Thread: Did Taker put Orton over?/How is it different? (Raw Spoilers)
View Single Post
Old 05-04-2005, 01:39 PM   #1
Kane Knight
Ron Paul 4 EVA
 
Kane Knight's Avatar
 
Posts: 152,467
Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Did Taker put Orton over?/How is it different? (Raw Spoilers)
Yeah. I was talking last night about the HBK/Shelton match, hence the spoilers. And I was asked how that match was different than Orton/Taker. I mean, the big name won both times, right?

Okay, to me, the differences:
  1. The Finish: That was a skin of the teeth victory. Taker looked kinda sorta on the ropes, but Michaels looked like that was all the "gas he had in the tank," To steal from the commentary's metaphors.
  2. The Momentum: Through most of the Taker/Orton match, Orton looked on the ropes. Compared to Benjamin, who looked like he could take over at any minute. Later in the match it was a real back-n-forth sorta deal. When was Orton's momentum the strongest? After a cheap shot from Cowboy Bob? Yeah, ok.
  3. Selling: Michaels sold the moves BEnjamin laid on him. Taker didn't really sell more than he did vs Heidenreich, and he wasn't put over.
This combined (aside from the fact that I think Michaels is still a credible wrestler and Taker's only there as a museum piece to draw fans in) makes a pretty huge diff to me between the two, but let's see what y'all think./

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”

--John Rogers
Kane Knight is offline   Reply With Quote