That was used to put Ryback over after losing to Cena.
A backstage segment would have sufficed, no need to see him pick up Khali to make him look like a plausible strong man, when we've seen him prove it numerous times already.
That was used to put Ryback over after losing to Cena.
A backstage segment would have sufficed, no need to see him pick up Khali to make him look like a plausible strong man, when we've seen him prove it numerous times already.
But the backstage segment would have only been a few minutes shorter than the match so why not put him over
Oh yeah, because beating Khali totally puts a guy over lol.
Oh yeah, because beating Khali totally puts a guy over lol.
Sheamus/Christian vs Rhodes Scholars was pointless. (shocking, sheamus being in something pointless.)
Agree with everything in the OP man. New talents, fresh uses for old talents, not only are we getting storylines but they're good... There's a lot to love in WWE right now.
Just really worried when the show starts to be terrible again.
The Shellshock on Khali was impressive tbh
To the younger audience and casual fans yes
And I agree, it was impressive, but when people say that beating Khali puts a guy over in this day and age, they're wrong.
It was the shellshock that put Ryback over and made him look strong after losing twice to Cena.
I prefer 3 hours, Its bad when I watch it live but more TV means longer matches.
And I agree, it was impressive, but when people say that beating Khali puts a guy over in this day and age, they're wrong.
Urm, how often do we get said matches? You can have a long fantastic match on a 2 hours how; WWE history is proof of that. Three hours makes no difference to match quality and length, it simply means more filler segments and more advertisements.
It put him over enough to remind you that he can beat somebody, that was nice.
It'll be ultimately forgotten and doesn't put him back in title contention, but it certainly didn't hurt halting his downward momentum.
Don't disagree with you though![]()