Viewing Thread:
"SMACKDOWN Thread"

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.

Ant wrote:
> Ahhh I dunno, can't you see the supernatural/sinless/generally weird
> gimmick going up against someone like Eddie Guerrero?

No, quite frankly.. I mean, Mordecai isn't good enough in the ring (have you seen his OVW work? It's the meaning of the expression 'meh'), has little experience on the mic, and the clash between a gimmicked wrestler and one working a more realistic 'athlete-based' character never worked for me ever. Eddie isn't pantomimed enough, and Mordecai isn't realistic enough to make a match (and especially a full-blown feud) actually work. It's too much of a clash, and the same must be said for a lot of the SD! roster.

Mordecai doesn't have what it takes to survive in WWE, in my opinion.

Dork Wad... Heh. :D

Lipe wrote:
> Ant wrote:
> I would enjoy a feud between someone like Mordecai and Eddie
> Guerrero
> - two very different gimmicks and styles, much like Kane and Taker
> have been used in the past?
>
> Kane and 'Taker had similar styles/gimmicks and they both didn't
> talk.

You dork wad you misunderstood.

I mean like the way Kane and Taker used to feud with 'normal' people.

Duh. :P

A Kane/Mordecai fued would work if one of them jumped shows. I dunno how it would end though! :D I think the gimmick is good and when Taker retires, he could go on to be something big.

Ant wrote:
> I would enjoy a feud between someone like Mordecai and Eddie Guerrero
> - two very different gimmicks and styles, much like Kane and Taker
> have been used in the past?

Kane and 'Taker had similar styles/gimmicks and they both didn't talk.

Ahhh I dunno, can't you see the supernatural/sinless/generally weird gimmick going up against someone like Eddie Guerrero? I mean, yes Taker vs Mordecai will work but neither of them say a bloody word. :S

I would enjoy a feud between someone like Mordecai and Eddie Guerrero - two very different gimmicks and styles, much like Kane and Taker have been used in the past?

Jae wrote:
> I'm not sure. If they keep him with the same gimmick, I think that he
> could last a long while.

I think the gimmick will go stale really quickly.

This quasi-religious stuff clearly needs a counterbalance to Mordecai's 'sinless' nature, and that is the most evil of them all, the Undertaker. I reckon this is clearly the guy who Taker's finally going to give the rub to and retire against, which is all well and good for establishing Morders as a threat of some kind, but... who does he go after? For such a superficial and obvious gimmick, you'll need a similarly superficial and obvious target for Morders to feud with properly, and SD! doesn't have such a gimmick available for feuding.

And it's not as though he could just go after anyone as Taker used to - he needs to be built up and have a history behind him.

I think it'll be a fluke if Mordecai lasts after an Undertaker feud.

Jae wrote:
> I'm not sure. If they keep him with the same gimmick, I think that he
> could last a long while.

Apparently the whole 'Mordecai' gimmick was actually used before in OVW, on a guy called 'Conscience'. The gimmick didn't get over and the wrestler using it was last seen wrestling for some Scottish fed. Surely WWE should actually learn from mistakes they make in their own development fed?

I'm not sure. If they keep him with the same gimmick, I think that he could last a long while.

I reckon that as soon as Undertaker retires (which will probably be at the hands of Mordecai anyway), Morders will lose any direction in WWE.