Jump to content

The LBC

Global Moderators
  • Content count

    35,332
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Prospect

About The LBC

  1. ~~//~~ Pro Wrestling: The Truth is Not H ~~\\~~

    It's not a matter of what they could survive. They could survive plenty. What it's a case of is they simply don't want to. They could survive it, but they don't have to so they have no want to.
  2. ~~//~~ Pro Wrestling: The Truth is Not H ~~\\~~

    Oh I get that there are feuds aplenty for him. But guys who have the clout that if he were to steamroll them would make him look like a modern day gladiator. I love Shinsuke and I've been a big fan of his, but there is going to come a point where his past accomplishments in the ring and his theme music can't be the main things that are keeping him over. And, realistically when you consider that they're going to keep trying to script him (at the very least Road Dogg seems to understand to very selectively limit how much they're giving him to say), it's not gonna be stick work that's going to keep him over. And Nakamura doing the amount of selling he was doing in the Ziegler and Corbin feuds isn't going to help him, because it doesn't fit the character. This isn't "plucky underdog" Sami Zayn we're talking about. Sure, he can hit some snags, make a mistake that a savvy opponent capitalizes on and he has to make a comeback in a match or two, but his chaiacter isn't one that's helped by having a consistent match formula that involves him having to fire-up and come back on a regular basis. I look at the way that Alastair Black is being booked/presented in NXT right now and that's how a champion Shinsuke should spend his first 4+ months as champion - guys might come back on him but the inevitable is coming, Shinsuke is going to catch them with a strike and then the Bomaye (sorry, I'm a stickler for calling it that) and it's lights out, good night, cue that obnoxious kid from Karate Kid screaming, "Get him a bodybag." The first three you mentioned can carry that kind of feud with Shinsuke - whether Orton would allow Shinsuke to be put over him looking super strong is questionable because really he's only done that for Brock and he realistically just did that for Brock last year. Rusev, I don't know. Neither of them is strong enough on the mic to carry the other, and I think you run into the situation they've largely been avoiding having to deal with in this Naka/Jinder feud. One option that could work though and it isn't going to hurt him in the long run is to bring Bobby Roode up at the Rumble and have him immediately feud with Shinsuke (the "I took your NXT title and now I'm going to take your WWE title" business), and let Shinsuke finish that feud from 6 months ago on top and go over strong. And before anyone would think to suggest that that "buries" Roode, it doesn't. It thrusts him into the main event scene immediately on his arrival, and at worst even if he gets squashed, he's able to land quite softly in the upper-midcard and likely very quickly carve out volleys back into the ME soon, particularly if AJ comes out of Mania carrying the title, which he should.
  3. The Best Actor Ever According to You (And WHY)

    Also I agree with you @HorizontoZenith on Meryl. I feel the same way with Denzel, even though that may catch a lot of flack. Both are fine actors, but I do believe they both get overrated because they get teed up opportunities that other actors could give as good or better performances in because, frankly they're damn good scripts (which speaks to the quality of the role) with quality directors. I actually think (though he's fallen victim a number of times to taking some questionable roles) Lawrence Fishburne is a better actor than Denzel is, and could have turned in better performances in several of the roles that Denzel got a good amount of accolade for. Meryl's got a strong enough foundation to her resume to keep her in the Top 10 of Actresses for me, but she's entrenched in the bottom half of that and that's before I really start making strong critical comparisons that factor in the actresses of yesteryear who weren't always being given the quality of script or opportunities to improvise from the script that actors are given today.
  4. The Best Actor Ever According to You (And WHY)

    If you've seen those, and I'd add Ironweed, Five Easy Pieces, and The King of Marvin Gardens, along with some later stuff like The Postman Always Rings Twice. They're not the same character or variations on the same character. You start to see the modern Nicholson archetype really first show up (I suppose, those there's an argument to be made against it) in Easy Rider and then that archetype doesn't show up again until '78 in Goin' South - which I'm not even sure Jack was taking serious as a role. It disappears again, pops up in '87's Broadcast News and again two years later in Batman, and then outside of some satirical work in Mars Attacks! you really don't see it until it's rolled out never to go away again in About Schmidt in 2002. But there's a lot of films in there where he's not just playing "The Jack" archetype that most people associate with him from Something's Gotta Give, The Bucket List, Anger Management, and The Departed.
  5. ~~//~~ Pro Wrestling: The Truth is Not H ~~\\~~

    I don't even know that I'd make it champion vs champion in terms of both belts being on the line, but having AJ challenge for the belt as the US Champion. It won't happen because, the CvC thing, because ultimately one of the biggest goals they have going into every Mania is to try and pack as much talent onto the card as possible, because they're trying to get everybody that Wrestlemania bonus. It's admirable, but it's also making it a little too easy to get onto the Mania card and in effect cheapens the luster (for the viewer) of a talent making the Mania card. So ultimately, they're going to want to have a US Title match on the card, all belts defended, blah blah blah. Honestly, the best thing they can do for this whole feud (AJ/Naka) is to make Shinsuke look like a totally unstoppable force throughout the fall and winter. They ought to damn near Lesnar him; you give a couple of guys who are over enough to survive a bad loss a little extra in "holiday bonus" to get squashed by Shinsuke. And I'm talking established guys, not mid-carders or up-and-coming main eventers. Cena put him over, at this point anyone can be justified in doing it. Thing is, I don't know if Smackdown has those guys on the roster outside of Owens. Maybe you bring Jericho back in, even as a face vs face type thing, because Chris can easily survive getting squashed by Nakamura, the match itself would draw huge, and you know that Chris is capable of working and selling the hell out of a strong style match.
  6. The Best Actor Ever According to You (And WHY)

    Tom does a fair share more of his own stunts than a lot of actors do, but let's not insinuate that he doesn't use a stunt double. He does and has on virtually every film he's been in.
  7. The Best Actor Ever According to You (And WHY)

    How much of the early stuff have you seen of his? I agree, he's someone who got way too comfortable playing variations on the same character in his late career, but that's a habit of a lot of actors. Also, I realize he may be too far back for some of you guys, but I'm kind of shocked there hasn't at least been a mention of Lawrence Olivier yet. Also, I'm not even sure the best "actor" ever is even a man. And no, I'm not going to drop Meryl here because she's incredibly overrated. But Cate Blanchett, Helen Mirren, Katherine Hepburn, and Jessica Lange all have stronger cases than A LOT of their male counterparts.
  8. The Best Actor Ever According to You (And WHY)

    I'm curious as to hear the defense of this. Because I struggle to think of a movie where Tom Cruise isn't just playing himself. The Last Samurai maybe.
  9. Transfers & Rumors: New Forum Edition

    I've started watching the Eredivisie at roughly an equal rate to the Bundesliga the past couple seasons, and most of what''s been easiest to DVR through the networks my satellite provider gives me end up being Ajax matches. So I've watched easily 15 games of Ajax last season. Given the amount of CONMEBOL matches I watch to, I'd wager I've probably seen his two matches for the Colombian national side too, but I don't really recall them. It's no huge fault not getting playing time over Zapata and Barca has already bought Yerry Mina, whose just yet to come over from Palmeiras, whereas most of the rest of the Colombian defenders other than Sanchez are more natural fullbacks than centerbacks. I definitely believe he's coming in to start because he only a year ago turned down an opportunity to go to Barca to instead go to Ajax because he didn't want to get stuck in the reserves and wanted first-team football. And I can see exactly why Poch likes him: Strong, athletic, high pass-completion rate, accustomed to pressing. I'm just concerned (and yes, some of it can be attributed to youth, but they're also things that will do him no favors in the PL or CL) about his only 50% win-rate in duels won as a defender and his tendency to dive in - both in terms of some pretty careless challenges (he was fortunate to avoid a number of bookings in the Ajax matches I saw, including the Europa Final against United IIRC) and in terms of leaving his back linemates exposed (that's something I do believe Poch will be able to coach out of him, but it will take time and could be rough going early on). He ticks just about every box you want for the modern prototype of a CB in these 3-man back lines that have come in vogue. In a way, he reminds a bit of a young David Luiz, but we both remember young Luiz during his first spell in the PL, he was far more effective as an attacker than he was as a defender. I'm not saying he's going to be another Mangala; that's pretty low probability as Mangala was more set in his bad habits by the time he came to City, but at the moment Sanchez has some of those same bad habits and he'll need to work them out on the fly.
  10. Transfers & Rumors: New Forum Edition

    Decent enough player. Should be worthwhile depth, but he's not without holes in his game and the PL isn't exactly the league you step up to to iron our creases in your game. I, more often than not, trust Poch's nose on players (largely due to his pedigree), but this one definitely isn't without his fair share of question marks.
  11. Transfers & Rumors: New Forum Edition

    I have to agree there. The "he doesn't think he can trust the manager" stuff has the fingerprints of agent wants to get paid a fat fee/percentage. But then, it's Barca. When they come sniffing around it's hide yo kids, hide yo wife time. Call me crazy, even with the litany of worthwhile keepers they have, but I wouldn't be shocked (particularly if there's a front office shakeup at Barca) if they make a run at DeGea next summer just "trying to make a statement."
  12. Ask Keyser - 2017 Fantasy Questions Thread

    I can't speak for him, but I have them relatively even with a slight nudge to Freeman (mostly because we know, for the most part, how the use/touches-split is going to work out in the Freeman/Coleman - with that also seeming to suggest that Coleman is the bigger regression candidate from last season of the two and that Coleman's not going to gank goal-line carries from Freeman; whereas I'm not as convinced when it comes to the Murray/Henry and could see Henry stealing some from Murray). I'm comfortable drafting either and have them comfortably in the same tier as my RB's 4 and 5 - if we handicap Zeke for the moment due to the "unknown aspect" of his suspension (if he doesn't serve the suspension this season, he slots in above these to and Shady, but it only bumps each of these guys down one spot). I actually have them both above Gordon (same tier, but he's my RB6/7).
  13. Ask Keyser - 2017 Fantasy Questions Thread

    Yeah, my issue with Ingram is that on the season you're going to get likely a Top 12-15 RB performance, but week-to-week he's not a consistent contributor you can count on - through no fault of his own, it's largely on Sean Payton just deciding to give a bulk of touches to a different back like he did last season with Hightower. That lack of dependable week-to-week consistency, per rule of thumb, tends to put guys more in the comfortable FLEX but not necessarily someone you want to be rolling out most weeks as a RB2. In comparison to Gillislee, while he's certain in a somewhat similar situation where his touches could swing dynamically from one week to the next, you can at least be confident that some of the touches he's going to get consistently week-to-week are going to be inside the opponent's 10. That kind of upside actually has me with Gillislee two tiers above Ingram (granted, Gilly is the last guy in my 3rd tier and Ingram leads off my 5th tier, but it's worth noting). I've always (and I think key is similar because for years we used to roll with the same guy to target in Fred Jackson) targeted consistency as the top asset in my RB2; floor over upside. This is largely because WR's tend to have way more tendency to go on swings from week to week, so if you're creating a balance team, you want to lay hands on consistency at the positions that typically tend to give it to you more readily when you can.
  14. Ask Keyser - 2017 Fantasy Questions Thread

    I feel like a parrot repeating this so much, but it really depends on your league and the people in it. In one league I'm in where I know that people in it overvalue QB's, I actually rehearsed WR-WR mocks just seeing what I could end up with. I'm OK with taking Gronk but I have no desire to reach for him - even as there continues to be more disparity in terms of TE's. I tended to find in mocks that taking him limited my later strategies more than I preferred; i.e. I could necessarily feel as comfortable rolling the dice on guys with lengthier injury histories (but big upsides) or who are currently carrying injuries (which was why they had slipped on the draft board), because I was trying to regain ground on guys who had gotten clear-cut WR1's or RB1's in the round I'd taken Gronk. Again, I play in mostly 14-team leagues, so the amount of guys off the board by the time the pick gets back around to me in these leagues is more notable, especially as the draft gets further along. As to waiting on RB's, I think it has a lot to do with how your league is structured in terms of how many RB's could potentially start a week for any team, how deep your benches are, and how the scoring is formatted (i.e. can TD-dependent RB's actually carry your roster given the scoring format or are rushing/receiving yards necessary for a starting RB on your team to be a consistent weekly competitor on par with the average of your league?). I'll say this, in the instances of practice where I went WR-WR, I did so already conceding that I was going to reach (if necessary) for specific RB's later on that I had confidence in, value be damned. The problem I can foresee (and have had happen to me in drafts of previous years) is if there are one or two people in your league who tend to think and value particular players similarly to how you do. Because you can end up the proverbial creek in a hurry if you push your chips in on a strategy of conceding to reach on a specific guy at your next pick because of his floor/ceiling combo relative to your earlier strategy and someone else snakes him a couple picks ahead of you, making a similar such "reach" because they place similar value in him.
×