Alright, I have re-opened the Mailbag section with the help of two individuals, Kayfabe and Grandpa. Hopefully, it will work out better this time, as the above individuals will handle the great BULK of the emails.

Here are the steps to take if you like your question answered in the Mailbag section:

1. Please check to see that your question(s) have not been answered on any other sections of the page. Take great note of the FAQ Part I and FAQ Part II as well as the mailbag archives at the bottom of the page. .
2. Send a legibly written question or comment to mailbag@rajah.com. Please limit yourself to only one question per person per email. This allows us to update the mailbag more frequently.
3. ALL email sent there may potentially be included in the Mailbag. If you do not want your response posted, do NOT send it there!
4. If a name is included, I will post it along with the email. If you do not want your name published, do NOT write it!
5. Remember, it is impossible that every email I receive get posted on this page. Only the best and most popular questions/comments will likely make it on.
6. Also remember, that questions will be answered by either Kayfabe or Rajah, so any personal remarks should be addressed accordingly. The following color scheme will be used:

Rajah - GREEN
Kayfabe - YELLOW
Vegas - AQUA

From: Mick
In the results for Smackdown 2/20, the guy that wrote the report said the Undertaker and Kane couldn't use the Tombstone.. why not? I must have missed something. Thanks

There are rumors going about that all moves with direct head to neck impact are somewhat discouraged in the back. I certainly can't verify this, but I'm guess if it is true (which it seems to be with the lack of such moves as of late), it's a somewhat valid decision based on a run of recent injuries.

From: Joshua
Hey Rajah and crew,
At the last mailbag I read something that quite disturbed me. A reader wrote in and said that he hated Stone Cold because he's been at the top so long and because he wanted the Rock to be the number one face. Oh, and he also said Austin is a terrible wrestler. Well where should I start. OK, how about his wrestling ability. The kid obviously hasn't watched ANY of Austin's matches in the past and obviously hasn't caught any of his instant classics with Benoit. The guy CAN wrestle, and he's been proving the critics wrong week in week out. *Sigh*, I guess no matter what happens good ol' Steve'll never be able to prove ALL of them wrong. Also, if you look at Austin's time on top and Hogan's time at the top, Hogan was at the top MUCH longer. What's the rule now, three years and move over? Gimme a break. And I'm a Rock fan as well. And I enjoy TWO guys being on top rather than just one. It makes it more interesting, and as far as popularity goes, you can tell that they are TIED. Now, Vegas made a remark about if Austin is actually drawing fans. All I gotta say is look at the fan reaction when he comes out. It's HUGE. So is the Rock's. They both draw the same amount of fans. Vegas also said something about Austin writing his own storylines. I believe this to be a bit false. Does Austin have some control? Yeah, every main eventer does. But the bookers and Vince do the majority of the stuff, INCLUDING Austin's matches. So, Austin isn't refusing to lose or anything like that. I usually respect everyone's opinions, but the kid that wrote it was obviously a mark that came around while Austin was gone and the Rock was the main guy, and therefore is ignorant of Austin's work, so it kind of disturbed me. I just HAD to write something before I exploded!

Well, well, well, everyone is entitled to their opinion...but since everyone is a mark in some fashion, please try and refrain from using the term mark in a negative light, especially since you yourself are an Austin mark (as I am still a Steamboat mark, etc).

Anyway, I think you blow my contentions way out of context. My actual quote was that Austin should be on top not one minute longer than he is the top draw.
Now, relax a little bit and read it again. I'm not saying he isn't the top draw at any point in that statement. I'm saying that at the time when he isn't anymore, there's no reason to push him as the top guy. That'd be bad business. I feel that way about all wrestlers, and I always will. Wrestling is a business, first and foremost, and I'll never understand putting someone in the limelight when they don't deserve it as much as someone else.

Now, as far as Austin's current popularity is concerned...it's disputed. Some argue that other guys (the Rock or HHH for instance) get bigger reactions. Unfortunately, I can't discern whether they do or not because I don't go to every show, and I am subjected to piped in crowd noise at times (which by the way, both of the Big 2 have used that effect at various points in time.....just in case anyone cares). Anyway, following my initial point, if he isn't the top draw...then he shouldn't be pushed as such, and almost no one on the net is on the road enough to legitimately make a claim either way. If he averages the most reaction, he's legitmately the top draw. If he's doesn't, he shouldn't be.

As far as Austin's power over his angles is concerned...that's nearly documented over the last few years. While guys like the Rock and HHH have done the job to lower card talent, Austin hasn't done so as much. He has a patchy history with an unwillingness to put over Jeff Jarrett, HHH (at a certain time), etc. Plus, as he returned, he was granted a lion's share of control over his character's angles. Now, is he evil for doing this? No. Could this lead to bigger things that could hurt the product down the road? Yes. That's my whole point..nothing more.


Finally, I'm not sure if you were aiming criticism in my direction or not, but if you were that's ok. I took on the chance of being publically criticized when I took on this positoin, but please, please, please don't get all up in arms at other rajah.com readers and resort to belittlement or name calling. Everyone has an opinion, and they are all valid. In closing, relax man, it's going to be ok, and enjoy Austin at Wrestlemania as millions of others will.
Thank you

From: locdog07
Hey there, great site, been visiting for over a year now. Anyway, on to my question.

Why do so many people pick at the little mistakes JR makes? Apparently it completely spoils the outcome of a pay-per-view if JR mistakenly refers to The Rock as "Austin", or vice versa. Do these people seriously think we should demote the guy to something like Jakked, or take him off screen entirely, and replace him with someone like The Coach (until Coach makes a similar mistake and he gets fired too, and replaced by Michael Hayes, etc...)?

If we're going to harp on at commentating errors, then here's one for those JR haters out there. Wrestlemania 4. Savage vs Ted DiBiase. Main event. Gorilla Monsoon calls Ted DiBiase "The Hulkster" mere moments before Hogan emerges and pretty much saves Randy Savage from losing. That's a Wrestlemania main event. Does that make Gorilla Monsoon a "fool"? Absolutely not.

Anyway, my point is, these people should try talking to a live audience for 2 hours (and sometimes 5 hours) a week for a few years, and see if they manage to get through it without a single mistake.

I completely agree. I don't understand why people like to harp on such insignificant errors that take nothing away from the show in the great scheme of things. JR is one of the all time greats. Besides that, he's multi-talented. His XFL work with Jesse Ventura has been terrific thus far.

From: Dianna
Love the site! Please, please change the font in the mailbag for the questions portion! Italic writing is incredibly hard to read, at least for me. Keep the white, loose the italic.

Well, what do you think, folks?

From: Philip
This is in response to that one guy who said the west coast isn't that great because of Raw's time delay, and to you Pete, for saying that the west coast gets the short end of the stick:

Sure, Raw is shown on a time delay, but the PPV's aren't. So while you guys have to wait until 8 at night to see a PPV, we get to see it three hours earlier at 5. Then it ends at 8 for us and we can watch the Simpsons without having to tape it. Or we can then watch the PPV again, and go to bed early at 11. Ha ha.

I'll give you points for the part about the Simpsons, but other than that I think starting a PPV that early would be weird. It wouldn't have that PPV feel to it if it was still light outside for most of the show, but maybe that's just me. Also, in the earlier days, when some of the PPV's started at 4 PM EST, that's 1 PM PST. I'm not even awake by 1 PM on a Sunday afternoon and you're going to show me a PPV then? I don't think so.

From: The Commissioner
Hey Kayfabe, I'll address this to you since you handled the run-down of Harvey Whippleman's WWF career in the last mailbag, I thought I'd add a tidbit to it. As the RajahWWF TV reporter (Heat, Jakked and WCW Thunder for the uninitiated) obsessed with working in a referee mention for every match, I of course remember that Harvey was one of the scab refs that took over for the regular officials when they went on strike shortly before the 1999 Unforgiven PPV. In fact, Harvey was the referee for the Jeff Jarrett/Chyna IC title match where Chyna actually won the strap, but she used the belt to waffle Jarrett into oblivion while Whippleman was down to do it. A dazed Harvey counted the three, but head scab ref Tom Prichard came out and showed Whippleman what Chyna had done on the TitanTron. Being the fine, upstanding official he was, Harvey proptly reversed the decision and awarded the Intercontinental Championship back to Jeff Jarrett. In the interest of completion, the scab refs who worked during the strike were:

Harvey Whippleman, Tom Prichard, Steve Lombardi (The Brooklyn Brawler), Jim Cordares (a regular WWF referee who crossed the picket line because he'd just gotten married [I remember EVERYthing])

Actually, while we're at it, the night the regular refs actually struck (on Smackdown) the WWF was caught short handed and the following people were pressed into service as referees:

Shawn Stasiak, Pat Patterson, Gerald Brisco, Dave Hebner, Sgt. Slaughter, Tony Garrea, Mark Eaton (WWF timekeeper)

There now THERE you have it. A freakish amount of detail no one needed. My work here is done.

All true. Harvey was also the outside ref during the '96 SUrvivor Series, but I thought I'd only include the, you know, significant details unlike yourself (kidding, kidding). See that? The Commissioner and Kayfabe: co-authors of the Harvey Wippleman biography.

From: MD
Hey Raj, Pete, and the new kid on the block, Vegas.

First off, you run an excellent site, any info I need, this is where I come.

My question... The WWF's roster is deeper then it's ever been, and it's constantly getting more talent, with Mark Henry coming back, Tori, Credible, Tajiri (possibly), and the list goes on and on. Do you think perhaps changing Raw, Smackdown or both to a 3 hour show would be a good way to get everyone on TV, because there's talent that doesn't get any time simply due to the lack of time, and size of the roster.

I'd like to see both big shows changed to 3 hours, I'm a huge fan of a few of the mid carders and I don't get to see them enough. Lemme know what you think.

I've addressed this before, and my opinion hasn't changed: I don't think it would be wise to change either show to 3 hours. The booking team is already overworked coming up with 4 hours of major TV per week (plus Heat and PPV's once a month). To increase that load by 50% would be difficult and unnecessary, and I think the product would suffer for it. WCW made the mistake of doing this when their roster was loaded a few years back, and it bombed horribly. My advice: Don't try to fix what isn't broken. Leave them at two hours.

Send ALL Mailbag-related email to mailbag@rajah.com.

The rajah.com Mailbag Archives

FastCounter by LinkExchange