OO Column: Crashing the Boards (Pro Wrestling News, Analysis, and Commentary... WWE, WWF, WCW, ECW, The Rock, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, Rob Van Dam, Hulk Hogan, Undertaker, Trish Stratus, Lita, Stacy Keibler, Divas, RAW, SmackDown, WrestleMania

CRASHING THE BOARDS
HHH v. Booker T — In Defense of Hosses —
Golllllllldberg — Screw Mr. Hippity-Hop (Tenacious Z)
— Columnists in CtB? Is This Opposite Land? — Jeb
Didn't Compile This, So Send Hate Mail Elsewhere...
Perhaps to Djibouti — And Other Things!!!
November 25, 2002

by YOU, The OO Readers
[Usually Compiled by Jeb Lund, but] Compiled by bigfatgoalie [This Week]

[What a crazy week. A kickass pay-per-view, a Raw featuring Booker T starting a big push, Rock hitting all the right notes, and SmackDown! featuring Mr. Paul E almost crapping his pants. This resulted in perhaps the best week of discussions since Jeb and The Rick started this little project. And of course this is the week Jeb takes off. — bigfatgoalie.]

HHH v. Booker T
Who do you think should win this match, and why? Me, I think Booker T should win — for the simple reason that it would create some better storylines for future months. For example — HHH and Austin have unfinished business, and don't really need the title to feud over.

Also, Booker T would be able to feud with the other members of Evilution over the next couple of PPVs, while HHH-Austin is happening. Mind you, I'm not saying Batista or Orton are ready to headline a PPV, but there's no reason they couldn't be second from the top. Booker T was also able to get half-way decent matches out of Steiner in WCW's dying days. If they end up turning Steiner heel, there'd be another guy for Booker to feud with.

On the other hand, if HHH wins, yeah — we still may end up with Austin-HHH. But the two of them will probably suck up all kinds of main-event time and not put over the other guys in the promotion.

Bottom line — give Booker a solid, clean win (ha! I kill myself...), thus making Booker stronger. It will then give credibility to his opponents when they give him a run for his money, thus strengthening the roster.
— Thom

Booker all the way.
1. Since he has been mainly a tag-team wrestler for a good part of the last year, any new feuds he has as world champ will be fresh, new, and interesting.
2. His matches are way more entertaining than HHH's, and you can just tell he is busting his ass every time he goes out there.
3. The casual fans are behind him. We internet fans have been screaming for champion Booker for a while, but the casuals have really been backing him strongly lately, and that is good for business and a good sign that he will succeed as champ.
4. With HHH so injury-prone, they need to put the title around the waist of someone who will be able to defend it at least a few times a month on TV, once a month on pay-per-view, and actually deliver the title matches that are promised at house shows.
5. If HHH puts over Booker cleanly in the title match at WrestleMania, it will silence all the HHH conspiracy theorists, haters and whiners at least for a little while.
— beatenlikeagovernmentmule

Based on the pop he got last night, I think Booker is about ready for a title reign. I agree 100% with what you are saying. Have Booker take the belt and then have storylines develop between Booker and Batista and Orton. Batista and Orton are going to be built up as viable opponents for Booker over the next few weeks, as HHH is going to pimp them to do his dirty work to eliminate Booker as a viable threat to his title.

They could also give us a Booker/Y2J feud. I remember him and Goldie going against Y2J/Christian, but I can't remember them squaring off in a serious singles feud.

If they run the course on those feuds through the summertime, they could turn Austin by then and have him chase Booker for the belt. For that matter, they could even turn HBK by then and have him chase Booker for the belt. Booker as a champion gives us so many fresh possibilities, as he has not been in the WWE very long and has never had a serious run as a singles champion. A Booker title run would explain why they decided to bench Goldie for awhile to separate him from Booker a bit.
— doublee

It's a nice thought to have Booker T going over, but he won't and deservedly so. The pop he got when he won was decent, but it was largely due to the fact that the Rock went out there and put him over so well. He wouldn't have gotten that kind of reaction had he thrown Batista over the top. Secondly, if you all think that pop was impressive, just wait until you hear the pop for Austin next week. Booker T's pops are getting better, but they are not main-event worthy. He's just now solidly establishing himself as a singles wrestler again, and needs more time and more booking like he got on Monday night to really pull it all together.

