Loss

Reigns has also had some of his best performances against guys lower on the card where he wins but makes them look awesome in the process. Cesaro and more recently Jason Jordan come to mind.

They were quite over upon their arrival, but that fizzled out quickly. I think being separated from Styles hurt them, but they were probably already on the decline even when they were partnered with him.

Hogan and Flair are very good friends now. Flair reached out to Hogan after he went through his divorce and they have developed a close bond since then. I don't think they ever hated each other, even if it did get snippy at times and there was some gamesmanship from both of them. But that's wrestling, especially at that level and in that era.

Same now applies to Zero.

I won't deny his ability to draw. It's right there, and if Dave is just arguing that and nothing more, so be it. If he's arguing being known outside the bubble, I'm pretty sure John Cena fits that description, primarily based on my own anecdotal experiences, but also just based on Cena's greater visibility on projects outside of WWE.

My take is that if Hogan is speaking in front of a camera, he's working. I'm sure he thinks a lot more of himself and his own talent than he made it seem like he did in that interview, and he should!

True. I just think the number is higher for him than Conor or Ronda.

I don't think Dave understands the Big Bang Theory phenomenon, which applies to lots of things oddly enough, and I have an (unproven) theory that it's relevant in wrestling sometimes too. The idea that no one watches a show except 14 million people. The idea that something can do big business and have very little buzz or talk surrounding it.

There's no questioning who means bigger box office, but I'm fairly certain I don't know anyone in real life who could name Conor McGregor or Ronda Rousey if shown a picture. John Cena I don't have to guess because I've heard his name mentioned already because of the Today Show, Trainwreck, Total Divas, Kids Choice Awards, and American Grit.

Honestly? I think a lot of it comes down to the idea that it signaled Shawn's full-time comeback, which excited a lot of people. Also, this was -- in 2003 -- a dream match people didn't expect to ever see with really great buildup. It was **** before it even started.

I would think Brock's feuds with Braun Strowman, Samoa Joe, and AJ Styles still have gas in the tank, so they could always do a rematch.

Batista in 2005, which was a divisive quote at the time, but had a lot of people on his side: "I've also seen clips of their car wreck matches with AJ Styles doing his stunts. That's not wrestling. Wrestling is storytelling. But at the same time, I have friends in TNA and I wish them the best. Those type of matches definitely have their place, it's just not my thing. I also welcome the competition, which I think can only be good for the wrestling business."

The interesting thing, though, is that it seems like a lot of people panned Styles before he left TNA. That he was a spot-heavy wrestler or whatever. The universal love of AJ Styles is relatively new. He was seen as better than but in a similar light to someone like Christopher Daniels pre-New Japan.

I actually just came here to post that. I haven't watched the whole thing and probably won't for a while, but the stills I've seen from the post-match angle show some legit awesome facial expressions from HHH. When you have someone that smirks everyone away most of the time, I suppose that is a positive. It allows something like that to have some bite.

Not to defend the taste level of that angle, but just to point out that the HHH-Stephanie drugged and date raped thing was revealed to be the two of them scheming a week later.

Awesome, thanks. As much as I rag on WWE for plotholes, I do think they're above doing that type of angle and not coming up with a way to explain Bryan not being part of it ahead of time.

All I saw was the go-home segment and nothing else. Was there an explanation earlier in the show for why Daniel Bryan wasn't even around during the closing angle? I'm guessing there was, but just wondering.

Didn't the Jeff Hardy run he's referring to happen in 2003 anyway?

It is definitely impressive, especially in the modern climate. Sadly, the way Dave formulated his point takes away from that instead of pointing out how impressive it is.

On what planet do proportional increases matter when the companies are nowhere near the same size? If a company draws 5 people, then brings me in to headline and 10 people show up, am I a bigger difference maker than John Cena? It's a completely useless thing to even talk about unless you're comparing oranges to oranges.

That's like saying that someone who has a three-way doubles the house. It doesn't really mean anything.

It sounds like it's already blown over. It also sounds like it's possible it was genuine miscommunication considering that they are back on TV so quickly.