Jump to content

Monday Night Raw Live


Ludo*1

Recommended Posts

Austin wasn't at Mania 2000 (main event was HHH vs Rock vs Foley vs Show).

Taker doesn't have to be a heel if he really will be facing Shane. He could play the part of the guy not wanting to do it but threatened with the old 'you're fired!' schtick if he doesn't go along with it. It could be a reluctant beating he dishes out only for whatever sort of interference that happens to come along later.

Still hoping though that he faces someone else.

And of course, by saying Austin, I meant HHH, and was just testing...aye :unsure: Yes, Rock vs HHH was pretty good, not Austin. That was around the time he was "hit by a car" and went for surgery, wasn't it?

Edited by forameus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shane O back is fucking great, I've only been dreaming of it for months :lol:

Surely they can't have him fighting Taker tho. I can see Taker telling Vince to ram it next week and Vince turning on him leading to Taker for Shane against someone like that monster Whyat dude for Vince.

Perhaps even the Rock V Taker if Taker accepts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And of course, by saying Austin, I meant HHH, and was just testing...aye :unsure: Yes, Rock vs HHH was pretty good, not Austin. That was around the time he was "hit by a car" and went for surgery, wasn't it?

Aye. Survivor Series 99 was when he was written out.

Or curve ball Taker v Stone Cold?

Stone Cold will never wrestle again (it's been 13 years since he last did so).

Edited by DA Baracus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

bambino7, on 24 Feb 2016 - 15:49, said:

Or curve ball Taker v Stone Cold?

No.

I still don't see them changing the match for anyone other than Cena, and even then I don't see it. It's now a match advertised for PPV. I can't remember them every going back on that unless it's been forced. Or they've added someone to the match, rather than take someone out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye. Survivor Series 99 was when he was written out.

Stone Cold will never wrestle again (it's been 13 years since he last did so).

Retirement match in his home state?

See WWE are advertising wwe raw v wwe in events after 'maina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retirement match in his home state?

See WWE are advertising wwe raw v wwe in events after 'maina.

He's already had his retirement match (although it was never advertised as such). He won't wrestle again.

Also seemingly that was a typo and it's been corrected now. But it might just be them covering their tracks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Austin's neck still not ruined?

If anything for old times sake he might come out to stunner someone, drink beer and rant down a microphone.

I'm certain he'll be at the show but don't know if he'll have a serious role. I'd love for him to be involved though. It's clear they don't know what they're doing with the new guys anyway so might as well push the legends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could well end up being host. Would make the most sense. He's not going to wrestle, and being in someone's corner would either lead to him just being a cheerleader, or stealing the spotlight. Have him open the show, maybe do a segment with someone later on. Job done.

In fact, if Vince is at ringside (cellside) for the Taker/Shane match, have him come down at the moment that Vince is threatening to derail the match, stunner him, and then leave. Pop would be enormous. Of course it would make absolutely no sense, but who cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone still actually give a f**k about heel vs babyface dynamics anymore, just put two guys with momentum together and let them do their thing. This obviously in reference to Lesnar vs Ambrose, Shane vs Taker is something different altogether and I'd be amazed if Taker didn't address the bizarreness of representing McMahon before long. But in the case of Lesnar/Ambrose you can hardly say it's a case of the company not "getting it" and in any case Lesnar is hardly exhibiting the behaviour of a face anyway, what, just cos he was up against a low-blowing Undertaker a few months back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone still actually give a f**k about heel vs babyface dynamics anymore, just put two guys with momentum together and let them do their thing. This obviously in reference to Lesnar vs Ambrose, Shane vs Taker is something different altogether and I'd be amazed if Taker didn't address the bizarreness of representing McMahon before long. But in the case of Lesnar/Ambrose you can hardly say it's a case of the company not "getting it" and in any case Lesnar is hardly exhibiting the behaviour of a face anyway, what, just cos he was up against a low-blowing Undertaker a few months back?

Plenty still do, but WWE are stuck in the past in their thinking. Just look at how all their heels have to be cowardly ones. Why can't we have a dominant heel who doesn't run away but is just a nasty b*****d (I suppose Lesnar was supposed to be this, but again showing how behind times WWE are, he was never going to get the boos)? And look at how anyone who isn't from America is given the gimmick of not being from America.

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...