KB Answers Wrestling Questions

I hear people say that Dean Ambrose is the next Brian Pillman or Luke Harper is the next Bruiser Brody. Which wrestlers do you think are The Next _____ if you know what I mean.
 
You think Sami Zayn is going to get similar following that Daniel Bryan got. He is one of the best loveable underdog babyfaces I have seen in a while. Are we on the verge of an "Olé Movement" in the future?
 
Booker vs. HHH for sure. It could have only been a month but it needed to happen.

Hogan vs. Sting - Starrcade 1997. Yeah they kind of did but hten it was held up and all that jazz. Just do it clean and let the NWO die then and there.

Other than that......Luger vs. Flair at Great American Bash 1988. It made Luger look like a choker for the rest of his career and he never got over that reputation.

I just watched the May 2001 match between Benoit and Austin where Vince called for the bell and thought it would've been awesome for Benoit to win the title there. Could've had a great run with double duty on PPV (tag title) and Jericho eventually growing jealous or something. Therefore the question.

As for Starrcade, sure, Sting has to win clean, but you can play it out a little longer with big matches and Sting having a run against the NWO instead of a single moment. I would've had Sting defeat Hall at Souled Out (WW3 shot) and Nash at Superbrawl for sure. Then there are several options. I'd probably have a 3-on-3 match (with Luger and someone else, Hart maybe) to end the NWO at Uncensored. At Spring Stampede, Hogan interferes so that Sting loses his title to a young heel (Raven?), setting up a Loser Leaves Town match against Hogan for Slamboree. Hollywood has clearly run his course and needs at least until 1999 before he can return as a face. Staying away forever might be better actually. Over the summer, Nash and Hall can feud and Goldberg defeats Raven.

Would you have Sting stay the crow or revert to the surfer? I'm not sure about that.

I'm looking over WCW PPVs of 1998 on Wiki and notice shows like "Boston Brawl", "Malice at the Palace", "Profiles in Pain" and "L.A. Melee". What's that? Have you reviewed these?
 
You think Sami Zayn is going to get similar following that Daniel Bryan got. He is one of the best loveable underdog babyfaces I have seen in a while. Are we on the verge of an "Olé Movement" in the future?

I was at a house show about a year ago and he showed up. Save for some random OLE chants, he came out to crickets. Eight minutes later, he had the place completely behind him. That's a VERY good sign.

I just watched the May 2001 match between Benoit and Austin where Vince called for the bell and thought it would've been awesome for Benoit to win the title there. Could've had a great run with double duty on PPV (tag title) and Jericho eventually growing jealous or something. Therefore the question.

As for Starrcade, sure, Sting has to win clean, but you can play it out a little longer with big matches and Sting having a run against the NWO instead of a single moment. I would've had Sting defeat Hall at Souled Out (WW3 shot) and Nash at Superbrawl for sure. Then there are several options. I'd probably have a 3-on-3 match (with Luger and someone else, Hart maybe) to end the NWO at Uncensored. At Spring Stampede, Hogan interferes so that Sting loses his title to a young heel (Raven?), setting up a Loser Leaves Town match against Hogan for Slamboree. Hollywood has clearly run his course and needs at least until 1999 before he can return as a face. Staying away forever might be better actually. Over the summer, Nash and Hall can feud and Goldberg defeats Raven.

Would you have Sting stay the crow or revert to the surfer? I'm not sure about that.

I'm looking over WCW PPVs of 1998 on Wiki and notice shows like "Boston Brawl", "Malice at the Palace", "Profiles in Pain" and "L.A. Melee". What's that? Have you reviewed these?

Benoit and Jericho were just there to advance the Austin vs. HHH feud, which was going to involve a very slow burn face turn by HHH, setting up a showdown at Summerslam.

You could do whatever you wanted after Starrcade, but Hogan had to lose there, no matter what.

Probably a hybrid of the two.

You forgot the Battle In Seattle. I haven't, because there's nothing for me to see. Those weren't actually pay per views but rather Pay Per Listens. They were basically glorified house shows where you could go onto WCW.com and listen to commentary on what was going on. The idea bombed because the technology wasn't there yet and they scrapped it pretty quickly.
 
Brock Lesnar needs to be despised universally if Roman Reigns is to get the Ultimate rub. Yes, his lack of appearances have helped, but is that enough for people to get behind Reigns against Lesnar.
Also, will Cena be unsuccessful thrice in a row vs Lesnar? Or will Cena perhaps win the title at Rumble to the dismay of many, equalling Flair's record in the process?
Perhaps Cena vs Reigns could prove to be of more help to the latter in becoming a loved babyface... remember That segment they had on RAW raising each other's hands?
 
A bit of a mean spirited question.

Is there any wrestler that you actually would not mind seeing get buried?

(Big show, Kane, and Cena don't count)

The Bellas. I almost cringe every time I hear their music.....though a lot of that goes away when I see Nikki in shorts but that's beside the point.

In before "Tommy Dreamer" :lmao:

Not Dreamer. I want him to have whatever he wants so he doesn't have to cry and talk about having to keep everything alive.
 
Big Show. I'm sick of seeing him doing the same stuff over and over and for some reason barely ever doing a job. Rollins can take a clean pin on Smackdown but Kane and Big Show have gotten saved by a DQ more times than I can count.
 
A lot of people bag on Diesel's WWE Title run back in 95. Looking back on that reign, it seemed to get off to a great start with the house show quick win over Backlund and then facing Hart and Michaels at Rumble and Mania. I would have to assume then most people bag on this reign for what happen post Mania. Is that accurate? If so, what could have been done differently or what would you have done post Mania with Diesel to make his title run better? Or was there nothing that could have been done?
 
Give him better opponents. Sid and Mabel just aren't going to work as challengers for Diesel. You can get good matches out of Sid with the right opponent, but it's not Diesel.
 
Since the Golden Age in the WWE was dominated by faces holding the WWE title we never really got to see a heel hold the strap for an extended period of time. We had Slaughter as the only guy to win the title as a heel but that only lasted for 2 months. Then we had Macho but he turned heel during his title reign and was only heel for about 2 months before dropping.

So my question is out of the guys that where the top heels back in that time:

Ted DiBiasi
Mr. Perfect
Rick Rude

Who was most deserving to hold the title based on there work in the company?
Who would you have most liked to see given a title reign?
And finally, what would have been the ideal time for each guy to have held the title if they were given a run as a heel champ?
 
DiBiase by about a mile.
DiBiase by about a mile.

Wrestlemania IV for DiBiase. That was actually the plan before a lot changed.
Early 1990 for Perfect but it wouldn't have lasted long.
Rude really wouldn't hvae been a WWF Title candidate. He wasn't a serious enough heel for most of his run.
 
Do you get the sense that the WWE is treating TLC as a "throwaway" PPV? The whole buildup to just seems kind of meh to me. Coming on the heels of the NXT Takeover I get the feeling it's going to wind up extremely underwhelming by comparison.
 
Yeah that tends to be the case. I just got done with Smackdown and it felt like the exact same show I watched before Survivor Series but with weapons.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,826
Messages
3,300,733
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top