Man, I'm some kind of sentimental I would like to see McMahon coming back and saying that "he loves co..." This was a great show, now I don't think it's so good as it was or I just watched it to much

You could tell Vince is heavily influencing the product right now because the word "opportunity" is used 500 times per show. I may punch the next person I hear say the word in real life.

I wish I could be less disheartened by this Vince re-takeover. Granted that if I loved today's product I'd surely be willing to look the other way, because I've known that Vince was a POS for ~25 years and watched during many of those years anyway (not to mention that I patronize many other evil corporations on a regular basis), but when I already increasingly struggle to find any will to tune in anymore, the knowledge that it's a Vince product again feels like an unusually high bar to entry anymore.

Why was Logan Paul added directly to the MITB match?
Shouldn't he have to qualify like the others?

$$$$$$$$$$

This LA Knight guy seems super over and pretty good but why this white rock thing?

I tried to watch Raw on fast-forward. I got as far as them replaying Roman doing the shocked-face kickout reaction at the recent PPV. Hey mother****ers, fix this part of your **** you stupid non-functional dumbasses. How do these people who think that's compelling not just spend all day walking into random walls?

I realize, for the record, that this is pure masochism that I ever allow myself to be tempted to look in, knowing full well that this is the type of thing I'm going to see. I just desperately want wrestling to be good, yet I'm unwilling to do the Dids thing and just talk myself into believing that the things I'm watching are, in fact, secretly good.

I'm sure I'll continue intermittently engaging in this activity where I touch the obviously hot stove and then rage about how my finger burned. I acknowledge that every new instance of this happening is entirely my fault.

Is dids still alive?

Yeah I just looked, he’s still tweeting away.

The MSG Smackdown Bloodline stuff was tremendous. As they were showing highlights throughout the night of famous WWE moments and events at MSG, I can't believe how many of those I was actually there for (almost every one in the latter half of the 90s).

While I'm firmly in the camp that Jimmy is the much better Uso, I can totally understand why they'd be reluctant to trust him with his legal history.

Surprised they kept L.A. Knight off SD. After his reaction in London, I'd have thought they'd want to see what kind of reaction he'd get in NY, but it would also be a totally Vince thing to keep him from getting the reactions that Vince doesn't want.

So I read about how Vince turned L.A. Knight into a manager because of his age and then today read that Damien Priest is the same age (40).

Holy **** LA Knight is over

Push this man

Would anyone even notice there was a writer's strike by watching WWE shows? It's seemingly had no effect.

WWE writers aren't a part of WGA and the wrestlers aren't in SAG

We know the wrestlers can't unionize as wrestlers, but I thought anyone who wrote on a tv show or movie had to be unionized. Also brings up another interesting point. Aren't guys like Edge or Cena, who have done a lot of tv or movie acting part of SAG?

I don't know anything about any of this, but I'd be extremely surprised if a scumbag like vince would allow anyone working for, or around, him to be unionized. Allowing something that that takes a minimum of decency after all.

Some wrestlers did manage to get SAG membership along the way, I'm pretty sure. Jesse Ventura and Kevin Nash come to mind.

I've heard Lapsed Ventura say "I'm apart of SAG" so many times over the years that I feel like I've heard the actual man say it

Fairly certain Piper was apart of SAG as well

IIRC the minimum income to be a part of SAG is ~$27k, so decent chance anyone in WWE that had a speaking role in a major movie is a part of SAG

Assuming edge miz and orton are SAG

Vince McMahon retired a year ago today.

Dunno how much truth there is to it but apparently the reason LA Knight didn’t win the us title invitational is cuz he’s going to get a main event push for the title after summerslam.

I assume this means Jimmy is beating Roman? Cuz there is absolutely no way they’re planning on LAK being the one to unstrap him

At this point, I think a Roman loss has to be at Mania. Knight can get a huge push and be in the title picture without winning it (ie Cody Rhodes).

Based on the manner in which they had no idea how to do anything but waste the rub they gave Lesnar after he ended Taker's streak, I guess giving a little bit of it to ****ing Goldberg and then letting the rest just sort of evaporate with time, I don't think the smart money is generally on them having a solid plan for this.

It's not 1988-89, and these days Vince McMahon is the guy at the poker table who is unaware of everyone else's cards, and after seeing a K52r flop looks at his 75o and thinks, "Oh! I have a pair of fives. I bet. ... oh I got raised? I call," then after a blank turn resets and thinks, "Oh! I have a pair of fives. I bet."

If he's going to plan long-term, it's going to be something like specifically trying to get Rock in for a Mania match, which can't simply be solicited the same day as the event like he'd prefer.