John: Welcome to the seventh edition of For Love or Money in 2005 and the fourteenth edition overall by Matt Seagull and myself, John C. The first eight questions will deal with current topics while the final two questions will be our usual "classic" questions talking about things from the past. Then we'll wrap it up with some Quick Hits. 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.

Note that the questions were asked prior to this Monday's Raw although the discussion portion took place after Raw. The blue (odd numbered) questions were chosen by Matt. The green (even numbered) questions were chosen by John.

1. The Boogeyman. I mean....seriously?
Matt: You know who I feel really REALLY bad for? Marty Wright. The man who's playing this character. Apparently he had his teeth intentionally knocked out in order to add to the scariness of the character. But this character has a shorter shelf life than freakin' Mordecai. He'll be fired in a couple months, and I hope for Wright's sake that WWE will foot the bill for him to get dental implants, because he's fucked for life. The only way I'd ever let somebody knock my teeth out was if I was guaranteed to get a WWE/World title run for like...a year at the minimum. I also feel bad for Smackdown. You've got serious wrestlers like Benoit, Eddie, Orton, Rey, Batista, and they have to compete on the same show as guys like the Boogeyman. It was a stupid idea to begin with, and it's still stupid now. But I will admit I did get a chuckle out of Boogeyman smashing the big clock over his head.

John: Worst gimmick ever. Yes, I'm not afraid to say it. It's already that bad. It's worse than anything I've seen ever produced in wrestling. Absolutely horrible. As soon as he steps into a ring to have a match it'll be even worse. Not just because the gimmick sucks, but all accounts of the guy say that he's not ready to be wrestling in WWE rings. It's just that WWE likes his charisma enough to give him a chance. Doesn't mean it'll work. This has complete and total failure written all over it in red ink and in capital letters too.

Matt: In a recent OTC review I did, I said that I think that the Boogeyman is part of a storyline to have Teddy Long start to tire of Palmer Cannon's antics. Teddy's trying to put together a wreslting program, and Cannon just wants to do crazy things to get ratings. I mean, that's the only logical explanation I have for this guy. Did they actually think this would draw money? I mean, that's what this business is about, correct?

John: Dude, have you seen some of the angles and characters that Vince McMahon has thought of? When he thought about bringing in a Japanese wrestler to be a "bronze warrior" he picked Kenzo Suzuki, who was horrible? Remember Mordecai? Kevin Fertig might be alright, but Mordecai was awful. The Boogeyman is another example of WWE going against what they should be doing (real characters over fake characters) and it's only making them look even worse.

Matt: I personally wouldn't mind the Boogeyman if all he did was show up in Teddy Long's office every week and cut these promos. They're hilariously horrible. I just fear the day he steps in the ring. He might tear his quads again.

John: It definitely is funny in a bad way. Imagine if they invested time in actual talented wrestlers like a Paul London or Spanky, though? Oh, they are short, I forgot. They must not be very good.

Matt: I think if you get rid of The Boogeyman, Jillian Hall and the midgets (more to come on that later!), you'll actually have a VERY good wrestling program in Smackdown.

John: Well, from what I've read, Hall isn't a bad performer. It's just the stupid mole thing on her face. Let your talent show their talent. It's not a hard concept.

2. Two people have debuted on Smackdown at relatively the same time. Between Ken Kennedy and Bobby Lashley, who will be the bigger star by the time WrestleMania 22 gets here and beyond that?
John: Kennedy. Don't be shocked if he's winning the US title or maybe even wrestling somebody the stature of the Undertaker at WrestleMania. Vince McMahon loves the guy. I think he's more polished than Lashley, who is more Goldberg or Lesnar like in his presence. I think Kennedy is more complete of the two in terms of a character, charisma and all those other intangibles that make people great. The thing Lashley has in his favor is the credentials of being a legit wrestler. Fans believe in people with those credentials. They see through people like Masters who come off as way too fake while Lashley looks like the real deal. I think Kennedy gets to be a bigger star faster, but don't be shocked if either of these guys, or maybe both, are main eventing WrestleMania 23. Of course since they're both potentially great they'll be on Raw soon because they can't let Smackdown be the better show.

Matt: Ooh, tough one here. On one had, you've got Lashley, who has the size that makes WWE officials cream in their jeans. On the other hand, you've got Kennedy, who's got the charisma of a Rock or a Cena, which also gives the office a hard on. As we've seen in the past, though, charisma goes a farther distance than size. I think Kennedy will be the bigger star by Mania 22. I see a U.S. Title run in his future. But I could be wrong. A lot of people are pegging Lashley as the next Brock Lesnar. But I'm still sticking with Kennedy as the big star.

John: I'm really impressed by both guys. Here's an interesting stat on Lashley too. As I read in the Observer the last couple of weeks, the first three times that Lashley has appeared on Smackdown in matches the ratings have gone up substantially, like 450,000 viewers each time, which is big. It doesn't even do that for main events most weeks. Lashley has star power to him. It's that whole "it" thing. Nobody can define what "it" is, but you can tell when somebody has it. Lashley is just one of those guys. As for Kennedy, he's simply one of those guys who has the passion and desire to constantly get better as a performer. These two are going to be huge for WWE in the near future.

Matt: I give Kennedy the edge here because to me, charisma goes a long way in the WWE. I always say that WWE is always trying to look for the next Diesel when they should be looking for the next Shawn Michaels. They love size, and even though Lashley has potential, I don't think he'll have the staying power. Same reason I think John Cena will end up meaning more to WWE in the long run than Batista. No matter what your size, overwhelming charisma is the ultimate formula for success.

John: Well, Cena will mean more also because he's like 28 years old while Batista is about 40 or so. I definitely think Kennedy has more long term potential than Lashley, but I think Lashley has more people talking. The question is do they push him as hard as WCW pushed Goldberg in 1997/98 when they were really hurting for new stars or do the veterans in the locker room complain about the young guy getting too much too soon (which always happens in WWE, it seems) and kill off his push way too fast. The other question is, will either of these guys still be on Smackdown come the next draft lottery? I say no. They're both going to be too good by then.

Matt: Well as for the big push factor, yes, I think he'll have a rise similar to Brock Lesnar. They might give him a U.S. title reign, but it might be too soon to start thinking about Lashley as World Champ. As for the Raw question, there's no doubt in my mind that Kennedy will be on Raw during the next draft lottery. I don't know about Lashley yet.

John: I think Lashley in the US title scene is likely. I say push him, but slowly. Kennedy's going to be over and stay over whether he wins or loses because of his promos. They are his strong suit right now.

3. Triple H vs. John Cena. It'll happen. When and how?
Matt: Unfortunately, I think they're going to blow their wad at New Year's Revolution, and it will take a back seat to the Hunter/Flair feud. Bear with me. Hunter is obsessed with the World/WWE Title. The only time he's not focused on it is when he's distracted by something else. I also think the Hunter/Flair blowoff will happen at Wrestlemania, so Hunter will take Flair out at Taboo Tuesday. Then Hunter will focus his attention on the WWE title. They'll hype the match to boost buyrates for New Year's Revolution, and it will be at that point where Flair comes back and costs Hunter the win to continue their feud. Fantasy booking? Sure. But that's what I think's going to happen.

John: I dunno. To be honest, I haven't thought about it that much. I think they'll do another Elimination Chamber match at New Year's Revolution since it did so well last year. Maybe HHH wins the belt there. Then they do HHH vs. Cena at WM22 for the first time. Of course the question is when would Edge get his shot, but really, I haven't thought about this stuff a whole lot. It's not like Cena vs. HHH is some sort of dream match.

Matt: I think your idea of having an Elimination Chamber is too unoriginal (which is probably why it's such a likely route they'll go). As much as I'm warming up to Triple H lately (the man is a heel GOD), I would like to see a change of pace and see him out of the Raw title scene for Wrestlemania. I think Mania would be a great place for them to end the Triple H/Flair feud, as it'll have gone on for six months. I think they'll do a tease match of Triple H vs. Cena either at NYR or the Rumble, but we're not going to get our full-on match until the summer, I think.

John: I don't see how HHH/Flair lasts until WrestleMania. What, they're gonna put Flair over him a bunch of times and Hunter over him a bunch of times to have a grudge match there? The Taboo Tuesday match is gonna be in a cage, so it's not like they're slowly pushing this feud. Worst of all, they got the IC title on Flair even though they make no mention that he's even the champion on Raw. What a waste of that belt. Again. I love Ric Flair as much as the next guy, but dude is over 55 years old. I don't want him in some six month feud with a top guy. Have a match at Taboo Tuesday, have a match at Survivor Series and be done with it. As for the EC match at NYR, I just think that's what they'll do because it drew so well this year. Of course it drew well because the build was great, not because of the gimmick, really. They can't hold off on HHH/Cena that long. Have HHH win the belt in the EC, then Cena gets it back at Mania. It's a simple story, but it works.

Matt: Well, the HHH/Flair feud can be prolonged if they go the route I originally said by having Hunter "take out" Flair, so Flair's gone for a couple of months. IC belt has to be vacated, and it prolongs the blowoff to the feud. Kinda like Kane/Snitsky.

John: Nothing that's "kinda like Kane/Snitsky" can lead to good things. Nothing. I don't think HHH/Flair is going to be that interesting. Flair is fine in small doses and as a supporting player, but he can't draw with his wrestling anymore. Nor should he be asked to, really.

Matt: I think you'll be surprised.

4. Is it a good idea to use Taboo Tuesday on the returns of Steve Austin and Mick Foley considering that last year's Taboo Tuesday drew the lowest buyrate for WWE in 2004?
John: I don't think so. Don't get me wrong, I love both men and am excited to see both wrestling again, even if Austin's "match" with Coach will have very little bumping I'm guessing. I just think WWE is panicking too much. They brought back too many stars for Homecoming, it popped one good rating and then the rating fell back to what it always is. Meanwhile, they had a PPV show in No Mercy that nobody watched. The worst buyrate this year, probably. And why? Because they panic. They don't think long term. Austin is not having a "match" with Coach. It'll be advertised as such, but let's be realistic about it. It's a legal way for him to give a guy about 15 Stunners. Not that I'm complaining about seeing Austin. I'd just rather see his first match in 2+ years against a better opponent in a match with more meaning at a bigger show.

Matt: Absolutely. I mean, if I had it my way there wouldn't have been any new PPVs added to the original list of 12. But since they ARE having a Tuesday Night PPV, the best thing they could have possibly done is put Austin and Foley on the card. Those two could be single-handedly the reason why people order this show. I know it's the reason why I'm going to Hooters on a Tuesday night. I can see shows for free, and I decided to skip both Unforgiven and No Mercy even when I could have seen it for free. But now I'm going to watch Taboo Tuesday. The reason? Austin's official return. And there's a possibility we'll see our first Dude Love sighting since 1998. I mean, do you REALLY want to miss that? They have to compete against baseball, so the best thing they could do was put Austin and Foley on the card. Brilliant move.

John: I'm the biggest Austin fan you'll ever know, but will I watch his first "match" in two years on Tuesday? Nah. It's against Coach. He's not a wrestler. Maybe if Austin was against a wrestler I'd actually care. As for Foley, the Carlito thing seems rushed. I like Carlito, but in the ring he still hasn't shown me much. These are just desparate moves by WWE to try to pop a buyrate. I don't think it'll work. I'd rather see Austin against a real wrestler. You know who I'd like to see him against? Edge. That's new. Edge could benefit huge from working with him. But no, we get Coach. I don't give a fuck about Coach.

Matt: Did it ever occur to you that Austin may not be physically ready to put on an actual match with a competent wrestler? Or he might not be ready to take serious bumps yet? Do you think Coach is going to get any offense in this match? If anything, this is a test to see if Austin can still go. And if he ends up winded after this match, he's going to have to step up the cardio a LOT between now and Wrestlemania.

John: If he's against Hogan at Mania he has to step up against the cardio? Hogan hasn't run in 10 years, man. I think Austin's hesitant about having a real match, which is why he's doing this. Like I said, though, I don't think it's appealing. They're wasting an Austin comeback only because TT last year was the lowest buyrate for WWE. That's the only reason.

Matt: If Austin is facing Hogan at Wrestlemania, all the reason more to make sure he's in shape, because he's going to have to carry Hogan's ass around, and then get put over when Hogan shakes his hand. But I definitely agree it's being done to pop a buyrate. But WWE definitely lucked out that there is no baseball playoffs to compete with. I think that's why they put the show a couple of weeks later than it was last year.

John: Yeah, well, they can blame Sox/Yanks, but I think it's the PPV being on a Tuesday that's a problem. A Tuesday PPV won't draw as well as a Sunday one. It's not something fans are used to.

Matt: I actually wish Survivor Series was still on Thanksgiving, or on the Friday after Thanksgiving.

5. It looks like Hurricane is finally going to do a heel turn. Where do you see this going?
Matt: First off, I see Rosey getting the axe soon. His meal ticket just went bye bye. Unfortunately, I don't see Helms going anywhere, unless he gets shipped over to Smackdown and tries to make an impact in the Cruiserweight division. Raw is unfortunately a land of the giants, and it's tough for a small heel to try and get over. Plus, Raw's suffering from a severe lack of faces, even moreso now that Hurricane turned heel. After Rosey, who will Helms feud with? I'm surprised the Hurricane gimmick lasted over four years, but it did. Rest in peace.

John: Feels like I've been here before. Shane Helms should have ditched the stupid mask two years ago when the gimmick became boring fast. Watch the last six months of WCW. Helms was arguably as good as any performer on the program by the time the company ended. He has charisma, good mic skills and he can go in the ring. In WWE he's basically a jobber. What a fucking waste. Where do I see it going? Nowhere, because Helms is as misused as anybody in the entire company. Where should it go? With Helms on Smackdown as the face of the cruiser division.

Matt: I already am digging the Helms heel turn after his promo on Unlimited this week on Raw. But "Gregory Helms" has to go. No matter how good he his, I can't take any heel seriously who's name is "Gregory." What's so bad about Sugar Shane? Do they think we'll confuse him with Shane McMahon?

John: Yes, they think it'll confuse him with Shane McMahon. That's their thinking. Surprised they didn't change Chris Benoit's name to Chuck Benoit or something since Chris Jericho was there before him. As for the Helms thing, how many people watch that Unlimited thing? Maybe half a million at best? Certainly not the 4 or 5 million watching Raw on Monday. If they REALLY wanted to get this new character over for Helms then it would have been on Raw, not on the internet show. So I have little faith that this will result in anything, but at least he's ditched the stupid mask.

Matt: It's funny, because Shopzone just came out with new Hurricane merchandise with a new Hurricane wind-up toy. Whoops.

John: And you ordered it because you want Hurripowers, right? I know you're a mark Matt, but come on, save your money!

Matt: I don't want, I *have* Hurripowers, be-yotch.

John: Back on topic, he IS a good talent. One of the few bright spots in WCW's last six months. Just use him better. That's all.

6. Why would WWE invest time in a midget division on Smackdown? Did they just do it to make Tazz feel taller or do they really know what they're doing with this?
John: Why do it? Because, like I said earlier, they are panicking. Smackdown drew huge ratings with Latinos during the entire Rey/Eddie feud, often times being the most watched show on all of TV for Latino men aged 18-34. Since then ratings have gone way down, so they brought in the Mexicools (even though they barely use them on SD) and now the midgets are in there too. Personally I think the midgets will get less attention than the cruisers, which is saying something because they're practically non-existent too.

Matt: They're trying out new ideas, and because they've already assumed Smackdown is the B show, they're going to do the experiments there. Apparently some of the "little" people they brought in are really good, so if it's good wrestling, I personally don't care how tall they are. The only downside is that they're going to be eating up precious air time on Smackdown that could be used for other people. James Gibson and Spanky left ROH for THIS?

John: The midget division is there for humor. Anybody who thinks they're going to get some 10 minute match on TV is kidding themselves. They'll be there to feud with their comedic heels, try to get a cheap laugh and after a few months of realizing that it won't work they'll be gone pretty soon. I don't see this lasting long at all. But I guess it's better than doing another shitty Tough Enough.

Matt: I read spoilers for this week's Smackdown, and although I won't spoil anything, it sounded pretty entertaining. But like you, I don't see anything lasting too long. Despite what Palmer Cannon was told to say on-camera, midgets do NOT equal ratings.

John: I only have one more thing to say on this topic: Fuck off with the midgets. Use the cruiserweights. Geez.

Matt: That's all that needs to be said, really.

7. From November 2004 to the present day: rate how the year has been for Chris Benoit.
Matt: It's been....interesting to say the least. Around this time last year, Benoit was over. It can be argued that Benoit was even MORE over after he lost the World Title than when he had it. I really enjoyed the subfeud with Edge while Shawn Michaels was on the shelf. Benoit was always involved in the midcard and helping talent like Orton, Batista and Christian improve in the ring. Then all four of them got shipped over to Smackdown, and I'm just wondering why he hasn't done the same. I loved the U.S. Title win, but they overdid the beating Orlando Jordan thing way too much. I mean, how many times can you challenge for the U.S. belt before the office decides to move on to somebody else? I thought he should have had a long run with it, but the office is just so high on Booker T, and I have no idea why. Benoit is more over than Booker and is a better wrestler. He just doesn't have an attractive wife on screen. So yeah, disappointing year for Benoit, but not horrible. I'd go 5 out of 10.

John: Well, nothing is going to compare to 2004 for Benoit. That's his best year ever as far as a push in North American wrestling goes and will not be topped. This year there hasn't been anything that memorable for him. Just a lot of matches in the three to four star range, but nothing exceptional like he routinely was doing in 2004. That's mostly due to a lack of a push. When you have to wrestle somebody as poor as Orlando Jordan as much as he has then your quality is going to be down. He's still solid, although obviously not as good as last year because of fewer opportunities. On the 10 point scale, I'll go at 6 out of 10. What can I say, I'm a Benoit mark.

Matt: It's amazing how over Benoit still is, even after doing relatively nothing all year. I think he could get another World Title reign over on Smackdown and it'll still seem credible. I'd love to see Benoit work Kennedy in the near future though. He'll do wonders for Ken.

John: I think that's definitely a feud to do in the future. To see how well Kennedy can do against him. The thing with Benoit is last year was probably better than any of us could have imagined for him. The thought of him being World Champ was just nuts, but then they used him right and well. He's getting massive pops as a wrestling machine because he was presented so well last year. I don't hate that he's a supporting guy this year, but I just want him to get into a deep feud rather than throwaway ones that seem to last a month and then die off. Or the lame Orlando Jordan thing that took what, three months to end?

Matt: I laughed when he did the coffee thing, but you're right. It lasted way too long. How many times can you make Orlando Jordan tap out and still be entertaining? I personally think he could have had a badass title reign, but apparently creative wants to push Sharmell (and Booker along with her).

John: You know what match I would LOVE on PPV? Benoit vs. Shelton Benjamin. I think they only wrestled on Raw that one time in a 8 or 9 minute match that was really good. It's too bad they're on different shows now because a face vs. face "who's the better man" type of feud would be perfect for BOTH guys right now.

Matt: It may happen next year. Benjamin's getting stale, so you know what that means? Ship him off to Smackdown!

8. What's the Smackdown World Title match at WrestleMania 22 (hi Seagull!) going to be?
John: I know we've talked about this before, so I'm pretty sure we'll both be saying Orton defending against Mysterio. I wouldn't upset if it's Eddie defending against Rey though. Considering that has been the best feud of 2004 (in my opinion), I think it would be fitting to give them 30 minutes at Mania, have Rey beat him one more time with a clean pin and end the show on that note. As long as they give Mysterio the shot to be the top babyface at WrestleMania I'm going to be happy. Nobody deserves it more.

Matt: Randy Orton as champion defending against Rey Mysterio. I've been saying it for months. They used the Guerrero feud to test Mysterio's durability as a top babyface, and I think they succeeded. They're going to play up the size difference like WHOA. Orton will beat Batista either on Smackdown or at the Royal Rumble, and Mysterio will win the Rumble. It's going to be excellent.

John: I know we talked about Rey/Orton as our SD title match before, but I don't think it'll happen with Rey winning the Rumble. He'll get the shot some other way. Like I said, though, I wouldn't mind heel Eddie defending against face Rey on the biggest stage because they had such a good feud this year that they deserve that reward at WM. As I've said many times, I will never get sick of them wrestling.

Matt: On the contrary, I think that Rey *will* win the Royal Rumble, which will start the deck being stacked agianst Rey. Was it a fluke? Was it not? And then Orton's the champ, and Orton's so much friggin taller than Rey, and he'll NEVER take Rey seriously. And there's your feud. The heels don't believe in Rey, but the fans do. Ultimate babyface.

John: I'm not saying it doesn't work. As much as they love Rey (which is great), I don't know if they love him enough to have him with the Rumble, ya know? It goes against all McMahon logic of size > everything. That's all I'm saying.

Matt: Which if they're smart, they'll take the risk and actually have the SMALLEST guy in there win the Rumble. Play up the fact that size is such an advantage, and then Rey eliminates somebody like Big Show by doing the bait and duck thing he does. Big Show's always great for that "last guy you have to eliminate" role.

John: "If they're smart" eh? Remember question one. They're not. One thing I will say is a Rey Mysterio push is the one thing that could excite me the most as we head into WrestleMania. Well, that and the return of the Rock. Everything else seems tired and done before.

Matt: And I'll be there live for it, sucka.

John: I'll be at the Super Bowl. That's better for me, so I'm not down about it.

Matt: Enjoy watching somebody other than the Rams play.

John: I will.

9. Our dear friend Jim Ross was fired. He's been part of some really stupid shit over the years. What's your favorite horrible moment?
Matt: See, all the dumb shit everybody remembers served a higher purpose. Jobbing to Bischoff tried to get Eric over as a credible threat against Austin at No Way Out 2003. Kane setting JR on fire was supposed to get him more over as a heel. Same with Taker for making JR kiss Vince's ass. To an extent, the latter two worked. The stupidest thing I ever saw with JR was his attempt to be a heel in 1999 by bringing in Dr. Death. People just refused to boo him. And nobody cared about Dr. Death, unfortunately, after he got whooped by Bart Gunn in the Brawl for All. When JR came out as a face at Mania 15, it was like things were back to normal. You can't boo JR. He's like a lovable uncle.

John: I'll go with the time he had to kiss Vince's ass. I hated that whole "kiss my ass club" thing. It was just really bad. The time he got lit on fire by Kane was one of those hilarious wrestling moments where they expect fans to act sad because of it, but I'm pretty sure 90% of the people watching were laughing because of how bad it was in terms of quality. Then there's the whole thing where they brought out the fake Diesel and Razor Ramon. More bad stuff.

Matt: See, I thought the Kiss My Ass segment served well to get Undertaker over as a heel, as I already mentioned. It was the catalyst to one of Taker's best years of his career. I loved his 2002 heel work. And what better way to get over as a heel than to help humiliate JR in his hometown? I just couldn't buy JR as a heel either time. Not with the fake Diesel and Razor nor in early 1999.

John: We wrote the question before Raw, but the colon thing is the worst ever. The fact that Vince thought it was funny makes it the worst. Easy. It never seemed to end.

Matt: Ha. I was going to use that for a quick hit, but I think I'll discuss it now. If this leads to JR coming back, then Vince's segment, while dragging on for way too long, did some good to put sympathy heat on JR. The pop for JR's return will be huge, if it happens. If not, then I'll agree with you that it was pointless.

John: JR is gonna come back. That doesn't make that segment any better. If it was three minutes, fine. It was eight, though. It got tiresome fast. I don't think it was offensive. Just bad.

Matt: A lot of people are calling it Katie Vick bad. I think that's being a little harsh. The soundbytes were hilarious.

John: Katie Vick is worse, definitely. This was bad comedy. It was funny at times, like I said, but it was more bad than good.

10. With Survivor Series just around the corner, what your top five matches in Survivor Series history?
John: I asked this question more because I never associate SSeries with great matches. So I was interested in what my list would be. Here's what I came out with.

1. Austin vs. Hart in '96 - The match at WrestleMania 13 is better, but this one is still arguably a five star match that shows how technical Steve Austin could be. Tremendous finish in this match too.

2. Michaels over HHH, RVD, Kane, Jericho & Booker in '02 - The first Elimination Chamber match ruled. I loved it.

3. Hart over Diesel in '95 - Arguably the best match Kevin Nash ever had without the use of a gimmick. Hart was phenomenal here.

4. Michaels vs. Sid in '96 - Terrific match. Sid's best match ever. Michaels was completely on fire here, as was the NYC crowd.

5. Michaels vs. Hart in '97 - People forget the match, but I have it at about **** and it might have been higher if we saw the finish that Bret Hart thought we'd see. Plus when you think about the historical significance of the match I think it has to be put here.

Matt: 1. Bret vs. Austin - 96
2. Bret vs. Diesel - 95
3. Elimination Chamber - 02
4. Bret vs. HBK - 92
5. Bret/Piper/Virgil/Bulldog vs. Flair/Dibiase/Warlord/Mountie - 91

Bret really shined during Survivor Series time. I'm sure Bret would have been in the Elimination Chamber too if he could. If you guys thought Team Austin vs. Team Bischoff was good, watch the 91 opening Survivor Tag. It's just as good, it has about the same heat, and it doesn't have to rely on a sick bladejob to be good. I just wish people still remembered it.

John: We got a lot of similar matches on there. Survivor Series has really only had one MOTY Candidate and that's Austin/Hart. Everything else is pretty good, but nothing exceptional and no all-time great match.

Matt: The best way I can describe the PPV is fun. I love the traditional series matches. If I could make a number 6, I'd include the Winner Take All match from 2001. That PPV was very very fun, even though pretty much the entire card outside of the main event was booked the week before by Foley.

John: It was also a very predictable PPV, but it was still good, I agree. The Rock/Austin stuff in that match was terrific. Some say they should have just done Rock/Austin in singles, but I don't mind how they did it.

Matt: Survivor Series also has the potential for a lot of disappointments. 99 and 2000 spring to mind. Makes me queesy just thinking about 1999 again.

John: I was there. I have no comments. One of my worst nights as a wrestling fan. Chyna beating Jericho. Sigh. Big Show instead of Austin. Groan. But at least I saw Angle's PPV debut. I have a column all about it.

QUICK HITS
Matt: Who loses his belt first? Cena or Batista?
John: Cena, hopefully as soon as Taboo Tuesday. I'm ready for an Angle or Michaels reign, personally.
Matt: I think Batista will drop at Armageddon to Orton.

John: You think there's a babyface turn in the future for JBL?
Matt: God, I hope not. I'm just starting to warm up to him as a heel. A year and a half after the fact....
John: I think it's going to happen. He can really thrive in that role due to his promo skills, particularly his ability to be funny.

Matt: Mickie James: success or bust?
John: I like her bust. Does that count? The angle is basically the same that Tori did with Sable a few years back, but it's WWE, so we're not supposed to have brains or memories.
Matt: Yes, but I think this time around, the fan will turn on the Diva, not the other way around. I think success. More actual women wrestlers who are also hot is a good thing.

John: What outfit are you voting for in the Divas Battle Royal? I only ask because that's the only vote I'm really interested in.
Matt: Leather and lace. I'll use this space to say VOTE FOR DUDE LOVE YOU ASSHOLES!
John: Let's go Leather and Lace! (clap clap clap clap) Let's go Leather and Lace! (clap clap clap clap) Mmmm, Trish in leather.

Matt: This one's for Johnny....who'd you rather meet in person: The Rock or Trish Stratus? (And you can't say both!)
John: I don't think I'd pick any celebrity over Trish Stratus at this point. She is the only answer. As for meeting her, it's probably best that I don't. I'd prefer not to get arrested.
Matt: I'd take Trish too. As much as I'd love to meet The Rock, I am a warm-blooded male.

John: Speaking of Rock. Rock vs. Michaels: Does it ever happen?
Matt: Of course. It's professional wrestling.
John: It's sports entertainment. Idiot! You'd get fired by Vince for calling it wrestling! I say yes too, though.
Matt: Vince already fired me, remember? He fired you too!
John: Yeah. Best firing I ever got, really. When do I get my colon surgery? He could pull out a Rams helmet. Maybe a basketball. Maybe a couch, since I like to sit a lot. It'd be great!

Matt: Before I sign off, I'd just like to repeat: VOTE FOR DUDE LOVE! It's the only choice to me, really.
John: Vote for leather and lace. That's more important. But I guess that's where we differ. I like women, you like 300 pound hairy men. He's married with four kids, Matt. Stop hitting on Foley!

----------------------------------

We did such a good job this month that I think we deserve a hand.

Uh. Yeah.

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 at some point before the end of the year, most likely in December.

Visit the For Love or Money Archives. Thanks for reading.

Vote for Leather & Lace!

Note from John: I haven't done the News & Views column due to being very busy of late. I will trying to bring back either this weekend or in the second week of November.

Matt "The Love" Seagull - OratorBirdman@gmail.com
John "JC Money" C. - oratoryjohn@gmail.com