[DorianGrayism]

(Original post by nonotrly)
He currently has no injuries.

I mean injuries as those to the brain so he cannot remember things and etc. Injuries that will never heal.

[nonotrly]

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
I mean injuries as those to the brain so he cannot remember things and etc. Injuries that will never heal.

There's no 'etc.' and the injury is singular, not plural. Even so, Mick has not been diagnosed with brain damage. All he's said is he doesn't feel sharp and Bret Hart feels the same way.

But even if we and WWE consider he does have brain damage, the sad possibility is that a large chunk of the roster is already going the same way from all the snapbacks and supposedly minor bumps they take, even just landing on their back, so no-one can be singled out otherwise they may as well send everybody home.

If Mick says he wants to wrestle Taker at WM, he's not doing it at the risk of his body. He's already main evented an historical match with Taker, he's headlined WM, he likely has a very comfortable home life. So that rules out that he'd risk his life for money, fame or recognition.

[DorianGrayism]

(Original post by nonotrly)
There's no 'etc.' and the injury is singular, not plural. Even so, Mick has not been diagnosed with brain damage. All he's said is he doesn't feel sharp and Bret Hart feels the same way..

It was an example of a chronic injury he has sustained. Hence the plural and the etc.

He doesn't need a diagnosis of brain damage to know that he has brain damage. He has had over 100 concussions. Also, not feeling sharp is a sign of brain damage or are you going to argue against that as well?

(Original post by nonotrly)
But even if we and WWE consider he does have brain damage, the sad possibility is that a large chunk of the roster is already going the same way from all the snapbacks and supposedly minor bumps they take, even just landing on their back, so no-one can be singled out otherwise they may as well send everybody home.

If Mick says he wants to wrestle Taker at WM, he's not doing it at the risk of his body. He's already main evented an historical match with Taker, he's headlined WM, he likely has a very comfortable home life. So that rules out that he'd risk his life for money, fame or recognition.

Well, no. Foley has taken more and harder bumps that the average wrestler. Therefore, it is nonsensical to compare him to the rest of the rooster.

[nonotrly]

Well, just saw Jeff's big return promo at the end of Tits N Ass' show. Wow.

First he comes down to the ring with his face music (apparently when he turned up high and got owned by Sting, that was his face turn), which is incredibly ironic because the lyrics to the intro and chorus repeats that he's "modest to the top, modest at the top".

He thanks the kayfabe network for letting him speak, and that he won't take long.

Then he starts cutting a forced-emotional promo that sounds like he's saying he let everyone down for losing to Sting in a few seconds, not for being high at a PPV main event, or at all. He didn't have to say anything about drugs, he could've even said that he was sorry for being "irresponsible" or "putting others in a bad position" and so on.

He ends it, though, by saying he CAN'T expect everyone to forgive him(TM), but all he "can do is ask". He follows that line up by demanding "give me one more shot". Not even a please.

Then he reiterates that all he can do is ask (not all he can do is make it up to everyone by working his butt off, helping others and earning his due) then just drops the mic and leaves the ring! And TNA dub the "one more shot" chant that had ended a few seconds ago over the end credit.

Wow. I always wondered what would happened if a 12 year old kid playing EWR happened in real life, and I've been seeing it - TNA.

What next? Andre the Giant's corpse making his debut as a German?

[InsaneLoony]

(Original post by nonotrly)
Mick Foley has made it public that he would go back to WWE in any capacity, including as a semi-active wrestler to elevate stars or have big money-making matches.

Which immediately made me think WrestleMania XXVIII - Mick Foley vs. Undertaker.

You can't do a normal WM match with Taker any more, because we know he's going to win. So it'd either have to be against a heel faction that have been asking for a pounding, or just downright entertaining with spots where the excitement is from the move, not the posibillity of a pin (how many finishers and match-ending moves were in the last 3 Taker WM matches put together? 25?).

If Foley and Taker still have it in them, that seems a given, especially considering their history. The only active names big enough that Taker hasn't already beaten would be CM Punk and Cena, but Punk wouldn't fit or make sense, and WWE are never gonna put Cena against the most popular guy ever.

not necessarily, i'll say this, IF and i use that cautiously because there is much speculation that he might not wrestle beyond 20 wrestlemanias, if undertaker continues on till wrestlemania 29 or just his 21st wrestlemania appearance, then without a doubt that match will be cena vs undertaker. There are alot of rumours that the night after wrestlemania 27 the original plan was taker vs cena at wm28, however they realised that rock being on wm27 helped that ppv achieve over 1 million buys. So instead of doing that, they decided to have cena vs rock booked so in advance to ensure that wm28 has a massive buy, which i believe it will.

Unless wwe build cm punk in a way that he can go after taker then i think they will have to go down the root of taker vs foley at wm28, only because theres nothing left to do... i mean you cant do henry, kane and if they do orton again thats gonna be really boring because it only worked first time because it was the "legend killer" vs the legend.. orton now should just stay away from taker, i would honestly have no interest at all if they booked orton vs taker for wrestlemania

[nonotrly]

(Original post by InsaneLoony)
not necessarily, i'll say this, IF and i use that cautiously because there is much speculation that he might not wrestle beyond 20 wrestlemanias, if undertaker continues on till wrestlemania 29 or just his 21st wrestlemania appearance, then without a doubt that match will be cena vs undertaker. There are alot of rumours that the night after wrestlemania 27 the original plan was taker vs cena at wm28, however they realised that rock being on wm27 helped that ppv achieve over 1 million buys. So instead of doing that, they decided to have cena vs rock booked so in advance to ensure that wm28 has a massive buy, which i believe it will.

I don't see why you say 'without doubt'. there is a lot of doubt over Taker's future and streak opponents. The only certainty is that he won't lose, but that's so certain that it then becomes doubtful.

The rumours sound like complete BS. So Vince brought Rock in to host, and then was surprised that he was quite popular? Really? You really think that?

[InsaneLoony]

(Original post by nonotrly)
I don't see why you say 'without doubt'. there is a lot of doubt over Taker's future and streak opponents. The only certainty is that he won't lose, but that's so certain that it then becomes doubtful.

The rumours sound like complete BS. So Vince brought Rock in to host, and then was surprised that he was quite popular? Really? You really think that?

It becomes doubtful but the thing is, the streak in the last 5/6 years especially has been built in a way where people have a much greater vested interest before the match, in who he faces. It doesn't become doubtful per say, simply people want believable opponents for him, guys that legitly could beat him and matches in which there are moments, even for a split second where you go, "holy ****, hes gonna lose" (triple h tombstoning taker wm27, hbk superkick wm25 etc)

look at it this way, wrestlemania 25/wrestlemania 26 had stronger cards than wrestlemania 27... lets be honest wrestlemania 27 had the weakest wrestlemania main event out of all 3.. and mind you wrestlemania 25 practically had 2 main events (orton vs hhh and hbk vs taker) and wm26 had batista vs cena and taker vs hbk. so wm27 only has miz vs cena, was a decent match but the crowd were dead and before this ppv began people knew rock would get involved but overall would only host the event. wm27 drew over 1.12 million buys, whereas wrestlemania 26 drew 950k and wm25 860k. Overall the cards for wm25/26 were arguably stronger because wm27 didnt even have a very strong main event or money in the bank, i dont think rock "hosting" a wrestlemania should have given wwe the impression they would have a massive increase in wm buys, not by 200k buys anyway. Yes it helped, but 200k for a wrestlemania buy rate is massive... and thus they realised not using rock again would be silly.

Eitherway i dont know why cena vs taker would be a shocking kinda rumour, after you make hhh face taker for the 2nd time ever, practically ignoring there wm17 encouter through the whole buildup, and the fact that he faced micahels for 2 straight years... who else could he face except the face of the company? the guy that has been built up so strongly... no legend can make you believe that they can beat taker anymore than cena. So no we won't get cena vs taker this year, but if taker has 1 more wrestlemania after this one, then yeah i would bet quite highly on the possibility of cena vs taker. but your right his future is very shady because of his injuries and whether he wants to continue on for the sake of it, we dont know.

[nonotrly]

(Original post by InsaneLoony)
It becomes doubtful but the thing is, the streak in the last 5/6 years especially has been built in a way where people have a much greater vested interest before the match, in who he faces. It doesn't become doubtful per say, simply people want believable opponents for him, guys that legitly could beat him and matches in which there are moments, even for a split second where you go, "holy ****, hes gonna lose" (triple h tombstoning taker wm27, hbk superkick wm25 etc)

look at it this way, wrestlemania 25/wrestlemania 26 had stronger cards than wrestlemania 27... lets be honest wrestlemania 27 had the weakest wrestlemania main event out of all 3.. and mind you wrestlemania 25 practically had 2 main events (orton vs hhh and hbk vs taker) and wm26 had batista vs cena and taker vs hbk. so wm27 only has miz vs cena, was a decent match but the crowd were dead and before this ppv began people knew rock would get involved but overall would only host the event. wm27 drew over 1.12 million buys, whereas wrestlemania 26 drew 950k and wm25 860k. Overall the cards for wm25/26 were arguably stronger because wm27 didnt even have a very strong main event or money in the bank, i dont think rock "hosting" a wrestlemania should have given wwe the impression they would have a massive increase in wm buys, not by 200k buys anyway. Yes it helped, but 200k for a wrestlemania buy rate is massive... and thus they realised not using rock again would be silly.

Eitherway i dont know why cena vs taker would be a shocking kinda rumour, after you make hhh face taker for the 2nd time ever, practically ignoring there wm17 encouter through the whole buildup, and the fact that he faced micahels for 2 straight years... who else could he face except the face of the company? the guy that has been built up so strongly... no legend can make you believe that they can beat taker anymore than cena. So no we won't get cena vs taker this year, but if taker has 1 more wrestlemania after this one, then yeah i would bet quite highly on the possibility of cena vs taker. but your right his future is very shady because of his injuries and whether he wants to continue on for the sake of it, we dont know.

Is there a shorter version of this post?

[Tango189]

I heard Taker's back at Vengeance a few weeks ago so they may start the WM promo from there.

[InsaneLoony]

(Original post by nonotrly)
Is there a shorter version of this post?

nope

[chelseafreak]

might seem a stupid question but is noc free tonight?

[Lewroll]

(Original post by chelseafreak)
might seem a stupid question but is noc free tonight?

Yeah its on sky sports 1 i think

[S.J.Shiro]

(Original post by Lewroll)
Yeah its on sky sports 1 i think

They may criticise us for having bad dental hygiene, but at least we get the PPVs for free a lot of the time.

[Lewroll]

(Original post by S.J.Shiro)
They may criticise us for having bad dental hygiene, but at least we get the PPVs for free a lot of the time.

Hahah, very true. Poor americans

I take it everyone will be staying up to watch it live. I just hope its not disappointing.

[chelseafreak]

(Original post by Lewroll)
Yeah its on sky sports 1 i think

cheers

[S.J.Shiro]

(Original post by Lewroll)
Hahah, very true. Poor americans

I take it everyone will be staying up to watch it live. I just hope its not disappointing.

Well with a renewed attempt at making the tag division good, I'm confident that it will be good. Midcard matches, while not having much story, can be solid matches. Mark Henry and Randy Orton could go either way, the Sheamus match was actually quite good last month. Cena and Del Rio will be a good match but there is no story which knocks it down. Triple H and Punk depends on the ending, and the diva's match is a case of "who gives a ****?"

[nonotrly]

(Original post by S.J.Shiro)
They may criticise us for having bad dental hygiene, but at least we get the PPVs for free a lot of the time.

Ahem. We USED to get the PPVs free a lot of time (notably Stone Cold's return at Backlash, Stone Cold winning the Royal Rumble, Stone Cold tag teaming with Triple freakin' H at Backlash a year after pwning his entire family and faction, Stone Cold going through a car window at 6-man Hell in a Cell at Armageddon, and... Rikishi jumping his fat ass off the cage onto Val Venis at Fully Loaded's multi-main event PPV).

Now YOU get it for a monthly fee to watch Sky.

I, however, do not get it. So there.

Gee at least I can watch TNA dubbing dead theme park free-entry crowds while turning Mr Kennedy every few weeks for free. Actually, no, I don't watch that.

[Lewroll]

(Original post by S.J.Shiro)
Well with a renewed attempt at making the tag division good, I'm confident that it will be good. Midcard matches, while not having much story, can be solid matches. Mark Henry and Randy Orton could go either way, the Sheamus match was actually quite good last month. Cena and Del Rio will be a good match but there is no story which knocks it down. Triple H and Punk depends on the ending, and the diva's match is a case of "who gives a ****?"

I'm hoping Truth and Miz win the titles. I hope Mark Henry wins as well. I don't really care about any of the other matches tbh (especially the divas match). I suspect Cena will win his match with Del Rio. We will probably have a surprise visit from Kevin Nash as well.

[Kenan and Kel]

If you don't have Sky..

http://www.firstrowsports.tv/watch/8...champions.html

[S.J.Shiro]

(Original post by Lewroll)
I'm hoping Truth and Miz win the titles. I hope Mark Henry wins as well. I don't really care about any of the other matches tbh (especially the divas match). I suspect Cena will win his match with Del Rio. We will probably have a surprise visit from Kevin Nash as well.

No chance, he's teaming up with The Rock at SS. They won't take the title from Del Rio after only a month. Nash and Henry I agree with, after fifteen years I think he deseves it. Truth and Miz I'm not sure about, I think them losing would make for more entertaining television in the coming weeks as they claim that it's a bigger conspiracy. I think the division needs actual rivalrys not quick title changes.