Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 280 of 367
  1. #241
    Feeling Minnesota Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,569
    Rumors have been circulating that the WWE wants a latino stable with Rey, Andrade, Sin Cara, and maybe the Lucha House Party.

  2. #242
    As it should be. Macho Mourn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    262
    I see it happening mid April after the roster shake-up.

    “How great the tremors will be when the judge comes."

  3. #243
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by Powder View Post
    Rumors have been circulating that the WWE wants a latino stable with Rey, Andrade, Sin Cara, and maybe the Lucha House Party.
    I've heard those rumors. I guess Rey is pushing this stable. I would LOVE it. Especially if it leads to Andrade turning on him next year and taking his mask!

  4. #244
    Feeling Minnesota Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,569
    I am not starting a thread for Eric Rowan, but to give credit where it's due, his new Claw Slam is a great variation of the Choke Slam. It implies that he drives the head into the mat. Nice touch.

  5. #245
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    790
    So... there’s even more force in the slam in the head possibly leading to more concussions?

  6. #246
    Feeling Minnesota Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,569
    No, not at all, it just looks like there is more of an impact. The recipient lands in the exact same manner as a traditional choke slam, it just looks better.

    I think, it is the first variation of a traditional choke slam that I have ever seen.


  7. #247
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,001
    Stokley Hathaway officially signed with WWE

  8. #248
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    So I can't be the only one who's hooked on watching Hulk Hogan matches from 1984-1985. I search the web to find the original audio. Something about Hulk Hogan coming out to Eye of the Tiger that still, to this day, gives me goosebumps and remind me why I love wrestling in this modern era.

  9. #249
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by LK3185 View Post
    Stokley Hathaway officially signed with WWE
    And Robbie E too.

  10. #250
    Feeling Minnesota Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,569
    Where has Sanity and Nikki Cross been?

  11. #251
    They have way too many people under contract. It will never happen but they really should consider offseasons for individual wrestlers. You can organize them into three groups, and one group will be off for 4 months of the year (meaning two-thirds of the roster will always be available).
    Last edited by comfortablynumb; 03-12-2019 at 04:35 PM.

  12. #252
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,001
    There's also wrestlers and gimmicks that Vince just doesn't like and doesn't commit to.. I mean Sanity on the main roster is clearly something he doesn't care for.. They've had one maybe minor push. Nikki Cross had one match with Becky and that's pretty much it.

    Look how EC3 is doing. Yeah, you can say its mania season, people get the short end but fact is, you shouldn't bring people up without a plan. It happens way too often.
    Last edited by LK3185; 03-12-2019 at 05:12 PM.

  13. #253
    The Brain
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    2,508
    Amazing about Stokely Hathaway. I really love the guy as a character and a promo but I would have thought his appeal was too quirky for WWE. He's very game when he does wrestle but he's really more of a manager, a damn good one but I would have never guessed WWE would pick him up. Good for him though, I hope he does really well.

    Quote Originally Posted by LWO4Life View Post
    So I can't be the only one who's hooked on watching Hulk Hogan matches from 1984-1985. I search the web to find the original audio. Something about Hulk Hogan coming out to Eye of the Tiger that still, to this day, gives me goosebumps and remind me why I love wrestling in this modern era.
    Fucking yes!! I always say this to people and nobody understands. There's just something special about it, it's unreal.

  14. #254
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by comfortablynumb View Post
    They have way too many people under contract. It will never happen but they really should consider offseasons for individual wrestlers. You can organize them into three groups, and one group will be off for 4 months of the year (meaning two-thirds of the roster will always be available).
    Trouble is, you then have one third of the roster missing Mania and with it the biggest payday of the year, and a third missing SummerSlam which is probably the second biggest.

    Maybe it could work if, for example, they gave two months off to half the roster post-Mania, and two months off to the other half post-SummerSlam? Not exactly a lot of time, but it works in terms of the general WWE scheduling.

  15. #255
    That's a good point. I definitely think it's worth exploring some type of "offseason" for the individuals.

  16. #256
    Feeling Minnesota Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,569
    There is another option.

    Cut dead weight. Cut guys like Ryder, Hawkins, No Way Jose, Bo Dallas, Curtis Axle, Fandango, Slater, Mahal, Lucha House Party, Rhyno, Singh Bros, Titus, Breeze, Ascension, Big Show, the Colons, Sanity, Shelton, Aiden English, Sin Cara, and eventually Truth and the Club.

