|
|
Post by john casey on Sept 22, 2017 16:53:00 GMT -5
With all the bad publicity that The WWE has received and the upcoming TV Rights deal due to be negotiated, Does the WWE hotshot a WWE Title change so that the bad feelings associated with Jinder's recent promo go away especially if it's Nakamura who takes the title and goes on to feud with Kevin Owens for the championship?
|
|
|
|
Post by siredger on Sept 23, 2017 0:39:23 GMT -5
That would be a total Vince move to do that but I wouldn't complain at all if it was Shinsuke who took the title away from him. Even less if he feuds with KO afterwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian Small on Sept 23, 2017 3:04:45 GMT -5
At this point you have to say that his reign has failed. Maybe it's doing well for the Indian audience but they spend the whole year running TV & PPVs in America and it's failing there. Put it on Nakamura and go on to Owens, that seems logical to me. Jinder has just received backlash, flat programs and little interest during his entire run. Whatculture just did a video of facts about him and it really highlights how short sighted this push was. He's the first WWE champion to win the title with 0 merchandise to his name and he didn't even have a logo, his name plates is just his name. Now I'm a huge fan of Nakamura so I'd love to see him with the belt, I think if they can book him right he could be great in that role.
|
|
|
|
Post by groovyphoenix on Sept 23, 2017 9:02:25 GMT -5
Jinder asa champ... A footnote in the history of WWE... Jinder is not being permitted to shine, he has potential but they booked him as a heel coward champ, sucks ass.
|
|
|
|
Post by rinaldo on Sept 23, 2017 11:18:46 GMT -5
Jinder is the foreign heel. Oldest gimmick in the book. Of course he's a "footnote" in history. His job is to make the face shine. Is The Iron Sheik a footnote in history? Pretty much considering he didn't do much after losing the belt to Hogan in '84 but people still remember him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian Small on Sept 23, 2017 13:33:10 GMT -5
Difference being that Sheik was actually a legit draw before his title run and was still in a pretty good high profile spot after.
|
|
deezy
Misawa
Posts: 2,334 
|
Post by deezy on Sept 23, 2017 14:22:39 GMT -5
I don't know what the controversy is tbh....he's saying that's what the American audience say about Nakamura behind his back.
And judging by most of the forum I've been too. ..he's not telling lies. And based off the reaction. ...so do the audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by thebenjamin on Sept 25, 2017 10:45:13 GMT -5
I guess it was worthwhile as an experiment but it's been a bust. They need to get the title off Jinder ASAP. Cant work or talk. He would have been better as a US title guy and try to elevate from there
|
|
|
|
Post by groovyphoenix on Sept 28, 2017 12:39:09 GMT -5
Jinder is the foreign heel. Oldest gimmick in the book. Of course he's a "footnote" in history. His job is to make the face shine. Is The Iron Sheik a footnote in history? Pretty much considering he didn't do much after losing the belt to Hogan in '84 but people still remember him. I'd disagree strongly about Iron sheik eing a footnote, what did he do? He beat Bob Backlund that at the time had a 6 year title reign, a hell of a lot better then Hogan ever was, he also won teh tage tile with Nikolai, his exhuberant rants on Twitter keep him alive and well and known. Now stop talking bad about the sheik before I bend you over and make you humble! |
|
deezy
Misawa
Posts: 2,334
|
Post by deezy on Sept 29, 2017 0:35:34 GMT -5
What did Backlund ever draw?
Hogan still the greatest draw ever.
Racist or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by rinaldo on Sept 29, 2017 12:33:30 GMT -5
Backlund was ok. Not great but ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian Small on Sept 29, 2017 13:24:49 GMT -5
He was good enough to be champ for 6 years. If he wasn't good then they would have taken the belt off him way earlier. But in the grand scheme of things he's kind of the "worst" long reigning champion (I can't word that any better). Bruno set the standard and Hogan redefined it. He was way better than Pedro though who is the forgotten long reigning champion.
|
|
|
|
Post by RKing85 on Sept 29, 2017 23:33:07 GMT -5
I am not for a single second arguing the Backlund was a bigger draw than Hogan. To say that would be ludicrous. But there is one stat where Backlund trumps Hogan.... Hulk Hogan sold out MSG 17 of the 42 times he main evented there (40%) Bob Backlund sold out MSG 41 of the 69 times he main evented (59%) Hell, Bruno was only 41 out of 127 (32%)(you didn't actually think the WWE was honest about Bruno's sell out record, did you?  ) |
|
deezy
Misawa
Posts: 2,334
|
Post by deezy on Sept 30, 2017 20:52:59 GMT -5
What person living in a cave in Guam would know who Backlund was in the 80S.
Everyone knew who Hogan was....fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by RKing85 on Sept 30, 2017 21:59:43 GMT -5
no doubt about it. Hulk Hogan legit was probably one of the 20 most recognized faces worldwide in the 1980's.
|
|
)