The Indy/Int'l Wrestling Thread - ROH Final Battle ‘17, M Dalton Castle def. Cody Rhodes for Title

  • Thread starter Thread starter New Editor
  • Start date Start date
Peezy_Jenkins;9178756 said:
So they have to look like they can beat ass

As if there arent stories of those types getting beat up by smaller cats but I digress.

I guess that's just something ion care about

Name one fight the young bucks ever won in real life, much less over a hansen or a brody or a sid vicious type, them niggas wouldve been jobbers when wrestling was hot, shit they were jobbers in tna
 
Black_Thunder;9178910 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9178756 said:
So they have to look like they can beat ass

As if there arent stories of those types getting beat up by smaller cats but I digress.

I guess that's just something ion care about

Name one fight the young bucks ever won in real life, much less over a hansen or a brody or a sid vicious type, them niggas wouldve been jobbers when wrestling was hot, shit they were jobbers in tna

Ion care about them winning fights in real life fam, hell ion even care about the young bucks
 
I prefer the high flying technical style, it's the reason I still watch. I don't need believable roid rage looking immobile monsters to suspend my disbelief but people have different tastes I suppose
 
Peezy_Jenkins;9178920 said:
I prefer the high flying technical style, it's the reason I still watch. I don't need believable roid rage looking immobile monsters to suspend my disbelief but people have different tastes I suppose


Ill take this shit over junkie looking hobos like dean Ambrose any day of the week with his hoodrat punches and bald spot, what kind of wwe champion is that anyway?

No wonder they doing 1.87 ratings and shit, damn near tna numbers
 
Last edited:
Black_Thunder;9178938 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9178920 said:
I prefer the high flying technical style, it's the reason I still watch. I don't need believable roid rage looking immobile monsters to suspend my disbelief but people have different tastes I suppose


Ill take this shit over junkie looking hobos like dean Ambrose any day of the week with his hoodrat punches and bald spot, what kind of wwe champion is that anyway?

No wonder they doing 1.87 ratings and shit, damn near tna numbers


Black_Thunder;9178930 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9178927 said:
But Joey styles handled himself well against jbl, just saying

When he was drunk, anybody could drop a drunk motherfucker, you dont get no points for that

Smh Lol aight bruh
 
Black_Thunder;9178938 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9178920 said:
I prefer the high flying technical style, it's the reason I still watch. I don't need believable roid rage looking immobile monsters to suspend my disbelief but people have different tastes I suppose


Ill take this shit over junkie looking hobos like dean Ambrose any day of the week with his hoodrat punches and bald spot, what kind of wwe champion is that anyway?

No wonder they doing 1.87 ratings and shit, damn near tna numbers


Goldberg is not your average heavyweight. Bad example, use Nash, Vader or Kane.
 
Black_Thunder;9179030 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9179014 said:
Them junkie types helped save the wwe a few years ago but again I digress

Steve austin and the rock aint look like no junkies, john cena aint look like no junkie, so what junkie saved the wwe?

The shield, cm punk and especially Daniel Bryan were some of the most popular acts in the last 10 years, not on scsa level but trust me, wwe would b absolute trash without em, maybe not to u but...
 
Acrobatics has its place but its too much of that shit now. When it looks like gymnastics I'm out.

If it looks smooth, almost natural then its good. But all that power ranger shit is not for me, at least not in wrestling.

It almost guarantees ludicrious pinfalls, and no selling.

I also prefer these guys have personality, limited moveset and be multifaceted rather than dull personalities doing nonsensical flips. Alot of thos Indie guys might as well be interchangeable.
 
Last edited:
That is why it's dope that some have come up and adjusted to the wwe style and psychology without having to sacrifice much, meanwhile in places like roh which is still dope ur more likely to see a fool kick out of some amazing high spot just to lose to a basic roll up
 
Peezy_Jenkins;9179056 said:
Black_Thunder;9179030 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9179014 said:
Them junkie types helped save the wwe a few years ago but again I digress

Steve austin and the rock aint look like no junkies, john cena aint look like no junkie, so what junkie saved the wwe?

The shield, cm punk and especially Daniel Bryan were some of the most popular acts in the last 10 years, not on scsa level but trust me, wwe would b absolute trash without em, maybe not to u but...

WWE had record low ratings with cm punk as wwe champ and lost 750 million with daniel bryan as champ and the shield dudes as champ have ratings worse than cm punk

None of them were attractions in anyway shape or form
 
Last edited:
Black_Thunder;9179131 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9179056 said:
Black_Thunder;9179030 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9179014 said:
Them junkie types helped save the wwe a few years ago but again I digress

Steve austin and the rock aint look like no junkies, john cena aint look like no junkie, so what junkie saved the wwe?

The shield, cm punk and especially Daniel Bryan were some of the most popular acts in the last 10 years, not on scsa level but trust me, wwe would b absolute trash without em, maybe not to u but...

WWE had record low ratings with cm punk as wwe champ and lost 750 million with daniel bryan as champ and the shield dudes as champ have ratings worse than cm punk

None of them were attractions in anyway shape or form

Please give me the sources

Lmao at lost 750 million
 
Peezy_Jenkins;9179137 said:
Black_Thunder;9179131 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9179056 said:
Black_Thunder;9179030 said:
Peezy_Jenkins;9179014 said:
Them junkie types helped save the wwe a few years ago but again I digress

Steve austin and the rock aint look like no junkies, john cena aint look like no junkie, so what junkie saved the wwe?

The shield, cm punk and especially Daniel Bryan were some of the most popular acts in the last 10 years, not on scsa level but trust me, wwe would b absolute trash without em, maybe not to u but...

WWE had record low ratings with cm punk as wwe champ and lost 750 million with daniel bryan as champ and the shield dudes as champ have ratings worse than cm punk

None of them were attractions in anyway shape or form

Please give me the sources

Lmao at lost 750 million
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danalex...-lost-750-million-in-two-months/#30cf43a25317
http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/477539-vince-mcmahon-no-longer-a-billionaire
https://www.reddit.com/r/SquaredCir...ince_has_lost_around_750_million_after_wwes/?

Want anymore?
 
Peezy_Jenkins;9179112 said:
That is why it's dope that some have come up and adjusted to the wwe style and psychology without having to sacrifice much, meanwhile in places like roh which is still dope ur more likely to see a fool kick out of some amazing high spot just to lose to a basic roll up

I hate that shit. I think Neville is dope as is Rollins. Rollins learned how to time his stuff. Neville will get there hopefully.
 
So I'm supposed to believe that is tied to Daniel Bryan and cm punk?

Smh this is what I get every time I digress and come my silly ass back in the thread anyway
 

Members online

No members online now.

Trending content

Thread statistics

Created
-,
Last reply from
-,
Replies
2,506
Views
651
Back
Top
Menu
Your profile
Post thread…