There's also the fact that the WWE won't have both titles change hands on the same card. There is no doubt that Lesnar/Angle is the money feud that has to pay off for the face so that the crowd can go home happy. The way the feud has been simmering will not allow for any other end. Ergo, the other title will remain on the heel, Triple H. This feud, and I use the term loosely because it doesn't even qualify as a feud yet, has been going for all of two weeks, and Booker T hasn't had a real string of singles victories to gain the kind of momentum needed to justify a title win at WrestleMania. If they really wanted to have Booker T go over at WrestleMania, they would have had him going over guys like Jericho, Kane, and RVD in some way shape or form on the pay-per-view level over the past few months. No such luck, no such booking, and no chance that Booker T walks out with that belt.

Sorry, Booker. I could dig it if you won, but you won't. At least not yet.
— markout

Of course fans would have a stronger reaction to Booker throwing out Rock instead of Batista — just as Brock threw out Taker instead of Kane at the Rumble. What I think needs to happen is a facelift for the World Heavyweight Title.

I know fans were basically booing because of Steiner, but the last two world title matches have been completely trashed by fans. The title needs to go on someone who they respect. Triple H isn't exactly endearing himself as a worthy champion, either. The other world title has been getting a better response for the last few months. Austin is good, but how much shape is he really in? Is he even going to be on Raw? Not to forget that Triple H is not in very good shape himself.

However, I do see both sides. I think it can go either way, with leaning more towards Triple H winning. You have a point about two world title changes, but didn't that happen at Survivor Series? It would definitely give fans the happy ending for the world championships at the biggest show of the year. I can't say that for the last three years that's for sure (although Austin turning heel had me marking out). Maybe it's needed.
— promoter2003

Booker T got this title shot because he's the only face on the roster that has the potential to put on a decent match with HHH, but only if HHH brings his A-Game and leaves about 20 pounds at home. I totally agree that he deserves the shot; hell I think he deserves more than just the shot. He deserves some decent booking and attention to his character development. He deserved that six months ago when they should have started building this feud. They had a great opportunity right before the Elimination Chamber. He cut the best promo of his WWE career on HHH, but they just let it drop and shoveled him back to the tag division.

As for the man retiring... I sincerely hope he stays on for a few more years. He's starting to roll now, and next year he could be winning the main event at WrestleMania, if he keeps it going.
— markout

We [seem to] agree that a face will walk out the champ in one of the heavyweight matches, and a heel will win the other. But I'm not sure this translates to Booker losing and Brock winning. If anything I can see putting Brock's victory off for a month until Smackdown! gets some more main-event-level heels. I think having Angle win at WrestleMania but drop the strap at Backlash makes sense. I could also see Booker win at WrestleMania and get into a program with Jericho (culminating in a Jericho victory), while HHH battles Austin.

I agree that Booker should have been built-up better over the last few months, but the fact is that, other than Austin (who doesn't need the belt and already has another feud), no one else is ready either. Go ahead and blame the creative team if you must, but Booker is challenging for the title at WrestleMania regardless, so you might as well learn to deal with it.
— Milky

I totally agree with that way of thinking. In fact, I deeply suspect that Angle will win at WrestleMania, because it will be too pushy for Brock to do so. Plus, it opens up lots of options. If Angle then loses to Benoit at Backlash, it puts three guys at the same level. Brock, who, let's say, got screwed; Angle, who defeated Brock; and Benoit, who did what Brock couldn't... defeat Angle. You could have a Benoit title run, while maintaining the Brock-Angle feud and weaving it in and out of the title picture.

