- Joined
- Sep 29, 2012
- Messages
- 27,213
- Reaction score
- 5,799
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 36
- Location
- Toledo, Ohio
- Website
- twitter.com
Even when trips loses, we all know whenever he gets that itch he will rassle again, cuz that's what he does.... he rassles.
Yo is it just me
- Thread starter Dolph'sZiggler
- Start date
-
Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!
I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register
Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2012
- Messages
- 10,893
- Reaction score
- 1,241
- Points
- 0
- Location
- United Scotland of Ambrose
It was horrible. They tried to build up the suspense, but just ended up disappointing with a pretty generic stipulation. Why not just have it be a winner gets Stephanie match? Yeah, some may argue it would be predictable, but IMO it is anyway. Heyman implying all the things Brock could do to her would be sick and hilarious.
Edit - Forgot about the retirement thing. Yeah that makes it even more predictable than the above stip then.
Edit - Forgot about the retirement thing. Yeah that makes it even more predictable than the above stip then.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 6,691
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 37
- Location
- Union City, Tennessee
AnnaLove said:
He acted heelish just because he attacked a guy who insulted his wife? Heyman is supposed to be a pip-squeak who has a beating coming most of the time anyway, Triple H just gave it to him.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 6,691
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 37
- Location
- Union City, Tennessee
Austin attacked security guards as well a few times, like 2003 Survivor Series. Triple H is supposed to be a bad ass, at least the old HHH persona that he's brought back for this feud, complete with leather jacket and everything. I think it can probably be justified as simple as saying they're Heyman paid cronies who probably would have held down HHH for Lesnar if Heyman ordered them to.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 63,815
- Reaction score
- 6,080
- Points
- 1
- Location
- United Kingdom of Ambrose
- Website
- wweforums.net
We need more faces being less transparent. I liked the beat-down HHH gave to those guards to be honest. It's just a shame such a character is given to a guy who wrestlers twice a year instead of a face who wrestles weekly.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 15,948
- Reaction score
- 3,135
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Nashville, TN
- Website
- i.imgur.com
I thought him beating Heyman and the security guards up was a nice touch but overall the segment came off as awkward, so to speak, yeah.
I didn't see it myself but from what I've read it sounded dreadful. Which is to be expected from a contract signing segment in my opinion, I liked the Punk ones with Cena/Trips but most of the other ones I saw were pretty boring and predictable (not that the Punk ones didn't fall under the latter). Not as bad as arm wrestling segments though. Anyway, from what I read it just sounded like useless padding to build suspense for the stipulation, and then the obligatory brawling happens (granted, an inverted form from the norm).
However, the stipulations chosen for the match are just idiotic and kayfabe-wise, makes Brock/Heyman crappy tactician. The whole, his career will be on the line crap? Like Triple H will care, kayfabe-wise every single match he's had in the past two or so years happened because somebody forced him into that situation. Otherwise, Trips character has been content with just remaining the COO. He fought CM Punk because Punk's a bit of dick and kept making derogatory remarks about Triple H and his personal life (under the belief that Trips screwed him). He only fought Kevin Nash because Nash is a dick and started targeting Triple H. He spent weeks telling Taker "no", but he kept raping him with requests until he finally hit a sore spot that caused him to break and accept (and of course that sore spot was his ego, it's still HHH after all). This whole feud with Lesnar originally started because Triple H was trying to do business with him but Lesnar plays hard ball and broke Trips arm during the negotiation. This match is still reeling from those ripples, plus I'm sure the attack on Vince helped. Or it could all be ego-driven revenge, this is HHH after all. But seriously, you get the point, putting his career on the line means diddly-squat even if you pretend that it'd actually stick if Lesnar won (which it won't, but then again Lesnar isn't winning so the point is moot).
