# Report: Sting was unhappy with the way he was treated in the WWE



## MoxAsylum (Jan 9, 2020)

According to a new report from Louis Dangoor of WrestleTalk, the reason that the WCW icon appeared on Dynamite and signed a multi-year contract is that he was unhappy with how he was used by WWE and wants a proper final run for his audience.

Sting only had three matches in WWE, all of which took place in 2015. Of those matches, he lost two of them. His WWE debut was a loss to Triple H at WrestleMania 31, he would win a tag team match alongside John Cena on an episode of Raw and then lose to Seth Rollins in the aforementioned match.



Report: Sting Signed With AEW Because He Was Unhappy With His WWE Run | Fightful News


----------



## Lorromire (Jun 17, 2014)

As long as he's healthy and can actually wrestle, sure, give him a run. The only issue is finding decent opponents for him.


----------



## famicommander (Jan 17, 2010)

No ****.

He was a 5 time world champion, tag champion, and Hall of Famer in TNA. He could have stayed there and continued to be treated like a legend. He could have gone to ROH and got paid good money to work 20 shows per year with some of the best in ring talent the world has to offer. He could have gone to NJPW and wrestled at the Tokyo Dome in front of 50,000 people with Tanahashi or Nagata. He could have gone to CMLL and main evented the Anniversary Show at Arena Mexico with Ultimo Guerrero.

Instead he went to WWE, got jobbed out to HHH, then got hurt.

Literally any other promotion on the planet would treat Sting like a god and he went to the one who treated him like crap so Vince could spike the football on the WCW rivalry that only he is still playing out in his head.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

He's* sixty*


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

I try to forget about his terrible WWE run

It would have been best if it never happened


----------



## Chris22 (Jan 7, 2010)

Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


----------



## One Shed (Jan 7, 2014)

Chip Chipperson said:


> He's* sixty*


Sting with a TOPE SUICIDA! And what is this? Sting up to the top rope to hit a Shooting Star Press onto the floor! 1, 2, and a kickout!


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

Everyone has a bad run and leaves un happy. Very few people get alec3ial treatment and which even those people aint making noise.

Anyways aew needs more leaders to teach these kids how to sell their dam chracter or devleop one. So he will be a benefit no Mather how hes used


----------



## 304418 (Jul 2, 2014)

Chris22 said:


> Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


IIRC, I think it had to do with a promo during the Invasion angle, where The Rock asked “Who are you?” to Booker T. And Sting watched that and was all, "nope, not going to work there.” Since that line can be interpreted as disrespect of WCW talent in general, not just Booker. 

I think if TNA wasn’t falling apart in 2013-14, Sting would not have left TNA at all. He had a chance to sign with WWE in 2011 and just did not do it. Going to WWE as late as he did had the benefit of his legacy being remembered. But that was about it.


----------



## famicommander (Jan 17, 2010)

Chris22 said:


> Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


He didn't go there because he knew they'd treat him like crap.

TNA paid him huge money to work few dates and put the world title on him 5 times. He was having good matches against good opponents. Plus they let him do what he wanted with his character. He did Crow Sting, he did Mafia Sting, he did Joker Sting.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

*This seems like a good place to leave Cornette's review:*








Chris22 said:


> Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


*Because he thought the WW(F) audience wouldn't know who he was and he'd embarass himself. He's said this in interviews.*


----------



## Chris22 (Jan 7, 2010)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Because he thought the WW(F) audience wouldn't know who he was and he'd embarass himself. He's said this in interviews.*


Then that's a stupid reason. Would the WWF audience have known who Booker T was prior? I never watched WCW but I assume Sting was a much bigger star than Booker T. It's a whole new audience. If he thought he'd embarrass himself then it seems like a confidence issue.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

Chris22 said:


> Then that's a stupid reason. Would the WWF audience have known who Booker T was prior? I never watched WCW but I assume Sting was a much bigger star than Booker T. It's a whole new audience. If he thought he'd embarrass himself then it seems like a confidence issue.


*It's a combination of it being a confidence issue, Sting not trusting Vince, (which was proven to be the right choice 15 years later) and Sting underestimating his star power back then. It's funny that you brought up Booker T because he used Booker T as the example when The Rock came out and asked him "Who in the blue hell are you?" as the fans laughed. He didn't want to be in that position.*


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

Well Screw WWE.

I hate Sting for going there. I've never watched any documentary, interview or any crap of him for the past 5 years.
He's my favorite wrestler and I loath the fact he jobbed to Triple H at mania. I loath Vince and HHH for what they did. You won't be seeing me type "RIP" when these motherfuckers die for a multitude of reasons, but the way they treated Sting is one of the stuff that's on top of the list.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *This seems like a good place to leave Cornette's review:*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, it was about The Rock burying Booker T on Day 1 with the “Who the hell are you?” Booker was WCW World champ at this time. Sting found the entire thing off-putting and didn’t trust Vince.

Sting only recanted his version of things in recent years when he signed with Vince.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Well Screw WWE.
> 
> I hate Sting for going there. I've never watched any documentary, interview or any crap of him for the past 5 years.
> He's my favorite wrestler and I loath the fact he jobbed to Triple H at mania. I loath Vince and HHH for what they did. You won't be seeing me type "RIP" when these motherfuckers die for a multitude of reasons, but the way they treated Sting is one of the stuff that's on top of the list.


Tell em, Definition of Technician!!


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

bdon said:


> No, it was about The Rock burying Booker T on Day 1 with the “Who the hell are you?” Booker was WCW World champ at this time. Sting found the entire thing off-putting and didn’t trust Vince.
> 
> Sting only recanted his version of things in recent years when he signed with Vince.


*Scroll up two posts above you. I posted those interviews.*


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

bdon said:


> Tell em, Definition of Technician!!


I've posted in the past the series of events and it just makes me sick, I've hated Taker, and more HHH/Vince for it, because i am 100% sure these fuckers had this planned the entire time.



> Sting came to WWE for the Taker match, mianly.
> Taker didn't want it at the time and/or they had other plans with HHH and SurvivorSeries
> The feud was Sting vs Authority and Sting was supposed to win his debut at Mania
> Shortly before Mania plans change because Triple Bitch though he had a chance in hell of fighting The Rock at WM 31. I can already imagine the insecure cunt taking advantage of Sting's professionalism and respect for the business, convincing him he needs the win more to build for his Rock match (*LMAO*). (AS IF STING WINNING HIS DEBUT INS'T IMPORTANT, BUILDING TO THE TAKER MATCH ISN'T IMPORTANT, CHALLENGING FOR THE TITLE ISN'T IMPORTANT, only HHH's BORINNG CRAP matters)
> ...


----------



## Prosper (Mar 25, 2015)

I mean they had the guy job to fuckin Triple H at Wrestlemania of course he was unhappy. Vince was still salty about the Monday Night Wars and felt like he needed to make Sting look like shit.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Scroll up two posts above you. I posted those interviews.*


Yes. The original interview is the truth. Sting was not going to WWE to be mocked by Vince and the WWE. In latter years he played the good guy that he is, saying it was moreso him than them, yadda yadda yadda.

Don’t try and put that on Sting lacking confidence in front of WWE crowds. He lacked confidence that he’d be _allowed_ to get over with the WWE audience.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Definition of Technician said:


> I've posted in the past the series of events and it just makes me sick, I've hated Taker, and more HHH/Vince for it, because i am 100% sure these fuckers had this planned the entire time.


Vince rotting for an eternity in hell will not be enough for the shit he’s done.


----------



## thorn123 (Oct 10, 2019)

Biggest mistake sting ever did was go to WWE. I hope he got paid well. 

Regardless of his WWE run, sting is on Mount Rushmore for me.

Having said that he shouldn’t wrestle on AEW, just clean house a few times and create shenanigans ... I hope AEW get it right.


----------



## thorn123 (Oct 10, 2019)

famicommander said:


> He didn't go there because he knew they'd treat him like crap.
> 
> TNA paid him huge money to work few dates and put the world title on him 5 times. He was having good matches against good opponents. Plus they let him do what he wanted with his character. He did Crow Sting, he did Mafia Sting, he did Joker Sting.


Joker sting was great


----------



## Wolf Mark (Jun 5, 2020)

Here's the thing he mentioned the reason he didn't come was the Rock promo but I think he was already lukewarm on going there in the first place. The comment was essentialy the cherry on top. And he was lukewarm for many reasons and the biggest one was he's a WCW guy. More than Booker T or DDP or any other WCW outside of Flair ever was. And Flair went back cause he was he had been there before and was friendly with Vince. WCW was Sting's company. I mean having his company dying, he probably didn't have the WWF/E in his heart just for that. And then having to cross over the enemy champ, can you imagine? Wrestling is not like sport where you get traded to your enemy and that's fine. And Buff Bagwell learned that pretty quickly. You are either surrounded by guys that don't respect you cause you're the enemy, you may have guys going at you without being sure that management will have your best interest at heart enough to protect you from these sharks. And there's even your former colleagues now working there that hated you but could not do anything in WCW cause you were God there but now it's open season(again this is what happened when Shane Helms attacked Buff backstage). How on Earth would Sting have been in any excited to go the WWE, especially in the early 00s?

And then he joined TNA which was low pressure and for him became this sort of "little WCW" for him. And the guy is a pretty faithful. He always felt he owed Dixie, he owed them.

As far as going to the WWE I think him losing to Hunter was no big deal for him cause he went there knowing that this could happen. He had made peace with it, he went there to play ball. He was just happy to be in the WWE, to live the experience, go to Wrestlemania in a big match. Considering he had not been in a major promotion in a big while so just the idea to be in a big match at Mania was more than he could ask for. This is on his first match in the company, remember. And he already got a big Wrestlemania match. Not everybody can do that.

The issue is what I saw as a fan and how the WWE mishandled him in my opinion either by petty politics or stupidity or disrespect. Him jobbing to HHH was just wrong and petty. I remember at the beginning of the hype they said it wasn't about WWE vs WCW but then it became just that in the promos, etc...Them not doing Taker-Sting was horribly stupid and the biggest missed opporunity of all the time. And then them having him wrestle Seth Rollins have him use the buckle bomb on an old man of his size was irresponsible. And then finally the WWE not even contemplating using him during their shows on TV since has been disrespectful. God knows Sting can easily make things more awesome and entertaining. I bet when he signed with them, he thought he would be used more in a non-wrestling capacity. Look at his AEW appearance, his presence was off the chart. This is what Sting does. I would not be shocked if that would be his big issue with the WWE that they "didn't have anything for him".


----------



## Pencil Neck Freak (Aug 5, 2013)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *This seems like a good place to leave Cornette's review:*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He wasn't worried that the audience wouldn't know who he was... he was worried the WWF would treat him badly because he was a "WCW" guy.


----------



## VIP86 (Oct 10, 2019)

"unhappy with the way he was treated in the WWE"
doesn't this description fit every WWE talent except for Roman Reigns ?


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse (Jun 20, 2014)

Well...yeah...duh!

Can't blame the guy, and its completely understandable for him to want to go out on the back of something good. WWE wasn't it. Despite Sting being the last big 'get' out there for the WWE, and despite all the anticipation, all the what ifs, and the dream match with The Undertaker. The McMahons chose to shit on WCW's grave one last time by jobbing him out to the doofus son in law, and then having the doofus son in laws adopted son cripple him.

It was a shit send off for Sting all around. And while he's years past his use by date, decades in fact a guy of his importance deserves a good send off, not just being used as one last shot at how WWF is better than WCW.

If time travel was possible then going back and stopping Sting from ever going to WWE feels like something that should be done. The guy deserves better, the guy should have been remembered as a "what if" when it comes to WWE. He should have never gone there, nothing good came from his return, just Vince and HHH stoking their massive ego's some more.

I wish he'd shave his head or something. I wish more of these Legends in Stings position would shave their heads when their hairline receedes too far back. Like Taker with the mohawk could still look imposing, but with long hair he just looked like an old man. Now Sting, you put him in all black, the trenchcoat and paint his face and he can still look like quite the presence...except his hair which reminds you he's an old man at this point. Get a hair transplant, wear a good wig, shave your head, do something.


----------



## Typical Cena Fan (May 18, 2016)

Chris22 said:


> Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


Can you blame Sting
WWE jobbed everybody from WCW out. 
Look how they treated every TNA wrestler not named AJ


----------



## elo (Oct 25, 2006)

The only thing most of us wanted to see was Sting v Taker (didn't matter if Sting jobbed) and instead Vince went ahead and had his son-in-law beat him in his first match in WWE for ZERO reason other than to emphasize he had won the "Monday Night Wars" a decade earlier, it was so petty and it was so Vince McMahon, no shit Sting was disappointed.


----------



## PhenomenalOne11 (Oct 2, 2016)

elo said:


> The only thing most of us wanted to see was Sting v Taker (didn't matter if Sting jobbed) and instead Vince went ahead and had his son-in-law beat him in his first match in WWE for ZERO reason other than to emphasize he had won the "Monday Night Wars" a decade earlier, it was so petty and it was so Vince McMahon, no shit Sting was disappointed.


As much as I seriously agree with you, Sting vs Undertaker in 2015? That match would have been fucking awful. Yeah it would have been huge just for the build, but the match itself would probably be a car crash to watch.


----------



## PhenomenalOne11 (Oct 2, 2016)

He's right to be annoyed, but WWE were idiots for giving this man a fucking WWE Championship match, what the fuck? Dude should have gone into a feud with Bray Wyatt, had Bray go over at WM32 after he beats Triple H at WM31, fuck Triple H man.


----------



## fulcizombie (Jul 17, 2011)

Sting should never have gone in WWE. He was actually still very good when he went there, at least for a man of his age, and yes the match with Undertaker should have happened. Who cares about the quality of the wrestling, all these high flyers don’t bring ratings, just look at Hogan versus The Rock to see what a professional wrestling match is all about. It is not like The Undertaker vs. HHH matches were any good and nobody cared about them unlike the interest and passion (from the fans) Sting vs. Undertaker would incite.


----------



## Wolf Mark (Jun 5, 2020)

VIP86 said:


> "unhappy with the way he was treated in the WWE"
> doesn't this description fit every WWE talent except for Roman Reigns ?


Roman shouldn't be happy either. He could have been a good face or heel a long time ago but they pushed him wrongly for five years during a time where they saw him as their prized talent that the whole company should be booked around but they were so innept that his mere presence made people physically ill at the sight of him. I mean they gave him this big career but the sort that you take the money but have difficulty looking at yourself in a mirror. He even admited that it was affecting him all the booing.


----------



## Shaun_27 (Apr 12, 2011)

What was the plan for Sting if he didn't get hurt with Seth?

I don't see how Undertaker vs Sting happens. I thought Cena vs Undertaker was the plan for Mania 32, and when Cena got hurt they had to draft in Shane? It's sad because Taker vs Sting is one of the only dream matches left, but I don't think WWE (and possibly Undertaker) ever wanted the match. WWE wanted WWE vs WCW 15 years later and that's what they got.

@The Definition of Technician ; Very well written and when you list the bullet points like that it's kind of sad to read, but how much of this is a fool me once, fool me twice situation? Sting is on the right side of history when we look back, but he had to know they would try and screw and him over. He should be more aware than anyone. As soon as there was any talk of WWE vs WCW the writing was on the wall. HHH vs Sting was only going to go one way.


----------



## Dark Emperor (Jul 31, 2007)

The man joined WWE at 55 years old after rejecting them many times and was expecting to be treated like a God and win big matches. He had already devalued himself by staying in TNA so long and drawing very poor numbers.

There was no reason for WWE to treat him as a god. It was the right call to lose to HHH & Rollins. At no point in his career has Sting showed he cares about WWE and would be loyal. So why should Vince book him strong at 55 and way past it & minimal value left.

I feel they only got him to put him in the video game and thought might as well put over HHH whilst we're at it lol.


----------



## Asuka842 (Jul 19, 2016)

Not shit. That’s like the least surprising news possible.

He was a casualty of Vince needing to shit all over WCW’s corpse yet again sadly.


----------



## ReekOfAwesomenesss (Apr 6, 2012)

Dark Emperor said:


> The man joined WWE at 55 years old after rejecting them many times and was expecting to be treated like a God and win big matches. He had already devalued himself by staying in TNA so long and drawing very poor numbers.
> 
> There was no reason for WWE to treat him as a god. It was the right call to lose to HHH & Rollins. At no point in his career has Sting showed he cares about WWE and would be loyal. So why should Vince book him strong at 55 and way past it & minimal value left.
> 
> I feel they only got him to put him in the video game and thought might as well put over HHH whilst we're at it lol.


lol a typical response from a WWE fanboy.


----------



## La Parka (Oct 28, 2008)

I don’t think anyone was happy about his WWE run.


What a wasted opportunity.


----------



## Dark Emperor (Jul 31, 2007)

ReekOfAwesomenesss said:


> lol a typical response from a WWE fanboy.


*But why should Vince McMahon treat Sting like a God and book him strong at 55 years old. The guy was part of competition that tried to put him out of business. Then he refused to work for Vince for 13 years whilst his value was high and still had a lot left in the tank.

Then he turns up at 55years old when TNA ran out of money and you all wants Vince to be grateful and give him a sendoff like Flair or HBK. Business doesn't work that way, what exactly has Sting done for WWE to deserve such good treatment. If he was younger and had value then he would be treated better as there would be money to be made.

He rightly jobbed and got paid well doing it.*


----------



## ShadowCounter (Sep 1, 2016)

PhenomenalOne11 said:


> As much as I seriously agree with you, Sting vs Undertaker in 2015? That match would have been fucking awful. Yeah it would have been huge just for the build, but the match itself would probably be a car crash to watch.


Live, probably. But Sting wanted to film it ahead of time and have it be cinematic in nature. With editing and breaks in between, they could have made that match look fantastic. But, no. It was far better to feed a sad old family's ego instead. Fucking McTrash.


----------



## PhenomenalOne11 (Oct 2, 2016)

ShadowCounter said:


> Live, probably. But Sting wanted to film it ahead of time and have it be cinematic in nature. With editing and breaks in between, they could have made that match look fantastic. But, no. It was far better to feed a sad old family's ego instead. Fucking McTrash.


Cinematic would have definitely worked, but oh well, we can't have everything in life. They could have easily still had Sting lose if they really wanted to, I don't think anyone would have cared if he'd lost to Undertaker.


----------



## ShadowCounter (Sep 1, 2016)

PhenomenalOne11 said:


> Cinematic would have definitely worked, but oh well, we can't have everything in life. They could have easily still had Sting lose if they really wanted to, I don't think anyone would have cared if he'd lost to Undertaker.


Sting was always gonna lose if a match with Taker happened. But who gives a care? The match would have surpassed "That's good shit" caliber.

EDIT: I know we can't have everything we want in life but this match is the ONLY reason to bring Sting in at that point. I don't know why Vince is considered some great promoter when he's literally fallen ass backwards into every great thing that's happened to him and fought and denied the layups that could have made mint.


----------



## CM Buck (Sep 2, 2012)

Chip Chipperson said:


> He's* sixty*


With age comes wisdom


----------



## Nickademus_Eternal (Feb 24, 2014)

Chris22 said:


> Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


I disagree with the bs about him being to blame. Maybe he didnt want to be like everyone else and kiss Vince's ass for a paycheck? Man, people on here need to think before they type.


----------



## Nickademus_Eternal (Feb 24, 2014)

Yeah, fuck wwe. They take what makes a talent interesting and completely butchers it. All because vince gets pissy because he doesnt want any competitors and knows last time he had one it almost killed wwe. Fuck vince,fuck that big nose bastard and fuck wwe for the way they treated sting. Ok I'm done.


----------



## Nothing Finer (Apr 12, 2017)

HHH is 5 years younger, still an important star, and committed to the company for life. He was the obvious winner, Rollins even moreso.

If Sting wanted a win maybe he should have asked for some smaller feuds. Sting v Dolph Ziggler at No Way Out or Sting v Miz or something.


----------



## EyeFoxUp (Apr 9, 2020)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Well Screw WWE.
> 
> I hate Sting for going there. I've never watched any documentary, interview or any crap of him for the past 5 years.
> He's my favorite wrestler and I loath the fact he jobbed to Triple H at mania. I loath Vince and HHH for what they did. You won't be seeing me type "RIP" when these motherfuckers die for a multitude of reasons, but the way they treated Sting is one of the stuff that's on top of the list.


----------



## CtrlAltDel (Aug 9, 2016)

Sting could have asked for creative control like Brock Lesnar. If he didn’t get it, then don’t sign the deal. Take it or leave it.


----------



## Nickademus_Eternal (Feb 24, 2014)

Dark Emperor said:


> The man joined WWE at 55 years old after rejecting them many times and was expecting to be treated like a God and win big matches. He had already devalued himself by staying in TNA so long and drawing very poor numbers.
> 
> There was no reason for WWE to treat him as a god. It was the right call to lose to HHH & Rollins. At no point in his career has Sting showed he cares about WWE and would be loyal. So why should Vince book him strong at 55 and way past it & minimal value left.
> 
> I feel they only got him to put him in the video game and thought might as well put over HHH whilst we're at it lol.


I disagree strongly. It was NOT the right call to have him job to big nose.


----------



## EyeFoxUp (Apr 9, 2020)

Sting was a bodybuilder who became a wrestler for the payday. WWE in the early 2000’s was going to be a lot of traveling and politics. TNA gave him the exact opposite but still a good payday. WWE came knocking again with a payday he could not pass up. Now AEW has come with a payday worth his time.

Sting is a businessman first so in his heart I don’t think he regrets anything as long the money was right.


----------



## Dark Emperor (Jul 31, 2007)

Nothing Finer said:


> HHH is 5 years younger, still an important star, and committed to the company for life. He was the obvious winner, Rollins even moreso.
> 
> If Sting wanted a win maybe he should have asked for some smaller feuds. Sting v Dolph Ziggler at No Way Out or Sting v Miz or something.


HHH is actually 10 years younger than Sting


----------



## Stellar (May 30, 2016)

The thing with WWE is that once someone gets hurt they hardly use them until they are 100% healed and able to wrestle again. Well, most of the time.

All that Sting has to do is show up and swing the baseball bat. If there is a guy that can get away with doing little it's Sting because that is what he did in WCW as the crow character. WWE didn't even try to do that after he got hurt and that is unfortunate.

I don't worry too much about that Sting lost to Triple H at WrestleMania. His last match being when he got hurt I am sure he focuses on more. No one wants to go out that way.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

Dark Emperor said:


> The man joined WWE at 55 years old after rejecting them many times and was expecting to be treated like a God and win big matches. He had already devalued himself by staying in TNA so long and drawing very poor numbers.
> 
> There was no reason for WWE to treat him as a god. It was the right call to lose to HHH & Rollins. At no point in his career has Sting showed he cares about WWE and would be loyal. So why should Vince book him strong at 55 and way past it & minimal value left.
> 
> I feel they only got him to put him in the video game and thought might as well put over HHH whilst we're at it lol.


Vince could have put together one of the biggest matches in wrestling history Taker v Sting (even if cinematic) - something the fans would have really cared about and would have made money. But yeh you're right it was more important for Vince to get his 'oneupmanship' about a rivalry that had been dead for 15 years. If that keeps you warm at night, good for you lol.


----------



## JC00 (Nov 20, 2011)

MoxAsylum said:


> was unhappy with how he was used by WWE


They gave him a WM match and then a title feud with Rollins at 55 years old which he got severely injured taking a bump into the turnbuckle pads mainly because of his age. , what else did he want? a run with the title?


----------



## Dark Emperor (Jul 31, 2007)

Pentagon Senior said:


> Vince could have put together one of the biggest matches in wrestling history Taker v Sting (even if cinematic) - something the fans would have really cared about and would have made money. But yeh you're right it was more important for Vince to get his 'oneupmanship' about a rivalry that had been dead for 15 years. If that keeps you warm at night, good for you lol.


Taker was not interested in that match anymore. Sting had his chance in 2011 when a deal was all but signed. WWE even did a sick vignette for him.

But he pulled out and decided to stay in TNA. Then on his TNA return he was gloating about how they must have heard all the rumours but he’s going nowhere as TNA is his home. I assume Taker felt disrespected and didn’t need Sting in 2015 so declined.

Plus let’s be honest, Sting only went to WWE because TNA couldn’t afford to pay him anymore. We all know this & Vince did too. He is not some innocent party here that got done dirty. There is no way you would treat him the same as a returning WWE legend.

How do you people expect HHH, the COO of WWE to lose to Sting. A WCW & TNA through and through at 55 years old. What do WWE gain with Taker already refusing to work with him.


----------



## CovidFan (Aug 19, 2020)

Sting just seems to be a really ungrateful person. Vince taking him in for their mutual benefit even though Sting's been worthless since Starrcade of 1997. Sting should be thanking Vince and HHH in every interview for making him even close to relevant again in 2015.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

The older you get, the more you agree that Vince was right. 

Sting never drew in TNA, he drew for about 1 year out of 13 in WCW. He was a cult Icon and nothing more and personally he's one of my favourite of all time. 

People need to look at it realistically, the guy was about 55 at the time, snubbed WWE for 13 years, body was wrecked, what did they honestly expect? 

As for this dream match with Taker. Why was it even a dream match? They have nothing in common apart from a trench coat and makeup, its quite laughable really, it's like AEW booking, oh look Sting wore. Makeup let's have him stare down another wrestler that wears makeup and he would have been jobbed out anyway after a lacklustre performance and you would all be shitting on WWE again anyway.


----------



## fulcizombie (Jul 17, 2011)

the_flock said:


> The older you get, the more you agree that Vince was right.
> 
> Sting never drew in TNA, he drew for about 1 year out of 13 in WCW. He was a cult Icon and nothing more and personally he's one of my favourite of all time.
> 
> ...


Nobody drew in TNA, you could put the Rock in there and he wouldn’t draw. He was a huge main eventer outside the wwe for all his life and there is a reason why so many fans respect him.

People wanted a match with the Undertaker for the spectacle, the feud, the entrances , the hype not because they wanted to see great wrestling (which is something you don’t see anyway in matches with Undertaker, HHH, Goldberg or even Lesnar). Who exactly has been a draw in the wwe after Cena left ?

Anyway the WWE dropped the ball with Batista’s return, with Sting e.t.c and has created zero stars since 2004.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

He was 55 I can't believe folk are still calling losing to HHH and the then world champion a burial. What would it have been better for him to come in lose to Taker and then nothing. Or did he need to come in and run through the roster at 55? They're damned if they do damned if they don't. Goldberg comes in beats Brock and wins the Universal title of Kevin Owens that's wrong. Sting loses to HHH and puts over Rollins that's also wrong.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Well Screw WWE.
> 
> I hate Sting for going there. I've never watched any documentary, interview or any crap of him for the past 5 years.
> He's my favorite wrestler and I loath the fact he jobbed to Triple H at mania. I loath Vince and HHH for what they did. You won't be seeing me type "RIP" when these motherfuckers die for a multitude of reasons, but the way they treated Sting is one of the stuff that's on top of the list.


[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] how ridiculous lol


----------



## fulcizombie (Jul 17, 2011)

RapShepard said:


> He was 55 I can't believe folk are still calling losing to HHH and the then world champion a burial. What would it have been better for him to come in lose to Taker and then nothing. Or did he need to come in and run through the roster at 55? They're damned if they do damned if they don't. Goldberg comes in beats Brock and wins the Universal title of Kevin Owens that's wrong. Sting loses to HHH and puts over Rollins that's also wrong.


Yes loosing to taker and doing nothing would be better.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Dark Emperor said:


> Taker was not interested in that match anymore. Sting had his chance in 2011 when a deal was all but signed. WWE even did a sick vignette for him.
> 
> But he pulled out and decided to stay in TNA. Then on his TNA return he was gloating about how they must have heard all the rumours but he’s going nowhere as TNA is his home. I assume Taker felt disrespected and didn’t need Sting in 2015 so declined.
> 
> ...


@Firefromthegods 

Can’t you ban this guy for such heresy? Haha


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

fulcizombie said:


> Yes loosing to taker and doing nothing would be better.


Then people are whining about nothing.


----------



## fulcizombie (Jul 17, 2011)

Nobody has still explained why we had to go through the debacle of HHH vs. Sting with the interferences instead of Undertaker vs. Sting, Oh and Sting was still a much better wrestler than HHH and showed it in that match. I mean is what HHH does, in at least the last 5 years or more, in his matches even considered wrestling ?


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> He was 55 I can't believe folk are still calling losing to HHH and the then world champion a burial. What would it have been better for him to come in lose to Taker and then nothing. Or did he need to come in and run through the roster at 55? They're damned if they do damned if they don't. Goldberg comes in beats Brock and wins the Universal title of Kevin Owens that's wrong. Sting loses to HHH and puts over Rollins that's also wrong.


Goldberg fucking sucks and doesn’t have the power of the supernatural on his side. Fuck that bald son of a bitch that literally went into matches trying to hurt people and showed no goddamn remorse when he would injure them.

Big fucking pussy wouldn’t go to MMA, so he came to wrestling to hurt people he knew weren’t trying to do the same for himself.

Fucking mark. (Goldberg, not you)


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Goldberg fucking sucks and doesn’t have the power of the supernatural on his side. Fuck that bald son of a bitch that literally went into matches trying to hurt people and showed no goddamn remorse when he would injure them.
> 
> Big fucking pussy wouldn’t go to MMA, so he came to wrestling to hurt people he knew weren’t trying to do the same for himself.
> 
> Fucking mark. (Goldberg, not you)


Sting isn't supernatural though either so I don't know what all of that is about. But unless people wanted Sting running through the roster and becoming champion then the upsetness about his WWE run is silly.




fulcizombie said:


> Nobody has still explained why we had to go through the debacle of HHH vs. Sting with the interferences instead of Undertaker vs. Sting,


Depends on who you ask and believe

*Sting[\B] said that he talked to him about it but Taker didn't seem interested









WWE News: Sting wanted a dream match against The Undertaker


The Undertaker may not have been as interested in a match against 'The Icon'.




www.sportskeeda.com





Taker said they never even discussed it and he thinks they should've had it in the 90s or 2000s it would've been too watered down by the time Sting came over. 









The Undertaker On If He Ever Discussed Having "The Dream Match" With Sting


The Undertaker vs. Sting still remains atop the list of dream matches for most pro wrestling fans across the world. Unfortunately, the two iconic wrestlers…




www.wrestlinginc.com








Oh and Sting was still a much better wrestler than HHH and showed it in that match. I mean is what HHH does, in at least the last 5 years or more, in his matches even considered wrestling ?

Click to expand...

You don't even believe this*


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Double post


----------



## La Parka (Oct 28, 2008)

RapShepard said:


> He was 55 I can't believe folk are still calling losing to HHH and the then world champion a burial. What would it have been better for him to come in lose to Taker and then nothing. Or did he need to come in and run through the roster at 55? They're damned if they do damned if they don't. Goldberg comes in beats Brock and wins the Universal title of Kevin Owens that's wrong. Sting loses to HHH and puts over Rollins that's also wrong.


Losing to HHH wasn't the issue. It was a match that no one wanted with an outdated "WCW vs WWE" storyline that only existed to put one over on WCW when the majority of the audience couldn't possibly care less about WCW. 

Losing to Rollins would've been fine but the way they did it just buried Sting. They couldn't let Sting just lose cleanly they had to make Rollins get his ass kicked and beat by Cena moments before their match. 

Yes it would've been better if he came in and only wrestled Undertaker and did nothing. HHH vs Sting was awful in story and in match quality. At least Sting and Undertaker could've been a spectacle. Rollins and Sting would've been fine if it was a one off at a bigger PPV than night of champions.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

La Parka said:


> Losing to HHH wasn't the issue. It was a match that no one wanted with an outdated "WCW vs WWE" storyline that only existed to put one over on WCW when the majority of the audience couldn't possibly care less about WCW.
> 
> Losing to Rollins would've been fine but the way they did it just buried Sting. They couldn't let Sting just lose cleanly they had to make Rollins get his ass kicked and beat by Cena moments before their match.
> 
> Yes it would've been better if he came in and only wrestled Undertaker and did nothing. HHH vs Sting was awful in story and in match quality. At least Sting and Undertaker could've been a spectacle. Rollins and Sting would've been fine if it was a one off at a bigger PPV than night of champions.


The argument people didn't want WWE vs WCW is pure bull shit. The only appeal of Sting in WWE was nostalgic WWE vs WCW stuff. I mean even if they did the Taker feud, what do you think it logically should've been about. Let's be honest the appeal was "we're both kinda dark and brooding and seen as the heart of our respective companies". This nobody wanted nostalgia argument is super ridiculous when people are super excited because "omg Sting is on TNT I feel like a child/teen". 

As far as it burying him because he Rollins lost tk Cena, that's ridiculous. It's fucking Sting trying to make an argument him losing a world title match buried him is fucking silly. I could see if he loss to Santino and the Cobra being considered an attempt to bury him, but this is folk overreacting.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

@RapShepard , how old are you? You come fucking running in defense of WWE, which gives one the impression of someone who ONLY knows Vince McMahon and WWE.

Are you really Seth Rollins pulling a Kevin Durant?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> @RapShepard , how old are you? You come fucking running in defense of WWE, which gives one the impression of someone who ONLY knows Vince McMahon and WWE.
> 
> Are you really Seth Rollins pulling a Kevin Durant?


I started out watching WCW in 97. Sting was 55 and an icon. Him losing to HHH and Rollins couldn't hurt his legendary career any more than the stupid Vampiro and KISS Demon feud hurt his career. I mean seriously people are still upset about a loss an at the time 55 year old wrestler took, have some perspective.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The WWE’s 5th or 6th best talent of the MNW went over THE face of WCW.

That is the goddamn issue. Fuck Hunter. Fuck Vince.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> I started out watching WCW in 97. Sting was 55 and an icon. Him losing to HHH and Rollins couldn't hurt his legendary career any more than the stupid Vampiro and KISS Demon feud hurt his career. I mean seriously people are still upset about a loss an at the time 55 year old wrestler took, have some perspective.


Explain what fucking good came of putting Hunter over? Huh!? Explain it!!! At least with Taker, the GODDAMN STORY WOULD HAVE MADE SENSE!!!


----------



## EyeFoxUp (Apr 9, 2020)

RapShepard said:


> The argument people didn't want WWE vs WCW is pure bull shit. The only appeal of Sting in WWE was nostalgic WWE vs WCW stuff. I mean even if they did the Taker feud, what do you think it logically should've been about. Let's be honest the appeal was "we're both kinda dark and brooding and seen as the heart of our respective companies". This nobody wanted nostalgia argument is super ridiculous when people are super excited because "omg Sting is on TNT I feel like a child/teen".
> 
> As far as it burying him because he Rollins lost tk Cena, that's ridiculous. It's fucking Sting trying to make an argument him losing a world title match buried him is fucking silly. I could see if he loss to Santino and the Cobra being considered an attempt to bury him, but this is folk overreacting.


Loads of nostalgia for me. Loved it.


----------



## Hephaesteus (Aug 20, 2018)

You really joined AEW cuz they paid you a truckload of money for a minimum amount of work which is fine. Just spare me the victim act


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

fulcizombie said:


> Anyway the WWE dropped the ball with Batista’s return, with Sting e.t.c and has created zero stars since 2004.


No stars since 2004, are you sure about that? 

How did they drop the ball with a 55 year old perma-crocked Sting?


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

bdon said:


> Goldberg fucking sucks and doesn’t have the power of the supernatural on his side.


This comment is why people don't take wrestling seriously anymore.


----------



## Dark Emperor (Jul 31, 2007)

bdon said:


> @Firefromthegods
> 
> Can’t you ban this guy for such heresy? Haha


You should be the one banned. Didn't you say Vince should rot in hell a few pages ago. Just over wrestling, disgraceful.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

the_flock said:


> This comment is why people don't take wrestling seriously anymore.


Sting and Taker, in kayfabe, can live fucking forever thanks to their finely crafted characters, and no one would bat an eye. Look at how fucking NEWSWORTHY it was when Taker lost at Mania to a goddamn MMA machine in Brock Lesnar.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Dark Emperor said:


> You should be the one banned. Didn't you say Vince should rot in hell a few pages ago. Just over wrestling, disgraceful.


He should and SHALL.

Not just over the Sting thing. Everything. Ashley Massaro says hello.

Here is where you say she had it coming to her...


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> The WWE’s 5th or 6th best talent of the MNW went over THE face of WCW.
> 
> That is the goddamn issue. Fuck Hunter. Fuck Vince. And fuck you if you don’t get that.


HHH is a bigger draw than Sting so you just have to deal with that. I don't care about you being all angry. 



bdon said:


> Explain what fucking good came of putting Hunter over? Huh!? Explain it!!! At least with Taker, the GODDAMN STORY WOULD HAVE MADE SENSE!!!


A match that people loved and the crowd enjoyed . And let's be all the way honest here Taker vs Sting is still a WWE vs WCW story. I mean the only appeal to Sting in WCW is "here's the guy from WCW, you remember the MNWs, he's here now in our company". You can pretend Taker vs Sting is deeper than that by waxing poetically about how they were the souls of their companies and shit. But end if the day it's still WWE vs WCW. 



EyeFoxUp said:


> Loads of nostalgia for me. Loved it.


Aye


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

bdon said:


> Explain what fucking good came of putting Hunter over? Huh!? Explain it!!! At least with Taker, the GODDAMN STORY WOULD HAVE MADE SENSE!!!


How would it have made sense wrestling the Undertaker than HHH. Stings character was about fighting for justice and was always the hero against the bad guys. HHH is the ultimate bad guy. Undertaker was neither a bad guy or a good guy.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

the_flock said:


> How would it have made sense wrestling the Undertaker than HHH. Stings character was about fighting for justice and was always the hero against the bad guys. HHH is the ultimate bad guy. Undertaker was neither a bad guy or a good guy.


Because they're both kinda dark and are the "hearts" of their companies. But remember they don't want it to be a WWE vs WCW thing lol


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

RapShepard said:


> Because they're both kinda dark and are the "hearts" of their companies. But remember they don't want it to be a WWE vs WCW thing lol


They both wore black therefore it s a dream match, I don't get it. It would make sense during the Invasion in the face of the company battle, but in 2015, 16,17,18...neah makes no sense at all. 

What makes sense is Sting is finally here in WWE, HHH comes out and kicks his ass, that's exactly how I would have booked it.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

the_flock said:


> They both wore black therefore it s a dream match, I don't get it. It would make sense during the Invasion in the face of the company battle, but in 2015, 16,17,18...neah makes no sense at all.
> 
> What makes sense is Sting is finally here in WWE, HHH comes out and kicks his ass, that's exactly how I would have booked it.


I mean even if folk think he should've won, the idea that losing to HHH was a burial and blemish on his career is hilarious.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> Because they're both kinda dark and are the "hearts" of their companies. But remember they don't want it to be a WWE vs WCW thing lol


I don’t have an issue with the WWE vs WCW aspect. You don’t send the goddamn 5th or 6th best of that era to face the other’s top dog for any other reason than to JUST shit on Sting.

This fact is hammered home further by the commentators making Sting sound like a goddamn joke.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

HHH was behind Rock, Austin, Kane, HBK, and Mick Foley.

Having HIM represent WWE over the FACE OF WCW is just that same goddamn Bleach Blonde, Chicklet Tooth Cody rHHHodes bullshit. It serves no one other than the fucking ego of the guy in power.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

I’m done with this discussion. Y’all can suck at that McMahon asshole. I won’t deter you further.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> I don’t have an issue with the WWE vs WCW aspect. You don’t send the goddamn 5th or 6th best of that era to face the other’s top dog for any other reason than to JUST shit on Sting.
> 
> This fact is hammered home further by the commentators making Sting sound like a goddamn joke.


If we're putting HHH the top wrestling heel for the company at 5th or 6th from that era despite him being the top draw for the 2000s, then realistically we should admit that Sting was at best 3rd in WCW. As you can't realistically put him above Hogan or Flair, and he probably shouldn't be above Goldberg. 

As far as commentary making him sound like a joke, JBL the heel commentator was the only one bashing him. Because this may sound crazy, but that's what heel commentators do. Imagine being offended at a heel commentator saying mean things.





bdon said:


> HHH was behind Rock, Austin, *Kane*, HBK, and Mick Foley.
> 
> Having HIM represent WWE over the FACE OF WCW is just that same goddamn Bleach Blonde, Chicklet Tooth Cody rHHHodes bullshit. It serves no one other than the fucking ego of the guy in power.


You don't even believe this you're just saying anything at this point. 




bdon said:


> I’m done with this discussion. Y’all can suck at that McMahon asshole. I won’t deter you further.


Just to further prove your points wrong, this is a list of Meltzer's top draws by decade. Notice who appears in the list and who doesn't.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> how ridiculous lol


Not ridiculous at all.
Some guys have too much respect for the business and pride in their professionalism and aren't selfish egocentric assholes, like Sting. They should be applauded for that, but at the same times, you need to tell them "not in the wrestling business, not with scum like Vince and Hunter".

If I were Sting I'd have spit in Triple H's face when he said he was going to go over me and would have walked out of WM (Austin 2002). He would have saved both his legacy and his career. I hate him for not seeing what was clearly infront of him: a sabotage by 2 evil psychotic cunts who just wanted to shit on his legacy and manipulated the fuck out of him


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

bdon said:


> I don’t have an issue with the WWE vs WCW aspect. You don’t send the goddamn 5th or 6th best of that era to face the other’s top dog for any other reason than to JUST shit on Sting.
> 
> This fact is hammered home further by the commentators making Sting sound like a goddamn joke.


WWE Vs WCW died in 2001,why wouldn't you have a problem with that 15 years later?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Not ridiculous at all.
> Some guys have too much respect for the business and pride in their professionalism and aren't selfish egocentric assholes, like Sting. They should be applauded for that, but at the same times, you need to tell them "not in the wrestling business, not with scum like Vince and Hunter".
> 
> If I were Sting I'd have spit in Triple H's face when he said he was going to go over me and would have walked out of WM (Austin 2002). He would have saved both his legacy and his career. I hate him for not seeing what was clearly infront of him: a sabotage by 2 evil psychotic cunts who just wanted to shit on his legacy and manipulated the fuck out of him


You're being super ridiculous you're going to spit in somebody's face over a fake match lol. Imagine saying losing to HHH ruined Stings legacy and career. This is the same Sting that was in a feud that involved the KISS Demon and him being set on fire. You saw that and went Legacy intact, it's the loss to HHH that ruined it for you lol.


----------



## Nothing Finer (Apr 12, 2017)

Dark Emperor said:


> HHH is actually 10 years younger than Sting


Lol, holy shit. He should be thankful that he lost via cheating, so he could set up a world title shot.

The only thing that was bullshit about it was the handshake. Why would you gain respect for someone after they cheat like fuck to beat you? That made it seem like a WWE power fantasy. It would have been much more effective if he'd just disappeared and the next we saw him was the statute reveal.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

Lol, the reasons Sting should have beat Hunter at WM 31.


Made more sense for the story going in the match
He was going to challenge for the world title
He was going to challenge Taker

Reasons HHH went over:
- I might be fighting The Rock next year.

Fuck off with that shit. It's all crap. The only reason HHH won was for Vince to take one last dump on WCW's remains.



RapShepard said:


> You're being super ridiculous you're going to spit in somebody's face over a fake match lol. Imagine saying losing to HHH ruined Stings legacy and career. This is the same Sting that was in a feud that involved the KISS Demon and him being set on fire. You saw that and went Legacy intact, it's the loss to HHH that ruined it for you lol.


It's ABOUT THE FUCKING LIES that I'd spit in his face, not about the match. Everything they promised the guy went to shit because 
1- Undertaker is a fucking cunt who didn't want to do the match (or Vince/HHH/Taker planned the whole sabotage, bring him in for the match then say Taker isn't interested).
2- "Change of plans" that don't make any fking sense, reasons I mentioned above.

Yes, that burial hurt more because it ruined everything that made him special. His W-L record in WWE is a joke, him losing to HHH was a joke. I hope the money was worth it, but there is ZERO doubt his legacy took a hit with everything he did inn WWE.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Not ridiculous at all.
> Some guys have too much respect for the business and pride in their professionalism and aren't selfish egocentric assholes, like Sting.


Aren't there quite a lot of stories out there where Sting doesn't have any respect for the business. Sting isn't holier than thou either.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Lol, the reasons Sting should have beat Hunter at WM 31.
> 
> 
> Made more sense for the story going in the match
> ...


Sting has already said Taker didn't seem interested. He also said in his documentary that the Mania match originally was going to be his final match. So like this list kind of falls apart under his own words.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> Sting has already said Taker didn't seem interested. *He also said in his documentary that the Mania match originally was going to be his final match*. So like this list kind of falls apart under his own words.


I'm really not going to believe anything Sting said when he was under WWE contract. He literally fought 6 months later. 
Do you really think if Sting and Taker were both healthy they couldn't have done it at WM 31?
Especially with how desperate for part-time attraction Vince for over the past 5 years?


----------



## 3venflow (Feb 3, 2019)

Anyway, whatever people think, I believe Sting deserved better closure to his career than the Rollins match. And I think he'll get some kind of proper send-off by AEW if this is his last contract in wrestling. I'd hope to see guys like Lex Luger and DDP appear if/when Sting formally retires in AEW. Flair would be great too, but he has the WWE Legends contract right now and Vince wouldn't allow it.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Lol, the reasons Sting should have beat Hunter at WM 31.
> 
> Made more sense for the story going in the match
> He was going to challenge for the world title
> He was going to challenge Taker


How was Sting going to challenge for the World title, neither HHH or Taker were in the World title scene at that point. It was Seth, Orton, Reigns, Ambrose at the top. 

And unless I'm mistaken, Sting got a match against Rollins anyway.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

the_flock said:


> *How was Sting going to challenge for the World title*, neither HHH or Taker were in the World title scene at that point. It was Seth, Orton, Reigns, Ambrose at the top.
> 
> And unless I'm mistaken, Sting got a match against Rollins anyway.


Because he did?

Wouldn't it have been the more logical booking for Sting to win his match vs HHH, if he was going to wrestle Rollins for the title?
Instead he was #1 contender with a 0-1 record. Such logic.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

wcw dont know what to do with a bret hart guy and wwe dont know wha to do with a sting guy. End of story

But fuck did AEW make his debut make stings wwe run look like a joke with in 2 minutes


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Because he did?
> 
> Wouldn't it have been the more logical booking for Sting to win his match vs HHH, if he was going to wrestle Rollins for the title?
> Instead he was #1 contender with a 0-1 record. Such logic.


When Hogan joined WCW, he went over Flair and the WCW fans shat all over it saying why has their guy gone over our guy. That's the equivalent with Sting and HHH.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> I'm really not going to believe anything Sting said when he was under WWE contract. He literally fought 6 months later.
> Do you really think if Sting and Taker were both healthy they couldn't have done it at WM 31?
> Especially with how desperate for part-time attraction Vince for over the past 5 years?


I mean first off we know retirements in wrestling in general. But is it that hard to buy a 55 year old man thought "hey I think I'm done after this match" then changed his mind? Could they have done it sure, but if Taker wasn't interested as Sting has said, and according to Taker he didn't think they needed to do it at that age. 

None of that sounds outlandish or hard to believe if people got out of "ah the McMahons are satan" mode lol.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

3venflow said:


> Anyway, whatever people think, I believe Sting deserved better closure to his career than the Rollins match. And I think he'll get some kind of proper send-off by AEW if this is his last contract in wrestling. I'd hope to see guys like Lex Luger and DDP appear if/when Sting formally retires in AEW. Flair would be great too, but he has the WWE Legends contract right now and Vince wouldn't allow it.


