Want more wrestling news, rumors, and results? Be sure to visit PWInsider.com and PWInsiderXtra.com.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.
I like the way things are going with HHH. Why does everyone think he is crapping up the COO job? I like the way he is doing things, the attitude with which he does them, and the things he does. I guess they are just creating a storyline, but it's a shame; I like where it could go, but probably won't. Your thoughts?
Speaking only for myself, my problem with it is that it has mucked up storylines that were working, like CM Punk vs. John Cena, and also presented an older guy as being far more important than the young stars that they should be creating. HHH has had his run but it should be over now. Instead, he is dominating storylines in his forties and making younger guys look subservient. It's bad booking.
Don't you think it's is just SO COOL when sites use real names for wrestlers, just to show they know what their real name actually is, when they report things? What do you think of star ratings?
I am not a big fan of star ratings because too many people take them as being factual instead of opinion. Plus, inherent biases that we all have skews them. Also, they are basically just an adjective to me, so I prefer to use words that actually describe the match. They began about 30 years ago as a way for people to communicate via the US Mail with others about matches that were not available to them. Things have changed since then. As for using real names, that too is a matter of opinion. I don't see the point in using them most of the time as we know wrestlers by their work names in most cases so I think it's easier to just use those. But, journalistic standards say it's fine to use real names. To me, if someone gets arrested I will use his real name. If it's storyline related, I will use the character name.
My question centers around the word "closure", specifically closure for Attitude Era stars, who left the WWE or the business too early only to come back several years later to finish what they started. Example 1. Shawn Michaels. I finally was able to see his entire Hall of Fame speech from this year (not that watered down trash USA chopped up and put on the air). He talked about how he couldn't really live with himself the way things went down in 1998 with his back forcing him to "retire" in his early 30's. So he came back and was able to finish what he started. I totally agreed with him when he said that he was probably a Hall of Famer when he left in 1998, but not the "greatest in ring performer ever" at that point in his career. He was able to come back and put a stamp on his career with classic matches against UT, Angle, and even two men in their 60's (well, I think Flair was like 59 or something at Mania 24). Then, there's Bret Hart, who was able to come back to WWE after nine years and go into the Hall of Fame in 2006 and then a few year's later finally reconcile with HBK and FINALLY put the "Montreal Screw job" behind him. And that leads me to the Rock. Over the years, I've emailed you guys a couple of times questioning why you continued to report on how the Rock's movies were doing after he continued to distance himself from the wrestling business by the statements he made in the media. One particular act that really grinded my gears was when he flat out refused to be apart of the DVD project WWE did on his career back in 2008. Fast forward three years and here the Rock is, back in the WWE, hosting Wrestlemania this year and now wrestling at Survivor Series and at next year's Mania. My question is, do you think it would be "closure" to the Rock's career as a wrestler if he was to go into the Hall of Fame in his hometown, Miami, FL next year and then wrestle Cena the next night and call it a career wrestling wise? To me, that would be closure because I wasn't too thrilled on the way he left after Mania 20. Thoughts? As always, thanks for all the hard work you guys do on the site!!!!!
I think it would be closure only if that is what he wants to do. If he doesn't think he is done yet, it wouldn't be. I don't get the feel that he is done just yet.
Thanks again for all the great news, hotlines, etc. How is it that CM Punk was able to keep his name in WWE while Danielson, Castagnoli, Sterling James Keenan, and Tyler Black, amongst others all had their names changed?
Punk was able to come to an agreement with WWE that allowed him to do so. That means they respected him enough to let him use the name. In the case of the others, they obviously felt differently.
Why does it seem like internet marks want John Cena to go heel? I mean you switch from face to heel when being a face aint getting you over, same reason why you switch from heel to face. Even Hogan wasn't as over as Cena so why do the internet marks want Cena to go heel?
First off, just because someone feels differently than you do doesn't make them a mark. Be nice already. With that said, you are right as Cena sells the most merch and is WWE's biggest face, so I get what you are saying. People that call for him to turn heel are just sick of him as a face and would like to see something different. Plus, if he were to turn heel it could open the door for some new blood to step up and get over. It's not a crazy thing to consider.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.
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!
Bang On Casino
