Wrestlemania 32
Options
Comments
-
willhustle wrote: »My Top 5 Wrestlemania matches
1. Undertaker vs HBK - WM XXV
2. Austin vs Rock II - WM XVII
3. HHH vs Benoit vs HBK - WM ?
4. Hogan vs Rock - WM XVIII
5. Steamboat vs Savage - WM III
I'll admit, Hogan hulking up against the rock was a mark out moment. -
I was watching Mania 32 earlier today. Looking back and after the dust settled, they did well for not having a lot of their star power in marquee matches.
-
eternal soldier wrote: »I was watching Mania 32 earlier today. Looking back and after the dust settled, they did well for not having a lot of their star power in marquee matches.
Yeah, I just watched it back too. Played back much better than the resounding "meh" I felt when I watched it live last sunday. -
I'm watching WM21 and while looking back at the money in the bank match, Shelton Benjamin was that ? bruh
-
I was listening to Cheap Heat, Rosenberg and Shoemaker had an interesting discussion on why The Rock got far more screen time for WM than Steve Austin.
It got me to thinking about whether we should read anything into all the hoopla made over the Rock's involvment as opposed to Austin's or is it being overly smarky to wonder why this is?
It could be that Rock got more time because he was advertised but then the question becomes why didnt they advertise Austin?
While I'm personally not bothered by this I wonder if anyone else is. Does it bother you that Rock seems to get higher billing than Steve Austin?
Even going back to the recent WM they were both involved in (27, 30) Rock got more screen time and only one other time (27) was Austin even announced before the event (he was the referee for Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler...which is obviously a ? job).
27 can be overlooked as it was Rock's "return" to Wrestlemania and it jumped off his feud with Cena but WM 30 and 32 have left me interested in how they value the two guys.
THOUGHTS? -
I was listening to Cheap Heat, Rosenberg and Shoemaker had an interesting discussion on why The Rock got far more screen time for WM than Steve Austin.
It got me to thinking about whether we should read anything into all the hoopla made over the Rock's involvment as opposed to Austin's or is it being overly smarky to wonder why this is?
It could be that Rock got more time because he was advertised but then the question becomes why didnt they advertise Austin?
While I'm personally not bothered by this I wonder if anyone else is. Does it bother you that Rock seems to get higher billing than Steve Austin?
Even going back to the recent WM they were both involved in (27, 30) Rock got more screen time and only one other time (27) was Austin even announced before the event (he was the referee for Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler...which is obviously a ? job).
27 can be overlooked as it was Rock's "return" to Wrestlemania and it jumped off his feud with Cena but WM 30 and 32 have left me interested in how they value the two guys.
THOUGHTS?
I'm guessing because there's still plans for Rock in the future where as Austin can barely give a good stunner anymore, if Austin wanted or could be more active I'm sure they would give him the green light -
That plus rock being hot as hell in the movie world
-
those stunners at mania were tough to take serious
-
Rock is a bigger star than Austin right now.
-
PWR Extra Wrestlemania Review
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BeApwXtqg4 -
Hollywood, movies, Rock = attention and more time
I don't think Austin gives a ? to do this and that on there. He didn't get mic time. He truly didn't seem into it, IMO. And none of the legends were advertised to be there and I think it's because they weren't sure if they were gonna do it or not. -
Shawn Michaels looked like he still had one more Wrestlemania left in him *pause*. But he is gonna honor that loss to Taker. ? , has any wrestler come back for 1 more match after losing a match were they put their career on line?
-
CJBachelor85 wrote: »Shawn Michaels looked like he still had one more Wrestlemania left in him *pause*. But he is gonna honor that loss to Taker. ? , has any wrestler come back for 1 more match after losing a match were they put their career on line?
Savage -
CJBachelor85 wrote: »Shawn Michaels looked like he still had one more Wrestlemania left in him *pause*. But he is gonna honor that loss to Taker. ? , has any wrestler come back for 1 more match after losing a match were they put their career on line?
Damn near all of em -
man hbk looked like pre first retirement hbk
i think he could step in with ease right now but he's honoring taker plus he'd rather hunt raccoons n ? -
CJBachelor85 wrote: »Shawn Michaels looked like he still had one more Wrestlemania left in him *pause*. But he is gonna honor that loss to Taker. ? , has any wrestler come back for 1 more match after losing a match were they put their career on line?
Terry Funk more times than you can count