    I know that Vince may be afraid of some of these guys jumping to AEW, but that might actually be a good thing in the long run. Competition leads to better products. Also many of those guys that I listed would flounder in AEW as well.

    And finally that would clear up a lot of room on both brands for fresher talent and more time on TV. So many of the guys I listed are no where near TV that it is not even worth keeping them.

    Less people means more opportunity for the others.
    Last edited by Powder; 03-13-2019 at 11:11 AM.

  17. #257
    Administrator Prime Time's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    3,188
    I tend to think the answer isn't in an off-season but in ending the overexposure of certain key talents. Don't have them wrestling every week - hey, we don't even have to see them every week. Give them some time off from the house show circuit every so often so they can go home for all but a few shows in a stretch. Let the time they aren't using go to other people, so you can actually see what they've got to offer.

    And yeah, maybe on an individual basis rather than wholesale, just let them go home for a while every now and then.

    "The worst moron is the one too stupid to realise they're a moron."

  18. #258
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    I do actually think wrestling should do a rotation of talent, like keep talent out for a month or so, give them time to rest and heal, and bring them back. The show must go on, but it doesn't always need the same talent every week.

    I do also agree that WWE needs to cut off a TON of fat. I'd honestly cut a bunch of talent, end the Brand Split, and have the focus of each show change. Raw can be a storyline driven show which drives the story, and Smackdown can be a "payoff show" that features more wrestling and I'd have titles defended on Smackdown more ofter. Like the Tag, Women's Tag, Cruiserweight, and mid-card title (please only one) can be a featured match on Smackdown, make that title feel important for the night and it's a pay off from a story. Have the shows interact.

    Of the talent Powder listed, I'd keep Show as long as he'd like, Sin Cara until I run a program with him and "Cien" Almas leading to a Mysterio program for Almas, and Shelton short term (I kind of want to see a return of the Minnesota Stretching Crew). I think English is transitioning to commentary, and even though he never met Eddie, I think as Eddie's son-in-law, he's got a job with WWE for as long as he wants. But yes, lots of fat needs to be cut from this roster.

  19. #259
    Feeling Minnesota Powder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,569
    I would rather see less talent on the roster and each given TV time. What we have now is a 15-25 minute opening segment that most 51% of the time also involves the people in the main event of the night. Then later on in the show we get a few minute recap of what we have already watched. Why? Why do we have to watch the opening segment, followed by a recap of the opening segment, and then later more of the same people in a match?

    Have less in the opening segment, then skip the recap, and allow that time to go to other talent.

    What amazes me is that during the Attitude Era, where the 15-25 minute opening segment got its origins, there were more segments on RAW (because Smackdown didn't exist yet) for more talent. There were so much more TV time dedicated to a lot of talent and feuds. Now even with a 3 hour show the WWE cannot figure out how to incorporate good and interesting plots for all of their talent. We get the same thing over and over gain with the same people.

    Now we have more talented people, with nothing to do, with no real meaning behind feuds. Remember Kaientai and their feud with Val Venus? Mark Henry as Sexual Chocolate? All of the "gang wars" with Los Boriquas, DOA, Nation, DX? The Hardcore Title 24/7 Scrambles? Etc.

    Say what you will about the Attitude Era and the content, but during that time, the WWE knew how to put more talent on TV and give them programs.

  20. #260
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Time View Post
    I tend to think the answer isn't in an off-season but in ending the overexposure of certain key talents. Don't have them wrestling every week - hey, we don't even have to see them every week. Give them some time off from the house show circuit every so often so they can go home for all but a few shows in a stretch. Let the time they aren't using go to other people, so you can actually see what they've got to offer.

    And yeah, maybe on an individual basis rather than wholesale, just let them go home for a while every now and then.
    To me, this is why NXT succeeds - it doesn't have time to get everyone on TV every week, and as a result it feels important when you see someone like Ciampa or Baszler on screen.

  21. #261
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by Powder View Post
    I would rather see less talent on the roster and each given TV time. What we have now is a 15-25 minute opening segment that most 51% of the time also involves the people in the main event of the night. Then later on in the show we get a few minute recap of what we have already watched. Why? Why do we have to watch the opening segment, followed by a recap of the opening segment, and then later more of the same people in a match?

