![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
3 Dicks Out For Trips
Posts: 29,760
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
lolol wtf
Not gonna lie though, my first reactions when I heard it were "Vince is gonna be PISSED at her and Seth" and "Why would she choose to do this when she's at the top of the company". |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | ||
Wrestling Marks Rejoice!
Posts: 10,166
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Two: from a wrestling business standpoint, you know he's kinda right. Think about how hard WWE was just trying to get Maria Kanellis back. Rumors of that shit for ages. They finally get her, and get roped into signing her husband with her (whatever your opinions of Mike Bennett as a wrestler, you know damn well WWE didn't want him, and he was never a talent they would have looked at otherwise). In spite of that, they were in line of a huge, potentially overexposing push, until the guy had the unmitigated gall to get his wife pregnant. The one "prize" the company were horny for, and they were denied soon after finally getting her back. You know Mike was getting shit from the corporate side for that. It killed Kharma/Kong's WWE push dead. The only one it seemed to not "backfire" on was Miz, since it helped him maintain his heel status at a time where people were starting to just cheer his wife just because she's "hot". Three: there are no lies in what he said about Dana Brooke. A concerned "What the hell is wrong with Dana?" is the exact reaction you'd have if you saw her years ago and then just saw her again recently. At least with Jordynne Grace, the opinion on how she looked was an opinion based on nothing that could be helped. Dana, on the other hand, could have avoided every nip and tuck. That shit never looks good over time, and seems to require more maintence to make it look half as good over time. Plastic surgery has diminishing returns, no matter how much money gets thrown into it. Not his fault she has become more living proof of that. |
||
![]() |
![]() |