Al

Had Untertaker kicked Triple H and pinned him in eight seconds, I would've given it *****.

Caught a peak while browsing in Barnes & Noble's. I'll probably pick it up when it hits the Kindle next month.

I didn't start watching until 1990. I have the impression though that WWE's home video market was far more expansive and organized than WCW/NWA's.

Rey Mysterio killed the cruiserweight division. What I mean is, a guy like him became SO talented that you couldn't reasonably limit him to just wrestling cruiserweights. You want him against your best heels. And when the smallest guy on your roster is main eventing, it makes it hard to sell a separate cruiserweight champion.

Flair had Russo though.

If you were to fairly and accurately rate Bruiser Brody all time, which wrestlers would you rank him with and around? (In lieu of a number, I assume most of us don't have standing top 1000 lists.)

I get the feeling that if you could book John Cena against anyone in history, Dick Murdoch and Stan Hansen seem like his ideal opponents.

Obviously Larry Latham (Spot). But then you have Ed White, Randy Colley, and whoever Moondog Spike was. Any one of them in particular?

The Molinaro book (which was produced by the Observer) rated Brody #18 among professional wrestlers all time. That's pretty substantial praise coming from somewhere. And it's easily the most absurd ranking in that book. Brody over Terry Funk? Harley Race? That's not just overrating Brody. That's ranking him over some of the iconic figures of wrestling. I take it most here wouldn't rank Brody in the top 100? (Keeping in mind that includes more than ringwork)

Agree with much of what was said above, particularly the versatility, and that Funk manages to draw people in to almost everything he does. A one-off match against a guy who everyone knows is one of his real life best friends? Terry somehow manages to get real heat in those situations. In the Roundtable thread the Hardcore discussion came up, and in that show Terry was mentioned but kind of brushed aside. I don't think there was ever a babyface hardcore wrestler better than Terry Funk. He was fantastic at selling, made you believe he was legitimately hurt with crippling injuries, and somehow came back. The only wrestler his equal at bringing storytelling to hardcore wrestling was perhaps Onita. Loss mentioned that most of his great matches are crazy brawls. My one criticism of Funk as a GOAT candidate isn't that, but somewhat related to that. You can't do crazy brawls all the time. I think Funk knows that, so he tended to travel, retire and unretire far more often than most wrestlers of his era. He stuck in one spot in the WWF for a little over a year (1985-86) and it burnt him out. I think it marks him down a tad against wrestlers who could perform steadily in front of one audience and stay over.

I thought the Roundtable was fairly poor. Patterson was so curmudgeonly on the product that he shouldn't have been there in the first place. I thought the most interesting comment was Road Dogg saying that now that he's older, he's not so certain that he'd be comfortable doing the Outlaws' most edgy material again.

It seems to me that Lawler was booked strong in 1993 against Hart. Then the statutory rape charges hit and he went on hiatus. When Lawler came back, he was booked as a comedic heel. Even against Bret it was a "Kiss My Foot" match and cartoonish foolery surrounding it.

Boring is in the eye of the beholder, really. Stampede was somewhat connected with the AWA in the early '80s though. So a fan in that area would've seen a far bit of Bockwinkel. I don't know how much Keith saw in the early '80s.

Kane's a mediocre worker, but I think he's also a valuable worker given his versatility and longevity.

The Greg Oliver book is very good. If you've enjoyed any of the other books in the series, you'll enjoy that one. Legends of Pro Wrestling is interesting for the information on the pioneer era wrestlers. When it comes to bios on wrestlers from the 1970s on (which are a healthy portion of the book), it's about as useful as reading Wikipedia. Too much information is given in kayfabe form. His book about the National Wrestling Alliance is quite good though, albeit somewhat dry. Andre the Giant is one of the worst wrestling books I have ever read. Entire chapters are pulled word for word from old editions of WWF magazine. Strong recommendation to avoid.

I think there's a clear difference between interpreting a career a wrestler actually had and basing an argument over a career a wrestler never had.

When Dustin mentions on Twitter about Dakota going to college, goddamn that makes me feel old.

It's not meant to demonstrate that Dusty escaped from impoverished roots. It implies that Dusty and his family were good, hard-working folks like you and me.

It's 15 years for the Baseball HOF, as long as you remain above 5%.

I think there's a difference between murder-suicide and familicide as far as the mental breakdowns and causes leading up to the crimes. I'm stunned though how swiftly this thing has been hushed and seemingly swept under the rug. I've barely heard a peep in my social circle.

To try and foster some discussion. Here are five workers with traits I think a bit similar to Sting. Most famous for face runs, got national exposure, not in the WON Hall of Fame. Where would you rank Sting among them? Sting Kerry Von Erich The Junkyard Dog Mr. Wrestling II The Ultimate Warrior Batista

I would support Sting for the HOF. But I can't say that Sting was entirely the victim of circumstance. It's not as if he never had the opportunity to work elsewhere. His candidacy would have been greatly helped by a WWE run somewhere along the line, and he never attempted it. His complacency is ultimately his downfall. As far as Goldberg, it is really difficult to imagine a Hall of Famer who pretty much worked less than five years as a worker his entire career. It's like putting Mark Fidrych in your Hall of Fame. Sting at least has a 25 year career going for him.

It might have been even cooler if the jocks had eventually changed their looks/personalities and evolved into freaks. Well, one was Rick Steiner and the other became a wrestling accountant.

Honestly, I think every Hall of Fame has that watershed moment of someone completely undeserving or divisive going in. The MLB Hall of Fame inducted only five in its first election. Ten years later, they inducted Tinker/Evers/Chance en masse.

The Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame is (I believe) 25 years into a career. I don't think that is an unreasonable alternative. The only problem is that it would cause a gap in time between guys who were inducted early and guys who would have to wait. Maybe that would be helped by focusing on '60s-80s stars who were overlooked.