JOHN: Welcome to the sixth edition of For Love or Money in 2005 and the thirteenth edition overall. I wasn’t really feeling it this month, so Matt came up with pretty much all the questions. I think I came up with two or three, but I barely remember. Most of the time we deal with current stuff, but this month we thought we'd do a little bit of Summerslam retrospective.
The first four questions will deal with current topics while the final six questions deal with Summerslams from the past. Think of it like a written version of Pardon the Interruption, the hit ESPN sports talk show program featuring Mike Wilbon on Tony Kornheiser. Not exactly like that, obviously, but loosely based on it.
1. Why the de-push of Shelton Benjamin all of a sudden?
Matt: I honestly have no earthly idea. A lot of it has to do with the migrations of "wrestlers" like Benoit, Christian and Orton over to Smackdown. And with Jericho now in the main event scene, Benjamin has less midcard toys to work with. He doesn't really have much in a way of personality (yet), but he gets over in the ring by having great matches. He can't do that against guys like Masters and Snitsky. Even his matches with Carlito after Vengeance weren't good because suddenly Benjamin's got a fear of the top rope. I really hope the Angle program happens sooner, rather than later, because if they wait until Mania or something, people may have stopped caring about Shelton altogether.
John: Because Vince McMahon is racist! Actually, no, he's just a guy who claims he makes good business decisions, yet he is unable to push more than one babyface at once. It's like since Cena is getting pushed no other babyface can get a really good shot up the card. Imagine how much better Benjamin vs. Angle would be instead of Eugene vs. Angle. Instead, they're wasting Angle on the handicapped guy that draws no money while the talented in-ring performer like Benjamin jobs to Masters for reasons that boggle the mind. Why the de-push? Because they're doing a shitty job of promoting in ring wrestling. That's what Benjamin is good at. That's why he's suffering. That's why Benoit is suffering on Smackdown. You hire a bunch of writers that don't know shit about wrestling then you get shit for the real wrestlers.
Matt: It's pretty ironic how the 2004 draft lottery was the best thing to happen to Shelton Benjamin's career, yet the 2005 lottery was the worst thing to happen in his career. Most of his best opponents go to Smackdown, and he loses his title to somebody who came over to Raw. To me, Benjamin's only salvation is the Angle program. Otherwise he'll be joining his former tag partner in the unemployment line by the end of the year, and I'm dead serious when I say that.
John: Ah, the prestigious IC title that is so big it can't even be defended at WrestleMania or Summerslam. That belt didn't do anything for Benjamin. He's not getting fired. He has more potential than Haas in terms of his ring work and his ability to relate to the crowd. He's not getting fired. Anyway, he'll feud with Angle when the time is right although it probably won't be Unforgiven since Cena vs. Angle is advertised heavy in Oklahoma City already. I'll take Benjamin vs. Michaels just fine.
Matt: Knowing WWE they'll stick Michaels with fucking Eugene for Unforgiven. I don't understand why they put Eugene over Benjamin. I get what you're saying about the writing team. But whatever happened to politics? Angle HAS to have some stroke. He should have pushed for Benjamin at Summerslam. But yeah, I'd love Benjamin/Michaels at Unforgiven, considering what they did on Raw a couple months back. It's not happening though.
John: Angle had to do that shitty thing where he stalks Sharmell (or Charmin as one dude wrote in spoilers this week) and now he gets Eugene after having a classic with Michaels. I don't understand. Anyway, I guess they're just saving Angle/Benjamin for later in the year when it could be a longer match and have a bigger spotlight. Still, it's a shame that Benjamin, as well as Christian, isn't on Summerslam.
Matt: I'd love to see Christian and Carlito have an argument over who gets a talk show segment on Summerslam. Just stick him somewhere. But we're getting on another topic. Moving on?
2. Has the Edge/Hardy feud been built up the right way or was there a better way to go about it?
John: If they moved Kane to Smackdown during the lottery like I said FOR MONTHS then this thing would be a lot better. However, I think they fucked it up for some fans by having Matt mention the word "marriage" with the quotes around it. I don't see how the average fan has an idea what's going on with all of this. I've got an 11-year-old nephew that I try explaining it to and even I don't understand how it's all supposed to make sense on WWE TV. Maybe if they moved Kane months ago and brought Hardy in then it would have made a bit more sense. Now what do they do when Kane comes back? I love how he's "arrested" yet WWE.com with their "breaking news" has no information about it. You gotta love WWE sometimes.
Matt: I think it's been built up as well as it could be. You have to remember, this is WWE we're talking about. I think it was good by their standards. The promos have been excellent. Last week, Edge took what was basically a one-sided feud and made the playing level even. He stopped making it all about Matt. The only negative I can really give to this is Kane's involvement, but that stopped after he was "put in jail." Kane needs to get the hell away from Lita, Snitsky and the rest of the crew...like NOW.
John: One of the funniest moments in terms of bad booking for WWE came this week when they aired the Edge/Hardy storyline with absolutely no shots of Kane in it. The guy feuded with these two (and Snitsky) exclusively for more than a year yet he's not even in the video package. No mention of the marriage, the baby or anything. Hilarious. The feud has been handled just okay. Edge's promo was great. Hardy's first attack on Edge was great. Everything else? Just okay or below average.
Matt: I think the ultimate judge of how the feud will be remembered is their Summerslam match. It really depends on what kind of match they have. Knowing how WWE books, it could probably get REALLY weird. But I think they've handled it as well as they could so far.
John: I think we'll only see some ten minute match with lots of brawling, beating up of refs, security and throwing the match out before it can ever really be a match. This thing is going to Unforgiven and probably beyond, like Survivor Series.
Matt: Keep Kane out of it, and it should be fine, says I.
John: They have kept Kane out of it. Too bad they didn't have the foresight to do it months ago.
3. Is Vince starting to go overboard on the nostalgia kick again by making Animal a tag champion and bringing in Tatanka?
Matt: Yeah man, that's enough. The one guy he DOES bring back that can actually wrestle (Marty Jannetty) he releases. Really, right now, the only person from the 1990s I'd want back is Bret Hart, and that ain't going to happen anytime soon, according to Bret. Tatanka was just a bad move. I can't believe how fat he got. Kamala was okay, because he's funny. If they can bring the comedy (and not wrestle) I'll take it. Jake the Snake's appearance a couple months ago was an example of a good cameo. Animal and Tatanka's were not.
John: You forgot to mention that Hogan guy, Matt. You know, the 52 year old that is headlining Summerslam. Yeah, that guy. I think what Vince is doing (and I can say this because he said it himself in interviews) is going after that older demographic in hopes that they'll get into the product once they see old favorites against current stars. Plus, with them pushing WWE 24/7 so much I think Vince wants the wrestlers to feel welcome on the show and to also get the fans to see these people every once in a while. To finally answer the question, I say no. If they're used for minor things (and the tag titles are minor, lets face it) then it's fine by me. Just as long as we don't see the old guys all over PPVs and stuff.
Matt: I like to reminisce, but enough is enough. Who in their right mind was actually pining to see TATANKA again? Hogan gets the pops, Piper gets the pops. Animal got the pop when he first came in. Legend appearances should be very sporadic so they mean more. And they should actually, you know, BE legends. I wouldn't mind seeing Dibiase make an appearance sometime down the road.
John: Jesus won't let Dibiase. Anyway, with Dusty Rhodes in the fold again I'm sure he'll pop up at some point too. He can have a match against JBL in the battle of the man titties.
Matt: Oh lord. Thanks for reminding me. Ah'll be changin mah channel, if you weel.
John: I wouldn't mind Dusty vs. Flair on a Raw sometime in Florida or the Carolinas. That atmosphere would be fun to see. See, as long as they don't bring them back and have them take PPV spaces away from the likes of current stars then I understand it. They want to bring back some old fans. They want to hype WWE 24/7. It's good business, just ask Vince!
Matt: Really, the only legend coming back that would be "good business" is Bret, and I don't think it'll happen anytime soon. They were doing such a good job earlier this year building toward the future, and now they're resorting to the past again. It's a 2003 move, and it didn't pay off back then. I'm not complaining about the HBK/Hogan dream match. I'm glad it's happening. But no more after that. PLEASE.
John: Austin vs. Hogan is happening at WrestleMania 22. And I'll fucking love every second of that.
Matt: That's the only Hogan dream match I want to see left.
John: You don't count Rock and Foley amongst the "no more after that" group do ya?
Matt: Rock's not washed up. I don't even consider him among that so-called "legends" group. He's in a class of his own.
John: Okay good because Rock is still in his mid-30s and Foley's got a few big matches left in his tank, I think.
4. What match, be it announced already or heavily rumored, has you most excited about this year's Summerslam?
John: I think Hogan/Michaels is first for me because of the sense of unpredictability to it. A lot of times for big matches I think we know who is going to win, how they're going to win and it causes the match to lose some appeal to us when we see it. With this one, there's a lot of uncertainty about what might happen. That's appealing to me, so that would be my pick. Second would be Guerrero/Mysterio because athletes of that category with a hot storyline like this one will make for a very good match.
Matt: If Angle vs. Benjamin was on the card, I'd say that match. But it's not, so I'll say Hardy vs. Edge. I would say Hogan/HBK, but a little part of me is nervous that they're actually going to put Hogan over God. When I read that out loud, it actually makes perfect sense, especially given how this feud has gone. But no, I'm excited for Hardy/Edge because I want to see who goes over. It really is a pick em for me. If Matt wins, great, another good comeback. If Edge wins, great, he gets another step toward the main event after months of being delegated to the midcard.
John: Like I said earlier, I'm not excited that much for Hardy/Edge because I doubt we're going to get a clear cut winner or that this is their last match. Neither guy is great enough for me to get giddy about any of their matches the way I do for the likes of Michaels, Angle, Benoit, Rey, Eddie, etc. Hogan/Michaels is first for me for the sheer unpredictability factor. Of course, if Hogan wins with the big leg then I'll be bitching up a storm after it's over.
Matt: After reading Keller's report on some rumblings backstage between the two of them as to how the match will run, and the fact that there possibly is no decisive finish as of yet, I'm suddenly more intrigued as to what happens with Shawn and Hogan. The pessimist in me says Hogan goes over cleanly, though.
John: Hogan is going over. Not only is he going over, but he wouldn't even do the tapout in the sharpshooter at the end of Raw like 99% of the wrestlers do in that situation. Anyway, if Eddie/Rey gets 20 minutes then it's going to be a match of the year contender and everything else that follows will have a tough time. Although I suspect their match will be too short, sadly.
Matt: Yeah, I'm afraid this year's Summerslam will suffer the same fate as last year's show. The wrong matches will get the most time (Batista/JBL comes to mind) and the undercard will be cut short.
John: That's always a problem.
5. What's your favorite Summerslam IC title match?
Matt: Bret Hart vs. Mr. Perfect, Summerslam 1991. It's my favorite match of all time, and the moment I became a Bret Hart fan for life. The atmosphere was unbelievable in MSG, and the time was so right for the Hitman to become IC Champ. Having his parents there in the building just made the moment even better. 1995 Ladder match would probably be second.
John: I'd say Michaels/Ramon at Summerslam '95 is my pick. To me, the best ladder match ever. They were both faces, but there was history there from the first one at WMX, so it made for a really fun match. Bret/Bulldog from England in '92 would be next because the atmosphere was so great and the wrestling was top notch. Amazing that Bulldog was blown up about ten minutes in leaving Bret to carry him the rest of the way, at least that's what Bret says.
Matt: HBK/Razor is a given for many people's favorite. The fucked up finish takes a bit away from it being my favorite. It's the *best* IC title match Summerslam has. It's just not my favorite. To me, Bret/Perfect is flawless, even with Hennig's bad back.
John: Hart/Hennig was pretty good and I know you love it. It's like **** to me. Nothing epic, but still very good. Michaels/Ramon is clearly my favorite. My second favorite would be Bulldog/Hart in England. I think arguably the most memorable of the bunch is Owen Hart vs. Steve Austin in '97. Who knows what happens if Austin doesn't screw up his neck right there. Maybe he's wrestling to this day.
Matt: Shame. I was there live for that match. A lot of people forget Austin was IC Champ, because he barely defended it with his injury.
John: So many great IC title matches at Summerslam, though. Throw in Rock/HHH from '98 as one I forgot to mention too.
6. Counting all Summerslam appearances, which one superstar has put on the greatest performance?
John: Can't go wrong with Hart or Michaels, but I will go out on a bit of a tangent to pick Kurt Angle. He had arguably the best Summerslam match ever with Austin in 2001, he put on a heroic performance in 2000 when he fought through a concussion to finish the match and he had maybe the best opening match in Slam history with Rey Mysterio in a ten minute match to open the card in 2002. Two years ago he made Brock Lesnar tap out clean in the ankle lock in a very good match, then last year he beat Eddie Guerrero in a solid match. Everything there is about ***1/2 and up to me. You can make the case for Michaels or Hart, which is obvious, but I'll go out on that limb to say Angle because he's been very consistent for five years in a row now.
Matt: Some may say Shawn Michaels. I say Bret Hart. 1988 Brainbusters tag, 1990 Demolition 2 out of 3 falls. 91 against Perfect, 92 against Bulldog, 97 against Undertaker. All of those were great, ****+ matches. Yeah he's had some stinkers against Doink and Issac Yankem, but who hasn't?
John: People might be shocked by my Angle pick. That's fine. I think Hart or Michaels is a clear choice. Angle is at their level in my opinion. The match with Austin is money. The others I mentioned are really strong too. He's got no bad matches on his Summerslam resume. Of course now that I think of Shawn's with Razor, Vader and HHH to name a few I feel bad for not picking him. Oh well, he knows he rules.
Matt: I never thought about Angle until you brought him up, but you make a great case for him. I'd put his four matches in a row (2000-2003) up against anybody. I think Bret's just had more memorable performances. The two IC title matches in 91 and 92 and the Taker title match at 97. But Angle would probably be my number 2. Then Shawn, then Austin.
John: Dude, you're forget the Owen cage match in '94 for Bret too. That's better than the Undertaker match. The Taker match was good too, just saying that cage one was better.
Matt: Shit. Completely forgot about that one. It wasn't as good as Meltzer said it was, but it was pretty damn good.
John: Yeah, Meltzer gave it five stars. I'd go like ****1/2, but obviously still very good. Bret's resume at Summerslam and everywhere is great. Will be fun to see his DVDs.
7. Forget about shows that have one or two good matches, which Summerslam had the most complete card?
Matt: 2002 for me. Every match was great. I even enjoyed Undertaker vs. Test slightly. Then you've got my 2002 MOTY on the card, and a very good, big-match style main event. Angle vs. Rey was awesome. Edge vs. Eddie and Benoit vs. RVD were great. Jericho vs. Flair was good. It also looked like an all-star card, with all the best talents being used on the card, something that hasn't really happened since then.
John: It's really tough to choose between 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2002 for me. When I think about them all I have to go with 2001 because from top to bottom it was a very strong card with one omission. The tag title match with Undertaker/Kane vs. DDP/Kanyon was a horrible match. Everything else though was near three stars or better capped off by a classic in Angle/Austin, plus two more really good ones in Hardy/RVD and Booker/Rock. I wouldn't really argue with anybody who picks one of the other three I mentioned, though.
Matt: I kinda had a feeling you'd go with 2001. You did a column on it once, and I think with the exception of Austin/Angle you went WAY too high on star ratings for most of them. I really didn't like RVD/Hardy at all. I think the InVasion match was much better. I enjoyed Rock/Booker as a moment, but not a match. I liked Austin/Angle and Edge/Storm. That's about it. 2002 blows it out of the water with a gigantic torpedo.
John: Well, you like a Test match so you lose all credibility with me. Test doesn't have good matches. Ever. The Undertaker one was nothing special. Benoit/RVD would have been good if RVD knew how to sell an injury. Killed that match. Edge/Eddie had a way better match on Smackdown a few weeks after Summerslam while their one at SS was mostly thrown together because neither had anything to do. HBK/HHH was great, but Austin/Angle is better, so 2001 wins. I'd probably put 2002 in second. 1998 was a bunch of three star matches with Rock/HHH being better than the rest. 2000 was a lot of fun mainly due to the first TLC. I really like all four of those Summerslams.
Matt: I do as well. Throw 91 on top there also. What it lacked in match quality it made up for in memorable moments. I think three title changes happened that night, which was unheard of in 1991 WWF.
John: I think you're nuts. Hennig/Hart was really good, Dibiase/Virgil was surprisingly good. If I remember there was some Buschwackers match against Earthquake and Typhoon. You probably loved that, like Test!
Matt: They also had the Mountie going to jail! That was funny. And Hogan/Warrior as a team was surreal. You should hear their promo. It was amazingly horrible.
John: It's not as good as the other four. Stop reaching. You'll hurt your back like I do when I have to carry you.
Matt: Please homeboy. You're the Masterpiece to my Shelton. I destroy myself to make you look good.
John: Didn't he make him submit? I rest my case. BTW, Rafael Palmeiro is a Masters fan. Huge, even.
8. What was the worst Summerslam match of all time?
John: Either Undertaker/Undertaker or Diesel/Mabel. There might be other undercard matches that completely blow as much as these, but since they were booked and promoted as top matches I think they have to be the "winner" here. I picked Diesel/Mabel because while the whole Undertaker thing was completely ridiculous, at least there was no title on the line. Not only is Diesel/Mabel the worst Summerslam match of all time, but it's the worst PPV title match of all time. Talk about killing belts. What's funny in both cases is that both of these matches followed classics. The Taker match followed Hart/Hart in the cage and Diesel's match followed Ramon/Michaels with the ladder. Great booking, WWE. Genius!
Matt: Undertaker vs. Undertaker. I think it insults my intelligence more to believe there was "another" Undertaker than it was to believe that Mabel was a credible title contender. Both matches were absolutely atrocious, but Taker/Taker was just horrible on the logic side as well. That gets my vote.
John: I can honestly say that I have never watched Diesel/Mabel or Taker/Taker more than once. Both were absolutely abysmal the first time I saw them and that was enough punishment for my eyes. It wasn't just bad matches. It was bad angles too. Everything about both of those matches sucked hard.
Matt: I hated Undertaker/Undertaker more because it was during a pretty good year for wrestling. 1995 just sucked the whole way through, save a couple HBK matches. Diesel/Mabel wasn't discernable from the rest of the crap that was going on. But man, you were right about these matches following classics. 1994 was a really good year for wrestling. And to have Taker/Taker is just inexcusable. Mabel was a failed experiment, but at least it was an experiment. Did they really think Underfaker would draw?
John: Yes, and then they thought Mabel would draw a year later. It's amazing how bad those decisions were in back to back years at the supposed second biggest PPV of the year.
9. What's the most underrated Summerslam match of all time?
Matt: D'Lo Brown vs. Val Venis for the European Title, the opening match of Summerslam 1998. This match was what really turned me on to D'Lo's work, and I became a big fan of his. Val was a relative newcomer, but his gimmick got him over. They gave this match a lot of time, and the crowd was hot, VERY hot for both men. The shmozz finish turns some people off, and yeah, I wish it was a bit more decisive, but what we got before that match was excellent. I wish D'Lo was still around.
John: How many times do I have to say I hate the terms overrated and underrated? They're just so vague. I'll say Ken Shamrock vs. Owen Hart in the Lion's Den Match at Summerslam '98. It was physical, it was fun and it actually worked. When they tried the gimmick again (in varying ways) it didn't work as well as this one. The other match I'd mention would be Owen vs. Austin @ the '97 Slam because all people remember is Austin getting dropped on his head. Before that happened, there was about 15 minutes of good wrestling that is largely forgotten.
Matt: I know you hate "rated," but I'm talking about matches that don't get very much love but should. That's what I mean when I say underrated. I think Owen/Austin is a good choice. You're right. What was there before the unfortunate injury was good stuff. It's kinda interesting how they never show the finish. Owen did the best job he could improvising, but it just came off as very weird.
John: What do you mean they never show the finish? Oh, you mean the actual finish. In Austin's book (and elsewhere) I've read it was supposed to go another seven or eight minutes. Also in Austin's book he told Owen to drop to his knees for the move. Owen said he goes to his ass. Austin was adamant that he go to his knees. Owen joked, saying okay. He went to his ass and Austin paid the price. Anyway, my most underrated match is still Hart/Shamrock.
Matt: Is that really what happened? Wow. I never knew that story. One of Owen's mini ribs gone wrong I guess. Yeah, I like Owen/Shamrock too. They fucked it up the next year though by having Shamrock/Blackman.
John: Yeah, it's an example of a match that should have stayed on its own. Not an easy match to accomplish, that's for sure. D'Lo vs. Val was pretty good. Like three stars. Nothing outside of a good midcard match, though.
10. If you could use one match to represent Summerslam, what match would it be?
John: The Kat vs. Terri in the Stinkface match. There were faces, there was stink. What more could you want? I'll say Angle vs. Austin in '01. It had the big match feel. I loved the staredown at the start so much. Angle's music plays, so Austin stands outside the ring to wait for him, then they brawl toward the ring. It's perfect. The ending doesn't bother me because it fit what they were going for in the match. I like it because it was for the World Title, it was a big match and even though the babyface didn't win he was more over by the match was done because of how Angle beat on Nick Patrick to end it.
Matt: I'd probably pick Bret Hart vs. British Bulldog from Summerslam 1992. It was Summerslam's biggest attendance, the only one held outside of the U.S., and the main event was actually a draw for the people in the UK. Nevermind the fact that it was a great match. Second would be the 95 HBK/Razor Ladder Match, because it was the best Summerslam match of all time, but it had very little hype surrounding it (not that it needed it) and it was during a very unsuccessful period for the WWF.
John: I like your pick. Good babyface match in a big setting with solid wrestling, a strong ending and a fun moment at the end with a hug. To me, though, wrestling at its best is a great heel against a great face so that's why I had to go with Austin/Angle. Who can deny the power of Kat/Terri though?
Matt: I completely forgot about that match, and I saw Summerslam 2000 a month or so ago! I remember that match actually had a build and storyline to it. Whoda thunk it?
John: Figures you would remember something that bad.
Matt: Another match you could consider is Rock vs. Brock. I always think of Summerslam as that kind of "secondary" big match of the year, behind Wrestlemania. Rock vs. Brock had a heavyweight boxing fight feel to it. It really "felt" like Summerslam for the first time in many years.
John: Good call. The feud wasn't built in a heated rivalry, but it felt like two athletes in a boxing match. Remember the video packages of them working out? I LOVED that stuff, and I only usually love the video packages of the chicks at the car wash!
Matt: If HBK/Hogan lives up to the enormous hype, it may take Bret/Bulldog's place as the match I'd use to represent what Summerslam is about. I kinda doubt it, though.
John: Yeah, I don't think so either.
Matt: bWo in WWE: Good idea or bad idea?
John: They're barely in WWE, so I pick too unimportant to even care.
Matt: Great idea. I really hope they don't kill it. They were over.
John: They're already done.
Matt: I guess they *are* over now, huh?
John: Ha, your first clever line! Took 13 editions!
John: My girl (not yours, go have mole girl) Trish is coming back soon. Should she be a heel or a face?
Matt: Face absolutely. With Vicky and Lita as heels, they need a face diva that's not Christy Hemme.
John: She should be a face that has a lesbian romance with Ashley. Greatest babyfaces ever, as far as I'm concerned.
Matt: What celebrity would you like to see make a cameo appearance in WWE?
John: Rafael Palmeiro. He can shoot steroids with like 80% of the locker room. He'd fit in perfect. Then he can point in the camera and say: "I'm Home!"
Matt: Anybody that doesn't show up coked out. That means YOU, Rob Schneider!
John: What happened to the Masters/Big Show angle that was happening on Raw?
Matt: Nothing. They weren't going to have it at Summerslam, so they didn't want to give it more time than it needed. They're going to prolong it, and they're going to have it at Unforgiven (wow, that was kinda long for a quick hit)
John: You'd think they'd know this before they actually, you know, SHOOT THE ANGLE ON TV. I love this booking team. Love it.
Matt: Why is Christian getting beaten down by the Mexicools?
John: For one, he's going face. Second, he should be higher up on the depth chart but the bookers have something against him for whatever reason. Oh I know, he has talent. That's it.
Matt: You took the words out of my mouth. The writers suck. The Mexicools were fine when they were beating down jobbers like Scotty 2 Hotty. Christian doesn't deserve that.
John: They should be used in the cruiser division where they are needed. Oh yeah, what cruiser division?
Matt: Is that the next quick hit? Okay, I'll answer. There is none.
John: Will Bret Hart be inducted at the 2006 Hall of Fame?
Matt: I say yes. I believe Bret when he says he won't be in a WWE ring for a while, but the HOF ceremony isn't a ring. I'd love to see Austin introduce him.
John: I say yes. The DVD will sell and it will be encouraging enough for him to decide to appear for it.
Matt: Is the tag title scene on Smackdown going ANYWHERE?
John: No. Speaking of, where's my boy Doug Basham? Fuck!
Matt: LOD is going to beat jobbers and hold the belts warm until MNM win them back and Animal goes back into hibernation.
John: Austin vs. Hogan @ WrestleMania 22: Will it happen?
Matt: I hope so. Get Hogan's final match out of the way quickly. I can honestly say I don't want to see him in a WWE ring ever again.
John: Ha, as if that would be his final match. He's got another 20 years! Yes, that match will happen. I hope to God I'm there too.
Thoughts? Questions? Comments. Email us at the addresses below or feel free to talk about it with us in the column feedback section of our forums. Also, if you've got an idea for a topic that we can use please let us know and we might use it.
The next edition of For Love or Money will come to you in September, most likely. We may look back on some questions and answers we have looked at in the past.
Visit the For Love or Money Archives. Thanks for reading.