|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:55 am
the dead man is bck and he takin his anger out on cm punk man i kant wait til they braw it out in the ring i mean we al know who is goin 2 win right? kome on punk has skillz but is is nowhere near ready 2 fight tanker(1of the greats) so wat does the wwe universe think wil happen pleaz respond
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:55 pm
If the WWE was real
Undertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS.
Since it's not
Two things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time.
Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:06 pm
I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't be complaining about little things like this, but how hard is it to spell correctly and/or type slowly? I can't keep editing these posts so that people like you appear to be of average intelligence.
Undertanker...oy. How do you not even see that?
/ranting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 7:46 pm
Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thorax_The_Impaler Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 9:14 am
Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. yo i thought i liked tanker but i guess i was wrong tanker is 1 of da greats so deal wit it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:28 am
Captain Edge78 Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. yo i thought i liked tanker but i guess i was wrong tanker is 1 of da greats so deal wit it Ok, now I think you're just doing it on purpose. TAKER! TAKER! No N! He is not a military vehicle!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:41 pm
Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton. For one, he's not one of the greatest champs. He's a good wrestler but whenever he's champ he's like Jeff Hardy, can't hold on to it. Next CM Punk has yet to show much emotion as the undertaker because, well obviously undertake has been a wrestler way longer than punk, CM Punk has played all of those emotions you just stated. I bet you can't even name the last time undertaker was champ without searching it. Also Captain Edge78, the undertaker has been one of my fave wrestlers since I was a kid, I'm just not in denial to think he's a good champion. I won't ever think that. From his like what 20 years in the business he's only won the title 6 times and he's not simultaneously in every ppv match, even before his hiatus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:02 am
Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton. For one, he's not one of the greatest champs. He's a good wrestler but whenever he's champ he's like Jeff Hardy, can't hold on to it. Next CM Punk has yet to show much emotion as the undertaker because, well obviously undertake has been a wrestler way longer than punk, CM Punk has played all of those emotions you just stated. I bet you can't even name the last time undertaker was champ without searching it. Also Captain Edge78, the undertaker has been one of my fave wrestlers since I was a kid, I'm just not in denial to think he's a good champion. I won't ever think that. From his like what 20 years in the business he's only won the title 6 times and he's not simultaneously in every ppv match, even before his hiatus. Last time Undertaker was champ. Was either after WM 23 when he beat Batista or he might have beaten Edge for it but I can't remember who won the match. True Punk hasn't been in the WWE as long but I don't think Punk will last as long as everyone seems to think. And being a good champion doesn't mean keeping the title for a long time or how many title reigns you have (if it does the greatest WWE champino was Brunno Sammartino) because that isn't decided by wrestling skill. It would be your ability to sell moves and to compel the audience to believe it is real. Taker can do that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thorax_The_Impaler Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:19 pm
Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton. For one, he's not one of the greatest champs. He's a good wrestler but whenever he's champ he's like Jeff Hardy, can't hold on to it. Next CM Punk has yet to show much emotion as the undertaker because, well obviously undertake has been a wrestler way longer than punk, CM Punk has played all of those emotions you just stated. I bet you can't even name the last time undertaker was champ without searching it. Also Captain Edge78, the undertaker has been one of my fave wrestlers since I was a kid, I'm just not in denial to think he's a good champion. I won't ever think that. From his like what 20 years in the business he's only won the title 6 times and he's not simultaneously in every ppv match, even before his hiatus. Last time Undertaker was champ. Was either after WM 23 when he beat Batista or he might have beaten Edge for it but I can't remember who won the match. True Punk hasn't been in the WWE as long but I don't think Punk will last as long as everyone seems to think. And being a good champion doesn't mean keeping the title for a long time or how many title reigns you have (if it does the greatest WWE champino was Brunno Sammartino) because that isn't decided by wrestling skill. It would be your ability to sell moves and to compel the audience to believe it is real. Taker can do that. Everything you've said so far is everything that makes a good actor. Sure Undertaker is a great actor. Being a good champ IS holding your title for as long as possible and defending it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 1:32 pm
Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton. For one, he's not one of the greatest champs. He's a good wrestler but whenever he's champ he's like Jeff Hardy, can't hold on to it. Next CM Punk has yet to show much emotion as the undertaker because, well obviously undertake has been a wrestler way longer than punk, CM Punk has played all of those emotions you just stated. I bet you can't even name the last time undertaker was champ without searching it. Also Captain Edge78, the undertaker has been one of my fave wrestlers since I was a kid, I'm just not in denial to think he's a good champion. I won't ever think that. From his like what 20 years in the business he's only won the title 6 times and he's not simultaneously in every ppv match, even before his hiatus. Last time Undertaker was champ. Was either after WM 23 when he beat Batista or he might have beaten Edge for it but I can't remember who won the match. True Punk hasn't been in the WWE as long but I don't think Punk will last as long as everyone seems to think. And being a good champion doesn't mean keeping the title for a long time or how many title reigns you have (if it does the greatest WWE champino was Brunno Sammartino) because that isn't decided by wrestling skill. It would be your ability to sell moves and to compel the audience to believe it is real. Taker can do that. yea he beat edge at wm 24 he finished him with the hells gate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thorax_The_Impaler Captain
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:09 pm
Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton. For one, he's not one of the greatest champs. He's a good wrestler but whenever he's champ he's like Jeff Hardy, can't hold on to it. Next CM Punk has yet to show much emotion as the undertaker because, well obviously undertake has been a wrestler way longer than punk, CM Punk has played all of those emotions you just stated. I bet you can't even name the last time undertaker was champ without searching it. Also Captain Edge78, the undertaker has been one of my fave wrestlers since I was a kid, I'm just not in denial to think he's a good champion. I won't ever think that. From his like what 20 years in the business he's only won the title 6 times and he's not simultaneously in every ppv match, even before his hiatus. Last time Undertaker was champ. Was either after WM 23 when he beat Batista or he might have beaten Edge for it but I can't remember who won the match. True Punk hasn't been in the WWE as long but I don't think Punk will last as long as everyone seems to think. And being a good champion doesn't mean keeping the title for a long time or how many title reigns you have (if it does the greatest WWE champino was Brunno Sammartino) because that isn't decided by wrestling skill. It would be your ability to sell moves and to compel the audience to believe it is real. Taker can do that. Everything you've said so far is everything that makes a good actor. Sure Undertaker is a great actor. Being a good champ IS holding your title for as long as possible and defending it. No it doesn't because everything is scripted so you can't go on how long they hold it. All wrestling in about now a days is making money and getting ratings. Maybe back when Vince's father ran the company you could say that because Taker hasn't held on to it for a long time he was't good but nowadays holding on to a title doesn't make you a good champion. Undertaker is a good actor and guess what that is what WWE and TNA are about. The entire thing is basically on big soap-opera. So being a good actor would be pretty useful. That being a part of the McMahon family or being John Cena.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 7:09 pm
i wit u on the john cena thing but i not sure bout the rest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:46 am
Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI Thorax_The_Impaler Les PauI If the WWE was realUndertaker is old as hell, thats why he doesn't pull off the old school and go in the air as much as he use to. In reality CM Punk would beat the Undertaker, I mean to be honest all CM Punk ever has to do in any match is hit the GTS. Since it's notTwo things are gonna happen this Friday night. Either Undertaker is gonna start a beef with CM Punk and try to become WH Champ. Or...Undertaker was just using that as a comeback like how the WWE did with Matt Hardy and Shawn Michaels. Giving them all these bullshit old school reuniting for a short period of time. Honestly Undertaker whenever he was champ, he wasn't a good one. How the hell was Undertaker not a good champion? He is one of the greatest ever. He can compel the audience. He has proven he can do way more emotions then Punk has ever shown. He can do any emotion needed. He can be heartless and cold, emotionless, he has even played sentimental before. Lets see Punk do all that. Undertaker has proven to be one of the best champions. Better than any champion in a while. Mych better than Puck, Hardy, Cena or Orton. For one, he's not one of the greatest champs. He's a good wrestler but whenever he's champ he's like Jeff Hardy, can't hold on to it. Next CM Punk has yet to show much emotion as the undertaker because, well obviously undertake has been a wrestler way longer than punk, CM Punk has played all of those emotions you just stated. I bet you can't even name the last time undertaker was champ without searching it. Also Captain Edge78, the undertaker has been one of my fave wrestlers since I was a kid, I'm just not in denial to think he's a good champion. I won't ever think that. From his like what 20 years in the business he's only won the title 6 times and he's not simultaneously in every ppv match, even before his hiatus. Last time Undertaker was champ. Was either after WM 23 when he beat Batista or he might have beaten Edge for it but I can't remember who won the match. True Punk hasn't been in the WWE as long but I don't think Punk will last as long as everyone seems to think. And being a good champion doesn't mean keeping the title for a long time or how many title reigns you have (if it does the greatest WWE champino was Brunno Sammartino) because that isn't decided by wrestling skill. It would be your ability to sell moves and to compel the audience to believe it is real. Taker can do that. Everything you've said so far is everything that makes a good actor. Sure Undertaker is a great actor. Being a good champ IS holding your title for as long as possible and defending it. No it doesn't because everything is scripted so you can't go on how long they hold it. All wrestling in about now a days is making money and getting ratings. Maybe back when Vince's father ran the company you could say that because Taker hasn't held on to it for a long time he was't good but nowadays holding on to a title doesn't make you a good champion. Undertaker is a good actor and guess what that is what WWE and TNA are about. The entire thing is basically on big soap-opera. So being a good actor would be pretty useful. That being a part of the McMahon family or being John Cena. Okay think about this. Who are all the wrestlers thats ever been in the WWE that are always featured in these DVD's and what not. They've all had long title reigns, like take for instance MVP, he's a horrible actor lets be honest. He was one of the longest reigning USA champ or whatever, he does all these interviews and what not for the WWE and outside of the wwe. Hulk Hogan was a horrible actor, he constantly forgot his lines and went of script. He's always being d**k ridin by the WWE because he was a long reigning champ. I can argue this all day, the fact is even though it's scripted the wrestlers actually have skill and certain moves they can do better than others. All of the current wrestlers in the WWE were actual wrestlers before they went don't the path to pro wrestling. It's not about the acting, if they cared about the acting they wouldn't have bullshit actors like Khali, Rey Mysterio, Cryme Tyme and a ton of others. It's about there actual physical strength so they can pull off moves even if there scripted. Thats how the WWE picks it's champions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:21 am
I'm sorry to have to say this, but it's neither acting or wrestling skills that makes a good champion. It's all about popularity, and how well liked a wrestler is both in and out of the ring. Sure those two factors come into play sometimes, but it doesn't mean anything if the crowd doesn't like him or her.
The belts are glorified props used to show what wrestlers are meeting the fans interest and are selling the most merchandise and ppv ticket sales. Sometimes the belt is used to enhance a storyline, but it eventually makes its way to the most popular wrestler.
This applies not only to WWE, but to TNA, ROH, and all other wrestling federations. Guys like Bruno Sammartino who held the belt for over seven years did so because there were territories throughout the U.S. where a wrestler could defect from one brand to the next. Each brand needed to show its superiority over the others, so when the WWWF gives a recognized figure like Sammartino a lengthy reign, it doesn't mean he's a good champion. He was just good for business.
Good champions are in real sporting events like MMA or amateur wrestling. These groups are taken seriously because it's real, not scripted. When Brock Lesnar held the WWE title, he was never considered a threat by UFC fighters. Once he won the UFC title though, he was eventually considered a legit fighter and gained the respect of his peers.
However Vince wants to sell it to you guys, good champions in pro wrestling are manufactured in the back, not born.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:49 am
Gibby4 I'm sorry to have to say this, but it's neither acting or wrestling skills that makes a good champion. It's all about popularity, and how well liked a wrestler is both in and out of the ring. Sure those two factors come into play sometimes, but it doesn't mean anything if the crowd doesn't like him or her. The belts are glorified props used to show what wrestlers are meeting the fans interest and are selling the most merchandise and ppv ticket sales. Sometimes the belt is used to enhance a storyline, but it eventually makes its way to the most popular wrestler. This applies not only to WWE, but to TNA, ROH, and all other wrestling federations. Guys like Bruno Sammartino who held the belt for over seven years did so because there were territories throughout the U.S. where a wrestler could defect from one brand to the next. Each brand needed to show its superiority over the others, so when the WWWF gives a recognized figure like Sammartino a lengthy reign, it doesn't mean he's a good champion. He was just good for business. Good champions are in real sporting events like MMA or amateur wrestling. These groups are taken seriously because it's real, not scripted. When Brock Lesnar held the WWE title, he was never considered a threat by UFC fighters. Once he won the UFC title though, he was eventually considered a legit fighter and gained the respect of his peers. However Vince wants to sell it to you guys, good champions in pro wrestling are manufactured in the back, not born. wel ur right bout most of those things but wat bout UFC they go by who ever wins
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
