Update on Stone Cold - No Beer maybe he can drink Milk

Update on Stone Cold - No Beer maybe he can drink Milk - Printable Version

+- CDIH (https://www.cdih.net/cdih)
+-- Forum: The Smoke Room (https://www.cdih.net/cdih/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: The Faggy Artistic Forum (https://www.cdih.net/cdih/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+--- Thread: Update on Stone Cold - No Beer maybe he can drink Milk (/showthread.php?tid=4294)

Pages: 1 2

- Hybrid - 11-26-2002

you guys care way to much about wrestling :thumbs-up:

- Galt - 11-26-2002

I thought this was an update on Sean Cold.

Seriously though. GOD, wrestling sucks balls.

- Sir O - 11-27-2002

Quote:Yes, and several superstars were let go because of (compared to SCSA) minor problems. That sort of treatment gets you heat backstage, look at the NWO, we're down to what, 1 of them left on the roster? Why would you hire someone who has demonstrated to you that he is unwilling to bend if you don't meet his demands?

Austin was having problems with management/creative for quite a while before he left. The job to Brock was just the straw that broke the camel's back. There's no reason to have your top face to a job in a meaningless match with zero buildup - which is what creative wanted to do. It was nothing like the Brock/Rock or Brock/Hogan matches where there was a month of build to a PPV Main Event - he was asked to job to Brock on the undercard of Raw with no prior notice. He was tired of getting fucked in the ass, so he went home. As an independent contractor, and not an employee of WWE Inc, he had that right.

Quote:Sure Austin would be a ratings spike, emphasis on spike. SCSA is not the future of the wwe.

I don't think anyone is saying he is the future. But he still has major star power, and can still go in the ring - maybe not like he used to, but certainly better than has-beens like Hogan and Nash and HHH and Shawn and Flair. The majority fans don't yet see Austin as a has-been, and until that time comes, he'll sell tickets. It's not that he's the future, but he more than anyone can help bridge the present to the future.

Quote:So what would you do? Hire the man who might get you some ratings for a few months or get that young gun from the indy's who, with the right storyline, will be the big star of tomorrow.

How about, hiring the biggest star in wrestling to put over those young guys. Right now, all they have in terms of guys who can elevate wrestlers to the main event, is HHH, and he won't put anyone over unless they're no threat to him (see: Michaels, Shawn and Undertaker). Rock's out, Hogan's out, Austin's out, Michaels' body can't take working a full schedule, Taker's out. Other than Goldberg, there's nobody out there except Austin - the same Austin who was instrumental (I'm not saying singlehandedly responsible) in getting Rock, HHH, and Foley over at main event level.

Quote:People who stopped watching might watch when Austin returns, maybe they will stick around for a while, until they realise that nothing has really changed, and what will they do? Stop watching.

That's too shortsighted - it's not as simple as putting Austin on TV and the viewers will come crawling back. The entire company needs a major overhaul. They need someone to put over the Guerreros and Benoits, to further solidify the Angles and Lesnars. Where are tomorrow's main eventers going to come from, when (with the possible exception of Lesnar) nobody takes them seriously as a threat today, and nobody in the company is willing to do the job? This isn't something that an meaningless undercard loss on a meaningless Raw could fix.

Quote:Until Vince sees that this slump is here to stay and is something that can't be fixed by bringing back the people who were good during wrestlings high point.

Again, the answer isn't simply bringing in yesterday's stars - which is why the Steiner signing is a joke. The answer, or at least a major part of the answer, is using guys who are towards the end of their career but still have "main event" cridibility in the fans' eyes, to put over the next crop of main eventers, so they, 5 or so years from now, can do for others what Austin did for them, what Michaels and Hart did for Austin, etc.

Last, but not least...

Quote:the wwe is not in a slump...ratings are not down...for fucks sake...what show, week in and week out two times a week for 2 hours has more than 4 million people watching it?

WWE Inc reported a net loss last quarter. Ratings are the lowest they've been since before the Monday Night Wars, buyrates are down, TV and houseshow attendance is WAY down. That's definitely what I'd call a slump. Just because they get better ratings than Lifetime's Movie of the Week or reruns of SNL doesn't change that fact.

And yeah, wresting sucks.

- Teenweek - 11-27-2002

Japan rules!!! :bouncer:

- Sir O - 11-27-2002

That was the smartest thing I've ever seen you post.

- LyricalGomez - 11-27-2002

Quote:The entire company needs a major overhaul.

I agree, and that's why I think bringing in aging stars is not the answer...But time will tell if Austin returning to wwe will be a good thing or not.

Quote:There's no reason to have your top face to a job in a meaningless match with zero buildup - which is what creative wanted to do. It was nothing like the Brock/Rock or Brock/Hogan matches where there was a month of build to a PPV Main Event

Exactly what build-up did the Brock Hogan match have?

Quote:How about, hiring the biggest star in wrestling to put over those young guys.

If he was unwilling to put over one guy, what makes you think he will put over someone else? Austin is used to being at the top, having upwards of 15 minutes on each show, why would having a match with build-up suddenlly make him change his mind?

Quote:They need someone to put over the Guerreros and Benoits, to further solidify the Angles and Lesnars. Where are tomorrow's main eventers going to come from, when (with the possible exception of Lesnar) nobody takes them seriously as a threat today, and nobody in the company is willing to do the job?

Again, who's to say Austin will do this? All he has proven is an unwillingness to job to a younger guy, no matter the circumstances. And the reason they are not viewed as threats is because of the morons on the writing staff. They need to start having these guys get clean wins, dominate matches rather than pull out cheap wins.

Quote:The answer, or at least a major part of the answer, is using guys who are towards the end of their career but still have "main event" cridibility in the fans' eyes, to put over the next crop of main eventers

Problem is that won't happen.

- Sir O - 11-27-2002

Quote:Exactly what build-up did the Brock Hogan match have?

D'Oh...you're right. BUT...the match Hogan was a main event match, and was significant to the overall storyline, and Hogan was already on his way out anyway, so he really had nothing to lose. The planned Austin/Lesnar was an undercard match, and Austin would've still been around. His feeling (at least according to Meltzer) was that a match as potentially big as this should not be hotshotted, it should be saved for a big PPV buyrate. It was just another part of the poor direction of the company that he had been against for some time (witness his tirade on Byte This shortly before leaving), and this was the last straw.

Quote:If he was unwilling to put over one guy, what makes you think he will put over someone else? Austin is used to being at the top, having upwards of 15 minutes on each show, why would having a match with build-up suddenlly make him change his mind?

It's not even that he was unwilling to put over Lesnar, it's that it was the wrong time and the wrong context. Which would draw more money - Stone Cold vs. The Next Big Thing, for the first time EVER, main event of Survivor Series 2002 (or whatever), or Stone Cold vs. The Next Big Thing, tonight, to lead off Raw. Again, he wasn't protesting the simple fact that he was asked to job. It was the overall handling of the product and his character - partly selfish, sure, but it wasn't all "me me me" out of his mouth. He's been willing to put guys over before - Rock, Foley, HHH, and he did more for Angle and Benoit than anyone else ever did.

Quote:Again, who's to say Austin will do this?

If the product weren't total shit, he probably would. I'll just go by his track record, which overall is very good.

Quote:All he has proven is an unwillingness to job to a younger guy, no matter the circumstances.

Nah - he's historically been more willing than most main eventers to elevate new stars. He may not be Ric Flair when it comes to self sacrifice, but he's certainly no HHH or Kevin Nash either.

Quote:And the reason they are not viewed as threats is because of the morons on the writing staff. They need to start having these guys get clean wins, dominate matches rather than pull out cheap wins.

Of course. Which is why they're in such a bad situation right now. Because there's NOBODY left except HHH, and he won't give up his precious spot as "God". Funny how he hasn't been asked to job to Lesnar, despite being 1/1000th the talent Austin is. Hell, he even got his own belt.

Quote:Problem is that won't happen.

Then there won't be a WWF much longer. It's really that simple.

- Peachy - 11-27-2002

Quote:Then there won't be a WWF much longer.

But...but...what happens to the pandas? :-p

I am by no means an Austin fan, but, having had more than my fill of the Triple Ay-chuh Show, at this point I'd welcome him with open arms and a can of O'Doul's.

- FollowThisLogic - 11-27-2002

Don't you mean Coors NA? :-D

I've gotta go with Sir O here (big shocker).... the simplified argument is that Austin helped tremendously in making Rock who he became, both in the IC and World ranks.

That kinda brings me to the other point, Jack touched on it.... passing the torch. The two top guys in the Fed (or the Ent) are gone. Make no mistake about it, Austin and Rock are still the two top guys. As much as he'd love to think so, HHH-uh is nowhere near that level - forget the fact that he refuses to put guys over, and remember that even if he did, he's nowhere near their caliber.

Whatever happened to building guys up? Some of the main guys you see today worked their way up.... but the theory in recent years seems to be that you either shoot a guy straight to the top, or you bury him in a midcard that gets ignored anyway. Maybe I just answered my own question.... if the midcard meant anything anymore, maybe you'd still be able to have buildups. Instead, the midcard is where the announcers half-ass the calling of the moves (or maybe quarter-ass, since the main event only gets half-ass) - and in between the moves that aren't completely passed over, the annoucers talk about the main event. It's really pretty disgusting.

- JerseyThunder - 11-27-2002

Quote:Right now, all they have in terms of guys who can elevate wrestlers to the main event, is HHH, and he won't put anyone over unless they're no threat to him (see: Michaels, Shawn and Undertaker)