Going out injured certainly sucks. But realistically what can he do in AEW that feels like a proper send off. He just doesn't have history there and the company has no history due to age. In all honesty Impact is the only place he could really have a real send off given his actual history there.


----------



## CHAMPIONSHIPS (Dec 14, 2016)

Yes he was wasted. That's not a debate. A lot of people are saying "he didn't deserve it, he rejected WWE" 

Um, that's not how business is supposed to work. I actually loved the Rollins feud but you don't book characters based on grudges. You meet demand and Sting vs Taker was the dream match 

That's the damn problem with WWE today. Utter contempt for the fans AND most of the talent


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

the_flock said:


> When Hogan joined WCW, he went over Flair and the WCW fans shat all over it saying why has their guy gone over our guy. That's the equivalent with Sting and HHH.


This has nothing to do with what we were discussing. Why are you deflecting now? 



RapShepard said:


> I mean first off we know retirements in wrestling in general. But is it that hard to buy a 55 year old man thought "hey I think I'm done after this match" then changed his mind? Could they have done it sure, but if Taker wasn't interested as Sting has said, and according to Taker he didn't think they needed to do it at that age.
> 
> None of that sounds outlandish or hard to believe i*f people got out of "ah the McMahons are satan" mode lol.*


If only they didn't have this reputation widely known.

Nah, I ain't buying it at all lol, he was easily going to have a few more matches I'd wager. The guy was diving from the top rop to the floor in his match vs Hunter.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> This has nothing to do with what we were discussing. Why are you deflecting now?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of course you don't buy, it because then it means 5 years of rage and hate was over nothing. He didn't think he was coming back so he wasn't booked to win. He decided he was, so they said fuck it let's continue this and give you a title shot. He sadly got injured.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> Of course you don't buy, it because then it means 5 years of rage and hate was over nothing. He didn't think he was coming back so he wasn't booked to win. He decided he was, so they said fuck it let's continue this and give you a title shot. He sadly got injured.


I wish I had an innocent mind like yours..
I don't buy it, because 6months later wrestling is really some BS to believe "WM was gona be his last match".


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> I wish I had an innocent mind like yours..


It's less innocence and more not having an irrational hatred for people I don't know.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> It's less innocence and more not having an irrational hatred for people I don't know.


There is nothing irrational about it. Everything happened exactly as it would under scum management. It's too much of a coincidence all the crap Sting got.
1-Signing and wanted the Taker mach.. not getting it. As if Taker ever said no to Vince on anything, he'd suck Vince's dick in an instant.
2- Then telling Sting he was going to win his debut, only to change plans at the last minute, for a match that never happened.
3- Then not even giving him a single win vs Big Show.
4- Then agenting a match where he takes 2 bucke bombs.

You are innocent in your thinking.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> There is nothing irrational about it. Everything happened exactly as it would under scum management. It's too much of a coincidence all the crap Sting got.
> 1-Singing and wanted the Taker mach.. not getting it. As if Taker ever said no to Vince on anything, he'd suck Vince's dick in an instant.
> 2- Then telling Sting he was going to win his debut, only to change plans at the last minute, for a match that never happened.
> 3- Then not even giving him a single win vs Big Show.
> ...


Or I can take the word of the man who said he thought he wasn't going to wrestle again. It's only unbelievable if you've dedicated the last 5 years of hating somebody over a fucking wrestling match. 

The best part about all of this is you're seriously upset and calling legacy ruined because he lost to one legend instead of losing to another legend. I mean unless you think he would've been booked to beat Taker. 

Seriously think about this, some of y'all have spent 5 years upset because Sting came in after all those years just to do the job to HHH and not become a WWE champion. Because what you really wanted was for Sting to come in after all those years and lose to Taker, and not become a WWE champion. 

Somehow in your minds y'all have convinced yourself that Sting doing the job to HHH is fuckery and one last chance to stick it to WCW. But him losing to Vince's favorite creation Taker totally isn't fuckery and one last chance to stick it to WCW. 

This is why I called it irrational hatred.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

3venflow said:


> Anyway, whatever people think, I believe Sting deserved better closure to his career than the Rollins match. And I think he'll get some kind of proper send-off by AEW if this is his last contract in wrestling. I'd hope to see guys like Lex Luger and DDP appear if/when Sting formally retires in AEW. Flair would be great too, but he has the WWE Legends contract right now and Vince wouldn't allow it.


This 👆

Don't know/care so much about politics etc but as a fan I was left disappointed by the WWE run. I loved his entrance into AEW, spine tingling, and I just hope he gets a good send off for his career. Simple as that.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

RapShepard said:


> Going out injured certainly sucks. But realistically what can he do in AEW that feels like a proper send off. He just doesn't have history there and the company has no history due to age. In all honesty Impact is the only place he could really have a real send off given his actual history there.


*I agree with most of what you said in the thread up until this point. Impact is not anything remotely close to what it was when Sting was there. I couldn't name more than five people who are even recognizable to the wider wrestling audience. All the big names who were there when Sting was there either went back to WWE or just retired. They did 166,000 viewers last week. It would be embarrassing to go back to that company in its current state, and they damn sure couldn't even afford his desired salary.*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1335427102754152450
*I feel like a lot of people in here want to join that heated Twitter debate.*


----------



## kamaro011 (Jan 3, 2012)

He can't blames anyone but himself, he sign WWE knowing full well the consenquences and the past mishandling of WCW wrestler by WWE.

I will not defend the stupidity of decision, he reap his own mistakes.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

Out of interest, why would Taker be SO against facing Sting? Seems strange to me. Am I missing something?


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

kamaro011 said:


> He can't blames anyone but himself, he sign WWE knowing full well the consenquences and the past mishandling of WCW wrestler by WWE.
> 
> I will not defend the stupidity of decision, he reap his own mistakes.


As a fan aren't you more concerned with seeing the best storylines and matches rather than seeing a wrestler get 'what he deserved'? Shouldn't Vince as promoter/booker be more concerned with putting on the best storylines and matches rather than feeding his own ego?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *I agree with most of what you said in the thread up until this point. Impact is not anything remotely close to what it was when Sting was there. I couldn't name more than five people who are even recognizable to the wider wrestling audience. All the big names who were there when Sting was there either went back to WWE or just retired. They did 166,000 viewers last week. It would be embarrassing to go back to that company in its current state, and they damn sure couldn't even afford his desired salary.*
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1335427102754152450
> *I feel like a lot of people in here want to join that heated Twitter debate.*


I get what you're saying stage wise. But with him having no ties to AEW and AEW having long history they just can't give him the send of his legacy deserves. I mean on the current roster the best thing they have to offer for him creatively is "hey Darby wears face paint and Sting wears face paint". That's not exactly garnering faith that they can come up with something great to send him off on. He certainly has no dream matches there either if he could wrestle. So what do you do. At least Impact if he did a passing of the torch type deal it feels organic since he spent so much time there. 




Pentagon Senior said:


> Out of interest, why would Taker be SO against facing Sting? Seems strange to me. Am I missing something?


I mean think about it he was getting up there in age Sting was even older. The match they had couldn't have possibly lived up to expectations. His last match was him getting a concussion. Safer to see if he still had against a young guy that could do the bumping vs an even older guy.


----------



## kamaro011 (Jan 3, 2012)

Pentagon Senior said:


> As a fan aren't you more concerned with seeing the best storylines and matches rather than seeing a wrestler get 'what he deserved'? Shouldn't Vince as promoter/booker be more concerned with putting on the best storylines and matches rather than feeding his own ego?


If you speak every other company (other than WWE), then i expect the company will do the very best of their ability to maximise their wrestler star power like Sting to provide them the best possible storyline/creative control to create a great wrestling program.

But unfortunately this is WWE we are talking about and we know how WWE treat WCW guys after WCW purchase.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> I get what you're saying stage wise. But with him having no ties to AEW and AEW having long history they just can't give him the send of his legacy deserves. I mean on the current roster the best thing they have to offer for him creatively is "hey Darby wears face paint and Sting wears face paint". That's not exactly garnering faith that they can come up with something great to send him off on. He certainly has no dream matches there either if he could wrestle. So what do you do. At least Impact if he did a passing of the torch type deal it feels organic since he spent so much time there.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Didn't he fight Goldberg a lot more recently?

I guess it makes some sense...but if I'm Vince and my intention is to put on the best matches possible I would have been doing my best to convince Taker. A cinematic match could have worked well and protected them adequately I imagine.



kamaro011 said:


> If you speak every other company (other than WWE), then i expect the company will do the very best of their ability to maximise their wrestler star power like Sting to provide them the best possible storyline/creative control to create a great wrestling program.
> 
> But unfortunately this is WWE we are talking about and we know how WWE treat WCW guys after WCW purchase.


Yeh I agree it just seems madness to me that Vince would put something petty ahead of arranging one of the biggest possible matches in recent history. As a fan that's all I've care about really


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> Didn't he fight Goldberg a lot more recently?
> 
> I guess it makes some sense...but if I'm Vince and my intention is to put on the best matches possible I would have been doing my best to convince Taker. A cinematic match could have worked well and protected them adequately I imagine.
> 
> ...


He did, but that was also a really bad match that was panned. You also got to remember cinematic matches weren't really a thing in 2015, Broken Matt Hardy wasn't even born yet I believe. Even taking into account now I can't imagine a cinematic match works when both guys can't really bump. Like that's ultimately what it really comes down to with their age. Sucks it never happened, but it is what it is.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Because Sting has no ties to TNT.

Some fucking people will do anything to defend Vince, Hunter, and the E.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> Or I can take the word of the man who said he thought he wasn't going to wrestle again. It's only unbelievable if you've dedicated the last 5 years of hating somebody over a fucking wrestling match.
> 
> The best part about all of this is you're seriously upset and calling legacy ruined because he lost to one legend instead of losing to another legend. I mean unless you think he would've been booked to beat Taker.
> 
> ...


Everyone was A-OK with Sting coming in, having a spectacle dream match with Taker ala Rock/Hogan 2002, lose, leave. That was expected, fine, and not insulting. 

Nobody wanted NWO/WCW references for when Sting comes to WWE. Especially in a story that had nothing to do with it. If that would have happened in the Taker match, it would have been shat on. 

Everything they did with him and HHH was insulting. They baited fans in in an authority storyline only for them to throw the entire story in the trash at WM just so could they could stick it to WCW one last time. It's quite insane you don't see it that way.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Everyone was A-OK with Sting coming in, having a spectacle dream match with Taker ala Rock/Hogan 2002, lose, leave. That was expected, fine, and not insulting.
> 
> Nobody wanted NWO/WCW references for when Sting comes to WWE. Especially in a story that had nothing to do with it. If that would have happened in the Taker match, it would have been shat on.
> 
> Everything they did with him and HHH was insulting. They baited fans in in an authority storyline only for them to throw the entire story in the trash at WM just so could they could stick it to WCW one last time. It's quite insane you don't see it that way.


It was so insulting that the crowd ate the match up including the run ins. Insane is deciding that somehow him losing to Vince's favorite creation Taker in a WCW vs WWE based feud isn't a shot at WCW, but him losing to HHH was. 

But challenge to you what do Taker and Sting have a feud over without mentioning WCW vs WWE and their respective importance to the companies they worked for?

Because you keep saying that nobody wanted WCW vs WWE, when in reality the only reason to do Sting vs Taker is WCW vs WWE nostalgia. So surely you'll be able to come up with an enjoyable Sting vs Taker feud without mentioning WWE vs WCW at all.


----------



## HankHill_85 (Aug 31, 2011)

I've made it known multiple times that I've never been a Sting guy, but even I know that his WWE "run" was a steaming crock of shit. The Mania match with HHH was bizarre enough (made No DQ randomly out of nowhere, the NWO suddenly buddies with Sting despite their infamous feuding, HHH going over and absolutely no one knowing the fuck why), but even just the _concept _that Sting should've been paired with HHH in the first place made little sense. The people they had on the roster at the time, and Hunter gets the nod? It should've been an easy lay-up to give people that Sting/Taker match they still seem to clamor for, but instead they went with some narrative that HHH was suddenly "the WWE's franchise player who led the company through thick and thin" to match with Sting's rep in WCW.

LMAO, bull-fucking-SHIT.


----------



## kamaro011 (Jan 3, 2012)

Pentagon Senior said:


> Yeh I agree it just seems madness to me that Vince would put something petty ahead of arranging one of the biggest possible matches in recent history. As a fan that's all I've care about really


The same madness should be asked to Sting back then, why he sign WWE?

He isn't in lack of money and if he had well thought pension plan from the money he earn throughout his wrestling. He doesn't need WWE contract to live a comfortable life after his wrestling career is over.

So why Sting, why you decide to sign WWE?

The same company that willingly fucking you and burying you the oblivion if given chance. That means the money must be pretty good enough back then to willingly throw away your pride and respect as the only few major wrestling figure to never sign WWE.

Look i love Sting, but i will never defend his stupid decision to sign WWE with full well knowledge for the consenquence of his action.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

kamaro011 said:


> The same madness should be asked to Sting back then, why he sign WWE?
> 
> He isn't in lack of money and if he had well thought pension plan from the money he earn throughout his wrestling. He doesn't need WWE contract to live a comfortable life after his wrestling career offer.
> 
> ...


I don't know Sting's motivations, financial situation nor pension plan to be honest 🙂


----------



## kamaro011 (Jan 3, 2012)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I don't know Sting's motivations, financial situation nor pension plan to be honest 🙂


I refuse to believe that Sting is gullible enough to sign the contract despite many major warning flag that said is a very bad decision.

Maybe he is just growing old, so his decison making judgment isn't good as used to be.


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

Sting is a 61-year old broken down guy who isn't even medically cleared to wrestle in an ever evolving physically-demanding wrestling business who's pouting because he can't get his way...


----------



## The Raw Smackdown (Jan 8, 2017)

Well the important thing now is that he's in AEW and he can have a better stint and go out in a better way.


----------



## AthleticGirth (Jul 25, 2020)

Sting made a business decision to sign with WWE, commercially it was a way to earn from the library and merch machine - as well as the HoF award. Artistically, he knew that Vince wouldn't do right by him as proved to be the case, but for his legacy, holding his nose and signing for WWE, was the right thing to do. It's a crime we didn't get Sting v Taker, but hey what can we do, the son-in-law's ego has got to be fed. 

I don't know what Sting's role will be in AEW, but am certainly excited to see it.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

If you are wishing death on a person because they booked your wrestler to lose you really need to re-evaluate how you view pro wrestling...

And lol at HHH being the 5th or 6th guy during AE. Outside Steve Austin nobody else but HHH left Wrestlemania during that period as WWE champion. In fact he was first heel EVER in Wrestlemania history up to that point to leave Wrestlemania as champion.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

You can argue Sting should have beat HHH sure but what is mostly forgotten is WWE already had a huge match planned for HHH at Wrestlemania 32 so were keeping him strong.

They had already done couple of segments and then did the big 20 minute angle at Wrestlemania 31. Obviously match never happened because UFC stopped Rousey participating.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

validreasoning said:


> If you are wishing death on a person because they booked your wrestler to lose you really need to re-evaluate how you view pro wrestling...
> 
> And lol at HHH being the 5th or 6th guy during AE. Outside Steve Austin nobody else but HHH left Wrestlemania during that period as WWE champion. In fact he was first heel EVER in Wrestlemania history up to that point to leave Wrestlemania as champion.


HHH didn’t win the goddamn WWE title until WCW was merely 18 months from going out of business, so I’m not sure what era you’re discussing.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

Attitude Era was widely regarded as starting at Wrestlemania 14 and ending at Wrestlemania 17.

HHH won his first WWE title in August 99 so half way between two dates. 

HHH also dominated tv in all big angles from Summerslam 99 until Wrestlemania 17. He had an extended run with WWE title in 2000 something Kane, Foley or Undertaker never had during AE. He gave Austin his first clean loss as top guy.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

validreasoning said:


> Attitude Era was widely regarded as starting at Wrestlemania 14 and ending at Wrestlemania 17.
> 
> HHH won his first WWE title in August 99 so half way between two dates.
> 
> HHH also dominated tv in all big angles from Summerslam 99 until Wrestlemania 17. He had an extended run with WWE title in 2000 something Kane, Foley or Undertaker never had during AE. He gave Austin his first clean loss as top guy.


So, Attitude Era is what defines the Monday Night Wars to you? Get the fuck out of here with this. The Monday Night Wars began in 95 and were finished by 2000, most of those years HHH spent being the dipshit lackey.


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

Sting is starting to come off real bitter.

Like really...he's a 61-year old broken down guy with Spinal Stenosis that wants a match with a 55-year old broken down guy whose finishing move is the freaking Tombstone Piledriver...umm okay...

...should've taken the opportunity when it was offered at WrestleMania XXVII in 2011 -- not cry about it 10-years later.

This is all comes down to his ego and pride and he's mad because of his own regretful career decision.

MANY WCW superstars came to WWE and their careers flourished.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> So, Attitude Era is what defines the Monday Night Wars to you? Get the fuck out of here with this. The Monday Night Wars were finished by 2000, most of those years HHH spent being the dipshit lackey.


Then let's start at 96 with the formation of the nWo.

96- loss KotR won his first IC title. 

97- Debuts Chyna, wins KotR, formation of DX. Fair to say he's now a very notable character, so that's year 2 of the MNW. 

98- Takes over as leader of DX, successful face run, memorable feud with The Rock and The NOD, Feuded with the Corporation as well. That's year 3 of the MNW


99- gets Chyna back, wins his 1st and 2nd WWF championships, big feud with Vince and marries Stephanie in kayfabe. That's year 4 of the MNW

2000- officially the top heel, retired Mick Foley, first heel to walk out of Mania as champion, him and Rock lead to record breaking ratings, crown jewel of McMahon Helmsley faction, revealed as Mastermind of Austin being ran over. 

But yes tell us all about how he was irrelevant.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

No shit! WWE just wanted to sign him to shit on his legacy. HHH isn't half the talent that sting is.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> Then let's start at 96 with the formation of the nWo.
> 
> 96- loss KotR won his first IC title.
> 
> ...


Monday Night Wars started in 95. HHH wasn’t a world champion until 99 when WCW was floundering. He was HBK’s lackey for 4 of the 6 years of the MNW. 

You’re a paid shill. I’m positive of it.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

But I forgot, those European Championship feuds with Owen Hart were high up the ladder of importance!!!


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Monday Night Wars started in 95. HHH wasn’t a world champion until 99 when WCW was floundering. He was HBK’s lackey for 4 of the 6 years of the MNW.
> 
> You’re a paid shill. I’m positive of it.


Nah you're just upset because you have no real argument, just your upsetness. Man was winning titles as early as 96, but sure he wasn't a factor lol. 

Just remember of the 2 one guy was a top draw and it wasn't Sting


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

RapShepard said:


> I get what you're saying stage wise. But with him having no ties to AEW and AEW having long history they just can't give him the send of his legacy deserves. I mean on the current roster the best thing they have to offer for him creatively is "hey Darby wears face paint and Sting wears face paint". That's not exactly garnering faith that they can come up with something great to send him off on. He certainly has no dream matches there either if he could wrestle. So what do you do. At least Impact if he did a passing of the torch type deal it feels organic since he spent so much time there.


*Sting could literally have his Nitro booking minus the long matches and be over as fuck. I would much rather see him have a good, entertaining run here on the second biggest stage in wrestling than retire in TNA with the local nursing home watching on basic cable because they can't get up and change the channel.*


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Sting could literally have his Nitro booking minus the long matches and be over as fuck. I would much rather see him have a good, entertaining run here on the second biggest stage in wrestling than retire in TNA with the local nursing home watching on basic cable because they can't get up and change the channel.*


I think some are taking their dislike of him losing to HHH so far that they're desperate and willing to take anything. Let's just lay it out "yeah Sting went to AEW a company he has no affiliation with, hit a couple people with bats every once in a while, and then gave his bat to this other dude with face paint" viewer wise it doesn't sound like anymore of a good send-off to his career than what happened.


----------



## Ozell Gray (Jan 2, 2020)

It’s Wrestletalk and they’re known for clickbait headlines so I’d take this with a grain of salt.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> I think some are taking their dislike of him losing to HHH so far that they're desperate and willing to take anything. Let's just lay it out "yeah Sting went to AEW a company he has no affiliation with, hit a couple people with bats every once in a while, and then gave his bat to this other dude with face paint" viewer wise it doesn't sound like anymore of a good send-off to his career than what happened.


I do have concerns over what they do with him tbh but having no affiliation is not something that matters to me. If they build a good storyline around him with echoes of the past but something fresh too - I couldn't care less about him having no previous relationship with AEW just would like to see a cool end to his career. 

His entrance on Weds night already had a greater effect on me than most of what he did in WWE lol, so I'm down with it so far.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> It was so insulting that the crowd ate the match up including the run ins. Insane is deciding that somehow him losing to Vince's favorite creation Taker in a WCW vs WWE based feud isn't a shot at WCW, but him losing to HHH was.
> 
> But challenge to you what do Taker and Sting have a feud over without mentioning WCW vs WWE and their respective importance to the companies they worked for?
> 
> Because you keep saying that nobody wanted WCW vs WWE, when in reality the only reason to do Sting vs Taker is WCW vs WWE nostalgia. *So surely you'll be able to come up with an enjoyable Sting vs Taker feud without mentioning WWE vs WCW at all.*


uhm, how about the fact Sting and Taker were two powerful dark mysterious characters with distinct aura, that also happen to be 2 of the most popular of all times?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I do have concerns over what they do with him tbh but having no affiliation is not something that matters to me. If they build a good storyline around him with echoes of the past but something fresh too - I couldn't care less about him having no previous relationship with AEW just would like to see a cool end to his career.
> 
> His entrance on Weds night already had a greater effect on me than most of what he did in WWE lol, so I'm down with it so far.


At this stage I'm just over that era for the most part, the only exceptions are Jeff Hardy and Mysterio as they consistently show they can have entertaining matches. Though I wouldn't be disappointed to see them go either. And Matt doesn't bother me either. 

For me it's just too forced, Cody's involvement is forced on his end, the need to compare Darby and Sting is forced, and the constant "hey aren't we basically the new WCW, I mean it is TNT" is forced. Like at least with the WWE debut, which was better than this it had the history between the actual WCW and him being the only one to never cross over thing going for it. But you take that away it's a 61 year old guy popping up.


----------



## JasmineAEW (Oct 19, 2020)

I was thrilled to see Sting finally get a WrestleMania moment. The outcome really sucked, however' and was a real letdown. On the other hand, it’s not like completely jobbed him out. Triple-H won only after using his sledgehammer.

And who knows what would have happened had Sting not been injured in his Title Match with Seth? Maybe the WWE had more plans for him.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> uhm, how about the fact Sting and Taker were two powerful dark mysterious characters with distinct aura, that also happen to be 2 of the most popular of all times?


And how do you mention Stings popularity and all of their parallels without getting into WCW vs WWE? Truth is you can't tell that story without WCW vs WWE for the simple fact that it has no relevance as a dream match without WCW vs WWE. 

As far as powerful goes, one shoots lightening, has been resurrected a few times, has a cult of druids, brainwashed people, attempted to sacrifice several people, has a brother that can shoot fire, and can be controlled by a magical urn. 

Meanwhile Sting got upset about being accused of turning on WCW and got moody and painted his face and sat in the rafters for a year. 

They're not in the same ball park as far as dark characters go. Raven is closer to being Taker type dark than Sting is. Sting is about as dark of a character as Aleistar Black.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> At this stage I'm just over that era for the most part, the only exceptions are Jeff Hardy and Mysterio as they consistently show they can have entertaining matches. Though I wouldn't be disappointed to see them go either. And Matt doesn't bother me either.
> 
> For me it's just too forced, Cody's involvement is forced on his end, the need to compare Darby and Sting is forced, and the constant "hey aren't we basically the new WCW, I mean it is TNT" is forced. Like at least with the WWE debut, which was better than this it had the history between the actual WCW and him being the only one to never cross over thing going for it. But you take that away it's a 61 year old guy popping up.


I know what you mean about the old timers - I'm not usually a fan. Maybe it's that I never really watched WCW so missed out on Sting largely (only clips, highlights, articles etc) - so for me I'm getting to live out a little of what I missed. When he came out on Weds it made me feel a way I hadn't about wrestling for so many years and at the end of the day that buzz is what it's is all about. It's unfortunate it didn't mark you out like it did so many others.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

It's a pity for the undertakers legacy that he bottled out of a match with sting when had chance. Would have been the biggest match of his career and the ideal way to retire instead of the shit show cinematic match and that embarrassment of a retiral a few weeks ago in front of no one. But I guess he is happy now doing goofy cameos and his twitter account.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

RapShepard said:


> I think some are taking their dislike of him losing to HHH so far that they're desperate and willing to take anything. Let's just lay it out "yeah Sting went to AEW a company he has no affiliation with, hit a couple people with bats every once in a while, and then gave his bat to this other dude with face paint" viewer wise it doesn't sound like anymore of a good send-off to his career than what happened.


*So you have a problem with him ending his career by:

1. Doing what he does best
2. Making a new star
3. Leaving with his head held high

I'm struggling to see the issue here.*


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I know what you mean about the old timers - I'm not usually a fan. Maybe it's that I never really watched WCW so missed out on Sting largely (only clips, highlights, articles etc) - so for me I'm getting to live out a little of what I missed. When he came out on Weds it made me feel a way I hadn't about wrestling for so many years and at the end of the day that buzz is what it's is all about. It's unfortunate it didn't mark you out like it did so many others.


I get it on your end I guess then. Sort of how I felt about 2nd run HBK, though obviously the age difference, but same principle




thisissting said:


> It's a pity for the undertakers legacy that he bottled out of a match with sting when had chance. Would have been the biggest match of his career and the ideal way to retire instead of the shit show cinematic match and that embarrassment of a retiral a few weeks ago in front of no one. But I guess he is happy now doing goofy cameos and his twitter account.


Do you really truly in your heart of hearts believe that 50 year old Taker who hadn't wrestled in a year and got a concussion in his last match and 55 year old Sting who hadn't wrestled in over a year either would've put on a match that lived up to the hype?


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> I get it on your end I guess then. Sort of how I felt about 2nd run HBK, though obviously the age difference, but same principle
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sting was in great shape for 55 when him and HHH were at wrestlemania. The undertaker was blown up by the time he was 50 and prob ably knew he would get shown up by an older guy. As he was a loyal guy Vince decided not to risk it. But sting would have done the job for the undertaker and it would have been a better way for him to go out. OK I think we all agree it should have happened in like 2004 but the chance was there later and the undertaker swerved it.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *So you have a problem with him ending his career by:
> 
> 1. Doing what he does best
> 2. Making a new star
> ...


I don't care how he ends his career, it's his. But as a viewer 61 year old Sting trying to recapture that feeling isn't exciting to me. 61 year old Sting doing a forced partnership with Darby isn't exciting to me. Him wanting to go out on a better look isn't exciting for me. 

I don't want to see this anymore than I want to see Kane return to put over Lars Sullivan because "hey I was a picked on freak too". 

I don't want to see it anymore than I want to see Christian return and feud with Angelo Dawkins because "hey we're both funny decent workers who got off overshadowed by their tag partners" 

I don't want to see it anymore than I want to see JTG return and feud with feud with Titus O'Neil because "hey we're both black and spent a lot of time in catering".


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Sting was in great shape for 55 when him and HHH were at wrestlemania. The undertaker was blown up by the time he was 50 and prob ably knew he would get shown up by an older guy. As he was a loyal guy Vince decided not to risk it. But sting would have done the job for the undertaker and it would have been a better way for him to go out. OK I think we all agree it should have happened in like 2004 but the chance was there later and the undertaker swerved it.


Sting certainly was in better shape, but he was pretty blown up in his match too. I mean he was 55 so no knock. I don't even disagree it sucks the match never happened. But I can see why Taker would feel the match couldn't live up to the hype. It's probably better to have not got it, than get it and be let down by a dud.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> I don't care how he ends his career, it's his. But as a viewer 61 year old Sting trying to recapture that feeling isn't exciting to me. 61 year old Sting doing a forced partnership with Darby isn't exciting to me. Him wanting to go out on a better look isn't exciting for me.
> 
> I don't want to see this anymore than I want to see Kane return to put over Lars Sullivan because "hey I was a picked on freak too".
> 
> ...


It's simple don't watch then.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> It's simple don't watch then.


Somebody's upset


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Not at all you are the one saying you don't want to see this or that. If you don't watch you won't see it and it won't offend you lol.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Not at all you are the one saying you don't want to see this or that. If you don't watch you won't see it and it won't offend you lol.


Nah you definitely are, that's the only time people throw that out lol. But I use my remote anyway so it better reel in quick or that'll be the what's on NXT moment like most the women's shit.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Go for it.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

RapShepard said:


> I don't care how he ends his career, it's his. But as a viewer 61 year old Sting trying to recapture that feeling isn't exciting to me. 61 year old Sting doing a forced partnership with Darby isn't exciting to me. Him wanting to go out on a better look isn't exciting for me.
> 
> I don't want to see this anymore than I want to see Kane return to put over Lars Sullivan because "hey I was a picked on freak too".
> 
> ...


*The difference between Darby and the people you named is that he actually has the potential to be a top star within the next 2 years. The rest are almost undoubtedly going to be permajobbers. It would be huge for his career to get the blessing from Sting because he was on an upward trajectory before Sting was even in the conversation.*


----------



## Hephaesteus (Aug 20, 2018)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *The difference between Darby and the people you named is that he actually has the potential to be a top star within the next 2 years. The rest are almost undoubtedly going to be permajobbers. It would be huge for his career to get the blessing from Sting because he was on an upward trajectory before Sting was even in the conversation.*


Darbys a mid-carder at best. This'll work about as well as when flair gave the figure 4 to Miz.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> And how do you mention Stings popularity and all of their parallels without getting into WCW vs WWE? Truth is you can't tell that story without WCW vs WWE for the simple fact that it has no relevance as a dream match without WCW vs WWE.
> 
> As far as powerful goes, one shoots lightening, has been resurrected a few times, has a cult of druids, brainwashed people, attempted to sacrifice several people, has a brother that can shoot fire, and can be controlled by a magical urn.
> 
> ...


Taker stopped most of that stuff later in his run, and you know it's more than what they did, it's about what the darkness of their cloth and character represented, the emptyness and soulness. You don't need much for the build-up of it, a quick staredown would have been enough. 

You say that people ate up that Hunter match but you don't think they'd have eaten up Taker/Sting lol? 

Taker was nothing but a cunt and/or Vince puppet if he didn't want to do that match.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Hephaesteus said:


> Darbys a mid-carder at best. This'll work about as well as when flair gave the figure 4 to Miz.


By no means a fan but miz has done pretty well for himself I reckon since then. Any rub he gives to darby including last week only benefits the guy. He clearly isn't a mid carder if he had gone over cody to win one of their major titles at his age. For me he needs to bulk up a bit same as starks but that's it.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> Taker stopped most of that stuff later in his run, and you know it's more than what they did, it's about what the darkness of their cloth and character represented, the emptyness and soulness. You don't need much for the build-up of it, a quick staredown would have been enough.


What his last match saw him bury someone alive, hell even his last full time run saw him send Edge to hell and kidnap Teddy Long. 
You can't say it's not about what they did then throw out random words like emptyness and soulness with no actions to back it up.




> You say that people ate up that Hunter match but you don't think they'd have eaten up Taker/Sting lol?


I mean one had the benefit of being able to throw in run ins that people didn't even know they wanted. I don't think you can do the same with Taker vs Sting which means you have a straight up old people's match which has to live up to expectations. Does Taker vs Sting stay over once they start botching and blowing up with no hoopla to pad it out? 



> Taker was nothing but a cunt and/or Vince puppet if he didn't want to do that match.


Or maybe he just didn't think he could live up to the hype and decided to leave it as a dream.


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> It's a pity for the undertakers legacy that he bottled out of a match with sting when had chance. Would have been the biggest match of his career and the ideal way to retire instead of the shit show cinematic match and that embarrassment of a retiral a few weeks ago in front of no one. But I guess he is happy now doing goofy cameos and his twitter account.



Last time I checked, Sting is the one whom backed out of a match with Taker at WM 27 when Taker had The Streak. Not only that, but the vignette that was used for Sting in WWE, Sting had the audacity to use The Undertaker's name and play a similar vignette when he went back to TNA to capitalize off of The Undertaker's legacy.

Next, after Taker lost The Streak in 2014, Sting all of a sudden shows up in WWE in 2014 trying to connive his way into a match with Taker -- after Taker had already dwindled down his schedule and already had people lined up begging to work with him during his final matches. 

Then, after Taker retires, Sting all of a sudden pouts and signs with AEW alleging that WWE didn't give him what he wanted ??? He's a 61-year old broken down guy who isn't even medically cleared.

And to say that it would've been the biggest match of Taker's career is a f*cking joke because it would've been the biggest match of Sting's career --why do you think he's been begging for it. The biggest match of Sting's career is vs. Hogan at Starrcade...and that was a f*cking joke of a match.

Sting is nowhere near the level of The Undertaker. He had his chance to face Taker, but he farted and blew it -- because he is the one who didn't wanna be upstaged and is now trying to manipulate the narrative.

With all that being said: Sting is the one who is riding the coattails of being compared to The Undertaker because of their characters, and STILL keeps trying to capitalize off of it when The Undertaker doesn't need to do that with anyone, simply because he is one of the GOATs and can sleep at night knowing it.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

He bottled it but for some reason he took the money to make him and Goldberg a laughing stock. Having said that I just watched ric flairs real last match which was against sting not Michaels. Fuck me that was terrible lol.


----------



## Hephaesteus (Aug 20, 2018)

thisissting said:


> By no means a fan but miz has done pretty well for himself I reckon since then. Any rub he gives to darby including last week only benefits the guy. He clearly isn't a mid carder if he had gone over cody to win one of their major titles at his age. For me he needs to bulk up a bit same as starks but that's it.


 Miz is fine, but he was also a midcarder at the point so said rub was wasted.

Yes he took the mid-card belt. If he gets closer to the main belt other than a throwaway title match, Id be shocked.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> Last time I checked, Sting is the one whom backed out of a match with Taker at WM 27 when Taker had The Streak. Not only that, but the vignette that was used for Sting in WWE, Sting had the audacity to use The Undertaker's name and play a similar vignette when he went back to TNA to capitalize off of The Undertaker's legacy.
> 
> Next, after Taker lost The Streak in 2014, Sting all of a sudden shows up in WWE in 2014 trying to connive his way into a match with Taker -- after Taker had already dwindled down his schedule and already had people lined up begging to work with him during his final matches.
> 
> ...


Rubbish. And by the way sting is 1 and 0 vs the undertaker anyway now after taker jobbed to the super star surfer sting in WCW.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *The difference between Darby and the people you named is that he actually has the potential to be a top star within the next 2 years. The rest are almost undoubtedly going to be permajobbers. It would be huge for his career to get the blessing from Sting because he was on an upward trajectory before Sting was even in the conversation.*


How much did Flair giving the attaboy to AJ Styles and Mix help them?


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> Rubbish. And by the way sting is 1 and 0 vs the undertaker anyway now after taker jobbed to the super star surfer sting in WCW.


Ok Steve Borden.

You can't even debate the topic. YOu just start pouting and say "rubbish". 

LMFAO !!!


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Hephaesteus said:


> Miz is fine, but he was also a midcarder at the point so said rub was wasted.
> 
> Yes he took the mid-card belt. If he gets closer to the main belt other than a throwaway title match, Id be shocked.


Second most important belt in aew first if you believe cody lol. A mid carder is shida or orange cassidy or jericho these days.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> Ok Steve Borden.
> 
> You can't even debate the topic. YOu just start pouting and say "rubbish".
> 
> LMFAO !!!


Your argument isnt even on topic. We get your a massive undertaker mark but you can't change history and he has never beaten sting in his career and never will. He also bottled the match the fans wanted because he was shot and over the hill.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

RapShepard said:


> How much did Flair giving the attaboy to AJ Styles and Mix help them?


*Miz has been a joke for his entire career, even while champion. AJ was the face of TNA, so I'm not sure how a Flair cosign was a detriment.*


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Flair giving the rub to anyone helps them there is no two ways about it! Just look at Orton who has had a massive help over the years from ric. Similar to what sting can offer now in his last few years in the business to some up and coming talent.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Miz has been a joke for his entire career, even while champion. AJ was the face of TNA, so I'm not sure how a Flair cosign was a detriment.*


So what you're saying is sometimes these passing of torch moments have been proven to not mean a shit?


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> Your argument isnt even on topic. We get your a massive undertaker mark but you can't change history and he has never beaten sting in his career and never will. He also bottled the match the fans wanted because he was shot and over the hill.


My argument was a response to your statement -- so if that's the case, you're not even on topic. 

We get that you're mad because you didn't get your dream match with The Undertaker, Steve, but you will never be on The Undertaker's level in the history books. 

Why is it the only time your name is in the headlines for the past decade, it's because you try and associate yourself with The Undertaker ????

Why did you bottle the match at Wrestlemania 27 when the fans wanted it??? Because you're afraid of being upstaged by The Undertaker. 

Now you're just another joke of a legend running from promotion to promotion trying to collect a paycheck because you have nothing... Sucks to be you Steve Borden : ))


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Flair giving the rub to anyone helps them there is no two ways about it! Just look at Orton who has had a massive help over the years from ric. Similar to what sting can offer now in his last few years in the business to some up and coming talent.


So what positive did Flair bring to Miz and AJ?


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> Flair giving the rub to anyone helps them there is no two ways about it! Just look at Orton who has had a massive help over the years from ric. Similar to what sting can offer now in his last few years in the business to some up and coming talent.


Sting hasn't even been able to perform the Sharpshooter in TNA in the late 2000s, the f*ck you claiming he can help someone out. 

LMAO !!!


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> My argument was a response to your statement -- so if that's the case, you're not even on topic.
> 
> We get that you're mad because you didn't get your dream match with The Undertaker, Steve, but you will never be on The Undertaker's level in the history books.
> 
> ...


Whats the career score between sting and the undertaker? I see you choose to ignore the facts mean mark.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> So what positive did Flair bring to Miz and AJ?


Association is enough to elevate both of them. If the goat decides to give you the rub you can't say no. Include Orton and HHH and Michaels and batista. All have had the rub from greatness at one time.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Association is enough to elevate both of them. If the goat decides to give you the rub you can't say no. Include Orton and HHH and Michaels and batista. All have had the rub from greatness at one time.


So nothing you can actually point to got it


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> Sting hasn't even been able to perform the Sharpshooter in TNA in the late 2000s, the f*ck you claiming he can help someone out.
> 
> LMAO !!!


He already did last week by showing up and even looking at darby. When the franchise and the icon notices you it's big news. Almost broke the Internet last week.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> So nothing you can actually point to got it


They all were main event stars following the association I can point to that.


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> He already did last week by showing up and even looking at darby. When the franchise and the icon notices you it's big news. Almost broke the Internet last week.


LMAO !!! How old are you son ?


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> Whats the career score between sting and the undertaker? I see you choose to ignore the facts mean mark.



#168 • 32 m ago
Your misinformed and unintelligent self still refuses to reposnd to this topic. We're waiting for your response to this -- if you can.... 

LMAO !!


> thisissting said:
> It's a pity for the undertakers legacy that he bottled out of a match with sting when had chance. Would have been the biggest match of his career and the ideal way to retire instead of the shit show cinematic match and that embarrassment of a retiral a few weeks ago in front of no one. But I guess he is happy now doing goofy cameos and his twitter account.


Last time I checked, Sting is the one whom backed out of a match with Taker at WM 27 when Taker had The Streak. Not only that, but the vignette that was used for Sting in WWE, Sting had the audacity to use The Undertaker's name and play a similar vignette when he went back to TNA to capitalize off of The Undertaker's legacy.

Next, after Taker lost The Streak in 2014, Sting all of a sudden shows up in WWE in 2014 trying to connive his way into a match with Taker -- after Taker had already dwindled down his schedule and already had people lined up begging to work with him during his final matches.

Then, after Taker retires, Sting all of a sudden pouts and signs with AEW alleging that WWE didn't give him what he wanted ??? He's a 61-year old broken down guy who isn't even medically cleared.

And to say that it would've been the biggest match of Taker's career is a f*cking joke because it would've been the biggest match of Sting's career --why do you think he's been begging for it. The biggest match of Sting's career is vs. Hogan at Starrcade...and that was a f*cking joke of a match.

Sting is nowhere near the level of The Undertaker. He had his chance to face Taker, but he farted and blew it -- because he is the one who didn't wanna be upstaged and is now trying to manipulate the narrative.

With all that being said: Sting is the one who is riding the coattails of being compared to The Undertaker because of their characters, and STILL keeps trying to capitalize off of it when The Undertaker doesn't need to do that with anyone, simply because he is one of the GOATs and can sleep at night knowing it.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> They all were main event stars following the association I can point to that.


The Miz went from main eventing Mania as WWE champion and main eventing Surgery Series against Rock and Cena to turning face and going to midcard hell after his Flair rub. But yes tell me more about how he was elevated by Flair. 

AJ was a multiple time world champion and actually the world champ by the time he was "gave" the rub by Flair. During their alliance AJ's went from world champion when he first aligned with Flair to being television champion, you know midcard champ. Flair actually devalued him.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> LMAO !!! How old are you son ?


I had a look at your 72 posts and just about all of them are marking out for the undertaker. You even liked that god awful boneyard match which only took place because taker was so bad in the ring now even AJ couldn't make him look good. You probably loved the Goldberg undertaker match I think that was a real classic lol.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> #168 • 32 m ago
> Your misinformed and unintelligent self still refuses to reposnd to this topic. We're waiting for your response to this -- if you can....
> 
> LMAO !!
> ...


Your misinformed if you think mean mark hasn't already jobbed to sting before in WCW. A bit less of the cheek as well it seems you need to make personal insults.

Why copy and paste your previous post it isn't any more informative the second time round?


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> The Miz went from main eventing Mania as WWE champion and main eventing Surgery Series against Rock and Cena to turning face and going to midcard hell after his Flair rub. But yes tell me more about how he was elevated by Flair.
> 
> AJ was a multiple time world champion and actually the world champ by the time he was "gave" the rub by Flair. During their alliance AJ's went from world champion when he first aligned with Flair to being television champion, you know midcard champ. Flair actually devalued him.


Bit of a revisionist history there. You'll be saying next the horsemen never benefitted from having flair as a member. I guess you just don't like the guy.


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> Your misinformed if you think mean mark hasn't already jobbed to sting before in WCW. A bit less of the cheek as well it seems you need to make personal insults.
> 
> Why copy and paste your previous post it isn't any more informative the second time round?



Respond to it -- if you have enough intelligence to debate it


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Bit of a revisionist history there. You'll be saying next the horsemen never benefitted from having flair as a member. I guess you just don't like the guy.


So did AJ Styles not go from world champion to television champ while with Flair?

Did he elevate Miz back to the main event?


----------



## rjc (Oct 14, 2017)

thisissting said:


> Your misinformed if you think mean mark hasn't already jobbed to sting before in WCW. A bit less of the cheek as well it seems you need to make personal insults.
> 
> Why copy and paste your previous post it isn't any more informative the second time round?


Not only that, your grammars fucking horrible too...how old are you ?


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> So did AJ Styles not go from world champion to television champ while with Flair?
> 
> Did he elevate Miz back to the main event?


So the Miz since being given the rub by flair in 2013 has won 7 intercontinental championships and 3 tag team titles. Not bad that possibly makes him the 2nd best ic champion ever in wwe after jericho.

I'll check aj titles since being associated with Flair in tna and I think you'll find he has had a pretty handy career including being the main man in wwe for a few years.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

rjc said:


> Not only that, your grammars fucking horrible too...how old are you ?


My grammar was perfect in that last post. Why are you obsessed with my age?

You had better hit the brakes on the personal insults or you will find yourself on the naughty step my friend.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> So the Miz since being given the rub by flair in 2013 has won 7 intercontinental championships and 3 tag team titles. Not bad that possibly makes him the 2nd best ic champion ever in wwe after jericho.
> 
> I'll check aj titles since being associated with Flair in tna and I think you'll find he has had a pretty handy career including being the main man in wwe for a few years.


So you intially said he elevated them. Now your considering them being at lower heights than their peak elevation. Trying to say flair elevated AJ to WWE is hilarious though.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> So you intially said he elevated them. Now your considering them being at lower heights than their peak elevation. Trying to say flair elevated AJ to WWE is hilarious though.


Well I would say 7 ic champs and 3 tag is a pretty damn successful run and better than cashing a briefcase in on someone after a title match.

Your argument seems to be they were worse after the association and for aj after the association he went on to better things than tna. 

Is your argument flair has never elevated anyone, that stars don't give a rub or that you don't much like flair himself? I'm not sure the focus of your argument here. For me is the best wrestler ever and the business is all about giving the rub or passing the torch if you extend that to the top level. I'm not arguing hogan Rock torch passing but definitely the ortons HHH batista would all tell you they benefitted enormously from the association.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

In any case not sure what relevance this has to the topic. My point is that sting because of his status can provide a rub to up and coming talents in the company in the same way flair and others have in the past.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Well I would say 7 ic champs and 3 tag is a pretty damn successful run and better than cashing a briefcase in on someone after a title match.
> 
> Your argument seems to be they were worse after the association and for aj after the association he went on to better things than tna.
> 
> Is your argument flair has never elevated anyone, that stars don't give a rub or that you don't much like flair himself? I'm not sure the focus of your argument here. For me is the best wrestler ever and the business is all about giving the rub or passing the torch if you extend that to the top level. I'm not arguing hogan Rock torch passing but definitely the ortons HHH batista would all tell you they benefitted enormously from the association.





thisissting said:


> In any case not sure what relevance this has to the topic. My point is that sting because of his status can provide a rub to up and coming talents in the company in the same way flair and others have in the past.


The point is simple you're just missing it for whatever reason. Not every attempt at giving a rub actually ends up producing the desired effect. You're the only person I've ever seen say AJ and Styles benefited from their Flair association. Can Sting help Darby maybe, but more often than not these type of rubs don't work when one wrestler can't actually wrestle anymore.


----------



## Wolf Mark (Jun 5, 2020)

Dark Emperor said:


> *But why should Vince McMahon treat Sting like a God and book him strong at 55 years old. The guy was part of competition that tried to put him out of business. Then he refused to work for Vince for 13 years whilst his value was high and still had a lot left in the tank.
> 
> Then he turns up at 55years old when TNA ran out of money and you all wants Vince to be grateful and give him a sendoff like Flair or HBK. Business doesn't work that way, what exactly has Sting done for WWE to deserve such good treatment. If he was younger and had value then he would be treated better as there would be money to be made.
> 
> He rightly jobbed and got paid well doing it.*


Because when you invite a guest to your home, you don't then proceed to shit on their heads. (unless you're Vlad Tepes lol). They wanted him cause they felt he was important enough, he meant something, he was a star. Vince pride himself that he'll do anything to do business and nothing is personal. If you threat your guesses well, they'll give it back to you back ten folds. Then the sky's the limit and business can be great between the two parties.

