Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

chuckdawg1999 wrote:How does it compare to the Most Electrifying Man in The World set from a few years ago?

That set had mostly matches with a couple of skits. If you're more interested in his matches, that's better. This one doesn't have as many matches, but the documentary is what makes this set really worth it. I loved the match selection as well, because out of all those matches I've seen maybe 3 or 4. But The Rock is known better for his mic work, and that's definitely showcased in this documentary. If you got the 4-disc Austin DVD set, this is almost just like it, except a bit better.

Is there over lap between the two sets?

None of the matches from the new set are on the old set. They're matches from in-between. Together they make the perfect combo, I think, because this set is mostly for the documentary that the old set didn't have. So I think they go together perfectly. If you want to watch the matches in order you would have to go back and forth between the 2 sets, but I think it's worth it. If I had to choose between the 2, I would pick the newer one. But that's just my opinion.

I think I'm gonna have to pick it up when I next get paid.

Are there any comedy skits on there?

There isn't a feature for the skits in their entirety, but during the documentary a lot of them get played, along with some of his best one-liners and putdowns.

For those of you who remember him there's a report that Doug Furnas passed away last night.

What was the cause? Yeah, I remember him, he and Phil LaFon became a somewhat high profile tag team in the late 90s for a couple of years.

Rodimus Prime wrote:What was the cause? Yeah, I remember him, he and Phil LaFon became a somewhat high profile tag team in the late 90s for a couple of years.

Don't know but he was "big" for his size.

*does quick Wikipedia search*

Or maybe complications from Parkinson's and/or Alzeimer's.

Darth Bombshell wrote:*does quick Wikipedia search*

Or maybe complications from Parkinson's and/or Alzeimer's.

He was sick? Sadly didn't know. Lost track of his career after he left the WWF

Rodimus Prime wrote:What was the cause? Yeah, I remember him, he and Phil LaFon became a somewhat high profile tag team in the late 90s for a couple of years.

They were actually huge in Japan all through the 90's (LaFon was known as Dan Kroffat for most of his career) but got their first high profile runs in the US in ECW and WWF in the late 90's. I remember one or both got injured in a car crash while in the WWF and that cut things short.

Delicon wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:What was the cause? Yeah, I remember him, he and Phil LaFon became a somewhat high profile tag team in the late 90s for a couple of years.

They were actually huge in Japan all through the 90's (LaFon was known as Dan Kroffat for most of his career) but got their first high profile runs in the US in ECW and WWF in the late 90's. I remember one or both got injured in a car crash while in the WWF and that cut things short.

Yeah, in 1997. That was one of the reasons Sid left the WWE as well. He was in that wreck with them.

chuckdawg1999 wrote:For those of you who remember him there's a report that Doug Furnas passed away last night.

Was there a spot before RAW's opening song mentioning his passing? I turned on USA just after the theme ended.

Comments on last night's RAW--the funniest I've seen in at least 2 years especially the Rock and the Boston Tea Party bit and Teddy Long ordering Larenitis (sp) out the arena. Anybody see a match of some sort between the GMs at Wrestlemania? For that matter will there be Orton v. Kane at Wrestlemania?

Orton vs. Kane is pretty much a given. Otherwise there's no point to their fighting.

And I think HBK will screw HHH over. No way will the streak end. What sounds better? 19-1 or 20-0? Next year, if Taker is able, I can see him losing. 20-1 is acceptable. Probably with his career on the line, because he is in his 40s. But who will beat him? And will he go into the Hall of Fame like Flair did? Before he actually retired?

Rodimus Prime wrote:Orton vs. Kane is pretty much a given. Otherwise there's no point to their fighting.

And I think HBK will screw HHH over. No way will the streak end. What sounds better? 19-1 or 20-0? Next year, if Taker is able, I can see him losing. 20-1 is acceptable. Probably with his career on the line, because he is in his 40s. But who will beat him? And will he go into the Hall of Fame like Flair did? Before he actually retired?

Agreed, Taker is not going to go 19-1.. They hype the hell out of "the streak" and to be honest I doubt they will let it end..

Rodimus Prime wrote:And I think HBK will screw HHH over.

And they will feud that'll last until the next pay-per-view or the next one where Michaels come out retirement to fight HHH. Hell in the Cell "yawn"

No way will the streak end. What sounds better? 19-1 or 20-0? Next year, if Taker is able, I can see him losing. 20-1 is acceptable.

20-0 hands down. But if it's decided he lose, I don't want HHH nor Cena (it could happen: they use JC) to beat Taker. I want it to be Michaels or Kane or M. Henry.

Rodimus Prime wrote:Orton vs. Kane is pretty much a given. Otherwise there's no point to their fighting.

Thing is, there is no point to them fighting. Considering Wade Barrett was in a program with him prior to his return, a match between him and Orton was more likely. But then Barrett got injured, which pretty much made this shoehorn necessary.

As for Taker, I'll admit that what happened has made me more interested in the match than I previously was. Then again, the last time HBK refereed a match in which Taker was involved, Bret Hart became the champion.

Friend of Da Panda Symbol wrote:
20-0 hands down. But if it's decided he lose, I don't want HHH nor Cena (it could happen: they use JC) to beat Taker. I want it to be Michaels or Kane or M. Henry.

Not Cena, hopefully. I wouldn't mind it being Kane, I think he kinda deserves it. He's always been a very reliable performer, never getting hurt or anything like that, and the character has always gone over whether he was a face or a heel. Even Mark Henry, if the WWE can build him up as a monster heel (like Vader was in the 90s in WCW) and he stays injury free, he could go a long way with the claim of putting Taker down for good. But if he's given it, he has to own up to it, he can't waste it. But maybe he's too old. He's been in the WWE since 1996. That's 16 years. He's gotta be about 40. And a guy his size can't perform at top level as well as smaller guys as they get older.

How about The Rock? If he beats Cena and sticks to his word of staying around, at least not leaving as often, he can go against Taker next year. They never fought in a high profile match before at a high profile PPV. Personally, as a fan of the Attitude Era, that would be awesome.

And last night Cena got booed in his own hometown. That was great to hear.

Also, I know Owen Hart will never go into the HOF as long as his wife and Vince hate each other, but how about the Bulldog? Or Randy Savage?

Darth Bombshell wrote:

Rodimus Prime wrote:Orton vs. Kane is pretty much a given. Otherwise there's no point to their fighting.

Thing is, there is no point to them fighting. Considering Wade Barrett was in a program with him prior to his return, a match between him and Orton was more likely. But then Barrett got injured, which pretty much made this shoehorn necessary.

They just started. Give them a couple of weeks to work it out. Personally, I'd like to see them take in in the direction of who has the sicker mind. Remember, they're both supposed to be psychos. Or at least mentally unbalanced.

As for Taker, I'll admit that what happened has made me more interested in the match than I previously was. Then again, the last time HBK refereed a match in which Taker was involved, Bret Hart became the champion.

Yeah, the good old days. I actually have almost all the WWE PPVs from 1997 on VHS, might have to go back and watch a few. As for interest, I think the match will still hinge on the performance of the 2 wrestlers, and HBK is just added as an extra feature. Maybe he'll screw HHH "accidentally" like he did Taker in 1997?

The shame of this is that Taker should have lost this streak 10 years ago. At this point, they've built him up so big that there's no one the fans would really accept him losing to, especially on the current roster.

Delicon wrote:The shame of this is that Taker should have lost this streak 10 years ago. At this point, they've built him up so big that there's no one the fans would really accept him losing to, especially on the current roster.

If you're talking exactly 10 years ago, he was facing Ric Flair at WMX8. I liked watching Flair, but no way was he gonna win. If you're thinking of the general time frame, let's take it from WrestleMania 16 to Wrestlemania 20.

WM16 he wasn't even there.
WM17 he fought HHH. If he had lost then, it would have been acceptable. The streak wasn't so apparent yet.
WM18 I already mentioned.
WM19 he fought Big Show and A-Train after Nathan Jones was injured. It was a good match, but again, he wouldn't lose to those guys.
WM20. Round 2 against Kane. If his return hadn't been built up so much, I could see him lose. I said before, it should be Kane he eventually loses to (probably next year), like with Austin and The Rock at WrestleMania. 3rd time's the charm.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

Delicon wrote:The shame of this is that Taker should have lost this streak 10 years ago. At this point, they've built him up so big that there's no one the fans would really accept him losing to, especially on the current roster.

If you're talking exactly 10 years ago, he was facing Ric Flair at WMX8. I liked watching Flair, but no way was he gonna win. If you're thinking of the general time frame, let's take it from WrestleMania 16 to Wrestlemania 20.

WM16 he wasn't even there.
WM17 he fought HHH. If he had lost then, it would have been acceptable. The streak wasn't so apparent yet.
WM18 I already mentioned.
WM19 he fought Big Show and A-Train after Nathan Jones was injured. It was a good match, but again, he wouldn't lose to those guys.
WM20. Round 2 against Kane. If his return hadn't been built up so much, I could see him lose. I said before, it should be Kane he eventually loses to (probably next year), like with Austin and The Rock at WrestleMania. 3rd time's the charm.

WM 17 he was supposed to wrestle Kurt Angle and loose the streak but the stuff with HBK went down so having HHH loose to him was a sign of respect.

chuckdawg1999 wrote:WM 17 he was supposed to wrestle Kurt Angle and loose the streak but the stuff with HBK went down so having HHH loose to him was a sign of respect.

I don't understand the part about HBK.

Rodimus Prime wrote:

chuckdawg1999 wrote:WM 17 he was supposed to wrestle Kurt Angle and loose the streak but the stuff with HBK went down so having HHH loose to him was a sign of respect.

I don't understand the part about HBK.

HBK's drug issues hit their peak; he showed up to a planning meeting stoned and drooling on himself. This offended Taker who demanded Shawn be fired. Since HHH was his friend he did the job to Taker out of respect. Angle at this point was out with an injury.