The Energon Pub

News Credits: 335 · by **Down_Shift** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 1:49 pm

Prowl76 wrote:I agree about Sting. He really needs to retire. He was awesome in his day but that day is gone. Same thing for Ric Flair. Don't get me wrong I love both these guys but it hurts to watch them now and remember how great they were.

QFT. At least Flair has a bit of character left in him. Oh well, only a short while now until they are both written out of the story lines.

News Credits: 11 · by **Robinson** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 3:26 pm

Down_Shift wrote:
Prowl76 wrote:I agree about Sting. He really needs to retire. He was awesome in his day but that day is gone. Same thing for Ric Flair. Don't get me wrong I love both these guys but it hurts to watch them now and remember how great they were.

I am a really big "crow" fan so I loved it when sting first started the black and whit, but its been the same gimmick for ten years now, its time to go.

News Credits: 335 · by **Down_Shift** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 6:12 pm

1bigray wrote:
Prowl76 wrote:I agree about Sting. He really needs to retire. He was awesome in his day but that day is gone. Same thing for Ric Flair. Don't get me wrong I love both these guys but it hurts to watch them now and remember how great they were.

I am a really big "crow" fan so I loved it when sting first started the black and whit, but its been the same gimmick for ten years now, its time to go.

I agree. The crow was a a great movie and the crow gimmic was aces when it was first brought to the dance all those years ago. It was even better when he didn't talk. The silence part really made the gimmic work.

News Credits: 11 · by **Robinson** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 6:39 pm

Yeah I just about dropped a load when I saw him in the bleachers in crow makeup, that was the only reason i watched wcw for 3 years or so

News Credits: 1 · by **Heavy B** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 7:39 pm

im not a big fan of wcw or anything its stood for

by **soundwavegt** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:56 am

Heavy B wrote:im not a big fan of wcw or anything its stood for

WCW had it's moments, not many I'll admit, but some of it was enjoyable. The trouble was, the company bosses didn't know how to treat the talent right-see Benoit, Guerrero, Jericho, Hogan(at the end), and many of the others who left for WWE.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:04 am

So I just got home for a little variety in concert in town.

There were a few acts, including two little 8 year old girls who quite frankly showed better dancing talent than "Extreme Expose".
(And no, not in a jiggly shake their tits way either you freaks)

Kill off Extreme Expose and use the extra 3 mins to ... oh ... FURTHER FEUDS!

News Credits: 335 · by **Down_Shift** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:46 am

Burn wrote:So I just got home for a little variety in concert in town.

There were a few acts, including two little 8 year old girls who quite frankly showed better dancing talent than "Extreme Expose".
(And no, not in a jiggly shake their tits way either you freaks)

Kill off Extreme Expose and use the extra 3 mins to ... oh ... FURTHER FEUDS!

I was just about to post the same thing about Extreme Expose. What a slap in the face of everything ECW once stood for. At first I thought they were going to start a fued between Kelly Kelly and Layla because Kelly Kelly couldn't dance worth a **** and had to constantly look at the other two to see what was going on. Disappointingly not so... in reality KK is just an awful dancer. When I watched ECW last night, there were only three matches. What a waste of airtime. I won't hide the fact I watched it just to see Ariel, but they barely showed her anyways.

At least 25% of ECW will be working Wrestlemania, and that's not counting Ariel, Tazz and Joey Styles.

Like Prowl76 on Facebook · by **Prowl76** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 1:24 pm

WWE needs to end ECW. I thought it was going to be cool but it has turned out to be extremely crappy. I mean if everyone is showing up on other shows then why have seperate rosters and further tarnish the ECW name. Oh, I too watch for Ariel.

News Credits: 335 · by **Down_Shift** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 2:37 pm

Prowl76 wrote:WWE needs to end ECW. I thought it was going to be cool but it has turned out to be extremely crappy. I mean if everyone is showing up on other shows then why have seperate rosters and further tarnish the ECW name. Oh, I too watch for Ariel.

I agree, vince should just cut ECW loose. For the record, I don't care for the fangs or vampire stuff, she's just really really hot.

by **random63146** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:19 pm

-

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:38 pm

1 single Nitro Girl has more talent in her shaking left buttock than all of Extreme Expose combined.

It really serves no purpose. Why can't they follow the format of Impact? Both shows go for an hour and Impact does a vastly superior job of furthering feuds while still setting up PPV's.

News Credits: 1 · by **Heavy B** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:35 pm

Burn wrote:1 single Nitro Girl has more talent in her shaking left buttock than all of Extreme Expose combined.

It really serves no purpose. Why can't they follow the format of Impact? Both shows go for an hour and Impact does a vastly superior job of furthering feuds while still setting up PPV's.

but impact crams to much in to to little time. i may not like ecw or the fact that vince whipes his over exposed ass on its name but at least it keeps things simple. i have a hard time paying attention to impact. which is odd because i have a short attention span.

and arial is really hot.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:34 pm

I enjoy the fast paced crammed style of Impact.