I actually think they did not intended to threat him bad and maybe Sting losing at Mania was a way for them to say "prove yourself" and I have no issues with that. But I think mistakes were made. I actually think it would have been better to start slowly. Maybe have Sting only make a Wrestlemania appearance at first. And get involved in less-known stars afterwards. Maybe get in a match against Cody and Dustin. Hell if we want to make it WCW thing, have him start attacking former WCW wrestlers cause his character would feel they "betrayed" WCW. Give him a few wins in these matches before moving on to bigger stars. Then Taker announce his retirement in early 2018 and he enters the Royal Rumble. During the night, Sting would face HHH with the winner entering the Rumble. Sting goes banana during the match and at the end start beating Hunter with the bat so he gets disqualified. He's not in the Rumble. Taker whom everybody knows it will be his last Rumble, he almost wins it but Sting come down the rafters and cost him the match! It's a statement: Taker represents everything WWE and Sting wants to hit them where it hurts the most. A feud starts and the match is set for Mania. (This is where I would do the nWo appearance but in a logical manner they would try hurting their enemy Sting and cause these three have no allegiances. Then you would have Taker and Sting at the end teaming up the get rid of them).



RapShepard said:


> The point is simple you're just missing it for whatever reason. Not every attempt at giving a rub actually ends up producing the desired effect. You're the only person I've ever seen say AJ and Styles benefited from their Flair association. Can Sting help Darby maybe, but more often than not these type of rubs don't work when one wrestler can't actually wrestle anymore.


I think AJ Styles benefited tremendously from his Flair association. For example I had never liked AJ's mic work, he always sounded uncomfortable and whiny and like clockwork, he improved greatly in that area when he started being managed by the Nature Boy. I don't know if Flair gave him pointers or advices but I remember that the change was drastic on TV. I was like wow I had no idea AJ had it in him. (I didn't like the change in style, though that was a mistake).


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> What his last match saw him bury someone alive, hell even his last full time run saw him send Edge to hell and kidnap Teddy Long.
> You can't say it's not about what they did then throw out random words like emptyness and soulness with no actions to back it up.
> 
> 
> ...


In the late 2000's Sting and Taker were already legends, it definitely didn't matter much at that point what they did or didn't do because they had their mysterious around them. Rap, I think you're clearly the only one doing mental gymnastics here making things more complicated, but it's just so obvious. You have to guys who dress in black, are a bit of loners, have a dark past and overcame adversity. 
Even if you want to include the WCW/WWE element, it's NOT bigger than Sting/Taker itself, which could probably sell in itself without ANY company backing if they were to have it randomly now on a 1 match PPV. 

No, the crowd was not going to turn on that match. They didn't need to do much, just hit their spots, the match should have been a spectacle, just like Hogan/Rock. 

It's crazy you can hear all the stories about the lying and backstage politics of Hunter, the stuff he did with Gallows & Anderson, to Chyna, to many others, and think he's just some innocent victim of circumstances.
Nah mate, the guy is a psychopathic egomaniac hellbent on overcompensating for his B+ Status.


----------



## Qudhufo (Jun 25, 2019)

How the hell did I miss out on this thread? 

Is the party still on? Lol


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> In the late 2000's Sting and Taker were already legends, it definitely didn't matter much at that point what they did or didn't do because they had their mysterious around them. Rap, I think you're clearly the only one doing mental gymnastics here making things more complicated, but it's just so obvious. *You have to guys who dress in black, are a bit of loners, have a dark past and overcame adversity. *
> Even if you want to include the WCW/WWE element, it's NOT bigger than Sting/Taker itself, which could probably sell in itself without ANY company backing if they were to have it randomly now on a 1 match PPV.


Loner? Outside of 1 year in his career Sting has never had a problem teaming up with folk

Wearing black, sheesh what a shallow reason.

Dark past, what's Sting's dark past?

Overcoming adversity man what are we talking about dark characters or John Cena. 

Taker vs Sting doesn't work without including WWE vs WCW. It's like proposing doing Austin vs Goldberg, but totally just ignoring their roles in WWE and WCW. 



> No, the crowd was not going to turn on that match. They didn't need to do much, just hit their spots, the match should have been a spectacle, just like Hogan/Rock.


So let me get this straight you're comparing the likelihood of 50 year old Taker and 55 year old Sting to the fact 29 year old active wrestler Rock and 49 year old Hogan. I mean you see how absurd that sounds when you actually look at the difference. One match had a not even 30 year old Rock in it and your purposed match had 2 men who were both older than the Hogan. 




> It's crazy you can hear all the stories about the lying and backstage politics of Hunter, the stuff he did with Gallows & Anderson, to Chyna, to many others, and think he's just some innocent victim of circumstances.
> Nah mate, the guy is a psychopathic egomaniac hellbent on overcompensating for his B+ Status.


Nah I just don't have this weird anger about the fact that wrestlers and the wrestling business ain't different than any other people and jobs in the world. Some of y'all act like y'all never worked a job before.

So what if HHH cheated on Chyna. Sting cheated on his wife, Bret cheated on his wife, Austin cheated on and beat up his wives. But hey I guess they're different. 

So what if he played politics and used his power to help him and his friends, welcome to the work force. I mean would people like QT and Brandon Cutler be hired to AEW and have backstage roles that get them health insurance if they weren't close with Cody and The Bucks? But hey I guess that's different. 

So what if he used the fact that who knows we're AEW will be to get them to re-sign. Welcome to negotiating. You think AEW isn't selling themselves by highlighting cons of WWE?

Let's be honest HHH isn't much different than most wrestlers. Does some fuck shit does some cool shit. The only difference is a lot of you grown adults for whatever reason take it actually personal that he beat one of your favorites at one point and time and can't get over it.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

Taker v Sting was always a dream match regardless of any difference in characters - things only need to make a certain amount of sense in wrestling imo and there was plenty to play off of. I can't think of many bigger missed opportunities personally.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> Taker v Sting was always a dream match regardless of any difference in characters - things only need to make a certain amount of sense in wrestling imo and there was plenty to play off of. I can't think of many bigger missed opportunities personally.


But if you're going to argue the dream match wasn't about WCW vs WWE, but about their similar characters, maybe you should be able to explain in what ways the characters are actually similar.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> Loner? Outside of 1 year in his career Sting has never had a problem teaming up with folk
> 
> Wearing black, sheesh what a shallow reason.
> 
> ...


That 1 year for Sting is the most significant one of his career. Adversity as in NWO, or Undertaker's young house burning. It really doesn't need WCW/WWE as much as you think, you're just fixated on that. Most people when they talked about the dream match rarely mentioned WCW/WWE elements. More about how protected they both were booking wise, and how both had their dark aura around them.

Not absurd at all lol. Age has nothing to do with it, you're really reaching now, considering Hogan couldn't do shit even a 40. Sting was perfectly capable at 55 and Taker had a passable performance vs Lesnar at SummerSlam of that year. You're doing "what ifs" the match sucks, when it's obvious crowd would just eat up the typical Sting/Taker spots like the splash and old-school. 

There is a difference in HHH and a lot of others wrestlers because he had direct influence on a lot of wrestler's careers. The list is too damn long.






I don't see QT and Brandon Cutler getting world titles and PPV matches for being Bucks' friends. 
HHH is different than most wrestlers that he's able to fool folks like you like he's just a regular dude doing business. When in fact, he's scum. I can't believe you justify Triple H bringing in the wrestlers kids and families into negotiation tactics without even admitting it's scummy what they did later. His word mean nothing. 
He was lucky he sucked HBK's dick as soon as he got into WWF, that Motherfucker was able to get his "backstage power" long before he earned it due to tenure just because he sucked the right dick. 

You never think of the SCALE things are done, if to you hiring Brandon Cutler for some matches on Dark is the equivalent of HHH making his gym buddy WWE champion in 4 months.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> But if you're going to argue the dream match wasn't about WCW vs WWE, but about their similar characters, maybe you should be able to explain in what ways the characters are actually similar.


It's as simple as - when we were kids everyone dreamt if it. They were both kinda dark and mysterious and two of the biggest stars of the era. It's no more complex or nuanced than that.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Wolf Mark said:


> Because when you invite a guest to your home, you don't then proceed to shit on their heads. (unless you're Vlad Tepes lol). They wanted him cause they felt he was important enough, he meant something, he was a star. Vince pride himself that he'll do anything to do business and nothing is personal. If you threat your guesses well, they'll give it back to you back ten folds. Then the sky's the limit and business can be great between the two parties.
> 
> I actually think they did not intended to threat him bad and maybe Sting losing at Mania was a way for them to say "prove yourself" and I have no issues with that. But I think mistakes were made. I actually think it would have been better to start slowly. Maybe have Sting only make a Wrestlemania appearance at first. And get involved in less-known stars afterwards. Maybe get in a match against Cody and Dustin. Hell if we want to make it WCW thing, have him start attacking former WCW wrestlers cause his character would feel they "betrayed" WCW. Give him a few wins in these matches before moving on to bigger stars. Then Taker announce his retirement in early 2018 and he enters the Royal Rumble. During the night, Sting would face HHH with the winner entering the Rumble. Sting goes banana during the match and at the end start beating Hunter with the bat so he gets disqualified. He's not in the Rumble. Taker whom everybody knows it will be his last Rumble, he almost wins it but Sting come down the rafters and cost him the match! It's a statement: Taker represents everything WWE and Sting wants to hit them where it hurts the most. A feud starts and the match is set for Mania. (This is where I would do the nWo appearance but in a logical manner they would try hurting their enemy Sting and cause these three have no allegiances. Then you would have Taker and Sting at the end teaming up the get rid of them).
> 
> ...


Very much agree with this. The rub isn't necessarily being world champion there are lots of nuances of the business you can learn from the masters.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Qudhufo said:


> How the hell did I miss out on this thread?
> 
> Is the party still on? Lol


Sorry I had to go to bed it was 3am in the UK and was working at 9!


Pentagon Senior said:


> It's as simple as - when we were kids everyone dreamt if it. They were both kinda dark and mysterious and two of the biggest stars of the era. It's no more complex or nuanced than that.


Spot on. I bet you anything if they were able and they made this match a ppv only it would still sell huge. Tyson Jones Jr is testament that broken washed up fighters can still draw even if they are older. Its too late now good luck to sting in his new career chapter and to undertaker in the nursing home.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Hey guys what's going on in this thr-ohhhh lawd.


----------



## TheGreatBanana (Jul 7, 2012)

That was Stings fault. He should’ve went into WWE with creative control. He should’ve played hard to get and rinse WWE of every penny he could’ve gotten. WWE would’ve done everything to get Sting and he could’ve easily bargained for creative control since he owns the Sting character.

This would’ve prevented WWE from doing anything silly with his character and jobbing him out to stupid Triple Ego. Also he should’ve never taken the buckle bomb from stupid Rollins, that was next level stupid.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Sting’s an interesting case in that he would have benefitted from signing with the WWE way earlier, but not signing with the WWE for years is what drove his mystique up. For a long time, Sting was probably considered the greatest of the era to never wrestle for Vince.

At 61, I don’t really know what Sting brings to the table. He’s kind of anachronistic in the promotion, given that he’s such a stereotypical wrestler in a place where they are more interested in the antithesis to that.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> Sting’s an interesting case in that he would have benefitted from signing with the WWE way earlier, but not signing with the WWE for years is what drove his mystique up. For a long time, Sting was probably considered the greatest of the era to never wrestle for Vince.
> 
> At 61, I don’t really know what Sting brings to the table. He’s kind of anachronistic in the promotion, given that he’s such a stereotypical wrestler in a place where they are more interested in the antithesis to that.


Just give me badass entrances, those amazing facials that speak a 1000 words, a few ballbat dingers, and I’m cool with Sting living in the squared circle forever. I even find the grey hair cool. Haha


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

The Wood said:


> At 61, I don’t really know what Sting brings to the table.


Cornette mentioned this in his review. "They've signed him to a multi year deal? To do what? He can't wrestle, he can't be a manager, he doesn't fit as a commissioner, he wouldn't make a good announcer".

I would've hired him on a 6 month contract or not at all tbh. Give him a long drawn out story line, let him be an enforcer for a big title match and then have him ride off into the sunset.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

TheGreatBanana said:


> That was Stings fault. He should’ve went into WWE with creative control. He should’ve played hard to get and rinse WWE of every penny he could’ve gotten. WWE would’ve done everything to get Sting and he could’ve easily bargained for creative control since he owns the Sting character.
> 
> This would’ve prevented WWE from doing anything silly with his character and jobbing him out to stupid Triple Ego. Also he should’ve never taken the buckle bomb from stupid Rollins, that was next level stupid.


I agree to an extent but I think he is too nice a guy to be making demands to HHH or Vince. Even though HHH won by cheating via sledge hammer which is not as bad a clean win if it had been me I'd have been insisting on winning that match whatever way you want to spin it to protect my legacy. After that I'm sure he would be happy to take a loss to an up and comer such as rollins or Reigns. Maybe they were working towards the undertaker for a final match but were scuppered by injury but im not so sure.


----------



## Jaxon (Jul 20, 2020)

validreasoning said:


> If you are wishing death on a person because they booked your wrestler to lose you really need to re-evaluate how you view pro wrestling...
> 
> And lol at HHH being the 5th or 6th guy during AE. Outside Steve Austin nobody else but HHH left Wrestlemania during that period as WWE champion. In fact he was first heel EVER in Wrestlemania history up to that point to leave Wrestlemania as champion.


absolutely, why would you wish death on someone just because someone didn't win. SAD


----------



## fulcizombie (Jul 17, 2011)

the_flock said:


> No stars since 2004, are you sure about that?
> 
> How did they drop the ball with a 55 year old perma-crocked Sting?


Yes I am sure.


----------



## TheGreatBanana (Jul 7, 2012)

validreasoning said:


> If you are wishing death on a person because they booked your wrestler to lose you really need to re-evaluate how you view pro wrestling...
> 
> And lol at HHH being the 5th or 6th guy during AE. Outside Steve Austin nobody else but HHH left Wrestlemania during that period as WWE champion. In fact he was first heel EVER in Wrestlemania history up to that point to leave Wrestlemania as champion.


The fuck you on about? Taker, Austin, Rock, Foley were bigger stars than Triple H at the time. Just because Hunter won Wrestlemania 2000 doesn’t mean it was a good idea. The Rock was super hot at that time and it terrible booking decision for him to lose at that mania. That’s why Hunter lost the following month at Blacklash.


----------



## TheGreatBanana (Jul 7, 2012)

thisissting said:


> I agree to an extent but I think he is too nice a guy to be making demands to HHH or Vince. Even though HHH won by cheating via sledge hammer which is not as bad a clean win if it had been me I'd have been insisting on winning that match whatever way you want to spin it to protect my legacy. After that I'm sure he would be happy to take a loss to an up and comer such as rollins or Reigns. Maybe they were working towards the undertaker for a final match but were scuppered by injury but im not so sure.


You can never be nice in wrestling, you have to look out for yourself. If Sting was protective of his image, he should’ve put the criteria that he wins his first match. Sting is such a monumental figure in wrestling that he can get away with making demands.

Sting only joined WWE because he wanted a match with Undertaker. That is something he has always wanted. WWE didn’t deliver that and it’s his fault for not pressuring WWE for not doing it. In wrestling you have to strike when the iron is hot, you can’t delay things at all. It’s one sport where you have to live in the moment. You can get into the habit of taking the future for granted and think everything’s going to be ok. It wasn’t ok and he got injured later on. Circumstances change all the time, nothing can ever be planned which why gotta do things immediately.

He should’ve demanded Taker as his first match, instead we get a crappy program with Triple Ego.


----------



## xio4up (Dec 7, 2020)

They treated him like a piece of shit


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> That 1 year for Sting is the most significant one of his career. Adversity as in NWO, or Undertaker's young house burning. It really doesn't need WCW/WWE as much as you think, you're just fixated on that. Most people when they talked about the dream match rarely mentioned WCW/WWE elements. More about how protected they both were booking wise, and how both had their dark aura around them.


No your premise is just bad and you can't stop it from being picked apart. Implying that you can build a Sting vs Taker feud without including WCW vs WWE is absurd. Then when pushed to explain how there characters are so similar that that's the story you deflected. You're the one talking about "oh they both have dark past" but can't explain what's so dark about Sting's past.



> Not absurd at all lol. Age has nothing to do with it, you're really reaching now, considering Hogan couldn't do shit even a 40. Sting was perfectly capable at 55 and Taker had a passable performance vs Lesnar at SummerSlam of that year. You're doing "what ifs" the match sucks, when it's obvious crowd would just eat up the typical Sting/Taker spots like the splash and old-school.


 you're suggesting a 50 year old Taker who hadn't wrestled in a year and a 55 year old Sting who hadn't wrestled in a year also would've had a match go as smooth as a 29 and 49 year old. 



> There is a difference in HHH and a lot of others wrestlers because he had direct influence on a lot of wrestler's careers. The list is too damn long.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And this is why none of your absurd personalized hatred of the McMahons can be took serious. Look at how quickly you were able to get over the idea of Cody and The Bucks using their power to help themselves and their friends. You went from presenting yourself as this super moral person who found it scummy to play politics, to super okay with it as long as it doesn't affect the parts of kayfabe you pay attention to. Which means it's not a moral issue you have, it's an entertainment issue you have. Which is fine, but just be honest. Don't tell me you hate politic players then go, "well QT is different he isn't world champ, he's just got tag title shots, won PPV matches, got to steal someone's wife for months, and win a feud with a big gimmick blow off". But that's different. 

And again have you ever worked a job or negotiated things. Did you think for a second WWE weren't going to bring up whether AEW would be around in a few years. As far as what HHH did to him what did he do to them. Because according to Gallows and Anderson he wanted them in NXT. According to AJ Heyman was the one who suggested they get cut. 









Triple H wanted Gallows and Anderson to have specific role in WWE


Triple H had something wonderful in mind for Gallows and Anderson in WWE, but it never happened. This would have been incredible to see as there is no limit as to what Gallows and Anderson could have done with this move.




www.sportskeeda.com








Pentagon Senior said:


> It's as simple as - when we were kids everyone dreamt if it. They were both kinda dark and mysterious and two of the biggest stars of the era. It's no more complex or nuanced than that.


But again how do you tell that story of Taker and Sting without addressing the real reason why it was a dream match which is WWE vs WCW. I mean unless you think the whole story should be them brooding at one another


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> But again how do you tell that story of Taker and Sting without addressing the real reason why it was a dream match which is WWE vs WCW. I mean unless you think the whole story should be them brooding at one another


I personally wouldn't mind the WCW/WWE thing being mentioned - perhaps I missed that part of the debate. But for me, the interest would largely revolve around their characters and the dream match status of seeing two of the most enigmatic fan favourites if all time. Whoever wins goes down in history as the best 'dark' character of all time - and I would've been more than happy for Taker to get the win.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I personally wouldn't mind the WCW/WWE thing being mentioned - perhaps I missed that part of the debate. But for me, the interest would largely revolve around their characters and the dream match status of seeing two of the most enigmatic fan favourites if all time. Whoever wins goes down in history as the best 'dark' character of all time - and I would've been more than happy for Taker to get the win.


Here's the base of the argument. 



The Definition of Technician said:


> Everyone was A-OK with Sting coming in, having a spectacle dream match with Taker ala Rock/Hogan 2002, lose, leave. That was expected, fine, and not insulting.
> 
> *Nobody wanted NWO/WCW references for when Sting comes to WWE. Especially in a story that had nothing to do with it. If that would have happened in the Taker match, it would have been shat on.*
> 
> Everything they did with him and HHH was insulting. They baited fans in in an authority storyline only for them to throw the entire story in the trash at WM *just so could they could stick it to WCW one last time.* It's quite insane you don't see it that way.


My two points are

1. Realistically how do you tell this story without referencing WCW vs WWE. At the core of the dream match steams the WCW vs WWE rivalry leaving that out and their position in their respective companies ass the backbones and heart and soul just to focus on "hey they were kind of dark" is a disservice to the story. 

2. So since you have to mention WCW to tell the story regardless, pretending that HHH beating Sting is sticking it to WCW, but Taker doing it wouldn't be is silly. Either way it's a long time WWE guy beating the last WCW icon they hadn't got Sting.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

Aa i said in the past people need to stop looking at wwe as the end all. The past year and a half has proven that. Sting will never be a wwe guy . There is no reason why he needs a good run with him.


----------



## kamaro011 (Jan 3, 2012)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I personally wouldn't mind the WCW/WWE thing being mentioned - perhaps I missed that part of the debate. But for me, the interest would largely revolve around their characters and the dream match status of seeing two of the most enigmatic fan favourites if all time. Whoever wins goes down in history as the best 'dark' character of all time - and I would've been more than happy for Taker to get the win.


I'm not keen on this idea that Taker and Sting must face one on another, i don't like either of them to take a pin and lose.

Instead fight one another why don't they team up each other, I mean the team of Sting and Undertaker is as much rare as dream match between both of them and it will be nice symbolism and gesture for the WWE to acknowledge WCW history and prestige that they bought out many years ago as their equal and proper rival company, finally stand together fighting side by side.


----------



## omaroo (Sep 19, 2006)

Can't ever see sting going back to WWE. Could see sting being part of AEW for a good amount of time to help them grow.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> Here's the base of the argument.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Gotcha! Yeh I missed that part and don't necessarily agree that it should be ignored altogether. I just don't see that it'd need to be the focal point either. It was a fantasy match from before the invasion angle if I remember correctly.

I think the HHH hate comes down to 1) his proximity to Vince and the feeling he got more than he should 2) people had wanted Taker/Sting for so long.

I agree that Sting losing to HHH in isolation is no big deal. I think it's everything else that went with it (points 1&2) that left a sour taste in the mouth for many fans.



kamaro011 said:


> I'm not keen on this idea that Taker and Sting must face one on another, i don't like either of them to take a pin and lose.
> 
> Instead fight one another why don't they team up each other, I mean the team of Sting and Undertaker is as much rare as dream match between both of them and it will be nice symbolism and gesture for the WWE to acknowledge WCW history and prestige that they bought out many years ago as their equal and proper rival company, finally stand together fighting side by side.


Interesting idea. Wouldn't have been against it but it's too late now obviously. I still feel most fans wanted to see which one would overcome the other - which is why it was the dream match that never happened.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> Gotcha! Yeh I missed that part and don't necessarily agree that it should be ignored altogether. I just don't see that it'd need to be the focal point either. It was a fantasy match from before the invasion angle if I remember correctly.
> 
> I think the HHH hate comes down to 1) his proximity to Vince and the feeling he got more than he should 2) people had wanted Taker/Sting for so long.
> 
> I agree that Sting losing to HHH in isolation is no big deal. I think it's everything else that went with it (points 1&2) that left a sour taste in the mouth for many fans.


Yeah matches like Austin vs Goldberg/Hogan and Sting vs Taker were a thing even before the official invasion. 

I definitely get people wanted Taker vs Sting more no doubt. But when you take a step back and listen to them discuss the situation HHH getting the match and winning isn't that crazy.

Sting has said that Taker didn't seem interested and he originally didn't think he was going to wrestle after Mania, HHH also was scheduled to face Rock the next year with him and Steph vs Rock and Rousey. So a win for him, who hadn't one much as of late isn't crazy.

Taker said that he didn't think the match could live up to the hype and should've happened sooner and that he never even spoke to Sting. Add in his last match he got a concussion against Brock, his confidence being low isn't crazy. 

But because of people's personalized hatred for the McMahon's and HHH the only possibility is that it was done to personally make them mad


----------



## My_Melody (Feb 4, 2020)

RapShepard said:


> Sting isn't supernatural though either so I don't know what all of that is about. But unless people wanted Sting running through the roster and becoming champion then the upsetness about his WWE run is silly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Completely disregarding that sting is known to be a good guy and taker a bit of a dick. It is quite easy to tell from those quotes what the truth is.

We should have done it when you were in a different company,

well I’m here now let’s do it.

no

The Undertaker is a WWE/Vince ho


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

My_Melody said:


> Completely disregarding that sting is known to be a good guy and taker a bit of a dick. It is quite easy to tell from those quotes what the truth is.
> 
> We should have done it when you were in a different company,
> 
> ...


You mean the same Sting that was supposed to come in for 27 then flaked? And what is Sting a ho for anybody that'll pay the price?


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> But because of people's personalized hatred for the McMahon's and HHH the only possibility is that it was done to personally make them mad


I think that's largely it - but to be fair it does play into the narrative of Vince getting his oneupmanship, considering HHH's position.

