Wrestleview - Wrestling news and results from WWE, TNA, ROH, Raw

WWE & TNA Top Stories

9/19 WWE Smackdown Results

Get a detailed recap of WWE Smackdown for 9/19/14 from Biloxi, Mississippi featuring Roman Reigns vs. Rusev in the main event and The Wyatt Family in six man tag team action. Read more...

Podcast #199: Will John Cena win?

Darragh O'Connor and Adam Martin discuss if John Cena should win Sunday on Podcast #199 of International Desk. Read more...

Notes from the Nosebleeds #147 - Wrestleview.com

Notes from the Nosebleeds #147

Notes from the Nosebleeds #147
December 17, 2011
By: Matt O'Brien of Wrestleview.com


There is this pesky little thing in the United States of America called freedom of speech. It allows virtually anyone to say virtually anything they want. What some people choose to do with that right is both uplifting and disappointing. It has allowed me to have a weekly column posted on Wrestleview that might be insightful or ignorant, depending on what you think of my words. The words one says give illustrate that individuals views and personality. What you find out you may not always like. This week there has been a couple of wrestling personalities whose words were broadcast to the world, and it makes you wonder what goes on in their heads. What these words have shown is just how limited we are by verbal communication, and how that can sometimes make us pay.

Two words: Linda Hogan. The queen of Cougar Mountain was once again in the news this week because of the reactions of Hulk Hogan and Brutus Beefcake to statements in her book, 'Wrestling the Hulk--My Life Against the Ropes'. Linda claimed that Hulk Hogan and longtime friend Brutus Beefcake had a sexual relationship. Hogan was gracious about the homosexual claim. One of Hogan's responses was as follows: "If any of that was true, I would admit it, and [if] I was a homosexual I would embrace it. It's just so crazy to hear, so I have a real problem with it. If you're going to say I'm something that I'm not to try to ruin my career and my livelihood... I have to answer her back. It's so ridiculous. I don't mean to laugh about it, because it's not funny. But it's insane. It doesn't make any sense to me."

Thank goodness Hulk would embrace it. It shows that he is not anti-gay in any way. Just so we all know how okay with being gay Hulk is, he goes onto say that these rumors are ruining his career and livelihood. So being gay is something Hogan would embrace, but being gay would also ruin his career and damage his reputation. Understood. Thanks for clearing that up, Hulk!

What is it about Hulk, Linda and rumors about their sex lives? Just a few months back the Ultimate Warrior made claims that Hulk often loaned Linda out to other wrestlers, and even tried to get Warrior involved. Are all of these people so wrapped up in their world of lies that they don't know the truth anymore? Or maybe their sex lives are just that messed up. Either way, I don't care. The last thing I want to know about is if Hogan served himself up a piece of Beefcake. Those of you who have followed wrestling on the internet for a while know that compared to all the rumors and blatantly made-up lies about the personal lives of wrestlers, this isn't even that interesting. Does Linda really think she can hurt Hulk by claiming he was gay? What is she, in elementary school? I can just imagine her sitting at home thinking that it would really stick it to Hulk as she made up things to put in her book. "Wouldn't it be funny if I said he was gay with Beefcake?"

The war of words has gotten out of hand. At what point do these two put down their gun and move on? Words are not doing these two any favours when they use them in regards to one another. They are only getting themselves into more trouble and making thing worse.

Speaking of making things worse, Batista had some unfriendly things to say about the current WWE product in an interview with Daily Star. For those of you unfamiliar with what he said, the gist of it you can read below. The entire article can be found at this link.

"It's brutal. I can't watch it. I can't connect with it. I no longer know this business. I don't do PG wrestling. Love me or hate me, when I was there everyone took one look at me and knew I could beat someone up. I don't think they look at Miz that way. It's sad. It's not their fault.

These days the guys have their hands tied, they are so limited in what they can do. The difference is that guys like Rock, Austin, Triple H, excuse me, but they had to have the living sh*t beat out of them to get where they are. They went through war and the audience knows it and the audience appreciates it. The guys today will never get to that level. It's sad, but that's the reason for it."


A lot of people have jumped on Batista over this and rightfully so. After all, his words were not the most wisely-chosen. After Austin and Rock were gone and Brock Lesnar didn't pan out, Triple H carried the ball for the company while it built its new stars. It came down to two people: John Cena and Batista. Cena was the main guy on Smackdown while Batista had Raw. After a few short months, WWE swapped them around. Cena was put n the company's flagship show while Batista was bumped off the top of the hill. Maybe some of what he has to say is out of jealousy. A few weeks ago, Batista made some other unfriendly comments when he said that Cena had killed hardcore, edgy wresting. He also went onto say he had to work extra hard to get people to boo him during his 2010 feud with Cena. In regards to Cena, if that program did anything for Batista, it was bring out the best in him. The character work alone was the best he had done since his 2005 program with Triple H, if not better. If anything, Batista and Cena pushed each other harder to make a better program. The comments about Miz are misguided. When Batista left, there was a gap for the next top heel on Raw. Miz easily slid into that role and made his. Miz is not supposed to be Batista; he's not a guy whose going to press slam and powerbomb you. It is in his underhanded, dirty tactics that he gets the edge. Also, his comment about it being sad, but not their fault makes him seem like he pities the roster. Is there not a greater insult this guy can give his former coworkers? WWE was pretty good to Dave. Even though he was on his way out, they still put him in the top program and gave him the title going into WrestleMania. He also had four consecutive pay per view matched with the industry's top guy in Cena. WWE has picked up and moved on without Batista, and insulting a company that was made him a star is uncalled for.

As for PG, it's tough to see what Batista's problem is. He came up as the PG Era was dawning. If you took Batista and out him in the Attitude Era, he wouldn't stand out at all. But regardless of all the things this guy has said, I don't think he realizes the real issue. The bottom line is that Batista is a fan, and one who prefers one era to another. This is something fans debate to this day. I have written about the topic a few times. We even had a poll about it on Wrestleview. A lot of people just prefer the Attitude Era to today's show. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with that. Batista has forgotten that he is also a fan. His frustrations are understandable in that regard, but he has not worded it in the best way, especially when he knows his words will carry more weight than that of a run-of-the-mill fan with the same view.

We all want our views to be noticed in some way. There are those of us with forums to which we can dedicate those views on a different stage than others. No matter how many words one uses to describe how they feel about something, it is never sufficient, and can really get them into trouble. Just ask the Hogan's or Batista's of this world.

Matt O'Brien
Columnist, Wrestleview.com
mattman5436@yahoo.com