Remember the time I said Paul London got fired?
 

Next up The Burchills. :lol:

Jeff Jarrett just came all over himself.

snooze

Not at London, just as news like this. I don't get why some people get upset with it. It's not like he was on tv or going anywhere when he was anyways.

Better off in ROH, because TNA will make him a joke

<font color=goldenrod>I'd say all the following people are right on line to be cut:

-The Burchills
-Jillian (singing gimmick can only take you so far, prolly get cut once the Slut Search starts)
-Snitsky
-Deuce
-Gavin Spears
-Ryan Braddock
-Scotty Goldman
-Kenny Dykstra

The latter four are basically only working FCW shows anyway.</font> :o

They gave his last name to a diva. This is not shocking.

What's confusing about it?

The writers suck. They can't come up with jack shit for (insert talent here) so they release the talent, not the inept writers.

It's not exactly rocket science.

I'm with KoOS on his pick on Capt. Paul and Katie Lea Burchill next on the chopping block.

London will be down in TNA after 90 days are up. Palumbo got his bike business to fall back on. So yeah, I ain't surprised.

I don't think they'll release Katie Lea. She's a woman with boobs.

And only 2-3 sets of ring attire.

So they get in the video game and THEN they get fired? Greeeeat..... just when I thought this might be the most up to date SmackDown game in a while.

LOL.

I can't bring myself to get pissed.

She doesn't have implants, so she's expendable.

So is her chest.

I think Xero means her chest is expandable, not expendable.

:shifty:

I feel bad for London.

I thought Deuce was already history?

Nah, that was Domino.

It's OK. You can set their "brand" as free agent.

THATS HORRIBLE MAN! Have you no shame? Somone ban this clown. You're not even funny. Ect. ect. ect.

Seriously, how does the WWE have nothing for Paul London to do?

Oh well, a ROH return would be amazing, if ROHeven cares anymore given their new booking style. He could also land a job in TNA and could build the X Division around him.

Vince thought he could come up with something for him. He couldn't.

It's not a mystery.

Or confusing.

Or difficult to reason.

It IS confusing. It's confusing how WWE can remain a successful company when they can't come up with an idea, not one idea, for somebody. It shouldn't matter WHO.

One of the big complaints coming from both JR and Jericho is that the new guys are spending too much time at the catering table or chatting up bimbos and not enough on developing their own character.

Hell, part of Steve Austin's success was the fact that he didn't want to stick what he was handed to him by creative, which was jack and shit. Mick Foley would have been dead in the water if he kept with the Mutillator gimmick and was like, "it's good enough for me."

As much shit as we gave Rob Conway (when we weren't ignoring him.), he at least took the effort to put something into his "ConMan" gimmick.

...
 

Fuck the WWE. One of the best high-flyers around and they let him go! Fuck it, send him off to TNA where he'll get some air time.

London could have been a great deal on WWECW.

Once Londrick was broken up, it was only a matter of time for London to be fired. I am surprised that Palumbo got fired though because he was popular on Smackdown! WWE should've never moved Palumbo to Raw

When did the actual downfall of London began?

When he and Kendrick were drafted to RAW.

When he smiled at Vince McMahon.

Hey, that's the wrestling business for ya...

Boy, that week was full of deaths...

Vince, Benoit, London's Career.....

Because wrestling is the least of their business.

LOL.

The funny thing about this is that Paul London has apparently gone out of his way to take acting classes to help better his ability to play a character. He also, in my opinion, stayed in character during the segment that Vince McMahon got upset at London for (when Paul was smiling when Vince was doing his walk down the corridor). Seriously -- I get that the locker-room was meant to look upset at Vince's actions, but Paul's gimmick was that he was a smiling fucker who didn't give a shit. I mean, that's how I interpreted his character. I'm not sure if the WWE cared enough to give him one.

But basically the whole "Downfall of London" apparently started (or at least started getting reported on) when London went up to Vince McMahon personally and said that he didn't agree with the ban put on moves like the 450 Splash and Shooting Star Press. With the WWE lifting that ban, letting London do his thing would have been great, and given them a guy that could easily have filled Evan Bourne's spot in his absence, but alas. Let's just release him instead. The WWE's loss, if you ask me. ROH and/or TNA's gain.

And I'm sure they're crying all the way to the bank.

Um, if the WWE weren't smart enough to keep and use London, then they surely wouldn't be smart enough to cry about releasing him. I don't see your point.

You see, I was getting that what KK meant was that the WWE... couldn't. give. a. fuck. about. London.

Yeah, obviously. My point was: Of. Course. They. Fucking. Don't. They. Weren't. Smart. Enough. To. Use. Him. In. The. First. Place.

Besides, my point about it being the WWE's loss was based on London's talent. How does the WWE's care policy have any relevance to that? It doesn't.

*facepalm*

KK, you are fat. You are not allowed to facepalm me. LOL at you for not having anything past your initial smart-ass comment.

And yes, FA. The WWE did release London. Looking forward to ROH, though, let me tell you.

That was droll.

Rather than respond in kind, allow me to point out that just because you don't get it does not mean that there is no depth there. Though I can understand why you'd want to lash out.

Why I'd want to lash out? Righto.

Of course the WWE doesn't care about London. You say it like it's some big eye-opening statement. I just fail to see why they shouldn't care about him.

In fact, I didn't say it like it was some eye-opening statement. That was dishonest of you, Noid, to state the inference you drew as though it were fact. It also does strike me as lashing out.

Might I suggest that you're latching on to the wrong portion of the statement? Go back, re-read, and re-think. It's right there.

And, while I'm at it, is it really hard to imagine why WWE or any other major promotion shouldn't/wouldn't/couldn't care about Paul London?

Ah, so I take what you say, and it's wrong. You take what I say, and it's right. Hypocrisy at its best.

Was I right, or was I wrong: Your point is that Paul London wasn't making any money for the WWE, so they're not going to lose any sleep over cutting him? Again, I ask what the hell does that have to do with talent, which was my point. Don't respond to my point off-center and then say I latched onto the wrong part. You go back, you re-read, you re-think, and then you re-read again. Then you can just fuck off. :kiss:

And your ad hominems were anything other than lashing out?

It wasn't off-center, for the record. You were arguing that they didn't care and weren't smart enough. You said so explicitly. Don't try to chastise me for taking the wrong way when you say "my point is:" and then making an explicit statement.

Paul London is a great worker. Better than Evan Bourne, in my opinion. Does the WWE have a great thing going on with Bourne (injury aside)? Of course they do. You better believe that guy is over, and could make the WWE a lot of money with merchandise sales.

If the WWE were smart, they'd have marketed Paul London in a similar way. Use the London Calling to sell some t-shirts, because let's face it, it is a very, very cool move that the fans love.

That the WWE had the potential to do that, and chose not to, is my point. You missed it completely by saying "Oh, I'm sure they're so upset." Statements have subtexts, KK. Learn to comprehend them. It might also be handy to note that "lashing out" is aggressive. I was responding to you. Lashing out would imply that I struck first. I didn't.