Loss

No groaning here. In the past, despite any groaning, there was at least somewhat of an argument that HHH deserved his spot. But now, they've built up enough other strong main event level talent (Cena, Orton, Jeff Hardy, Jericho, JBL, Edge) that I'm not sure why he is still there, at least in the title match spot. HHH now is probably even more stale than he was in 2002-2003. His heel act was overpushed, but as a babyface, he's just so boring and colorless. He would be fine as a heel just below the belt who sets up new challengers and is kept strong. I wonder if they'll change the finish at the last minute yet again this year because they think HHH winning is too obvious.

I kinda think keeping the Edge/Jeff feud going, having Christian come back and join Edge, and setting up a Hardys vs Edge & Christian 10-year anniversary ladder match (or something like that) and having Matt do the turn there would have been hugely memorable and given them something big to ride post-Mania, while also keeping Christian involved in a high-profile angle.

Between the below recap and the WOL appearance last week, we should probably start something, as it appears we may be hearing from him for a while. From Lords of Paste:

Ha, I said in "the" New York. Not just any New York ...

I wish they would go back to the original 2001 theme, with the "Bohemian Rhapsody"-like tune mixed with random Italian screaming.

He is an American citizen. He was born in the New York and lives in Florida. He was just raised in Canada.

I agree. Mickey Rourke will wrestle at Wrestlemania, and WWE has us right where they want us with all this talk. That's my prediction, we'll see if I'm wrong. I very well may be.

Wonderful performers who have crossed generational divides and built the bridge to the 21st century of sports entertainment.

Yes, this match is one of my favorites of '92, and possibly the best Arn or Dustin singles match I've seen. **1/2 is lowballing.

It doesn't surprise me that they would try to portray stars in a rival promotion as relics from another era, considering they have a track record of doing this.

He's referring to it being in progress. He was at one point going through matches to be included on that set when it's released as well.

Also, by 1991, they had turned Luger so many times that I think people just got sick of him always going back and forth. When he won the belt, he needed to beat Flair for it, considering he had been chasing him for three years. Not beating Flair did him in. 1991 Luger was also incredibly bloated. He had probably put on a good 10-15 pounds of muscle, and looked ridiculous by the time of SuperBrawl II when he was probably a legit 300 lbs.

Going through the entire season of 1990 World Championship Wrestling for a top secret special project (details soon). I'm about halfway through, and had some observations: History has been far too hard on Lex Luger. Yes, Luger never met his potential as a full draw. But I think Meltzer oversimplifies it when he states that it was because despite getting an enormous push for years, he never found a way to connect with the audience and never learned how to have a great match on top without Flair across from him. Dave is someone who talks about how Goldberg on top of WCW in the late 90s could have been part of a really successful package, and Goldberg was far more limited than Luger was, and Luger at his peak was very popular as well. The major problem was that he was a huge choke artist who could never win the belt when he was pushed to challenge for it. WCW positioned Luger so many times as the huge favorite going into title matches, and while they always gave him an out, they never just pulled the trigger and put the title on him, and I think that's what in the end hurt him more than anything else. I really think 1990 is the year that killed him watching this, because he had found his calling as a loner heel in 1989, and when Flair turned and Sting got sidelined, he was turned out of necessity when he had momentum. Flair turning would have left him a bit aimless anyway, which is part of the reason Flair turning was a bad idea. By 1990, Ric Flair on top with Horsemen protection was such a stale concept, and while Flair was the biggest draw they had, he wasn't the answer to righting the ship, and while there were no guarantees anything would have worked, you really wish looking back they had elevated Brian Pillman or Scott Steiner, or made a play to hang on to Muta to see how he'd fare in that role as a babyface coming after Flair. Again, no guarantees anything would have worked, and I can understand the mindset to a degree, as Flair/Luger had a track record of drawing in 1988, and they just needed something to fill time until Sting healed from his injury. But in doing so, they really hurt what they had built up the year before with Luger. And why was Flair turning anyway? From my understanding, Flair simply preferred being a heel, and booked his own heel turn. But what reason was there to turn? The only reason would be to build heat for the match with Sting, which makes sense, but in a way, they booked themselves into a corner, because there was absolutely no other reason at the time for Flair to go heel again, and after the big Sting win and Flair rematches, what would they have done with a heel Flair at that point? While the matches would have been a step down, babyface Flair dropping the title to a heel Luger to feud with a babyface Sting, who would eventually win the title from Luger, seems like it might have cast everyone involved in a better role, with the idea that they could have saved Flair/Sting for later in the year as a babyface match, selling it as Sting's chance to prove that he's not only the champ, but now The Man. WCW was really damned if they did and damned if they didn't with Flair at this point. If they pushed him, it limited their ability to build new top heels, and if they didn't push him, they risked alienating the hardcores, which were pretty much the majority of what they were drawing at that point anyway. He needed to be phased down, but there was no one around who was as over who could do those matches and sell so well for babyfaces who needed to get over. Until Rick Rude and Vader came in 1991/1992, they never really had anyone pass through that could have filled that role either. What's so odd about it all is that I'm not sure WCW would have been nearly as interested in Rude if they still had Flair at that point, even though phasing Flair out and putting the promotional push behind Rude would have at the very least been a risk worth taking. While I'm not saying it's entirely untrue, Flair has been so eternally cleared of doing anything wrong during this time, to a point I feel that really needs to be looked at again. Flair is far from the worst offender, but he was definitely no saint, and did what he had to do to protect his spot. John made a good post recently about his Bash '91 power play that ties into this. Along those same lines, it's also worth mentioning again that he refused to drop the belt to Luger in St. Louis a year before because he never received the request in writing, and Dave has mentioned in the Observer that while it is true that Flair tried to avoid dropping the belt for Luger because he had made a promise to Sting, all along Flair had planned to regain the belt from Sting anyway. Everyone who booked during this time period made plenty of mistakes, but some of this was really a no-win situation.

I love it when old wrestling DVDs have bizarre commercials.

Well, this is the same company that once built an entire show (RAW X) around returning stars and nostalgia and never bothered to contact anyone to ask them to appear. It's unlikely, but it's certainly possible. Jericho's involvement (likely in the creative part of this angle) leads me to believe this is a work. Especially since in the past Jericho had a WWE.com announcement about his contract extension altered so it wouldn't affect the crowd reaction in his last run with John Cena. The idea of saying he's not going to be there when he is sounds like something Jericho (and WWE, for that matter) would come up with. If he does a promo this coming Monday, we know this is still on.

So does everyone think the talk of Rourke pulling out is just a work? This is getting confusing. I do think they definitely have the right person in this role. Jericho would probably be able to do more with him than anyone else and the promos should be good. If they do a bare knuckles match or something like that, though, I'm not sure what to think. Jericho is really good, but his punches are sometimes a little off.

I was just requesting clarification on your point. I haven't seen the match in question, I just don't believe in saying a match couldn't possibly be any good based on the reps of the people involved. Yes, they have those reps for a reason, but most wrestlers have at least one surprisingly good match on their resume. Since you've seen the match, that doesn't apply to you.

Have you seen the matches?

*Random bump* How about another issue?

I don't think they would, really. USA seems to want RAW to hotshot its way back to 6.0 weekly ratings. An all-wrestling cable channel would do better cable ratings than most. They wouldn't have any ridiculous expectations like that bestowed upon them that weren't self-imposed. Even if they were doing WCW 2000-level ratings, they would still be doing very well compared to other shows, and they'd be fine.

Yes.