Loss

This is a good time to ask if every single match that aired in the original ITV run aired on the "Movies & Men" run in the 2000s. Or were some left on the cutting room floor? In other words, are there original 70s-80s recordings out there that are worth finding and getting, or would they just be duplicates of the superior quality 2000s stuff that aired?

If I had to guess, the Club-Revival match would have gotten at least a few more minutes, but they had a time cut because something ran long.

Finish to Miz-Reigns was outstanding. GREAT match finish!

They seem to think that just throwing a bunch of nostalgic acts in a backstage segment is surreal enough to carry the segment on its own. So haphazard.

Miz's facial expressions toward Bryan there were MONEY.

That started a few months later when Vince banned their photographers so he could launch his own in-house magazine, but I suspect if he needed to be in their good graces in this type of scenario, he would have simply avoided that step. LOL at PWI billing the WWF title as a "regional championship" for two years in response.

Indeed they did. Clips would randomly pop up on TV from time to time, suggesting there's lots of archival footage.

I want them to do a Rarities show. Give us the stuff in your archives that has never been released in any form, WWE. And don't limit it to one company! House show matches, no whammies.

They've done so many insane angles with him that haven't closed the show and where the other wrestlers are still existing in their own universes doing their choreographed entrances unaware anyone else exists, and yes, that does have a diminishing effect.

I don't disagree with this. I was wrong on this front. 100%. 120% perhaps. I think it's easy to get caught up in this idea of fairness and a single standard in how talent is treated that isn't really practical or appropriate, one where Vince introduces and protects Ricochet every bit as much as he does Braun Strowman.

I won't criticize them for not pushing Rusev when they haven't not pushed Rusev yet, even if I don't expect it. But I would put his chances above someone like Daniel Bryan for a variety of reasons. He's a big guy and he's their own creation.

It wasn't so much that. It's that he didn't have to spend several months in NXT, and he came in with a huge push right away. He absolutely overachieved. But he obviously didn't get the opportunity because he was expected to be this awesome performer.

I was skeptical of Strowman when he debuted just because he does look like a WCW Power Plant reject and I still hate the whole thing in wrestling where people get initial chances in wrestling based on their size, even if they later prove it wasn't a mistake. But he has more than earned his spot since then. That's ancient history.

It does seem like there are a handful of wrestlers that are pretty open-minded and don't mind engaging criticism, but not many. Ricochet is the first that comes to mind.

Also, which "specific gossip site"?

Regarding the topic being discussed in spoiler tags, let's keep it in spoiler tags if we can. However, people are human and things could happen, so anyone who doesn't want to see what's being talked about might want to just avoid this thread until after the show.

I agree.

I thought Rollins almost got fired and wasn't really liked by management in FCW/NXT because he was so vocal about what he didn't like. Then he came in and was pushed as the clear #3 guy in The Shield. Things didn't really start looking up for him until he turned and broke up the group, did they? Or am I missing something?

A series of twists and turns that got them to Jericho-Omega vs Young Bucks might work.

I think this really comes from a place, as I've said before, of Dave not thinking it's appropriate to call out wrestlers for doing things that people in the most powerful positions have done without any consequences. Think Vince McMahon. I get that, but by going easy on wrestlers, the end result lets everyone off the hook. It lowers the bar instead of raising it. So therein lies a question -- what's a journalist to do if he doesn't want to hold labor to a tougher standard than management, but he can't nail management to the wall, even though he personally *knows* that the management allegations are true, because he can't get anyone to go on the record? I may be way off on this, but I really think that's where he's coming from.

What worked with Jericho won't work with just any WWE guy. I don't think they could do that with a lot of the guys that are legitimately bigger stars than Jericho. Ideally, the best picks are the ones who've proven they can (and want to) adapt -- dramatically if need be -- to new environments.

Dave said something not long ago that the **** matches that used to be the pinnacle just aren't good enough anymore. I can't tell you how much that bugs me as a wrestling fan. A show where the best match peaks at *** can still be an artistic success, and that can still be because of the in-ring. Anyone who attends a live show of 8 matches where 6 of them are in the *** range and leaves disappointed is probably a bit too spoiled. We don't appreciate matches that are simply good, or great but not quite all-timers, nearly enough.

If Enzo wasn't a blade job, I don't get the inconsistency with how they handle blood. They sure love pausing or ending Samoa Joe matches with hardaway blood.

I think this is probably true. Still trying to figure out where Angle fits into Wrestlemania. Will they do father vs son? Where are they ultimately going there? I'm also expecting Bray, New Day, Usos, Balor, The Bar, Rollins, Samoa Joe, Miz, and maybe the Bludgeon Brothers to have matches on the show, but I don't know what they'll do or if they can fit them all in without multi-mans.

Imagine if they'd ended the streak and Batista closed the show as champ, as was the original plan.