The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Same as the RAW thread. You all seem to think it's a good idea so I made a smackdown thread. Just discuss what happens on smackdown, week in, week out. Remember NO SPOILERS but if you really have to post one, make sure you give everyone a chance to watch the show.
P.S. Lets keep this different from Your Shout.
P.S. Lets keep this different from Your Shout.
Page:
FFS.
SmackDown was going along dandily till JBL somehow won the freaking match. I will stick up for a lot of what the WWE does, but what's with the bloody bumlove for JBL? He is simply the worst and least entertaining of ALL the WWE's main eventers.
By the way I only saw Afterburn and stupidly enough they didn't show how Benoit got eliminated?
SmackDown was going along dandily till JBL somehow won the freaking match. I will stick up for a lot of what the WWE does, but what's with the bloody bumlove for JBL? He is simply the worst and least entertaining of ALL the WWE's main eventers.
By the way I only saw Afterburn and stupidly enough they didn't show how Benoit got eliminated?
Poor Eddie. I know they are 'trying' to make him into an uber-heel. But I can't see his career recovering from this latest piece of retardo-booking.
Anyone would think Vince (McMahon) had somehow snuck Russo back on to the creative team...
Anyone would think Vince (McMahon) had somehow snuck Russo back on to the creative team...
Plus the simply breathtaking storyline which involved Mark Henry and Mae Young getting it on with Mae then giving birth to a hand. Actually, replace the word "breathtaking" with something a little more appropriate. I'm thinking along the lines of "needless, abhorrent, disgraceful and cringe-enducing", as those words help underline just how woeful that storyline was.
Why oh why oh why?
Why oh why oh why?
Not forgetting necrophilia with the Katie Vick storyline
Wouldn't put it past them
What with using 9/11 and the Hardy/Lita/Edge situation as a storyline.
What with using 9/11 and the Hardy/Lita/Edge situation as a storyline.
The Wardy wrote:
> Eddie looks like such a paedophile (sp?)
you know you got it right.... it's on all of your I.D cards ;P
> because he goes to a sort of
> kids playground and says to the kid..."You like candy?" and
> "You like secrets and bedtime stories?"
even the WWE wouldn't be stupid enough to use that as a storyline.
....er.... well hopefully.
> Eddie looks like such a paedophile (sp?)
you know you got it right.... it's on all of your I.D cards ;P
> because he goes to a sort of
> kids playground and says to the kid..."You like candy?" and
> "You like secrets and bedtime stories?"
even the WWE wouldn't be stupid enough to use that as a storyline.
....er.... well hopefully.
Im Happy that Tomko has stayed on RAW when Christian came to Smackdown because now Christian can get his push that we were all saying he needs. Glad they didnt do the Hassan/Daivari double package deal thing with Christian and Tomko.
Finally Christian has lost the baggage. Then again, thats another tag team broken up on RAW!
Finally Christian has lost the baggage. Then again, thats another tag team broken up on RAW!
I wanted to know what the secret was and they didnt say :(
Probably something like Rey isnt his real dad or something lol
Probably something like Rey isnt his real dad or something lol
I wonder if they'll actually keep the "i know your secret" storyline going for Eddie and Rey or just scrap it like they did with Booker T and his notes
The Wardy wrote:
> 1) I would have liked to have seen Christian/Benoit/Undertaker win
> it
> 2) I would have liked to have seen ther Smackdown title
> 3) I would have liked to have two titles for a little while which
> could make the show a tad more interesting
> 4) At some point have a unification match.
1) This wouldn't have worked seeing as it would have had to involve one of those three or Batista turning into a heel. It was always going to be Bradshaw or Christian winning the match. Quite why the creative team decided to pick Bradshaw out of those two really is beyond me. It's blatantly obvious who is the more talented and in need of a push out of the two.
2) The SmackDown title never existed. Why would they have created a new title if they weren't going to use it?
3 and 4) Two titles maybe would have been more interesting for viewers, but introducing another title when you've got the World Heavyweight coming to SmackDown means you're actually creating a title just to scrap it a few months down the line through unification, which is a bit pointless.
> Didnt really like Undertaker and Hassans elimination because it was a
> bit too ("hmmm how can we make Undertaker lose without making him
> look any less of a phenom, so he cant give up or submit, hmmm lets
> just get him disqualified")
>
> I think if they didnt want him in the match why did they put him
> there if he was going to lose like that.
The thing is, they needed him in the match to increase the hype for it. Advertising a "6-man elimination match" very probably draws a lot more fans' attention towards the encounter. They could have easily done it with only a couple of superstars, but the higher the number, the more enticing they make the match seem.
> 1) I would have liked to have seen Christian/Benoit/Undertaker win
> it
> 2) I would have liked to have seen ther Smackdown title
> 3) I would have liked to have two titles for a little while which
> could make the show a tad more interesting
> 4) At some point have a unification match.
1) This wouldn't have worked seeing as it would have had to involve one of those three or Batista turning into a heel. It was always going to be Bradshaw or Christian winning the match. Quite why the creative team decided to pick Bradshaw out of those two really is beyond me. It's blatantly obvious who is the more talented and in need of a push out of the two.
2) The SmackDown title never existed. Why would they have created a new title if they weren't going to use it?
3 and 4) Two titles maybe would have been more interesting for viewers, but introducing another title when you've got the World Heavyweight coming to SmackDown means you're actually creating a title just to scrap it a few months down the line through unification, which is a bit pointless.
> Didnt really like Undertaker and Hassans elimination because it was a
> bit too ("hmmm how can we make Undertaker lose without making him
> look any less of a phenom, so he cant give up or submit, hmmm lets
> just get him disqualified")
>
> I think if they didnt want him in the match why did they put him
> there if he was going to lose like that.
The thing is, they needed him in the match to increase the hype for it. Advertising a "6-man elimination match" very probably draws a lot more fans' attention towards the encounter. They could have easily done it with only a couple of superstars, but the higher the number, the more enticing they make the match seem.
Page: