Wrestling Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

The Official BTB Discussion Thread

489K views 6K replies 321 participants last post by  Deeds 
#1 ·
I'm not sure if it's just me, but the old thread has become an absolute pain in the ass to open due to it trying to take me ten or so pages ahead of the actual last page. So to make it easier, here's a new thread.

Old thread for those of you who wish to refer back: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/booker/510932-official-btb-discussion-thread.html

~ No spamming
~ No arguing
~ Under any circumstances, NO "WELL EXCUUUUUUUSE ME, PRINCESS!"
~ You can discuss other BTBs here, it's fine. Don't shill your BTB needlessly, however
~ If you have a question regarding "What Should You Do," just go with your gut instinct
~ Use references like google or onlineworldofwrestling for answers to questions you could easily find yourself

Post away.
 
#4,622 ·
So back in 2009, when a particular wrestler passed away, I wrote in my thread that I wouldn't use him as a character in EOD. I had a thing at the time about not using deceased wrestlers and it was fresh in both mine and everyone else's mind(s).

Now that it's been several years and I've brought the thread back, I've been wondering whether I could use said wrestler in my thread. I never wrote anything in the shows about him, so I simply let him stay off-screen. Do you think if I wanted to suddenly use him it'd be "allowed"? Or even in good taste? I wouldn't use him longer than his time of death IRL anyway.
 
#4,623 ·
pretty sure i know what wrestler you're talking about but that would be completely compliant with rules as far as i know, you're allowed to use a wrestler even after death if you want to you just can't introduce him after his death. for example if you had a 2004 thread that makes it to 2006 you could still use eddie, but if it was a 2006 thread i don't think you'd be able to. i'm not positive on this but that's how i've always understood it, never been in the situation though.
 
#4,628 ·
Exactly, I think I'd have to make them deceased in the thread.

Anyway guys how would you feel if it was like part of a plot line before their death since you knew it was coming up? Like if Umaga finally earned a world title shot in your thread in 2009 but died right before it, or you have him fired by a heel GM and then afterwards have a face wrestler go insane on them for it starting a feud or something. It'd make for an interesting plot but I just don't know if it would be right... I'm not planning to obviously, just a thought.
 
#4,633 ·
On the topic of bookers using certain superstars in their thread; what are peoples thoughts of using the likes of Ric Flair in the ring, in a WWE thread based in 2010? Or Shawn Michaels in a match in 1999? etc etc...

Real life scenarios made situations like these unlikely, or impossible, but btb is just fantasy; would it bother you as a reader? Or would it have you further interested?

:eek:
 
#4,637 ·
Question: Back in 2010 who would you guys say were the three biggest independent wrestlers in America. I currently was thinking Bryan Danielson, Nigel McGuiness (although I can't remember if he was with TNA at that time) and maybe Claudio Castagnoli. Would you guys agree? Any other names I should possibly be considering (Chris Hero/Austin Aries)?
 
#4,639 ·
I'd say El Generico. Involved in ROH's biggest story, mainstay in CHIKARA, mainstay/champion (?) in PWG. Working in some of the smaller indies as well as regular trips over to Japan and Europe. In 2010 Danielson was already with the WWE (he signed in late 2009, debuted in the first season of NXT in 2010) and McGuinness was already a part of TNA (debuted shortly after BFG 2009).
 
#4,648 ·
Nige™;25803793 said:
No chance. I've been planning ahead of Wrestlemania for what has to be over a year waiting to get Mania out of the way. The buying TNA idea only came up because I saw they're up for sale and the prospect of it would be interesting, not enough to want to give up what I've been doing and am enjoying more than ever.
Fair enough. I am surprised when bookers like you stick to the same project for so long and still feel motivated to carry on. I like the idea of someone posting a show that closes a project. I still think Szumi's last post in Trio Ownership should've been WCW going out of business (again).

Edit: 9,500th post. I've been here for way too long. :side:
 
#4,649 ·
Fair enough. I am surprised when bookers like you stick to the same project for so long and still feel motivated to carry on. I like the idea of someone posting a show that closes a project. I still think Szumi's last post in Trio Ownership should've been WCW going out of business (again).
I did stick my feet in the water with a new thread a few years ago but I just couldn't shake off A Strong Response. It doesn't help that the current product doesn't excite me. Buying TNA would be an ideal time to do something though from a creative POV.
 
#4,652 · (Edited)
King™;25804177 said:
Just as long as you don't do an "invasion" angle.
What strikes me most about that post is the invasion angle was 12 years ago.:eek:

If I wasn't as excited as I am about post Mania plans I'd be really keen to do it.

Edit: First idea just crossed up, having the TNA boys debut at the Rumble with AJ representing them and winning the Rumble with their help?!!
 
#4,653 ·
Edit: First idea just crossed up, having the TNA boys debut at the Rumble with AJ representing them and winning the Rumble with their help?!!
Jim Ross: Good god almighty! IT IS TNA!

Jerry Lawler: Puppies! Where's Trish?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top