"Overrrrrrr"

Damn, I would not want to see an Arn Anderson/Kevin Sullivan porn.

I'd say not agreeing with your point and not getting it are two very different issues. Clearly you feel the need to try and insult me b/c you cannot debate the point sensibly. Your point has been made apparent you feel the PG rating isn't an issue. Which I agree with to a lesser extent. But, to ignore WWE pissing off the 18-34 demographic having nothing to do with the lower ratings is ignorant. How can you logically say the PG rating isn't connected to the ratings issue? You keep sidestepping my longer tirades conviently as well. Every time I raise an interesting issue, you keep saying I don't get it in order to make yourself come off as more intelligent. Ironic too, b/c you claim I have a distorted argument. To me, dismissing any opinion but your own is distorting the facts to make your argument hold up(which it doesn't since you never directly debate the points I raise).

You claim I'm not listening??? Weird you completely ignore certain posts of mine or take them out of context in order to make you look right in the debate. If you don't discuss the points b/c you don't agree with them, then that makes you narrow minded. I'd say that is dismissive and distorts the topic more than anything....

Tired too of seeing the word "trolling". It's another way for one person to state their opinion and accuse someone else of baiting them in. I must have a different definition of debating sensibly and logically then you do. In order to objectively discuss a topic, it requires actual conversation and intelligent responses. Saying b/c we don't see eye to eye I'm trolling is a moronic way of overlooking the issue here. Maybe expecting intelligent responses and actual conversation on this topic was setting the bar too high. Otherwise, it makes this thread one sided and not appropriately examined...

Itd be funny if they all got together again and reshot that picture.

lol

You can't challenge someone and not expect one back. I never ignored you, I simply was replying to your challenge. Wanting to hear solutions to a PG less WWE is lame and lazy on your part.

If you want to hear creative solutions, give the ppl here something to discuss. Throw out a scenario during the PG era where WWE failed, and I'll give you ways it could've been solved...

lol come on now

Innovative? Does Wade Barrett think he's better than Kanyon?

Wow... forgot this thread even existed. Why do we need this thread anymore? Most videos just end up in the 100,000 thread anyway.

Wow. Totally avoided the subject...just after bitching about others pretty much doing the same.

That "challenge" wasn't just for you by the way. It was for anyone that said "get rid of the PG shit".

One of your points was that the rating restricts creativity, all I'm asking is for you to suggest a storyline that would need the rating removed. It seems like one of those "fix all" things like ending the Brand Split, that on further inspection, holds very little water.

And how is it lazy on my part? Suely it's lazy to suggest a fix to a perceived problem but then not back it up with examples of how it would work/benefit the product?

In response to your counter-challenge (:roll:), off the top of my head, I can't think of a time that WWE "failed" in the PG Era - or specifically, a time that they failed because of the rating.

I would agree, were it not for the fact that you were only a couple posts ago arguing that you were not disputing my point when you clearly were.

Please, stick to one story. The thing about internet message boards is it's possible to look back at prior messages. You can't weasel your way out by changing the script and hoping nobody notices.

You're claiming that you understand the point (Which you've demonstrated you don't) but you disagree, though you claimed you were not disputing it. Either a shite argument or a shite trolljob.

Who better than Kanyon?

It doesn't hurt that most of these responses are "I don't like it, so getting rid of it will fix things."

The nature of the IWC is regressive rather than progressive, and before anyone tosses up the pained strawman that I think I'm blasting only others, I find myself doing it, too. Doesn't mean it's right. It's certainly something I try to avoid.

But let's face it. The tendency is to look back to the golden years. Things were better in the Attitude Era, and it's not so much because they were the right place and the right time as it is they were just awesome. People rarely look at how things could be progressively better. The answer is always "go back to (X)," or so often as to make little difference.

We need to go back to blood and major stunts and garbage wrestling, because the way back si the way forward. It's also pretty much literally the cheapest fix, though not necessarily the right one.

