Ziggy Vercetti Posted December 7, 2017 Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 Justin Barrasso of the site wrote, A contact within WWE reached out to inform Sports Illustrated that Hardy will be allowed a creative license by McMahon, who sees opportunity and the opportunity to cash in on a character that is already established.Speaking of The Hardys, WWE is working on a 24 special about Matt & Jeffs return to the company. Reby Sky was interviewed for the piece and wrote the following on her Twitter account:Matt will never get hired because of your mouth.""WWE wouldn't touch you with a 10 foot pole."Ok cool cool.Source:http://www.allwrestlingnews.com/2017/12/06/matt-hardy-reportedly-creative-control-woken-gimmick/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunchbox Posted December 7, 2017 Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 Love how Matt was on drugs and crazy and people hated him now he plays a character that's batshit insane and people love him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted December 7, 2017 Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 Lol at her saying WWE wouldn't touch her with a 10 foot pole in the interview...since I said the same thing before I even heard that. It isn't any less true, though. It really is surprising that WWE is embracing her at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted December 7, 2017 Report Share Posted December 7, 2017 It only cuz Jeff a huge money maker by that the hardysbr huge money makers. Only reason they back if shw comea to wwe i,see a lot of,heat going be on her back stage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muur Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Matt getting creative control is massive really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango kid Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Who said he got creative control Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creepia Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Who said he got creative control You did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Matt getting creative control is massive really. Lol. Classic uninformed bullshit spewing by Muurcus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muur Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 "Creative licence" is close enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 It's really not, though, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creepia Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Urm yes it is, by its very definition. Both mean creative freedom. Dont listen to him Muur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muur Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 I guess the pedantic part MRN is moaning about is just someone like Lesnar will be able to choose his feuds or turn a loss into a win etc. Matt won't have that But I mean having creative control over promos and stuff is still close enough. Harping on technical wording is dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Creative license and creative control are two very different things. Saying they're close enough is dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Than Light Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Creative license and creative control are two very different things. Saying they're close enough is dumb. Why don't you enlighten us on the difference instead of insulting people then, lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy. Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Creative license and creative control are two very different things. Saying they're close enough is dumb. Why don't you enlighten us on the difference instead of insulting people then, lol That would require him making a sensible post for once, which obviously can't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Creative license and creative control are two very different things. Saying they're close enough is dumb. Why don't you enlighten us on the difference instead of insulting people then, lol He's the one who said what I said was dumb and just because of this post I won't enlighten your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Than Light Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 "Lol. Classic uninformed bullshit spewing by Muurcus." There is you insulting Muur at the beginning of the conversation. And in that case, just stop posting if you aren't interested in civilized discussion. Im not a moderator so you don't have to listen to me, but you probably should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Good point, my bad. Creative control is Vince telling you 'go out there and lose to the Singhs' and you being contractually allowed to say 'nah, fam, I'm not doing that' and Vince can't do it. Creative license is pretty much just having more liberty with your character, promos, etc. It's probably nothing contractual, even. WWE hasn't given anyone creative control since Bret Hart, I think. Might've been the only one to have contractually have it, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generations Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Pretty sure that when 99.99% of people talk about "creative control" in pro wrestling, they're talking about a gimmick and how it is portrayed. Which includes Vince saying "I want you to wear this panda suit" and you saying "Nah...I'm a badass...I don't wear panda suits". The bit about refusing certain losses is really something else entirely, IMO. That's less about creative, and more about just having earned enough long-time respect to demand victories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muur Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 Good point, my bad. Creative control is Vince telling you 'go out there and lose to the Singhs' and you being contractually allowed to say 'nah, fam, I'm not doing that' and Vince can't do it. Creative license is pretty much just having more liberty with your character, promos, etc. It's probably nothing contractual, even. WWE hasn't given anyone creative control since Bret Hart, I think. Might've been the only one to have contractually have it, too. I dunno, Jinder seems to think otherwise. https://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/2017/7/20/16003368/jinder-mahal-says-he-has-creative-control-over-wwe-character-vince-mcmahon-advice Also, pretty sure Taker, Cena, Orton, Goldberg and even Roman etc have it. Lesnar said no to a feud with Shane cuz he couldn't be *censored*ed for example. Cena reverted losses to wins in the past, even for people that aren't him like Nikki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil' Kazu Posted December 8, 2017 Report Share Posted December 8, 2017 You're right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted December 10, 2017 Report Share Posted December 10, 2017 According to WrestleTalk, Vince is "very high" on Matt and trusts him enough to give him "complete freedom" with the character. Although according to Meltzer, there is "definitely a ceiling on the push" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bushy. Posted December 10, 2017 Report Share Posted December 10, 2017 Thats fine. He doesnt need the world title lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willows Way Posted December 10, 2017 Report Share Posted December 10, 2017 Nah just let him be as entertaining as possible. He can lose every match idc i just want the Broken Matt shenanigans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted December 10, 2017 Report Share Posted December 10, 2017 Thats fine. He doesnt need the world title lol. Meltzer reckons it will be a "50 50 programme with Bray" at best. Personally I feel it's probably only until Jeff comes back, as WWE see him as the bigger star. So if they feud, Jeff's winning most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.