So yeah, when they said "all 17 of Shawn's Wrestlemania matches" what they REALLY meant was "16 of them and we'll pretend the 17th didn't happen."
Honestly, the Benoit stuff is a bit ridiculous at this point. If you want to not promote his match on the DVD, fine, but to excise a classic Wrestlemania match from history and cheat the consumers who would assume it was on the DVD? Come on now.
I'm kind of okay with them never reissuing a match featuring a man who murdered his wife and child winning the World Championship at Wrestlemania and celebrating to the cheers of the crowd with confetti and pyro.
ReplyDeleteAmen. Fuck Benoit.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Shawn isn't comfortable with it being included? I'm meh on it either way. I have no problem watching his matches but can't fault people who do.
ReplyDeleteThis is celebrating HBK, not Benoit. WM 20 was one of HBK's best wrestlemania matches, and that's saying something. Keeping this match off removes a big part of HBK history. It was his first WM main event since his return.
ReplyDeleteThis kind of revisionist history only happens in wrestling. You don't see them removing OJ simpson from the Naked Gun DVDs for example. I understand WWE not promoting a Benoit Box Set, but don't ignore history. It is a shame they can't do a complete history of HBK's WM matches.
But it's the phony world championship. A kid watching it today would wonder why anyone cares about Del Rio's vanity belt.
ReplyDeleteIs there anyone who is interested in a Shawn Michaels DVD who doesn't already have every WrestleMania on DVD anyway? Anyone buying Michales DVDs is a big old super-smark… this package is a total miss. We want rare Michaels shit, not stuff that's already been released on (in some cases) 3 other DVDs.
ReplyDeleteBut I guess if you're WrestleMania V disc is scratched and you REALLY WANT to see the Big Boss Man debut the powerbomb on North American ppv….
Even if they had included the match, they probably would have had to fuck about with it a lot anyway because HHH & Shawn both bleed like hogs almost all the way through.
ReplyDeleteMust just be personal soreness on the subject keeping them from doing it, because they've put out stuff with Benoit in it before. Plus by now the bad press would've died off.
ReplyDeleteOh and something something Stevie Richards.
It's easier to sneak Benoit in there in multiman matches. There is no hiding him in 20.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I agree. I'm hard pressed to call it a "classic match" when I can't separate the wrestling performance from the fact this dude murdered his family.
ReplyDeleteAnd this is sadly, coming from Benoit's #1 fan beyond even Scott back in the day. I just don't talk about it a lot (for obvious reasons)
You know, since 2007 I had actually not watched anything involving Benoit. Not by choice, it just kind of happened. So now, in my long watch through of WWE from 1997 on (which I've pretty much slowed down on since hitting 2000), I got a little uneasy watching anything involving Benoit.
ReplyDeleteIn the back of my head, all I could think was "in seven years, this guy is going to kill his family and himself".
Except they already included Benoit matches on the Elimination Chamber and War Games sets. While I hate Benoit and I refuse to watch his matches regardless, it makes no sense to exempt him from most sets but keep his matches intact on other sets. They should just exempt him from all sets like they initially claimed they were going to do.
ReplyDeleteBut then again, they also claimed they were going to release the complete Survivor Series Anthology on DVD and yet they stopped releasing those without anything resembling an explanation so who knows what they're thinking when they make his claims.
That could be. He's going to be giving some thoughts on each match, it would be tough for him to say anything about that one.
ReplyDeleteAnd celebrating in the ring with the two people he would inevitably murder.
ReplyDeleteIf we're going to rake WWE over the coals, it should be for painting themselves into a corner by making the DVD in the first place, not for removing a Benoit match from the set. And if you feel like you MUST make the DVD, just make it a "Best of" instead of a definitive collection. I'm sure no one is hurting to see The Rockers vs. The Orient Express go to a countout.
They can sneak him onto those sets quietly .He's the star of the WM XX match which puts it in a different category altogether
ReplyDeleteI dunno if anyone would buy that.
ReplyDeleteI'm definitely not someone who wants to watch any Benoit stuff (though I was a big fan at a time), but this is just false advertising unless they include a little blurb somewhere in the packaging. Like someone else said, just cut it off when Benoit wins, don't give him an intro, and maybe alter the commentary. You are either selling a set of ALL of HBK's mania matches, or you aren't. There's no in between.
ReplyDeleteI felt the same way, until I watched more and more. Do I see myself watching a horrible murderer? No, I see someone who gave everything to entertain us. It's unfortunate "everything" meant giving himself severe brain damage that triggered his instability that lead to him brutally murdering his family.
ReplyDeleteHey, for all we know, maybe Shawn didn't like Hunter's boots.
ReplyDeleteIf they are going to erase a person who murdered another human being, then erase the WM 10 Ladder Match. Oh wait, thats right..... Scott Hall is a friend.
ReplyDeleteWWE is nothing but damn hypocrites.
It's not like anybody's going to buy the 29th recycling of the Shawn/Bret Iron Man match. Seriously though, is Ted Turner in charge of their DVD department now? What's with their constant recycling of the same old shit while they won't even put any Tuesday Night Titans material or Gorilla/Bobby Prime Time skits on DVD?
ReplyDeletelulz
ReplyDeletefind the ESPN E:60 about Scott Hall. You'll see
ReplyDeletewhen Chris Johnson was running for 2000 yards in the NFL in 2009, and Adrian Peterson was doing the same last year, every game they played in during the waning weeks would show the "2000 Club" of the select few who eclipsed the mark. Of course, this meant including OJ Simpson.
ReplyDeleteNow, fine, OJ was found not guilty in 1995, but his name was beyond tainted, and he could never do anything in a positive celebrity light again. His name was ruined, and when you think OJ, you think of the double homicide. And yet, the NFL still mentions him by name for historical reasons. Hell, a number of NFL Network Top 10 specials have included OJ, focusing on his football achievements and fame. Near as I can tell, this has NEVER been a problem. And this is after he was sentenced to 30+ years for pulling a gun on memorabilia dealers.
What difference would it make to include Benoit matches, not erase Benoit mentions on commentary, etc? How paranoid do you have to be as a company to think it's all going to come crashing down as a result of one man's actions over six years ago, just because you're including him as part of a history package? Is the Mattel contract riding on some convoluted morals clause?
WWE really is the whore saying "I'm not a whore!" while jizz dribbles out of both sides of its mouth.
Benoit killed his kid.
ReplyDeleteNo, they're not.
ReplyDeleteI did. They're not. This is really stupid
ReplyDeleteDifference is...Benoit was booked to win. Wrestling is worked. OJ Simpson actually physically got those records. If football was worked it'd be the same.
ReplyDeleteI have zero problem with Benoit being erased from existence but I am kinda surprised that WWE wouldnt think these things out a little better. Good thing Benoit never jobbed to Taker at Mania, the streak would always be missing a match too....
ReplyDeleteWHERE IS THE PROOF?????
ReplyDelete/Some asshole on here last time this came up
Dustin Harris, I'm still waiting for you to respond to that discussion.
ReplyDeleteI didn't respond? I forget exactly where it left off
ReplyDeleteOJ killed his wife (most likely).
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying 'put him in the hall', because I agree that's too far. Still, they include Jimmy Snuka, Johnny K9 (80s jobber), and likely other scumfucks on their DVDs and on-demand programming. The difference is, Benoit's made international headlines. Bad press > morals, in Vince's mind.
...the fuck? I was all prepared to credit you for a cool name too... damn shame.
ReplyDeleteBenoit killed his wife and kid. They don't want to glorify a child killer. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
ReplyDeletePeople called him an idiot, and he got indignant, so I actually pointed out to him the proof Benoit did it. He never responded, so I've been trying to get him to respond to it since then
ReplyDeleteI refuse to believe that anyone still wanting Benoit in a HOF or on a DVD is a parent. Just nuts that some people still show this monster support.
ReplyDeletePeople like that will rarely let something like proof get in their way
ReplyDeleteBenoit didn't most likely kill his kid or wife, he definitely did. Huge difference. And are you really going to use some dude named Johnny K9 to try and prove your point?
ReplyDeleteactually, yes. If it's all about morals, and the sanctity of life, then WWE would take him off any Maple Leaf Garden shows that run OnDemand. But hey, he didn't make sensationalist news. Big difference.
ReplyDeleteThat's a terrible comparison. Nobody knows who Johnny K-9 even is.
ReplyDeleteBenoit used to wrestle under the name Johnny K-9 when he first started out.....
ReplyDeletemy point exactly. I don't even need to argue anymore
ReplyDeleteYou don't because you're wrong. You tried to use OJ and that didn't work since football and wrestling are two different sports.
ReplyDeleteNow you're trying to use Johnny K-9, a wrestler no one has heard of.
It doesn't change the fact there's nothing wrong wrong with them not featuring Benoit's matches. He killed his child while he was a prominent part of WWE. Why would or should they showcase that? Why do they want to remind people or showcase him?
ReplyDeleteOf all the things to criticise WWE for, you're criticising them for not glorifying a child killer?
This is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read. There is plenty to take WWE to task for but this is one of the rare times they are doing the right thing.
ReplyDeleteThere is simply no reason to glorify a coward that killed two people (including an innocent child) and himself. Any good he did in this world was erased by those deeds.
Why can't people let this go already? You want Benoit, go watch on Youtube. He doesn't belong on DVDs where JR and co. might be praising him in a match and he certainly doesn't belong in any HOF's....
I hope WWE puts up a graphic on the DVD that says out of respect to the memory of Nancy and Daniel Benoit, the WM XX match will not be featured.
ReplyDeleteThose are the two people that always seem to get lost and forgotten in this Chris Benoit mess, which is a terrible shame...
Benoit was good at choreographing fake wrestling matches, so it's okay.
ReplyDeleteYou're literally the only person who knows this dude even existed.
ReplyDeleteYou don't come in here and quote the Final Fantasy movie!
ReplyDeleteJimmy Snuka killed a hooker (allegedly), so that doesn't count.
ReplyDeleteThat was in self defense.
ReplyDeleteI doubt Benoit was defending himself against his son.
I hope you're at least against WWE putting a CONVICTED rapist in Mike Tyson into their Hall of Fame, and glorifying him with guest appearances and the like (including his inclusion as a playable character in last year's WWE game).
ReplyDeleteI realize the circumstances of his conviction are a little suspect, but regardless, it remains on his record. Rape and murder are capital offenses alike.
I like this solution. It points out that Benoit was in fact a wrestler who existed and may have been in some good matches but it also gives a valid reason behind why they choose not to include said matches on a particular dvd.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that everyone forgets Mike Tyson raped someone absolutely bothers me, yes.
ReplyDeleteMike Tyson is no saint but I refuse to believe he raped that chick. Why would that girl go up to that room in the middle of the night?
ReplyDeleteDo you think if his status as a convicted rapist were the subject of sensationalist news stories in this social-media-frenzied, 24-hours-of-news-that-isn't-necessarily-news world, we'd see Tyson anywhere near WWE?
ReplyDeletePerception is reality. Tyson's image as an absurd figure with lots of quotable malapropisms outweighs the 1991 rape, so say those who choose what's news and what isn't. The fact that the mainstream knows Benoit as a murderer (the 'wrestling murderer' is different than 'a brilliant wrestler, and then eventually the murderer') is what keeps Benoit buried.
I'll never defend what he did. I guess it's just a matter of me being able to watch his body of work without feeling icky. I can watch WrestleMania XIV with Tyson's appearance, knowing full well something happened in that hotel room in 1991. I even chipped in to see his 2002 fight with Lennox Lewis, mostly because I wanted to see Lewis maul him.
I honestly don't know if he raped her either, but I never like that argument. That doesn't equal consent.
ReplyDeleteAgain, you are comparing a rapist with a guy that murdered two people including his child and himself. Sorry, its not even close. WWE is 100% correct in what they are doing when it pertains to Benoit...
ReplyDeleteboth are capital offenses; both can get you the death penalty if convicted in the right state
ReplyDeleteI agree it doesnt equal consent. Just find it odd that the girl would go to his room in the middle of the night, especially with his reputation. Always felt that Mike was wronged in that case. King provided him with terrible representation.
ReplyDeleteTyson also seems pretty damn adamant all these years later that he didnt do it, when it really wouldnt affect his standing if he did admit he did it.
Sure they can but you really think that supposed rape was worse or even on equal footing to what Benoit did?
ReplyDeleteI mean, yea, there's a lot of grey area and Don King fucked him.
ReplyDeleteI think that's part of Tyson's gameplan to make people think he didn't do it by admitting to every other horrible thing but making sure he denies the rape
You cannot get the death penalty for rape
ReplyDeleteI think both are incredibly fucked up and twisted. As I said, the Tyson conviction is questionable in hindsight, but because Tyson's seen more as a mush-mouthed quirk than a capital offender, he's welcome in WWE's arms. Public perception will always trump evenhandedness.
ReplyDeleteAnd just a reminder, I'm not calling for Benoit to be enshrined or honored in any way. Just a tag match with him and, say, Arn against Sullivan and Giant on some DVD wouldn't end the world or stop time.
I think making it taboo has kept him 'alive' more than including him with little fanfare has, honestly.
you're right, I was incorrect. It can net a life sentence, however.
ReplyDeleteI cant fathom that a nut like Tyson can even comprehend what a game plan is, lol.
ReplyDeleteFunny thing is I was never a fan of Tyson's, but I never believed he raped that chick.
Like he says, he deserved to be in jail for other stuff he did, so he got what he deserved and unlike Benoit, he served his time like a man and didnt take the weak way out...
I think he knows Mike Tyson beating people up is funny, Mike Tyson biting someone's ear off is funny, Mike Tyson being crazy is funny, so he plays that up.
ReplyDeleteBut he knows the rape stuff is no laughing matter, so I think he makes sure people to deny that one.
But a lot of people don't want to watch Benoit. He makes people uncomfortable. It's out of respect for the victims and an acknowledgment of what he did that you quietly erase him from history.
ReplyDeleteIt's people spazzing out every time a DVD comes out that Benoit could be on that keeps this debate going
Tyson served his time, he paid his debt to society. Benoit didnt serve any time and he didnt pay anybody back.
ReplyDeleteHe left his other son without his brother and his father. He left Nancy's family without their daughter, sister, nephew, and grandson. Those people will never see Nancy or Daniel again, they shouldnt have to be reminded by that by WWE glorifying the maniac that made it happen in DVD releases...
Maybe true but I'll never believe he did it....
ReplyDeleteI guess in an odd sort of way, seeing the homogenization of the once proudly-archaic wrestling, and a drift toward the inoffensive and panderingly formulaic, the idea of reinstalling Benoit on even a minor scale is one of the few taboos left.
ReplyDeleteWhen you make things too safe, those taboos get a lot of attention.
People don't want to see a child killer. I remember being weirded out when HBK and HHH tried to bring back the crossface
ReplyDeleteSo lemme guess, once they go away from being safe by including Benoit in DVDs, what next, you want the footage of Owen's fall?
ReplyDeletea fair question: the investigation into Nancy Argentino's death was recently reopened. Snuka was held financially liable for her death, but never paid, claiming he didn't have the money.
ReplyDeletePresumably, this case won't be featured on Nancy Grace or Bill O'Reilly. If there comes to be irrefutable evidence that he killed her, do you believe WWE would absolutely wash their hands of all things Snuka?
why would I want to see a man's death? Sounds like you really wanna see it, since it came to mind so quickly.
ReplyDeleteI think they'd probably be very delicate about Snuka footage if it went to trial
ReplyDeleteAgain, this is a bit of a different circumstance. but with WWE being a publicly trade company, It wouldn't surprise me if they did.
ReplyDeleteyes, 'delicate'. Not an outright whitewashing, because there's no media frenzy attached.
ReplyDeleteIf Tamina's heritage is still brought up, we'll know which way the wind blows.
Not at all, just seems like the way a person supporting a child killer would think...
ReplyDeletewhere did I say I supported him? I just said I'm not emotionally distraught at the image of him. Then again, I can listen to the Sex Pistols, and Sid killed Nancy, so.....
ReplyDeleteYou are really reaching with this Snuka stuff. Its just not the same as what Benoit did. He killed an innocent child. When children are involved, its a much bigger deal.
ReplyDeleteNice to know that a woman getting her head violently bashed on a radiator can be considered second-class on the justice scale.
ReplyDeleteSid didnt kill his child though. That is the point you keep missing, when a child is involved, it becomes a much bigger deal...
ReplyDeleteshow me any piece of legislation that specifically states a child killer should be given less leniency than a killer of adults. Your reaction is on emotion, not justice.
ReplyDeleteIts not second class, but its just not the same thing. Still cant believe you are arguing in favor of releasing DVDs of this monster that will only bring pain to the remaining family...
ReplyDeleteRight. Nancy Argentino's family would get a big kick seeing Jimmy Snuka at WrestleMania XXV collecting money that they'll never see.
ReplyDeleteIn the court of public opinion, Im willing to bet that many would find killing an innocent defenseless child a bigger deal than killing an adult. Im not saying that one person's life has more value than another either.
ReplyDeleteI just cant compare women that were killed by men that they knew were drug addicts with issues to a child that was killed by his daddy...
Was Snuka ever convicted of the crime? Is there 100% solid proof that he did it?
ReplyDeleteyou're emotional and I'm practical, so we'll never agree. I get where you're coming from, but I feel WWE has far too many holes to come off as 'morally superior' with their Benoit whitewashing
ReplyDeleteBenoit was never convicted either. I don't recall there being a trial.
ReplyDeleteKidding aside, Snuka WAS held FINANCIALLY LIABLE. He has NEVER given a CENT to the victim's family.
Don't ignore that.
Like i say, WWE has done plenty wrong, possibly with Snuka too, but they are dead on with the Benoit thing.
ReplyDeleteI honestly believe they knew he committed the murders when they did the tribute but went through with it knowing they would never mention him again in a decent light following that Raw.
I think the tribute show was a way to do a show to appease the sponsors. The crew was too distraught, and they couldn't run a legit show with a story based on what they knew, so of their limited options, that was the best one, excluding "no show at all". Never underestimate the soullessness of sponsors.
ReplyDeleteIm not ignoring it, in all likelihood he did it and Im guessing if he was ever convicted, you would no longer see him on any WWE programming.
ReplyDeleteAnd its not being emotional by saying that people are more affected when seeing a child killed than anything else. It was a very tragic thing and WWE is just doing the out of sight, out of mind thing. Really is the best way to go, no sense in revisiting such a terrible thing...
Civil suits are totally different. There's are far less burden of proof.
ReplyDeleteSnuka's a scumbag obviously.
They could've ran other stuff, even an old PPV. This was their way to say goodbye in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI somehow doubt there'd be a $500,000 default settlement if she slipped and fell while he was busy showering.
ReplyDeleteIt's a story that isnt really well known outside the wrestling community. If it got mainstream coverage, he wouldnt be seen or heard about.
ReplyDeletethat's precisely the point I've spent an hour trying to make :-)
ReplyDeleteBut it's a 30 year old non story until something happens, while the Benoit thing was during a different time where you had it on Nancy Grace, etc. every night and again there was a child involved.
ReplyDeleteI also doubt that if it came out tomorrow that Snuka did kill the lady, watching Snuka matches would bother people nearly as much as watching Benoit matches does.
and that's my other point, which I will end this spirited debate with, because I'm tired:
ReplyDeleteIt's more about appeasing sponsors and comfort than it is about the balance of justice
We can agree to disagree but I wonder if it might also have an affect on the people involved.
ReplyDeleteVince and co can be scumbags but they knew all three people that wound up dead, perhaps there is an emotional connection for the folks behind the scenes that is tough for them to deal with.....
"Im not saying that one person's life has more value than another either"
ReplyDeleteActually that's exactly what your saying, by suggesting that a child's death should be treated as a bigger deal than an adults death.
And yet does Daniel Bryan using it today weird you out?
ReplyDeleteWhile I support the Benoit ban, I don't get why they don't give Jimmy Snuka the same treatment they give Benoit. After all, he killed his girlfriend and it definitely was not in self-defense. Jimmy did the same thing to his girlfriend that Benoit did to his wife and son yet Benoit gets erased (justifiably so) while Jimmy still gets name dropped during his daughter's matches every week.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Vince didn't want to cut a royalty check to Benoit's corpse.
ReplyDeleteThey ain't doing that either. The name "Benoit" is toxic, no matter which one it is. Honestly I'm surprised they let Jericho invite his kid to the shows, let alone take pictures of him on the set.
ReplyDeleteThey should just sub in the HIAC match between DX and Vince/Shane/Big Show. It's out of sequence, but the visual of having Vince's bloody head shoved up Big Show's ass can't be any worse than Benoit.
ReplyDeleteThe funny thing about Snuka and Benoit is that Vince is sorta complicit in Snuka's case. I bet that's one they'd rather not see the light of day, I have a feeling they'd rather talk about Chris Benoit all night long than open that can of worms. At least they can wash their hands of him. As much of a sick fuck as he was that weekend, at least they had nothing directly to do about it, and if you wanted to twist it around you could see the motivation for him at least killing his son... Snuka, that's just a damn tough one to explain.
Yeah, I thought that too.
ReplyDeletePathetic - no balls. Miss the days when Vince and co used to stand up for pro wrestling!
ReplyDeleteI think the best way to acknowledge terrible tragedies in history is to put it out there with disclaimers, a synopsis of the event, and let the public decide how the want to deal with it. That being said, wwe can do whatever the fuck the want because they own the footage, if they feel uncomfortable with him as a former champion, they can fucking exclude the match if they want.
ReplyDelete