I just thinks it's a shame is all. Should've happened in the early/mid 2000's ideally too. If I were Vince I'd have been doing everything to make it happen, then or later on. Who knows for sure about the backstage stuff - but it's just one of those things that will go down in (wrestling) history as a major missed opportunity regardless of who we blame for it.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I think that's largely it - but to be fair it does play into the narrative of Vince getting his oneupmanship, considering HHH's position.
> 
> I just thinks it's a shame is all. Should've happened in the early/mid 2000's ideally too. If I were Vince I'd have been doing everything to make it happen, then or later on. Who knows for sure about the backstage stuff - but it's just one of those things that will go down in (wrestling) history as a major missed opportunity - regardless of who we blame for it.


It definitely is a big what if for sure and certainly should've happened closer to when WCW originally closed.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

TheGreatBanana said:


> You can never be nice in wrestling, you have to look out for yourself. If Sting was protective of his image, he should’ve put the criteria that he wins his first match. Sting is such a monumental figure in wrestling that he can get away with making demands.
> 
> Sting only joined WWE because he wanted a match with Undertaker. That is something he has always wanted. WWE didn’t deliver that and it’s his fault for not pressuring WWE for not doing it. In wrestling you have to strike when the iron is hot, you can’t delay things at all. It’s one sport where you have to live in the moment. You can get into the habit of taking the future for granted and think everything’s going to be ok. It wasn’t ok and he got injured later on. Circumstances change all the time, nothing can ever be planned which why gotta do things immediately.
> 
> He should’ve demanded Taker as his first match, instead we get a crappy program with Triple Ego.



You cant be nice in business in general. Business dont become successful or people dont get ahead by being a push over and letting everyone else have say. Business are built around making strong decisions and having strong choices about people that work for you. That being said you can be a nice person but you still have to make real choices that in reality will not be positive for everyone. You always have moving parts coming and going.Even great talent in business get let go for different reasons. 

So its funny AEW is in the honeymoon stage when everyones saying how happy go lucky it is. A positive envierment is absolutely important but they cant just let everyone do whatever or lack of doing and people not getting over need to be let go sooner or later.

Sorry randomly got into my ramble lol


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> No your premise is just bad and you can't stop it from being picked apart. Implying that you can build a Sting vs Taker feud without including WCW vs WWE is absurd. Then when pushed to explain how there characters are so similar that that's the story you deflected. You're the one talking about "oh they both have dark past" but can't explain what's so dark about Sting's past.
> 
> you're suggesting a 50 year old Taker who hadn't wrestled in a year and a 55 year old Sting who hadn't wrestled in a year also would've had a match go as smooth as a 29 and 49 year old.
> 
> ...


No mate, you still don't get it. 

1- How about how many times Sting's been betrayed? To pretend Taker and Sting's character can't be worked because they're dark and similar is ridiculous, you're the one reaching now. You can see the discussions of the net in the 2000s round it. 

2- Lol. Yeah they would have, Sting and Taker both could have worked around each-other's limitations, and you thinking it matters (the quality of the match) says a lot about where you are with this whole thing of Sting/HHH 

3- No. I judge based on a scale. I judge someone who lies 10 times a day more than someone who lies every once in a while. You need to get a good look in the mirror if for you there's only black and white. Start seeing things for what they really are, notice the pattern and the gravity and the absrud in your face shit. I feel really sorry for people who can't tell someone who is clearly on the bad end of humanity. 

4- Of course it would be brought up.. they just wouldn't be released 4 months later xD lmao Excusing the scum again


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Imagine still defending Vince as anything more than scum in 2020.

What a time to be alive.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> No mate, you still don't get it.
> 
> 1- How about how many times Sting's been betrayed? To pretend Taker and Sting's character can't be worked because they're dark and similar is ridiculous, you're the one reaching now. You can see the discussions of the net in the 2000s round it.


No, you just are throwing out random words that are easily disproven. He's a loner, but always has friends and attaches himself to people. He's dark, but does nothing dark. 

I'm not saying they couldn't have worked a match. But if you're going to suggest throwing out the WCW vs WWE aspect which was the main drawing point, then your proposed character similarities need to be stronger than what they are. 



> 2- Lol. Yeah they would have, Sting and Taker both could have worked around each-other's limitations, and you thinking it matters (the quality of the match) says a lot about where you are with this whole thing of Sting/HHH


You're the one that's upset that you 50 year old Taker didn't want to work 55 year old Taker. He didn't think the match could live up and Sting didn't think he was interest. I'm going to take their word as you know they were kind of there. 



> 3- No. I judge based on a scale. I judge someone who lies 10 times a day more than someone who lies every once in a while. You need to get a good look in the mirror if for you there's only black and white. Start seeing things for what they really are, notice the pattern and the gravity and the absrud in your face shit. I feel really sorry for people who can't tell someone who is clearly on the bad end of humanity.


No, you judge on who you like as a wrestler. You're okay with political power being abused at work as long as you like the beneficiary. Which is fine, because that's how everybody operates. Just don't have a fake moral high ground. 

You talk about having perspective and scale, but read what you just wrote. We live in a world with murderers, rapist, abusers, hard drug dealers, and political tyrants. But somehow cheating on your girlfriend 20 years ago and engaging in work politics is on the bad end of humanity for you. It's hard to believe some of y'all have even been outside with how y'all take things in 



> 4- Of course it would be brought up.. they just wouldn't be released 4 months later xD lmao Excusing the scum again


I mean when the only fingers being pointed go to Heyman, maybe you should be upset with him


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Are you seriously suggesting Crow Sting wasn’t a dark, march to the beat of his own drum character!?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Are you seriously suggesting Crow Sting wasn’t a dark, march to the beat of his own drum character!?


I'm going to continue to wait for one of you to name the actual dark shit he did, especially compared to who he's being compared to. Undertaker has tried to sacrifice people, has successfully brainwashed people, ran a cult, kidnapped multiple people, tried to commit murder, and thought of himself as a friend of satan. 

Meanwhile the dark things Sting has done are? Moping in the rafters and painting his face.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> I'm going to continue to wait for one of you to name the actual dark shit he did, especially compared to who he's being compared to. Undertaker has tried to sacrifice people, has successfully brainwashed people, ran a cult, kidnapped multiple people, tried to commit murder, and thought of himself as a friend of satan.
> 
> Meanwhile the dark things Sting has done are? Moping in the rafters and painting his face.


You do realize “dark” doesn’t mean “heel”, right?

No wonder your takes are always met with such contention.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> You do realize “dark” doesn’t mean “heel”, right?
> 
> No wonder your takes are always met with such contention.


You do realize Taker did some of these things as a face right?

And again you've yet to name what dark things Sting has done. Is he dark because he does dark things or dark because he pouts and wear black. Neither of you seem to have an actual answer for a simple answer and are deflecting.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Sting is just bubbly fucking rainbows huh, @RapShepard !?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Sting is just bubbly fucking rainbows huh, @RapShepard !?


So you don't have any examples of Sting actually doing things? Just the fact he wears black lol. It's hilarious you can be really detailed when it's Cody. But Sting you suddenly have nothing but deflections


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

TheGreatBanana said:


> You can never be nice in wrestling, you have to look out for yourself. If Sting was protective of his image, he should’ve put the criteria that he wins his first match. Sting is such a monumental figure in wrestling that he can get away with making demands.
> 
> Sting only joined WWE because he wanted a match with Undertaker. That is something he has always wanted. WWE didn’t deliver that and it’s his fault for not pressuring WWE for not doing it. In wrestling you have to strike when the iron is hot, you can’t delay things at all. It’s one sport where you have to live in the moment. You can get into the habit of taking the future for granted and think everything’s going to be ok. It wasn’t ok and he got injured later on. Circumstances change all the time, nothing can ever be planned which why gotta do things immediately.
> 
> He should’ve demanded Taker as his first match, instead we get a crappy program with Triple Ego.


That's a good take on it. He doesn't come across as an ego type guy but I'm guessing to he fair to wwe they were maybe planning on him and taker after the rollins. Both sides though could have demanded the match the first year he was in. In interviews sting has always wanted the match but iv not seen an undertaker interview where bee seemed keen.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Hot take: Sting vs. Taker would have sucked even with both men in their primes. Sting’s best work is when he got in there with a heel who could lead — Flair, Vader, etc. Taker always worked to the level of his opponents. They would have ended up very lost very fast.

Some matches are way better in your head.

Sting vs. Triple H is a fine match. Trips loves to cosplay Ric Flair and works best as a heel, which at least plays to what Sting can do well. The issue with it is that Triple H isn't as good as Triple H thinks he is. It was always going to hit a ceiling. But there is enough potential for imagery and story there. The Ric Flair connection. Sting with his baseball bat and Trips with his sledgehammer. The Kliq being allies of Triple H and having a history against Sting. The potential story is there and was tailor-made for Sting to overcome Trips. The story they chose to tell was dogshit awful though. Sting saying "This isn't about WCW" only for it to all be about WCW. Yuck.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> So you don't have any examples of Sting actually doing things? Just the fact he wears black lol. It's hilarious you can be really detailed when it's Cody. But Sting you suddenly have nothing but deflections


You don’t have to do evil shit to be a “dark” character, man. You really don’t fucking understand storytelling, character or any of this shit. Sting is a dark character in that his character’s history has gone through things that changed him, left him scarred.

But I get it. You refuse to give any credence to anything that isn’t WWE. I’m done speaking with you about it. You want to play stupid, twisting words, disagreeing with a 2 and a half decades old industry-accepted fact that Crow Sting was, in fact, a dark character, then you do you, buddy.

I won’t waste my time with someone arguing to be cool and different. I have better things to do with my time.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

I can see both sides in the Sting debate. I can see why you would obviously see him as dark, but if you wanted to split hairs, it's also possible to see how someone would look at him as Surfer Sting in black gear to match the times but didn't really change that much. Especially when he clearly entered his "I don't give a fuck anymore" stage.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> I can see both sides in the Sting debate. I can see why you would obviously see him as dark, but if you wanted to split hairs, it's also possible to see how someone would look at him as Surfer Sting in black gear to match the times but didn't really change that much. Especially when he clearly entered his "I don't give a fuck anymore" stage.


So, his character didn’t change. He merely changed his colors. Still running around high-fiving everyone, smiles, John Cena’s inspiration...only in darker colors.

Uh huh. Okay.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

bdon said:


> So, his character didn’t change. He merely changed his colors. Still running around high-fiving everyone, smiles, John Cena’s inspiration...only in darker colors.
> 
> Uh huh. Okay.


Yeah, I can see how people would think that. I'd lean towards it being a "change," but you also had Sting in the Wolfpac and yelling "WOOO!" all the time. I really think it depends when you really started looking at Sting, or how much you bought into him. If you were right into it, you're more likely to look at how he presented himself as something to the core. If you didn't give a flying fuck, he's just a dude in face-paint.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

Are we seeing a problem caused by smarkism here? As in, we all wanted to see Taker v Sting when we were young but we've gotten older and smarter to the point where we don't want to see it anymore because the characters aren't quite perfectly suited? 

I wonder if we're just overthinking it...


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> You don’t have to do evil shit to be a “dark” character, man. You really don’t fucking understand storytelling, character or any of this shit. Sting is a dark character in that his character’s history has gone through things that changed him, left him scarred.
> 
> But I get it. You refuse to give any credence to anything that isn’t WWE. I’m done speaking with you about it. You want to play stupid, twisting words, disagreeing with a 2 and a half decades old industry-accepted fact that Crow Sting was, in fact, a dark character, then you do you, buddy.
> 
> I won’t waste my time with someone arguing to be cool and different. I have better things to do with my time.


So the dark thing that happened to him is people thought he joined the nWo? So I guess when Test turned heel because he didn't like the fact he was accused of being the Alliance mole he became a dark character. I guess when Matt turned on Jeff because he was WWE champion, he became a dark character. 


Let's be honest y'all aren't good with definitions that's all this is. These explanations of him being dark get funnier and funnier the more y'all try to explain why he's so dark lol. You were asked to explain you're stance and now you're throwing a hissy fit because you know it sounds ridiculous when you actually analyze as an adult and not a child who thinks "oh he's sitting in a dark corner spooky".


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

@RapShepard you are most patient person on this forum. Just reading back the abuse you received for what are well thought out posts.

I had to laugh at one guy saying Sting was in good shape at 56. Here he is in TNA two years earlier wrestling in a t-shirt unable to perform scorpion deathlock.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Wood said:


> I can see both sides in the Sting debate. I can see why you would obviously see him as dark, but if you wanted to split hairs, it's also possible to see how someone would look at him as Surfer Sting in black gear to match the times but didn't really change that much. Especially when he clearly entered his "I don't give a fuck anymore" stage.


I simply want somebody to explain what's so dark about him without using the most shallow examples. Post 2006 Cena sometimes cussed and did mean things to heels unprovoked. Nobody would ever use those blue moon examples to say he was an edgy badass face that took no prisoners though. Same thing with Sting if the extend of him being dark is he pouted in the rafters. Then maybe focusing on him being dark as a reason to fight The Undertaker more than the roles in WCW and WWE isn't thought out enough. 



Pentagon Senior said:


> Are we seeing a problem caused by smarkism here? As in, we all wanted to see Taker v Sting when we were young but we've gotten older and smarter to the point where we don't want to see it anymore because the characters aren't quite perfectly suited?
> 
> I wonder if we're just overthinking it...


I'm simply challenging people who say the character is similar to actually prove it. 

I'd have definitely took the match at Mania 27 for sure. But if come Mania 32 one wasn't up to it then whatever.



validreasoning said:


> @RapShepard you are most patient person on this forum. Just reading back the abuse you received for what are well thought out posts.
> 
> I had to laugh at one guy saying Sting was in good shape at 56. Here he is in TNA two years earlier wrestling in a t-shirt unable to perform scorpion deathlock.


This is light my friends and family speak way worse just in general playful conversation lol. This is clearly just folk who are passionate about their side, but don't have a real rebuttal.

Oh yeah Sting was in a shirt the last few years lol


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Double post


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> Yeah, I can see how people would think that. I'd lean towards it being a "change," but you also had Sting in the Wolfpac and yelling "WOOO!" all the time. I really think it depends when you really started looking at Sting, or how much you bought into him. If you were right into it, you're more likely to look at how he presented himself as something to the core. If you didn't give a flying fuck, he's just a dude in face-paint.


Wolfpack Sting lasted, what, a few months? I’m going fully on memory on that one. 

The discussion at hand is specifically about MNW and The Crow Sting. The one who EVERYONE as far back as a goddamn 1998 issue of PWI (I had the issue, dreamt of wrestling Taker. 

Rap’s argument sounds like one coming from lifelong WWE’er fan who has not ever watched anything else, certainly not Sting, yet speaks like he knows the character so well. 

Crow Sting is not bubbly. He is nothing like Wolfpack Sting clapping fans hands and “Too sweet”-ing them.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Dark does not equal evil!!!


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Wolfpack Sting lasted, what, a few months? I’m going fully on memory on that one.
> 
> The discussion at hand is specifically about MNW and The Crow Sting. The one who EVERYONE as far back as a goddamn 1998 issue of PWI (I had the issue, dreamt of wrestling Taker.
> 
> ...





bdon said:


> Dark does not equal evil!!!


Again stop being salty because you want to call Sting dark and can't actually point to dark things he did or about. I mean besides "he wears black and moped when WCW questioned him". Again I'll keep waiting for something of actual substance to earn that dark moniker. By your logic "I'll do anything to face Taker at Mania again" HBK was a dark character.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> Again stop being salty because you want to call Sting dark and can't actually point to dark things he did or about. I mean besides "he wears black and moped when WCW questioned him". Again I'll keep waiting for something of actual substance to earn that dark moniker. By your logic "I'll do anything to face Taker at Mania again" HBK was a dark character.


Did HBK’s entire fucking personality change!?


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> Again stop being salty because you want to call Sting dark and can't actually point to dark things he did or about. I mean besides "he wears black and moped when WCW questioned him". Again I'll keep waiting for something of actual substance to earn that dark moniker. By your logic "I'll do anything to face Taker at Mania again" HBK was a dark character.


Go ahead. Say what you want to say. “He was still Surfer Sting with different colors.”

Say it with your chest if you’re going to say it.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

validreasoning said:


> @RapShepard you are most patient person on this forum. Just reading back the abuse you received for what are well thought out posts.
> 
> I had to laugh at one guy saying Sting was in good shape at 56. Here he is in TNA two years earlier wrestling in a t-shirt unable to perform scorpion deathlock.


I could give you a flair undertaker hogan or jericho shit show package in their latter years. Bear in mind matt Morgan is a piece of shit in the ring like a walking corpse.

Sting was in great shape for the HHH match at 56 or were you watching something else? Taker is 55 now and can hardly walk and has been gassed for at least 5 years or more. Hogan needs a wheelchair now and has been barely able to stand up for the last 20 years. Jericho is only just 50 and looks like trash gets blown up in 5 mins.

Im not in favour of him working matches at 61 but his conditioning has alway been top rate for his age that can't be denied.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Did HBK’s entire fucking personality change!?


I mean HBK went from the confident pompous HBK to a desperate begging man to the post he was willing to help Jericho who punched his wife in the eye a world title. Your Sting standards he was super dark.


bdon said:


> Go ahead. Say what you want to say. “He was still Surfer Sting with different colors.”
> 
> Say it with your chest if you’re going to say it.


He can not be Surfer Sting and still not be dark lol. You have a lot to say when you want to defend your arguments on why Cody is trash as a wrestler, executive, and person. You can articulate and give examples on that got days. 

But now that you're being asked to defend your stance on Sting being dark. Suddenly you have nothing of substance to say. Not being sunshine and rainbows doesn't equal dark. A character change in itself doesn't equal dark. 

So again what are some things of substance that made Sting dark? No wearing black and moping about WCW questioning him doesn't count as him being dark.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Goddamn, you fucking tell me what defines “dark” for you, so I can find exactly what fucking loopholes one must leap through to appease you, Rap.

Sting didn’t speak for 18 months, was a lost soul, vignettes walking in rain and thunder and lightning, control of the lighting when it wasn’t fucking done to death by everyone in a squared circle, the mind games that had Hogan acting like he’d seen a legitimate ghost, THE GODDAMN FACIAL EXPRESSIONS, etc.

But no. Nothing is going to appease your ass, because you’re on one of your “I’m bored, so I’m going to be distinctly contrarian just for fun” bullshit.

So, you tell me. What made Undertaker dark?Don’t say that a fake attempted sacrifice makes one dark. That makes a character “evil” or a heel. “It doesn’t make them dark.”

Goddamn 34 years as Surfer Sting. I’m impressed, Steve Borden!!


----------



## Klitschko (May 24, 2020)

I am loving the last few pages of this thread.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Goddamn, you fucking tell me what defines “dark” for you, so I can find exactly what fucking loopholes one must leap through to appease you, Rap.
> 
> *Sting didn’t speak for 18 months, was a lost soul, vignettes walking in rain and thunder and lightning, control of the lighting when it wasn’t fucking done to death by everyone in a squared circle, the mind games that had Hogan acting like he’d seen a legitimate ghost, THE GODDAMN FACIAL EXPRESSIONS, etc.*
> 
> ...


When I think of dark I think of someone actually dark like Raven. Raven at his best is a paranoid conspiracy theorist who is willing to endure pain to take out his enemies. That's just face Raven not even doing insane evil shit. 

When I hear Sting is dark it doesn't add up to stuff like that. Walking in the rain is so shallow on the dark scale. As I said earlier it's just as much of a reach as saying Austin was a comedic figure because he swam in beard or occasionally make a joke out of Vince. 

Stings aesthetic maybe dark, but as a character he himself isn't dark. If you're saying dark isn't necessarily evil which is true, but same token black isn't necessarily dark either. I mean replies in and still the best is well he walked in the rain. Like christ 

As far as Undertaker I mean he's an undead zombie wizard, he's lead a cult, he's friends with satan, his powers are connected to an urn. Kayfabe background of dead parents and was raised by the weird fat mortician who had an affair with his mom. Has a rocky relationship with brother and said fat mortician. At his best his niceness extends to wouldn't hit a girl. Somehow has the power to resurrect himself. Was super into speaking in tongues. Has a secret dungeon. 

Taker is a dark character with a troubled history. Sting is a good guy who went goth for a bit over a bad break up, got better, but kept the clothes because cool.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Problem solved. Simple as that.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> No, you just are throwing out random words that are easily disproven. He's a loner, but always has friends and attaches himself to people. He's dark, but does nothing dark.
> 
> I'm not saying they couldn't have worked a match. But if you're going to suggest throwing out the WCW vs WWE aspect which was the main drawing point, then your proposed character similarities need to be stronger than what they are.
> 
> ...



1- Dude, you're in minority who think Sting wasn't dark. This isn't something I'm breaking news with. Are you telling me now a simple staredown and match between Sting/Taker wouldn't have been more anticipated than ALL the build up of HHH/Sting.

2- No, Because Taker is clearly lying, Vince probably told him to say that because he didn't want to do the match just to screw Sting. Otherwise, I can clearly see how both Taker and Sting were moving at WM vs HHH and Bray, and their body movement was fine. 

3- No, fuck that lol. Have you seen me post on the bucks? I am not a fan.
But wtf are you talking about. There is a difference between "hiring your friends" to do a low-something job in a company that wouldn't exist without you, VS hiring your friends and giving them a high paying position.

If I owned a company, I would hire friends in need to do some assistant job.. sure...but I wouldn't hire them to be head of marketing. Now, still, it is still my company, and If I wanted to I could have, but, then I look at Triple H, who is only the guy who sucked the right dick and fucked the right pussy. 
AEW wouldn't exist without The Bucks (WWE would without HHH), they can hire Brandon and QT to do some irrelevant stuff nobody cares about. The Bucks aren't using their backstage power to sabotage other people's momentum or leech off them, they aren't trying to make backstage a toxic environment, they certainly haven't abused their powers. 
Triple H sucked the momentum out of other's peoples pushes, taking money away from them, and using his power to undermine them. Someone who does that consistently for 20+ years is not a good person. You can complain about your Bucks nd Cody all you want, they're not 1/10th as bad or abused their power as nearly as bad HHH, while they have a higher claim to it even considering the fucking company woudn't exist it without them, So that tells you a lot.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> 1- Dude, you're in minority who think Sting wasn't dark. This isn't something I'm breaking news with. Are you telling me now a simple staredown and match between Sting/Taker wouldn't have been more anticipated than ALL the build up of HHH/Sting.


And y'all not knowing what a Dark is isn't my problem. Staredown gets over sure no doubt, bjt if Taker doesn't think the match would live up to expectations then you get no match. 



> 2- No, Because Taker is clearly lying, Vince probably told him to say that because he didn't want to do the match just to screw Sting. Otherwise, I can clearly see how both Taker and Sting were moving at WM vs HHH and Bray, and their body movement was fine.


You only believe this because as I said before you have a weird personalized vendetta against the McMahons. All actual evidence points to you being wrong. But hey you need too hate Vince and HHH because grrr.



> 3- No, fuck that lol. Have you seen me post on the bucks? I am not a fan.
> But wtf are you talking about. There is a difference between "hiring your friends" to do a low-something job in a company that wouldn't exist without you, VS hiring your friends and giving them a high paying position.
> 
> If I owned a company, I would hire friends in need to do some assistant job.. sure...but I wouldn't hire them to be head of marketing. Now, still, it is still my company, and If I wanted to I could have, but, then I look at Triple H, who is only the guy who sucked the right dick and fucked the right pussy.
> ...


Again you're picking and choosing when it's okay to wield power and not. QT formats the show, but hey that doesn't count. As far as not holding people down, well let's look at a few things in over a year of TV.

Why during Moxley's reign did Cody constantly get more TV time?

Why did The Bucks feud with PnP overshadow what the initial tag team champions SCU were doing for the title?

Why were 2 singles guys in the Elite allowed to dominate the tag division of actual tag teams for 8 months?

Why did Cody immediately need to get his win back over Brodie Lee? 

Why did Cody put MJF over only for him to be the only for MJF to become directionless. Meanwhile Cody got to fight for the brand new TNT title against Vance Archer, who's managed by Jake Roberts, and the title is presented by Mike Tyson?

I'm not even saying the Elite shouldn't be involved in great things. I'm just saying their shit takes a lot of precedence even to the point that their friend Adam Cole's girlfriend has got more character build and actual stories than the 3 women's champions they've had. But hey they're not you know holding anybody down. 

And don't forget it's still early in the company's life, you've been around long enough to know, eventually the dirt comes out. It happened with ROH, happened with TNA, and it happened with LU.


----------



## zaz102 (Jul 26, 2011)

RapShepard said:


> And y'all not knowing what a Dark is isn't my problem. Staredown gets over sure no doubt, bjt if Taker doesn't think the match would live up to expectations then you get no match.
> 
> 
> You only believe this because as I said before you have a weird personalized vendetta against the McMahons. All actual evidence points to you being wrong. But hey you need too hate Vince and HHH because grrr.
> ...


Yeah, Sting definitely had a darkness to him. He was pretty much a PG copy of the movie The Crow.

I don't follow all the stories on HHH, but IMO he seems like a great person to take over from Vince. Nobody on top is going to be perfect, but he seems like he knows his shit and is motivated to help WWE.

The only stories I thought were bad were from STWW, Pritchard saying HHH didn't see it in Jericho, RVD, and CM Punk. Hopefully he learned from his mistakes, because it was pretty easy to see how talented those three were.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## CenaBoy4Life (Jul 31, 2013)

Sting should be grateful for the paycheck. The clown sat in TNA doing nothing stealing a million a year from panda.

Sting at his best was a average talent carried by flair. No memorable matches. Just moments which were excellently produced by WCW and Bischoff. Crow Sting...A stolen gimmick from a movie nobody remembers was his ceiling and peak.

Now hes milking another dumbass Mark Tony just like Dixie so he can probably buy his kids a another house.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

lol at people arguing whos on the dark side or the bright side. the force is weak with all of you.


ps wcw 96-98 that is mysterious dark. there is various forms of dark and if you downplay different forms of dark than you're putting yourself in a box.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

CenaBoy4Life said:


> Sting should be grateful for the paycheck. The clown sat in TNA doing nothing stealing a million a year from panda.
> 
> Sting at his best was a average talent carried by flair. No memorable matches. Just moments which were excellently produced by WCW and Bischoff. Crow Sting...A stolen gimmick from a movie nobody remembers was his ceiling and peak.
> 
> Now hes milking another dumbass Mark Tony just like Dixie so he can probably buy his kids a another house.


 TNA didnt pay him at all. he was paid out by spike tv and did what he was told in tna


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

zaz102 said:


> Yeah, Sting definitely had a darkness to him. He was pretty much a PG copy of the movie The Crow.
> 
> I don't follow all the stories on HHH, but IMO he seems like a great person to take over from Vince. Nobody on top is going to be perfect, but he seems like he knows his shit and is motivated to help WWE.
> 
> ...


It's just the older I get that claim on Sting makes less and less sense. Cool character though. 

As far as HHH I'm sure he did advocate for himself to get shit over others. But if you've played sports or had a job with promotions, that's not uncommon. So it's hard to take it personal for me. I don't get upset when I hear this NBA players is asking or pouting for more playing time. So wrestlers doing it doesn't bother me either.


----------



## Klitschko (May 24, 2020)

CenaBoy4Life said:


> Sting should be grateful for the paycheck. The clown sat in TNA doing nothing stealing a million a year from panda.
> 
> Sting at his best was a average talent carried by flair. No memorable matches. Just moments which were excellently produced by WCW and Bischoff. Crow Sting...A stolen gimmick from a movie nobody remembers was his ceiling and peak.
> 
> Now hes milking another dumbass Mark Tony just like Dixie so he can probably buy his kids a another house.


You are literally wrong on every single thing you said in this post. Like, its kind of amazing how wrong you are.


----------



## Wolf Mark (Jun 5, 2020)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Cornette mentioned this in his review. "They've signed him to a multi year deal? To do what? He can't wrestle, he can't be a manager, he doesn't fit as a commissioner, he wouldn't make a good announcer".
> 
> I would've hired him on a 6 month contract or not at all tbh. Give him a long drawn out story line, let him be an enforcer for a big title match and then have him ride off into the sunset.


I like some of things Cornette say cause of his experience in the biz but sometime he seems to be caught in the way he always did things so much that he doesn't see how things could be done differrently and for someone of his experience not getting what Sting could bring is mind-boggling. It doesn't even take much of an imagination to find something useful for him to do cause he is so cinematic in a World where characters matters a lot.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Guys, it’s really an argument over semantics at this point. It’s over the definition of dark. If you want Sting to be dark, you can project that onto him. And if you interpret him as the true light babyface, you can do that too.

Either way, he didn’t really draw.


----------



## Qudhufo (Jun 25, 2019)




----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> Guys, it’s really an argument over semantics at this point. It’s over the definition of dark. If you want Sting to be dark, you can project that onto him. And if you interpret him as the true light babyface, you can do that too.
> 
> Either way, he didn’t really draw.


Who says? What “facts” do you use to define who draws?

This should be good.


----------



## Greatsthegreats (Apr 15, 2015)

Chris22 said:


> Why did Sting not join WWF whenever they took over WCW? Pride? He apparently let his contract expire and then messed about in inferior companies until 2014. What did he think was gonna happen when he eventually went to WWE? He has himself to blame. I get that he maybe wanted to help TNA and that's admirable but still....


*where the hell do i begin with this glue huffing bullshit?*

1. Sting didn't join because Rock stupidly asked who Booker t is, Sting predicted that WCW was going to get trashed in the alliance angle

2. those "inferior companies" had more reason to exist and were head and shoulders above WWE because they weren't the monopoly holding, history erasing, insipid trend chasing political, disrespectful company that still exists to this day as if there was any justice in it

3. Every person on the planet had reason to believe that an important part of wrestling history was going to finally get his due when he was no longer welcome in those "inferior companies" (2009)

4. "What did you expect" is no excuse to charge full price for a sub par output of quality and for pushing product over significance

5. "First rule of leadership, everything is your fault"

6. It's all the more reason to boycott WWE forever

7. You and the six other boot lickers that liked this baseless propaganda made the list. (Ignored).


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

And I’m not even going to disagree with the notion as I don’t care who draws. Austin draws, because a lot of brain dead people came out in droves to watch an employee kick his boss’s ass without disciplinary action.

HBK wasn’t much of a draw either. Not having a lot of talent around you during your golden years will earn one’s ability to make money.

I only asked for your “proof”, because I know where you get that info.


----------



## Wolf Mark (Jun 5, 2020)

The Wood said:


> Guys, it’s really an argument over semantics at this point. It’s over the definition of dark. If you want Sting to be dark, you can project that onto him. And if you interpret him as the true light babyface, you can do that too.
> 
> Either way, he didn’t really draw.


Literally the first day he joined TNA was the first time Impact got 1 million in ratings. And this is just TNA and one televised TNA show. If we go back in time and look at all the Monday Nitros, I'm betting the ratings went up when he was on TV. Not to mention all the good PPV buyrates. Starrcade 1997 was based on the build up of Sting vs Hogan, esp. Sting and it's the biggest number WCW ever had.


----------



## tower_ (Nov 19, 2020)

Cannot believe I've had to read multiple people cite the Memeltzer opinion that Sting didnt draw just because he didnt like him. The man is truly poisonous to the business. Ah well, his opinions will do a 180 now that Sting's on the AEW payroll


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> And y'all not knowing what a Dark is isn't my problem. Staredown gets over sure no doubt, bjt if Taker doesn't think the match would live up to expectations then you get no match.
> 
> 
> You only believe this because as I said before you have a weird personalized vendetta against the McMahons. All actual evidence points to you being wrong. But hey you need too hate Vince and HHH because grrr.
> ...


1- No, you are stretching a definition of Dark. Making it way more complicated to prove a point

2- No, I have 30+ years of history and patterns of them going back on their words, lying, deceiving, and people like you justifying everything with "just business", when it is more about taking a shit on Sting and WCW. Even if Taker match happened, you think fans would be okay with DX/NWO interfering, Sting losing like that and then shaking hands of Taker, it would have got backlash either-way, people just wanted 1 godamn spectacle match that was easy to deliver. But nah, of course this over-booked crapfest would only happen with the biggest piece of shit there is, HHH. He was able to fool Sting, just like he was able to fool many others.

3- No, I am not. You're reaching now,

Bucks are bigger stars than SCU, PnP were part of IC, SCU were given the title to give them credibility as they are on the older stars, so veteran status with credibility that lose to stars.

Cody didn't constantly get more TV time than Moxley.

You're acting as if MJF was really directionless for months, It is quite simple that MJF was going to challenge for the world title at All Out so no plans for him with TNT title so soon, there was also pandemic going on that limited his appearance for a few shows, yet he still got a PPV match with Jungle Boy. Jeesh, you of all people thinking this is what someone being directionless is booked.

I just don't see The Bucks, Cody, and co coming in and stomping someone's momentum when they get hot (OC), I see The Bucks have less than 5min segments at least twice in a month when they are some of the biggest stars in the company.

Of course you'll have a couple of stories that you will largely exaggerate to prove things are similar, but Triple H is the guy who stomps on others momentum consistently, in the main event, and buries them into oblivion. He has 20+ year history of doing it because he's an insecure cunt who's afraid of for his spot/ego. When Bucks and Cody are doing anything similar, you'll hear complaints, but so far, where are their 20min long promos? long title reigns and repetitive crap? where are they inserting themselves into anything that is over to kill its momentum?


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Wolf Mark said:


> I like some of things Cornette say cause of his experience in the biz but sometime he seems to be caught in the way he always did things so much that he doesn't see how things could be done differrently and for someone of his experience not getting what Sting could bring is mind-boggling. It doesn't even take much of an imagination to find something useful for him to do cause he is so cinematic in a World where characters matters a lot.


Yeah I listened to his take and he very reluctantly only half shit on stings entrance last week. Meanwhile in the real world most wrestling fans bloody loved it. His main point was why did the heels scatter so quick and why did sting just walk around then leave. I mean come on Jim this is sting if there were 100 heels they would leave the ring! And he completely missed the symbolism and artistic nature of the entrance. He also questioned what sting will be doing in aew and to that I would stay tuned and you'll find out! It really pains him to be in any way positive about AEW.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> 1- No, you are stretching a definition of Dark. Making it way more complicated to prove a point


Nah y'all are just being really loose with dark, he pouted in the rain. So dark. 



> 2- No, I have 30+ years of history and patterns of them going back on their words, lying, deceiving, and people like you justifying everything with "just business", when it is more about taking a shit on Sting and WCW. Even if Taker match happened, you think fans would be okay with DX/NWO interfering, Sting losing like that and then shaking hands of Taker, it would have got backlash either-way, people just wanted 1 godamn spectacle match that was easy to deliver. But nah, of course this over-booked crapfest would only happen with the biggest piece of shit there is, HHH. He was able to fool Sting, just like he was able to fool many others.


Again when even the person you declared to be wronged is saying Taker didn't seem interested, maybe you should put your hate boner aside and accept reality. 



> 3- No, I am not. You're reaching now,
> 
> Bucks are bigger stars than SCU, PnP were part of IC, SCU were given the title to give them credibility as they are on the older stars, so veteran status with credibility that lose to stars.


How much credibility can they get if they're champs, but The Bucks get the real focus. We see how much that "oh you get the belt, but are real focus is on Brit" has helped the women's division



> Cody didn't constantly get more TV time than Moxley.


Yeah Cody was just getting in ring promos, vignettes, and lengthy open challenge matches compared to Moxley's 2 minute off location promos and rare TV matches, but tell me more about how their time was similar.



> You're acting as if MJF was really directionless for months, It is quite simple that MJF was going to challenge for the world title at All Out so no plans for him with TNT title so soon, there was also pandemic going on that limited his appearance for a few shows, yet he still got a PPV match with Jungle Boy. Jeesh, you of all people thinking this is what someone being directionless is booked.


So he beats Cody does nothing for weeks, gets a last minute PPV feud with a low card tag guy what would you call that state if it happened to somebody coming off a HHH feud? Especially if HHH was in the middle of a storyline despite losing to said guy. 

Also you can't play the pandemic card here, somehow Cody got a storyline a shiny new belt in the pandemic, so no excuses.



> I just don't see The Bucks, Cody, and co coming in and stomping someone's momentum when they get hot (OC), I see The Bucks have less than 5min segments at least twice in a month when they are some of the biggest stars in the company.


 you mean like how OC beat Jericho only for him to fail 3 times to win the TNT title, 2 of those times at the hands of Cody. You can claim well OC got that visual pin over him and Cody cheated in the rematch. I'd counter with "lyeah plenty of people got visual pins over HHH and got cheated by him. Y'all call them buried, so which is it?



> Of course you'll have a couple of stories that you will largely exaggerate to prove things are similar, but Triple H is the guy who stomps on others momentum consistently, in the main event, and buries them into oblivion.


Who has he actually buried into oblivion? Who did he Zack Ryder? Who did he Billy Gunn? Let's be honest here you're exaggerating because you've dedicated a significant portion of your life having this comically one sided hatred of him because hardcore fans tell you, you should. 

Who did he bury into oblivion RVD, Booker T, or Kane do you really want to make a serious argument they were buried into oblivion? Or would you rather just admit when you were a teenager young adult you got a little too upset because he won a match against them and can't let it go.



> He has 20+ year history of doing it *because he's an insecure cunt who's afraid of for his spot/ego.* When Bucks and Cody are doing anything similar, you'll hear complaints, but so far, where are their 20min long promos? long title reigns and repetitive crap? where are they inserting themselves into anything that is over to kill its momentum?



You mean sort of like how Cody is still salty WWE never seen him as more than a midcarder. So now he needs to be extravagant as fuck by having the biggest entrance, matches filled with hoopla(which I enjoy lol), constant crying voice please support me promos, and need to attach himself to anything that could possibly be hot? I mean for fucks sake people wanted Darby and Sting. They got Darby and Sting, but Cody has to be there too because know that he's Cody Rhodes and he's a big deal. I mean he hijacked Darby vs Team Taz.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

thisissting said:


> Yeah I listened to his take and he very reluctantly only half shit on stings entrance last week. Meanwhile in the real world most wrestling fans bloody loved it. His main point was why did the heels scatter so quick and why did sting just walk around then leave. I mean come on Jim this is sting if there were 100 heels they would leave the ring! And he completely missed the symbolism and artistic nature of the entrance. He also questioned what sting will be doing in aew and to that I would stay tuned and you'll find out! *It really pains him to be in any way positive about AEW.*


It really does. Listened to a few of his segments this week and he comes across like a child when commenting on AEW (didn't listen to his other stuff). Huffing and puffing, screaming, sentences that don't make sense because he's just spitting random words out. He may be a historian and some may find him entertaining (not me) but my god he's clearly biased and childlike in his AEW commetary.

Fun story - listened to a Wrestletalk podcast yest where some of their subscribers were saying they're getting into AEW for the first time through Mox/Omega and Sting. One of them even said they were an avid Cornette listener who hadn't given AEW a chance because of his views - they watched last week's show, loved it and will continue watching!

The Sting entrance was class, the symbolism was cool. If a handful of heels running away from *flippin Sting* annoys you then sheeesh maybe wrestling is not for you lol


----------



## .christopher. (Jan 14, 2014)

thisissting said:


> Yeah I listened to his take and he very reluctantly only half shit on stings entrance last week. Meanwhile in the real world most wrestling fans bloody loved it. His main point was why did the heels scatter so quick and why did sting just walk around then leave. I mean come on Jim this is sting if there were 100 heels they would leave the ring! And he completely missed the symbolism and artistic nature of the entrance. He also questioned what sting will be doing in aew and to that I would stay tuned and you'll find out! It really pains him to be in any way positive about AEW.





Pentagon Senior said:


> It really does. Listened to a few of his segments this week and he comes across like a child when commenting on AEW (didn't listen to his other stuff). Huffing and puffing, screaming, sentences that don't make sense because he's just spitting random words out. He may be a historian and some may find him entertaining (not me) but my god he's clearly biased and childlike in his AEW commetary.
> 
> Fun story - listened to a Wrestletalk podcast yest where some of their subscribers were saying they're getting into AEW for the first time through Mox/Omega and Sting. One of them even said they were an avid Cornette listener who hadn't given AEW a chance because of his views - they watched last week's show, loved it and will continue watching!
> 
> The Sting entrance was class, the symbolism was cool. If a handful of heels running away from *flippin Sting* annoys you then sheeesh maybe wrestling is not for you lol


Cornette has praised AEW a lot of times. Stop talking rubbish just because you don't agree with him.


----------



## Not Lying (Sep 9, 2013)

RapShepard said:


> Nah y'all are just being really loose with dark, he pouted in the rain. So dark.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


1- It was more than that and you know it.

2- Taker is a WWE bitch and if Vince would have asked him for the match he'd have done it, 100%.

3- No. Stop taking the hyperboles as some way to prove a point, maybe not "buried into oblivion" but Did you see the list of wrestlers he ruined and because he ruined them he put a ceiling on much up the card they can go, ergo, how much money they can make? 
His run from 2002-2012 was nothing but him going out of his way at every turn to inject himself in the biggest match, he would beat wrestlers when the story logically should have had the other guy go over, but nah, squash them and ruin how over they are..and you're like.. "yeah, he has the right to do that because he earned his right by fucking the boss's daughter". lol.

Besides the big examples, there's the likes of Carlito, Umaga when he came back from his 2007 injury. 

How about this famous night when he buried 5 people in 5min






There's list of 10+ wrestlers he has buried, ruined their momentum, caused them to be released, and just flat out put them in embarassing segments to inflate his own ego. 

Just because I don't recall everything that happened 10-15+ years ago doesn't mean the motherfucker wasn't constantly killing others people's momentums left and right with Punk in 2011and nd everything he did to him being one of the biggest example of his bitter poor ass.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

.christopher. said:


> Cornette has praised AEW a lot of times. Stop talking rubbish just because you don't agree with him.


I don't know what to say other than I can't take the guy seriously. If you think he's impartial and sensible in his views on AEW that's fine - but my opinion is he reaches for negativity and begrudgingly semi-praises what he can't justify totally shitting on.


----------



## TheGreatBanana (Jul 7, 2012)

@RapShepard Dude wtf are you even on about. Surfer Sting and Crow Sting are completely different. Surfer Sting was the life and energy of WCW, he represented everything good about the company. A valiant warrior.

Then you have Surfer Sting team up with Macho Man to tackle the Outsiders. Hogan appears and betrays the WCW and sides with two former WWF guys. They form the NWO and lay waste to WCW.

Months go by without Sting. He reappears as a dark mysterious character known as Crow Sting. At first no one knew where his allegiance lied because it seemed like he turned his back on WCW, but then it became apparent he was on WCW's side. He became the Batman of WCW and tackled the NWO his own way and used a bat to lay his justice. He went against his former self and became something new. The NWO were Gotham Villians who did whatever they wanted and led WCW to a chaotic path. Sting was the Batman who came to restore order.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

.christopher. said:


> Cornette has praised AEW a lot of times. Stop talking rubbish just because you don't agree with him.


Lol quantify a lot of times. 95% is negative. Only thing I remember full praise for was brandis promo recently and even that was a bit of a dig really as they were making fun of how bad she is normally. Very negative and bitter old man is Jimmy.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I don't know what to say other than I can't take the guy seriously. If you think he's impartial and sensible in his views on AEW that's fine - but my opinion is he reaches for negativity and begrudgingly semi-praises what he can't justify totally shitting on.


Spot on. Hatred gets more hits on YouTube than praise and sells more merch for him.


----------



## Dr. Middy (Jan 21, 2015)

Realistically I don't mind Triple H beating him in that match given that if there was always going to be a WWE/WCW thing, it's not like Vince would ever allow WWE to not win there. But the way that it was done definitely left a sour taste in many people's mouths. If it wasn't bad enough he was kind of buried on commentary, the fact that they had Sting go and shake Hunter's hand after he won with a sledgehammer shot to the face made Sting look like a geek honestly. 

It's a shame they didn't figure out cinematic stuff till later on, because they could have easily pulled off a really entertaining Sting/Taker match then with those bells and whistles. 

Also, legit Cornette does appear in every god damn thread here huh?


----------



## .christopher. (Jan 14, 2014)

Pentagon Senior said:


> I don't know what to say other than I can't take the guy seriously. If you think he's impartial and sensible in his views on AEW that's fine - but my opinion is he reaches for negativity and begrudgingly semi-praises what he can't justify totally shitting on.


It's fine to hold that opinion, but he has praised a lot of AEW stuff with a full chest.


thisissting said:


> Lol quantify a lot of times. 95% is negative. Only thing I remember full praise for was brandis promo recently and even that was a bit of a dig really as they were making fun of how bad she is normally. Very negative and bitter old man is Jimmy.


If you're going to make baseless claims about his opinion as a whole, you should listen to the show. He praises a fair bit they do, but the negativity does outweigh the positivity. That doesn't mean the positivity isn't there, though.

A while back he prefaced a AEW review by saying this may cost him listeners but he thought it was a good show, and went on to give them a lot of props.


thisissting said:


> Spot on. Hatred gets more hits on YouTube than praise and sells more merch for him.


True, but he was doing just fine before AEW even existed. Just because you disagree doesn't mean he's not giving out his honest opinion.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

TheGreatBanana said:


> @RapShepard Dude wtf are you even on about. Surfer Sting and Crow Sting are completely different. Surfer Sting was the life and energy of WCW, he represented everything good about the company. A valiant warrior.
> 
> Then you have Surfer Sting team up with Macho Man to tackle the Outsiders. Hogan appears and betrays the WCW and sides with two former WWF guys. They form the NWO and lay waste to WCW.
> 
> Months go by without Sting. He reappears as a dark mysterious character known as Crow Sting. At first no one knew where his allegiance lied because it seemed like he turned his back on WCW, but then it became apparent he was on WCW's side. He became the Batman of WCW and tackled the NWO his own way and used a bat to lay his justice. He went against his former self and became something new. The NWO were Gotham Villians who did whatever they wanted and led WCW to a chaotic path. Sting was the Batman who came to restore order.


None of this makes him a dark character


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

The Definition of Technician said:


> 1- It was more than that and you know it.


Nah y'all can't even explain the darkness about Sting, because in your hearts when asked to look at it as in adult you can't actually name it. Which is why you are so flustered and throwing random things like walked in the rain and he wore black. 



> 2- Taker is a WWE bitch and if Vince would have asked him for the match he'd have done it, 100%.


 again here you go in your personal feelings because he didn't want the Sting match lol. I mean but hey Taker is a Vince bitch and Sting is money slut who will do anything for a bag lol. Do you see how ridiculous being that upset is. 



> 3- No. Stop taking the hyperboles as some way to prove a point, maybe not "buried into oblivion" but Did you see the list of wrestlers he ruined and because he ruined them he put a ceiling on much up the card they can go, ergo, how much money they can make?


The thing is none of this can be taken serious because you only speak in hyperbole because without it the HHH buried everybody talk holds no fucking weight. If you acted like a rational person and just said "hey I didn't really care for him on the top and thought he won tins of matches he shouldn't have" you can't push this he's the devil narrative. So you have to be hyperbolic and turn a loss from not just a loss, but to a loss that ruined their career and put them in the poor house and caused their wife to divorce them. Whole life ruined because they lost to HHH. 



> His run from 2002-2012 was nothing but him going out of his way at every turn to inject himself in the biggest match, he would beat wrestlers when the story logically should have had the other guy go over, but nah, squash them and ruin how over they are..and you're like.. "yeah, he has the right to do that because he earned his right by fucking the boss's daughter". lol.


