2011 Pro Wrestling Thread

Old-school Lawler would likely agree with you.

 

That's easy to fix, though. Undertaker could have been set to call out Wade Barrett, or say he was going to get revenge on the old Nexus one by one, but Triple H interrupted. When faced with the challenge, he wouldn't back down.

Trips decides he wants Sheamus, but there's something bigger he needs to take care of at WM. Last year, Taker ended his best friend's career. Now, Trips wants to end Taker's streak. He'll deal with Sheamus later.

 

My guess is they planned to have HHH-Sheamus be a hot feud for WM, but a) HHH came back later than anticipated, b) the Taker-Barrett (or Lesnar) match fell through, c) it was nearly a year since Sheamus injured HHH and the bookers didn't think there'd be that much heat for a revenge delayed that long, and/or d) Sheamus is in the doghouse, which a clean loss to Mark Henry would seem to indicate.

Undertaker not getting his revenge on Kane is a little more troubling a plothole, but I think the bookers figure that if you don't mention it for six months, people will forget. On the other hand, they brought back Christian to take out Del Rio at the PPV.

 

Can anyone else see this scenario: Christian winning MITB FINALLY (he needs to be in there), Edge losing the title to Del Rio at WM and setting up Christian v. Del Rio feud for the "injury" he caused Christian.

I like the Cole-Lawler match, but I can see Riley getting involved and taking Cole's place with Cole as a manager type in the match.

HHH/Taker is good. I'm sure they'll build it as HHH wanting revenge on Taker for ending Shawn's career last year. If they don't, I dunno then. It just makes sense to me.

GLad they finally announced another HOFer last night. Hacksaw! You got it, tough guy!

The PPV and Raw were really good.

 

Are they still doing MITB this year?

 

Glad to see the return of The Undertaker.

 

I would hope so, but they do have a PPV solely named for it.

 

I kind of got the impression that they were planning on removing it from WM and having it only on its own PPV. I may have just assumed it though, and I'd be glad to be wrong.

 

If they don't do MITB, they better plan something big in its place. That has been one of the best matches at WM since they started it.

 

I could see the anonymous GM refuse the Lawler-Cole match just for the reveal that it's Cole hiding behind the anonymous GM schtick. More heat. Why not? I don't see why we can't have a heel announcer again. Ventura did it. Hell, Lawler did it. I like the variety.

Besides, people were always going to hate Cole for "taking" JR's spot on Raw.

 

The Lawler/Cole face/heel switch has been one of my favorite announcer moves ever. They did it so effortlessly.

 

One of my biggest worries last year when they announced the MITB Pay Per View was whether or not it would lead to the demise of the match at Mania. I really, really hope that's not the case.

MITB has been, for years now, one of the best matches on the biggest shows of the year and it's a great chance to showcase a whole bunch of talented newcomers who might not break in to the card otherwise.

I understand the allure of an entire PPV based around the concept, and I'd understand the need to either scrap the match from Mania or scrap the PPV, but getting rid of it from the biggest show of the year is a terrible, terrible idea because, much like the Rumble, that match can attract casual fans who might not pay much attention but can dig the idea of six or eight dudes having a crazy, balls out ladder match.

A quick look at WWE.com says the MITB Pay Per View is set for July so I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.