DMJ

50-70? I'm guessing most every staff member or white person over 35, including HHH and Steph, don't know what "skeet" is. I was in college at the time that Lil' Jon song was ubiquitous and I needed it explained to me then. Michael P.S Hayes may claim to the "blacker than Mark Henry" but I'm guessing dude couldn't tell the difference between Lil' Jon and Lil' Bow Wow.

On Taker/Reigns - Part of me feels like Vince is kind of showing his genius, or, at the very least, has stumbled into a really interesting dynamic. So, Taker is the ultimate babyface to many, of course, but the next 30 days are going to be filled with plenty of people talking about how Reigns should go over him, how Taker is a 1-match-a-year guy and that it is his time to put over someone other than Brock before he retires. And so, even though they might despise Reigns, these "smarts" who love to say things like "Booking 101 dictates..." will actually be rooting for Reigns because if they cheer Taker, they'd have to admit to themselves that they actually do want part-timers to win matches over "the future" and pretend there's a difference between Taker beating Reigns and Goldberg squashing Owens and The Rock beating CM Punk and Lesnar beating Ambrose etc. etc... Plus, as others have said, even if they don't fully turn Reigns, the more he veers in that direction, the more he'll be perceived as potentially turning and the less people will openly despise him. As Taker threw down the gauntlet, Reigns can spear him every week for the next 4 weeks, throw him threw a table, and dominate him and though it will get booed, there will also be a sense that these are heel actions - which means some people will like it because, if the feud were to be so one-sided, it would telegraph a Taker victory at Mania, which would, again, make some people even more rabid about wanting to see Taker lose! TLDR? If Reigns wins, he becomes de facto heel (which is what he is now much of the time) but gains some cred because beating Taker is a big deal. If Taker wins, Reigns gets some begrudging "smart" cred as a guy "held down" by part-timers. Win or lose, Reigns is the talk of RAW and has inched even closer to that "Most Controversial Star" territory that was Cena's tag for years. On Goldberg - Speaking of part-timers, I expect the Goldberg disapproval to only grow over the next 30 days. Goldberg grabbed headlines in November, but its March and he had a cameo role in is own championship win on Sunday. Lesnar's star has faded a bit too. This is beginning to sound a lot like what derailed their match a decade ago - and, at least at that time, Lesnar was still regarded as still being a capable worker when he was motivated. Nowadays? Lesnar's coming off a pretty disappointing 2016 where he put on stinkers against Ambrose and Orton. Essentially you got the WWE hoping Goldberg is able to maintain his current popularity level for the next month by probably hitting spears and jackhammers, but with each day, I think it will trickle down the way it often does with returning stars that don't really offer anything but nostalgia (see The Rock or Batista). The WrestleMania crowd is hard to read/hear due to the size of the stadiums, but that next night on RAW should be interesting when Goldberg and/or Lesnar show up...

The spot was obviously screwed up, but It didn't take me out of the entire contest plus, to me, I can look at it and say that Charlotte was actively getting out of position because she was wisely trying to avoid Bayley's premeditated elbow drop attempt. It was a botch, but Charlotte had been using the ropes and cutting off Bayley so well throughout the match that I felt like it was easier to overlook it than it would've been had the whole match been full of gaffes or had Charlotte not been showing great ring awareness throughout her heel run. I can totally understand if this makes me come off as a fanboy of these two and I'm not sure it's not true, but from bell to bell, that was MOTN to me and, not to bring up another issue but, it was a match that kept me engaged without a million dangerous high spots (a common critique of Sasha/Charlotte but one nobody has levied against Gallagher/Neville which featured at least two really dangerous direct-to-the-neck bumps).

Legitimately surprised that people hated the Bayley/Charlotte match. I thought it was terrific. Another great performance out of Charlotte and I thought Bayley, while not the most technically proficient worker, continues to make me want to see her fire up and start clubbering. When Cena or Reigns or whoever is taking a beating, I'm just waiting for them to "get their shit in" because that's how their matches always go. With Bayley, the hope spots are well-earned and emotional and, while her offense sometimes seems like it's buffering, I can get caught up in her struggle and believe that it's because she's so full of emotion, she can't think straight. I also thought the finish worked - Bayley didn't cheat, Sasha ran in unsolicited, distracted Charlotte from hitting a moonsault to the floor and then got the referee to see she had a handful of tights during a pin attempt. It's not like she tossed Bayley a pair of knucks or held Charlotte's feet down from outside the ring Rude/Warrior style. As for the 4way - my biggest gripe is that Nia Jax is involved. Even in kayfabe, she hasn't earned it. Like in NXT, she's a big monster who loses all her big matches. In a perfect world, we'd get Sasha/Bayley and the women's division on Raw would be more like the one on SD where you'd have someone for Charlotte to face that was credible and interesting and over separate from being a "horsewoman." On SD, you have/had Naomi, Becky, and Nikki all involved in separate angles, while on Raw, aside from Dana Brooke, I can't name another female talent.

Wrote nearly the same exact words in my review. I don't watch 205 Live or RAW regularly, but in terms of Network Specials, this was the best match in the division's run by a couple country miles. First half was nothing too special, but the second half was just brutal, borderline dangerous at times. The crowd was into it, which obviously helps, but there's also a reason they were into it - Gallagher is a much more interesting babyface than TJP and Neville is a much more interesting heel than Kendrick was. Take two guys with established characters that are relatively over and throw them in the ring and you're bound to end up with a better finished product than just trotting bland, vanilla guys likes TJP and Rich Swann and hoping they win the crowd over just by wearing joggers and Nikes and doing the splits. Great and ridiculously brutal moments included Gallagher's back suplex off the top rope, Neville's release german suplex off the ropes, and Gallagher's awesome headbutts. I wouldn't mind seeing a rematch at Mania as there's simply no reason to believe adding another guy would make things better or that Neville and Gallagher won't still be the most and arguably only guys in the division over enough to deserve that spot.

The only way to do that is to have him not cut promos at all. I agree and think thats actually a wonderful short-term idea. In fact, I daresay that Triple H himself could've been a bigger babyface star at any single point in his career by just shutting the hell up (save for maybe the original DX run, which, while I could never enjoy rewatching any of it, I must admit to being a fan of when I was 14). Rollins, like HHH, may be funny or charming off TV, but he's always been "jock funny" to me on TV - the kind of guy that thinks he's clever and witty, laughs at his own jokes the hardest, but is actually more engaging and interesting the less he opens his mouth. As a heel, HHH and Rollins' ingratiating speech patterns and self-importance work fine (though, obviously, their endless promos are kind of a necessary evil because of it). Roman Reigns, similarly, was most over in his feud with Triple H when he stopped talking and just beat the crap out of him all over the place. It may be retreading ground, but watching Rollins and HHH do "verbal sparring" is harming more than helping in terms of making me want to see this match.

I just watched GAB 98' and The Giant walking down the aisle with a cigarette is just awesome. It is just so absurd and great. Two reasons I love it - First, it almost feels like a rib. Not only does the cigarette look comical in Big Show's catcher's glove of a hand, but I feel like the "gimmick" came from someone (Nash maybe?) seeing Big Show smoke a cigarette in real life, laughing at how funny it looked, and then saying, "You gotta do that on TV" even though it isn't really all that "heelish" anyway. Second, the commentators, at least at GAB 98', play up the relevancy of the smoking by talking about how it was one of the factors that led to The Giant's split with Sting...even though it really wasn't. The Giant joined nWo Hollywood and Sting wouldn't join and then The Giant turned on him and Sting was saved by the Wolfpack. I just love the fact, though, that even if it is revisionism, Schiavone and Tenay had to describe a world where Sting and The Giant were the principal characters in an after-school special about tobacco use.

Cool moment with Rock after RAW. I love that he's such a mega star he can get away with stuff like that and Vince will still do whatever it takes to have him be at Mania. I feel like Austin is at that level too but just would never pull a stunt like that because it's not in his nature. I base that thought entirely on his podcast where he comes across as a level-headed guy that isn't eager to ruffle feathers with anyone over anything. Like, dude just did over an hour with Paul Roma and let him talk all sorts of insanity and just kinda laughed through the stories respectfully. Rock, on the other hand, loves that immediate live crowd feedback he can get by just entertaining a crowd with a mic and is willing to do or say whatever will get the biggest reaction. If the crowd chants CM Punk, get him on the phone! I'm not even sure Rock is aware what a faux pas that was (how much does Rock really keep up with 3 year old WWE drama?) which makes it even greater to me.

Just saw this for the first time. Excellent match. Hard-hitting, really good execution on nearly everything, and a hot crowd. Plus, just watching the PPVs and Clashes, this is kind of Benoit and Booker T as established as they'd ever been as singles guys. Every signature move (even the most basic) they do get huge reactions in a way they weren't 2 months earlier. It's cool to see. Benoit is an animal, throwing himself into everything but Booker is no slouch either with his selling or his comebacks. Booker might be cringeworthy as a announcer these days, but he holds his own here. Respect. Ending is a touch abrupt for me, though, as a missile dropkick is just not a finisher to me - especially considering the types of moves they had hit prior. Still, easy. 4 stars and a 4.25with 60 more seconds and a better finish.

This could go in the Ziggler thread (if there is one), but I'll posit it here in case it gains no traction... Ziggler reminds me of 89' Luger or even modern Jericho and (I predict) Bray Wyatt in that he is more over as a face when he's supposed to be a heel than he ever is when he's an actual face. For example, wasn't his initial big push a few years back a "double turn" with ADR where Ziggler, the heel, was getting cheered because the crowd felt it was "his time" and Del Rio was flopping as a good guy? As good as his feud with Miz was, the "Thank You Ziggler" chant he received after Pillmanizing Apollo Crews seemed louder than any pop he had during that feud, which I'd say was probably his peak in popularity. It's a funny thing to me and one that is not super common. Even Austin, who was booked as a heel at the start of 97' for example, got MORE over when he was clearly a face in 98' so it's not like you can just explain it away as "fans like to cheer heels." Another example not being the case would be Rollins - save for some nights here or there, he got a general 50/50 response as a heel (which is par for the course) while, after the turn, he now gets a fairly muted response and is obviously not mega-over. Ziggler, on the other hand, has been consistently more "beloved" when the smarks feel like the WWE is trying to "book him into being unpopular" or something.

Gotta second KawadaSmile - I can't recall an EC match I enjoyed as thoroughly as this. To me, it really had all the right ingredients for me (even if the winner was somewhat predictable). - Crowd was absolutely hot from the start and John Cena, from the moment he came on screen, was "on." - I know the whole "Bacon Makes Everything Better" meme is seriously outdated and played out but is there a better metaphor for AJ Styles? His performance was further evidence that his mere presence makes a match better. - Thought the Ambrose/AJ/Cena segment was better in its short duration than the entirety of their 3-way match a few months back, which I thought was good-not-great. - Not to harken back on AJ too much, but while the closing stretch wasn't that great, it still was good enough for me (along with their initial interactions in the match) to say, "Yeah, AJ has chemistry with Bray too and I wouldn't mind them having a program down the line either." - Corbin and Braun Strowman are on these parallel paths from being not very good at all to being guys I like. Loved the way Corbin, after hitting the End of Days on Cena, just seemed so super psyched and proud of himself - which is exactly how he SHOULD feel because, hey, he just hit his End of Days on John F'N Cena! Sure, a 10-year vet would have the presence of mind to go for the cover, but Corbin is not a 10-year vet in kayfabe or reality, so, it really worked for me. - The only guy who seemed to get the short-shrift to me was Miz. He got beaten pretty handily by Cena in there so I don't see how they're going towards a Cena/Miz feud even with Nikki and Nattie in mind. If they were interested in that story, they should've had Miz look a little more dominant. Overall, no less than 4 stars from me.

I think the answer to the question posed in the thread might be "Because the late 90s/early 00s happened." There was a time when the 3-way or 4-way match was really novel, but then it became a monthly happening on Nitro and RAW and often occurred without a single storyline purpose beyond "let's get more guys in this 24-hour Hardcore Title match because lord knows nobody wants to see Viscera or Pete Gas in a singles match." Oddly, I do think the WWE has done a pretty decent job over the past few years in bringing some "specialness" back to the stipulation. Over just the past few years, I had the matches below at 3.5-4 stars: - Banks vs. Charlotte vs. Bayley vs. Lynch (NXT Takeover: Rival) - Orton vs. Ambrose vs. Reigns vs. Rollins (Payback 2015, I think?) - Banks vs. Charlotte vs. Lynch (WrestleMania 32) (only good match on the show, IIRC) - Zayn vs. Owens vs. Miz vs. Cesaro (Extreme Rules 2016) And I rated Rollins/Cena/Lesnar from Royal Rumble 2015 a very strong 4.5. (And I'm gonna be a bit unapologetic there as Austin called it "the best 3-way he'd ever seen" on his podcast the day after too - so, y'know, even if hindsight that rating is a bit hyperbolic, at the time, I loved it and others did too)

I was genuinely surprised that he didn't show up on last year's show and now I'd be even more shocked if he did show up at Mania (even satellite). I'm guessing, despite his ties to Trump, Vince is wise enough not to touch this issue with a 20 foot ladder. On a separate note, I'm really eager to read a lengthy, well-researched article connecting Trump's controversial attitudes and image with his various appearances on WWE programming. For example, did the RAW writers forecast Trump's rabble-rousing and "populist" message during his feud with Vince? Wasn't there a segment where he basically dropped a couple grand from the ceiling of an arena and had fans grabbing at cash in a frenzy? I feel like there's a link there to his campaign promises that hasn't been fleshed out yet.

Something tells me we won't be getting a "Tell Me A Lie" music video when Foley leaves his GM post. (Full confession: I just wanted to remind everyone about "Tell Me A Lie {HQ} - YouTube" )

Gallagher was one of the show's highlights to me. He's also, aside from Neville somewhat, the only guy in the CW division who the company seems to have any interest in promoting. Complaints on both sides - "He's a comedy character and there's no room for humor in a 60-minute, 30-man wrestling match!" or "He's a legit shooter so he should be pushed like a no-nonsense ass kicker" - are equally stupid and annoyingly identical to the shit that people said about Santino years back (and I'd take Gallagher's act over anything Santino all day, every day, for the next 50 years).

I expect Strowman to win the Andre the Giant Battle Royal, but man, I would much prefer a Henry/Strowman match just because the chemistry there was obvious at Rumble. Then again, with Shaq/Show likely (?), I'm not sure they need another Giant vs. Giant match and I'm not sure I'd actually like as much in reality as I do on paper. If they can hold it off till another PPV (and not blow through it on RAW), though, it'd be a real strong midcard match. Love the idea of HHH/Joe vs. Zayn and Balor, especially if they play it like Joe is just running roughshod over people and he and Triple H make Zayn's life miserable just because they don't like him. Then, a week or two before the show, Zayn is getting beat down for the nth time and either (a) Balor makes a surprise return to save him or ( Zayn announces that he's got a friend who has unfinished business with Joe and it's Finn or (if he's healthy) Seth Rollins. Any which way, adding Joe and Zayn to the Rollins/HHH angle would do a ton in making it interesting to me.

Can someone explain SAnItY to me? I mostly watch the NXT Takeover shows and am confused by the gimmick. Are they like escaped mental patients or just crazy meth-heads or a Wyatt Family cult? Are they cyber-terrorists? I just don't understand what their raison d'être is and the outfits feature a half dozen different cultural signifiers. I can post this question in another thread if no one feels like answering here.

Anyone think there's a chance we'll see Styles/Cena/Orton at Mania in a 3-way and that this is "the idea that the IWC is gonna love"? At EC, due to some sort of Wyatt Family shenanigans involving Orton (and maybe Harper involved too), Cena gets screwed out of the title when Randy tries to help Bray - but the plan gets fudged up somehow and its AJ Styles who walks out as champ. AJ vs. Orton is set, but Cena, having been screwed, gets his rematch clause and inserts himself into the match. Bray Wyatt gets the "rub" by being Orton's cornerman and Styles continues to be elevated by being spotlighted in a match with the two biggest full time guys of the past decade.

Full review on my blog. Few takes - - Thought the Rumble match was really good for first third, sagged in the middle, and then picked up a great deal once Lesnar came in at #26. - Thought Cena/AJ was an improvement from SummerSlam and MITB last year. Can't place my finger on why, but it may have been context and expectations. AJ is hotter now. Match was happening in front of a hotter crowd. Cena has been off TV for longer. Whatever the reason, when you combine it with how well everything was executed, I think this was a better match than their "SummerSlam classic" (which I didn't even put in my WWE Top 10 of the year). - I'm a Rumble traditionalist. I think the most over babyface or the most over heel should win every year (see 91'-01') and that "upper midcard" guys winning and "main eventing" WrestleMania in the 4th most hyped match on the card is silly (see ADR's and Sheamus' wins). Add Orton to that list. I'm not sure who the better option was this year - Goldberg? Lesnar? Jericho? Taker? AJ at 30 instead of Reigns? - but when you have 8 weeks of TV and two more brand-specific pay-per-views before Mania (one involving an Elimination Chamber for the title, no less) you could essentially have whoever you want win it and still not be "stuck" (case in point - Orton won and nobody believes he'll be closing the show in April). Why not have the crowd go insane with a feel-good Goldberg win? Or for a Lesnar win? Or for a Taker win? Or even "embrace the hate" and have Reigns get mega-heat by eliminating Taker or Goldberg last? Orton was the least controversial winner they could've went with when the WWE only sometimes sticks to the "Rumble Winner challenges World Champion in Last Match at WrestleMania" formula of the 90s. (In fact, in the past 7 years, that's not been the case just as much as it has been).

Full write-up posted on my blog... Quick takes - * Match-for-match, I didn't find a single one offensive - but also didn't rate a single one at 4-stars, which hasn't been the case for most recent TakeOver specials as, for these events, you're likely to see at least one Match of the Year candidate (even if its a low-end contender). * As heatless as Strong/Almas was, I think Almas is finally getting somewhere as a heel. He worked hard to get heat and the crowd seemed at least somewhat interested by the end. Not the worst match in TakeOver history (that' d be Dempsey/Corbin from NXT Takeover: Rival if you ask me) or even in the past 12 months (I found TM61 vs. Authors of Pain from the last show pretty dumb). * Liked the result, but didn't love the finish solely because I've spent the last 2-3 months stating on multiple platforms how dumb the WWE would be not to have Nakamura debut at the Rumble tonight. Based on the finish, him debuting would be ridiculous as they put a lot of work into getting the injury angle over, but whatever, the greater good (and necessary step) is to have Nakamura get a mega-pop tonight to help establish him as a big deal like they did with AJ Styles last year. With only Cena and Ambrose as dependable babyface stars on the Blue Brand these days, they need an instant game-changer and major WrestleMania player and Nakamura is the only "call up" that fits the bill. I'm a Joe fan, but nobody touches Nakamura's "It" factor and I really don't see them positioning Joe into a huge Mania match the minute he debuts. Nakamura, though? Far more likely to me. * The formula with Roode is going to have to be setting him up against guys that are worth rooting over and exciting to watch. Sadly, without guys like Sami Zayn, Nakamura, or Balor, there aren't many faces on the current NXT roster that I find particularly engrossing as characters. I don't think Roode is "boring," but this match kinda proved that his entire persona relies on him having foils that will bring the flash that he doesn't have. Roderick Strong won't work. I'm not even sure Kassius Ohno will work unless he really gets over to the same extent that a Zayn did. Fortunately, they have plenty of time to build up a talent for Roode to face at the next TakeOver, but all the time in the world won't matter if there isn't a guy that has big enough personality to offset Roode's ultra-serious, purposefully dour character.

Main event time - Shinsuke Nakamura vs. Bobby Roode for Nakamura's NXT Championship. As has become the norm, Roode gets a magnificent entrance, with the crowd singing along to his theme. Not to be outdone, Nakamura comes in on a Green Goblin-esque glider fitted with strobe lights. The crowd was fairly split here, though I think there were a fair number of fans like myself who were rooting for Roode only because we're eager to see Nakamura get the well-earned "call up." Good but not great first third with Roode in control, which is par for the course with the Glorious One as he's never been a particularly flashy performer. Nakamura's comeback picked up the pace and the suspense level raised quite a bit when Roode played possum to combat Nakamura's multiple attempts at a Kinchasa. The faux injury angle actually hurt this one for me - I'm not sure it was entirely necessary when you could've reached the same conclusion without having essentially a 2-3 minute break in the middle of the match with trainers and extra refs and, at one point, Albert showing up at ringside. While not a MOTYC like most of Nakamura's other TakeOver bouts have been, I thought the last two thirds were very good/almost great. (3.5/5)

Voted for the Hitman, but mostly because he's the best "total package" on the list for me. Maybe not the best in any specific category, but top 3-4 in most categories I'd consider (promos, great matches, babyface/heel work, selling, execution of offense). For the same reason, I might place Christian somewhere in my top 5.

Yeah. I'm thinking AJ somehow retains and Taker accidentally costs Cena the title at Elimination Chamber. Then, we'll get Cena/Taker at Mania (even though various outlets reported that its off the table). I just don't see them going into Mania with HHH, Lesnar, Goldberg, and Taker (and likely Shaq) all making somewhat steady appearances on RAW and SD buoyed by only AJ and Cena. At least, in my mind, that'd be silly. The key piece (again, in my mind) is Nakamura, even moreso than Samoa Joe. Joe coming up would be cool, but he's not ready from Day 1 to be a top SD attraction (especially when the brand is already full of really strong heels - AJ, Miz, and Corbin all being positioned rather well over the past few months and Ziggler freshly turned). Nakamura, meanwhile, can come in and from Day 1 feel like a legitimate main event babyface that is credible enough to challenge for the WWE Championship as long as he makes a strong showing at Elimination Chamber. And you won't get a better pop for his debut than on Sunday. If they don't bring him up this weekend, they may as well friggin' wait another 12 months because this is the time for him. AJ/Nakamura at Mania would be your "IWC pleaser" too and set up the main event card decently: Reigns/Braun (Universal Title probably) Owens/Jericho Rollins/HHH Styles/Nak Cena/Taker Goldberg/Lesnar Clusterfuck for IC or US Title Fourway for RAW Women's etc. etc.

While I'm not sure he'd come close to toppling Flair or the Japanese guys who have been mentioned or Bryan, "Big Match John"'s collection of 4-star outings probably isn't too shabby compared to other WWE aces. He probably has far less 4.5 or 5* matches, but in terms of sheer output, the amount he has in that 4* sweet spot is probably fairly high.

Based on only what I've reviewed from the Network on my blog up to August of last year... **** Flair vs. Race (Starrcade 83) Flair and Anderson vs. Doom (Havoc 90) Flair and Anderson vs. Hollywood Blondes (Clash 23) Rude vs. Flair (Fall Brawl 93) Vader vs. Flair (Starrcade 93) Flair and Sting vs. Vader and Rude (Clash 26) Flair vs. Hogan (Bash 94) Flair vs. Savage (Bash 95) Flair vs. Savage (SuperBrawl 6) Flair and Anderson vs. Greene and Mongo (Bash 96) **** 1/2 Flair vs. Steamboat (Spring Stampede 94) Flair and Sting vs. Anderson and Pillman (Havoc 95) Over the past couple months I've watched the big shows from 89 on the Network so Flair now has even more 4.5 and 5s on my spreadsheet, plus, off hand, I could probably name at least three more matches that I haven't reviewed but would likely reward 4s at least (vs. HBK at WM24, for example, or vs. Savage at WM8) and one more 5 star (Rumble 92).