Douglas Nunnally: Welcome to another riveting, to say the least, edition of The Wrestling Roundtable. After last week's stirring discussion on steroids, we are back to talk about the final stop before Wrestlemania 22; WWE No Way Out 2006! Like last week, we have we have Matt Green (author of Get The 'E' Out), Mike Johns (author of The Trademark Rants), Tim Wronka (author of From The Eye Of The Dragon), and myself as the moderator. Sadly, Joe Pritchett could not make it this week, so we have a guest this week. Matthew Oropeza (author of Viva La Lucha) has decided to fill in for this week so let's just get right into it. What did you all think about the first SmackDown! PPV of 2006?
Tim Wronka: For being a one brand SmackDown! show, it was quite good. SmackDown! brand shows have developed, at least in my eyes, a reputation of being sub par to Raw and are usually let downs. No Way Out this year was solid for the most part, and the last two matches with Orton/Rey and Taker/Angle, were well worth the money. The undercard was a bit lacking in some areas, but came through and was definitely better than last year's.
Mike Johns: First off, anything would be better than last year's Barbed Wire Cage Match. I actually went to see No Way Out 2005 live in Pittsburg last year and that show totally sucked. This year, though, I'm not sure what was so solid about it. It had the seven billionth Benoit/Booker T match ever (Matt Green will most likely have the exact number), which, amazingly, I fell asleep halfway through. Keep in mind, I watch WWE PPVs in a sports bar filled with people so it's usually hard to fall asleep during a match. So, please, keep that in mind. JBL won, so that should make you guys happy. And...yeah...that's about it. An otherwise boring show I'm glad I didn't pay full price to see. Just like last year.
Matthew Oropeza: I've got to disagree with Mike on this one. I'm actually not a very big Booker T fan, but I thought that match was really well done. It was eerily reminiscent of their matches in WCW. They both seem to, strangely enough, have been reinvigorated with their spot on the card. SmackDown!'s storylines are very well developed, and this PPV was good proof of that. This definitely was one of the best single brand PPV's I've seen in the last year. I honestly don't feel like SmackDown! gave us even one throwaway match.
Douglas Nunnally: Matt, care to expand on that thought that Benoit and Booker were reinvigorated?
Matthew Oropeza: Benoit, Booker, and even JBL have all been reinvigorated in my eyes with their fight over the US Title. It could possibly be the addition of Lashley & Finlay, or just that Wrestlemania is coming around, but they all look crisper and cleaner in the ring. It just goes to show that sometimes, the belt is more than just a prop.
Matt Green: Personally, I think the show as a whole was average: a couple of enjoyable bouts, some real rubbish, and, of course, the awesome main event between Taker and Angle. That was a great back and forth battle with great near falls and high spots that had the crowd caring for the match like no other match in the WWE in recent memory. They had the crowd in the palm of their hand and it made the under card look more spectacular because the show went off the air with the audience awestruck. The Cruiserweight opener was far better than the rumble and had some pretty enjoyable high spots. They seemed to have gotten over the styles clash (no pun intended) from the Rumble, in my opinion. JBL versus Lashley was better than it had any right to be. The interference from Finlay worked really nice as well as the simmering rivalry there was pre-empted by the SmackDown! tag and no doubt will lead to some good stuff. After that though, the PPV kind of died for a bit. The US and Tag Team Title matches were, as I said, really poor. I can't even remember how the tag match showed any importance. The US Title match was real generic up until the finish, which was nice and fresh and will no doubt get the match more recognition than it deserves. The Orton/Rey match was passable with the finish absolutely killing the crowd especially the way in which Orton won. Had he gone over cleanly, no one would have cared because it would of be more of a competitive win. With the hands on the ropes finish, it basically said to me that the WWE management had no idea what their fans view as entertaining wrestling. Then again, it could be because wrestling fans tend to have morals.
Douglas Nunnally: Phew, anyone still alive?
Matthew Oropeza: Barely.
Mike Johns: Kind of reminded me of the Chris Benoit-Booker T match.
Tim Wronka: Burn!
Matt Green then stands up and takes a bow.
Douglas Nunnally: It's sad you're proud of that. Anyway, you guys all seem to have your own opinions, but what really shocked me was that the Wrestling Observer audience voted it so highly. For this PPV, it got a "thumbs up" from 79% of the people who turned in feedback, and though the overall amount of people who turned in feedback was down by 11% since last year according to Meltzer, it's still a bit of a shocker considering how the crowd rates the WWE PPV normally. Mike, as probably the only one here really disappointed with the show, what's your take on that?
Mike Johns: My take? Jeez, I'm not sure where to start. 79% of people are so bored by the current wrestling scene that they gave what might have been the most boring wrestling show in the past three years a "thumbs up." I'm not sure what to say. I mean, I guess I could wax on and on about how technically sound the show was. About how the Cruiserweights stepped up a notch or how Booker and Benoit, despite having seven billion matches, can still manage to make them seem good (although, after about five billion, I stopped caring). But, let's be honest here, we're talking about the Observer. The Observer audience is, well, internet marks. Guys who give a rat's ass about the technical soundness of a show. Now, as I said before, I watch PPVs at a Sports Bar in Austintown. A lot of smarks go, but mostly, it's casual fans. So, I can say I see a bit of both worlds, so to speak. I like casual fans because they don't know or care about how sound the wrestling is. They care about whether the show is any good. Whether it's interesting or not. Whether the characters are worth watching or not. Yeah, they like high spots as much as anyone else, but high spots are 10% of all wrestling. So, I guess my reply is, "Of course the Internet Elite is going to approve of NWO 2006. It's more or less their job to remind us that Chris Benoit is a good wrestler, that Cruiserweights are underappreciated, that JBL used to be good in Japan, and that Kurt Angle, despite some people's opinion, actually is the second coming of Bret Hart." But beyond that, I don't get it. I don't care. And that's why I didn't like NWO. I wasn't given a reason to care about anyone on the show. Eddie Guerrero is dead, Randy Orton is reading from a badly written script, and I've seen Booker T and Chris Benoit seven billion times already! Enough is enough!
Matt Green: In response to casuals caring whether a show is good or not or how interesting the characters are, if they're so interested in that, go watch a movie or go watch a soap opera and don't watch pro wrestling. Your estimation of smarks is a little weird as well since I don't consider Angle the second coming of Bret Hart in any way. I'd rather watch an entire midgets show than a lot of Kurt Angle matches in the past four years. As for 79% of the Observer readers giving this show a "thumbs up," let's just remember, these are the same people who gave TNA Against All Odds a unanimous "thumbs up" so they're not 100% sane in my book. It's not the internet's place to tell people what they should think it is; the internet's place is to present the facts in black and white and then form opinion around facts, not rumors and not what Dave Meltzer thinks. I don't think Chris Benoit is the best worker on the planet, I don't think JBL was a great worker in Japan, and I don't think No Way Out was a great PPV.
Tim Wronka: This is a very interesting debate. To be honest though, who is WWE's true audience? The mark fan base, of course. As it's been said many times, the internet "smarks" are merely a minority and really pick apart the product. Anyone that is a follower of my columns knows that I am a big advocate of being a mark when watching wrestling, because that's what the product is meant for, no matter how you cut. Sure there is a big smark following, but smarks care more into evaluating "match psychology" instead of enjoying storylines and characters. I would like to see this poll on a mark site and see the results. Just to compare it from a personal view, I, the smark, said the show was solid. My little cousin, who is a 12 year old and an avid John Cena fan, said the show was boring. It really is all about who you ask. Internet fans always complain about certain things, but in the end, WWE doesn't care about their views, as evident by who enjoys the shows more.
Matthew Oropeza: Well, am I allowed to say, "f*** Meltzer?"
Douglas Nunnally: Go ahead, though this has nothing to do with Meltzer, just his audience.
Matthew Oropeza: Well, that's not who's telling me I liked something. If I liked a show, I liked it. The fact that 79% of a bunch of smarks liked it isn't going to influence me; and if that smarky-smark group of fans liked it as well as a general consensus by non-net fans says it was a good PPV, then it must have been a good PPV. SmackDown!'s ratings haven't dropped one bit. I believe that anytime you have the Undertaker in the title hunt and Rey Mysterio being prominently featured on your show, people are going to enjoy it. You've appealed to your main demographics. Those fans that are the pure marks are going to get off and the fact that you have good wrestling on the card just makes me believe that this was something that all wrestling fans would enjoy. Top to bottom, I didn't hate one match and I do not believe that I am your typical "smark" because if anything, I thought this show was severely lacking in Boogey.
Douglas Nunnally: That was definitely refreshing with some off-the-wall remarks. At this point though, I'd like to switch to the good and the bad. We touched down on it individually somewhat and I think I know what you would all say, but what do you guys think was the best match on the card?
Tim Wronka: I think we all know what's coming: Undertaker-Angle. This was the reason I ordered my first SmackDown! PPV since Wrestlemania 20 and it was awesome. Just the atmosphere of two very over faces going against each other was phenomenal. Sometimes face vs. face doesn't work too well, but they really pulled it off. Everyone watching live was given a motive to cheer for one guy over the other because of the tremendous story that was being told. And of course, the actual wrestling was great and the best match that those two have had in a while.
Matthew Oropeza: Well, like Tim said, sometimes face vs. face doesn't work. Usually it does though, and when it really does, it really does. Any time you get two guys like Taker and Angle, who are surefire first chance Hall of Famers, in the ring together, fighting over the title to boot; that's the stuff that's talked about for years. See, I'm actually in contact with real life marks. My little cousins are 7 and 10 years old and they were very worried about Undertaker. They thought that maybe Angle would "kill him" since Taker was dead not too long ago. Those guys love Taker. Then you have my Dad who's not quit a mark anymore, but nowhere near being a mark, and he was enthralled by this match. Then you have me, who hates being called a smark, but face it, I probably am. I'm sitting on the edge of my seat! I loved the submission exchanges and I really liked the drama that this match gave us. The kids liked that Taker put on his usual show and my dad, who's a huge Kurt Angle fan, was huge on Angle's continuing attempts to snap on the ankle lock. There was something for everyone and that's why there can't really be an argument as to what was the match of the night.
Mike Johns: Well, despite the fact I wasn't awake for the whole match, I can say that Benoit/Booker T was probably the best wrestled match of the night. As for everyone marking out on Taker/Angle, I don't know. The match that best advanced a story was probably the Cruiserweight bout, but I do have some questions about that. See, if it's supposed to be everyone vs. Greg Helms, then where was Jamie Noble? Or how about Chavo? He was there that night! We even saw him! Who says that being a Raw superstar means you can't be Cruiserweight champ? It obviously didn't stop Greg! But, in the end, I have to give it to Angle/'Taker because, well, when it was over, so was the show. That's about it. Like I said before, I really didn't care about the show. Although, I will say Tatanka is always good for a laugh
Matt Green: Just to clear up the Cruiserweight thing, Long announced the challengers who beat the crap out Helms on the preceding episode of SmackDown!. As for match of the night, there is no contest whatsoever, in my opinion, that Angle Vs. Taker should take that accolade. It was great back and forth action, great nearfalls, and Angle, for once, using the ankle lock awesomely to add to the tension and pops on near falls. Even the botched superplex that look like it killed Taker added to the brutality of the match, and the finish was a great way to show that these guys had gone balls to the wall through the whole match and that they had zero gas left in their tanks so the simplicity of the cradle pin added to the greatness of the match as well.
Douglas Nunnally: Well, on the flip side, what do you all think was the worst match on the card?
Mike Johns: Tatanka. 'Nuff Said.
Douglas Nunnally: That wasn't a match, but point taken.
Mike Johns: Matt Hardy & Tatanka vs. MNM then. Better?
Douglas Nunnally: Probably not to all who saw one of the worst gimmick wrestler of one of the worst gimmick eras return.
Matt Green: Like Mike said, the tag title match was utter rubbish. It's not even worth picking it apart because the structure of it was as solid as water.
Tim Wronka: As far as my worst match goes, I'd have to agree with everyone that tag match was terrible. The star wrestler, Hardy, didn't even make the pin and Tatanka looks terrible in there. It doesn't even really make sense. Storyline wise, are we really supposed to believe that Hardy needs help from some has-been? So overall, it was a terrible encounter that was very generic and had little logic involved.
Matthew Oropeza: My biggest problem was the lack of the Boogeyman. This character is hot. I don't know how and I don't know why, but Lord knows I love it. It's the strangest shit and it somehow seems to fit, and people seem to love it/hate it/want to marry it. There's no accounting for taste and the Boogeyman tastes like worms, people, so, why not have him in a match? As for the matches, meh. I can't say Tatanka was the worst because I marked hard for the Indian, so we'll go with Lashley/JBL.
Douglas Nunnally: We've been up and down the whole card here, guys, and you've all gone really in-depth, but I've just got one final question. How do you think, SmackDown! wise or both, this set the stage for Wrestlemania 22?
Matthew Oropeza: SmackDown!'s presence on the card will be very important because, in my eyes, they have what is the money match. The Angle/Orton/Mysterio storyline is, for my money, the match to see. This match has been developed for months and it's interesting to see that it's overshadowing Raw's main event. No Way Out left us with a feeling of "Wow, what's going to happen next," and with a transitional PPV like this one; you're just building storylines for the big payoff, which is Wrestlemania.
Matt Green: I don't think storyline wise it did a whole lot to help Wrestlemania, but match wise, it has set up a lot of intriguing contests that can now go onto the Wrestlemania card like Kash/Helms, Lashley/Finlay, and obviously the World Heavyweight Title match. Personally, I think SmackDown! is a far more entertaining show to watch at this point and will definitely be the stronger side of Wrestlemania despite No Way Out failing to start any serious buildup.
Tim Wronka: Storyline wise, it did little to set up for Mania though I will say that it gave a strong lead into SmackDown! where I'm assuming we will see the actual buildup. I mean, we were all left with a cliffhanger involving the Orton win and the ending of Taker-Angle, which were in the end resolved on SmackDown! and that show succeeded in getting me hyped for Wrestlemania. Wrestling wise, we were given a preview of the Wrestlemania main event with Orton and Rey tangling up and the brief altercation with Lashley and Finlay, which I'm hoping makes it into the card in some way.
Mike Johns: Okay, first off, Helms/Kash and Lashley/Finlay won't even make the card. If anything, we'll get the 7,000,000,001st Booker vs. Benoit match for the US Title, the Money in the Bank sequel: Electiric Boogaloo, the Triple Threat World Title match, God, I mean Triple H, Vs. John Cena, Edge Vs. Foley (for reasons I can't even begin to imagine), and Trish Vs. Mickie James because tits apparently equal PPV buys. In other words, SmackDown! shows with this PPV that they will barely have a presence at Wrestlemania 22, and if it weren't for re-hashing WCW booking from 1998, SmackDown! would only have one angle and Eddie Guerrero to thank for having any Wrestlemania presence at all.
Douglas Nunnally: Well, on that note, I think will end this one. We'll be back next week with an examination of marks and smarks after the repeated references this week. Thanks to all who read this and thanks to these great columnists as well. We'll see you all next week, Roundtable fans!
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement