View Single Post
Old 08-31-2010, 10:48 AM   #5711
Swanman Swanman is offline
It's a league game, Dude
 
Swanman's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Itasca, IL
Casino cash: $48126
Quote:
Originally Posted by keg in kc View Post

I'm still trying to figure out what they're doing with Danielson. I mean, I know what they're doing, they're going to give him Miz's US title while Miz goes up to the main event, but beyond Summerslam, they haven't done much to build him as a challenger. You'd think they could let him not get outsmarted by Miz some week or another. The only time he's gotten any shots in on Miz was after Cena laid him out. He's still losing every match they put him, for whatever reason. Sometimes I wonder how fresh it might feel to bring back the idea of a badass shoot-style wrestler a la Benoit (yeah, yeah, I know...) or Malenko from the WCW days. Somebody who can overcome the size disadvantage that they seem to go out of their way to harp by just being nasty in the ring. But I know what the odds of that are.
The Miz/Dragon booking is puzzling at times. Obviously they are building to Dragon taking the strap off of him as the payoff. But at the same time, they are doing the patented Vince move of "you made your name elsewhere so you will basically look like a bitch for the better part of a year so my ego can be massaged". At least for the most part Dragon isn't losing cleanly to inferior competition, it's usually through Miz-erference.

The Benoit comparisons are obvious, with Dragon using the crossface as his finisher, although I wish he would use cattle mutilation too. His main draw in the indies was that he had like 729 finishing moves, but I know WWE likes to book guys to have just one finisher, two if you are super special.

Hopefully Low Ki wins season 2 of NXT (I am not calling him Kaval). That will put another small asskicker in WWE. I have been watching 2003 Era Low Ki from ROH and holy shit he would just destroy people.
Posts: 3,299
Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.Swanman would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote