Jump to content

Monday Night Raw Live


Ludo*1

Recommended Posts

Are they even contemplating jobbing the Undertaker to a 46 year old spot monkey? Who hasn't been seen in almost 10 years?

Lockbox?

What the heck is going on in that place? Honestly? Who thinks this nonsense up (Rhetorical question, we all know the answer).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just read the results from last night's show and the whole thing sounds brutal. Is this what we want to see in 2016, a recycled Authority storyline from 2000? Why must everything reference the Attitude Era? I didn't really care much for Shane McMahon when I was watching the wrestling as a boy so this means nothing to me, there's nothing to get invested in.

What a way for the Undertaker to go out. Let's hope there's a massive swerve somewhere down the line. The road to WrestleMania starts here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Wrestlemania escalated quickly.

I had a notification when I woke up of a Youtube channel I subscribe to with a video entitled "Undertaker vs Shane O'Mac for WM?!?!!", and I assumed the dirtsheets were having a field day and just making shit up. But no, went to look at the RAW write-ups, and the crazy b*****ds have actually done it.

First thoughts, I actually like it. IF it happens, then we're not going to get a technical masterpiece, but it has that unknown factor. It's hell in a cell, Undertaker isn't going to be stretched to lengths he can't quite reach anymore (Lesnar especially) and it can be a slow-paced bah-gawd slobberknocker of a match. It's one I'd actually like to see right now, although that opinion can change if they ruin the build.

Then you think about it a bit more. Shane has come back as the face GM kind of role (or potential at least), the spot I h oped they'd give to Daniel Bryan. I think it's something that they could bring in to breathe some life into a product that badly needs something new for the authority to do, or just to go away for a bit. So in that sense, it's a decent move. BUT, that essentially means that they're trying to paint Undertaker as a heel. I know they teased that with Lesnar and the rampant dick kicking, but is anyone really going to treat Undertaker as a heel at Wrestlemania? Not a chance.

What would have made more sense would be for Shane to go after a heel with the same stipulation, then he turns up injured with a few weeks to go. Who replaces him to fight for control of RAW? Undertaker.

Which takes me to the last point - the video I watched made a good point that they couldn't really see this match actually happening. Something will happen, Shane will drop out, and then we get a representative against Undertaker instead. Maybe Cena, given he is making vaguer and vaguer comments about working hard to get back.

Well they've certainly got people talking, and they needed that post Fastlane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shane was gash last time. This can f**k off.

Agreed. Shane is dreadful.

Just read the results from last night's show and the whole thing sounds brutal. Is this what we want to see in 2016, a recycled Authority storyline from 2000? Why must everything reference the Attitude Era? I didn't really care much for Shane McMahon when I was watching the wrestling as a boy so this means nothing to me, there's nothing to get invested in.

What a way for the Undertaker to go out. Let's hope there's a massive swerve somewhere down the line. The road to WrestleMania starts here!

This is exactly what I was thinking, specifically Mania 2000 with a McMahon in every corner.

What must the wrestlers be thinking when the grand plan to turn things around seems to be Shane McMahon?! Truly utter nonsense. They could actually get behind some guys for once, promote some folk from NXT, fire shite like Show, Kane, Henry, The Ascension and generally freshen things up.

Instead we get Shane McMahon. Whilst he had a couple of mental matches in 2000/01, he surely won't be able to do that shit again.

This is tragic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as he doesn't do those god awful punches it could be alright. It just doesn't make any sense from a booking standpoint though, I cant figure out any logical reason why Shane would fight Undertaker. None whatsoever, did they explain anything on Raw?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...