The Online Onslaught Forums
By contributing to Online Onslaught, you'll help make sure we're around for years to come. Toss us as little as a few bucks, or as much as your generosity allows.
Thanks!
Member List
|
Search
|
FAQ
|
Live Chat
Back to: OOWrestling.com
Last active: Never Not logged in [
Login
]
OO Forums
»
Current: The February Surprise (Sad Edition)
»
Rumor Crap 2016
» Post Reply
Post Reply
Who Can Post?
All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username
Need to register?
Password:
Forgot password?
Subject:
(optional)
Icon:
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help
Andale Mono
Arial
Arial Black
Book Antiqua
Century Gothic
Comic Sans MS
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Tahoma
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Script MT Bold
Stencil
Verdana
Lucida Console
-2
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
White
Black
Red
Yellow
Pink
Green
Orange
Purple
Blue
Beige
Brown
Teal
Navy
Maroon
LimeGreen
Message:
HTML is On
Smilies are On
BB Code
is On
[img] Code is On
[quote][i]Originally posted by G. Jonah Jameson[/i] [quote][i]Originally posted by First 9[/i] Oh man, how awesome would it be if there was a power struggle in WWE? The creatively lazy bastards finally having a reason to try harder and as there's only so much space on the top. So it seems like things are a set for the IC Title to be a multiman match and Ryback vs Kalisto as a single match. Yeah, you'd think things would be the other way around. I really hope it's not because Ryback is going to squash Kalisto. [/quote] I don't know about squashing, but it does allow WWE to book a shorter match on the card. Whether he's defending in singles or multi-man, Kevin Owens needs some time for his match. Kalisto only needs it for multi-man. [/quote]
Disable smileys?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email notification of new replies?
Attachment:
Topic Review
This is a long topic, click
here
to review it.
OO Forums
»
Current: The February Surprise (Sad Edition)
»
Rumor Crap 2016
» Post Reply
Powered by XMB 1.8 Partagium Final SP1
Developed By Aventure Media & The XMB Group
Processed in 0.0688262 seconds, 20 queries