Ongoing Thread For Smarmy Spam Responses to the WZT

[Poop Master Flex]

You said Foley wasnt a draw or a star. I pointed out you were wrong. If you want to argue that its irrelevant dont bring it up to use against him to start with.

No i didn't, not once or if I did I was drunk as fuck but to my recollection I didn't, it certainly wasn't said in what you quoted in your earlier. I said foley was used to get the top guy over, which is true, that doesn't mean he's not popular or a main eventer but in Foleys top years he often was used to help elevate the other guys, meaning he put them over to raise their stock higher. Its not a knock, I really don't know why you would think that for saying he usually lost to top talent and put them over, I didn't say Foley himself wasn't a top talent or not a draw, or not a star because he was all those things. Look at Foleys time against top guys as in the main event though, Foley usually lost and ALWAYS lost the blowoff match to these guys, he never won them. If Foley losing to guys like Triple H made Triple H better in the fans eyes it says a lot about Foley and how important he was, he still lost though, that's the point.

Which brings me to your comment, you gave me a useless fact that meant NOTHING towards who would actually win a match. If it did maybe he would have beaten Triple H instead of losing to him a bunch of times within a few months after that segment took place. Just being popular doesn't guarantee you a win and in Foleys case it more often than not didn't.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Has anyone tried to argue that Foley actually is God?

A lot of fans felt that way for a while.

 

[Shocky]

I remember Foley winning Times man of the year award in 1998.

 

[Lee]

I remember Foley winning Times man of the year award in 1998.

I won it in 2006 and a noble peace prize last year.

 

[shattered dreams]

HHH dominated for 5 years.

I doubt it. He can't even produce a male child. We all know Stephanie is on top.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

DICKS. YOU'RE ALL DICKS!

 

[Miko]

No i didn't, not once or if I did I was drunk as fuck but to my recollection I didn't, it certainly wasn't said in what you quoted in your earlier. I said foley was used to get the top guy over, which is true, that doesn't mean he's not popular or a main eventer but in Foleys top years he often was used to help elevate the other guys, meaning he put them over to raise their stock higher. Its not a knock, I really don't know why you would think that for saying he usually lost to top talent and put them over, I didn't say Foley himself wasn't a top talent or not a draw, or not a star because he was all those things. Look at Foleys time against top guys as in the main event though, Foley usually lost and ALWAYS lost the blowoff match to these guys, he never won them. If Foley losing to guys like Triple H made Triple H better in the fans eyes it says a lot about Foley and how important he was, he still lost though, that's the point.

Which brings me to your comment, you gave me a useless fact that meant NOTHING towards who would actually win a match. If it did maybe he would have beaten Triple H instead of losing to him a bunch of times within a few months after that segment took place. Just being popular doesn't guarantee you a win and in Foleys case it more often than not didn't.

My useless fact proved that Foley had more business being on top than Triple H, it could be argued that he was more destined to be a top guy but was probably held back because he's fat, I wouldn't argue with that assessment, even now he can't headline a Hall Of Fame class, which is pure, pure bullshit. Before anybody says that its because Trips talked Bruno in, if he hadn't have done that DX would've gone in as headliners this year.

Like it or not, you are holding it against him because he was used to put over people. Whereas his legacy and everything else puts him on a top tier level and he can always feasibly beat HHH.

My point? In a tourney to crown the greatest wrestler ever, when two guys are as evenly matched as HHH and Foley, maybe its best to put the win/loss record aside and vote for the one people actually wanted to see, the one who made people like Austin/Rock/Undertaker as good as they were as opposed to the one that leached off of them and nearly sucked all the life out of the WWE. The Attitude Era afterbirth.

Now stop being such a defensive douche. I am bored of this already.

 

[Miko]

Hmm, Warrior plowing through matches he'd have struggled in even last year has kind of spoilt the appeal.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Having a genuinely tough time with the Cena-Funk match. I think i know which way I am going, but still....