As for the No Holds Barred stipulation . . . really? The point of being able to choose the match in secret like they did there was to lure Triple H into a match he wouldn't agree to because it'd situation where he has an obvious disadvantage. There are literally tons of different stipulations that would've put Triple H at an obvious disadvantage. The first one that comes to mind is a submission match because Triple H doesn't have a submission finisher, has tapped to Brock before, and had his arm broken by Brock's Kimura Lock. But a No Holds Barred, that's a stip Trips himself probably would've pick. I understand Brock probably already [believes he] has an obvious advantage of Trips and all, but really. On a personal note, isn't this exactly the same match stip they had at SummerSlam? Like, I don't think it was called No Holds Barred but isn't it the same thing essentially? While I still haven't seen their first bout (going to do that once I log off), that just turns me off the rematch even more.
*Edit*
Just saw their SummerSlam bout, it was okay. Good psychology throughout and it built well to the end but I had my problems with it. It was like in WWE '12 with the new limb target system. Yeah, you can target body parts now, but you only got one move to do it with. If Trips targeted Brock's stomach, 95% of the time it was with a knee to the gut. If Brock targeted Trips arm, it was usually either with an attempted Kimura Lock, or that scoop slam with the arm bend on the back. Minor issues I guess since Brock had more variety and Trips made sense from a logical point of view (it was the quickest and most effective way) but I wouldn't entirely call it entertaining. I enjoyed it for what it was. The point I'm bringing this up is because the No Holds Barred thing while in effect, wasn't really utilized, so that's not really a big negative for the rematch now for me. The bigger negative now would be the match wasn't good enough to make me want to see another match. I'm starting to venture off-topic, so I'll end of here.
However, the stipulations chosen for the match are just idiotic and kayfabe-wise, makes Brock/Heyman crappy tactician. The whole, his career will be on the line crap? Like Triple H will care, kayfabe-wise every single match he's had in the past two or so years happened because somebody forced him into that situation. Otherwise, Trips character has been content with just remaining the COO. He fought CM Punk because Punk's a bit of dick and kept making derogatory remarks about Triple H and his personal life (under the belief that Trips screwed him). He only fought Kevin Nash because Nash is a dick and started targeting Triple H. He spent weeks telling Taker "no", but he kept raping him with requests until he finally hit a sore spot that caused him to break and accept (and of course that sore spot was his ego, it's still HHH after all). This whole feud with Lesnar originally started because Triple H was trying to do business with him but Lesnar plays hard ball and broke Trips arm during the negotiation. This match is still reeling from those ripples, plus I'm sure the attack on Vince helped. Or it could all be ego-driven revenge, this is HHH after all. But seriously, you get the point, putting his career on the line means diddly-squat even if you pretend that it'd actually stick if Lesnar won (which it won't, but then again Lesnar isn't winning so the point is moot).
As for the No Holds Barred stipulation . . . really? The point of being able to choose the match in secret like they did there was to lure Triple H into a match he wouldn't agree to because it'd situation where he has an obvious disadvantage. There are literally tons of different stipulations that would've put Triple H at an obvious disadvantage. The first one that comes to mind is a submission match because Triple H doesn't have a submission finisher, has tapped to Brock before, and had his arm broken by Brock's Kimura Lock. But a No Holds Barred, that's a stip Trips himself probably would've pick. I understand Brock probably already [believes he] has an obvious advantage of Trips and all, but really. On a personal note, isn't this exactly the same match stip they had at SummerSlam? Like, I don't think it was called No Holds Barred but isn't it the same thing essentially? While I still haven't seen their first bout (going to do that once I log off), that just turns me off the rematch even more.
*Edit*
Just saw their SummerSlam bout, it was okay. Good psychology throughout and it built well to the end but I had my problems with it. It was like in WWE '12 with the new limb target system. Yeah, you can target body parts now, but you only got one move to do it with. If Trips targeted Brock's stomach, 95% of the time it was with a knee to the gut. If Brock targeted Trips arm, it was usually either with an attempted Kimura Lock, or that scoop slam with the arm bend on the back. Minor issues I guess since Brock had more variety and Trips made sense from a logical point of view (it was the quickest and most effective way) but I wouldn't entirely call it entertaining. I enjoyed it for what it was. The point I'm bringing this up is because the No Holds Barred thing while in effect, wasn't really utilized, so that's not really a big negative for the rematch now for me. The bigger negative now would be the match wasn't good enough to make me want to see another match. I'm starting to venture off-topic, so I'll end of here.