Kanyon has been working pretty stiff lately. :shifty:

Yeah, he keeps dead-weighting everybody too.

Hey KK, do me a favour? Suggest a time when WWE "failed" in the PG Era so that ccm can attempt to show me how a non-PG environment would have fixed the problem.

The only exceptionally bad storyline I can think of in recent times was the Edge Kidnaps Paul Bearer storyline. Yes, it was corny as hell. Yes, there were holes bigger than the Grand Canyon in the logic of the whole thing. I can only imagine that a non-PG version would have Edge going even crazier and bloodying Bearer instead of tossing pizza at him, but that doesn't change the fact that, as a face, Edge shouldn'thave been doing any of that stuff to egin with. So, poor example.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/n_Vtwdozi-Q?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/n_Vtwdozi-Q?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

http://bryandanielson.net/

I have just received an email from Colt Cabana :love:

And you quote?

Also, I have Celebrity Apprentice US on right now, Vince is Trump's Right Hand Man.

Hey,
I just wanted to thank you for being concerned. Thanks for being a fan and for your e-mail.

Colt Cabana

It is not a generic email Xero.

Well then what was it?

"Hi Meet! I just sent your shipment out to the address you gave me

Sent from my iPhone"

--------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a business reply to my request to change the shipping address.

Fuck you CSL! I am not that bad.

<object id="ch6569854" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=6569854&use_node_id=true&fullscreen=1" width="600" height="338"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"/><param name="wmode" value="transparent"/><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"/><param name="movie" quality="best" value="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=6569854&use_node_id=true&fullscreen=1"/><embed src="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=6569854&use_node_id=true&fullscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="600" height="338" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object>

Thank you for making me feel bad about myself.

Snarky Smarks and the Nerdy Bunch

Two things:

1 - Matt Morgan's out 6 weeks with a torn pectoral muscle. I wonder what they'll do with him in the BFG Series considering he was probably gonna be in the Top 4.

2 -

http://www.tnainsider.com/index.php?...&attach_id=407

How compelte does it has to be? Because JBL is poopy immediately came to mind.

I'd as soon not nitpick, but I think this epitomises the difference between old Cena and new Cena.

Onthe other hand, I disagree the problem there is with the PG rating, since PG didn't require them to go that far.

I don't know. I have trouble looking at the problem as a PG one, so thinking of what could have been fixed is a little challenging. I mean, the Nexus angle could have been fucked by Daniel Bryan Daniels choking out a bitch, but simply not choking a bitch wouldn't have really made that angle worse. That was a fucking awesome deal, which was eventually ruined more by lack of direction.

So I'm not rally sure what to say.

I never claimed I wasn't arguing with you. To some extent, I agree being PG isn't the only problems WWE have. My opinion differs from yours however that being PG for WWE is an issue. To claim being PG doesn't hurt them any is ludicrous. Telling the 18-34 demographic to fuck off and targeting kids makes no sense ratings wise. Especially since having that demographic could make a huge difference.

And I never have backed down from my opinion on the subject. Agreeing with one point you made and endorsing your views are two different things. Whether you agree or not, the PG rating pisses off the adult audience and limits them to a degree. WWE trying to market themselves as something their not is laughable. For instance, having Keystone Light as a sponsor and having Keith Stone on RAW. How exactly does that scream PG??? Just backs up my point that most of their sponsors are adult oriented and being PG isn't a real big benefit.

I like how you ignore certain parts of my debate to try and claim I don't get your points. I do know what you're saying, I simply disagree for the most part. I never disputed being PG was the entire problem for WWE, but to overlook it has a connection to the show quality is wrong. It's all about fan perception. Most fans over the age of 18 probably thinks being PG blows and start looking elsewhere for entertainment. The numbers don't lie here is the bottom line for me and major overhauls to the shows have to be made...

LOL
 

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/gjsJBgNNJUQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sB1BhzGbV0Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

dont remember that

<blink>MERGE</blink>

...Just embedded the vid, to be nice...

:-\