Rob Van Dam Disputes Online Reports, Claims He'll Be Back in WWE
Rob Van Dam has taken to his official Twitter account to dispute online reports that he was unhappy with his most recent stint in WWE.
Following his loss to World Heavyweight champion Alberto Del Rio at Battleground, Van Dam was written out of WWE storylines following the expiration of his short-term contract (per an article on the company's official site on Monday, the star needs time off following his disheartening loss at the pay-per-view).
Soon after, various sites reported that Van Dam was deeply disgruntled with the company and his treatment at the hands of the booking team. It appeared there was also doubt concerning whether or not he would even be back in the company following his hiatus.
Interestingly, Van Dam made a point on Twitter to refute these allegations, telling followers he was, in fact, very pleased with his time in WWE and had every intention of returning to America's No. 1 promotion at some point in the near future:
So, what to make of this?
Well, it has to be said that Van Dam's latest stint in the company has left a great deal to be desired.
He lost left and right on television, was stuck in a nonsensical partnership with Ricardo Rodriguez and, to make matters worse, the company didn't even try to make the Del Rio/Van Dam bout at Battleground into anything resembling a big deal.
Despite (usually) having the fans behind him, he came off as a total afterthought for much of his run.
What did you think of Van Dam's most recent WWE run?
Even if he has no intention of cutting ties with the company, it's hard to imagine the former ECW star being satisfied with how his career has gone after Money in the Bank.
However, despite these issues, we can almost certainly trust Van Dam's word that he will be back. It's not like the troubled TNA, where he worked for three years, is a valid option right now. Besides, where else in the world would he be able to make good money on a relatively easy schedule?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?