Last Man Standing Match at Backlash *SmackDown! Spoilers*

[Mr. Nerfect]

I don't recall reading this in the spoilers for the show, but apparently The Undertaker vs. Batista at Backlash is scheduled to be a Last Man Standing Match. Mmm. Could be OK.

[SammyG]

meh

[The Naitch]

isn't Backlash a RAW PPV?

[St. Jimmy]

Yeah, this year backlash is completely "interpromotional". Everything but the Fatal Fourway looks to be complete shit so far.

[El Fangel]

IMO LMS Matches tend to be alright. I enjoy them at least no matter how poor the wrestlers are.

[St. Jimmy]

Yeah, but Last Man Standing with Batista and Taker? C'mon now. That's legal rape of your viewers.

[Mr. Nerfect]

They had a good Mania match, apparently, but I think that was because they planned out the spots well, and expections were low. The WWE should have cut their losses and given The Undertaker something fresh to do. The Undertaker vs. Finlay, although lacking in young talent, would be a pretty decent match, and this is coming from a guy who isn't too fond of Taker.

But yeah, I think I'm most excited about The Hardys vs. Lance Cade & Trevor Murdoch and Melina vs. Mickie James so far. :-\

[Dave Youell]

They had a good Mania match, apparently, but I think that was because they planned out the spots well, and expections were low. The WWE should have cut their losses and given The Undertaker something fresh to do. The Undertaker vs. Finlay, although lacking in young talent, would be a pretty decent match, and this is coming from a guy who isn't too fond of Taker.

But yeah, I think I'm most excited about The Hardys vs. Lance Cade & Trevor Murdoch and Melina vs. Mickie James so far. :-\
Only problem with that is, no one in there right mind would think that Finlay could beat Taker.

Batista is the only guy currently who I feel from a booking point of view could beat Taker.

Possibly Kennedy, but it's too soon for the MITB shot.

And there's also a Kane match to be had at some point of course.

But because of the way that Taker has been booked over his career, it's hard to buy into some matches as you know there's no way the guy is going to beat him.

[Rammsteinmad]

Why couldn't they do The Hardys VS Worlds Greatest Tag Team. I really don't give a rats ass about Cade and Murdoch, plus I'm a Charlie Haas mark.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Only problem with that is, no one in there right mind would think that Finlay could beat Taker.

Batista is the only guy currently who I feel from a booking point of view could beat Taker.

Possibly Kennedy, but it's too soon for the MITB shot.

And there's also a Kane match to be had at some point of course.

But because of the way that Taker has been booked over his career, it's hard to buy into some matches as you know there's no way the guy is going to beat him.

You do have a really good point there. From a storyline perspective the match makes total sense. It's just quality-wise that I think the WWE is pushing their luck.

I was going to suggest Mr. Kennedy for a shot, but not make it MITB. They could have just had him earn a title shot the old way, and have him tease in his promos that he could beat The Undertaker, like he's done in the past, become World Heavyweight Champion, and then use the MITB title shot against the WWE Champion or ECW World Champion.

But yeah, I guess we're getting the Last Man Standing Match. I just hope that they find a way to make it work.

An idea occured to me while watching SmackDown!. Mark Henry is apparently on the way back to SmackDown! (according to his return video). Am I the only one who can see him running in during this match, and putting both guys down for the count? Like it or not Vince has a hard-on for the guy; it'd also keep Batista looking strong by not losing to Taker for a second time.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Why couldn't they do The Hardys VS Worlds Greatest Tag Team. I really don't give a rats ass about Cade and Murdoch, plus I'm a Charlie Haas mark.

I like Cade and (to a lesser extent) Murdoch, but I would have much rather seen The World's Greatest Tag Team get a title shot, too. I guess it would just been too much awesome for the rest of the sub-par card?

[Dave Youell]

You do have a really good point there. From a storyline perspective the match makes total sense. It's just quality-wise that I think the WWE is pushing their luck.

I was going to suggest Mr. Kennedy for a shot, but not make it MITB. They could have just had him earn a title shot the old way, and have him tease in his promos that he could beat The Undertaker, like he's done in the past, become World Heavyweight Champion, and then use the MITB title shot against the WWE Champion or ECW World Champion.

But yeah, I guess we're getting the Last Man Standing Match. I just hope that they find a way to make it work.

An idea occured to me while watching SmackDown!. Mark Henry is apparently on the way back to SmackDown! (according to his return video). Am I the only one who can see him running in during this match, and putting both guys down for the count? Like it or not Vince has a hard-on for the guy; it'd also keep Batista looking strong by not losing to Taker for a second time.

I just thought of a great way for Kennedy to win the title, he gets an old fashioned one on one match without the MITB, goes about 20 mins, then KILLS taker with a chair, gets DQ'd beat's the living hell out of him, then declares he's using the MITB, Kenton Bomb and WINNER! That would rule, Taker wouldn't lose any heat.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I just thought of a great way for Kennedy to win the title, he gets an old fashioned one on one match without the MITB, goes about 20 mins, then KILLS taker with a chair, gets DQ'd beat's the living hell out of him, then declares he's using the MITB, Kenton Bomb and WINNER! That would rule, Taker wouldn't lose any heat.

Holy shit! That would kick ass! They've already had the winner run out after a grueling defence, so something like this is fresh and effective. I'd love to see it. :y:

[Theo Dious]

I don't recall reading this in the spoilers for the show, but apparently The Undertaker vs. Batista at Backlash is scheduled to be a Last Man Standing Match. Mmm. Could be OK.

I doubt it, how many times are we going to have to see Taker to a cold sit-up in that match? My money is on 6.

[Mr. Nerfect]

LOL! I'd mark out like a little bitch if The Undertaker sat up at nine, but because he didn't stand, the referee counts ten anyway, then runs off. :lol:

[Theo Dious]

LOL! I'd mark out like a little bitch if The Undertaker sat up at nine, but because he didn't stand, the referee counts ten anyway, then runs off. :lol:

It would be funnier if it happened in Montreal...and then the ref turns out to be Hebner in a mask. :rofl:

[Mr. Nerfect]

It would be funnier if it happened in Montreal...and then the ref turns out to be Hebner in a mask. :rofl:

Undertaker: I'm the deadest there ever was, the deadest there ever is, and the deadest there ever will be...

*Taker sees the crowd reaction when Chris Masters comes out to wrestle a match*

Undertaker: Even my screwjob character is all smoke and mirrors. :(

[AdrianM]

Why couldn't they do The Hardys VS Worlds Greatest Tag Team. I really don't give a rats ass about Cade and Murdoch, plus I'm a Charlie Haas mark.

I'm hoping they're gonna hold that off until Summerslam, then give WGTT a long run with the belts...

hoping!

[DAMN iNATOR]

We all know 99.9% that Taker and Lashley (barring a situation where Vince and Shane are content to just let Umaga work, and let him take the ECW strap away from Lashley in a squash) are keeping their titles, so yeah it's kind of sad, but I'm looking forward to the Women's title match the most so far, and that's saying something...

[Theo Dious]

I'm looking forward to the Women's title match the most so far, and that's saying something...

Yeah, it says that you're looking forward to touching yourself.

[FourFifty]

THIS JUST IN!

No one cares.

[hb2k]

You know what I love? The irony of WWE wanting to turn back the style of the company years to the slower, "make everything mean something", and "tell the story" style. Then they throw a Last Man Standing stip on, after they just did one three months ago, for no other reason than to have a stipulation match, in a feud where, seriously, I have no idea what the issue between them is. That's good storytelling.

[Avenger]

Pretty sure the issue is that they lost their respect for each other and the desire for the World Heavyweight Championship has driven them to go to any length to win it.
























Basically every World Title feud for the last 6 years.

[Team Sheep]

So is every PPV gonna be all 3 brands now, or is it just a one-off for Backlash?

[Xero]

They've expanded them all to three brands because, *SHOCK*, single-brand PPVs weren't getting the buy rates they wanted.

[Team Sheep]

Although I like this idea, and it will obviously strengthen every PPV, it takes away from the big 4 when it was a rarety to see all 3 brands together. But I'd rather see 14 (or however amount of PPV's they have a year these days) stronger PPV's than just 4.

[Tommy Gunn]

If they stop brand-only PPVs, I think 2008 will be back to 12 per year. Personally I find 14 PPVs a year plus specials a bit much when I'm already trying to keep up with 3 shows a week on TV.

[What Would Kevin Do?]

I don't care if they go to all brand ppvs, as long as they book the regular shows right. Mainly, have more things happen on them that aren't just for ppv buildup.

If the shows only focus on ppv build up, they're digging themselves deeper.

I mean, shit, there's how many... 9 titles? There's no way to book a ppv where every title is defended, and have other matches on the card.

Now if they have IC/US/ Tag/Cruiser matches on the normal shows, then it'll all be great.