Random Wrestling Thoughts That Float Through My Mind...

[Y 2 Jake]

Jericho on the next Broken Skull Sessions. It's only good for AEW if he effectively plugs it.

[Yer Maw]

Jericho on the next Broken Skull Sessions. It's only good for AEW if he effectively plugs it.

Jericho being on their shows that Vince is not worried about them at all.

[Y 2 Jake]

I'm think of it more from the perspective that AEW shouldn't allow him on the show if he's just there to do a career retrospective without ending with what he's up to now.

That's almost like AEW doing WWE a favour. And why would they do that.

[BestSportsEntertainer]

Should be an entertaining, informative podcast. Doesn't have to be anything else.

[Storm Trooper]

No, there's a HUGE difference on the consumers end because there is content that was once available that is no longer available for viewing unless you want to pirate it or watch it illegally. This is nothing a cultural sensitivity or political correctness rating could not solve, like what already exists with age ratings.

What I said is that there no difference in your eyes between being removed or not being added to the new platform.

And give it the fuck up with this cultural sensitivity rating or political correctness rating. That doesn't exist.

So you're not personally affected by the change. In that case, why are you happy to see it removed in the first place if you don't even care to watch that era of content to begin with? I think most people who watch it are smart enough to not suddenly become racist because of it; as far as I could tell, mocking the Nation on a racial basis wasn't even the point of the promo from what I can tell re-watching it.

Since racism is still blatantly alive and well in this country, maybe you may want to reconsider your statement.

No, because I accept there's legal precedent in my examples and that wasn't motivated by subjective sensitivities; keeping a show up that honoured a child murderer after he had committed the crime is far worse than being politically incorrect.

But better or worse is irrelevant. You say that they should have EVERYTHING on the Network. Well, everything includes stuff that's morally ambiguous. Therefore either you want those on there or you're fine with stuff being removed.

They're removing the only legal way to watch specific parts of shows because a corporation/part of society finds them inappropriate. Call it whatever you want lol.

The issue is defining what's inappropriate. Everything you've listed in this thread and much more could be considered inappropriate. There's some no-brainers such as Owen Hart's death and the Chris Benoit tribute show. There's a LOT more that isn't. It's a very complicated issue and shouldn't be dismissed with the logic of "corporations can do whatever they want".

But... Yes, corporations can do whatever they want WITH THEIR OWN FUCKING PRODUCT. If an Ice Cream manufacturer decides to shrink the size of their packaging and charge the same rate, they're allowed to do that. We gripe for about 5 seconds and move on with our day like nothing happened. This is the same thing. NBC chose to not do something that they deem improper (airing blatantly offensive content), and the ramifications are that maybe a few people cease supporting the product, but the company is not liable.

When a television network decides not to air something that is offensive to a rational human being you're up in arms.

nobody is forcing you to buy the product, but nobody can force them to put out product they don't want to. It is wrong to force either end. That's how capitalism works.

They've kept the Owen Hart and Droz incidents in the vault since they first occurred, so it's entirely understandable as to why those never became public. The Benoit tribute show came down to them lacking information about the tragedy, and was never uploaded to the Network for viewing in the first place, WWE immediately took it back when the details became apparent. If there are any other examples of WWE not releasing certain footage, point them out.

The issue is removing content that had already been approved for the Network previously.

Again, NOTHING HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE FUCKING NETWORK.

THE CONTENT IS NOT BEING ADDED TO THE PLATFORM THAT ANOTHER COMPANY OWNS AND OPERATES. It is not being REMOVED. HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE. If WWE Network did not go to Peacock and this was all happening you'd be right, but it did and WWE is catering to Peacocks Standards and Practices.

Would you be OK if they took down Benoit's entire library of matches and scrubbed the Network clean of him?

I'd be fine with it, yes. I can't watch that piece of shit. I've tried and it is sickening. I can't even watch the match from Mania XX and I was there in person for it.

[OYDK]

It’s their right to be commies. Still makes them commies.

[Yer Maw]

It's crazy how over RVD was in 2001. Only in the company a couple of months and the fans loved him.

[#AbsoluteUnit]

The stream on Peacock has been pretty terrible.

[Fallout]

WM31 is definitely in the lower half of Wrestlemanias, and I have no idea why it's rated as highly as it is.

You had:

• A tag team match that existed.
• Big Show winning the battle royale and totally devaluing it (although you could argue Cesaro's lack of push for winning the initial one hurt it). Sandow was such wasted talent, if he upped his in-ring work, he could have easily been another Triple H.
• An admittedly good opening ladder match that ended up not mattering due to Bryan's temporary retirement, but far from the best ladder match ever or anything
• An OK Orton vs Rollins match with a cool finish
• An overblown clusterfuck between Sting and Triple H with the wrong guy going over and needless referencing to WCW. I'm not accusing HHH of backstage shenanigans here, maybe Sting wanted Hunter to go over, but it was a terrible decision.
• A diva's match that existed.
• An average match between Rusev and Cena (Rusev had a hella cool entrance though)
• A celebrity moment with Rousey + Rock which wasn't acted upon until 3 years later.
• A relatively lifeless match between Bray and Taker.
• WWE using the MITB as a get out of jail free card for their own terrible booking decisions.

Is it the worst? No, 32 was probably worse, which might explain why people look back at this in fondness, and 2 and 9 are dreadful. 11 is a bit overhated, but it would be hard for me to argue it's better than 31. But seeing 31 in the upper echelons of people's rankings is a head-scratcher for me; other than the Rollins cash-in, which you had to know was coming given how much people were crapping over Roman at the time, there really wasn't much to it.

[Y 2 Jake]

WrestleMania 9 is one of my top shows ever.