KB Answers Wrestling Questions | Page 379 | WrestleZone Forums

KB Answers Wrestling Questions

Do you still think that Mania 29 will be headlined by Rock/Cena/Punk for the title, or are they going to split them up?

Also, what do you see for Taker during Mania season if he's in as bad a shape as he reportedly is?
 
The triple threat is probably the best likely situation.

Taker's health has been an issue for years and he always pulls it off. I can't imagine he won't be there.
 
What do you think about this being one of this year's traditional Survivor Series 10 man elimination tag team match?

Team Ryback

Ryback
Kane
Daniel Bryan
Kofi Kingston
Randy Orton

Team Show

Big Show
Sandow
Rhodes
Miz
Del Rio
 
Because I read a rumor on 24Wrestling that it could be Team Show vs. Team Ryback. I don't know why. So I just played along and added the rest in.
 
Would Cena winning the WWE Championship from Rock at Mania 29 more than make up for his Mania 28 loss against him?

Would you be upset if Mania 30 isn't in Madison Square Garden?

Lastly, why does no one stand out in the midcard today? I feel like I could pick any of them out of a hat for something and it wouldn't make a difference. None of them have that "this guy is going to be huge" factor to me.
 
Here's the pattern for the midcard guys: win one, lose three, win two, lose one, win one, lose two. Repeat and rinse.

KB, which is easier: going from face to heel or heel to face?
 
Would Cena winning the WWE Championship from Rock at Mania 29 more than make up for his Mania 28 loss against him?

Would you be upset if Mania 30 isn't in Madison Square Garden?

Lastly, why does no one stand out in the midcard today? I feel like I could pick any of them out of a hat for something and it wouldn't make a difference. None of them have that "this guy is going to be huge" factor to me.

Not really but they'll play it up as if it doesn.

No.

I wrote this the other day:

No one is elevated strong anymore. Before Ryback, who was the last guy who got a rocket strapped to his back and was launched to the main event? Del Rio I guess. before him? Not quite sure. Anymore, this is what you get:

WWE wants to push let's say Kofi. Kofi pins Miz and gets pushed. Well now Miz needs to get his heat back so let's have him beat Brodus. Brodus looks weak now so have him get a fluke win over Del Rio. Del Rio is angry so he destroys Kofi.

Now we're say two weeks later, everyone is 1-1 and no one is any stronger than they were when the whole cycle started. Then the cycle starts all over again and there's no one to get behind because they're all the same and no one of the four looks ready to move up because they're the same as everyone else. Then Cena gets hurt and you get lucky that there's one guy you haven't jobbed out yet and the fans are getting behind. If Ryback wasn't there, who in the world were they going to throw at Punk? Orton? Maybe? They need to fix this FAST so there are people to get behind. Stop worrying that these people are going to get hot and leave and enjoy them while you've got them there.


Here's the pattern for the midcard guys: win one, lose three, win two, lose one, win one, lose two. Repeat and rinse.

KB, which is easier: going from face to heel or heel to face?

Face to heel. It's easy to just turn on someone. Turning face isn't as easy because you have to get people to care about you. Heels can attack heels and not turn face. Faces can't attack faces without turning heel.
 
Why are people who don't work for the wrestling promotions or television networks obsessed with ratings and PPV buyrates?
 
Martin Gabriel is quite literally costing me phone credit as I have to go through so many more pages of this thread to get past his mostly inane, uninspired questions. Any way he could get banned from this thread? Seriously. It's doing my head in.
 
From your reviews, I gather that you are pissed at the GMs getting a lot of TV time. So, would you consider Teddy Long's stint as GM (before Aksana) to be almost ideal?

He was mostly a background character and there were some nights when he was not even on TV.
 
From your reviews, I gather that you are pissed at the GMs getting a lot of TV time. So, would you consider Teddy Long's stint as GM (before Aksana) to be almost ideal?

He was mostly a background character and there were some nights when he was not even on TV.

Yeah he was pretty much fine, although I oculd have gone without the tag matches all the time. The ideal GM is Dusty Rhodes on NXT. He's been around on like five episodes and never for more than two minutes. He makes the big match and you don't hear from him again. It's a nice touch.
 
That the Attitude Era was good for wrestling.

It was good for wrestling, but it reach a point where it needed to be stopped, and it was. Sure, there's been some long-term effects from it, but the attitude era was almost necessary for the survival of the show. Without the attitude era, one could reasonably ponder whether or not the show would even exist today.

In other words, the attitude era was a financial success, and thus good for wrestling. Additionally, because it was doing well financially, the audience must have liked the product. So, the era was monetarily beneficial, and the fans loved the product. Like I said, though, some possibly bad things spawned from it (which I'm sure you know more about than me), but for the most part, unless I'm missing something, it was good for wrestling.
 
It was good for wrestling, but it reach a point where it needed to be stopped, and it was. Sure, there's been some long-term effects from it, but the attitude era was almost necessary for the survival of the show. Without the attitude era, one could reasonably ponder whether or not the show would even exist today.

In other words, the attitude era was a financial success, and thus good for wrestling. Additionally, because it was doing well financially, the audience must have liked the product. So, the era was monetarily beneficial, and the fans loved the product. Like I said, though, some possibly bad things spawned from it (which I'm sure you know more about than me), but for the most part, unless I'm missing something, it was good for wrestling.

No, it wasn't.

It was good for the WWE and it was good for sports entertainment, but for professional wrestling, it was awful.
 
No, it wasn't.

It was good for the WWE and it was good for sports entertainment, but for professional wrestling, it was awful.

Why are they different entities? WWE is a professional wrestling organization. Professional wrestling is sports entertainment. I'm not sure why you're differentiating the terms.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top