Live WrestleMania 37 Discussion Thread - Night Two - April 11th

[Sabretooth]

Roman retired on TV like a year after Edge retired, too. Which is even crazier.

roman retired?

 

[Smart Marx]

Ah yes let's have a pointless one month reign to give a cheap nostalgia pop. Or keep the belt on Roman when most people are still into it and make it really mean something when someone beats him

Well you keep believing that. I doubt they're doing what you think they are and even if they are, why do it June when it could have been the show of shows. Anyways. We're not gonna agree here.

 

[Poyser]

He's the Head of the WWE Table. He just put an end to 2 geek darlings and y'all are riled up over it. With Brock gone Roman is the boss.

so he couldn’t be the boss if brock was around? Sounds like a beta cuck soy boy to me

 

[Smart Marx]

Roman didn’t retire in 2012

Debuted, sorry.

 

[Mox Girl]

roman retired?

i assumed he was talking about the leukemia thing, but he also could have written retired instead of debuted lol

 

[Roy Mustang]

I didn’t see the promo but for arguments sake: the reason the don’t make new stars is because they don’t allow talent to develop. They give talent start/stop pushes, don’t book them consistently, and don’t let them be themselves. Roman has avoided all those things for his entire heel run. Losing the title to Edge wouldn’t effect that.

So you want them to do what cause their other talents to not be stars by having roman lose to Edge? Great plan. Or have Roman go over the legend and look even more of a star for whoever beats him

 

[Smart Marx]

lol you are way off lmao, roman DEBUTED the year after edge retired

Read what U wrote, read what you wrote and use you reasoning skills to infer that maybe that's what I meant.

 

[Sabretooth]

Also people constantly bringing up age when I've said it's about people from the past coming back and winning are missing the point by pointing to age. If you always tell people the past is better, why would they buy into your current guys when they go?

But what defines you as the past? It has to be age. I’m saying if you can wrestle just as good as the younger guys then it shouldn’t matter how old you are.

 

[Smart Marx]

roman retired?

Does nobody have common sense? I meant debuted. My point was their "generations" are off by a single year. So calling Edge the past is just silly.

 

[THISisAWESOME]

so he couldn’t be the boss if brock was around? Sounds like a beta cuck soy boy to me

That makes Edge and Bryan the cross dressers. They may as well get sex changes after tonight. It's obvious who calls the shots in WWE. Alpha Reigns.

 

[Mox Girl]

Read what U wrote, read what you wrote and use you reasoning skills to infer that maybe that's what I meant.

well, im not psychic am i lol

 

[Poyser]

Boys the point gambit is making isnt that Roman needs the belt, it’s that someone will eventually get a huge rub from beating him and ending his dominance and that should never be edge in a million years

 

[Roy Mustang]

Debuted, sorry.

Him debuting a year after Edge retired has literally nothing to do with my point and even furthers it. Edge is clearly part of the past. Like I said you keep on having the past win and the present lose, then wonder no one cares about today's wrestlers.

 

[Roy Mustang]

But what defines you as the past? It has to be age. I’m saying if you can wrestle just as good as the younger guys then it shouldn’t matter how old you are.

When did Edge mostly wrestle. That quite clear answers it. By your logic Goldberg can wrestle just as good as he used to so he's fine as champ

 

[Poyser]

Does nobody have common sense? I meant debuted. My point was their "generations" are off by a single year. So calling Edge the past is just silly.

if roman debuted after edge retired then it means Roman debuted 15 years after edge debuted lmao they’re a COMPLETELY different generation what a strange point