IYHWrestling.com | WithoutYourHead.com

Welcome to In Your Head! Wrestling podcast, news and community!

Ask X #10

Posted in Ask X by Jack at 01:35, Apr 13 2009

by Jason X

Alright, welcome to what might be the last Ask X for quite awhile, I?ve noticed a lack in interest lately in people asking questions, and I myself have been slacking in answering your questions. First off I want to thank everyone who has asked questions, and who have been supportive in reading the columns and offering your opinions. Thank you very much. With that, I have to cover WrestleMania. I thought overall this years WrestleMania was a bit of a let down, with both main events in my opinion failing to deliver. The triple threat match was far too quick, and was very predictable. Triple H Vs. Randy Orton was very boring, and contrived. The Money In The Bank match also, felt like it was rushed, however, I?m hoping CM Punk?s win in it will lead to bigger and better things than there were in last years victory. I was also very disappointed in the fact that the Tag Team match was cut from the PPV, It was one of the reasons I ended up going out with friends to watch it, instead I got a nauseating performance by Kid Rock. One of the bright spots for me was Santino?s performance in the Diva Battle Royal. The Undertaker Vs. HBK match was easily the best match of the night, but I think it?s getting rave reviews for the wrong reasons. The match itself told the best in ring story I have seen in a long time. There were a few moments where myself, my friends, and the other wrestling fans there all thought that HBK could win. We were all caught up in the match, which was a great thing. Now, I feel like most wrestling writers on the net, are saying it was the match of the night based on some rather scary bumps, and for me I think that takes away from what should be the matches impact. Overall, I thought the show was much better than I thought it would be, but it still wasn?t a great show.

Okay, now that I?m off my soapbox, let?s get started with the column.

Now the answer to the question I posed to you guys was The Pontiac Silverdome, and the attendance was only 1,800. A little over a year before they drew 93,000+, and by 1988 they only had a little less than 2000. I?m sure that was a sad sight.

Old School kicks things off this week with multiple questions, thanks man for being an MVP

Old School: WWE's brand split philosophy hasn't really brought anything new to the business, so, just wondering: don't you think maybe they should go all the way and really split the brands - no matches between RAW and Smackdown stars, separate PPV's, etc? The problem, nowadays, seem to be everyone knows RAW is the "major league", with Smackdown a little lower, and ECW just in place to sell merchandising and DVD's of the "real" ECW. Going that route, you could even setup a believable "invasion" angle, further down the line. Plus, it would probably give further importance to the Smackdown title. What's your view on this?
Furthermore, do you think the present brand split will last? I think it just dilutes the importance of all the shows.

A: Honestly, it would be all but impossible to do an invasion angle with the brand spilt, due to the fact that like you said RAW is the ?A? show. Factor in the fact that everyone knows that all the wrestlers are a part of WWE, the invasion angle would be a moot point. I honestly think the brand split was a bad idea since day one, and at this point it seems like even with the draft happening again this year, the draft probably won?t last until next WrestleMania. If they really feel like the brand split is worth continuing they really need to continue to reduce the amount of titles, have one main belt, keep the IC Belt, and The U.S. Belt, that way the guys on RAW, and SmackDown have something strive for. As for the ECW brand, continue to keep that more for up and coming members of the roster, keep the ECW belt, and move a few more veterans over to help out in bringing along the new talent.

OS: Here's another one: i think most of the problems with today's product stem from the fact they're using TV writers instead of wrestling bookers - TNA is a major proof of this, but even WWE sucks big time, and the recent Jackass angle did just that: make the writers look like jackasses. Don't you think there should be bookers in place, instead of writers - even though i'm aware Pat Patterson still plays a role in some booking decisions, and Michael Hayes writes for Smackdown? And, if that's the case, who would you see being the main bookers on WWE and TNA, nowadays?

A: well, I?m a huge fan of the old school method of using a booker, who has been involved with the business before. I?m not a fan of them using writers who are trying to break into show business. It takes away from the wrestlers creativity, and from the ability for younger wrestlers to learn how to improvise in front of the camera, and in front of an audience. Also it gives way to this sterile product which we have today. Now as far as who I think should be bookers for WWE, and TNA. I?ll cover WWE in respect to the brands. Raw?s booker in my mind should be Shane McMahon, he?s probably the only member of his family that grasps the sport better than Vince and doesn?t have the ego Vince has. SmackDown?s booker has to be Michael Hayes, he has the years in the business to do, and has the gift for coming up with great television, his assistant booker would be Jim Ross, for the same reasons I mentioned for Michael Hayes. ECW?s would be Dusty Rhodes, over the years Dusty has made both great and horrible decisions as a booker, but he has always had a knack for helping to make young talent look better. Now for TNA, when you have a company with people, like Mick Foley, Mike Tenay, Kevin Nash, Terry Taylor, Jeff Jarrett, and Vince Russo, who would I have as their booker? It?s Easy it would come down to two people, Raven or Jeff?s dad Jerry Jarrett. With Raven, it?s simple the man understands psychology better than anyone in the history of pro wrestling, the things he could do as a booker would be nothing short of memorable. But he needs someone to give him the book to do it. For reference, check out his legendary 2003 feud with a younger CM Punk, that feud is what put Punk on wrestling?s world map. With Jerry Jarrett, it?s simple this is the man who along with Jerry Lawler helped keep Memphis fresh from the 1970?s to the 1990?s, he booked the mid-south coliseum every Monday for almost 30 years and everything drew, he had one of the highest rated territory shows in wrestling history, because what he did worked. He could have TNA drawing 3.0?s if he was booking.

