PDA

View Full Version : Few things. Puder, Heyman, Other stuff.


Loose Cannon
11-19-2004, 02:01 PM
After watching the ECW DVD this week and reading the Observer for this week just before, I want to discuss a few things. Let's start off with Paul Heyman

Well as some of you know, I watched the ECW DVD on Wed and finished disk one yesterday. Well after watching it all the way through, I'm convinced Paul Heyman is the best talker in the history of the business. That guy has got a gift and has the ability to draw your attention like no other. Now, I knew he was very good at talking before, no doubt, but some of those promos he gave directly to the ECW fans were just so far above many other promos throughout the industry that it's not even funny.

For example, when Sabu didn't tell Heyman he wasn't going to be at the show and went to Japan instead. Heyman just came out to the ring and told it like it was, blasting Sabu in the process. His delievery kept you listening for the whole time he was up there. You don't get distracted when Heyman talks. He has a way of stressing words and changing up his tone of voice that I can't even explain with words. Heyman told it like it was/is and he is just the best. If I was campaigning for president, I want Heyman as my manager. He could probably rally people up without even trying.

I wish they would let Heyman lead a revolt against WWE and just give him a mic and let him go. I can't tell you how much that would rule. Which brings me too my next point.


Daniel Puder. So I'm reading the Observer and had a very in depth section on the whole Puder/Angle thing. Meltzer was very critical on the WWE because he said that on that night, the WWE created a star in Daniel Puder and are doing nothing about it. He said the St. Louis crowd that night was mega hot for Puder. He said the WWE actually had to edit some "Puder" and "UFC" chants out, so Puder wouldn't come off as a star on national TV against someone like Angle. They actually fucked up in the contest as someone from the back instructed the referee to call Chris N (the guy who won) out and Puder was suppossed to win. But the ref called Puder out by mistake and Angle took down the other guy pretty quick. The crowd was real pissed when Puder got called out by the ref as they thought he got screwed, which he did. Then when Angle called out anybody else to come in the ring, the crowd went nuts when Puder accepted. I'm not sure how it came off on TV because I actually didn't see the whole thing. They might of toned down the crowd a little through editing.

Anyway, Angle was upset backstage as most of you know. The Observer reported that one WWE Superstar said it was the best segment on Smackdown in a long while, which I agree with. Melzer said that the next day at his sons HS, kids were actually talking about wrestling, which haden't happened in quite some time. The MMA Boards has so many threads talking about this inncident. Some thought it was real, some thought it was fake, so didn't know. But look what you had here. A BUZZ. When's the last time there has been a buzz about the WWE? They had something special here and once again they do nothing with it. Maybe they will in the future, but you got to run with the ball while the ball is still hott.

They already started fucking with Puder's credibility and trying just push what happened aside. First Taz (who was directed probably by Vince in the back) says that "Angle has a tougher time with Puder, but it was still an easy match" after Puder got "pinned" Oh and the pin was bullshit to begin with as his shoulders weren't even down. Someone from the back told the REF to end it quick before Angle really did get beat. On the WWE's website, theyv'e taken down something in Puder's bio that mentions his UFC background. When they showed the clip from Smackdown recap, they edited out that whole part. It's like they're trying to say it never happened which is a god dam shame.

PAUL HEYMAN AND TAZ actually pushed for them to push Puder right after it happened, but no. Why listen to Heyman? It's not like he has any creative ideas right?


Meltzer brought up another good point on how the WWE used to take a guy and showcase only his strengths and hide his weaknesses, which exactly was mentioned about what Paul Heyman would do on the DVD. But, he says today in WWE, they showcase every guys weakness and use that as an explanation as to why he fails to get over.

Well, so what could of come of all this? We'll never know and it's really ashame. You got people in that lockeroom who don't want to give the fans what they want anymore, even though they insist that's their main focus. Puder was made that day and could of been huge. Yea, he doesn't have any training, but you can hold off on him getting in the ring for a while. Less is more right? I just wish those within the WWE would put there egos behind them for a second and pounce on an oppurtunity to make someone before it's too late. They've missed the boat on a lot of guys through the past 3 years and in the end, it has hurt them.

The Naitch
11-19-2004, 02:22 PM
it is a god damn shame. The Puder incident that is

MVP
11-19-2004, 02:52 PM
Angle probably complained to Vince that Puder was intentionally trying to make him look bad; so Vince had everything that could have helped Puder editted and removed.

Of course Angle probably knows deep down that he should have tried to push Puder as much as he could.

Splaya
11-19-2004, 02:52 PM
Watch. Even though they both have UFC backgrounds, I guarantee Puder will either win this thing, or be signed anyway. But he will be the Ken Shamrock of this wrestling era.


Shamrock vs Puder in the Octagon at a WWE PPV: :drool:

The Naitch
11-19-2004, 03:10 PM
what's wrong with Puder's mouth? Does he have a mouthguard in there or something?

Corkscrewed
11-19-2004, 03:22 PM
Too many blows to the mouth? I dunno.

I just wish those within the WWE would put there egos behind them for a second and pounce on an oppurtunity to make someone before it's too late. They've missed the boat on a lot of guys through the past 3 years and in the end, it has hurt them.

I gave you rep for that, LC, because that's just hte perfect way to detailing the WWE over the past few years. The company is being slowly driven to the ground by the egos who have gained power and refuse to relinquish it. We've seen that not even Kurt Angle, a guy who many have likened to Bret Hart, is immune to the corruption that power can bring.

It's the same case with a lot of big companies, but I really hope they can turn things around. Unfortunately, it would take something very drastic to sound a warning bell loud enough to catch the WWE's attention.

Right now, we're reduced to quality that would have been absolute trash and outrage five years ago, but is now accepted as "typical." Even the "good" shows only rise up to "average" five years ago. It's a real shame, but we've been conditioned to accept mediocrity in a company that is supposed to represent the best.

Rob
11-19-2004, 07:59 PM
Shamrock vs Puder in the Octagon at a WWE PPV: :drool:

That would last about 15 seconds. Shamrock knows that game like the back of his hand.

SuperSlim
11-19-2004, 08:14 PM
it is a real shame. Hopes are the one day WWE will finally open their eyes and do somethin. Probably it is but the egos are too in the way.

I mean they started lookin and was doin it right with Benoit and Guerrero. Then egos got back in the way and blocked everything. So things turned back to crap so maybe in due time their egos will be moved again and they will see that there is a chance for at least Puder to become someone.

The CyNick
11-19-2004, 09:12 PM
Ive heard Meltzer's POV on this subject, and I think he's overstating the value of what happened/could have happened.

I think when it comes to PRO WRESTLING, you need to keep the "real" stuff as far away from the TV as possible. People will point to SurvSer as a deal that was real and become larger than life, but I think thats a rare situation.

Vince Russo used to try all of the "this is real" BS and it totally backfired and drove away many longtime wrestling fans, and ultimately put a major promotion out of business.

Where I think Meltzer is off the mark is how he's making a big deal out of something being big on MMA boards (what is that, like 40 people?) and some kid talking about it with his buddies (who BTW Meltzer said are in wrestling class, whoch would lead me to believe they follow wrestling a little more closely than the 'average' kid). I know people who watch wrestling on a casual basis around my block and at work and nobody I know was talking about it.

Back to the MMA fans, MMA struggles in North America to survive, so banking on something that is hot in such a small community (a community that hates pro wrestling for the most part anyway) is pretty rediculous. Yeah they may have talked about it, but where do you go with it? The MMA fans are going to want to see Angle and Puder shoot, but that would be really......really stupid on WWE's part. So what are you left with? A Pro wrestling match between two pro wrestlers, thats going to turn off MMA marks.

Shamrock was mentioned, and they tried to get him over initially as a shooter, and it failed miserably. Shamrock didn't become a somewhat worhtwhile piece of talent until he shifted from a shooter in the WWF to a sports entertainer with a legit background.

Where I agree with Meltz is that they shouldnt have tried to bury it. Tazz could have talked about how from 'his angle' it looked like Puder got his shoulder up, and with Angle in the submission move, he could have tapped. Then, even if Puder loses, you have something to play off of when the contest is over. Puder can come out and say to Angle, "I almost made you tap", Angle would blow him off as nothing special, you build to a match and Puder destroys Angle. Angle would be hot, and now you've got a heated program, and maybe you're on your way top creating a new star.

Its worth mentioning, even with all thats happened, and all thats been said, that scenario could still play out.

Loose Cannon
11-19-2004, 09:29 PM
See, I don't know if you agree with this on me or not, but I think the "real stuff" is good for wrestling. And when I mean "real stuff" I mean it like this:

Obviously, the St. Louis fans knew Puder's UFC background. And obviuosly, they know Angle's amature backgroud. See, that's real right there. I think stuff like that outside of wrestling makes a great story. Two guys who compete in other forms of "fighting" or whatever going on it.

Same with something like Vince vs Bishoff if it ever happened when Bischoff first came in. Fans knew in reality, they hated each other. Sure the storyline would be scripted, but you use the real life hatred that fans know about to fuel that story.

Like for the Puder/Angle thing, they could of followed up on that 'real" moment and made a story out of it, but they chose to ignore it.

So you see how I think reality and wrestling can work hand in hand sometimes.

Aussie Skier
11-19-2004, 09:44 PM
I havent watched wrestling ina while cos of exams and work...but come monday i will!

the wrestling i have seen has been all on the WWE website (and surv series).
And i gotta say, i realyl like this Puder guy! I think he will be like the Benoit of smackdown. I just wish they'd take him out of Tough Enough and get him in the ring. Altho, knowing the WWE, they'll probably get him in the ring and have john Heidenreich destroy him, just like how they are destroying charlie hass...*hmm, topic idea*

The CyNick
11-19-2004, 09:59 PM
See, I don't know if you agree with this on me or not, but I think the "real stuff" is good for wrestling. And when I mean "real stuff" I mean it like this:

Obviously, the St. Louis fans knew Puder's UFC background. And obviuosly, they know Angle's amature backgroud. See, that's real right there. I think stuff like that outside of wrestling makes a great story. Two guys who compete in other forms of "fighting" or whatever going on it.

Same with something like Vince vs Bishoff if it ever happened when Bischoff first came in. Fans knew in reality, they hated each other. Sure the storyline would be scripted, but you use the real life hatred that fans know about to fuel that story.

Like for the Puder/Angle thing, they could of followed up on that 'real" moment and made a story out of it, but they chose to ignore it.

So you see how I think reality and wrestling can work hand in hand sometimes.

I agree with that in principle, but Meltzer's point seemed to be, MMA fans were making a big deal of it, so they should play up that Angle (gold Medal winner) almost tapped to Puder (UFC unknown).

I dont think thats a big deal to anyone except hardcore wrestling or MMA fans. What might work, is just trying to use the segment to push Puder. But forget about the keylock part of it, you need to have him kick Angle's ass in the realm of a wrestling match/segment. Anything else, and you run the risk of alienating non hardcore fans. And I dont think the fact that the segment was "real" had anything to do with it.

Meltzer mentioned the Cena-Angle deal that helped make Cena. Nobody thought that was real in any way, but it still got Cena over because he looked good against a top guy in a wrestling angle, not a shoot.

With Vince and Eric, both guys spent a lot of TV time portraying their hatred for one another. So the average fan would know the Vince McMahon character hates the Eric Bischoff character. The fact that Vince really wanted to kill Eric in real life, to me, had very little impact when they started a wrestling angle, because I dont think anyone buys into it thinking they will actually shoot on each other. Further to that, I dont think the average fans cares about that.

So, yeah, you can use reality to enhance a story, but to make it the focal point of the story generally falls flat. I mean if real hatred sold tickets, Bret and Shawn would have destroyed every known record in wrestling history when they were working each other through 1997.

Rob
11-20-2004, 03:07 PM
By the way, Puder has a MMA background, NOT a UFC one. Slight difference.

Mr. Nerfect
11-20-2004, 06:13 PM
I have to agree with The CyNick here. As far as the WWE goes, everything is real. We are not supposed to believe that one thing is more real than another, because then we lose some illusion to the business. Angle/Puder was enjoyable, not because it was real, but because Puder was real. We KNOW he can break a man's arm, but in wrestling he's no more real than when Kane was in a fire as a child.

We all were cheering Puder when he went to break in Angle's arm, because we all know he COULD do it, whether or not he was doing it was not important, because in wrestling everything is on the shared level of realism. Puder's MMA background makes him more believeable in the ring, but him shooting is not going to get him anymore over than Kane was when he was destroying people left, right and center.

McMahon/Bischoff had the heat from WWE/WCW, and a lot of that was real, but most of the heat can be attributed to McMahon being WWE owner, and Bischoff being WCW owner, not some of the political and business movs that went on behind the scenes.