View Single Post
Old 07-11-2016, 07:25 PM   #12
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 61,524
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+)
This is a rather meek suggestion, but when they put the World Heavyweight Title on Khali, I always thought that Kane was a much better choice at the time. I think they only really did it because Khali was huge in India, but they quickly learnt from that mistake. I know there aren't too many Kane fans around the table, but I think you could agree that Kane winning would have just been a slap in the face and not as much a kick in the bollocks.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote