PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE

PWINSIDER Q&A: JIM ROSS CALLING ECW MATCHES, THE RISE AND FALL OF WCW AS A WWE DVD, HULK HOGAN'S INFLUENCE TOWARDS THE END OF HIS WWE RUN & MUCH MORE

In a real world situation which wrestler would be most likely to come out on top in a proper fight against all the others, would it be someone who has boxing abilities like Big Show or Undertaker or someone like Cena  because of their strength or even a smaller and much more agile guy?

It's impossible to say.  When something is a shoot, you never know when flukes or injuries are going to come into play.  I wouldn't even suggest who might be the toughest, although I certainly would put my money on Umaga if I had to pick someone because everyone knows the last person you want to be involved in a street fight with is an angry Samoan wrestler.

What's been going on with the Iron Sheik? He's seems almost incoherent when he rambles on and with some of the comments he made about B. Brian Blair. Is it just an act?  Does he hate Blair for something that happened in the ring or is it because he is a friend of Hulk Hogan. I know his daughter was murdered so maybe that had something to do with it?

I think it's a mixture of Sheik letting himself get carried away (for different reasons, some emotional, some chemical) and trying to re-create himself as some sort of comedy figure.  The problem is that no one seems to know where the comedy act ends and the actual person begins these days.  I believe the Blair stuff is a work, since Blair is among those scheduled to "roast" the Sheik this October in New Jersey.  I've written in the past that a number of people who make money off Sheik's antics might be well served to make sure that he's in the best of health.  I do believe the death of his daughter was a trigger for some of the antics, but he's been considered an "out there, eclectic" personality for many, many, many, many years.

I just read about Shawn Michaels' influence and about the Hulk Hogan situation. My questions is, wouldn't it have been better if HBK won the match? His losing to Hogan did nothing for Hogan since he disappeared and also the following year beating Randy Orton was also another Hogan winning did nothing to either man.

It would have made much more sense from a booking standpoint for Hogan to lose the first match to Michaels and then come back for a rematch but when he had full control over his matches at that point, Hogan got what he wanted.  Ditto the Randy Orton match.

Are there any plans for a "Rise and Fall of WCW" DVD? For obvious reasons, it has to be done right.

I haven't heard anything about such a project, although one would think it could be an interesting one to watch.  I think in World Wrestling Entertainment's eyes, they may already produced that DVD with the Monday Night Wars DVD a few years back.

So, why did JR and Mick call the US title match between Matt and Chavo on  Night of Champions?  Both participants are from ECW and, following the   rules of the draft where the belt follows its holder, so is the US title.   So, I can see why the tag title match with Miz/Morrison vs. Finlay/Hornswoggle would be called as a Smackdown match despite all participants being from ECW at least the belt is from Smackdown.  Being as the ECW title was technically a RAW belt at the time, maybe Cole/Lawler   should have called that one, but at least they had someone from ECW involved in the match.  But there's nothing about the US title match that had anything to do with Smackdown.

I think it was simply they wanted to make sure Jim Ross called multiple matches more than any other reason, plus with all the talent STILL bouncing around the rosters, does it really matter where the belts "belong?" 

 

 

If you enjoy PWInsider.com you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more by clicking here!

• Tweet