In your last Q..about "how pissed will you be if"....you make me really pissed with 3 out of 5(i think statements you gave us..!!!especially with the Cody beating Taker's streak...
i will be defienetely choose David Arquette for 12 years cause in both 2 occassions i will stop watching WWE.I prefer to stop it for 12 years than from 40...
Here is your *star*..funny Q..i hope that neither of these two options will become reality...
2007-11-13 12:02:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Koumidiator WRW VLR OS 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
David Arquette Holding The WWE Title For 12 Years because 12 is less than 40 and both would be boring either way so ya 12.
2007-11-13 19:53:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by gkd 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Cody Rhodes Holding The WWE Title For 40 Years.
2007-11-13 19:49:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Toni Muller 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
David Arquette holding the title for 12 years.
2007-11-13 19:48:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by |angie| 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
David Arquette because I cant stand Cody Rhodes in the slightest bit. Then again, I couldn't stand David Arquette...but 12 years is less than 40...
2007-11-13 19:49:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Cody Rhodes holding the WWE title for 40 years is most horrifying.
2007-11-13 20:12:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Animal Luvr 4 Life 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
First both of them I would stop watching the WWE but I would say Cody Rhodes holding the title for 40 years because that is longer and wrestling would lose all their viewers for 40 years.
2007-11-13 19:50:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
B.
Cody Rhodes Holding The WWE Title For 40 Years.
Who is a more believable champion? Someone in wrestling that wrestles, or an actor that held a title to draw ratings and controversy?
2007-11-13 19:59:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
David Arquette for 12 years. I'm glad neither are possible.
2007-11-13 19:50:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jules Michael Michaels 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'll go with David Arquette,he dosen't really annoy me much
2007-11-13 19:49:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