 

[Coco]

2. As for Cena, yeah Punk beat him. Then Punk went on to hold the title for what, four weeks? Then he lost to Alberto freaking Del Rio inside the Cell. Punk isn't a big match player. Punk is the guy that had one huge win and since then has cooled WAY off. Shawn rises to the occasion like almost no one else in history no matter where he goes.

Oh, KB. I'd hate to be pussy-whipped into such overwhelming delusion.

a) Punk losing the title four weeks later on account of an ADR cash in AFTER he was jumped AFTER a gruelling cash in means he isn't a big match player? Going on to be the longest reigning champion of the last quarter century means he isn't a big match player? How much credibility are you going to squander in the name of getting Becca to slob your knob?

b) In no way does the aftermath of that match negate the win in Chicago. Get real.

c) For all the rising to the occasion Shawn's done, who's he beaten when it mattered the most? Not Triple H, Orton, Benoit, or Cena with the title on the line. In spite of dominating Jericho, HBK couldn't even take the belt off of him. He got tapped out by Kurt Angle at WrestleMania 21 and put down by Undertaker at back-to-back WrestleManias. His last title reign lasted a month. So what's he got going for him? A title run where he was able to ward off a run-down Vader, Mankind, and Bulldog? Big deal. WrestleMania wins over the likes of Bret Hart, Vince McMahon, and a decrepit Ric Flair? Wow, what a great big match player!

HBK sucks in when it's all on the line. End of story.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Oh, KB. I'd hate to be pussy-whipped into such overwhelming delusion.

a) Punk losing the title four weeks later on account of an ADR cash in AFTER he was jumped AFTER a gruelling cash in means he isn't a big match player? Going on to be the longest reigning champion of the last quarter century means he isn't a big match player? How much credibility are you going to squander in the name of getting Becca to slob your knob?

Fuck that, I would LOVE to be...Can you imagine how amazing the pussy would have to be!??! I bet jelly beans fall outta that motherfucker after the deed is done!!

Also, the title reign which followed has fuck all to do with what occured in the match were he won it.

Once again I say.....Only in the WZ tournament.

 

[FlexAmerican Dynamite]

Shawn should not have gone over Brock and theres no way in hell he goes over Punk.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

My useless fact proved that Foley had more business being on top than Triple H, it could be argued that he was more destined to be a top guy but was probably held back because he's fat, I wouldn't argue with that assessment, even now he can't headline a Hall Of Fame class, which is pure, pure bullshit. Before anybody says that its because Trips talked Bruno in, if he hadn't have done that DX would've gone in as headliners this year.

Like it or not, you are holding it against him because he was used to put over people. Whereas his legacy and everything else puts him on a top tier level and he can always feasibly beat HHH.

My point? In a tourney to crown the greatest wrestler ever, when two guys are as evenly matched as HHH and Foley, maybe its best to put the win/loss record aside and vote for the one people actually wanted to see, the one who made people like Austin/Rock/Undertaker as good as they were as opposed to the one that leached off of them and nearly sucked all the life out of the WWE. The Attitude Era afterbirth.

Now stop being such a defensive douche. I am bored of this already.

From what I've seen most vote for who would win a match given certain circumstances and not who is greatest. Take the Warrior vs. Savage match, everyone says Savage is better but voted for Warrior because he's more likely to win the match between the 2, although you can vote however you want. I think Foley is greater, always have but don't think he would win the match. I would also never hold it against him and in my opinion him being chosen to get guys like Rock and HHH says a lot about Foley. Its been said that the best top guys are the ones who can elevate their opponent while not causing themselves any harm and Foley had that in spades.

I just feel Foleys role wasn't the same as guys like the Rock or HHH, his job was to put top guys over to raise their stock. I just don't know how I'm knocking Foley by saying that.

Sorry if I was a douche, it pisses me off when people put words in my mouth. I'm just saying don't quote a person and completely miss what they are saying. Whatever though its done now and as Foley would say Have a Nice Day.

 

[shattered dreams]

Maybe Warrior over Savage in that match while they were both alive but people are forgetting to give Savage his death increases your abilities boost.

