To Watch or Not to Watch...

[shattered dreams]

Got to agree with you about the nostalgia being the most disappointing part. The vast majority of it just wasn't special. They seemed to go to more trouble to get an put over Charlie Sheen than they did anyone from Raw's past. The main event was so shitty that I almost turned it off before the moderately interesting thing happened.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Yeah that match did kind of blow. They were just going through the motions. I forgive em, though. Their match last year still hasn't been topped since.

This Heath Slater argument is ******ed. He's not very good as a talker, but he's magnificent at bumping at selling which is incredibly more important than any of the other shit. He's a jobber and he's pretty good at it. He was the perfect candidate for that little legends squash gauntlet.

 

[Барбоса]

Yeah that match did kind of blow. They were just going through the motions. I forgive em, though. Their match last year still hasn't been topped since.

Personally, I thought that the main event was like the opening act of a match that was planned to last 45mins. I suppose you could argue from a kayfabe POV that they were pacing themselves for what was to be a long match but from a planning POV they could probably have gone out at a higher pace, especially if part of the point of the show was to get those who tuned in to be impressed by the wrestling.

However, given the swerve at the end, they were wise not to shoot their bolt before the inevitable rematch.

This Heath Slater argument is ******ed. He's not very good as a talker, but he's magnificent at bumping at selling which is incredibly more important than any of the other shit. He's a jobber and he's pretty good at it. He was the perfect candidate for that little legends squash gauntlet.

This right here. How people do not understand the role that Slater is playing boggles my mind. If you were not even slightly entertained by the One Man Band setting himself up for a fall each and every week and selling that fall like a champ then I think that WWE and TNA have done such a poor job in highlighting the various levels of performer outside of the upper card and main event stars that people have forgotten that there is still a need for a clown. Either than or you personally have a distorted view of what a wrestling show really is.

The expectation that Slater should be AJ Styles, Kurt Angle or John Cena in the ring or a heel the calibre of Bobby Roode or Daniel Bryan is just ludicrous.

Slater is at this moment the heel Santino or Eric Young of the card; except seeing him get annihilated all and sundry is more entertaining than anything those two have done. Rather than being the X-PAC of Triple X who you didn't want to see do anything, Slater is the ridiculously and unjustifiably cocky heel that the crowd enjoys seeing getting beaten up.

And people wanting and, in the case of RAW1000, tuning in to see a heel get beaten up is the definitiion of a heel doing his job.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I don't expect Slater to be "AJ Styles or Kurt Angle or John Cena". I expect him to be entertaining, which he's not. Having a personality matters, even when you're the guy just "jobbing" to legends.

Just my two cents, and as usual, I'm in total agreement with shattered dreams.

 

[Барбоса]

So it wasn't you that compared Slater to Roode or Bully Ray?

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Yes. Not "AJ Styles, Kurt Angle or John Cena" though. Those three men are verifiable superstars (at least Angle and Cena).

But again, my point stands, regardless of whether you agree with the comparison. He's not entertaining, even if he can sell better than others. I can think of a handful of more entertaining performers who've gone through losing streaks that were much, much more entertaining to watch. MVP, Samoa Joe, Jay Lethal (as Black Machismo, not Jay Lethal), AJ Styles, Santino, etc.

When you're in a program like that, you need to be able to sell the PROCESS, not just the act of you losing.

 

[Барбоса]

I would not put it in the "losing streak" bracket of storylines. That kind of situation is used so the eventual breaking of that streak gets the loser over. "Legends vs Slater" was in no way about getting Slater himself over (although if Foley's Tweet is to be believed, Slater has done himself no damage by working well with the Legends). It was about using the Legends for an entertaining segment.

And if people found seeing Slater get punked out entertaining then it stands to reason that he is part of that entertainment, even if it was more about the Legends themselves.

Would it really have been as entertaining without Slater's selling ability or his grating One Man Rock Band gimmick?

I sincerely doubt it.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Yes, because they care about the people punking him out, not because they care about him. Replace Sid, Animal, Vader, etc. with total fucking no-namers from WWE's past and I guarantee you no one gives a flying fuck about this angle.

