When they sent that big bastard out there to pour his heart out I lost faith in creative's ability to take advantage of the monster appeal Ryback had.

The way he was booked going against Punk was perfect. It's a shame they can't figure out how they did that the first time through.

I missed the promo. I liked the idea of Ryback "waking up" and realizing the hero he could be to the people. Not so sure about the guy taking book recommendations from Oprah.

Too much blather in this thread right now...

https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hp...03164602_n.jpg

Beyond you in intelligence. Just because he's a good guy doesn't make him a good wrestler.

John Cena sucks.

More Emma-tainment please.

Who is the girl on the left?

Dear fucking lord.

Looks like WWE Hall of Famer Lita

Oh shit, it is too. The hair threw me.

I didn't spend much time looking at Lita's face evidently...

So who is at the level of The Rock that is being passed over? This will be good.

Enlighten me on his point

He said Owens got screwed by going 1-2 against Cena

How did Austin do going 0-2 vs Bret?

You know the difference? Austin > Owens. Not Vince is a terrible booker.

Typical of today's society, look to blame someone other than the dude in the mirror.

Considering I was posting here 10 ago, I guess you guys were 0 back then. Or you like childish programming. Speaks badly of us all I guess.

Guys get paid more for being on the road.

Maybe there were some guys against it, but thats just speculation. Going by the TV that was presented, he was positioned to be the next one.

I like him too, a lot. But I still see holes in his game. On top of that, how did you feel about HHH when he was rolling around in slop. But you know what happened? He fought his way to the top. Talent wins out. We'll see what Cesaro really has.

Its like some people here want every guy with potential to get the Goldberg push.

This is some sad attempt at debating.

Where did I ever say Vince was right 100% of the time?

Im saying I think he understands booking better than anyone else on the planet. Nobody is close. So if you give me the option of trusting Vince's opinion on someone or not, I will always side with him. Doesn't mean I expect to be right 100% of the time.

And yet you continue to watch and always will. What a crap show.

What benefit did Owens get from beating Cena? Check out his push vs that of Neville. That should help clarify things for ya. If it doesn't, there's little to no hope.

I like Wyatt too, but outside his entrance he's not there, his promos are death to the live audience WHAT?

Again, so of Wyatt, Cesaro, Ziggler, Ambrose, or Rusev who should be headlining right now? Would business be better with them on top instead of say Rollins? Got news for you, Rollins is better than all those guys right now. Thats why he is where he is, and they are where they are.

You're doing the sad typical IWC thing of thinking Vince doesnt want guys to become The Rock or Austin. You posting on a message board who stands to gain nothing from WWE success sees things clearer than the guy who's entire like is WWE? You see the absurdity of that thinking?

I crown you King of the Too Cool for School Crowd

I think you're illiterate.

Where's the part where I said he was screwed? Austin isn't even remotely comparable. He lost to a roll up in a way that still protected him. He then wasn't subsequently fed to Bret in convincingly losing efforts. He lost a match that again protected him in a loss and ultimately made him due to not giving up and the match being called.

Owens, just like Rusev, lost consecutive matches in a manner that didn't protect them or elevate them, and were shortly bumped down the card into meaningless feuds that have only further diminished any momentum they gained after initially defeating Cena in their first encounter.

Imagine had Austin lost to Bret the first time, then again the following month, them getss bumped down the card and is no longer a featured player, instead feuding for the not so coveted European title.

How you could even remotely think Austin is comparable to any of the current young guys who've been stunted by awful booking decisions is beyond me.

Literally said in that post above that I didn't watch. I have tried a few times but usually don't bother. Thought that was clear from the post. I think it is a crap show and I try to watch it from time to time, as a fan of wrestling, but its been a long time since I made it through a whole Raw.

The hulu replay helps a ton.

So did Owens lose matches 2 and 3 in 5 minute squashes? Because that would actually make your point. Oh whats that? That didnt happen... he kicked out of like 200 AA's? Hmmm.

In the first Bret-Austin fight Austin lost to a rollup, and it was done in a manner to make it look like Austin made a mistake. The 2nd fight was Bret beat the shit out of Austin, beat him literally to a pulp, the saving grace was they told the story that Austin was tough and refused to give up. But if you were to look at both matches, Austin was positioned to be closer to beating Bret the first time. If they did that today with Cena and Owens, the people like you would post "berrrrrrried" right after the fight.

Owens went from Cena to headlining the biggest NXT event in history to a match with Cesaro. Who should he have be put with after Cena?

And the difference between Austin and all these guys is that Austin proved he could hang with Bret. None of the guys today can hang with Cena. You know what is the most real promo that has been cut in the last few years? Its the one where Cena talks about wanting to pass the torch, but he's not just going to hand it over, someone needs to take it from him. In the promo he talks about how guys get a certain level of popularity, and they claim to be the next one. Then the match happens and all you hear is "Lets Go Cena, Cena Sucks". Cena might as well be wrestling a broom, because he's the one drawing the babyface AND the heel heat, and all these guys prove to be interchangeable. As a result, they go into the heap of guys who are interchangeable. Austin on the other hand was booked no differently than a guy like Kevin Owens, but he proved he could hang with the guy who was seen as the very best. Not only did he hang, but he started taking fans from him (hence the Mania double turn). Guys in this era have been given that chance, but they hit fly balls to the track when they are up to the plate. When someone hits a homerun, then they will be booked as star.

So then you're opinion on any of this is rather irrelevant because by your own admission, you are watching very little. Its like reading 10 pages of a book and saying the storyline wasnt compelling enough.

I read the whole book and it isn't.

Just FYI, I was a casual fan in 96 and I loved the Rock from day one (but I was like 10). Never got tired of him (loved the Nation over DX, even) and never turned on him. Loved Heel Rock.

Another swing and a miss. He was booked different in that he continued to be placed into relevant feuds that kept progressing his character. Owens for bumped down to Cesaro and again bumped into a baseless match work Ryback. When did Austin get moved down the card to feud with guys who've had zero direction? Oh, he didn't. That's right.

You're fucking daft if you think anyone outside of Cena has been given a legitimate opportunity. The guys he's wrestling are interchangeable because that's the way they are presented. How do you expect the talent move forward if they're suddenly dropped into feuds about losing their girlfriends or against a guy who's most recent success was being a tag team champion? Is that how they booked Austin into becoming a star?

Cena is also given the OPPORTUNITY to cut a heartfelt promo. Outside of Punk's pipe bomb when was the last time anyone was given ten minutes to just let loose and show some real personality instead of the same old tired pre written promo they've been doling out for years? Can you name one?

And please explain how going from beating the top face of the company, to the lose to him twice in consecutive matches, to headlining the developmental league show, to going on to face two guys who've done jack shit in the last number of years is in beneficial? Can you elaborate how that opportunity is the same as Austin and how that is being given a chance to "hit a homerun"? Because I'm baffled as to how that's supposed to help.

Any nobody can hang with Cena? Had you noticed nobody raved about his matches until the US title open started and he suddenly started working matches against guys like Owens, Cesaro, Zayne, etc , guys who were already known as great in ring talent? I don't recall anybody going ape shit watching Rusev and Cena go at it. Owens could clearly "hang" with Cena. His current status as with most of the roster has more to do with how the talent is presented that the talent themselves.

Nobody has or had a problem with Owens losing. It was the consecutiv loses and immediate bump back into obscurity that people bitch about. That didn't happen to Austin, regardless of whatever bull shit parallels you're going to try to pull out of your ass, they're not the same.

Dirtsheets sponsored by #NewDayBooty:
https://i.imgflip.com/r6xfa.gif

ROH was also down by around 40,000 viewers for the week.

Part of a recent interview Sting had with Rolling Stones. http://www.rollingstone.com/sports/f...llins-20150916

Besides Amanda, the other runner up from last season ZZ also rumored to have signed a NXT/WWE deal recently.

Recent rant by Vampiro on his Facebook page regarding the growing frustrations with Lucha Underground's management not being clear to fans and wrestlers about the status of a second season. A lot of wrestlers have either been postponing indie dates because they don't want to be left out of a new season or gave up waiting and don't care if their indie dates clash with the new season.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">talking to my tailor about some. . .changes to my wardrobe
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/future?src=hash">#future</a> 🎃 <a href="http://t.co/0ARzY0rr7q">pic.twitter.com/0ARzY0rr7q</a></p>&mdash; Stardust (@StardustWWE) <a href="https://twitter.com/StardustWWE/status/644610034006028288">September 17, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It could be a combination of that and the fact that WWE booking was still on-point enough to follow up with a push and keep momentum going instead of following the Bret feud by putting Austin in a boring, lifeless, nothing feud with a directionless midcarder. But since the booking was good back then, that must mean it will always be good til the end of time and all problems are 100% the wrestlers fault.

So it's my fault WWE can't build stars anymore and business is down? Shit.

Also, I don't know what the hell this is supposed to mean. lol

The idea that CyNick used Austin as a losing to Bret as an attempted parallel to Owens and Cena says all anyone should need to know.

Anyone else watch Friends of the People. Its a sketch comedy show on TruTv and have wrestlers on every once in a while. Tatanka and D'Lo Brown were on tonight.

Please spin off whatever is going on with The CyNick into another thread.

Can we get a separate "argue with cynick" thread?

Not sure if anyone follows cageside seats but in their rumor post tonight they stated there's a chance Sting could win the belt Sunday only to drop it back at HITC.

Thoughts?

Meh. :|

The Rock should name his kid Chip.

Really excited at the prospect of Sting winning the title. No idea why as it would be ridiculous.

Nostalgia. When I read that as a possibility that included a short run. But in reality it wouldn't be beneficial to anyone other than Sting.

Sting in WWE now just pisses me off at the thought of what he could have done in WWE if he hadn't hung around with TNA or even went there in the first place.

Could have had Sting vs HBK

Fuck you Steve Borden

Would be the biggest thread in the history of this site

Not a fan.

There is more value in keeping Rollins as champ. He should either lose it via MITB (taste of his own medicine) or to a conquering babyface (Lesnar, Cena, Reigns).

Probably, but I wasn't a big WCW guy. It world benefit no one but Sting and me. I would love to see him win, even though Rollins should totally retain.

Find it a bit odd mostly because of the idea of giving the WWE's biggest prize to a WCW guy this soon and after all the jabs the WWE has done for years to WCW's legacy.

If Sting is winning the belt, it has to be the main event of NoC. Wouldn't make sense for the US belt to main event like rumors have been teasing for a while if that was the case.

Sting winning is the right choice. Rollins is great but has kind of run his course as champ. Seems to me they are just wasting time getting to the Rollins / HHH feud. Have Sting, and Cena win and that would piss off HHH and not allow him to have rematches. Sting would then face Sheamus at HIAC. Don't know about Sheamus as champ though, think I'd rather have Sting have a longer reign. V

Rollins has been awesome as champion. His run has been totally fresh, his matches are amazing, and he sounds more confident on the mic than he ever has. I'm happy for him to retain the title all the way to Wrestlemania, and then lose it in a Shield Triple Threat match. I don't even care who he loses it to.

Seth Rollins is the man. He should definitely win both matches at Night of Champions.

Also, Dana Brooke would get it. Just saying.

And that Devon chick that does backstage interviews in NXT...fucking sucks. What is she doing?

<font color=goldenrod>WhatCulture had a brilliant YouTube series called "10 Things WWE Went You to Forget About *insert wrestler name here*" where they'd pick out a wrestler and just talk about stuff that WWE swept under the rug. Once in a while there would be something serious (ie: Austin's included his domestic violence charges) but for the most part it was light-hearted and non-malicious.

WWE finally went ahead and filed a copyright claim against them, so all the videos had to be removed. Whaddya know, I guess WWE really didn't want you to remember those things.</font>

Think I'd rather see Sting as champion for a month than Rollins keep it. Since TNA doesn't exist in the "WWE universe", he's at least got some credibility as a huge star who would bring the prestige of the title up for a bit by holding it.

Honestly, I think I'd rather see Brock holding it while making his rare appearances still than have it on Seth Rollins as he jobs left and right and makes it look like a glorified title for losers. It should always be on someone ridiculously over until they're able to get someone else to that level. This "throw your world championship on a guy and hope to maybe get them over to that level later" thing is just bad for business all around and makes the title itself not draw for shit.

Rollins should wipe the mat with Sting

I'd agree with you if not for the fact that WWE has pretty much proven they're incapable of ever getting someone even remotely close to that level without throwing the title on them. It's not right, but honestly the title really is just a prop these days. It should be the prize for guys that got to the level of mega star, but it's not, and throwing it on Sting or any other legend really isn't going to change that unfortunately. To build the title back up to being meaningful would probably take years at this point.

When it was on Lesnar it was definitely gaining credibility again. Like I said, I'd rather it be on a part-time spectacle at this point rather than it being what it is now. Putting it on far lesser guys with no credibility and crossing their fingers is definitely counter-productive.

Plus, if there's ever a time to use the title to just give a guy like Sting a reign it would be now when he can actually bring up the prestige as opposed to taking it from someone like Cena or Lesnar.

Nothing will ever make the WWE title prestigious to any of you ever again because you're not 10-year-old kids any more. Same as the Intercontinental and the United States titles. You should all stop banging on about it's prestige and "elevating guys" because at the end of the day, wrestling will never be the same again as it was for us all in our youths.

Lol, ridiculous argument. I knew what I was watching was no compelling so I stopped. I have checked in again to see if it has changed because I very badly want it too, but it hasn't.

Terrible analogy and rather bizarre tbh.

CyNick is apparently a big fan of missing the point, telling other people what they want and failing to recognise the flaws in his own work. It's not really surprising he has this stance on current WWE.

Problem is look what happened the second the belt was off Lesnar. Sure it seemed like a big deal when he had it, but no one could have ever lived up to the hype when they beat him for it unless they themselves were a mega star like he is.

Of course this all comes back to the fact that WWE doesn't know how to book properly anymore. If they were to keep the belt on a guy like Lesnar for a couple years maybe, or bring in a couple of big names to feud with him over those few years they could then have everyone else fighting for the secondary titles. All of this would however require WWE to actually put effort into those smaller feuds and actually write compelling storylines.

Undertaker/Sting with the WWE Title on the line at Mania in Dallas is intriguing to me....would have been 10 times better 10 years ago, but beggars cannot be choosers....

That's a cop-out. As an adult I enjoy the hell out of many cartoons, shows, etc that are predominantly focused toward children. Shows like Steven Universe, and movies like 99% of the stuff Pixar makes all manage to be just as entertaining to millions of adults as they are to children. WWE's product is bad, and their titles mean nothing because they don't put any real effort into it.

Children can be entertained with crap, just like the majority of adults can. But just because you can survive on crap doesn't mean you should have to. WWE is perfectly capable of making quality entertainment that all ages could enjoy. They just choose not to, period.

I'm not talking about the quality of the product, I'm talking about what internet fans consider the "prestige" of the titles.

I guarantee, every single title in the WWE from this day forward will always be spoken about in the context of comparing it to it's "former glories", or how it can "regain it's prestige" or some other nonsense. There will never, ever be a day when internet fans will be happy and say how prestigious any specific title is.

Not anymore.

Also, in regards to comparing it to a kids show, you need to consider how your mindset has changed since your youth.

When you were ten, you'd watch a cartoon and you knew it was a cartoon, nothing more. You'd watch wrestling and it was super cool seeing these other-the-top characters beating each other up, winning championships etc.

Now, when you watch a cartoon, you know it's a kids cartoon and you enjoy it for what it is. When you watch wrestling, as a grown-up, with a better idea of the inner-workings of the business and with the ins-and-outs of wrestling so exposed today, you don't watch it with the same mindset.

Didn't recall the phrase "R.K.O., FROM OUT OF NOWHERE!" going so far back, but was watching DVD of Backlash '08 with Orton (c) v. Triple H v. Cena v. JBL in an elimination fatal-4-way for the WWE Championship...J.R. made the call of it...seems crazy that's been (probably on-and-off) used for at least around 7 1/2 years.

I see Sting winning due to botched interference by HHH leading to HHH declaring himself number 1 contender and Rollins going after him for the spot. Meanwhile Sting can deal with Sheamus trying to cashing his briefcase with Cena sticking his nose in or he can be involved in the HHH/Rollins feud by egging Rollins on. In any event I see Stings role in the Title pretty much the same as one of Jerichos championship early runs, booked ok but not as the main event.

First time i remember "RKO outta nowhere" was against Benoit at the finish of Summer Slam 04.

Maybe the average internet fan would/does feel that way, but I certainly don't. There have been times when I felt like the title and the matches for it actually meant a lot, even as an adult. It all just came down to the story behind it and whether I thought said story was good. Oh, and the players involved of course.

For example I really felt the title held a lot of prestige throughout all of Lesnar's run with it. I also felt the same way when CM Punk had it because you had guys like the Rock even clamoring to beat him for it. It all just came down to the fact that the belt really felt like something major stars wanted. I think this deal with Sting is pretty great for that too. This is a guy that was the franchise player of WCW yet even he is interested in winning the belt. I'm not necessarily happy with him winning it (not angry either), but him wanting to fight for it at all is huge IMO since for years legends would just pop in and not even bother with the belt. Everyone should be ecstatic to get a shot at the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, even legends that are supposedly "above it". By making anyone above the title you sorta cheapen it.

Personally I still watch wrestling with a very similar midset to that I had as a kid. Sure, my taste has changed as far as who I think is cooler, but that's happened with cartoons too. However, I still scream at my tv while watching RAW. I still make condescending and snarky remarks to their points such as if HHH were to talk about being the man and not need others to Rollins I'd probably say something along the lines of "Because you totally didn't need Flair, Orton, and Bats did ya, Hunter?".

I don't know, maybe I'm just weird, but for me I've always still had the ability to disconnect from reality while watching tv. I know it's not real and all that jazz, but for those three hours RAW is on it doesn't matter. Meh, guess it all has to do with being a child at heart. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I always figured that if grown men and women could still enjoy wrestling they must be similarly young at heart. Maybe I'm wrong. :-\

I was gonna mention Lesnar's reign as making the title bring a "big fight feel" with it. There are examples where the title's prestige is being raised even if they end up going in reverse. So the idea that titles can't have prestige because we're adults is kinda BS. I was not a 10 year old kid and was well aware wrestling was "fake" during the attitude era and that didn't stop title matches from being incredibly meaningful within the story because they meant something. Same deal when Lesnar had it but to a lesser degree because they'd spent so long diminishing it that one man, no matter how credible, could only do so much.

Dirtsheets sponsored by Evil Emma:
https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hp...51456242_n.jpg

Oof. NUCLEAR HEAT for Paige coming.

Does Carlito even want to come back?

I hope so. Fucking loved Carlito.

Awwwww @ awkward teenage Emma getting a pic with Trish. Love Emma. Want to take her out for a vegimite sandwhich.

There is not a chance in hell of Sting walking out of Night of Champions with the WWE Title.

I can realistically see Cena beating Rollins for the US title, then Rollins beating Sting. Even if Sting does win the title, then Sheamus will cash in Money in the Bank afterwards (which would be a disastrous decision for business) but either way, Sting will not be the WWE champion the next night on Raw.

<font color=goldenrod>I would be all for a Carlito return if he was interested in a comeback.</font>

He's older than Vince when Vince won the title. How is that bringing prestige to the title? WWE has been very smart with their long term booking, I would be shocked if they did all this build up of Rollins only to have him lose to a guy that is old and past his prime. Especially if the plan would be just to put the belt back on Rollins. If they really wanted to give Sting a moment, have Seth get royally screwed. Cena runs in, and causes the pinfall, and then the next night on RAW Sheamus cashes in MITB on Sting. But even that is convoluted.

Another option if they want to get another month out of Sting, is have Rollins retain via DQ and then that justifies the HIAC rematch. In fact, if they did it where Rollins-Sting goes on before Rollins-Cena (say they flip a coin backstage to determine the order of the matches), then you can have Rollins retain via DQ, Cena beats Rollins for the US title with Sting's help. That sets up HIAC where you have Rollins go over Sting clean. That also sets up Survivor Series nicely where you can have a Rollins-Cena rematch for the WWE title.

Thats such BS.

The title is VERY strong right now.

Cena had it, and got battered by Lesnar. Lesnar was THE strongest WWE champion since probably Hogan in the 80s, maybe even going back to the Bruno days (although I wasnt around for those so cant really comment). And Rollins won the title in a way a villain should, and has retained it like a villain should.

Playing hot potato with the belt championship, especially putting it on a senior citizen, only serves to devalue it. But hey, I know, we're supposed to bash the WWE booking on the internet. So my bad.

Wow...

You mean my stance that WWE does a great job because they are far and away the market leader in their industry and continue to grow and revolutionize the industry. Man, am I a dope!

You're right though, we should let Jim Cornette chime in on the flaws of the WWE business model.

Okay, you're right. Its more like you pick up a book that you enjoyed for a while, then stopped enjoying, then skipped a whole bunch of pages, read 5 pages and went "I dont like it" and put it back down.

Its fine to do that, just doesnt mean you can have an opinion on current storylines because you are not following close enough. My guess is you are lying and you watch every week like the rest of us, and dont admit it. Its cool though, I still like you.

Their business continues to grow, so obviously they are appealing to the right people. You're opinion is valid, its just kinda irrelevant.

Do you watch Breaking Bad with an idea of the inner politics between the actors and the writers? Why would you possibly care what goes on behind closed doors?

If you stayed off the dirt sheets you would enjoy the product much more. Trust me.

You seem to have a problem with heel champions. Makes sense since you are #1 wwf fan. That was a babyface territory that you grew up with. So you're rejecting the idea of a long heel run because its foreign.

IMO you gotta let the angle play out. WWE has been good about slowing their long term angles down. You can see an arch develop with the characters, and they actually build to something. May not always be exactly what you personally want to see, but its better than changing direction every 6 weeks.

Depending where they are ultimately going with Rollins, I think you have to wait for the cash in until they turn from Rollins back dooring his way to wins, to Rollins winning clean and setting the stage for the eventual babyface turn. They can start that with Sting. It can be this month or next, but at some point Rollins should beat Sting clean. Then depending where they go with Cena, I would want to see Rollins beat him clean as well. After that, then you can have Sheamus cash in. HHH can blame Rollins for losing, and start to side with Sheamus as the new "face of the WWE" (which would be funny because it will play off the you look stupid chants), and that leads to the rift between Rollins and HHH. Payoff at Mania with Rollins vs HHH.

Gentlemen, to evil!

Is there any reason to believe that Sting is sticking around after Night of Champions?

As in that actually being called by commentary?

First RKO he ever did was on Kane, I believe, during the infamous Kane/Triple H "World Heavyweight Championship vs. Mask" match on RAW c. Summer '03, causing HHH to pin Kane and thus forcing Kane to unmask.

Yes, as in JR actually making the call.

And lol at "He's older than Vince than when Vince wonthe title". Clearly Vince and Sting are comparable.

Someone clearly didn't read both of my posts properly. :roll:

So 2k have announced that Sasha, Charlotte, Becky and Bayley WILL NOT be included in 2k16, nor will they be included as DLC. No real mention of why not, other than a hint at external figures being involved.

I have nothing to base this on but I blame Cena

Lol, I can promise you I don't, maybe the occasional look or segment but most weeks it is less than an hour and about half the weeks it is nothing at all. It's because of consistent behaviour over several years, so have to reject your book theory once again.

Don't miss the specials of PPVs usually though because the match quality is always excellent. I don't hate WWE, nor am I being critical because its cool. I, personally, just don't think Raw is very enjoyable because I personally don't find the repetitive nature or stories very interesting.

Love the PPVs though, and I still like you too lol

No not really. I don't know the details of his deal. Just saying if he is they could easily get another match out of him.