KB Answers Wrestling Questions

Would it have better served the WWE to keep Michaels heel after his SummerSlam match with Hogan and explore the possible fueds that a heel Michaels at that time could have had, or was making him a face right after there match the right move?
 
Going back to your 2000 statement, for what particular reasons would you put it over '02, '03 and '04?

Combination of a few things.

1. It was the last year HHH was mind blowingly good. He weighed like 250 and could MOVE. When he came back in 2002 after the injury he weighed a lot more and turned into a slow power guy which isn't interesting.

2. The talent depth. Look at the roster in 2000. Yeah you have a lot of the same guys in 2002-4, but there were a lot of guys dragging it down then as well. Also the Brand Split kept them apart.

3. A 23 year old Stephanie and a 24 year old Trish. Dear goodness.

4. Rock is at the peak of his powers.

5. Guys like Jericho and the Radicalz debuting and freshening things up.

6. The amazing final matches of Foley's career.

7. Never knowing when Austin would be back.

8. Backlash 2000.

I could go on and on. It's probably the best year the company ever had.

Would it have better served the WWE to keep Michaels heel after his SummerSlam match with Hogan and explore the possible fueds that a heel Michaels at that time could have had, or was making him a face right after there match the right move?

Shawn is one of those guys who can't be a long term heel. It just doesn't work.
 
Where does the whole Gurerro/Mysterio/Dominick storyline rank in terms of the most out there storylines?

Also did you find it weird or off putting how they had Mysterio being fueled by the memory of Eddie during his title run and reign in 06 when it was just a few months before that that they had there bitter fued over Dominick?
 
It's way up there.

I hated everything about the way Eddie was exploited after he died. I wrote in the review that Eddie Guerrero put on a mask and won the 2006 Royal Rumble because that's pretty much how it went.
 
I was reading a review of yours on Wrestlemania XIX, and you said that the second half of the show was "too packed" and it hurt the show.

Why do you think that is?

EDIT: Yeah, I go on his reviews, you guys should check them out.
 
There's no room to breathe with all of the stuff on there and it brags the show down. I remember being tired from watching everything as it aired and it's similar on later viewings.
 
I wanted to run a theory I have held for some time now and want to see where your heads at on the issue.

After Cena won his first world title and moved to Raw his first two feuds were against Jericho and Angle. While this set up two great matches at SummerSlam and Survivor Series I believe it created the split in the crowd when it comes to Cena. Both Angle and Jericho by 2005 had established themselves as great wrestlers and while they were heels they had so many great matches by that point that they each had the respect from the entire crowd. So Cena walked into his 1st two feuds against guys who while making him look good in the ring, created the heat Cena now gets from the fans because they were not buying what Cena did against these two guys.

I maintain it would have been better to have Cena have his first few title feuds against more traditional monster type heels that would allow Cena to showcase his power and keep the fans on his side. I don't think Cena was ready for feuds against the Jericho's and Angle's of the WWE and he wouldn't be ready for such feuds until the time he took on Michaels at Mania 23.
 
Well remember that his first feud was against JBL as he beat him in a rematch at Judgment Day 05.

There's probably something to that but at the same time I think it's more of he was the anti-establishment and now he's the establishment that ticked people off more than anything else.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,837
Messages
3,300,747
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top