    Have less in the opening segment, then skip the recap, and allow that time to go to other talent.

    What amazes me is that during the Attitude Era, where the 15-25 minute opening segment got its origins, there were more segments on RAW (because Smackdown didn't exist yet) for more talent. There were so much more TV time dedicated to a lot of talent and feuds. Now even with a 3 hour show the WWE cannot figure out how to incorporate good and interesting plots for all of their talent. We get the same thing over and over gain with the same people.

    Now we have more talented people, with nothing to do, with no real meaning behind feuds. Remember Kaientai and their feud with Val Venus? Mark Henry as Sexual Chocolate? All of the "gang wars" with Los Boriquas, DOA, Nation, DX? The Hardcore Title 24/7 Scrambles? Etc.

    Say what you will about the Attitude Era and the content, but during that time, the WWE knew how to put more talent on TV and give them programs.
    I agree with you on the TV show being put together in a better fashion. Honestly, if you have cruiserweights, I'd open every show with a cruiserweight match. I HATE opening segments. It's old and tired, and you don't have McMahon and Austin anymore. Open with some cruiserweights, maybe a short talking segment after the match, set up the main event. Like there needs to be some change. No matches longer than 2 segments, and matches that are 2 segments are only with main eventers. Like so much needs to be cleaned up on formating the show.

  22. #262
    Administrator Prime Time's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    3,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Oliver View Post
    To me, this is why NXT succeeds - it doesn't have time to get everyone on TV every week, and as a result it feels important when you see someone like Ciampa or Baszler on screen.
    Got it in one. Absolutely what I'm driving at. I think even people who've been watching a long time now have forgotten just how important it felt whenever you got to see someone like, say, Undertaker wrestle back before '97 or whenever.


    Totally there for doing away with the opening segments. Frankly all non-wrestling segments need an overhaul at this point, they're far more the problem than what happens in-ring. There's a whole lot of things that you could do that'd just be tweaking them but would immediately make the whole thing more appealing to a broader group of people.

    "The worst moron is the one too stupid to realise they're a moron."

  23. #263
    The Brain
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    2,508
    I am also all for tossing the boring opening promo trope completely out the window. Open with a hot match then do a quick backstage promo to set up whatever it is you need to do.

    I do agree it's more fun when they try to come up with something for even the minor characters to do, and with so many writers you'd think it would be doable. Even if some of those Attitude examples were pretty poor, they were at least memorable (sometimes for the wrong reasons, though).

  24. #264
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,001
    They have this opening promo structure because its easy to do and set everything important up. It can be done in less time and i wish they would tweak things but I'm actually not against the concept.. Especially the recap segs, as much as it doesn't matter to me who DVRs... recap so that viewers that weren't watching at the start or just flicking on the channel randomly know what's going on. Its not for the diehard viewer watching every week.

    I want more things happening backstage, i want more things happening in general. Long matches are fine but if you're doing a 3 seg match and it doesn't have a decisive, meaningful winner, then its time filler that should have been broken up.

  25. #265
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by LK3185 View Post
    They have this opening promo structure because its easy to do and set everything important up. It can be done in less time and i wish they would tweak things but I'm actually not against the concept.. Especially the recap segs, as much as it doesn't matter to me who DVRs... recap so that viewers that weren't watching at the start or just flicking on the channel randomly know what's going on. Its not for the diehard viewer watching every week.

    I want more things happening backstage, i want more things happening in general. Long matches are fine but if you're doing a 3 seg match and it doesn't have a decisive, meaningful winner, then its time filler that should have been broken up.
    Yeah, I'd cut matches to two segments, three segment matches just really are hard to keep my attention through commercials. They just really need to tighten up the show so much. The show just drags.

  26. #266
    Administrator Prime Time's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    3,188
    TV time limits (and draws) could help in more ways than one, as I think could matches ending more by surprise. As it is, in WWE and elsewhere, we're generally too attuned to the rhythms of matches and you know you can actually let your attention drift off through ads.

    If it could end at any time - including, radical thought, during the ads - you'd find that your attention would be much more focused.

    "The worst moron is the one too stupid to realise they're a moron."

  27. #267
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Time View Post
    TV time limits (and draws) could help in more ways than one, as I think could matches ending more by surprise. As it is, in WWE and elsewhere, we're generally too attuned to the rhythms of matches and you know you can actually let your attention drift off through ads.

