybe this is my bias clouding things, but I feel like if Cesaro was given the push Reigns got (same promos and all), either he would be more over than Reigns or they would see how the promos were bombing (like they were for Reigns) and decide to depush him.

[Matt D]

I think the gripes that people within our broader community have with Hunter are very different than those we have with Vince. It's almost like Hunter understood the elements we love about pro wrestling and appreciated them for the most part, with just a few major differences. It's just that he used that understanding for evil basically. 

[JonnyLaw]

In a slightly related note, what if Cena's promo was foreshadowing this summer's big angle.  How well do you think an NXT invasion would go over now?

[The Z]

 

I did think that Austin let him off the hook a few times. There's such obvious hypocrisy in the Reigns thing.  You can't preach that main event players need to have a long list of skills. Then use that as a reasoning why certain talents aren't prominently featured.  Then when you're questioned whether or not someone like Reigns is ready, you get a response like "you're never ready."

 

The one thing that he said that took me out of it a little early was how no one gets over with every part of the crowd, yet it seems pretty apparent Daniel Bryan does.  Maybe they're looking at something we're not paying attention to, like merch sales or house show draws, quarter hours, or whatever, but watching Raw/Smackdown/PPVs, Daniel is that guy.  If you think no one gets over with everyone, why wouldn't you take full advantage of the one guy that does. 

 

He's not over with Vince.

 

Noone talked about the Brock Lesnar talk so far. Unless he's completely bullshitting us (which is a possibility) it seems like the last word hasn't been spoken yet about Lesnar going back to UFC. Here's where Vince comes in handy, because he's probably still the best, when it comes to negotiating deals like that.

 

There was also this weird moment, where I thought they are going to adress Benoit, when they talked about people who are never going into the HoF.

[offspring515]

It was interesting but lacked the sizzle of the Vince interview. Maybe just because with Vince being older and the boss there's the feeling he might go off on a crazy tangent and say something really wild.  Hunter is too smart and grounded for that.  He knew exactly how to answer without really saying anything controversial.

 

I did find him putting an emphasis on Vince being the final decision maker, in cases where those decisions weren't the best, interesting.  Perhaps a deflection to avoid discussing his role in things, perhaps a subtle way of saying "I would do things differently".

[Petey]

I'm sure USA LOVED Triple H crapping all over three hours.

[Matt D]

It was interesting but lacked the sizzle of the Vince interview. Maybe just because with Vince being older and the boss there's the feeling he might go off on a crazy tangent and say something really wild.  Hunter is too smart and grounded for that.  He knew exactly how to answer without really saying anything controversial.

 

I did find him putting an emphasis on Vince being the final decision maker, in cases where those decisions weren't the best, interesting.  Perhaps a deflection to avoid discussing his role in things, perhaps a subtle way of saying "I would do things differently".

 

We also hear from Hunter a lot more. 

[JohnnyJ]

You're just not going to get Hunter going off on a tangent about what great fun it is throwing people into the pool. God, that was great.

[Phantom Lord]

I did find him putting an emphasis on Vince being the final decision maker, in cases where those decisions weren't the best, interesting.  Perhaps a deflection to avoid discussing his role in things, perhaps a subtle way of saying "I would do things differently".

 

I loved that part. He threw Vince right under the bus and pretty much said if you hate the way things are it's only one person to blame. Triple H has a future in real politics if he ever wanted to run for Congress or something.

[Brysynner]

I'm sure USA LOVED Triple H crapping all over three hours.

 

Hasn't Steph, Vince and Cena crapped all over three hours. I think it was Vince or Steph who said the reason they have three hours is USA pays them to and the deliver the ratings USA wants

[Technico Support]

 I would love to hear why the things Cesaro is missing seem to be more important than the things Reigns is missing.

 

 

Cesaro is strong but Reigns has more muscle mass so he looks strong.  That's more important to Vince.

 

Cesaro is bald, Reigns has flowing lustrous locks not seen since the heyday of Kevin Nash.

 

Cesaro has a funny accent that Republican Vince can't get on board with.

 

Cesaro is kind of weird looking.  Reigns looks like a Lorenzo Lamas and gives Vince a chub.

[sydneybrown]

 

I'm sure USA LOVED Triple H crapping all over three hours.

 

Hasn't Steph, Vince and Cena crapped all over three hours. I think it was Vince or Steph who said the reason they have three hours is USA pays them to and the deliver the ratings USA wants

 

 

Yes, I'm pretty sure USA is too busy counting all the extra revenue that third hour of RAW is bringing in to even care about what HHH thinks about it.

[jstout]

Didn't watch the inteview (read about it), but that won't stop me from commenting on it:

 

The "brass ring" is really not something a guy can grab, per se. Sure, if they give you an opportunity, you have to try, but the final vote on whether you're a success or not is by the fans.

 

With Reighs, they probably could've handled his push a little better, sure, but they didn't really make any huge, glaring, disastrous mistakes. They offered him the brass ring, the ball, and he did his best with it and the fans said "no sir, we didn't like it," and that's that. They voted against the WWE's candidate no matter how much the WWE tried. He lost. Moving on.

 

Daniel Bryan got the "yes" vote from the fans and is still popular. Obviously WWE is worried about his neck/elbow situation in the long term, but injuries can happen every day.

