Monthly News Thread (September 2017)

[Cor]

It literally does neither of those things. I've refuted your claims. That's all I needed to do because it was ridiculous on your part in the first place. lol

Brandi attempting to take an unneccessary shot at the WWE over nothing was ridiculous on my part? Yeah, okay.

You refuted nothing. All you said is they should have given credit to someone who named an event in a ticket release, and then said those who named/created other aspects aren't the same, assumingly because they aren't dead. Failed to acknowledged that WWE gives Dusty credit about everything he's done including his involvement with Starrcade.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Big wrestling shows are as old as the second ever wrestling show, it wasn't a new concept at all. In fact, the show that Starrcade replaced was a regular big show that was run there every year anyway. The only difference with Starrcade was them trying and go national to combat Vince who was already moving with WWF.

The big deal was having it on CCTV, right?

 

[DenisSamson3]

So will there be complaints if starrcade is a house show? Some might see it as a disservice to dusty. I have been reading some comments on the internet that this is another way for the wwe to crap on wcw. Some people take this stuff too seriously.

 

[GarbageGoal]

There's a huge segment of the IWC that sides with WWE quite often. Don't try to use some lame unfounded generalization to try and make your argument for you. Besides, Brandi isn't now nor has she ever been an internet darling and there's always a large segment of the internet willing to tell anyone and everyone to keep their mouth shut just because they can. It doesn't lend any credibility to your argument.

Especially if they're female (in addition to being "someone's wife" or "just a ring announcer").

 

[M.C.G. 31]

Network numbers in India have gone down since Mahal's title reign, per WON.

WWE.com also made its first mention of Paige since her suspension, noting she's returned to the PC, has been cleared to compete and is now a free agent and no longer on Raw.

 

[DenisSamson3]

Network numbers in India have gone down since Mahal's title reign, per WON.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Network numbers in India have gone down since Mahal's title reign, per WON.

WWE.com also made its first mention of Paige since her suspension, noting she's returned to the PC, has been cleared to compete and is now a free agent and no longer on Raw.

Turn her heel and put her on SD to feud with Becky and Charlotte as she claims she started the women's revolution, etc etc.

 

[M.C.G. 31]

I'd love for Paige to be the top heel of the SD Women's roster.

I miss that theme too

 

[Emperoreddy]

Either that or get murdered by Asuka on RAW

 

[DenisSamson3]

Michael Hayes

Starrcade was the creation of Dusty Rhodes and WWE producer Michael Hayes wants to honor that by having Cody Rhodes and his brother Goldust team at the upcoming live event.
As we previously reported, WWE announced this morning that they’d be reviving the Starrcade name for a live event in Greensboro, North Carolina next month and Cody reacted on Twitter by saying, “Dear @MichaelPSHayes1 If you’re afraid an event won’t sell cuz’ the holiday and want one of my Dad’s events…at least book Goldy..”

Hayes responded by saying, “So Cody, UR right we should have Goldy on the show, by the way, what R U doing that night??? Wanna team with UR Brother?”

www.prowrestlingsheet.com/michael-hayes-cody-rhodes-starrcade/#.WcFT-idlDqC

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Brandi attempting to take an unneccessary shot at the WWE over nothing was ridiculous on my part? Yeah, okay.

You refuted nothing. All you said is they should have given credit to someone who named an event in a ticket release, and then said those who named/created other aspects aren't the same, assumingly because they aren't dead. Failed to acknowledged that WWE gives Dusty credit about everything he's done including his involvement with Starrcade.

Unnecessary is a matter of opinion. Your shot at her is as unnecessary as you feel that hers is to WWE. They feel slighted because they never bothered to bring this back when Dusty was alive and they decided not to credit him thus far with what they've said about it. In their minds, it was a necessary shot because of how shady it looks to them regarding it.

And yes, I refuted it. All your argument on this matter has been is the credit given to him in other manners. But the way that this type of stuff tends to work is that even if you give credit for other things to the proper individual, if you try to run something that is also to be credited to them in a certain manner and don't, it will create issues even if you think they will do the right thing on the way and at the event itself.

You asked what are they supposed to do and have been told what they are supposed to do. You're the one that has been using straw man arguments and deflecting the issue. All they had to was a small blurb in their release about the event saying that Rhodes helped create the event and it wouldn't be an issue. Not very difficult but you're not getting it for some silly reason.

 

[DenisSamson3]

Unnecessary is a matter of opinion. Your shot at her is as unnecessary as you feel that hers is to WWE. They feel slighted because they never bothered to bring this back when Dusty was alive and they decided not to credit him thus far with what they've said about it. In their minds, it was a necessary shot because of how shady it looks to them regarding it.

And yes, I refuted it. All your argument on this matter has been is the credit given to him in other manners. But the way that this type of stuff tends to work is that even if you give credit for other things to the proper individual, if you try to run something that is also to be credited to them in a certain manner and don't, it will create issues even if you think they will do the right thing on the way and at the event itself.

You asked what are they supposed to do and have been told what they are supposed to do. You're the one that has been using straw man arguments and deflecting the issue. All they had to was a small blurb in their release about the event saying that Rhodes helped create the event and it wouldn't be an issue. Not very difficult but you're not getting it for some silly reason.

Looks like wwe is finding a compromise.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Looks like wwe is finding a compromise.

Wouldn't surprise me and it looks like Hayes is reaching out. I'm sure it was just a misunderstanding more than something malicious but it's understandable why the Rhodes outside of WWE may have an issue here.

 

[Deen]

I mean Goldust is still there, if this was such a big issue I am sure he could have said something.

 

[Cor]

Unnecessary is a matter of opinion. Your shot at her is as unnecessary as you feel that hers is to WWE. They feel slighted because they never bothered to bring this back when Dusty was alive and they decided not to credit him thus far with what they've said about it. In their minds, it was a necessary shot because of how shady it looks to them regarding it.

And yes, I refuted it. All your argument on this matter has been is the credit given to him in other manners. But the way that this type of stuff tends to work is that even if you give credit for other things to the proper individual, if you try to run something that is also to be credited to them in a certain manner and don't, it will create issues even if you think they will do the right thing on the way and at the event itself.

You asked what are they supposed to do and have been told what they are supposed to do. You're the one that has been using straw man arguments and deflecting the issue. All they had to was a small blurb in their release about the event saying that Rhodes helped create the event and it wouldn't be an issue. Not very difficult but you're not getting it for some silly reason.

Why the f would they go into the creation of the event in an event/ticket announcement? That's not how it works.

There's a whole DVD on Starrcade. Go watch that.

There will likely be a bunch of YT videos on it, leading up to the event. Watch those.

They will probably talk about stuff during the event itself, actually watch the event!

THAT is how it works.

It's not an issue. She tried to take a shot, it backfired.

The WWE did nothing different than any other event announcement. They did nothing wrong.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Why the f would they go into the creation of the event in an event/ticket announcement? That's not how it works.

There's a whole DVD on Starrcade. Go watch that.

There will likely be a bunch of YT videos on it, leading up to the event. Watch those.

They will probably talk about stuff during the event itself, actually watch the event!

THAT is how it works.

It's not an issue. She tried to take a shot, it backfired.

The WWE did nothing different than any other event announcement. They did nothing wrong.

Why? Pretty simple. It helps to hype the event and credits a well-known Hall of Famer who has family within your own company. It's a matter of respect and it isn't even that hard to do. You're the only one seeing it as some difficult thing to do. Telling me to watch some other stuff from the past doesn't mean that they shouldn't do what's right now when it comes to this. I agree that they will probably talk about Dusty leading up to it and at the event itself. It doesn't mean that they didn't make a mistake by not mentioning this type of thing in the statement they sent out there.

To say it isn't an issue is just factually incorrect. The Rhodes had an issue and Hayes is treating it like it is one by reaching out. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean they're wrong or right.

 

[Cor]

WWE did the same thing as every other release. Brandi jumped the gun.

That's all there is to it. It's not this big thing like you are making it seem

 

[Pinkfloyd]

WWE did the same thing as every other release. Brandi jumped the gun.

That's all there is to it. It's not this big thing like you are making it seem

Every other release doesn't include an event that was partially created by a somewhat recently deceased Hall of Famer of theirs. That's not all there is to it just because you choose to ignore things for your own convenience. Hell, I'm not even making it a big thing. There is a simple solution to it and I've repeatedly said that they will probably give credit on the way and at the event itself and that it's nothing malicious on WWE's part. The only reason why you think it's being made a big thing is because of your own exaggerations in your arguments.

 

[Emperoreddy]

That was pretty much the best response Hayes could have given to Cody.

Just makes Cody and Brandi look more out of line.

 

[dahrougem2]

Wonder what will happen to the WhatCulture guys. Personally, I love Blampied. I think the guy is hilarious.

 

[Kimi]

The big deal was having it on CCTV, right?

Yeah, from a business side of things that was the big step up from the past (the actual wrestling show was bigger too, but I'd say the business side is the most important in a historical context).


By 1983 Vince was already national with his TV, was touring nationwide, and hoarding talent. JCP was national (with a smaller footprint) via TBS, and understood that they had go as wide as Vince if they were to survive. Their goal was to unite the NWA under roof (JCP's own ofc) and to go toe-to-toe with Vince as a whole.

Starrcade was the first real big move to go big, even if it was still a local show (the CCTV was only in the south east). I think is very fair to say was the right move. Big flagship shows ended up being massively important to wrestling's future, far more so than the big shows of the past were to the territory markets.

The problem was that Vince was just levels above everyone else. Less than a year-and-a-half later he put on the first Wrestlemania that was bigger and better, getting mainstream with celebrities and what not. And also got to PPV first. So when Starrcade tried to get PPV later he inventing Survivor Series to go directly against it (which is fun story).

 

[garnetpalmetto]

Turn her heel and put her on SD to feud with Becky and Charlotte as she claims she started the women's revolution, etc etc.

So essentially Emma's gimmick?

 

[Emperoreddy]

Yeah, from a business side of things that was the big step up from the past (the actual wrestling show was bigger too, but I'd say the business side is the most important in a historical context).


By 1983 Vince was already national with his TV, was touring nationwide, and hoarding talent. JCP was national (with a smaller footprint) via TBS, and understood that they had go as wide as Vince if they were to survive. Their goal was to unite the NWA under roof (JCP's own ofc) and to go toe-to-toe with Vince as a whole.

Starrcade was the first real big move to go big, even if it was still a local show (the CCTV was only in the south east). I think is very fair to say was the right move. Big flagship shows ended up being massively important to wrestling's future, far more so than the big shows of the past were to the territory markets.

The problem was that Vince was just levels above everyone else. Less than a year-and-a-half later he put on the first Wrestlemania that was bigger and better, getting mainstream with celebrities and what not. And also got to PPV first. So when Starrcade tried to get PPV later he inventing Survivor Series to go directly against it (which is fun story).

The Survivor Series story is a great display of how ruthlessness Vince can be.

 

[M.C.G. 31]

So essentially Emma's gimmick?

Yeah but Paige can actually back it up storyline wise.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Paige would also be more aggressive about it. Emma's gimmick is more her whining, then trying to kick people's ***** for feeling slighted.