Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Kick-Out!! Radio - Episode 25



Rumors are circulating that the ECW brand could undergo a massive overhaul in 2010. The future of arguably the best brand in WWE is the main topic of discussion this week on Kick-Out!! Radio.


Subscribe to Kick-Out!! Radio via iTunes! (This link will open your iTunes)

MP3 version - just scroll down to "Recent Episodes" and click the MP3 icon.

Theme song: "Believe" by Grasp Infinity


13 comments:

  1. It's clearly all an elaborate scheme to bring Paul Burchill back to Tuesday nights under the flawless logic of 'I'm banned from ECW, not (insert new show name here)!'

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well now it all makes sense! They totally booked themselves out of that corner!

    ReplyDelete
  3. And then re-do the Hurricane vs Burchill feud. Pure genius WWE.

    Now take that dirtsheets, its a storyline plot, not some 'tarnishing the legacy' crap.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shelton vs Christian may well be a contender for match of the night at TLC, but John Cena vs Sheamus will probably be the most intriguing contest for me. If Sheamus gives a decent showing, I think there will be a large chance that he will get a couple of Pay-Per-View rematches in the next few months as well. The tables match stipulation suggests that a rematch at Royal Rumble is likely, simply because neither man will have been pinned or made to submit at TLC. Then, as long as the Elimination Chamber match is used for the WWE Title as it was last year, Sheamus will probably be competing in that contest also.

    Great idea about ECW One Night Stand, by the way. The 2005 and 2006 events were two of my favourite Pay-Per-Views in recent years, and I'd love to see another televised event emanating from the Hammerstein Ballroom.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If Sheamus DOESN'T win at TLC, I don't know how they can continue his push. In any other match, if WWE didn't want to put the strap on a wrestler, they could go with a DQ finish. Or something where the "monster heel" beats on the guy so bad and the ref stops the match. But there's no screwey finishes for a table match. It's either one guy wins or the other does, and if Cena wins then there's no logic to Sheamus getting a rematch or even being called a "monster".

    In this situation, I say throw the WWE Title on him. What's the worst that can happen? A few people don't like it and start complaining? Maybe Raw's rating takes a hit for a week or two? At the end of the day, Cena can take the title back at the Rumble if WWE doesn't like Sheamus with the title. But if WWE are serious about pushing Sheamus, and they're sticking with a tables match, I don't honestly see how else they can get out of it.

    But hey, that's just this guy's opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I can see your point, but I still think that Sheamus could use the "I wasn't pinned" excuse if he loses at TLC. There are plenty of ways in which someone can be put through a table without looking particularly weak. To be fair, you could also argue the same point the other way, in that Cena could also lose without looking too weak if the circumstances were correct.

    If Cena wins and the feud continues onto the Royal Rumble, they could still have a regular one-on-one match for the belt, with Cena perhaps getting his decisive pinfall or submission victory. Not only would this keep some of the potential WWE Title contenders out of the picture until Elimination Chamber or Wrestlemania, but it would also mean that there would be a little less pressure on Sheamus to shoulder the burden of competing in a Pay-Per-View main event, as the Rumble match itself will overshadow it anyway.

    Furthermore, as Umaga's feud with Cena in 2007 demonstrated, there isn't any real reason why losing more than once in consecutive Pay-Per-View title matches should stall Sheamus' push significantly. One doesn't necessarily have to win in order to remain over.

    As you say, though, it's all a matter of opinion, and there will always be a million ways in which an angle like this can be successfully executed or completely screwed up.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree on some levels, but Umaga was completely different. Umaga had an undefeated streak, a feud with Ric Flair, Kane and DX, kayfabe backing from the McMahon's and a ton of momentum behind him. WWE took the time to build Umaga into his main event position, they just failed to follow him up after he lost in his feud with Cena.

    Sheamus only has the destroying of Jamie Noble and a unique look to sell him on. I'm not bashing WWE for putting Sheamus in the main event like some do (not inclusive of yourself), but I have a bad feeling about Cena going over in the Tables Match. I understand your point about Sheamus using the old 'I never lost' excuse and that's fine, but it feels like the heat is taken out of the feud as soon as Cena goes over Sheamus.

    One way out would be them doing a bit where Cena has Sheamus on the top rope for an Attitude Adjustment through the table, but Sheamus reverses and they BOTH crash through ending the match in a No Contest. That way, you could logically book a rematch at Royal Rumble, and Sheamus hasn't lost to Cena in their first encounter. That's what happened with Miz, and look how far that feud went.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That could actually be a very good idea. That way, the rematch books itself and neither man loses credibility before the feud is over. I wonder if the rematch would end up being a regular singles match or another gimmick match. I would prefer the former, but going from a gimmick match straight to a straight singles match seems to be a reversal of the general booking trend, not, of course, that there should be anything drastically wrong with that.

    Fair point on Umaga too. I definitely agree that Sheamus could have done with an additional feud or two before facing Cena, but my guess is that they may have rushed it in order to have someone ready to keep Cena busy in the pre-Wrestlemania mixup. I still think that a clean Cena victory at TLC, provided it's carried out carefully, would not hurt Sheamus too much, but I now think that a situation similar to the one you described would probably be better.

    ReplyDelete
  9. As you said, for a rematch a nice singles match would probably wind up being better. We can then see what Sheamus can do in a straight singles match against Cena.

    The RR match is a gimmick in itself, so it would be nice to be light on gimmick matches at the Rumble, considering what the February pay-per-view will likely wind up being: Elimination Chamber x3. Shudder

    ReplyDelete
  10. Loving the debate guys!

    If I could play devil's advocate for a minute, I don't know if throwing the belt on Sheamus right now would be a good idea. He's not in any position to carry a brand as WWE Champion, so he would have to be a transitional champion at most.

    Looking like a weak champion this quickly out of the gate could potentially do more harm than a loss. There's no shame in losing to John Cena, and anyone can be built up after that (just ask The Miz).

    ReplyDelete
  11. No he shouldn't be carrying the brand, but at the end of the day, with 7 weeks until Royal Rumble, putting the title on him isn't going to cost them any money (i.e. buyrates).

    At the end of the day, Sheamus having the title might actually spark interest in the brand. People may tune in just to find out if it's true that this new guy with whiter skin than a polar bear actually has the top title in the company. If it doesn't work, or people lose interest, there's plenty of time between TLC and the Rumble to take the belt from him.

    I'm not silly enough to think he needs to have a long term run with the belt, but, as I said, I can't see a loss doing anything positive for his career. However, I take your point, too, Razor.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Both of your arguments should be taken into account here. A Sheamus title reign may not be the best idea, but he must be made to look strong throughout the feud. I'm sure nobody truly doubts that Cena will ultimately come out on top after the blow-off match, whenever that might be, but this rivalry should focus more on making Sheamus a credible star than anything else.

    I think that the level of debate that has been raised by this situation shows that this could be a fork-in-the-road moment for Sheamus. A good performance at TLC will possibly see him being rewarded with another title match, perhaps followed by a decent position on the Wrestlemania card. On the other hand, let's not forget how Vladimir Kozlov's main event push ended up turning out around this time last year. He seemed to join the title picture a little too early (on his Pay-Per-View debut, if I remember correctly), which may have done more bad than good for his short-term future. This is Sheamus' Pay-Per-View debut in a singles capacity, and it can only be hoped that he does a little better.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well said, friend. Well said.

    ReplyDelete