I think it makes much more sense for Angle to retain and for Triple H to lose his belt, and here's why. Although I'm not a Triple H fan, I do think he's doing a disservice by not wrestling weekly. He is not even doing the same thing as Angle, which is wrestle in tag matches, but not defend the belt. Instead, he's doing nothing. An embattled Booker T could return the World Championship to the highlight of the show, rather than the emotional or action downturn at the end of the show. He doesn't have to defend every week, but just being there every week helps restore interest in the biggest goal on the show.
— Jeb Tennyson Lund

I agree that Booker should win, but using the "one face wins and one heel wins" logic is a wash for this WrestleMania, as there are going to be 4 main events — Rock/Austin, Hogan/Vince, and the two title matches.

So we could have a scenario where HHH, Angle, and Vince all win, but they end the show with Austin winning to send fans home happy. Or they could have a scenario where Rock and Vince win, but Lesnar and Booker win. We don't know how they're going to place the 4 main events on the card yet, and now that we've had 2 heels win the final match in the last 3 WrestleManias, we can throw the "send fans home happy" logic out the window too.

So what am I trying to say? In the immortal words of Vince McMahon, anything can happen in the World Wrestling Federation!
— salmonjunkie

"Hey, that movie guy can work a crowd. Who'd have guessed?"
I was disappointed when Austin didn't show, and when Rocky first walked out, I figured that the show wouldn't be anything special. I was dead wrong.

The Rock owned Raw tonight. Unlike on Smackdown! last week, I don't think that his promo went on too long. The "Yes, I am a heel, and you will boo me" vibe of his promo was very entertaining. And his interaction with Hurricane? Absolutely priceless. Rocky is going to have to be careful, though... if he keeps up that kind of mic work, the crowd will start cheering for him again.

The setup for the Jericho/Stacy bit was very well-done. I never thought that I would see a Toronto crowd chanting for HBK to come out and beat up on a couple of Canadians, but it happened. Plus, I'm happy any time that a diva who can't wrestle (that's a little redundant in some cases, isn't it?) gets her ass kicked.

The wrestling may have been sub-par, but some good storytelling and the addition of the Rock made the show a lot of fun.
— Alana

I just dunno what to say, except what I usually say: wrestling fans are damn hard to please. So what if Austin wasn't on Raw? Monday night was all about the Rock and Booker T, baby. I mean, geeze, people have been whining for months now for Booker to get a push, and now that he's getting it in a big way, we're upset that Austin wasn't there to upstage him?

Getting back to Austin... he wasn't exactly the universal panacea last time he was around. In fact, the current ratings drop started right around his return and hit bottom right around when he left. Me, I don't think Austin was responsible for the ratings drop — but he sure as heck didn't do anything to stop it. While it's good to see him back, let's not kid ourselves — he's gonna be old news within a month.

The Fed is actually doing the smartest thing possible — they're building anticipation. The anticipation of Stone Cold is way better than the reality of Stone Cold is going to be. It seems to me that a lot of us spend way too much time fixating on what the WWE isn't doing, instead of appreciating what they are doing. Instead of lamenting the lack of Austin (and trust me, you'll get enough of him to last a lifetime real soon), why not applaud the incredible performance put on by the Rock?
— OO Kyle

Smackdown Thoughts
One thought on tonight's edition of Smackdown! I hope that Brian gets in through a Loophole. Basically, the time Kurt wasted in the ring before the match started gets tacked on or something. Brian looks like he could be a really good wrestler and entertainer, and he was pretty good-looking tonight when he was getting his offense in on Kurt.

And did anyone else notice that Charlie Haas had kind of a more psychotic look to him tonight?
— Shastar

Well, I know the guy has a rep for being sloppy, but c'mon. Nathan Jones saves Undertaker, on SmackDown!, from Team Heyman and does one move (a spin kick) and he does it so badly they have to redo the entire spot. Now that's funny.
— JJBRWESQ

Jones might turn out to be Kurrgan from "the Oddities", but it kinda seems like maybe we ought to actually watch a few matches before making that determination. Hell, we're giving Lesnar and his "man of a thousand holds, as long as they're all belly to belly suplexes" routine a chance. If Hogan, Kurt Angle and the Rock all team up and job to Jones, maybe he'll be the Next Big Thing, too.
— OO Kyle

I don't think Rhyno's ever been one, but his personality as a heel can lend itself to be a badass face easily. He doesn't cheat, he's not conniving, he's never been cowardly, and he was never really an asshole; he just aligned himself with heels. His character is basically a badass, so I think he could definitely pull off being a face.
— salmonjunkie

In Defense of Hosses
So I was thinking — why is it that so many wrestling fans seem to hold Big Men in contempt?

It seems as if anyone bigger than Rey Mysterio is instantly branded as a lumbering doofus to be mocked and ridiculed. This seems odd to me, since this is pro wrestling, a sport that was built by big, lumbering men.

When I think of the Wrestling heroes of my youth, I think of Big John Stud, King Kong Bundy, Hulk Hogan and Randy Savage. Sure, I also dug Roddy Piper and and the British Bulldog, but nothing really amused me like watching Bundy do his "five count" routine, ("When I pin you, you STAYED PINNED!") or Andre cleaning house in a Royal Rumble.

So why is it that Big Men are so hated now? Look at Nathan Jones — it seems everyone on the 'net is bound and determined to hate the guy, just because he's not the same size as Jamie Noble. Yes, I understand that there are a lot of moves that Big Men can't do. So? I mean, if I really wanted to watch Puro or Lucha — well, that's what I'd be watching.

While I totally enjoy Rey Rey, Kidman and Benoit, I really don't mind the occasional Big Man brawl. I thought HHH/Taker from WrestleMania 2001 was pretty damn good. And Taker/Show wasn't nearly as godawful as people are making it out to be.

As much as I despise the term "good for what it was" as used by the Internet Writers Community, I think it's wrong to judge Kane by the same standards as the Hurricane. Kane's never going to do a Shining Wizard. But then, the Hurricane plays the Chokeslam for laughs, because he knows he looks silly doing it. In the same vein, people give Taker a lot of grief for never selling his opponent's offense — but what's more believable, Taker no-selling a chair shot, or RVD no-selling Storm's maple leaf? Damn, the Big Guys are supposed to be invulnerable to the petty attacks of mere mortals. Since all pro wrestlers are pretty much superheroes anyway, why complain when they act like superheroes? You wouldn't complain if the Hulk no-sold a bazooka.

Maybe this is just all in response to the current spate of Jones-bashing around the 'net. Hell, the guy is a freaking monster — who cares if he's never gonna bust out an Asai moonsault? Now, if he turns out to be "Kronik" bad, that's one thing. Yeah, sure, lose the bastard. But puttin' the hate on a brotha just because he tops six feet is wrong.
— OO Kyle

I totally agree. Hardworking big guys like Taker, Kane, A-Train, Test and Batista get way too much hate on the internet. Sure, none of them have a moveset like Angle or Benoit, and they don't fly like Kidman (minus Taker's plancha), but they don't need to to entertain me. They're huge guys, I don't expect them to.

I think Sid once said in an interview something about how people rag on his limited moveset, and he responded by saying something like this: "I could do a drop toe hold if I wanted to, but I don't need to to get over. Fans want to see big guys do power moves."

Granted, not all big guys are good. El Gigante and Kurrgan were boring, and Kevin Nash after becoming lazy was awful (but he was good when he was a motivated Diesel). It's funny how Scott Norton got a lot of hate in the IWC during his WCW days, but the supposed workrate-freak fans in Japan just love him. And then there was 911, in ECW, who didn't seem to be hated either, although he was pretty much a chokeslam machine.

