Robert Randall wrote: 2-3 years?? he can hardly go now

Seems like his lateset matches have all been good quality. Especially when he won the title on iMPACT.

Big Bad Booty Daddy wrote:Very good point gentlemen!!!!

The one thing i find about Sting is, i still find him entertaining!!! I dont know what it is but i really still enjoy watching Sting's matches!! Whether he looks bad in it or not!!

I mean i watch matches involving Hogan, Flair, Steiner, Dreamer and Foley and the just bore me. I tend to either fast forward the matches or go out the room and do something til its finished!!!

But with Sting i still enjoy some of his matches!!!


So cannot wait to see him return to the UK next year!!!

I love you. No I really do. YOU DA MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I say he can still go decent. In pretty good shape too. Lean, and still a little definition. Moves well for 50+

Big Red Machine wrote:Rob's point is that he can't move well now because he already is worn out. And I fully agree. When was the last time we saw him do anything aside from one of his finishers, a punch, and Irish Whip, or a weak Stinger Splash?

Re watch the match from last night's iMPACT tapings. You'll be adding moves to that list. And I doubt he's worn out. If you are worn out at 50+, you CAN'T even do half of what he does.

SONICdopeFRESH wrote: Moves well for 50+

Thats the thing, he's that old. Which means, have the occasional match but stay away from the World Title. He's held it enough....

SONICdopeFRESH wrote:

Big Red Machine wrote:Rob's point is that he can't move well now because he already is worn out. And I fully agree. When was the last time we saw him do anything aside from one of his finishers, a punch, and Irish Whip, or a weak Stinger Splash?

Re watch the match from last night's iMPACT tapings. You'll be adding moves to that list. And I doubt he's worn out. If you are worn out at 50+, you CAN'T even do half of what he does.

I disagree. A lot. He just did the same stuff. This match just had a lot more psychology to it.

To say that Sting can still go is the same as saying that The Undertaker is in his prime and looks amazing whenever he gets in the ring, or that Kane's not in obvious pain when he does half the stuff he does in the ring, or that The Great Khali is a brilliant wrestler.

It's just plain to see that all of these things are untrue.

Sting's in GREAT shape!

....for a 52 year old man. Comparatively, The Undertaker, Mick Foley and Steve Austin are 46. One Man Gang is 51. Kevin Nash is 52. Brett Hart is 54. Hulk Hogan, Ted DiBiase and Roddy Piper are 57. Rick Steamboat is 58. Ric Flair is 62.

All things considered, Stinger's not doing so bad for his age - but it doesn't change a thing. I think it's more than obvious in his matches that he can't physically keep up, and that's FINE - HE'S 52 YEARS OLD. Now is NOT the time to revamp his character. NOW is not the time to "freshen up" his image.

If they thought a change was ABSOLUTELY necessary, they should have taken the nostalgia route that WWE likes to go. They painstakingly dressed Anderson up in the oldshcool Stinger get-up, why not let the man himself go back to that for old time's sake. The actual gimmick itself isn't that far off of the Joker one they've got him in now!

He's not doing bad, he's just not doing good either.

I'd rather see more X-Division focus than more Sting.
That's a little slanted seeing as how I'd rather see more X-Division than anything.

Someone put his new gimmick as (quite humorously):

...Sting has now turned into the Clown Prince of Derp. He's like doing some sort of Jim Carrey's Riddler meets Heath ledger's Joker meets Hurrr De Hurr Durrr!!!

Rabid619 wrote:

SONICdopeFRESH wrote: Moves well for 50+

Thats the thing, he's that old. Which means, have the occasional match but stay away from the World Title. He's held it enough....

Until he becomes a 10 time TNA chapion, he ain't held it enough. Age doesn't mean you can't take the young guys to school. A little old school. And I mean, at least he has the guts to work every week. We know a lot of old guys, that just wanna be in a top card match & work just a Wrestlemania (cough dead cough)... Sting has guts.

Big Red Machine wrote:I disagree. A lot. He just did the same stuff. This match just had a lot more psychology to it.

And he incorporated different stuff in it. You say it as if his whole career, his matches haven't gone predominantly towards a fight back outta the turnbuckle game. He's a super face. That's how he supposed to fight.

SONICdopeFRESH wrote:Until he becomes a 10 time TNA chapion, he ain't held it enough. Age doesn't mean you can't take the young guys to school. A little old school. And I mean, at least he has the guts to work every week. We know a lot of old guys, that just wanna be in a top card match & work just a Wrestlemania (cough dead cough)... Sting has guts.

For the record, I don't even think he should have been a 1 time champion. I don't even think TNA needed him to begin with. They should have focused on their X-Division, their Women's Division, and all of their fresh talent. When I was watching Samoa Joe rampaging through the ranks, wearing his opponent's dried blood on a towel, that got my attention.
Not some soon-to-be geriatric like Sting and Rob Van Dam doing the same tired old crap they did 10 years ago.

SONICdopeFRESH wrote:

Big Red Machine wrote:I disagree. A lot. He just did the same stuff. This match just had a lot more psychology to it.

And he incorporated different stuff in it. You say it as if his whole career, his matches haven't gone predominantly towards a fight back outta the turnbuckle game. He's a super face. That's how he supposed to fight.

Yes, but the difference was that back then, he could actually take a bump, and put up a fiery babyface fight! Now, he can't take a damn bump, and looks like he doesn't even care.

SONICdopeFRESH wrote:Until he becomes a 10 time TNA chapion, he ain't held it enough. Age doesn't mean you can't take the young guys to school. A little old school. And I mean, at least he has the guts to work every week. We know a lot of old guys, that just wanna be in a top card match & work just a Wrestlemania (cough dead cough)... Sting has guts.

Sting doesnt need to be a 10 time TNA Champion. Right now thats like saying you're the smartest idiot. I had another analogy to use but im trying to make a point, not trying to put people down. Sting is a 4 time champion. To be a 10 time champion he would need to be around probably another 5 or 6 years at least unless they play hot potato with that belt. Sting has accomplished so much, he's won the belt everywhere he's been. Enough is enough, i'd rather see Mr Anderson as the champion then Sting especially with this rip off Joker gimmick. I see it as an insult to someone who played Joker perfectly and Sting is trying to ruin it. All Sting has are Clotheslines, Stinger Splash, Scorpion Death Drop & Scorpion Death Lock. He hasn't been in a good main event type match in years. 52 YEARS OLD Enough of this old fart TNA, bring on the young ins before they say f*ck this i'll go somewhere i'll be appreciated.

SONICdopeFRESH wrote:

Rabid619 wrote:

SONICdopeFRESH wrote: Moves well for 50+

Thats the thing, he's that old. Which means, have the occasional match but stay away from the World Title. He's held it enough....

Until he becomes a 10 time TNA chapion, he ain't held it enough. Age doesn't mean you can't take the young guys to school. A little old school. And I mean, at least he has the guts to work every week. We know a lot of old guys, that just wanna be in a top card match & work just a Wrestlemania (cough dead cough)... Sting has guts.

Sting doesn't wrestle every week.

And when Taker wrestles... it is always GOOD. With Sting... rarely. I would rather see Sting in one great match a year than in the 50 mediocre or bad matches he puts on. Just because the Honkytonk Man or the Iron Sheik or whoever wrestles on indy shows every week doesn't mean that they aren't a shell of their former selves in the ring. Same with Sting. When Taker wrestles, he still looks like Taker.

Big Red Machine wrote:And when Taker wrestles... it is always GOOD. With Sting... rarely. I would rather see Sting in one great match a year than in the 50 mediocre or bad matches he puts on. Just because the Honkytonk Man or the Iron Sheik or whoever wrestles on indy shows every week doesn't mean that they aren't a shell of their former selves in the ring. Same with Sting. When Taker wrestles, he still looks like Taker.

Takers match @ WM 27 wasn't that good though. The whole thing took so long because they had to catch their breaths so often. There wasn't as much psychology as much as just being slow. Taker saves his body for one match a year now it seems and this time it wasnt so great.

Rabid619 wrote:

Big Red Machine wrote:And when Taker wrestles... it is always GOOD. With Sting... rarely. I would rather see Sting in one great match a year than in the 50 mediocre or bad matches he puts on. Just because the Honkytonk Man or the Iron Sheik or whoever wrestles on indy shows every week doesn't mean that they aren't a shell of their former selves in the ring. Same with Sting. When Taker wrestles, he still looks like Taker.

Takers match @ WM 27 wasn't that good though. The whole thing took so long because they had to catch their breaths so often. There wasn't as much psychology as much as just being slow. Taker saves his body for one match a year now it seems and this time it wasnt so great.

I 100% disagree! That match was my MOTY until Davey vs. Eddie came along.

Big Red Machine wrote:I 100% disagree! That match was my MOTY until Davey vs. Eddie came along.

I saw that match (Trips v. Taker), it was more psychology than anything and im a person who likes to see some action in matches. Not just mind games, it also didnt help that i knew Undertaker was going to win from the start. His matches with HBK the past years had been great and actually made me believe that HBK might snap that streak. Maybe thats why i didnt like this match, i'd been spoiled the past 2 years. On top of that i wanted Trips/Sheamus over Trips/Taker because Trips/Sheamus would have made more sense to me.

Rabid619 wrote:

Big Red Machine wrote:I 100% disagree! That match was my MOTY until Davey vs. Eddie came along.

I saw that match (Trips v. Taker), it was more psychology than anything and im a person who likes to see some action in matches. Not just mind games, it also didnt help that i knew Undertaker was going to win from the start. His matches with HBK the past years had been great and actually made me believe that HBK might snap that streak. Maybe thats why i didnt like this match, i'd been spoiled the past 2 years. On top of that i wanted Trips/Sheamus over Trips/Taker because Trips/Sheamus would have made more sense to me.

it was a spot-fest with Psychology.

cero2k wrote:

Rabid619 wrote:

Big Red Machine wrote:I 100% disagree! That match was my MOTY until Davey vs. Eddie came along.

I saw that match (Trips v. Taker), it was more psychology than anything and im a person who likes to see some action in matches. Not just mind games, it also didnt help that i knew Undertaker was going to win from the start. His matches with HBK the past years had been great and actually made me believe that HBK might snap that streak. Maybe thats why i didnt like this match, i'd been spoiled the past 2 years. On top of that i wanted Trips/Sheamus over Trips/Taker because Trips/Sheamus would have made more sense to me.

it was a spot-fest with Psychology.

And it worked.