Mike Rickard
Rickard's Ramblings: Will Cena vs. Khali Be As Bad As People Think, Undertaker Out of Action, Results of “Greatest Horsemen Lineup” poll, Manufactured Controversy On a WWE DVD, Box Office Results For The Condemned, and More
By Mike Rickard II
May 3, 2007, 13:47

After a long week in court, there’s nothing like rambling on about the latest happenings in the wild and wacky world of professional wrestling.  Help me wind down from lawyer mode to smark mode as I ask a few questions of you, the intelligent wrestling fan.

1. How long before Jeff Jarrett is arrested for the clothes he stole from a homeless shelter?

2. Why was Mr. Kennedy bobbing his head like a chicken at the Backlash PPV?

3. Don’t you wish Vince would bring out the barber chair and shave Carlito bald?

4. What’s worse, a Great Khali/Cena match or HBK/Cena 327?

5. What’s harder to find, a Nintendo Wii or Samoa Joe’s push on TNA?

CENA VS. GREAT KHALI:  Fans are already up in arms over what looks to be a championship series between the Great Khali and John Cena.  Last Monday’s show saw the 7’3” monster destroy all of Cena’s top contenders (Randy Orton, HBK, and Edge) before proceeding to annihilate the WWE champion, setting up what looks to be a main event program.   Personally, I don’t think the series is going to be as bad as some people are anticipating.  Like Hulk Hogan, Cena is best used as a brawler fighting off monster opponents such as Khali.  Those in doubt should look back to Cena’s matches with Umaga, a series that was a lot better than anyone expected.  And while Khali has next to nothing in terms of wrestling ability, Cena should be able to get some good brawls out of him.   Cena/Khali is a good way to kill some time as the WWE gears up for a more worthy opponent for SummerSlam.

What’s really intriguing to me about the Khali/Cena situation is whether or not the WWE is going to put the belt on Khali.   If so, the question then becomes does Cena regain the belt or does Triple H get a run against Khali.   As you probably know, the plan was for Triple H to take on Cena at Wrestlemania until Hunter’s unfortunate injury sidelined him.  With Triple H’s imminent return, this could be a great way for the WWE to present a fresh set of opponents for the WWE belt without Cena running the risk of being booed as Triple H challenges him.    (I talk more about the RAW title picture over in Club WWI so check it out and let me know what you think).

UNDERTAKER OUT; WHO’S IN? By now you’ve heard the reports about the Undertaker suffering a serious arm injury (an injury which will supposedly sideline him for seven months).  The timing couldn’t be worse for the Dead Man as he was reportedly set for a lengthy reign as World Champion over on SmackDown!  As fans send their wishes out for a quick recovery, they also have to be wondering who will be the new champion.   Should the WWE put the belt on a familiar face or a fresh face? 

GREATEST HORSEMEN ROSTER OF ALL TIME: After my review of Ric Flair and the Four Horsemen, I asked my fellow fans which incarnation of the Four Horsemen they liked the best. 

1. Ric Flair, Arn Anderson, Tully Blanchard, and Barry Windham: 50%
2. Ric Flair, Arn Anderson, Ole Anderson, & Tully Blanchard: 38.89%
3. Ric Flair, Arn Anderson, Tully Blanchard, and Lex Luger:5.56%
4. Ric Flair, Arn Anderson, Brian Pillman, & Chris Benoit: 5.56%

As you can see, the third incarnation of the Horsemen edged out the original lineup in terms of who they liked the best with the Flair/Anderson/Blanchard/Windham quartet being seen as the very cream of the crop. 

Some comments on which Horsemen lineup was the best:

I'd have to go with Flair, Arn Tully & Windham, with the original lineup a close second.

Mainly because in each and every other grouping, there is a definite weak link. And I include Sting & Pillman in that. In Sting's case, he didn't need the Horsemen and they didn't need him, and he stuck out like a huge sore thumb. With Pillman, I think he was just a little TOO crazy to fit properly. He was already heading his own way. -Aaron Wood

I also voted for the Flair, Windham, Arn and Blanchard team, as my tape collection and readings seem to suggest they were the best. That said, due to my age, my fondest memories are of the Flair, Arn, Benoit and Pillman and Flair, McMichael, Benoit and Malenko factions. BlackFrancisFan

I voted for the Windham version, as well...but I think that Luger's version was under-rated. Upon his debut in the NWA he was an instant superstar and his joining the Horsemen was seen as a very big deal at the time that made news headlines all around the wrestling world...regardless of how crappy Luger was in the ring at the time. His lack of in-ring progression only really became apparent after his jump to the WWF- Zah

What was most interesting to me was the controversy over Lex Luger.  While Paul Roma is generally considered the worst Horseman of all time, there was more than one person who felt Lex Luger never belonged as a Horseman with some people comparing his run to that of Sid Vicious.  While I’ve never been a huge fan of Lex Luger after his first run in the WWF, his work in WCW during the 1980’s and early 1990’s wasn’t as bad as many people remember.  Sometimes I wonder if Luger’s association with Miss Elizabeth around the time of her death has tarnished his legacy more than anything he did in a wrestling ring.

CONTROVERSY CREATES CASH: Speaking of the Ric Flair and the Four Horsemen DVD, Dave Meltzer reported in this week’s Wrestling Observer Newsletter that the WWE made sure to agitate Paul Roma so he had some not so nice things to say about Ric Flair and Arn Anderson.  According to Meltzer, the WWE production team led all parties involved to believe the others were less than glowing in their evaluation of each other’s work after initial comments praising their work.  If this is true (and I have no reason to doubt it), it’s really puzzling why the WWE Home Video people felt there needed to be some sort of extra controversy on the DVD.  The story of the Four Horsemen is already full of controversy whether it’s the Arn Anderson/Sid Vicious stabbing incident or Ric Flair’s longtime war with WCW’s Eric Bischoff.  Why the need to include manufactured drama between Roma and Anderson/Flair is beyond me.

IS THE CONDEMNED A FLOP?: Last week, WWE Films’ third release The Condemned (which reportedly cost $1.8 million dollars to make) debuted to a rather lackluster 3.8 million dollar opening weekend.  Unless word of mouth lifts the film to stronger ticket sales next weekend (doubtful as online reviews of the film have been less than generous in their praise), the WWE is going to have to hope for some serious home DVD sales.  WWE officials must be scratching their heads as to what happened.  The Condemned starred one of their most popular wrestlers of all time (“Stone Cold” Steve Austin) and you would think that by now, WWE Films would know what it’s doing.

While it’s too early to write off The Condemned as a flop, the WWE really needs to evaluate the future of WWE Films.  Given the DVD sales success of See No Evil and The Marine, the WWE should strongly consider future releases in the direct to DVD market.  Believe it or not, there is a strong market for certain types of films in the direct to DVD market and it’s not always a case of a studio dumping a film by releasing it straight to home video. 

As WWE Films considers its future on the silver screen, look for a small screen production featuring Mick Foley.  Foley has reportedly agreed to star in the WWE’s first made for television movie.

THIS WEEK’S MAGNIFICENT BASTARD: This week’s Magnificent Bastard Award goes to World Wrestling Insanity columnist Aaron Wood who recently put together a fantastic retrospective of WWE SmackDown!   Major kudos to Aaron who’s been doing a stellar job all around for WWI and who is one of the IWC’s rising stars.