OS: Just another little one: i recently watched a Warrior shoot interview, where he was asked which one he thought was his best match while in the WWE. The interviewer expected him to mention the legendary match against Hogan, but Warrior said it was probably the one versus Savage. I'm not really sure what this match is/was, and when/where it happened. Could you refresh my memory?

A: wow, I?m quite shocked you don?t know of this match, it took place at WrestleMania VII, it is a legendary retirement match, it?s worth tracking down on the net or even purchasing. Savage carried Warrior to easily the best match of his career. Although, Warrior did hold up his end. Everything before that match lead up to it, and everything since couldn?t compare to it. Well worth viewing at least once, it?s on my list of mandatory viewing.

OS: Don't you think the WWE HOF is inducting too many people, too fast? There's eventually gonna come a time when the E is gonna run out of worthy inductees, and risk putting someone in that doesn't really deserve it. What are your thoughts on this?

A: honestly, no I don?t, let me explain. There are still tons of wrestlers, who are more than deserving to be inducted. Further more, they haven?t even scratched the surface of legendary wrestlers from the 70?s or 90?s they have really been focusing on the 1980?s. By the time they get to the legends of the past, it will be time to get to some of the people from the 90?s and the modern era.

Next up is Spec_Sun, the man who hasn?t missed a single on of these thanks for contributing man, you helped make this a fun column to write

Spec: What is your opinion of Stephanie McMahon as the top creative executive in the WWE. Do you think she deserves that position? From what you know, has she hurt the company more than she has helped the company?

A: well let?s look at it this way, their ratings have been steadily decreasing since she took over the job in 2000. The last big rating they did was Edge?s Live Sex Celebration, which was one of my personal favorite moments in the last five years. She has had some creative ideas, but for the most part she is horrible, and she always panders to what her dad or husband wants. Shane like I said earlier would be ideal for the role.

Spec: Would you support a CM Punk heel turn down the road? Is he worth more money as a heel or a face?

A: oh without a doubt I would, really Punk rarely was a face on the indies, it was only in a few of them that he was a face, everywhere else he was a heel, and an uber one at that. I?ve seen on tape and DVD him fighting fans, them spitting on him, him challenging them to fights. The man was an old school heel, he was everything that Piper was at one point in time. His heel runs in ROH are still talked about today, look I?ve been a CM Punk fan since his IWA Mid-South days in the early 2000?s, the man is a better heel. I?m tired of face Punk, simply because he is worth more money to the company as a heel, he would be a very believable contender to John Cena or Triple H. It would also freshen up his character, and while it wouldn?t be near as great has his ROH stuff, it would be some of the most memorable stuff on WWE TV in years.

Monty checks in next this week

Monty: Who has the greatest move set in history?

A: good question, it really comes down to the style the guy wrestles. Best move set also comes down to who used what they did to it?s fullest. I?m going with Bret Hart as easily the guy who had one of the best move sets, also Arn Anderson, Mutoh, Flair, Samoa Joe, and HBK.

Craig is also here this week, Craig thanks for always having nice things to say about the column.

Craig: Do you ever see WWE putting Tazz and Tommy Dreamer in the HOF?

A: Taz depends on what he does now that he gone from WWE, if he goes to ROH or TNA for any reason, he?s probably fucked. Dreamer is all but a shoe in, and he?ll probably have a job for life in WWE. Also, Dreamer really epitomizes ECW, he?ll be the first guy from ECW to go into the HOF. With Taz, he has all the accolades that should put him in there, but again it comes down to his choices now that he is gone from WWE.

Afro Twinky also shows up this week with a HOF question as well.

Afro Twinky: Why do you think the WWE hasn't inducted Vader and Bam Bam Bigelow yet, apart from them possibly not being interested.

A: honestly, I couldn?t tell you, with Bam Bam, I?m sure his death and the cause are a reason as to why he isn?t in yet. Also, he only died in 2006, so it?s a little too soon to be putting him in there especially in light of all the recent wrestling/drug related deaths in the last few years. With Vader, it might be his performance last time he was in a WWE ring. As far as I am concerned the two men are easily the best big men ever in the business. They could do things that men their size shouldn?t have been able to do, and no one since has tried to do. The helped revolutionize the role of big men in the business. The deserve to have that spot one day.

The Al Snow to my Mick Foley, Travis In Denver, makes his debut this week with questions concerning the DDT and Big Show. (you wait for what could be the last column, you douche)

Travis: Other then "The Big Show: Paul Wight" and "The Giant", what other names did Big Show wrestle under?

A: When he did the PMG Legends of Wrestling show in Memphis he went as Paul ?The Great? Wight (I?m hoping this was meant for laughs), other than that I can?t find anything that states he has gone by another name.

Travis: A guy at work says Jake the Snake Roberts invented the DDT. I disagree and say the move is older then that. My question. Who invented the DDT?

A: Jake did, completely by accident in a match against The Grappler. The Grappler stepped on Jake?s foot while he had him in a front face lock, and when he stepped on Jake?s foot, he fell backwards dropping The Grappler on his head, the rest is wrestling history.

With that I?m out, give IYH some support and listen every Wednesday, Jack, Incher, and Barb work hard on the show, and it shows. Thanks for letting me do this. Give my older and not related brother El Santo Loco some love and support his show AAA In English.

With that I?ll be back, maybe in a week, maybe in a month, but I will be back?

Till next time?

Quick Reply

Sorry, commenting is currently disabled.

IYH ON FACEBOOK
Follow IYH on Twitter Subscribe to IYH on iTunes
Upcoming Events

Date

Event