Al

How dare you sir. The Bull was great. I remember him leaping up against the wall and robbing Johnny Bench of a Home Run once and it was spectacular. Granted , I don't remember much else but hey, I was a little kid. (Bull may very well have been not great in the field. But he was my childhood hero.) Luzinski was famously terrible in the outfield. Famously. The single most famous loss in Phillies history (Black Monday '77) was due to Luzinski's inability to catch a fly ball at the wall. For about four years though, he was a legitimate terror at the plate.

Citizen Kane is a fine film IMO. Probably slow by today's standards but it's solid and has a LOT of value in repeat viewing. The Godfather movies are good, but I don't personally enjoy them.

The rules of the American League allow you to use the DH, and the production of the DH helps you to win the game. I don't see how you can hold that against Martinez, beyond not giving him credit for playing defense that you would other players. Especially when relief pitchers are in the Hall of Fame. Is Edgar Martinez less one dimensional than Bruce Sutter? Or Lee Smith? As far as worse players than Womack, it's only Lenny Harris unless you go back to 1988. That ballot had Willie Montanez and Jim Spencer. Womack really only got on the ballot because he led the league in steals three times. It's kind of a shame because if he were used properly, he would've been quite a useable bench player.

It occurred to me that Brodius Clay could be the WWE version of Bob Sapp, if that makes sense.

What I mean is if you polled people in 1961, knowing only what they knew then, what would they have said? Do agree with the problem of ancient history. I think if you polled the average fan today, they would tell you Michaels/Angle or Michaels/Undertaker from Wrestlemania.

Looking at the Wrestling Observer Match of the Year Awards, I was a bit surprised to see Ramon/Michaels won match of the year in 1994. Misawa/Kawada has such a mythical quality that I just assumed it had won that year. Which leads me to ask, at what point was Misawa/Kawada praised as the greatest match of all time? Almost immediately, or did it take time to filter through the smart wrestling community? Is it still considered the greatest match of all time? A related question I had pondered earlier. If you were to ask a smart wrestling fan in say, 1950, what would their response be? 1960? 1970? I think it'd be interesting to track the evolution of the GOAT question. Was Rogers/O'Connor seen as the greatest match as it was seen by a mass audience? Did fans regard matches such as Thesz/Rikidozan or Thesz/Leone that they might not have seen?

Ric Flair vs Harley Race Gene Kiniski's incompetence doesn't bother me as it's a central point of the match. Kiniski basically cost Race the World Championship. The onus is on Solie and Caudil for no-selling the angle there. Though the ending was certainly botched. The strength of this match is Crockett's promotion. It made the title change look like an even bigger deal than usual. The Von Erichs vs The Freebirds This one from 7/4/84. Fun brawl. Doesn't seem like there's really anything that elevates it to classic status though. Tiger Mask (Misawa) vs Kobayashi Was this the first loss for the Tiger Mask character? Good match but I was hardly overwhelmed. I prefer Magnum vs Blanchard. Ric Flair vs Barry Windham Battle of the Belts II. My first time watching this match, absolutely a classic. Flair vs Windham isn't remembered as a rivalry in the same vein as Flair vs Dusty or Flair vs Sting, but they had quite a few very good to great matches in 1986-87, and their rivalry extended through 1993. One complaint about the booking. No issues with the double countout. But the semi-main had a DCO as well, and the match before that ended in a double countout. You can't end the last THREE matches on a card with the same non-finish! Ricky Steamboat vs Randy Savage Sting vs Ric Flair Almost certainly not the best matches of the year, but safe picks. Very good matches that were seen live by mass audiences. I think the Sting/Flair finish was as bad as Flair/Luger. Judges whose presence promise a finish, and then give them a draw anyway.

If it's an active/recently retired performer, sure you want him/her on the ballot if they're anyone of note. If they had a long career, headlined a bit, they deserve a look. But as a veterans' committee type of vote, no. And it's the wrong approach. It shouldn't be whether Toyonobori belongs on the ballot. It's whether Toyonobori is the best (or among the best) possible candidate.

Randy Savage?

And Okerlund's AWA work is fairly strong I believe. Maybe Dylan can enlighten us there. It's worth noting that WWF popped a crowd by promoting Okerlund in a wrestling match in St. Paul. Finkel really should be in. If the precedent is there to induct an announcer, than the Fink was the best of them all.

I know the answer but this is fun to think through. Tiger Mask or Rey Mysterio Jr.?

Bob Backlund vs Ken Patera Pat Patterson vs Sgt. Slaughter Tiger Mask vs Dynamite Kid Figured that watching the Observer Matches of the Year would make a fun "rainy day" activity. Backlund/Patera I would much agree with the consensus. Patterson/Slaughter I like more than most. The lack of clear ending doesn't hurt the crowd heat. They're roaring at the conclusion of the match. I think it's a fun brawl, a change of pace from the standard style and it holds up well. Tiger/Dynamite left me underwhelmed. A few nice spots at times, but the mat wrestling was dull and there was little selling or apparent story, especially from Sayama. I think the duo is remembered because for many, it was the first exposure to this high paced style. Especially in the United States. But there just isn't substance behind it to sustain it for a long period of time. In retrospect, Sayama was smart to get out before he grew stale.

It's a fair point in that you want to find the BEST possible candidate and not merely a qualified one. The counter-point is that with the above inducted, we're reaching a point where Rose might indeed be the best candidate.

That post inspired me to look at Graham's Greensboro Coliseum listings. 1. I'm surprised how many times JCP could run out some combination of Becker/Weaver, Bogni/Lubich, Hawk/Hanson, the Scotts and the Andersons and draw money. 2. Johnny Weaver was all over the cards for about 15 years. How good was he? 3. I always thought of Valentine as a JCP mainstay but he wrestled there less than two years before the plane crash, and once in the '60s. I guess pushing Greg made Johnny a bigger figure historically in the Carolinas.

The Savage/Steele matches were integral to building Savage's character. The Megapowers angle doesn't work without Savage's jealousy of Elizabeth being firmly established in that feud.

The ones that strike me are when the champion is "too bloody to continue," and yet retains the belt.

Billy Robinson in the AWA. Would be a definite choice if Verne had more than one title change that decade.

I don't know if it was Iaukea, but there was definitely a different Cheetah Kid floating around the East Coast indies at the time. I remember him getting a bit of press in the Apter mags.

It might be that Sandman worked as "Hardcore Hak" in ECW. I could see a mix-up if you didn't see original ECW.

Normally you'd want it to be a title match, but with Rock being a special attraction you don't want to put yourself in the corner where he can't go over because he can't drop the belt later.

Wrestling works better when it follows a narrative of some sort. That can take dozens of different forms. But on a basic level you want something that builds so fans can follow it logically. They know the big spots, and when the climax of the match occurs they pop. Sgt. Slaughter hitting the Iron Sheik with his own loaded boot. So many old time wrestlers talk about getting the fans hooked into the match, that's where psychology comes in. You can work a match without it for 5-10 minutes. Just like a real fight, which never lasts more than a minute or two. But even then, that's part of your narrative.

My brother and I called them "cheap guys."

Ever read Bill Plaschke?

What about Pat Patterson for Backlund? Only seen the MSG cage match but that was outstanding. The two main evented MSG four times in a row, with the cage match as the blowoff. And looking at Cawthon's page, it looks like Patterson built up a brass knuckles storyline that pays off in the cage match, which I hadn't known about before.

I'd be interested in what a WWE (one major company) roster would've looked like in say, 1981. It would've been massively stacked.