View Single Post
Old 11-23-2015, 02:44 PM   #5
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 61,569
Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
You've got so many conflicting points in your posts. The small amount of losses Triple H took during his heel run has been brought up as a counterpoint to the shit they had Seth Rollins drudge through recently plenty of times. It is NOT a point for your case, so I would drop it.

The Booker vs. Batista thing? You seem to say that one being a major star and the other not is somehow indicative of their actual limits -- whereas we are saying that poor booking and presentation may have hampered Booker and aided Batista. That doesn't prove anyone right or wrong, but you can't take a guy that was booked amazing well and a guy that was booked tremendously bad and say "all things being as equal as they are" like it's a ghost of a point.

You say that guys like Goldberg weren't commited to the business. Sure, there might be truth to that -- but how much of his decision to leave the WWE as quickly as he did was BECAUSE the WWE were clearly fucking him up. Everyone thought so. People stopped watching.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote