Loss

08/28/86 - Ricky Steamboat v Jake Roberts -- SNAKE PIT MATCH I dug the opening few minutes of this a lot, with Steamboat coming out like he should have come out at Wrestlemania III, with guns a-blazin'. He's also really good working over Jake's arm, although slowing the pace down so dramatically after starting off so fast really comes across as anti-climatic. You can see them calling spots on camera early on quite a bit, with the camera even zooming in on them doing so. Oops. Steamboat just isn't that great in this match compared to his best, as he hesitates to take any flat-back bumps and throws way too many chops. It's not as good of a match, but I prefer this to Savage/Steamboat at WM III for wrestling the right kind of match in the right environment, and also for showing real hate and real emotion. In terms of the action, I even think this is more brutal, with most of the offense looking really tight and the pace not being so fast that some of the good stuff is lost in time. Jake's knee-first gutbuster and his catapult of Steamboat into the ringpost are world class spots. Not much of a fan of the flash pin finish, just because it doesn't feel like it resolved anything, but it's still a strong match. *** or so

I still think we'll be doing good if every person who has them will at least say a line or two about every single match.

05/20/85 - Hulk Hogan v Don Muraco Gotta love Okerlund on commentary. "If anyone knows anything about Pearl Harbor, it's Mr. Fuji!" Times have changed in 20 years. Crowd is absolutely molten. In terms of what Hogan brings to a match, this is one of the best efforts I've seen from him if offense is your thing -- check out his headbutts, his elbow drops, battery ram, vertical suplex and belly-to-back suplex, all of which look really good. The problem is that this isn't much of a competitive match at all -- it's just Hogan beating up Muraco for a few minutes before getting DQd. Nothing special and I'll probably never watch it again. Of the three matches I've watched so far, this is my #3.

06/17/84 - Hulk Hogan v David Schultz I agree with goodhelmet that the clipping really hurt this match. I do think this is probably a satisfying match and it's decent for a "babyface snaps and the match is no longer about the title" affair, but I guess the word I'm looking for is meandering. Hogan hulks up midway through the match, hits the legdrop and pulls Schultz up himself. I also don't like the way Schultz took the dive from the top bump -- what the hell move was he going for anyway and why did he roll on his shoulder before he even hit it? Kind of a flash pin to boot -- great bladejobs and great heat, but not much going for it between the ropes.

*bump*, since I know a lot of us have these now 07/23/84 - Adonis/Murdoch v Slaughter/Daniels Murdoch and Adonis might have ended up the best tag team of the 80s had they been in the NWA and lasted a lot longer as a team. Great match that I loved and a terrific way to start off the set. I'm thinking Adonis may eventually become one of my five or ten favorite wrestlers ever, the way he bumps and plays his character in the ring. This match is so simple yet so brilliant, with Daniels following Slaughter's lead and the game plan working like gangbusters. I love the way Adonis bumps off shoulderblocks, and I love the way they lured Daniels in to show his inexperience. Twice, earlier in the match, Daniels had caught both Adonis and Murdoch with an armbar off of a criss-cross sequence and the third time, Adonis caught him with a WICKED elbow to his face! Crowd goes nuts and Adonis and Murdoch are great at the typical heel clowning spots. I love how eager Adonis is to get in the ring early on when he tags in, and by mid-match, he exercises much more restraint. This is a clinic in not just doing great sequences and involving the crowd, but taking every sequence somewhere important. Murdoch's Backlund-esque spot with the armbar shocked the Hell out of me. I've probably seen better tag matches, but I've seen few tag matches paced as well as this one -- since when does the FIP stuff start 17 minutes into a match? I agree with others that this would have been even better with the heels torturing Daniels longer, but it's still an excellent match. ***1/2 or so sounds about right, all things considered.

I've watched Joe/Punk I, but not Joe/Punk II yet. Probably tomorrow. I want to see how the two compare before ranking either one here. There were some things I really liked in 06/12/04 (pacing, suspense toward the end, even Mark Nulty's announcing ... at times), and then there were some things I didn't like at all (picking on one fan in the crowd which confuses them even more about who to root for since he was probably annoying everyone around him mainly).

Please don't call me Sugar. Anyway, even WCW was smart enough not to have the guys they were inducting in their HOF run rampant over guys that were on the road every night.

HHH v Flair is the only program that has me even partially excited going into fall, only because it's an HHH program, meaning that Flair will probably be able to do some long promos. That's the only reason, and that's even a stretch. Funny that Trips is a midcarder for now, though.

I think it's the fault of the promoters, to answer your question. It's been nearly 10 years since anyone in power has looked at what the fans seem to want on anything beyond the most superficial level possible. As a result, they've created a monster they're unable to tame. Longer storylines often fail to get over like they would have even 8 years ago because too many fans are busy critiquing everything and have no patience to see how things play out. You'd think that sounds awfully hypocritical coming from me or you, but the difference between us and some others is that we're able to detach ourselves and attach ourselves at the proper times. "They blew their load on HHH/Orton when it could have carried them all the way to Wrestlemania" is a valid criticism coming from people who want to see wrestling thrive and succeed. "X-Pac sucks and I don't want him on my television screen" is the type of view that should be ignored or scoffed at, because it doesn't even attempt to take the bigger picture into account and it doesn't understand wrestling anyway. The former view is a valid and somewhat thoughtful criticism of the booking while the latter view is complaining because someone who's not as good as Eddy Guerrero or Chris Benoit is daring to take up three minutes of your time. Fuck that. When promoters start listening to fans like that, the fans end up the puppeteers, which they should never be. To make another comparison, I get frustrated watching Lost sometimes because I want immediate answers. I want to know who stole Shannon's inhalers (an old question they never answered). I want to know what happened to Claire while she was gone and why she can't remember. I want to know why the others are interested in children, why they're evil and why they're out to kill. If they answered all those questions when I wanted them answered, the show wouldn't be nearly as good and they too would be creating a monster. They have enough foresight and experience to avoid that, because they know how to tell stories. WWE knows how to tell stories as well, but they're too busy looking at themselves in the mirror to take the time to do so most of the time. Sadly, when WWE thinks of the Internet fan, they think of the "X-Pac sucks" guy, not the "I wish the booking was more patient" one, because quite frankly, there are far more of them than there are of us. Criticism is dished out by people who don't attempt to view things outside their own insular world; insane decisions are defended by fanboys who desperately want things to be great again and just pretend they are instead of giving up. It's those types of fans that have more than done their part in bringing wrestling down the past few years, but ultimately, they can't shoulder all of the blame. They have other things to do, like watch ROH. I do like ROH. I saw Joe/Punk I (haven't watched II yet) and it impressed the hell out of me. I think Bryan Danielson is fucking great and I hope his best years remain ahead of him. I also realize they'll never be as great as they have the potential to be, and the talent, the fans and the promoters, all of whom created the problem, will suffer because of it.

4.4 is a very disappointing rating for that show. I'm interested in the quarter-hour breakdowns, but to put in perspective, that's a lower number than RAW drew at the beginning of Shawn Michaels' title reign in 1996 when they ran unopposed one night when Nitro was off the air. That show was headlined by HBK/Lawler and had Diesel on commentary. It opened with Vader/Yoko. It got a 4.7. It's not a bad number by any means, but HHH's return in 2002 and the RAW the night after WM X-8 both did 5.0+. HHH/Kane with Kane unmasking did one of the highest ratings they'd done in years, much higher than this. This isn't substantially higher than their average numbers for the past year, and really, I think anything under a 5.0 had to be considered a disappointment.

They could probably rake in even more money doing "Best Of" PPVs from past shows for $14.95-$19.95 or something. A series of 2-hour specials to get viewers caught up on the promotion's history. Also, I'm assuming the budget would be thrown out of whack if a bidding war eventually started between WWE and TNA over talent. But I'm assuming we're years away from a possibility of that even happening, unless TNA somehow secured Goldberg, Lesnar, Rock and Jericho.

Does TNA charge less for their PPVs than WWE?

Not a bad start at all, considering there weren't really expectations in place for the show to begin with. Maintaining an audience throughout the show is also a good thing. They should make their short-term goal to reach a 1.0 and then go from there.

Bret had GREAT comic timing and delivery on the rare occasions where he showed it. My favorite all-time quote from him was one that wasn't even said on the mic, but rather he was mouthing it to a fan in the crowd. This was on the Nitro when Russo reformed the NWO. Fan to Bret: "YOU SUCK!" Bret to fan: "I don't suck, you suck! You're the one who bought a ticket to watch this shit!"

Whether it's true or not, the most successful time period in WWF history, the Attitude era, was a middle finger in the face of the establishment. Now, it's a case where guys trying to fight The Man are just portrayed as stupid for doing so. Wrestling is escapist. Conceivably, wrestlers should look like supermen and one current athlete should be able to wipe the mat with 20 retired fogies. Steve Austin used to fight the numbers all the time and win without a problem, so why can't anyone new do the same? The show didn't need the legends stuff at all. It didn't need the McMahon family. And it didn't need Piper or Foley. The Austin and HHH segments could have been cut in half during that time. With all the time they could have saved there, the SD 6-man could have eaten up 15-20 minutes and they could have found a way to fit the tag champs on such a huge show. No wonder no one cares about the tag belts anymore -- there's no reason given to care about them.

RAW really is where the big boys play.

That's a really bad way to set up the angle, especially considering that if SD ever does get a measure of comeuppance on the same level they received here (and they won't), it'll happen on a less-viewed show with less hype and less interest, which means it won't matter and the perception of Smackdown as must-miss TV will continue among casual fans. Having all the SD faces gang up on Angle while all the SD heels ganged up on Cena, conveniently, does wonders to expose the business as well because it all seems so neat and pre-planned.

There was no need to put those guys over. If they really wanted to make an impact that could build to something, bringing MNM over from Smackdown and having them lay out a ring full of old geezers might have been a step in the right direction. How's a 15-year old watching RAW supposed to relate to a company that's preaching to respect one's elders and that the past is better than the present? And while I'm at it, why weren't the tag titles defended on a show that's supposed to be the biggest night in TV for wrestling in years?

I can guarantee you a HHH/Angle/Carlito v Cena/HBK/Flair match would *never* get that treatment. Anyway, tonight's show was pretty underwhelming considering the hype, and they have no one to blame but themselves if their continued plan for the future is to make their current roster look bad in favor of pushing retired guys as the real stars. Would the McMahon family lie as a whole lie down like that for Cena or Batista? Would Cena be in an all-talk segment that long in the first place? The only time they actually pushed their current guys to look better than their past ones was when they used Foley and Piper to get Orton over, and even that is a waste of everyone involved, since any potential program between Foley and Orton has already been done and wouldn't work as a retread. I guess we got the hint tonight that Rob Conway's singles career will stay in the doldrums for the foreseeable future. I also find it interesting that in video montages and pre-show hype, they portray Chris Jericho as one of the company's biggest stars. It may have helped to portray him that way when he was under contract instead of now. You could already see the propaganda machine putting the wheels in motion tonight, suggesting that Spike TV is responsible for WWE's decline. The more things change, the more they stay the same. What's sad is that this isn't the usual, "fuck WWE" response I've given in the past, when I still gave a shit about what they were doing. This is just a summary of the sad state of affairs surrounding the current landscape.

I never understood fans obsession with analyzing business practices, and ignore that they are getting a good show. Let the WWE worry about it. I'm pretty sure they wont go bankrupt cause they put Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan on RAW tonight. Now, I can understand if they were putting on bad shows, and questioning the product, but the financial aspects, let the WWE worry about that stuff. I just want a good show. It's fine to have that mindset, but if you do, you really should stay out of any topics concerning booking ideas or backstage news. At least that's my take. To discuss the other stuff, you sort of have to put yourself in their shoes.

*bump* This topic seems to be one that's more and more discussed. I want to link to Rudo's blog entry at TSM on this subject: http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/blog/rrr/i...d=2&m=10&y=2005 I'd also like to copy/paste my response: