General Pro Wrestling News and Discussion Thread Part Deux!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...7-challengers-for-the-world-heavyweight-title

I talk a little about title unification in there as well.

 

Barring another invasion storyline or finally ending the brand split once and for all, a major title unification is one of the few "megaton" plots left, and probably the simplest to pull off. It's also something that can be fairly easily reversed if the need arises.

I'm thinking of it more as a short-term angle here. The stars are aligned in such a way that it could really work as a quick surprise pop if they need it, but with Rock/Punk on the horizon and Lesnar still having a few appearances left, it might not be sustainable for too long before getting overshadowed by angles already in the queue. But I can't think of a better way to nail down Punk as a Cena-level modern legend, which is what they need to be doing/what they should've had done by now.

 

Wade Barrett is dull as hell. I'm sorry, but the guy is just so wooden and bland on the microphone. The "Barrett Barrage" thing makes absolutely no sense and sounds ridiculous, coming from a guy who sounds about as intimidating as an English teacher. Obviously, Barrett is a tough guy (he really was a bare-knuckle boxer), but WWE is failing miserably trying to characterise him as such.

Barrett has started using a forearm smash as a finisher. This can't be very reassuring for Chris "Kassius Ohno" Hero, who utilises a rolling elbow as a finisher (which is said to KO - hence the gimmick). WWE has a tendency to see such things as being "too similar", which would surely render Ohno's gimmick null and void. After all, that would mean four men on the main roster who use an arm strike as a finisher (Ohno along with Big Show, Wade Barrett and Santino). Barrett's original finisher - "The Wasteland", was awful. I have absolutely no idea whether it was his idea to use it as a finisher, or whether WWE commanded him to do so. For those of you unfamiliar with the history of the move, it's commonly used in Lucha-Libre to position an opponent for a diving aerial move, such as a moonsault.

The best way to book Barrett, in my opinion, would be to pair him with an old style mouthpiece. Barrett seldom needs to cut promos, he just needs to get in the ring and demolish his opponents, whilst his cowardly and big-mouthed manager celebrates on the outside. Think Heyman/Lesnar in 2002, people wanted Heyman to get his ass kicked and despised Lesnar even more, when he got in the way of Heyman receiving a good old beating. Have Barrett go over, and I mean REALLY go over (in the way that Khali went over Taker at Judgement Day 2006) the likes of Randy Orton, Sheamus and other big names.

Barrett could really do with toning back on the hammy content, although that's not really his fault since WWE heavily scripts his promos (it's only the really top names that have a decent amount of control over what they say).

See this all stems back to the end of 2010. Ever since WWE royally fucked up the Nexus angle, the members of the original Nexus (with the exception of Daniel Bryan, since his association with the group was "quicker than a hiccup" - to borrow a phrase from JR) have had varying levels of success, but it's clear that none of them have risen to the top of the card.

Wade Barrett: Former IC champ, had a series of filler feuds and never got off the ground in the feud with Randy Orton which was meant to elevate him. Arm injury killed whatever momentum he had left, necessitating a re-packaging following his return earlier this month.

David Otunga: Following the cowardly, obnoxious heel tradition. Had a couple of tag title reigns and showed no personality during any of those. Association with John Laurinaitis has been beneficial, but it's still hard to take him seriously as a competitor, although he could have a very bright future as an authority figure/occasional wrestler, like Vince McMahon or Eric Bischoff.

Skip Sheffield: Long-term recovery following an injury, meant the end for the cowboy. Re-debuted under the moniker "Ryback" and has thus far remained undefeated. Has a good chance since he ticks all Vince McMahon's boxes and has gotten over, surprisingly (there has not been much love for musclehead bruisers in the last few years as Nathan Jones, Luther Reigns, Heidenreich and Mike Knox each learned).

Michael Tarver: Released before he really had a chance to make an impression.

Darren Young: Floundered in NXT oblivion for a year, made the transition to the main roster a couple of months back alongside Titus O'Neil in a pretty tedious (and somewhat exploitative) tag team. Has the chance to succeed, should WWE continue to care about the Prime Time Players.

Justin Gabriel: One of the most popular members of the original Nexus. Drew comparisons to the likes of Rob Van Dam, AJ Styles and Evan Bourne. Floundered on NXT following three tag team title reigns with Heath Slater.

Heath Slater: Currently the WWE's most prolific jobber. Scored a massive victory over Chris Jericho when NXT Season 1 was still in effect and was percieved to have a very bright future ahead of him. Stock declined following a wellness violation and his new gimmick as the "one man rock band" isn't exactly a career maker.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1344150-wwe-is-cm-punk-the-greatest-wwe-champ-of-all-time

This one's another commission. About CM Punk, who's popular atm.

 

^ Good article.

It's a very debatable subject really, when it comes to whether CM Punk can be called one of the "greatest WWE Champions" or not. I personally take the adage of "it's still early days". Sure, Punk's had a long and eventful reign, but he's only just risen to the top of the company in the past year. He may have flirted with the main event previously, but his status as a "top guy" has never been quote so concrete before.

I compare CM Punk's current level of greatness, to that of Triple H in early 2001. Triple H, at this point was firmly cemented as a top guy, had been WWE Champion on a couple of occasions, and had some choice main event feuds with other top names. It wasn't until 2009, following 13 world title reigns, that Triple H could easily be recognised as one of the all time greats. The 13 world titles played a part, but it was mainly his involvement in great matches, feuds and storylines from the time in which he ascended to the main event, to his last WWE Championship reign in 2009.

 

How many titles does a guy really need to be considered one of the greatest of all time? I remember the days when Booker T would constantly refer to himself as the five-time WCW champion, and that was impressive. But how long ago was that, really? Ten years? Has the business really changed so much in that time that double-digit title wins like Triple H's and John Cena's are necessary to attain that status?

That feels dangerous to me, honestly. There are a lot of guys, very talented guys, who aren't necessarily even going to be in the business long enough to break through to the top, let alone win the big title a dozen times. Seems like they're weakening the importance of individual title victories somewhat, which is why 300-day reigns like CM Punk's are nice to see.

I vaguely remember someone commenting to Booker T that being a five-time champion just means you've lost the belt four times...

 

I think that was the Rock during his program with Booker T during the invasion story line.

 

Ric Flair won and lost 16 world titles over a period of 20 or so years. OTOH, John Cena has won and lost 12 world titles over a period of 7 years.

The thing about having several world title reigns, could mean that a wrestler has been relevant on more occasions that somebody with less title reigns. It could also mean, in the case of Ric Flair, that a wrestler has managed to stay in the main event picture for an incredibly long time, whilst other wrestlers have come and gone.

 

I think it's worth noting here that Triple H has won and lost 13 world titles in a 10 year period.

 

I was actually going to use Trips as an example, but Cena clearly takes the crown of short-term accumulative title reigns. Cena will probably equal or even surpass Triple H in the next few months.

ETA: With the uncertainty regarding whether Cena will be medically cleared to wrestle at HIAC, I'm starting to worry that WWE will put Ryback in his place. Don't get me wrong, I think Ryback has the potential to become a top talent, but the "too much, too soon" idea, could very well apply to Ryback.

 

I just saw on Maffew's Botchamania fan page that Kelly Kelly has left/fired/quit from the WWE.

 

Cheers. I'm quite a bit late posting it, but here's last week's WWE vs. TNA: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1344715-wwe-vs-tna-whos-been-better-this-week-sept-16-22-2012

This week, I have to say, has been the first week where Raw, Impact and SmackDown have all been at least good. SmackDown's best in a long time in fact.

 

If I were in Tensai's shoes, I'd do everything possible to get out of my WWE contract and take the first ticket back to Japan. It's absolutely shameful how he has been treated since his return. He has now been demoted to jobbing to Santino Marella at house shows.

WWE is completely to blame for this. They gave him a shit gimmick, booked him to debut with minimal impact (the monster heel demolishing lower card workers, is outdated) and then gave up on his push when he didn't immediately get over in the way that was apparently expected.

Part of the reason that Tensai was so successful in Japan, was because he was booked to compete in incredibly physical matches, where he would dominate but not annihilate, so the babyface could still make a believable comeback and take the victory. Tensai filled that void that Vader vacated in Puroresu. He is a truly exceptional performer when booked effectively, with the intention of both wrestlers getting over and not just John Cena or Sheamus.

 

Didn't stop Kane in '97... but of course, like Kane, he'd have to "rip the door off its hinges." Don't see that happening.

 

Does anyone else actually want Big Show to beat Sheamus? I think I'd even want Orton to beat Sheamus. Despite all that, it's been a good week all round: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1353435-wwe-vs-tna-whos-been-better-this-week-sept-23-29-2012

 

I might be the only one here who wants to see another Randy Orton World Title run

 

I'd take that over Sheamus.

I can't believe that WWE has discussed elevating Sheamus to the "top guy" position, once John Cena calls it a day. Even though I may frequently criticise Cena, nobody can deny he has a natural aptitude for entertainment. There is absolutely no way that Sheamus, could even come close to cutting the kind of promos that Cena has cut in feuds with the likes of, The Rock, Edge and CM Punk.

Don't get me wrong, Sheamus is a considerably better wrestler than John Cena, especially when it comes to consistency with selling. But that's just not enough to justify being in the top spot.

 

Oh God, he really isn't. He's a low-selling, paceless, one-move-of-doom embarrassment to the form. Seems to exist just to remind that it could be worse than Cena.

 

^ He's also living proof that it's rarely what you know as a performer that gets you a push, it's who you know.

 

I'll agree with you that this is how it's essentially been in the last few months. However, Sheamus has shown that he's not completely paceless and devoid of talent.

Compared to Cena, Sheamus hasn't quite crapped on the art of wrestling, but he could go there if he continues to wrestle quickfire, unenthusiastic, and TV style matches.

John Cena hasn't made any effort to improve as an in-ring performer, since his promotion to the main event in 04/05. In the first few months of his first reign as WWE Champion, Cena received criticism due to his terrible punches. From 07-09, he was carried through choice encounters by Edge, RVD, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Batista, Chris Jericho and Randy Orton. It wasn't until 08/09, that we got to see how poor Cena really could be in the ring.

In the last couple of years, Cena has completely toned back on his moveset (which wasn't particularly that extensive, to begin with). His matches consist of the same routines, with very little deviation from the norm, or innovation. He relies on minimal offence, strung together with non-consistent selling (ie, if the heel spends the entire match working on a limb of a face, then the face should continue to sell the effects of that, even during their atypical babyface comeback and the conclusion of the match - Cena either doesn't or does with diminished enthusiasm, along with the "injuries" not impacting upon him executing certain moves) and superhuman comebacks (check out the finish of the Nexus Summerslam match in 2010 and the match against Miz at Over The Limit 2011).

When pushed, against a superior opponent such as CM Punk, Shawn Michaels or Edge, Cena will pull out unfamiliar holds (to him) such as the abdominal stretch, armbars, the crossface, armdrags, dropkicks and the odd aerial move. The trouble is, Cena is clearly out of his comfort zone when trying to wrestle like this, and is prone to make small, but noticeable cock ups. His dropkicks, in particular, are sloppily executed, due to his sheer muscle mass.

The biggest thing by far, is his inability to properly apply an STF. He has surely got to be aware of how sloppily he applies it, and the fact that there is such a noticeable gap between the opponents head and his "locked" arms, that there is no way in hell that he could be perceived as applying any kind of real pressure. Lou Thesz must be spinning in his grave!

Very true, although I doubt it's all down to Sheamus being gym buddies with Triple H. Vince has always shown fondness for Irish stuff (Vince's ancestary is Irish), particularly with Irish names (Hogan was McMahon's idea, attributed to his Irish affinity). I can imagine Vince feeling like he'd hit the jackpot when a tall, large framed, bona fide Irish man came looking for a job.