The whole thing, from what I gather, was about the excitement about "which legend is next?", not "how great could Slater sell a clothesline from the Brooklyn Brawler?".

 

[Барбоса]

Sorry, I was editing my last post when you were replying.

The whole thing, from what I gather, was about the excitement about "which legend is next?", not "how great could Slater sell a clothesline from the Brooklyn Brawler?".

Personally, I think it started off as "Which Legend is next?" but by the end it was more "How is Slater going to sell his beating this week? feat. A Legend"

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Well I'll have to bow to your knowledge on it, because admittedly I didn't watch them. I saw the Sid return on YouTube and only heard about the returns of the others, so the only one I saw in real-time, live, and in it's entirety was the one with Lita.

Either way I still think Slater is awful. Like bad awful. Not like a "he's so bad it's good" kinda way. Like an "I change the channel" when he comes on kinda way. Same goes for Miz.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I don't expect Slater to be "AJ Styles or Kurt Angle or John Cena". I expect him to be entertaining, which he's not. Having a personality matters, even when you're the guy just "jobbing" to legends.

Just my two cents, and as usual, I'm in total agreement with shattered dreams.

Now that's just total horseshit. He absolutely does have a personality.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Heath Slater? Yes, and it is strikingly similar (and equally as entertaining) as a dial tone.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Heath Slater? Yes, and it is strikingly similar (and equally as entertaining) as a dial tone.

The entertainment value of it is subjective, but to say that there's no personality there is wrong. That would be like me watching TNA for the first time in over a year and saying that Austin Aries is a spot monkey after watching one match.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

That's not the first time I've seen or heard Slater talk. He was one of the original cards available for the Dialtone Personality Club I created years back.

Right along side a good chunk of Nexus:

Spoiler

Etc.

 

[.]

Yes but that was a couple of years ago. Did you see his segment with Cyndi Lauper? He's the saving grace.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Last time I saw AA, he was putting on standard Indy style (trash) matches. I haven't seen him in over a year, but I'll watch one segment on Impact next week and make a sweeping generalization of his entire body of work.

Cue someone coming and here and shitting on me for comparing Heath Slater to Austin Aries, completely missing the point.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Last time I saw AA, he was putting on standard Indy style (trash) matches. I haven't seen him in over a year, but I'll watch one segment on Impact next week and make a sweeping generalization of his entire body of work.

Cue someone coming and here and shitting on me for comparing Heath Slater to Austin Aries, completely missing the point.

Go for it. No skin off my back. I've seen Slater through all of Nexus (before I bailed) and then again this past week, and during the Sid return which I watched on YouTube. I see NO difference whatsoever in who he is now versus who he was then. I see the same, bumbling, terrible public speaker who sounds like he's got a mouth full of marbles when he's cutting a promo.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I watched Slater through all of Nexus as well. Pretty sure he never spoke.

 

[jmt225]

As I said earlier, the Heath Slater gimmick worked for me because he was horrible. Yes, his selling was good too, but there are plenty of guys who can bump. But Slater's personality is so bad that it made it fun to see him cut this awful promo every week, only for some irrelevant "legend" to come down and beat his ass. If they had replaced Slater with a talented guy who could cut a good promo, then the gimmick wouldn't have been anywhere near as fun to watch.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

As I said earlier, the Heath Slater gimmick worked for me because he was horrible. Yes, his selling was good too, but there are plenty of guys who can bump. But Slater's personality is so bad that it made it fun to see him cut this awful promo every week, only for some irrelevant "legend" to come down and beat his ass. If they had replaced Slater with a talented guy who could cut a good promo, then the gimmick wouldn't have been anywhere near as fun to watch.

I think it's easy to say that, though, because you're putting the focus on Slater. I still don't think it was about him. I think it was about "who's next" to beat his ass. The focus was entirely on the legends coming to the ring, as it was known he'd essentially lose to them all, just like TNA was doing with Black Machismo a few years ago when he lost to Tatanka and Jim Niedhart.