Boondocks Kernoodle

Haha. WWE doesn't settle "to move on" unless they know they aren't winning. If they thought the lawsuit was a joke, no way they would have paid up.

They were talking about the cruiserweight division for a year before any of the luchadors came in.

Uh. Wow........was she raised by Kevin or is this just something in this family's DNA? Not to sound sexist or anything, but there are a LOT of 21-year-old girls (guys too) who write far worse than that on their Myspace and Facebook pages. At least she isn't cApItAlIzInG eVeRy OtHeR lEtTeR.

Is it just me or are all of BilJim2's posts complaints or attempts at flaming?

They do. A lot of wrestlers don't listen. End of story.

Bob Morris from Rantsylvania?

Dave:

Uh...wow. Just a hunch, but I'm thinking she won't be back on Raw.

But if you're looking for an example, how about WCW putting Tom Zenk under a mask at Slamboree '93 and pretending it was Shane Douglas?

Uh, Loss, I don't think he meant they used a stand-in. He meant that whoever wrote the SD spoilers misidentified Nattie as Beth.

I'd love to attend a Sid press conference.

I guess that would also explain the Benoit matches.

And it's that kind of powerful insight that's kept the Torch alive for two decades!

If WWE wanted to send someone to rehab and they refused, they'd probably fire them.

Especially when they're changing 70 fucking dollars for the HD version. If you pay that, you're a sucker.

No Mercy '07 did 265,000 buys.

You wouldn't say that the excellent build of Batista/HHH in 2005 helped the buyrate? Because Batista wasn't exactly "there" as a main-eventer, and he didn't get there until the show itself, but 21 did a better buyrate than XX, headlined by Benoit/HHH/Michaels in the kind of three-way feud that doesn't get built up great because the focus on individual grudges gets lost in the shuffle. And they both did much better than XIX, which featured title programs of HHH vs Booker, who wasn't really perceived as a main event-level babyface, and Angle/Lesnar, both of whom were stars but not main-event-of-Wrestlemania stars, and then there was Austin/Rock for the millionth time, and Hogan/McMahon, which, well, I think the match was well-built but I don't know how well it drew, and if I suggest that it, a match between two old men, might have been a turnoff for the younger audience I'll be bombarded with "SORRY THEY DIDNT DO A SPACE FLYING TIGER DROP" posts so I'll stop now. But I still think the individual build helps with Wrestlemania, it's just that the show itself isn't going to bomb because it's Wrestlemania, and the fans have been conditioned to know that it's the one show of the year that can't be missed.

December 2 Dismember's failure had nothing to do with its dissimilarity to the old ECW, it failed because it had no stars on it. No Cena, no Batista, no Undertaker or HHH or HBK or Edge or Orton. But it had a main event featuring Hardcore Holly, CM Punk and Test. Edit: Loss's post wasn't there when I wrote that!

The "buzzwords are so tiresome" talking point is getting annoying. I wouldn't be surprised if Meltzer or Gabe told Ray to say that.

I don't know where you pulled that factoid from. Cole to the best of my knowledge worked in TV news before joining WWE.

From reading a bunch of RSPW posts from late '94 apparently the scheduled Austin appearance was due to some legal action over WCW using the "When Worlds Collide" name for the AAA pay-per-view when ECW had used the name for a show months earlier. Of course, that doesn't explain why the ECW When Worlds Collide show itself featured Arn Anderson and Bobby Eaton.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/p...isers_avoid.asp

Even if Wade isn't making a ton of money from it, Powell is one of his best friends, isn't he? Maybe he just wants to help out his friend while making some money on the side. This ain't rocket science.