The promos are kept short, yet still manage to further storylines, while the matches (albeit slightly shorter than a WWE match) still manage to do a great job of showcasing the talent.

by **Mighty Scorponok** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:35 am

Battista vs Kennedy vs taker. That aint gonna happen. Minly cause kennedy is not even close to Battista's or Undertaker's league. Besides on Msackdown Battista deafeated Kane.Kae is heavier than Taker, but Taker is tad bitt quicker than kane. Similarity of moves is uncanny, but Battista proved that he can adjust his moves to the oponents, weightwise they are similar, so is height. Plus he powerbombed Kane. Off the top ropes nonetheless, but he did. Alas Undertakers Tombstone pile driver, I doubt if Taker be able to execute that, as well as I dont think Battista will let Undertaker walk the ropes like he always does old school style.Now choke slam might work here. Ok, CM Punk wise. He is not going to Wrestlemania. he got eliminated.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 4:31 am

Mighty Scorponok wrote:Ok, CM Punk wise. He is not going to Wrestlemania. he got eliminated.

eh? Got a link to that to back it up?

'cause Punk is in the Money in the Bank match last I checked.

News Credits: 1 · by **Heavy B** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:27 am

http://www.wwe.com/shows/wrestlemania/m ... 1/preview/

punks still in. scorponok must have miss hered somthing

Like Prowl76 on Facebook · by **Prowl76** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:01 pm

Just wondering if anyone was going to watch the TNA ppv tonite. I think I will.

Like Prowl76 on Facebook · by **Prowl76** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:08 pm

On another note- WWE hall of famer Ernie Ladd has passed away.

News Credits: 2024 · by **Hotrod** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:01 pm

Prowl76 wrote:On another note- WWE hall of famer Ernie Ladd has passed away.

This day has been filled with sad news :cry:

News Credits: 1 · by **Heavy B** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:59 am

damn it. cage is STILL champ

News Credits: 335 · by **Down_Shift** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:32 am

Burn wrote:I enjoy the fast paced crammed style of Impact.

The promos are kept short, yet still manage to further storylines, while the matches (albeit slightly shorter than a WWE match) still manage to do a great job of showcasing the talent.

I also like the format of Impact. I don't think anyone on the show other then Cage, Angle and Nash can cut a promo but I would have to think that's because of all the ex-wcw floating around back there. From what Devine and I have discussed about the back stage politics of TNA, it's no better the old WCW. That's bad.

As for Kennedy not being in the same leauge as Batista or Taker I can't agree to that. Ken Kennedy is one of
the most tallented guys they have, both on the mic and in the ring. There doing a slow push with him and it's working wonderfully. He's shaping up to be the next big superstar like Rock or Austin back in the day. Taker pulling off the Tombstone wouldn't be a problem. He's Tombstoned Vader, Kane, Umaga (back when he was Jamal) and many other big men. Batista could also Powerbomb anyone in the back, no problem. A sit-out powerbomb is one of the easiest ways to pull off a Powerbomb on bigger guys. You don't need to have them go all the way up, you don't need to keep your knees straight and you don't need to make it look flashy. I think Undertaker and Batista will be a good match, and I would have to think that 'Taker will be the one to carry the match to the finish.

Like Cyberstrike on Facebook · by **Cyberstrike** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:43 am

Prowl76 wrote:Just wondering if anyone was going to watch the TNA ppv tonite. I think I will.

I did and while it was better than Final Resoultion and Against All Odds were it wasn't great but it wasn't bad either just average. I gave it 2.5 out 5.

Like Prowl76 on Facebook · by **Prowl76** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:23 am

I thought the end of the Steiner/Angle match was weak. How about the fans chanting during the Sting/Abyss match? Glad I'm not the only one that thought that was crap. Even the Christian Cage/Samoa Joe ending was crappy.

by **soundwavegt** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:53 am

Down_Shift wrote:
Burn wrote:I enjoy the fast paced crammed style of Impact.

The promos are kept short, yet still manage to further storylines, while the matches (albeit slightly shorter than a WWE match) still manage to do a great job of showcasing the talent.

I also like the format of Impact. I don't think anyone on the show other then Cage, Angle and Nash can cut a promo but I would have to think that's because of all the ex-wcw floating around back there. From what Devine and I have discussed about the back stage politics of TNA, it's no better the old WCW. That's bad.

As for Kennedy not being in the same leauge as Batista or Taker I can't agree to that. Ken Kennedy is one of
the most tallented guys they have, both on the mic and in the ring. There doing a slow push with him and it's working wonderfully. He's shaping up to be the next big superstar like Rock or Austin back in the day. Taker pulling off the Tombstone wouldn't be a problem. He's Tombstoned Vader, Kane, Umaga (back when he was Jamal) and many other big men. Batista could also Powerbomb anyone in the back, no problem. A sit-out powerbomb is one of the easiest ways to pull off a Powerbomb on bigger guys. You don't need to have them go all the way up, you don't need to keep your knees straight and you don't need to make it look flashy. I think Undertaker and Batista will be a good match, and I would have to think that 'Taker will be the one to carry the match to the finish.

Oh man, I really hoped that I wouldn't hear that about TNA! If their backstage politics are going the same way as what happened in WCW then that is not a good sign for the future.

Would any of this have anything to do with Jeff Jarrett having a considerable stake in the company, because I heard that he did have a role in getting it started?