I've read bad things about Nate Jones in the WWA and in the Smackdown! spoiler, but I'll reserve judgment for when I see him wrestle.
— salmonjunkie

Does anyone remember seeing Mike Awesome from his ECW days? Here's a big man that can pull off some decent moves when he's healthy. The problem Mike had was getting picked up by WCW and getting bad gimmicks.

I also agree that the big men are supposed to be monsters in the ring. They should be sometimes made to seem unbeatable. Has anyone ever seen vintage footage of Andre or even Gorilla Monsoon when either of them would take on two guys at once? I was seven years old the first time I saw Gorilla on TV taking on two guys. I remember thinking that he was the toughest man on earth! Why shouldn't todays big men continue in that tradition?

I think that Kurt and Benoit and Mysterio and so many others are great, and I enjoy watching them, but I make no apologies about cheering for a Big Nasty Knuckle Draggin' Monster!
— BoerboelLVR

How come we all know Nathan Jones is gonna suck?

I'm not even touching on Kyle's idea that we seem to instantly hate big guys. But why do we all think we know Jones sucks? The experts in this field are the folks who saw him wrestle Jarret on WWA. That's one match. He could have been sick. Jarret could have disliked him. Lord knows. A couple of people at house shows then say, "He looked sloppy, just like I read," and suddenly everyone's calling for the guy to get fired. It's called the power of suggestion, folks. (Of course he could suck, but still....) I'm not even going to get into people calling for injuries and dismissals for a guy not entertaining them... sheesh... narcissism.
— LuckyLopez

Steiner booed for American tights
Did anyone else think that JR's reasoning for the booing was funny. At least JR is trying to get this guy over. A heel turn better be around the corner, because his time as a babyface is running out.
— metallikid

That whole American tights thing is ridiculous. In Montreal, Steiner was facing HHH, and HHH was cheered, and Steiner was booed. Was HHH cheered because he's Canadian? Was Booker T cheered in Toronto because he's Canadian? Regal and Storm were booed in Montreal — and Storm was holding a Canadian flag!

As far as the whole booing him because of the American flag bit, I think it's pathetic, and I'm genuinely upset with Jim Ross repeatedly basically calling Canadians "America Haters." Stereotyping the inhabitants of a country to keep trying to push Steiner? I think a different explanation should have been presented, especially one that doesn't insult a good portion of their audience as close-minded militant anti-Americans.
— masterofpigeons

Gotta give JR some credit for being creative at least. I wonder what Tony Schiavone would have said. I guess Boston hates America too.

On a serious note, who's bright idea was it to bring in Steiner as a face? Really! Who's bright idea was it to give Steiner 10 plus minutes to perform in a championship match (his first match at that) as well? Does Vince McMahon even scout his wrestling library when hiring people? He doesn't even have to go look for it in stores. It's in his own archives. They are doing things that are obviously not going to work.
— promoter2003

Golllllllldberg
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm praying that the deal with Goldberg falls through. I didn't watch WCW, but I've seen the home video that WCW released about him. To this day, I still can't understand how that guy got to be such a phenomenon.

If the deal does happen, I don't care who he faces, so long as he gets his ass handed to him in the ring.
— Alana

Goldberg will likely spike buy-rates a little (probably not as much as Vince or Goldberg think, but I think he would somewhat). I just don't really understand the complete hatred of Goldberg. I do, however, love how people talk about how he ends careers, blah, blah, blah. Who did he retire? Bret, and that's it I think. To all of you who bring that up every time someone mentions Goldberg, how about you step back and remember how Austin retired Steamboat?
— Bonestein

Like him or not, Goldberg = BUYRATE. Goldberg in the WWE will sell tickets, period. If Vince is smart enough to keep Goldberg humble, book him so that he wins, but doesn't look unstoppable, then an eventual Austin v. Goldberg match will sell huge. In fact, Austin v. Goldberg would be a hell of a headlining match to a WrestleMania 20 supercard.

Yes, Goldberg is a manufactured star. Who isn't? Very few stars in wrestling would be as big as they are if not for how they are booked. Goldberg let it go to his head. Who hasn't? Bret Hart is one of the biggest marks for his own character, as is Hogan. As long as Vince keeps the reigns tight, I'm sure Goldberg would be at least a short-term asset to the company.
— SuperRob

Once again Vince McMahon digs into the bag of WCW has-beens and pulls up shit. Goldberg hasn't done anything in 3 years. He's yesterday's news. I'd say save your money, Vince, and just build up some of the guys you already have. Sure there's some nostalgia value to it, but by now most people have pretty much forgotten about Goldberg. It seems ever since McMahon bought WCW, he's been trying to turn WWE into WCW North.
— DennisIsEvil

"I'm not putting no one-legged bitch over!"
Some WWE wrestlers are not happy about the signing of Tenacious Z. Most don't want to have to put over a one-legged wrestler, since it could go a long way toward taking their heat away.

Ok, is there a more whiny group of bitches anywhere than wrestlers? Seriously, is there another occupation that creates a self-importance like this? Do these retards seriously say, "If I lose to this guy who's battled against the odds created by losing his leg to cancer as a child, I'm gonna lose the house"? I honestly wish I was Vince McMahon or Gerwitz or someone with the book, just so I could job these assholes and show them it's not the end of the world if you lose to someone like Tenacious Z. Christ, being pinned by Moose Knuckles McMahon didn't seem to kill the Rock's career.
— Bonestein

If I could play devil's advocate for a minute.... He might not be all that great in the ring. Some people can overcome their handicaps, but if he's a bad wrestler because of it, that's another story. I would be embarrassed to see someone pinned by a midget or celebrity. Similarly if this guy isn't believable as a wrestler, the natural reaction would be the same. Basically what I'm saying is that we should give the guy a chance, but don't start lynching the roster yet. They have a reason for being skeptical.
— Andy

Sorry to generalize, but I think most sportsmen are the same. The sportman's ego usually prevents him from competing, let alone losing, to those who are considered inferior. Be that job boys, the disabled, or indeed women. The "old boys' club" just wouldn't let them live it down. I mean, in how many pro sports do men actually compete against women? Even putting aside the physical ones, what about Darts, Snooker, Pool, Cricket?

I hear that Annika Sorenstam has just been granted entry into the USPGA tour, and in all honesty, I think this is probably the first time that women have actively competed against men (and no, I will not accept China v. Jericho). It is interesting to see that a lot of the golfers appear to have the same fear about losing/competing, as the WWE boys do with Tenacious Z.

It will be interesting to see if Annika and Tenacious Z are the beginning — as well as the end — of this brave experiment.
— AnglesGoldMedals

The Gay Wrestler...
Vince likes being edgy right? He likes to be out there and do things that grab a headline. So if that is true, then why doesn't he do the one thing nobody would expect.

Have a gay wrestler.... and have him be a face.

Really, when you think of it, there is likely nothing more "out there" then gay males. For some reason, the public still cringes at the idea of two guys kissing each other. If Vince wants to be edgy, why doesn't he have a wrestler not only be gay, but also, not be a heel because of it.

I realize that wrestling has a more "traditional" audience, and this may be asking too much of them. But I think that if it was done as a "yeah, he's gay...so what?" type of thing, it could work. It could get decent press, and would help the WWE in the image department. Vince and Co. have proved they can make women wrestlers be more then just T & A, so why not knock down that last taboo in wrestling?
— bigfatgoalie

For the record I think its commendable. Maybe someday there will be a face gay character, but....

