Loss

I keep expecting it to happen and still think it's only a matter of time. The question is if anyone will care. I think they still benefit from the perception that because "it's all fake", somehow the people involved aren't real either.

The main reason is that he exposed Vince McMahon as a frail old man. The secondary reason I think is that I don't think I've ever seen a crowd react to him in the slightest.

I want to think about this more, but I think the two things that I'd say I look for in a great TV run more than anything are: * high quality (not just in-ring, but promos, booking, and announcing) * a sense of optimism I think in terms of actual match quality, the Smackdown Six period of late 2002 is probably much stronger than any period in 2000 WWF TV, for example. But in 2000, everyone who got so much as a pop got a television main event, and there was a real feel of guys climbing the ladder and the company having exciting things coming in the weeks and months ahead. To me, that was missing in late '02. I think 1996 WCW and 1997 WWF did a great job of capturing both. I think Memphis produced the most exciting week-to-week TV I've ever seen, even during their down period. All Japan and New Japan TV was awesome for close to most of the 20 years between 1980 and 2000. Crockett from 1985-88 probably did the best job of appealing to my tastes in wrestling of any national wrestling company ever. Lots of different runs with lots of big positives.

How is Jim Johnston like jdw?

WWE managed to survive nu metal no longer being cool by simply pretending that it still is. So that approach might work. Similarly, the Bucks have wrestler ponytails and do hand signals and catchphrases from 1996 WCW. So denialism over times changing is apparently an effective marketing tool.

"If not ___, then who, *clap clap clap*?"

I figured he was just a consultant. I didn't realize he was an in-house employee.

Ha, we'll totally do it. If it ends up here, we'll do (Chica)Go Wrestling Only! We might just stand around and stare at each other not knowing what to do next, but we'll make an event out of it!

Every time they do something like this, it makes me wonder why one of the indies hasn't introduced a Vynce McMann.

Hot Topic jokes have little to do with age. My friends and I made jokes about places like Gadzooks, which was pretty similar to Hot Topic in a lot of ways, when I was a teenager. It's not just teens, it's a certain type of teen.

I don't think there's an objective definition. Maybe anything not from the current year. More generally, anything not really being discussed as part of the zeitgeist.

Surely, me being in Chicago is good for at least a dozen tickets sold, but whatever dude.

They shouldn't beat it into the ground, but top heavy vs top cruiser is definitely something they should do here and there, as long as they present it as competitive and a big deal.

I guess a lot of this depends on how true we think Punk will be to his word on never returning to wrestling. There is a place for him to be viable now without ever having to cross paths with WWE in any way. He might change his mind at some point, but I'd be shocked if he's there mentally now. Punk-Danielson vs Young Bucks would be an interesting main event in an all-things-possible world, though.

I just had a horrifying thought. If it was the Attitude Era right now, would Russo book Big Boss Man to "shoot" a black wrestler to create an edgy storyline? Ugh.

The revamped Saturday Night thing is something that would have been awful, as the plan discussed briefly was for it to be a shoot talk show hosted by Hall, Nash, and Mark Madden.

Old. Hindsight is 20/20 for me. That's not to say that I can't enjoy a newer match, but I trust my thoughts on older matches way more. I think when I'm invested in real-time outcomes and don't yet fully grasp where something fits in overall, it's easy to say something rash -- either overly positive or negative -- that's regrettable when looking back. Keep in mind a couple of things: - I'm only talking about watching wrestling with the intent of saying how good it is or for the purposes of posting about it. I'm not referring to all wrestling watching. - I'm only talking about me and my limitations, not everyone else's. - No take on a wrestling match is ever locked in. Opinions are meant to live and breathe. I do think a match can be better or worse depending on what comes after it. I know someone like Dave would strongly disagree with that because it's out of the wrestler's control, and it is! But not every problem or attribute of a wrestling match is something a wrestler can actually control, and I've never believed that to be the case. I'd probably see Liger-Ultimo from the 1/4/93 Dome show as a much better match if so many of the sequences hadn't been repeated ad nauseum for a decade by lesser wrestlers. Is that Liger's fault, or Ultimo's fault? No. But when looking at good or great matches now, that makes the match less enjoyable to watch. It's been about seven years since I started watching the 1996 YB. It's probable that if I started right now, I'd have completely different takeaways on a lot of it, if nothing else based on what I've seen in wrestling since then. I think opinions are meant to be challenged, not immortalized, but they are highly valuable as a point of reference. Content curation is part of my professional life and I try to bring it to my personal hobbies, so if something has a rep, or has no rep but involves wrestlers who did or later developed one, then I'm more likely to be interested in watching it. I see that as something different than cherry picking since I want to see the five-minute throwaway TV matches too. Perhaps you could call my approach to watching wrestling the Kawada Model - 3/4ths legit!

Be nice.

I wish them well too. This transcends personal tastes in pro wrestling. But this post is out of line. Come on.

Just without the rape, ideally.

We can hang out!

I really like this thinking. Roman is the fighting champion, Brock is the spoiled and overpaid champion who can't be bothered to show up. If anything is going to work, that stands a really good chance. Maybe they try to get Roman in the ring at some point with pretty much everyone on Raw between now and Wrestlemania.

I want to say there have been some big-drawing lucha libre shows in the U.S. post-WCW. What was the one with Santo that drew 5K?

I don't disagree with any of that. It's just that when I look the modern era, the four biggest stars have been Austin, Hogan, Rock, and Cena while the most pushed guys have been HHH, Undertaker, and Michaels. Each person in the latter group brings some positives, but relative to their value, they have been pushed pretty hard. I realize this is a bigger conversation than this thread, and I wish I had the energy to flesh that out a little more. I just wanted you to understand what I meant.

His storyline brother?