 

If Reigns hangs around and his push becomes more "organic," more subtle and less of a hand-picked "he's the next guy" thing, fans may start liking him for being plucky despite the obstacles. He could win the next election. Just not this one.

 

Bryan's popularity, though, seems really "inside baseball" to me. I doubt he's brung many new fans into the sport, just provided a good story for the diehard fans to latch on to. This doesn't mean he's a failure by any means, but the WWE needs someone who can make people who used to watch wrestling before it beame "boring" or whatever watch again. It ain't Bryan or Reigns.

[JohnnyJ]

The key word is opportunity.

 

Yes, you can be given every opportunity in the world, and if the fans don't get behind you you wont last very long.

 

However, there are a handful of guys who were given an opportunity, the fans got behind them, and were never given the opportunity to reach the next level.

 

You're perfectly entitled to think that Bryans popularity is too "inside baseball." And maybe it is. Who knows? That's the problem. Why aren't they trying to find out?  Put the rocket ship behind Bryan. Get him on boxes of fruity pebbles. See what happens. Maybe he takes off like crazy. If he fails, you move on to the next guy. 

[JohnnyJ]

double post

[JonnyLaw]

 

 I would love to hear why the things Cesaro is missing seem to be more important than the things Reigns is missing.

 

 

Cesaro is strong but Reigns has more muscle mass so he looks strong.  That's more important to Vince.

 

Cesaro is bald, Reigns has flowing lustrous locks not seen since the heyday of Kevin Nash.

 

Cesaro has a funny accent that Republican Vince can't get on board with.

 

Cesaro is kind of weird looking.  Reigns looks like a Lorenzo Lamas and gives Vince a chub.

 

 

On the first point, does Reigns have that much muscle mass?  His arms looked a little more defined yesterday, but I thought the "rumblings" were that the reason he still wears the vest is because his chest/abs aren't as cut as you would think.

 

On the last two points, someone show Vince some Jason Statham movies.  Then Cesaro will grab the brass ring.

[Technico Support]

Vince hasn't seen Crank but he lived it in the 80s.

[DreamBroken]

I thought the interview got good after the first 30 minutes or so when Chyna was brought up after all the long Rumble and NXT talk. After that it was more like the Vince interview in wanting to just see it continue. Always enjoyable.

[Cristobal]

With Reighs, they probably could've handled his push a little better, sure, but they didn't really make any huge, glaring, disastrous mistakes. They offered him the brass ring, the ball, and he did his best with it and the fans said "no sir, we didn't like it," and that's that. They voted against the WWE's candidate no matter how much the WWE tried. He lost. Moving on.

The thing is, there's a fair point to be made that they weren't shitting on Reigns himself so much as the WWE's insistence on putting him over they guy they really wanted in that spot.

Suppose they keep Bryan out until after the Rumble, and the Rumble basically goes down the way it does. Maybe it's not a hugely over finish at the end, (because once we're down to Show, Kane, Reigns and Rusev, we know perfectly well who's going over,) but hey, Rock's out here, and so far as the crowd knows, Bryan is still on the shelf. I don't think it gets the boos it got.

Bryan can come back, complain once again about the Authority holding him down, ("WWE's doctor refused to clear me, but MY doctor says I'm ready to compete", etc) and he slips into some feud, or maybe tries to get himself into the title picture with the Authority refusing to let him.

This has been beaten to death since the Rumble, but I'll say it again: WWE thought they could get it both ways, with Bryan's involvement selling subscriptions, then they stuck his elimination in the first third in the hopes that fans would stop caring by the end of the match. Reigns hasn't been great since the Shield break-up, but when it comes to the Rumble, it was Vince who fucked up, not Roman.

[Stoychers]

Some great little details in the Triple H interview that I enjoyed greatly and feel WWE would benefit greatly from, with Hunter given full booking resonsibility of the main roster.

His passion for NXT and working with the talent there. I thought the playbook analogy was noteworthy and understandable. It perhaps smacks in the face of letting guys be unique and creating a cookie cutter environment but equally, soundly measured for the product they create. When he noted the point about some guys who had left NXT, who had the "I know everything" mentality, I got Chris Hero in mind. Not to knock Hero, but I think that's where there's a disconnect sometimes with talent.

He would preferably cut the show to 2 hours. Also worth noting that they could still give us 3 hours, with 1 hour of alternative programming added to a 2 hour Raw surely? Tag on NXT, Total Divas, a pre-game show, or a post-game show to pad out the hours perhaps? I still think a Mayweather 24/7 type show would be a possibility of doing something different too. The headaches of 3 hours are clear and good to know he agrees.

He squirmed in his seat for the Chyna and Punk questions a tad but answered them fairly and as expected. I thought he was fair and his answer on Punk definitely lends itself to the theory that their personalities just never quite meshed? Sometimes that can happen. I think quizzing him on Del Rio would have been more intriguing.

[Cristobal]

Honestly, I think he was BSing in his Punk answer. I think he gave a politic answer that wouldn't piss off Punk's fans and would let the issue stay basically dead. That's probably the right thing to do, but if you got him off-camera and he answered candidly, I think he'd say Punk was an ungrateful dick who thought he was better than he was, constantly bitched and complained if things didn't go 100% his way, and just generally hard to work with, no matter how talented he was.