Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to All Wrestling Talk. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Benoit Pwned By WWE
Topic Started: Dec 21 2007, 10:30 PM (1,291 Views)
Nathan Versus
Member Avatar
Versus > You
[ *  *  *  * ]
http://www.wwe.com/shows/royalrumble/3973952/

I guess there was no Royal Rumble in 2004.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jerseyboybastard
Member Avatar
Upper Midcarder
[ *  *  *  * ]
Part of me wants to say how weak that is of WWE.

Does anyone think that WWE refusing to acknowledge Benoit as once one of their own only shows they realize they had a hand in what led up to the circumstances of his death/actions (i.e. nonexistant drug testing) but are trying to come off as scott-free and act innocent of the situation?

They're trying to rewrite history. "Benoit? We never employed anyone named Benoit."

Just because the man became a monster at the end of his life doesn't mean he wasn't ever a man to begin with.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
#LJB
Member Avatar
We The People
Fucking hell.

Refusing to acknowledge him on the photo gallery of Raw champions (for the 15th anniv. show) is one thing, but to leave out his RR victory as a list of winners is just weak. How long will this go on. I'm pretty sure since everybody has moved on from this, the ideal thing to do is not leave out his past victories. I would like to see how they will handle Mania.




Though the 2004 RR is mentioned in the history w/ full results.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hal P. Warren
Member Avatar
The Master
[ *  *  *  * ]
jerseyboybastard
Dec 21 2007, 05:52 PM
Does anyone think that WWE refusing to acknowledge Benoit as once one of their own only shows they realize they had a hand in what led up to the circumstances of his death/actions (i.e. nonexistant drug testing) but are trying to come off as scott-free and act innocent of the situation?

I hate to sound like a broken record, but: mental illness and head trauma are far more likely catalysts in Benoit's decline than steroid use.

Although on the other hand, they should screen all their wrestlers for concussion damage and mental faculties.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nathan Versus
Member Avatar
Versus > You
[ *  *  *  * ]
I think WWE is looking at things from the perspective of the general public. Wrestling fans and Benoit fans are somewhat biased in much the same way I imagine Michael Jackson and Gary Glitter fans are to their heroes being kiddie fiddlers; they can turn a blind eye to it; it’s not that bad, etc.. Of course everybody else sees things differently. If Gary Glitter was given a lifetime achievement award at the Brits it would course uproar (in the UK, do Americans even know who he is?). WWE trying to portray Benoit in a positive light is not much different, so they don’t.

I don’t think it’s fair to say that everybody has moved on, it makes it sound like Benoit got released for misbehaving himself and deserves a second chance now that tempers have cooled and apologies have been made. Dude wiped out his family and did more damage to the wrestling industry than anything ever has. It wasn’t just his reputation that was destroyed; thanks to Benoit, the media have gone on a witch-hunt and attempted to destroy the credibility of wrestling and pro-wrestlers. Benoit is getting what he deserves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nascarsucks
Member Avatar
NOT A FAN OF NASCAR
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
If Gary Glitter was given a lifetime achievement award at the Brits it would course uproar (in the UK, do Americans even know who he is?).


Some people know him as the guy who did Rock and Roll, Part 2. Other than that, no.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
President Skroob
Member Avatar
Messiah of Cool
Nathan Versus
Dec 21 2007, 07:53 PM
WWE trying to portray Benoit in a positive light is not much different, so they don’t.

But surely just putting "2004 - Chris Benoit" and leaving it at that (no picture, no explaination of how he won, etc.) wouldn't cause that much of a problem, right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nathan Versus
Member Avatar
Versus > You
[ *  *  *  * ]
I agree, but I guess WWE feel differently.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
President Skroob
Member Avatar
Messiah of Cool
Which I find hilarious since they still have his name in their title history lists.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
White_Roach
Member Avatar
Upper Midcarder
[ *  *  *  * ]
Am I the only one who isn't really bothered by this?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
March Haire
Member Avatar
Jamie Lee Curtis
I could really give a fuck. What the WWE decides to do with their history, they decide to do with their history. He'll be silently added back a few years from now, and Chris will live on with Nitro swappin' fagz on the internet.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Don Carlos
Member Avatar
Slick Dick Dingo
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
White_Roach
Dec 21 2007, 09:50 PM
Am I the only one who isn't really bothered by this?

No . . .
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nathan Versus
Member Avatar
Versus > You
[ *  *  *  * ]
President Skroob
Dec 22 2007, 02:37 AM
Which I find hilarious since they still have his name in their title history lists.

WWE’s inconsistency is baffling, but I think the company is playing it by ear. Didn’t Michaels use the Crippler Crossface against Orton recently? In my opinion that’s far more offensive and tasteless than Benoit’s name being listed on WWE.com, since Benoit supposedly used that move to kill his son.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cowards
Member Avatar
BOW BEFORE HIM
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Nathan Versus
Dec 22 2007, 01:44 PM
President Skroob
Dec 22 2007, 02:37 AM
Which I find hilarious since they still have his name in their title history lists.

WWE’s inconsistency is baffling, but I think the company is playing it by ear. Didn’t Michaels use the Crippler Crossface against Orton recently? In my opinion that’s far more offensive and tasteless than Benoit’s name being listed on WWE.com, since Benoit supposedly used that move to kill his son.

Wait... I thought he suffocated him with a pillow.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lance
Member Avatar
Next time you get bored of your lives, gimme a call and I'll come round and KILL YOU.
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Fine. It would be offensive to leave him up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
#LJB
Member Avatar
We The People
Nathan Versus
Dec 22 2007, 06:44 AM
President Skroob
Dec 22 2007, 02:37 AM
Which I find hilarious since they still have his name in their title history lists.

WWE’s inconsistency is baffling, but I think the company is playing it by ear. Didn’t Michaels use the Crippler Crossface against Orton recently? In my opinion that’s far more offensive and tasteless than Benoit’s name being listed on WWE.com, since Benoit supposedly used that move to kill his son.

IMO, (because of the reason you provided) I think that more people (who aren't wrestling fans) are are more likely to come to the website than order/watch a PPV.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stinger Splash
Midcarder
[ *  *  * ]
Boricua
Dec 21 2007, 06:57 PM
jerseyboybastard
Dec 21 2007, 05:52 PM
Does anyone think that WWE refusing to acknowledge Benoit as once one of their own only shows they realize they had a hand in what led up to the circumstances of his death/actions (i.e. nonexistant drug testing) but are trying to come off as scott-free and act innocent of the situation?

I hate to sound like a broken record, but: mental illness and head trauma are far more likely catalysts in Benoit's decline than steroid use.

Although on the other hand, they should screen all their wrestlers for concussion damage and mental faculties.

Isn't that still kinda on the WWE? Don't they have a responsibility to make sure their wrestlers are in a proper physical and mental state considering the long and sad history of wrestlers dying young? I'm not saying they are the main source blame but they have to receive a small portion for not protecting their wrestlers from themselves, especially considering the number of wrestlers dying young.

Ya know, I'm gonna be honest, I don't know how they should handle any Benoit related info right now though I think that in a few years to not acknowledge all the positives he did in the wrestling ring would be unfortunate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
White_Roach
Member Avatar
Upper Midcarder
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nathan Versus
Dec 22 2007, 08:44 AM
President Skroob
Dec 22 2007, 02:37 AM
Which I find hilarious since they still have his name in their title history lists.

WWE’s inconsistency is baffling, but I think the company is playing it by ear. Didn’t Michaels use the Crippler Crossface against Orton recently? In my opinion that’s far more offensive and tasteless than Benoit’s name being listed on WWE.com, since Benoit supposedly used that move to kill his son.

I don't think he did the Crippler to offend anyone, probably more becuase it's generally considered "disrespectful" to do use a move that someone else uses on a regular basis when they are in the same company as you, hence why he used the Crippler since Benoit was dead, The Sharpshooter since Bret was retired, and the Ankle Lock since Angle is in TNA now. Was it a very tactful thing to do? Probably not, but I don't think it was out of malice
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
King of Kings
Member Avatar
Politicker
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I thought the WWE were done erasing Benoit. They are gonna include his matches on the upcoming Summerslam anthology. But then like Rated LJB said the people who buy that are likely to be wrestling fans.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jerseyboybastard
Member Avatar
Upper Midcarder
[ *  *  *  * ]
White_Roach
Dec 22 2007, 03:50 AM
Am I the only one who isn't really bothered by this?

I wouldn't say I'm bothered or offended by any means. I just think it's kind of silly to act like 2004 didn't happen.

Let's look at the other side of the coin.

Should people be bothered if he is acknowledged as the winner of the 2004 Rumble? It's not like he's being hailed or given a trophy or award. He doesn't have to be part of some promotional package of past winners. Outside of being listed, the name Benoit doesn't even need to come up.

Just don't try to gloss over your history (which I realize is like asking the sun not to shine). I think that's what I'm trying to say.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · WWE · Next Topic »
Add Reply