Complete abomination.

Best Match:

Worst Match:

Favorite Moment:

Least Favorite Moment:

Who Stole the Show:

OVERALL (Additional Comments):

Best Match: Cena vs. Rollins, no question. 

Worst Match: Probably the IC title match. I wasn't feelin' it.

Favorite Moment: Seth's sick superplex that he floated over into that Michinoku Driver. The Bellas losing was a highlight for me, tbh. I was also pleasantly surprised by Stephen Amell's performance. You go, Arrow!

Least Favorite Moment: The finish of the main event. I wanted Taker to win, but not like THAT. Also, Jon Stewart jumping his old ass into the Title vs. Title match. I better not ever catch him on the street after that shit.

Who Stole The Show: Seeeeth. For obvious reasons. And the Divas match was all kinds of turnt. Those girls killed it.

Additional Comments: Good show overall, I feel. There were highs and there were lows, but make no mistake, the highs were fucking HIGH, and they were great. All of the lows would be forgiven if not for Jon Stewart's bullshit and the whack finish to the main event.

Best Match: Dean Ambrose and Roman Reigns Vs. Luke Harper and Erick Rowan

Worst Match: Randy Orton Vs. Sheamus (fuck this feud)

Favorite Moment: when Dean Ambrose won a PPV match (FINALLY)

Least Favorite Moment: When WWE put another actor over good talent

Who Stole The Show: Undertaker

OVERALL: They are pushing Seth Rollins to the moon ladies and gentlemen

Best Match: Cesaro vs. Kevin Owens.... a pretty good performance by those two.

Worst Match: Main Event.... and for some reason, Divas Match.

Favorite Moment: 

Least Favorite Moment: Main event ending.... Obviously a momentum killer.

Who Stole The Show: Seth Rollins, ofc. Welcome to the Triple Crown club!

Overall: 5/10. so-so show.... Takeover still took over.

Randy Orton vs Sheamus
Boring and forgettable match, couldn't get into this at all and really was hardly paying attention to it, typical Orton match. ** 1/4

Fatal-Four Way Tag Title match
AMAZING. The New Day is amazing in every way, from that EPIC promo they did at the start of the show to the just the way Xavier Woods was going all on match, shit like 'Big E is triceps meat!' and just the whole action. Was it a total spotfest? Sure but it was completely entertaining and the most fun I had watching this mess of a show. New Day put this over the edge. *** 1/2

Dolph Ziggler vs Rusev
Eh, this was what it was. Rusev was pretty good in the match and Zigger was ...there. They had some nice spots but ultimately a forgettable match with a cheap finish. ** 3/4

Wade Barrett and Stardust vs. Neville and Stephen Amell
This was soooo much better than I was expecting it to be, Stephen Amell looked really good in the match and actually took some good bumps. Pretty cool for Neville to get a win in such a huge match, really enjoyable match and they told a good story with the heels just pounding on the celebrity. No faults with this. ***


The Wyatt Family vs. Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose

This was a good wild match that had some nice spots thrown in it and a anti-climatic finish but I truthfully remember fuck all. ** 1/2

Miz vs RyBack vs The Big Show
Surprisingly entertaining, again its just a bunch of spots but my expectations for this were really low so it was at least easy to watch even if the actual match wasn't that great and kept short. **

John Cena vs Seth Rollins
Okay, first on the positives: Right up until the finish, this was an incredible match and was a sure-fire Match of the Year candidate. Rollins was amazing and Cena was very good aswell, the whole match seemed to be wanting to make Rollins look like a top level wrestler (which he obviously is) and the star of the company and they actually were doing a good job with that, he had an answer to everything Cena threw at him and pretty much dominated Cena. He worked the nose and Rollins hitting an AA on Cena was amazing. Then of course, the ending. Jon fucking Stewart coming out with a chair and hitting Cena letting Rollins win. Who the fuck thought that was a good idea? Seriously? That just made Rollins look so weak and it didn't help Stewart telegraphed that finish the second he entered the ring. This wouldn't look out of place in WCW 2000, great match with a horrible finish (and SHOCKINGLY isn't even the worst finish on the card) **** 1/4

Divas tag match
Well um, this happened. My interest levels dropped once Sasha Banks was eliminated, went on too long.  * 3/4

Kevin Owens vs Cesaro
Loved this, absolutely loved it. Best match on the whole show and surprise, surprise, it's one of the few with no shitty booking attached to it. These two brought it and tore the goddamn house down. These two should REALLY be competing for the world title, holy hell. **** 1/4

Brock Lesnar vs The Undertaker
Hated it, absolutely hated it. I'm sorry but the last three Brock Lesnar matches I've seen in the last year have involved him no-selling AA's, Curb Stomps, Spears, two on one handicap matches essentially, going through announce tables and basically dominating everybody but now I'm lead to believe he's actually gonna sell moves AND have a back and forth match with a 50 year old man? I'm meant to believe a fuckin former UFC Heavyweight Champion can't dominate a broken down old man? Nope. Couldn't get into this match which is sad because Brocks easily one of my all time favorites but this was absurd.

And that fucking ending, not even Vince Russo booked anything close to the levels of retardness that was that finish. First, what's the point in ringing the bell and booking a ''screwjob'' finish when NOBODY could see Taker tap?? Why the hell would you confused everybody like that?? It makes absolutely no sense, and most of all - considering Taker's only tapped out once in his career, you'd think they'd make him tapping out again to be...ya know ...a BIG deal? Then have Lesnar pass out? This guy beat the streak, squashed Cena, went on a unbeatable God mode gimmick and basically just to give the biggest rub in the history of professional wrestling BACK to fuckin Undertaker? That should have gone to somebody else - a Rollins, a Reigns, a Cesaro, a Kevin Owens- Nobody came out of that looking good. Stupidest booking decision that WWE's ever made. * 1/2

Fuck this company so much. It's a reminder of why I barely, if ever, watch WWE anymore. Most of the stuff here was utterly forgettable or had HORRIBLE booking to the fuckin finishes and anything to do with Jon Stewart was terrible, I.E the finish, the Foley and Heyman segs (Seriously, who has bad segs with those guys?). What was the point of him? Ultimately, it's a show with utter tripe booking, two all-time horrible finishes and the waste of the biggest rub in history gone down the toilet to appease Takers fuckin ego (Oh Imagine the out-roar if Cena did that ...) so we can Brock/Taker 3. Fuck WWE.

Seth Rollins =

Fam. Owens is the best thing in WWE. Fuck the rest of 'em. Except Ziggler ofc <3

Best Match: Seth's match

Worst Match: The matches that didn't include Seth Rollins

Favorite Moment: The crowning of Seth Rollins

Least Favorite Moment: The moments Rollins wasn't the protagonist of.

Who Stole The Show: Seth Rollins

Overall: 10/10 would watch Seth win again

6/10

Aside from the ending, the show was pretty fucking good; probably the best the main roster has put on since Wrestlemania. 9/10.

Re watched and re rating after further evaluation, 7.5/10

Very good PPV for WWE. The future shined, not only Seth Rollins but Owens, Cesaro, New Day. Every match played their part and I didn't think anything was terribly bad.

I wish the Jon Stewart run in was better, like if he actually played up screwing Rollins a bit before hitting Cena. Clearly went to hit Cena too early then had to play it off like no one knew what he was going to do next. In the end, the move got WWE a ton of news exposure and Rollins def deserved the win.

The Taker/Brock finish could have been executed better, but again I understand the booking just like the Cena/Rollins finish. Taker had to cheat somehow to defeat Lesnar. I'm hoping we get the 3rd match at HIAC and move both guys on to good WM feuds. Taker/Sting is probably on everyone's mind, and I wouldn't mind seeing Lesnar/Rollins for the title at Mania. Who else could Lesnar face after Taker?

StarrStan wrote:

The Taker/Brock finish could have been executed better, but again I understand the booking just like the Cena/Rollins finish. Taker had to cheat somehow to defeat Lesnar. I'm hoping we get the 3rd match at HIAC and move both guys on to good WM feuds. Taker/Sting is probably on everyone's mind, and I wouldn't mind seeing Lesnar/Rollins for the title at Mania. Who else could Lesnar face after Taker?

The thing is the whole timekeeper shit opens up a whole new can of worms, is the timekeeper always going to ring the bell now when something happens? Why didn't the timekeeper ring the bell when Stewart attacked Cena and called for a DQ if he somehow has the power to call decisions the referee can't see? Is he gonna do that more often in the future? Why has he NEVER done it before?

There's so many other ways they could have done that to make it less confusing, easily could have had taker tapping with the ref missing it and having Brock break the tap and have Brock celebrating while Paul is shocked that he made Taker tap and then Taker rolls him up or whatever, would have been less damaging than having a guy they built up as an Unbeatable God of the Universe for the last two years pass out to a senior citizen. Granted any version of Taker beating Brock would have been dumb and wrong but at least it wouldn't have been assshit booking that wouldn't look out of place in TNA.

Best in the World. wrote:

Fam. Owens is the best thing in WWE. Fuck the rest of 'em. Except Ziggler ofc <3

nah fam fuck ziggler especially

Dark Demon wrote:

StarrStan wrote:

The Taker/Brock finish could have been executed better, but again I understand the booking just like the Cena/Rollins finish. Taker had to cheat somehow to defeat Lesnar. I'm hoping we get the 3rd match at HIAC and move both guys on to good WM feuds. Taker/Sting is probably on everyone's mind, and I wouldn't mind seeing Lesnar/Rollins for the title at Mania. Who else could Lesnar face after Taker?

The thing is the whole timekeeper shit opens up a whole new can of worms, is the timekeeper always going to ring the bell now when something happens? Why didn't the timekeeper ring the bell when Stewart attacked Cena and called for a DQ if he somehow has the power to call decisions the referee can't see? Is he gonna do that more often in the future? Why has he NEVER done it before?

There's so many other ways they could have done that to make it less confusing, easily could have had taker tapping with the ref missing it and having Brock break the tap and have Brock celebrating while Paul is shocked that he made Taker tap and then Taker rolls him up or whatever, would have been less damaging than having a guy they built up as an Unbeatable God of the Universe for the last two years pass out to a senior citizen. Granted any version of Taker beating Brock would have been dumb and wrong but at least it wouldn't have been assshit booking that wouldn't look out of place in TNA.

You bash Taker but to the WWE universe he's a deadman immortal all powerful creature. Also, would you or anyone have questioned Taker beating Brock clean at WM 29 and keeping the streak alive? Taker NEEDED that win, I agree the timekeeper shit was hella confusing and dumb and that's kind of what I meant by better execution. WWE tried to get creative, they tried to give both guys the win, but all it did was confuse people and make the ref/timekeeper look like idiots instead of making either wrestler look good.

StarrStan wrote:

Dark Demon wrote:

StarrStan wrote:

The Taker/Brock finish could have been executed better, but again I understand the booking just like the Cena/Rollins finish. Taker had to cheat somehow to defeat Lesnar. I'm hoping we get the 3rd match at HIAC and move both guys on to good WM feuds. Taker/Sting is probably on everyone's mind, and I wouldn't mind seeing Lesnar/Rollins for the title at Mania. Who else could Lesnar face after Taker?

The thing is the whole timekeeper shit opens up a whole new can of worms, is the timekeeper always going to ring the bell now when something happens? Why didn't the timekeeper ring the bell when Stewart attacked Cena and called for a DQ if he somehow has the power to call decisions the referee can't see? Is he gonna do that more often in the future? Why has he NEVER done it before?

There's so many other ways they could have done that to make it less confusing, easily could have had taker tapping with the ref missing it and having Brock break the tap and have Brock celebrating while Paul is shocked that he made Taker tap and then Taker rolls him up or whatever, would have been less damaging than having a guy they built up as an Unbeatable God of the Universe for the last two years pass out to a senior citizen. Granted any version of Taker beating Brock would have been dumb and wrong but at least it wouldn't have been assshit booking that wouldn't look out of place in TNA.

You bash Taker but to the WWE universe he's a deadman immortal all powerful creature. Also, would you or anyone have questioned Taker beating Brock clean at WM 29 and keeping the streak alive? Taker NEEDED that win, I agree the timekeeper shit was hella confusing and dumb and that's kind of what I meant by better execution. WWE tried to get creative, they tried to give both guys the win, but all it did was confuse people and make the ref/timekeeper look like idiots instead of making either wrestler look good.

I have to agree with Starr on this. We have this weird thing in EAW where we go "Realistically Undertaker couldn't beat Brock" but I'm not looking for realism. If WWE was so realistic do you genuinely think that someone like Mick Foley could have been a champion? Or the Miz? The Undertaker has been placed in the Universe as a godlike being of immortality. Realism can be thrown out the window. Suspended Disbelief. The booking decision could have been executed better, yes, absolutely, but this doesn't mean that WWE just killed a career. This opens up a few more ideas. It was just poorly executed at Summerslam, which is a bit disappointing.

Eclipse Diemos wrote:

StarrStan wrote:

Dark Demon wrote:

StarrStan wrote:

The Taker/Brock finish could have been executed better, but again I understand the booking just like the Cena/Rollins finish. Taker had to cheat somehow to defeat Lesnar. I'm hoping we get the 3rd match at HIAC and move both guys on to good WM feuds. Taker/Sting is probably on everyone's mind, and I wouldn't mind seeing Lesnar/Rollins for the title at Mania. Who else could Lesnar face after Taker?

The thing is the whole timekeeper shit opens up a whole new can of worms, is the timekeeper always going to ring the bell now when something happens? Why didn't the timekeeper ring the bell when Stewart attacked Cena and called for a DQ if he somehow has the power to call decisions the referee can't see? Is he gonna do that more often in the future? Why has he NEVER done it before?

There's so many other ways they could have done that to make it less confusing, easily could have had taker tapping with the ref missing it and having Brock break the tap and have Brock celebrating while Paul is shocked that he made Taker tap and then Taker rolls him up or whatever, would have been less damaging than having a guy they built up as an Unbeatable God of the Universe for the last two years pass out to a senior citizen. Granted any version of Taker beating Brock would have been dumb and wrong but at least it wouldn't have been assshit booking that wouldn't look out of place in TNA.

You bash Taker but to the WWE universe he's a deadman immortal all powerful creature. Also, would you or anyone have questioned Taker beating Brock clean at WM 29 and keeping the streak alive? Taker NEEDED that win, I agree the timekeeper shit was hella confusing and dumb and that's kind of what I meant by better execution. WWE tried to get creative, they tried to give both guys the win, but all it did was confuse people and make the ref/timekeeper look like idiots instead of making either wrestler look good.

I have to agree with Starr on this. We have this weird thing in EAW where we go "Realistically Undertaker couldn't beat Brock" but I'm not looking for realism. If WWE was so realistic do you genuinely think that someone like Mick Foley could have been a champion? Or the Miz? The Undertaker has been placed in the Universe as a godlike being of immortality. Realism can be thrown out the window. Suspended Disbelief. The booking decision could have been executed better, yes, absolutely, but this doesn't mean that WWE just killed a career. This opens up a few more ideas. It was just poorly executed at Summerslam, which is a bit disappointing.

I'm looking at Brock the way WWE built him up to be looked at. He no-sold and didn't seem remotely bothered by anybody moves for an entire year. He took Superman Punches, Spears, AA's (regardless of what peoples opinions on how affective the move is, it's been established to actually put people down for a decade), Curb Stomps and god knows what else. You call EAW weird for looking at things ''realistically' and should 'suspend disbelief' but I can't ''suspend disbelief'' and actually look at Brock the way WWE very clearly intended for me to look at him for the last year and a half? Why exactly is he selling for Taker now? Why the hell would he be having a competitive back and forth match with him? I'd be more willingly to buy into it if Taker used weapons, attacked Lesnar from behind or did something remotely else than actually have a competitve match with an unstoppable monster - what was that the entire purpose of giving Lesnar an unstoppable god of the universe aura JUST so Taker can make him look human? How fucking awful must Cena, Reigns and Rollins be if their best moves don't even affect Brock but Takers moves are somehow superior - That's a great job in making your full-time roster look good.

Even if you want to suspend that disbelief just because it's Taker, why exactly does he need to win? For what purpose? There was no need to book that match. He beat Wyatt at Wrestlemania (And I'd argue Wyatt needed that win more than Taker otherwise why fucking book it) so he looks good, you can easily have him take the year off again and face Sting or whoever at Wrestlemania next year. There was absolutely no need to book that match whatsoever if both guys couldn't lose. Nobody wanted to see a rematch, nobody was demanding it they could have let it go.

They obviously didn't end a career, but they wasted a rub of Brock being unbeaten for two and a half years, ending the streak and looking untouchable on the fucking Undertaker so he can get his win back. Everybody moaned and bitched about Brock ending the streak because he's a part-timer but imagine how much more impressive it'd be for a Reigns (who'd make a helluva lot more considering what happened at Mania), Rollins, Owens, Cesaro, Ambrose etc to actually be the guy who beat the guy who ended the streak and became God. It's a helluva lot less impressive now considering Taker, who doesn't need anything at this point in his fucking career, just made him pass fucking out.