 

[SSJPhenom]

From what I've seen most vote for who would win a match given certain circumstances and not who is greatest. Take the Warrior vs. Savage match, everyone says Savage is better but voted for Warrior because he's more likely to win the match between the 2, although you can vote however you want.

If we didn't vote on match types and in certain situations and only voted for who we felt was the greatest; then wouldn't the tournament have the same out come every year?

You know; always come down to Hogan, Austin, the Rock, and Cena (maybe Flair), with Hogan winning it every year?

 

[Mighty NorCal]

If we didn't vote on match types and in certain situations and only voted for who we felt was the greatest; then wouldn't the tournament have the same out come every year?

You know; always come down to Hogan, Austin, the Rock, and Cena (maybe Flair), with Hogan winning it every year?

It was originallt supposed to be a combination of the two. Kayfabe powers at the height of their prime, and who is the greater overall / prolific carreer.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

If we didn't vote on match types and in certain situations and only voted for who we felt was the greatest; then wouldn't the tournament have the same out come every year?

You know; always come down to Hogan, Austin, the Rock, and Cena (maybe Flair), with Hogan winning it every year?

That's my point exactly, it would be boring just to vote for the greatest every year which is why most don't do it, myself being one of them. I vote for who I think would win said match given the circumstances presented to me, its just much more enjoyable to me that way.

 

[Coco]

KB seems to be ducking me.

I think my work is done here.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

KB seems to be ducking me.

I think my work is done here.

Here's what I don't get.

We have a guy constantly called the best of all time by his peers and then we have a guy who has lost to Kane, Daniel Bryan and Alberto Del Rio.

Why should we hold it against Punk that he lost a few times during his title reign to guys like Kane and Daniel Bryan? During Cena's year-long reign, he lost to Kevin Federline, Khali, and Carlito.

I guess I don't invest heavily in wins and losses when you hold the title that long. Besides, he beat all of those guys in title matches on PPV so does a few losses here and there over a year's time really matter?

 

[klunderbunker]

Here's what I don't get.



Why should we hold it against Punk that he lost a few times during his title reign to guys like Kane and Daniel Bryan? During Cena's year-long reign, he lost to Kevin Federline, Khali, and Carlito.

I guess I don't invest heavily in wins and losses when you hold the title that long. Besides, he beat all of those guys in title matches on PPV so does a few losses here and there over a year's time really matter?

When we're talking about his prime, which in theory would be last year, and he lost that much on TV? Yeah I would think so.

 

[klunderbunker]

KB seems to be ducking me.

I think my work is done here.

Oh don't worry. I'll be getting there.

 

[Bernkastel]

If we didn't vote on match types and in certain situations and only voted for who we felt was the greatest; then wouldn't the tournament have the same out come every year?

You know; always come down to Hogan, Austin, the Rock, and Cena (maybe Flair), with Hogan winning it every year?

I find it to be the gimmick rounds that tend to change everything - neither Flair nor Hogan have won this thing largely because of the gimmick rounds - and by the championship rounds, it can be pretty easy to call the semifinals and finals just looking at the guys that remain.

 

[Coco]

Here's what I don't get.



Why should we hold it against Punk that he lost a few times during his title reign to guys like Kane and Daniel Bryan? During Cena's year-long reign, he lost to Kevin Federline, Khali, and Carlito.

I guess I don't invest heavily in wins and losses when you hold the title that long. Besides, he beat all of those guys in title matches on PPV so does a few losses here and there over a year's time really matter?

I'm not on your side here. I think Punk should be held accountable for those losses, just as I'd hold HBK accountable for similar losses. But the fact of the matter is that even taking Punk's losses into consideration, I still think he and HBK are on relatively even footing in terms of kayfabe success and star power. As such, Punk's record of huge home town wins becomes the deciding factor for me.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

That's fair.

 

[Coco]

FWIW, I'm very proud of my last post in the Punk-Michaels thread. I expect Dagger to accidentally infract me for it in the near future.