It's May 13, 2024, 02:23:38 AM
HoF 2014 looks already better than WM9 and WM11. lol
Quote from: Marty Jannetty on March 29, 2014, 04:51:42 PMHoF 2014 looks already better than WM9 and WM11. lolI wonder if they'll have anybody else or not. If not, I wonder who the 'main event' will be of the HoF (I'd assume Warrior).Anybody else wonder why they're inducting the Razor Ramon character rather than Scott Hall's career in whole?
Anybody else wonder why they're inducting the Razor Ramon character rather than Scott Hall's career in whole?
Quote from: Mo Z. Dizzle on March 29, 2014, 05:07:11 PMQuote from: Marty Jannetty on March 29, 2014, 04:51:42 PMHoF 2014 looks already better than WM9 and WM11. lolI wonder if they'll have anybody else or not. If not, I wonder who the 'main event' will be of the HoF (I'd assume Warrior).Anybody else wonder why they're inducting the Razor Ramon character rather than Scott Hall's career in whole?I think that's it. For the most part they always went with 6-7 inductees and they are at 7 already. I think that they could have saved either Warrior, Snake or Hall for another year but that they might have thought better to do it now when they are all willing/alive. My take on the Razor thing is that they want to prove that his Razor run in WWF is HoF worthy and that way they give props to themselves. Plus, I think they will introduce him as Scott Hall as part of the NWO which will come in 5 years.
Quote from: Mo Z. Dizzle on March 29, 2014, 05:07:11 PMAnybody else wonder why they're inducting the Razor Ramon character rather than Scott Hall's career in whole?Typical Vince bullshit - truth is, Scott Hall's character was bigger durning his WCW days but WWE won't ever admit it... SMFH.
Worst move WWE could make. Why have a part-time wrestler break the streak?They could have easily broken the streak to help build a future star (e.g.Roman Reigns; Bray Wyatt).
I'm not watching wrestling anymore
Quote from: Mo Z. Dizzle on April 06, 2014, 07:02:37 PMWorst move WWE could make. Why have a part-time wrestler break the streak?They could have easily broken the streak to help build a future star (e.g.Roman Reigns; Bray Wyatt). WWE had nothing to do with it . Undertaker chose Brock to lose to. Undertaker had creative control over the streak & choice who he lost to. . So it was all The Undertakers choice not WWE.
Quote from: midwestryder on April 07, 2014, 06:55:42 AMQuote from: Mo Z. Dizzle on April 06, 2014, 07:02:37 PMWorst move WWE could make. Why have a part-time wrestler break the streak?They could have easily broken the streak to help build a future star (e.g.Roman Reigns; Bray Wyatt). WWE had nothing to do with it . Undertaker chose Brock to lose to. Undertaker had creative control over the streak & choice who he lost to. . So it was all The Undertakers choice not WWE.Yeah; I saw the reports earlier today (which came up after my post). To each their own.Word is that he's done now w/wrestling as well.....so much for the Sting vs. Taker match (still hoping for that to happen).