A. Unfortunately, the wrestling fans tend to immediately hate gay characters. Even characters that show the slightest effeminate mannerisms. Too Much, Lenny/Lodi, Chuck/Billy, Goldust, Stevie Richards.... It probably says something horrible about wrestling fans in general. The fact that the Billy/Chuck wedding was met with "faggot" chants is pretty disgusting, and has nothing to do with WWE and all to do with the fans.

B. Unfortunately, wrestling provides that you have to be a bit over the top to get a gimmick across. Everything has to be a little larger than life. To get across that you're gay, you'd probably have to do some pathetic gay stereotypes. It always saddens me a bit when I see a film and a character is shown to be gay by flipping his wrist or arching his elbows behind his back.

C. Good stuff you do never really gets publicity. Sure, GLAAD will probably be a bit happy, but they'd also be a lot more wary now, seeing as how they were too foolish to not see the [Billy and Chuck] swerve coming last time. But very few people are going to write about how great the WWE is in helping break down a stereotype when they have Latino Heat, Rikishi and Rodney Mack going at the same time.

Hell, look at it this way. When Goldust and Booker started teaming for the comedy skits, they were heels. Goldie was in all his gay glory. As the two started to get over as faces, however, he toned the gay act down considerably. By the end, you bought that he was just weird, not gay.
— LuckyLopez

I do see a problem with the, "Yeah, this wrestler's gay... so what?" idea. For the "so what?" vibe to work, nobody would place any importance on the fact that Wrestler X is gay. The concentration would be on his in-ring work and not his flashy wardrobe or lifestyle choices, right? His opponents wouldn't use his homosexuality as a way to insult him in promos, because nobody cares, and it's nothing to be ashamed about anyway, right?

Then why have a gay wrestler if no emphasis is placed on his sexual orientation in the first place? Vince and Co. wouldn't bother with it unless they were going to make a big fuss about it.
— Alana

In the end it's the fans who decide who becomes a heel or face. Rock, before his recent turn, was a face. He was also portrayed as a cocky loudmouth, the same as Rob Van Dam. In the Pre-Attitude WWF, they'd have been considered heels and would have gotten non-stop boos. But in today's WWE, they're faces. It all depends on the audience.
— DennisIsEvil

The "New" Taker... how long will he last?
Watched No Way Out. Was stunned to see Taker bust out a plancha, and a cross armbar submission move. But more than that ... DID YOU SEE HIS ABS? Holy crap, Undertaker found a gym! Both Taker and Big Show looked like they used this recent light schedule to drop a few pounds. I thought Taker looked great.

My only concern is that we saw a "new" Taker debut with a new gimmick and a newfound "fire" once before, which quickly dimmed as his schedule seemingly kept him from staying in shape. Could we see the same problem with Taker today? Is this uncharacteristic turn (when was the last time he didn't finish with a chokeslam or Last Ride) just a way to handle Show?
— SuperRob

I was very impressed with Taker last night. He seemed to have more wind, and he looked a great deal slimmer. I hope that Taker can stay healthy and do what's best for himself in the long run. I look at a guy like Mick Foley, who I have the utmost respect for, and see how he drove himself into the ground to please the fans. So much so that he has a tough time playing with his kids. Taker, being a new dad, may want to think about a different style in the ring and tone down on the stuff that will wear his body out. If he only does the Triangle choke (with the occasional WrestleMania Tombstone) for the rest of his career, I wouldn't mind. At least I would know that he could go home, hug his wife and play with his baby without any more pain then he already has.
— jmagee

Taker looked good last night (not an easy thing when you're fighting Big Show), and he's definitely lost a good bit of weight.

While seeing the plancha from him is amazing, it's not something I'd want to see him do on a regular basis, for two reasons:
1. The move isn't nearly as special if he does it every night, and
2. I know that his body can't handle it anymore.
Taker is still capable of a good match without busting out moves like that.

