http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/blog.php?11396-BennyTheBall Wrestling News and Discussion - eWrestlingNews.com Community en Thu, 20 Jun 2013 06:17:04 GMT vBulletin 10 http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/images/misc/rss.jpg http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/blog.php?11396-BennyTheBall http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/entry.php?43283-Ramblings-of-a-Madman-Just-for-the-hell-of-it Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:10:33 GMT It’s no secret that I am against the mentality of using WWE Superstars from days gone by to grab ratings. I am an advocate of making stars out of... It’s no secret that I am against the mentality of using WWE Superstars from days gone by to grab ratings. I am an advocate of making stars out of the current crop of workers that are there, and only using ‘Legends’ to put over new talent and develop storylines.

Raw 1000, for the most part, seemed to use the same thought process as me, and it was great to see. With Heath Slater ‘feuding’ with Legends over the past few weeks, it was great to see some of the old faces come back to bring some closure to that angle.

Of course, The Rock made his return and it was, again, great to see what could turn out to be a very interesting and intense storyline between CM Punk and The Great One. He most certainly was there to help bring closure the Daniels/Punk feud, help create a bridge to the Cena/Punk match, and if WWE are going the way we all assume they are, it will move on nicely to a feud between Rock and Punk.

All very good examples on how to use legends. Now can someone please explain to me the point of The Undertaker being there?

Kane stands in the ring and is about to be ambushed by some jobbers who have less collective wins this year than I have fingers. Out comes The Undertaker to a great reaction and it was great to see him and Kane kick ass. But seriously, was that it? The biggest name in the industry was used to beat up a few jobbers? Just for shits and giggles?

I know how important it was to have ‘taker at Raw 1000, but I am going to say something controversial – I would have left him off it, and here is the reason why: Brock Lesnar.

Now to me, Brock Lesnar is a waste of space and I would be more than happy to see him leave and never come back. He has a great talent, but he lost all my respect by saying “I believe God put me on this earth to be a professional wrestler” and his parting gift before going to the NFL? The match against Goldberg, where the only interesting thing that happened was Stone Cold Steve Austin delivering a couple of stunners. That match there was a lack of respect from both competitors to all who have supported them.

But now he’s back, and we make our way to Summerslam. Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H. If I was going to book this match, Brock Lesnar should completely annihilate Triple H, and I mean full on annihilate. Maybe even have Shawn Michaels come out for a failed save attempt. Match is over, Brock is declared the winner, and it would have been at this point where I would have bought back The Undertaker.

If you think back to The Undertaker vs Triple H at Wrestlemania, it was declared the end of an era. Now that three-way hug at the end of the match would actually help with a Lesnar/Undertaker feud, because ‘taker could come back to fight for the honour of that era, after seeing Triple H and Shawn Michaels badly beaten up.

This in no way helps puts new talent over, but let’s face it – Brock isn’t back to help breed the next generation. So instead, let’s have him bow down to those who bleed WWE blood.

More specifically, Brock Lesnar should bow down to The Undertaker. ]]> BennyTheBall http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/entry.php?43283-Ramblings-of-a-Madman-Just-for-the-hell-of-it http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/entry.php?42896-Ramblings-of-a-Madman-The-debut-blog Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:06:54 GMT I actually look forward to reading blogs on here. Some are entertaining, some are informative but every one of them is thought provoking, and that... I actually look forward to reading blogs on here. Some are entertaining, some are informative but every one of them is thought provoking, and that is what I think a good blog does – makes people think.

For me, the ones that get me thinking the most are blogs that compare ‘what was’ to ‘what is’. It’s great to think about times gone by, but I am more interested in the future. I am, and always will be, an advocate of what is coming because if things stay as they are, or they try and go backwards to the glory days, then the wrestling industry would die on it’s arse wondering what the hell happened. It’s the basic concept of evolution. I’ve written similar things on the forums here on eWN, and I figured that it is a topic worthy of a blog.

I see plenty of members of the eWN forums say that we should bring back Jim Ross to the announcer’s table because Michael Cole is no good, or how much better the Attitude Era was and it should be like that now, or that Triple H should be a full time wrestler again and not a suit, and it actually makes my blood boil. By no means are these opinions right or wrong, and they certainly don’t hold any less validity than my opinions, but I absolutely despise the idea of going backwards.

It seems to be the general consensus that the WWE product is not at a place where it should be. We all know that. But here’s the thing – it’s got nothing to do with Michael Cole’s commentary. Granted, he’s not JR, but then who is? Jim Ross is a great announcer, no doubt about it and he will forever be in our hearts known as the greatest. The thing is, he’s not the lead announcer anymore, nor is not the answer to Cole’s commentary issues (although, in my opinion, I think Cole is a decent commentator). The answer is to look out there and see who can be our announcers for the next 10-15 years.

Bringing back the Attitude Era wouldn’t help either. The AE would not work in this day and age. We now live in a world it’s all about being politically correct, and to not be offensive in any way, shape or form. That’s why the WWE is rated PG nowadays – it’s the safest ground to be on to appeal to the largest audience possible. Like it or not, the 18-30 male market is no longer the target audience – it’s the moms and dads, and their kids. That could be a reason why we don’t enjoy it as much as we used to.

The talent that is there now, and the guys and girls who are learning the ropes (be it through the development territories or the independents) are what the WWE should be focusing and relying on. In the last few weeks, we’ve seen a considerable knock to the WWE with suspensions and injuries. Now, while there will always be a place for the likes of The Undertaker, Triple H, The Rock, Stone Cole Steve Austin etc., they should never be the answer to solve any problems. Use them to help develop story lines, and to help develop the talent, but that’s it. Don’t have them as the focus anymore. No more main event status for you. We thank you for all your hard work within the industry, and God bless you for the strides you have made to help make wrestling what it is today, but your time is done. It’s now up to this generation, and the future generation to take the relay baton and run with it.

And what better time than now for this generation to step up. How fantastic would it be to see Dolph Ziggler and Cody Rhodes take full advantage of this? Or any other talent, for that matter? Miz, for Christ’s sake, here is your chance to stop jobbing! If/when the suspended or injured guys come back, don’t make it a certainty that they get their spot back too. You’ve got this chance, so take it and if the returnees get arsey because they lost their spot – fuck ‘em. The developmental guys and girls should also see this as their chance to be promoted to the main roster. When Cody and Dolph become Main Eventers, there will be some spots opening for others to fill.

The answer is not looking back at what was – it’s looking forward to what could be. ]]> BennyTheBall http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/community/entry.php?42896-Ramblings-of-a-Madman-The-debut-blog