No, I'm just not going to cry for 2 decades and take it personal about the outcome of a match. Especially over people who are still considered legends. If y'all ever calmed your tits there's tons of shit I'd probably agree with you on match wins. Like as a Kane fan I'd have liked him to have won that feud. But nobody else put Kane over either at the various times he was over, so why only focus on HHH is how I look at it. 



> Besides the big examples, there's the likes of Carlito, Umaga when he came back from his 2007 injury.
> 
> How about this famous night when he buried 5 people in 5min
> 
> ...


And here goes more examples of the double standards. When Sting comes down and bats the fuck out of people that's not a burial. When Austin beats the fuck out of a group of heels that's not a burial. When Austin beats up other faces that's not a burial. The crowd in the video is actually cheering, but because you have a weirdly personal problem with HHH it's a burial and the worst thing ever. That's why you can't be taken serious here. You can't take your dislike aside and judge accordingly. 




> There's list of 10+ wrestlers he has buried, ruined their momentum, caused them to be released, and just flat out put them in embarassing segments to inflate his own ego.
> 
> Just because I don't recall everything that happened 10-15+ years ago doesn't mean the motherfucker wasn't constantly killing others people's momentums left and right with Punk in 2011and nd everything he did to him being one of the biggest example of his bitter poor ass.


These extra long lists of people HHH and hell even Cena buried can't be taken serious. They're not lists of actual burials. They're list of overly emotional adults who don't like them writing down every name they've beaten and throwing a hissy fit about it. That's all it is and all it has ever been. 

A lot of y'all lower y'all's standards for what's a burial and forcing yourself into an angle depending on if you hate the person at hand or not. Which is why you can rattle off all these supposed HHH burials and forcing himself into stuff. But when I give you multiple examples of Cody doing the same thing in just 1½ years of AEW programing suddenly you can be rational and see that a mere loss isn't a burial and top talent should be in top things.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

.christopher. said:


> It's fine to hold that opinion, but he has praised a lot of AEW stuff with a full chest.
> 
> If you're going to make baseless claims about his opinion as a whole, you should listen to the show. He praises a fair bit they do, but the negativity does outweigh the positivity. That doesn't mean the positivity isn't there, though.
> 
> ...


I'm no expert because I've only listened to a handful of clips but in those he shat on everything and was reaching pretty hard for stuff to moan about imo. I listened to his Britt Baker segment earlier where he said he refuses to watch anyone involved in the tooth and nail match because it was the worst thing EVER in wrestling. That's pretty petty lol and what's funny is the other guy said he'd missed a pretty good match because of it. 

I can only assume from what little I've heard that he's either playing an OTT character or he hates AEW so much that he's become biased. Folks are entitled to think he's impartial but I just don't see it.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

bdon said:


> Who says? What “facts” do you use to define who draws?
> 
> This should be good.


Attendance, PPV buys and TV ratings. The usual. How do you define who draws?


Wolf Mark said:


> Literally the first day he joined TNA was the first time Impact got 1 million in ratings. And this is just TNA and one televised TNA show. If we go back in time and look at all the Monday Nitros, I'm betting the ratings went up when he was on TV. Not to mention all the good PPV buyrates. Starrcade 1997 was based on the build up of Sting vs Hogan, esp. Sting and it's the biggest number WCW ever had.


Goldberg helped ratings, Flair helped ratings. For a brief time Hogan helped ratings. Sting didn’t really help ratings, no. Of course he has the Starrcade buyrate and helped make a small splash for a while in TNA. It’s literally anything anyone can ever point to when it comes to Sting.

I’m not out here saying that Shawn Michaels was a massive draw either. I don’t know why anyone brought him up? At least HBK was good for houses — but that just came at a time when ratings were the more focused on metric. It’s just like Nash didn’t do that bad in the WWF with ratings, but people were more focused on attendance and buyrates.



tower_ said:


> Cannot believe I've had to read multiple people cite the Memeltzer opinion that Sting didnt draw just because he didnt like him. The man is truly poisonous to the business. Ah well, his opinions will do a 180 now that Sting's on the AEW payroll


That much is probably true. It’s going to be fun using actual data to combat that point though.



Pentagon Senior said:


> It really does. Listened to a few of his segments this week and he comes across like a child when commenting on AEW (didn't listen to his other stuff). Huffing and puffing, screaming, sentences that don't make sense because he's just spitting random words out. He may be a historian and some may find him entertaining (not me) but my god he's clearly biased and childlike in his AEW commetary.
> 
> Fun story - listened to a Wrestletalk podcast yest where some of their subscribers were saying they're getting into AEW for the first time through Mox/Omega and Sting. One of them even said they were an avid Cornette listener who hadn't given AEW a chance because of his views - they watched last week's show, loved it and will continue watching!
> 
> The Sting entrance was class, the symbolism was cool. If a handful of heels running away from *flippin Sting* annoys you then sheeesh maybe wrestling is not for you lol


Lol, can’t stand Cornette but listens to WrestleTalk. Typical.



thisissting said:


> Lol quantify a lot of times. 95% is negative. Only thing I remember full praise for was brandis promo recently and even that was a bit of a dig really as they were making fun of how bad she is normally. Very negative and bitter old man is Jimmy.


Hang on, why do you listen?



thisissting said:


> Spot on. Hatred gets more hits on YouTube than praise and sells more merch for him.


Talking about WWE would get him more hits if that’s what he’s after. He talks about what he wants. Believe it or not, it’s possible to dislike most of the things AEW does.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

The Wood said:


> Lol, can’t stand Cornette but listens to WrestleTalk. Typical.


Can't stand Cornette is correct 👍 Only recently discovered Wrestletalk, I'm very new to the wresting podcast game. They're obviously AEW fans and put it over big time (no agenda just fandom imo) - I'd have no problem admitting that. Just like Cornette is clearly the opposite i.e. biased due to hatred (or playing a character). I've got no vested interest in either just calling it as I see it.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> Attendance, PPV buys and TV ratings. The usual. How do you define who draws?


Ohhh. So, you took Dave’s word for it. Gotcha.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

bdon said:


> Ohhh. So, you took Dave’s word for it. Gotcha.


The data’s out there, man. PPV buys aren’t top secret. You don’t need Dave to make the case.

Can you point to where Sting did make a difference to the bottom-line?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Top draws of 3 decades no Sting


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> The data’s out there, man. PPV buys aren’t top secret. You don’t need Dave to make the case.
> 
> Can you point to where Sting did make a difference to the bottom-line?


I’m not refuting the data. You relying on Dave Meltzer’s numbers, though? That’s the part I am mocking. _Whistles_

HBK and Sting being labeled bad draws is just a situation where HBK was the man during Doink the Clown years. Sting was the Man during RoboCop and Shockmaster. They can’t overcome stupid fucking booking.

What happened when the shows were at their best? Sting was the feature attraction.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

These stats seem very regional to me. I imagine konnan main evented in front of huge crowds in Mexico whereas wcw probably had less main events to less fans. Who has the bigger legacy and each comparing konnan to sting. It is sting and no one outside Mexico is going to argie that. That is why sting appearing last week at 61 is huge news in the business and konnan showing up the week before off his head in Vegas no one gives a shit. These stats are very deceiving. For example big daddy and giant haystacks would have probably drawn more than hulk hogan in the UK in the 80s easily does that make them more important than hogan no. Sting main evented 28 ppvs on wcw more than anyone else which is testament to his stature. If he had gone to wwe late 90s he would have been an even bigger star but he decided to remain loyal unlike a lot of them.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

bdon said:


> I’m not refuting the data. You relying on Dave Meltzer’s numbers, though? That’s the part I am mocking. _Whistles_
> 
> HBK and Sting being labeled bad draws is just a situation where HBK was the man during Doink the Clown years. Sting was the Man during RoboCop and Shockmaster. They can’t overcome stupid fucking booking.
> 
> What happened when the shows were at their best? Sting was the feature attraction.


There are plenty of outlets that have reported WCW’s buys. It’s not just Dave.

Nah, talent gets way too much of a pass. Was RoboCop stupid? Yeah. But that’s not evidence that Sting was great or that he drew when he didn’t.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> These stats seem very regional to me. I imagine konnan main evented in front of huge crowds in Mexico whereas wcw probably had less main events to less fans. Who has the bigger legacy and each comparing konnan to sting. It is sting and no one outside Mexico is going to argie that. That is why sting appearing last week at 61 is huge news in the business and konnan showing up the week before off his head in Vegas no one gives a shit. These stats are very deceiving. For example big daddy and giant haystacks would have probably drawn more than hulk hogan in the UK in the 80s easily does that make them more important than hogan no. Sting main evented 28 ppvs on wcw more than anyone else which is testament to his stature. If he had gone to wwe late 90s he would have been an even bigger star but he decided to remain loyal unlike a lot of them.


List is who made the most money main eventing in front of crowds of at least 10K people. I certainly agree with you that Sting is a bigger legend at least as far as I'm concerned. But things like these are good as it's one of the few factual things in wrestling. I don't watch watch Lucha Libre or Pureoso so something like this puts into perspective what happens elsewhere in the wrestling world. Konnan may have just been a star in Mexico, but clearly he fucking killed it.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

But how is it worked out. Do you get props if your not the last match on, does it include ppv buys as well as in stadium crowds? If you are a stacked roster your are a disadvantage to if your in a weak one. For me just because you main event doesn't mean you are the main draw. Look at rock hogan that was clearly the draw of that show no one was interested the main event of jericho HHH. In guessing with these stats HHH is said to be the draw on that show. For me it's complicated but longevity memorable matches crowd reaction merch sales opinion of peers are all as important as ticket sales as its hard to say who has come to see what and it varies in different countries.


----------



## peowulf (Nov 26, 2006)

bdon said:


> Vince rotting for an eternity in hell will not be enough for the shit he’s done.


You need to seek professional help sooner than later.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> But how is it worked out. Do you get props of your not the last match on, does it include ppv buys as well as in stadium crowds? If you are a stacked roster your are a disadvantage to if your in a weak one. For me just because you main event doesn't mean you are the main draw. Look at rock hogan that was clearly the draw of that show no one was interested the main event of jericho HHH. In guessing with these stats HHH is said to be the draw on that show. For me it's complicated but longevity memorable matches crowd reaction merch sales opinion of peers are all as important as ticket sales as its hard to say who has come to see what and it varies in different countries.


Credit goes to the headliner and it makes sense. If an event underperforms nobody blames the undercard, they blame the headliner. Those other things you named matter as well though.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

The biggest complaint I have with that list is when it comes to a guy like Triple H and the 00’s in general. Interest in the WWE slumped under Triple H, but he kept getting jammed into main event slots anyway.

Sting could have made the list if he were just in more main events, regardless of whether WCW’s business was trending upwards or not.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

peowulf said:


> You need to seek professional help sooner than later.


Thank you for posting.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

OK but I still find those lists pretty dubious. I guess we are used to north American wrestling and tend to disregard wrestling in Japan Mexico etc although I would think ticket prices in poorer counties would mean more fans get in. But for wwe prices could be quite high for possibly better cards than in Mexico. Also lots of stadia have restricted capacity for safety us USA whereas in South America they tend to pack them in at cheap tickets. Not sure you can say Sting hogan had x people in the arena but konnan v somebody had a bigger crowd and say he is a bigger draw.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> OK but I still find those lists pretty dubious. I guess we are used to north American wrestling and tend to disregard wrestling in Japan Mexico etc although *I would think ticket prices in poorer counties would mean more fans get in.* But for wwe prices could be quite high for possibly better cards than in Mexico. Also lots of stadia have restricted capacity for safety us USA whereas in South America they tend to pack them in at cheap tickets. Not sure you can say Sting hogan had x people in the arena but konnan v somebody had a bigger crowd and say he is a bigger draw.


That doesn't make much sense though if the people are poor then they don't really have the money to pay for entertainment like that. I get it's crazy to think of, but if Konnan headlined more 10,000 fans or more shows, then that's just what it is. Doesn't mean he's the GOAT or anything. Just that he was a crazy big draw in Mexico.


----------



## CtrlAltDel (Aug 9, 2016)

Time to give Sting the John Wick character and storyline: his enemy kicks Cody’s dog so he is coming for those mother******


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

RapShepard said:


> That doesn't make much sense though if the people are poor then they don't really have the money to pay for entertainment like that. I get it's crazy to think of, but if Konnan headlined more 10,000 fans or more shows, then that's just what it is. Doesn't mean he's the GOAT or anything. Just that he was a crazy big draw in Mexico.


I should think shows in Mexico in the 90s were way more affordable for the average person than wwe pay per views or even wcw at the same time. Be interesting to look at average gates on the ppvs in different countries and also look at the quality of the cards. Some of the wcw and wwe ppvs were stacked in that decade so for one person to dominate was hard.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Konnan has been compared to the Hulk Hogan of Mexico many times before in the past. It’s not some crazy thing to suggest that he drew big.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

thisissting said:


> I should think shows in Mexico in the 90s were way more affordable for the average person than wwe pay per views or even wcw at the same time. Be interesting to look at average gates on the ppvs in different countries and also look at the quality of the cards. Some of the wcw and wwe ppvs were stacked in that decade so for one person to dominate was hard.


That really only makes sense if you're thinking about it from the perspective of somebody from the richer countries buying tickets in the poorer country. If you don't make a lot of money it's hard to pay for entertainment. Konnan wrestled in AAA and CMLL the 2 biggest promotions. It's unlikely they were having shows so cheap anybody could come.


----------



## NahFam (Sep 12, 2016)

RapShepard said:


> Top draws of 3 decades no Sting


Where is this from? And do you have any idea what the criteria used to form the list is? Be interesting to read if you do, cheers.


----------



## zaz102 (Jul 26, 2011)

The Wood said:


> Konnan has been compared to the Hulk Hogan of Mexico many times before in the past. It’s not some crazy thing to suggest that he drew big.


I heard this too and it always confused me. How did he end up as a virtual jobber/low card as Max Moon in WWE and K-Dawg in WCW?

I mean I didn't have much interest in his character, but strange that he was so highly regarded in Mexico and nobody cared outside of Mexico.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

NahFam said:


> Where is this from? And do you have any idea what the criteria used to form the list is? Be interesting to read if you do, cheers.


Wrestling Observer the criteria was people drawing over 10,000 fans 



dave meltzer top draws by decade - Google Search



Same list multiple sites


----------



## NahFam (Sep 12, 2016)

RapShepard said:


> Wrestling Observer the criteria was people drawing over 10,000 fans
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cheers, the logic used for creating this list is rather odd though. Surely top draws for a decade should be done by comparing the average of what individuals achieved during the period they were active and featured prominently, rather than having an unfair advantage due to longevity (given the comparisons are not equal). It just doesn't really give any meaningful measurement of who the 'top draws' were given the bizarre way he's calculated it. Also, surely another measurement that needs to be taken into account within something like this is the amount of merch sold, viewers drawn in on TV to get a fairer indication. There's probably a few other things that need to be considered to get a proper measurement too.

Interesting to look at and read though so cheers for sharing. Certainly interesting from the perspective of who the workhorses of the decade were at the very least.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

NahFam said:


> Cheers, the logic used for creating this list is rather odd though. Surely top draws for a decade should be done by comparing the average of what individuals achieved during the period they were active and featured prominently, rather than having an unfair advantage due to longevity (given the comparisons are not equal). It just doesn't really give any meaningful measurement of who the 'top draws' were given the bizarre way he's calculated it. Also, surely another measurement that needs to be taken into account within something like this is the amount of merch sold, viewers drawn in on TV to get a fairer indication. There's probably a few other things that need to be considered to get a proper measurement too.
> 
> Interesting to look at and read though so cheers for sharing. Certainly interesting from the perspective of who the workhorses of the decade were at the very least.


I mean merch and things like that would probably be hard to do as most places are privately owned and don't announce that. How many in attendance is usually told though. But highest peaks would be a great separate chart though as overall most and peak most are definitely both valuable numbers and achievements


----------



## NahFam (Sep 12, 2016)

RapShepard said:


> I mean merch and things like that would probably be hard to do as most places are privately owned and don't announce that. How many in attendance is usually told though. But highest peaks would be a great separate chart though as overall most and peak most are definitely both valuable numbers and achievements


Just stumbled across a random site where somebody has collated all of the 96-00 data for WCW. Would love to know how legit it is, but seems to be fine due to the fact the information has come from lawsuits.









WCW Contract & Payroll Information (1996-2000) - chrisharrington


Pro Wrestling and MMA statistics




sites.google.com







NamePayrollLicensingMerchTotal*Hulk Hogan**$11,489,700**$1,505,271**$176,072**$13,171,042**1996*$1,930,436$17,876$20,750$1,969,062*1997*$330,044$94,656$52,413$477,113*1998*$3,635,969$111,946$40,147$3,788,061*1999*$3,756,228$832,988$20,846$4,610,062*2000**$1,837,024$447,805$41,916$2,326,744




NamePayrollLicensingMerchTotal*Sting**$4,901,499**$1,033,467**$110,844**$6,045,809**1996*$72,205$11,905$3,630$87,740*1997*$913,304$17,007$29,837$960,147*1998*$936,190$85,331$43,420$1,064,940*1999*$1,531,820$414,497$17,575$1,963,892*2000**$1,447,980$504,727$16,382$1,969,089


Not really too sure what this tells us as such but, Sting seems to have made the second highest amount on merch in that period in WCW having had a brief check, more than anybody other than Hogan. He was definitely a draw for WCW.


----------



## NahFam (Sep 12, 2016)

Having looked, nobody even gets close to how much Sting and Hogan personally made during that period in merch. Granted, it might be how the contracts were set up so possibly not telling how much merch was moved per se. But Hogan and Sting seem to be far and away above anybody else, which is quite crazy given the sort of talent they had there at the time.

The licensing side of things he's right up there too. Only below Hogan and Goldberg.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

NahFam said:


> Just stumbled across a random site where somebody has collated all of the 96-00 data for WCW. Would love to know how legit it is, but seems to be fine due to the fact the information has come from lawsuits.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Looking at the site I'm super confused. Sting only making $110,844 in merchandise sales sounds fucking crazy low.


----------



## NahFam (Sep 12, 2016)

RapShepard said:


> Looking at the site I'm super confused. Sting only making $110,844 in merchandise sales sounds fucking crazy low.


Yeah, it's made me question it too lol. I'm guessing WCW took the majority of any sales? The licensing seems to be where the wrestlers made most money.


----------



## zaz102 (Jul 26, 2011)

NahFam said:


> Yeah, it's made me question it too lol. I'm guessing WCW took the majority of any sales? The licensing seems to be where the wrestlers made most money.


Yeah, probably. If you listen to Bischoff on 83 weeks he makes it clear that WCW's offered higher guaranteed contracts and since didn't even have the infrastructure to offer bonuses based on merch. 

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

zaz102 said:


> I heard this too and it always confused me. How did he end up as a virtual jobber/low card as Max Moon in WWE and K-Dawg in WCW?
> 
> I mean I didn't have much interest in his character, but strange that he was so highly regarded in Mexico and nobody cared outside of Mexico.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


Konnan was over as shit in WCW, no matter what you think of his in-ring at that point.

WCW merch is a fool’s game. Wrestlers used to scan as other wrestlers to drive the profits to your golden elites — Hogan, Rodman, etc. Sting was possibly collecting on Juvi merchandise. We just don’t know.


----------



## zaz102 (Jul 26, 2011)

The Wood said:


> Konnan was over as shit in WCW, no matter what you think of his in-ring at that point.
> 
> WCW merch is a fool’s game. Wrestlers used to scan as other wrestlers to drive the profits to your golden elites — Hogan, Rodman, etc. Sting was possibly collecting on Juvi merchandise. We just don’t know.


What? I feel like I am missing something. I was huge WCW fan during their peak and I don't remember him being anything more than an nWo lackey. I don't remember him grabbing any belts or main eventing or anything notable. I know it's anecdotal, but I don't remember any of my friends thinking anything of him either.

Honestly curious, what made him a draw in WCW?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

zaz102 said:


> What? I feel like I am missing something. I was huge WCW fan during their peak and I don't remember him being anything more than an nWo lackey. I don't remember him grabbing any belts or main eventing or anything notable. I know it's anecdotal, but I don't remember any of my friends thinking anything of him either.
> 
> Honestly curious, what made him a draw in WCW?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


Who?


----------



## zaz102 (Jul 26, 2011)

thisissting said:


> Who?


Konan

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## Klitschko (May 24, 2020)

RapShepard said:


> Credit goes to the headliner and it makes sense. If an event underperforms nobody blames the undercard, they blame the headliner. Those other things you named matter as well though.


Sooooooooo, is it fair to say that in a weird twisted way Roman Reigns is the biggest draw of all time? Since he main evented the largest show ever with 100 thousand fans there at WM 32? Mind fuck right there lol.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

Fuck that logic lol.


----------



## thisissting (Aug 14, 2018)

zaz102 said:


> Konan
> 
> Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


Ah yes your right he didn't play huge role in USA tv although he was actually great in the ring. He also seemed to be good on the mic and get the crowd popping. His stats can't be from American TV though as I doubt he main evented many shows if any.


----------



## Boldgerg (Apr 2, 2017)

I've probably never been more pissed off in my years of watching wrestling than I was seeing Triple H put himself over Sting.

That entire match was absolutely nothing but yet another exercise in desperately saying "Look! Look how much better we are than WCW!" despite all the years that had passed. Pathetic cunts.


----------



## epfou1 (Jan 3, 2012)

Boldgerg said:


> I've probably never been more pissed off in my years of watching wrestling than I was seeing Triple H put himself over Sting.
> 
> That entire match was absolutely nothing but yet another exercise in desperately saying "Look! Look how much better we are than WCW!" despite all the years that had passed. Pathetic cunts.


Not only that but Seth Rollins doing the buckle bomb on Sting.

He's got to wrestle smarter than that. Sting was in his mid to late 50s, you dont throw around people of that age on their neck and not expect them to get injured.

You got to modify your style and protect their limitations.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

zaz102 said:


> What? I feel like I am missing something. I was huge WCW fan during their peak and I don't remember him being anything more than an nWo lackey. I don't remember him grabbing any belts or main eventing or anything notable. I know it's anecdotal, but I don't remember any of my friends thinking anything of him either.
> 
> Honestly curious, what made him a draw in WCW?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


I didn’t say he was a draw in WCW. I said that he was over. And he was. He had a music video that they played _all the time_. I’m pretty sure he held the US, TV and Tag Titles there too.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> I didn’t say he was a draw in WCW. I said that he was over. And he was. He had a music video that they played _all the time_. I’m pretty sure he held the US, TV and Tag Titles there too.


I don’t exactly remember the Tag Titles, but I definitely remember the US and TV Title runs.


----------



## CowboyKurtAngle (Jul 18, 2014)

WWE actually edited the reaction for Sting's debut. Official vs Live versions..


----------



## zaz102 (Jul 26, 2011)

bdon said:


> I don’t exactly remember the Tag Titles, but I definitely remember the US and TV Title runs.


Yeah, I looked it up youre right. His reigns were early 96 and at the end of 98/99. I was watching more of WWF at those times.

I guess the point of my question is why was he compared to Hogan in Mexico since he clearly couldn't be even close in his peak in WCW. Any Mexican wrestling fans?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

zaz102 said:


> Yeah, I looked it up youre right. His reigns were early 96 and at the end of 98/99. I was watching more of WWF at those times.
> 
> I guess the point of my question is why was he compared to Hogan in Mexico since he clearly couldn't be even close in his peak in WCW. Any Mexican wrestling fans?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


Because it's an entirely different country and promotion? 

In Mexico, Konnan was the biggest babyface in AAA. At the first TripleMania, he was the top star in front of 48k fans. Jake Roberts screwed him and became a top heel for the promotion (and drew quite well himself), and Konnan would come back by headlining two of the three TripleMania shows the next year. This is like Mexico's WrestleMania. His WCW run didn't reflect what a giant star he was down in Mexico.


----------

