General Wrestling Thread

[BimboBob]

<a class="postlink" href="http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/03/did-triple-h-imply-chynas-not-in-the-wwe-hall-of-fame-because-she-filmed-porn/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://thebiglead.com/2015/02/03/did-tr ... lmed-porn/</a>

And then just google...I don't know...Mickie James porn maybe?

Sure she did topless but the porn one was lookalike

Naaa...she did one scene, locker room, as a cheerleader. It's been around years and it's well known to be her.

 

[Damocles]

The Elimination Chamber worked as the last stop before WM, not convinced by any PPV that doesn't have the champion on the card.

I enjoyed the EC PPV, it was truly "No Way Out".

I feel the complete opposite.

The EC was needlessly crowbarred in and little would actually change between Rumble and WM.

Anything that drops a gimmick match focused PPV is good news to me. The whole idea is absolutely retarded

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

The Elimination Chamber worked as the last stop before WM, not convinced by any PPV that doesn't have the champion on the card.

I enjoyed the EC PPV, it was truly "No Way Out".

I feel the complete opposite.

The EC was needlessly crowbarred in and little would actually change between Rumble and WM.

Anything that drops a gimmick match focused PPV is good news to me. The whole idea is absolutely retarded

well as it is now, you get a Saturday Night Main Event card without the excitement of something different, like an Elimination Chamber, to at least build anticipation into the PPV, and a fair amount did change over the years of its use, especially if you didn't follow how Mania was going to be booked closely.

I agree on the whole about gimmick PPVs, especially MITB as that's the perfect opener to WM, but I liked the use of the EC as the last stop before Mania, it's better than not having the champ on the card and those tedious tag matches they used to have between WM main events on the old NWO PPV.

Plus, there's nothing like building up Lesnar even more by having start and win an EC, he should be defending his title. If gimmick PPVs annoy you, then you should be a stickler for 30 day title defense rules, which WWE conveniently ignored to suit Brock Lesnar, which I'm sorry, if you're going to build somebody up as "the reigning and defending, undisputed WWE World Heavyweight Champion", then he should be defending his title every PPV and annihilating everyone in tough matches. He's reigning, but not really defending it.

A champion should defend his title, it's one of the core principles of wrestling.

 

[Bluemoon115]

The Elimination Chamber worked as the last stop before WM, not convinced by any PPV that doesn't have the champion on the card.

I enjoyed the EC PPV, it was truly "No Way Out".

I feel the complete opposite.

The EC was needlessly crowbarred in and little would actually change between Rumble and WM.

Anything that drops a gimmick match focused PPV is good news to me. The whole idea is absolutely retarded

well as it is now, you get a Saturday Night Main Event card without the excitement of something different, like an Elimination Chamber, to at least build anticipation into the PPV, and a fair amount did change over the years of its use, especially if you didn't follow how Mania was going to be booked closely.

I agree on the whole about gimmick PPVs, especially MITB as that's the perfect opener to WM, but I liked the use of the EC as the last stop before Mania, it's better than not having the champ on the card and those tedious tag matches they used to have between WM main events on the old NWO PPV.

Plus, there's nothing like building up Lesnar even more by having start and win an EC, he should be defending his title. If gimmick PPVs annoy you, then you should be a stickler for 30 day title defense rules, which WWE conveniently ignored to suit Brock Lesnar, which I'm sorry, if you're going to build somebody up as "the reigning and defending, undisputed WWE World Heavyweight Champion", then he should be defending his title every PPV and annihilating everyone in tough matches. He's reigning, but not really defending it.

A champion should defend his title, it's one of the core principles of wrestling.

Since Daniel Bryan was stripped of the title ("You people deserve a fighting champion") Lesnar's defended it, what, twice?

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

I feel the complete opposite.

The EC was needlessly crowbarred in and little would actually change between Rumble and WM.

Anything that drops a gimmick match focused PPV is good news to me. The whole idea is absolutely retarded

well as it is now, you get a Saturday Night Main Event card without the excitement of something different, like an Elimination Chamber, to at least build anticipation into the PPV, and a fair amount did change over the years of its use, especially if you didn't follow how Mania was going to be booked closely.

I agree on the whole about gimmick PPVs, especially MITB as that's the perfect opener to WM, but I liked the use of the EC as the last stop before Mania, it's better than not having the champ on the card and those tedious tag matches they used to have between WM main events on the old NWO PPV.

Plus, there's nothing like building up Lesnar even more by having start and win an EC, he should be defending his title. If gimmick PPVs annoy you, then you should be a stickler for 30 day title defense rules, which WWE conveniently ignored to suit Brock Lesnar, which I'm sorry, if you're going to build somebody up as "the reigning and defending, undisputed WWE World Heavyweight Champion", then he should be defending his title every PPV and annihilating everyone in tough matches. He's reigning, but not really defending it.

A champion should defend his title, it's one of the core principles of wrestling.

Since Daniel Bryan was stripped of the title ("You people deserve a fighting champion") Lesnar's defended it, what, twice?

yhp, talk about a consistent storyline...

 

[pudge]

Orton never got a rematch.

Not a fan of PPVs like Hell in a Cell or Elimination Chamber. They aren't PPVs they are stipulations/special matches that lose their appeal and meaning.

Although I don't get the idea of Fast Lane either, unless they looked at the card and decided to be ironic.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Orton never got a rematch.

Not a fan of PPVs like Hell in a Cell or Elimination Chamber. They aren't PPVs they are stipulations/special matches that lose their appeal and meaning.

Although I don't get the idea of Fast Lane either, unless they looked at the card and decided to be ironic.

should be called "bypass".

they're in the habit of writing themselves out of the stipulations they previously set, like Reigns with his rumble win, think they got out of the Orton clause with a loss against Cena at some point in time.

I liked the EC concept under the "No Way Out" branding, but I agree on HIAC, TLC, MITB etc.

The Royal Rumble works as a branded match PPV as well, so it can occassionally work, just not in the majority of cases.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Kane just pinned Ziggler...

 

[Metal Biker]

Erm crowd....hello?

 

[pudge]

Gotta love that Dusty Finish

[video]https://vine.co/v/OQX0r6YTAgM[/video]