So I decided to continue my wrestling website. No I didn't get a single post from anyone asking me to continue on with my writing or anything like that. Nobody missed me, I simply missed it. I got to the stage where I thought 'I don't care if nobody cares about my posts [rants] enough to reply, I need to do this. I need to write. It keeps me sane. I need an area where I can put down my thoughts, and the site that I started back in September is the place to do it.
I have not written about wrestling in a couple of months but that doesn't mean I was in exile somewhere, not paying attention to what was going on. Okay, as far as TNA goes, I admit it, I wasn't paying attention, but in the WWE, I do know that John Cena won the Royal Rumble and that The Rock is the new World Champ, leading to an inevitable match between the two at Wrestlemania. Oh yeah, I also know that Del Rio is the other world champ, but I say that as an afterthought, since the World Heavyweight title is clearly an afterthought in the WWE. Why is it still there?! No really, why? It makes no sense. It is used to open PPV cards. What is this all about?
In order to follow up on what the title of this post promised, the WWE is too predictable. Way too predictable. I might be stating the glaringly obvious, but does this not give you enough of a reason not to bother watching? Unless you're 10 years old, you knew that The Rock was going to beat CM Punk for the title. Yet people still bought the PPV. They didn't buy it to see who would win in that match. They just bought it to see The Rock, period. They knew he would win, but wanted to see him do it. As for Cena winning the Rumble, that was possibly a little less predictable, but the Cena v Rock main event at Wrestlemania was not. We knew that one way or another the two would meet. The question was how? As it turned out, Cena being the Rumble winner was one way it could happen [and probably the most logical but that doesn't mean the WWE would do it]. Now the Wrestlemania main event is set, and once again, we pretty much know that Cena will take the belt. The Rock has to get back to Hollywood to make more movies and John Cena, as the number one guy in the company, can't afford to lose a 3rd Wrestlemania in a row. What would the kiddies say? They might turn on him. Then who would buy the merchandise?
Speaking of Wrestlemania and moving on to the lack of logic part of the post title, why pit Triple H against Brock Lesnar in a re match from Summerslam? Is it not supposed to be the other way around? A rematch can be hyped, but it's never going to have quite the same hype as when it was going to happen for the first time [unless the first time was over 10 years ago or something]. The original match should take place at a grander stage than the rematch, like the Brock Lesnar v Kurt Angle original match took place at Wrestlemania, then the rematch was at Summerslam, not the other way around. This time, a Summerslam match is going to get a rematch at Wrestlemania, if it actually happens, but there are strong suggestions that it is indeed the plan, so that's why I'm discussing it.
How about this logic. The Big Show faces Sheamus three times on PPV, wins twice and gets DQ'd once. He is made to look great, since Sheamus was on a role as the champion since Wrestlemania 28. So what do they do? They have him lose to Alberto Del Rio [you know that really 'over' guy. Not]. Then they have Big Show to lose to him again at the Royal Rumble, and then again at the Elimination Chamber. What doesn't make sense is, there was no indication of any kind of push going to Alberto Del Rio. In fact, he lost three or four times in a row to Randy Orton. Why give him the title? Why make him a face? What's with all the recent face turns anyway? Ah forget it.
On to the final piece of illogic [although I'm sure there are many more]. This is again based on a rumour, so I won't go too harsh on this one, in case it doesn't happen, but CM Punk v The Undertaker is said to be in the pipeline, so I'll rant about it. What are they thinking in making this match [if they do]? Three reasons why it makes no sense.
1/ The Undertaker has already buried CM Punk before so this match is not as exciting as if he was fighting someone for the first time [like Sting].
2/ If Punk loses, he is going to have 3 PPV losses in a row, following his over 400 day run.
3/ Continuing on from 2/, it's pretty darn obvious that CM Punk will lose. There's just no way, given some of those who have jobbed to the 'Deadman' at Wrestlemania, that Punk is going to end the streak. It's just not believable enough that he can win [again, unless you're 10 years old], so what is the use in doing this?
I'll leave you with that. I do feel a lot better. Keep checking the site for more posts folks, they will be there.
No comments:
Post a Comment