    If it could end at any time - including, radical thought, during the ads - you'd find that your attention would be much more focused.
    Yes, the unexpectedness of an actual sport instead of the rhythm of a scripted TV show.

  28. #268
    Super Moderator Team Farrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    393
    See, this basic structure was born in the 90s and the more I listen to Jim Cornette, Eric Bischoff and Bruce Prichard's insights on wrestling the more I really understand why they do what they do.

    You want to set up what people need to stay tuned for as quickly as possible.

    I can't put over enough Cornette's recent reviews of Raw and all of the formatting issues with the show.

    I've gone back over the last few months on the Network and started watching Nitro from the very beginning. I can really appreciate how well formatted early Nitros were. They kicked off with their pyro display and sweeping crowd shots to give a bit of excitement off the hop and a sense that this is a big event, then cut right to the commentators (with their names on the screen). This allowed them to cue up the show and what to expect, as well as allowing you to put names and faces to the voices that were going to be overtop everything for 2-3 hours.

    I love that format and wish WWE would adopt it. Maybe kick things off with a recap video from last week or the PPV, then cut right to the announcers. That can save you from needing a 20-minute opening monologue because in the span of two minutes or less the announce team can cue up what to expect and why you'd want to stay tuned. A cold open in-ring speech can work if you're coming off of a hot angle last week or on the Pay Per View. If Roman Reigns is left laying in a puddle of his own blood last week, kicking off this week with a recap and cold open directly with his music hitting and him coming out for a promo works, but then you have to cut to the booth afterward to get those nameplates on the screen and cue up the rest of your night.

    I also love Bischoff putting over how you don't want to change the channel every time they want to commercial. It was a hard sales pitch, for sure, but having him talk about how there's nothing going on on any other channel that's going to be better than what you'll see when you come back is great to me. I understand the idea of not wanting to put the bug in anyone's brain that they might want to switch, but if your product is good enough that reminder should make them stick around.

    I'm not a huge fan of multi-segment matches. I feel like it gives too much away that people should be expected to pay for on pay per view. However, I can't watch 1998 or 1999 Raw these days. There's so many short, completely pointless matches and so many backstage segments that I find myself getting annoyed with how fast everything moves.

    I encourage anyone to give Cornette's Experience podcast from three or so week ago a listen. It's his first review of Raw, and he goes through all of this and how impossible WWE programming is to watch right now if you're a new viewer.

    To us, recaps and nameplates and hand holding can be annoying as hell but that's what you need if you want to be friendly to new viewers.

  29. #269
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,001
    My issue with multi seg matches isn't the fact it gives away too much. That's a given, its the fact that often its just to set up some type of run in or distraction and that to me is a waste of time that could have been spent doing anything else. WWE shows lately do show the announce booth but its not always after the first seg, and they also will tell you what things are happening as the first seg ends, a graphic will come up... So I don't think that's a big issue.

    I feel like the big issues is the show feeling like it drags because they're filling time instead of doing proper segs.. You don't need to do rapid fire 2 min segs either.. just space it properly.

  30. #270
    Senior Member LWO4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    548
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    See, this basic structure was born in the 90s and the more I listen to Jim Cornette, Eric Bischoff and Bruce Prichard's insights on wrestling the more I really understand why they do what they do.

    You want to set up what people need to stay tuned for as quickly as possible.

    I can't put over enough Cornette's recent reviews of Raw and all of the formatting issues with the show.

    I've gone back over the last few months on the Network and started watching Nitro from the very beginning. I can really appreciate how well formatted early Nitros were. They kicked off with their pyro display and sweeping crowd shots to give a bit of excitement off the hop and a sense that this is a big event, then cut right to the commentators (with their names on the screen). This allowed them to cue up the show and what to expect, as well as allowing you to put names and faces to the voices that were going to be overtop everything for 2-3 hours.

    I love that format and wish WWE would adopt it. Maybe kick things off with a recap video from last week or the PPV, then cut right to the announcers. That can save you from needing a 20-minute opening monologue because in the span of two minutes or less the announce team can cue up what to expect and why you'd want to stay tuned. A cold open in-ring speech can work if you're coming off of a hot angle last week or on the Pay Per View. If Roman Reigns is left laying in a puddle of his own blood last week, kicking off this week with a recap and cold open directly with his music hitting and him coming out for a promo works, but then you have to cut to the booth afterward to get those nameplates on the screen and cue up the rest of your night.

    I also love Bischoff putting over how you don't want to change the channel every time they want to commercial. It was a hard sales pitch, for sure, but having him talk about how there's nothing going on on any other channel that's going to be better than what you'll see when you come back is great to me. I understand the idea of not wanting to put the bug in anyone's brain that they might want to switch, but if your product is good enough that reminder should make them stick around.

    I'm not a huge fan of multi-segment matches. I feel like it gives too much away that people should be expected to pay for on pay per view. However, I can't watch 1998 or 1999 Raw these days. There's so many short, completely pointless matches and so many backstage segments that I find myself getting annoyed with how fast everything moves.

    I encourage anyone to give Cornette's Experience podcast from three or so week ago a listen. It's his first review of Raw, and he goes through all of this and how impossible WWE programming is to watch right now if you're a new viewer.

    To us, recaps and nameplates and hand holding can be annoying as hell but that's what you need if you want to be friendly to new viewers.
    I just listened to that. I love the fact he points out errors, and the person who taught him that those were errors was Vince McMahon himself. I think Vince is so in the weeds with the current product, he can't step back and see the true problem.

  31. #271
    Super Moderator Team Farrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by LK3185 View Post
    My issue with multi seg matches isn't the fact it gives away too much. That's a given, its the fact that often its just to set up some type of run in or distraction and that to me is a waste of time that could have been spent doing anything else. WWE shows lately do show the announce booth but its not always after the first seg, and they also will tell you what things are happening as the first seg ends, a graphic will come up... So I don't think that's a big issue.

    I feel like the big issues is the show feeling like it drags because they're filling time instead of doing proper segs.. You don't need to do rapid fire 2 min segs either.. just space it properly.
    But a match doesn't have to have a proper finish to be worth something. I don't think that a multi-segment match ending in a run-in is inherently a waste of time, as long as it furthers a story. That's ultimately the goal of the weekly TV shows. If you're looking for matches with proper finishes, that's the pay per view.

    Using this week's Raw as an example of these production issues, we didn't cut to the announcers until 16 and a half minutes in. I didn't rewatch the opening segment in its entirety, but I would bet that none of the three announcers mentioned one another by name. Even when they did cut back, it was during a match and they didn't pop up a nameplate. It was 26 minutes before we were properly introduced to them. This isn't the biggest problem with the show, but if The Shield and Paul Heyman and Finn Balor all got nameplates, it's because they're important. If they announcers are being cut to and don't, it subconsciously tells the audience, especially a new viewer, that they're not important. If they're not important, why should I care at all about what they're telling me?

    A brand new fan, or someone tuning in that stopped watching 10 years ago but happens to be home on a random Monday night, isn't going to know The Shield's music based on its first two notes. So, to them that musical cue means nothing.

    To re-book this week's show, I'd have opened with that same crowd shot that they did and Michael Cole plugging how many days away from WrestleMania we are but having him say his name. Then I'd cut to the desk with that shot of the three standing up facing away from the ring because it looks really good, have the nameplate pop up quickly with Renee put over Batista and Triple H face-to-face (now that guy who stopped watching 10 years ago hears two names he recognizes immediately); Cole plugging an announcement from Kurt Angle; and Graves, who looks young and cool and like he knows what's cool, can plug that Ricochet and Aleister Black will blow your mind with what they're going to do tonight (similar to when Bischoff would fawn over the action that the Cruiserweights were going to give). Then I'd hit The Shield's music and ideally, because it would be a cool shot, try and zoom from over the shoulders of the announcers to where The Shield are going to be standing when they first come out. Then go from there because I think everything else flowed okay, though I'd try to fit Heyman's plug of Benjamin in.

    That would take us from The Shield's music hitting eight seconds into the show to The Shield's music hitting maybe 20-25 seconds into the show, but would give a new or lapsed viewer, which you have to be hoping for on the Road to WrestleMania, the identities of these disembodied voices as well as what to look forward to, all within 30 seconds.

    Quote Originally Posted by LWO4Life View Post
    I just listened to that. I love the fact he points out errors, and the person who taught him that those were errors was Vince McMahon himself. I think Vince is so in the weeds with the current product, he can't step back and see the true problem.
    I think you're probably right. I think he micro manages so much, that he doesn't think of these things. I really hope Prichard being back can take a look at some of this stuff and point it out.

  32. #272
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    But a match doesn't have to have a proper finish to be worth something. I don't think that a multi-segment match ending in a run-in is inherently a waste of time, as long as it furthers a story. That's ultimately the goal of the weekly TV shows. If you're looking for matches with proper finishes, that's the pay per view.
    Just to touch on this, you do a 20 plus minute match on TV, if it ends with interference or a run in, that gets heat naturally but they do this so often that the problem becomes its harder to invest in the all the hard work the wrestlers are doing. You do that in half the time, the audience doesn't feel cheated and you still further the story.

    Not only that, but if you do it that way, you can use the rest of that time for other talents to shine. Seems like a no brainer to me.

  33. #273
    Administrator Prime Time's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    3,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Team Farrell View Post
    I've gone back over the last few months on the Network and started watching Nitro from the very beginning. I can really appreciate how well formatted early Nitros were. They kicked off with their pyro display and sweeping crowd shots to give a bit of excitement off the hop and a sense that this is a big event, then cut right to the commentators (with their names on the screen). This allowed them to cue up the show and what to expect, as well as allowing you to put names and faces to the voices that were going to be overtop everything for 2-3 hours.

    I love that format and wish WWE would adopt it.
    I don't have a problem with recaps because I kinda think they are inevitable if you're going to have three hour show (or even 2 hours probably). It's not just realistic to think otherwise. But I'm totally there for this bit. Along with overproducing the announcers a bit less, bringing these points back in are right near the top of what I'd want to see in a revamped WWE.

    I absolutely believe that the importance of the 'I'm X, and coming up in the show....' or the '... and now we go live to X, who is ready to get some comments from y' are thoroughly underappreciated nowadays.

    "The worst moron is the one too stupid to realise they're a moron."

  34. #274
    Super Moderator Team Farrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Time View Post
    I absolutely believe that the importance of the 'I'm X, and coming up in the show....' or the '... and now we go live to X, who is ready to get some comments from y' are thoroughly underappreciated nowadays.
    Oh them not introducing the backstage interviewers and instead just throwing to a random person backstage (often Charly, who's often dressed in black and therefor resembles a mic stand with cleavage) with no context on who they are or who they're about to talk to.

    Renee got over huge. Part of that was that she is really fucking charming and fun, but a big part is that people personally invested in her. When they threw to the back, they called her by name. We knew her name, and with it were able to invest a little more in her personality.

    I recognize Charly at this point, but there's a random blond that runs around that I couldn't name if you paid me.

    If you're a new viewer, it's impossible to know who these people are. And once again, it goes to credibility. We're humans. If we don't know someone, and don't know their name, we're naturally less trusting of what they have to say.

  35. #275
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    372
    I take it no one saw John Oliver going after WWE tonight?


  36. #276
    Senior Member Gooner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    739
    Yeah I just watched it. It's pretty brutal, if perhaps skewed a little too much towards burying Vince (for example, they didn't mention how WWE provides rehab for all ex-wrestlers and a lot of the clips were more than 10, 15 years ago).

    But yeah, some pretty valid points there, especially with the contract situation. And the Vince interview where he slaps the reporters papers is cringe-worthy.


    I've tried taking up column writing, check it out here!

    Words from a Gooner #2: 7 Treatments for Wrestlemania Fever

  37. #277
    He did mention WWE provided rehab for past wrestlers, very quickly, but it was mentioned.

    I watch John Oliver every week so it was surprising to hear "And tonight's main topic is ... the WWE."

    I do agree it was essentially the same old - but still very valid - talking points. It seemed like something that could have run 10 years ago though minus a few more-recent events. Still not a good look heading into Wrestlemania though.

  38. #278
    Senior Member Gooner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    739
    It must have been quick cos I certainly didn't hear it mentioned


    I've tried taking up column writing, check it out here!

    Words from a Gooner #2: 7 Treatments for Wrestlemania Fever

  39. #279
    Very quickly. 16:01 mark.


  40. #280
    Senior Member Gooner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    739
    Can't see the video (must be US only), but I take your word for it!


    I've tried taking up column writing, check it out here!

    Words from a Gooner #2: 7 Treatments for Wrestlemania Fever

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •