The Thread Killer

I swear, he gets worse every show. Had the same thought earlier. He becomes more Striker in LU-ish with every show. It's like he doesn't care about calling the matches anymore. He seems more concerned with shoehorning in as much goofy wordplay and as many stupid puns and painfully labored analogies as he can, which is always done at the expense of calling the action.

I swear, he gets worse every show.

Not to get all kayfabey, but doesn't the "Freebird Rule" apply to the Undisputed Era? Meaning, does Strong assume Fish's place in the team with O'Reilly?

I honestly didn't see that coming, not one little bit.

Yeah, that's the problem with those matches, isn't it? The law of diminishing returns. That ladder match was about as good as you're going to see for a match like that. I did enjoy it, but I cringed a number of times. While I enjoy those types of matches on a visceral level, I think they're too dangerous and probably shouldn't be done. The participants have to constantly try and outdo what others have done before or risk being labelled as boring or unexciting. Edge claims (and I have no reason not to believe him) that the Ladder and TLC matches he did in WWE took years off his career. I'd rather see a guy like Ricochet or Velveteen Dream stay healthy and have a longer career. Great match, but some of those spots were just so damn dangerous.

Did Mauro Ranallo really just say "Velveteen Dream dropping elbows like DJ's drop the needle?"

This show is off to a horrible start, I just spilled poutine gravy on my monitor. That band was too loud. The rock musicians are too loud nowadays. *shakes fist*

Between the Hillbilly Jim speech and now Ivory, I don't think I'm going to survive this HOF show. Started off great with the Dudleys, but now...ugh. I don't really want to hear a story about Ivory's sister's husband. MAKE THIS STUPID WEDDING ANALOGY STOP.

I'm not a populist. I'm part of an anarchosyndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting. By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more... Hey...how come your posts in this thread are (moderately) coherent and grammatically correct, but everywhere else they look like you type exclusively with your thumbs? Anyhow, I already slandered you once. Stop provoking me or I will slanderize you a second time.

I agree with C.S. and Magnum. If you're going to post a bunch of nonsense, at least do it in a decipherable manner. It always takes me more than one try to even figure out what he's saying. Then I invariably wish I hadn't. Consider him slandered.

Ding ding ding! Mystery solved. From a DigitalSpy.com interview with Paul Heyman himself (via Larry Csonka)...

I had the same question. Questions like this are why I love Jim Cornette's "other" podcast, Jim Cornette's Drive-Thru. Unlike "The Jim Cornette Experience" it's the one where he (generally) talks only about wrestling and wrestling history, not ranting about Trump, gun control, Republicans, Vince Russo, and everything else under the sun that makes him go psychotic. Whether you like Cornette or you don't, even his detractors have to admit the man knows a ton about the history of Pro Wrestling. In this case, he actually knew Moolah, and in this clip he talks about the controversy and Moolah's history in the business. Agree with it or not, it's an interesting listen...

Reading this thread, I am forced to admit how few "big moments" I have witnessed live. This, despite my 35 years as a wrestling fan, attending quite a few live events in the Toronto area over the years. I have had the chance to attend several major shows and PPV's in the Toronto area, many of which I elected not to, because I hate crowds. For example, I was offered the chance to attend Wrestlemania 18 and see Rock vs. Hogan live, which I did not accept. In retrospect I wish I would have accepted that. (I actually turned down the chance to go to Wrestlemania 6 at the same venue many years before, which I don't regret.) I have to admit I am slightly jealous of Ricky Jackson, who experienced Canadian Stampede live. Having said that, a few moments do stick out in my mind. I saw Hulk Hogan wrestle live a bunch of times at Maple Leaf Gardens during the height of Hulkamania, and that was always a guaranteed crowd mover. I'd have to say one of the most impressive reactions I remember was the response Hogan got at "The Big Event" at the Canadian National Exhibition in August 1986, when he fought Paul Orndorff, after Mr. Wonderful's legendary turn on him. That one set an attendance record for a while, 68,000 + fans. On a much smaller scale, the response Kevin Steen got when he fought Nigel McGuinness at ROH Northern Navigation in July 2008 was pretty damn loud, one of the loudest I ever experienced. I know this is strange, but one that really sticks out to me is the crowd reaction New Jack (of all people) got when his music hit at November to Remember 1999 in Buffalo. I went to a handful of ECW shows in Buffalo over the years, at all of them as soon as New Jack's music hit, the crowd would lose their shit. That guy was crazy over with the ECW fans at the time. If I remember correctly, that was the show where New Jack hit one of "Da Baldies" over the head with a computer keyboard, which smashed into a million pieces. The keys went flying into the air, and one of them beaned my friend in the head. He kept it as a souvenir. Then there was the very last live show I ever attending, ROH Global Wars 2014. The fans were so annoying with their obnoxiousness, chanting, and overall dickish behavior that I swore off attending live wrestling ever again. That was also the night I found out who the Young Bucks were, and decided I didn't like them one little bit.

I don't mind Conrad Thompson, but he is definitely an acquired taste. He took quite a while to grow on me, at first I didn't really care for him or Bruce Prichard at all, but in time I became a fan. I'm actually looking forward to this new show. I saw the WWE Documentary they did on Bischoff, I saw his (surprisingly good) interview with JBL on Legends, and most importantly I heard the interview he did with Steve Austin on Austin's podcast. He's arrogant and smug, no doubt - but a lot of that is an act, I believe. And I actually find him to be an interesting interview, intelligent and fairly insightful on certain topics. My only major concern is his memory, he tends to "not remember" a lot of things, whether that be by design or not, I don't know.

I know Heyman inducting Goldberg sounds a bit odd at first, but I think it makes sense. They're friends, and I don't think Goldberg has many actual friends in Pro Wrestling...if any at all, really. I saw an interview (and I wish I could say where, but I can't find it now) that Goldberg gave shortly after his WWE run last year, where he credited Heyman with a lot of the success he had when he returned. As I recall, Goldberg claimed that Triple H was the one who reached out and helped mend the fences between Goldberg and WWE, but Heyman played a part, specifically in brokering the whole angle with Lesnar. I got the impression that Heyman may have been more hands on with the creative behind that angle than he has been with anything else since his return to WWE as an on-air character. On an entirely different level, I think Heyman and Goldberg's friendship may have something to do with their pride in their heritage. In the past, Heyman has given pointed interviews about antisemitism in Pro Wrestling, and I know Goldberg is sensitive to that issue as well. I remember seeing an interview with Goldberg years ago (during his WCW days) where he talked about wanting to have the Star of David on his tights or incorporate it into a T-shirt design, only to be told by somebody at Turner or WCW that they "didn't want to alienate anybody by using religious symbols." They are both vocally proud Jewish Pro Wrestling legends. I'm not saying that Heyman is inducting Goldberg simply because they are both Jewish by any means...but I know they are friends and that their cultural background is something they are both proud of, so the choice of Heyman to induct Goldberg may make more sense than is immediately obvious.

People on Twitter are saying it's a great listen. I'm really looking forward to it. I won't have time until next week, but I can't wait to hear it if it's anything like the Mind Games episode with Michaels and Foley.

Yeah, if you look up Billy Jack Haynes on YouTube, you get a nice glimpse into his particular brand of wackiness. You get to see him accusing Vince McMahon of impregnating Nancy Benoit (which drove Chris to the murders - but it might have been Vince's people who killed Nancy and Daniel), you get to see his truly awesome challenge to Steve Austin to fight in the UFC (because Vince McMahon is too chickenshit to book it) because Austin is a WOMAN BEATER, and the newest addition is him claiming he witnessed murders in Arkansas back in the eighties, while he was acting as muscle on a cocaine deal that went wrong. Which he implies was for Bill Clinton. You also get to see older clips of guys like Barry Windham and Jim Cornette, who claim that Billy Jack has always been...out there. Here is the challenge against Austin, which you have to see...

I think we should take the letter "e" out of this thread, and make it "Rap Culture in Pro Wrestling." Then we could use it as a forum to discuss the positive impact PN News had on all of our lives.

I'm sure this isn't a popular opinion, but I don't care...I hope he does go back. What he did was wrong and stupid and thoughtless and hurtful, but I don't think he deserves to be exiled for life. I don't want to see him wrestle, but rather as an ambassador and doing charity events and pubic relations stuff for them, plus as a talking head on documentaries and stuff like that. Hulk Hogan is way too big a part of what made WWE what it is today for him to spend the rest of his life as somebody they gloss over.

Depending on what they're going to pay, the new XFL and any other opposition to the NFL could potentially really hurt the CFL. The CFL already gets most of the guys who are either too small or not quite good enough to make the NFL. In some circles, they are viewed as a minor league for the NFL. If the new XFL and any other potential new leagues start up, it's conceivable that guys still hoping to make it to the NFL will head there instead.

I'm all about Bruce being combative and being a WWF apologist. It's his gimmick, it's what makes his show a "work" and as I said - if he wanted to try and defend pretty much any of the other stupid crap the WWF/WWE had done, as a fan I'd totally get that. But he has stated he disagreed with some stuff over the past year, and this one particular issue to me is indefensible. I am expressing my disappointment that he either didn't break character on this issue, or he legitimately is trying to excuse it.

I just can't understand why he wasting his time posting here. The man clearly has a gift which needs to be shared with the world. He is so incredibly eloquent, his posts are so poetic and prosaic, I am amazed he hasn't been contacted by a major publishing house and offered a book deal. I can see it now, his first book would be entitled: "oa n cao ak aprpr erorp gofir"

If his Shoot Interviews are any indicator, I can see why Ken Patera isn't in there. I have to give that guy credit, he manages to come across as perhaps the most obnoxious and unlikable Pro Wrestler I have ever seen, when out of character. And that covers a hell of a lot of territory. If he gets in, I want Billy Jack Haynes in too. I will be glued to my television screen with a big bowl of popcorn for THOSE acceptance speeches, let me tell you.

I'm not stupid, I know half the shtick of this show is Conrad busting Bruce's balls and Bruce digging in and being stubborn. I get that. However, I don't think when you're discussing a blatantly (and admittedly) racist angle is a particularly good time to pull that stunt. It means one of two things, either Bruce is using what was a racist angle to sell his own "WWE right or wrong" act or he is actually so thick-skulled that he actually believes what he is saying. Either way, he comes off looking stupid at best and incredibly ignorant at worst. I'd have much rather he tried to justify Katie Vick or HLA, to be honest. I don't care when he pulls his pig-headed routine about Meltzer, or fans second guessing booking, or even pretty much anything else. Why he chose this as an issue to dig his heels in is beyond me. He had to know there would be a backlash, especially in today's social media environment. You could say that he knew this episode would create a buzz and generate controversy (which it definitely has, if Twitter is any indicator) but once again, IF that is the case I find using an angle like this to help promote his show to be poorly thought out, and in poor taste. He should be better than that. He has been, since this show has grown. It annoys me to see him take a step back like this. Yes, he said he didn't agree with the "nappy headed" comment and even implied that was ad-libbed and not written for Triple H. But put that in one hand, and then all the other things he said in the other, and see what general impression you come away with after listening to this episode. If you can honestly listen to this and not come away thinking he was trying to excuse the entire angle, then I don't know what to tell you. I understand what both of you are saying, and I respect your argument. However, my counterpoint to that argument is that this issue is bigger than just what Booker T thought of the angle, if he did or didn't "give permission" for it, or have a problem with it, or even contribute ideas to it. Look at it this way, over the years I have had friends who are black. (I am not going to say African-American, because I'm Canadian, and once in an effort to be sensitive and politically correct I used the phrase "African-Canadian" and my friend almost died laughing.) So anyhow...if one of my black friends told me he didn't care if I made what were clearly insulting and racially insensitive comments towards him in public, even in front of other people - would that make it okay? If somebody else heard me and got upset, would I be able to use the excuse: "He told me I could say that?" No, of course not. That to me is the definition of specious reasoning. It's a question of intent, plain and simple. If you say something which is clearly intended to be racially insensitive, I really don't think you can get around it by getting "permission" - especially if the remarks are made on national television with the intention of being seen by other people. Quite simply, I don't think Booker T has the authority to excuse that type of thing on behalf of everybody. Just because it didn't bother him, it doesn't mean they all didn't know it wouldn't bother somebody. That's not even getting into the hypothetical scenario of what would have happened if Booker T had said he wasn't comfortable with it. I think we can all speculate how that would have worked out for him. Hell, look how it worked out for him when he went along with it. He got a big payday, sure. But I don't think in the larger picture that angle did his career any good, either.