And on a side note: I know that seeing a 300-pound man flying through the air at you is intimidating, but would it have killed Heyman and A-train to actually get underneath him so that Taker could make contact? He aimed perfectly, but those two were standing too damned far apart. UT is lucky that he wasn't injured doing that move.

I think that the armbar submission was just a way to handle his opponent. There's no way in hell he could have done a chokeslam or Last Ride, and I wasn't the only one laughing when he signaled for those moves. I think that the dragon sleeper is a much better submission, but he used it on Show earlier in the match; you could see that Show is just too tall and not flexible enough to sell it properly.
— Alana

This Week's Stats
Most Frequent Subject: Austin, Heel Rocky, Booker T v. Triple H.
Most Spammer-Like Poster: Eh... there are a few of them out there, but I refuse to give anybody credit for being an ASS CLOWN.
Most Encouraging News: Some really good posts with a lot of follow up debate. DEBATE ROCKS!!!
Most Discouraging News: People posting spoilers and giving away the surprise of Rhyno and Nate Jones. Dumbasses.
Poster in need of a hug: Jeb. I'm sure Bonestein will give him one.

[Thanks go to bigfatgoalie for sitting in during a busy week. He did a bang-up job, and anyone who feels compelled to thank him (and many of you should), should send their comments to him in the OO Boards' "Comments About OnlineOnslaught" section. Thanks again, goalie! — Jeb.]

E-MAIL THE EDITOR
SEE MORE OF THE SAME IN THE OO FORUMS

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Bonding Exercises

RAW RECAP: The New Guy Blows It

PPV RECAP: WWE Night of Champions 2012

SMACKDOWN RECAP: 18 Seconds? NO! NO! NO!

RAW RECAP: The Show Must Go On

SMACKDOWN RECAP: The Boot Gets the Boot

RAW RECAP: Heyman Lands an Expansion Franchise

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Losing is the new Winning

RAW RECAP: Say My Name

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Deja Vu All Over Again

RAW RECAP: Dignity Before Gold?

PPV RECAP: SummerSlam 2012

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Backfired!

RAW RECAP: Bigger IS Better

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Hitting with Two Strikes

RAW RECAP: Heel, or Tweener?

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Destiny Do-Over

RAW RECAP: CM Punk is Not a Fan of Dwayne

SMACKDOWN RECAP: The Returnening

RAW RECAP: Countdown to 1000

PPV RECAP: WWE Money in the Bank 2012

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Friday Night ZackDown

RAW RECAP: Closure's a Bitch

SMACKDOWN RECAP: In-BRO-pendence Day

RAW RECAP: Crazy Gets What Crazy Wants

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Five Surprising MitB Deposits

RAW RECAP: Weeeellll, It's a Big MitB

SMACKDOWN RECAP: #striketwo

RAW RECAP: Johnny B. Gone

PPV RECAP: WWE No Way Out 2012

RAW RECAP: Crazy Go Nuts

SMACKDOWN RECAP: You're Welcome

RAW RECAP: Be a Star, My Ass

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Needs More Kane?

RAW RECAP: You Can't See Him

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Lady Power

RAW RECAP: Big Johnny Still in Charge

PPV RECAP: WWE Over the Limit 2012

SMACKDOWN RECAP: One Gullible Fella

RAW RECAP: Anvil, or Red Herring?

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Everybody Hates Berto

RAW RECAP: Look Who's Back

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Care to go Best of Five?

RAW RECAP: An Ace Up His Sleeve

PPV RECAP: WWE Extreme Rules 2012

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Sh-Sh-Sheamus and the nOObs

RAW RECAP: Edge, the Motivational Speaker?

SMACKDOWN RECAP: AJ is Angry, Jilted

RAW RECAP: Maybe Cena DOES Suck?

SMACKDOWN RECAP: No! No! No!

RAW RECAP: Brock's a Jerk

SMACKDOWN RECAP: Back with a Bang

RAW RECAP: Yes! Yes! Yes!

PPV RECAP: WWE WrestleMania 28