Loss

At the time, Vince actually blamed declining ratings on there not being enough support for HHH and doubled down.

This reminds me that in the modern WWE world of fan trolling, a Rey heel turn where he does absolutely nothing except 619 attempts and 619s in his matches would be hilarious.

I agree with that and he's not the only one who does it. In general, I'm just not a fan of the WWE approach where every signature spot is rolled out in every match. I like signature spots, but I also like it when they aren't so predictable. The forearms to the chest stand out to me as a glaring example of that for whatever reason.

And on that point, I generally agree with you. Matches that are billed as competitive or should be competitive based on relative card placement that end up being one-sided almost always disappoint me. But then, something like Hogan/Bock, which you mentioned, will pop up as a reminder that we can't get too wrapped up in that. There is a Jeff Jarrett/Billy Joe Travis vs Sweet Daddy Falcone/Chico Torres match from USWA Texas in 1990 that is all babyface offense and still manages to be borderline great, as another example.

Patterns are there and we're going to notice them, but I think if we actively look for them, we are only narrowing our view of what great wrestling is instead of expanding it. The focus becomes on the pattern -- to me, it's like missing the forest for the trees, and the quality of the pattern takes precedent over other things that may be equally or far more important. "Oh, [pattern x] was done much better over here because this was missing [thing 1], [thing 2] and [thing 3], which [pattern x] should always have." It's a self-fulfilling prophecy that I think dictates what good wrestling has to be and then plugs everything into it instead of just being open to all the ways there are to do good wrestling, sometimes even in ways that are a direct contradiction to other good wrestling. I've fallen into this trap a few times myself and I'm trying to stay away from it.

My only problem with Sheamus is that rolling out the big forearms to the chest in every match reeks of a guy getting his shit in. Otherwise, I do think he's very good.

I also get annoyed by "rats" and "the boys", although you don't hear those phrases used too often by fans.

My problem with this is that not all match layouts have to be formulaic or meet certain pre-defined criteria.

I use this in a very specific context. It's for a section where the babyface is on top that isn't the shine. Shine Heat Comeback Control is just neater than "babyface on top for no reason". I think this is my issue with it. It's a phrase that appeared out of thin air about 10 years ago and was never properly defined, so reading multiple match reviews, you're going to have conflicting takeaways over what it means. I would never think that's what a control segment is. I think in some ways it also boxes in the way people think about match layouts. Does every match have a control segment? I don't mean that sarcastically, by the way, I'm just asking.

Understood. I know the type you are talking about. I think I identified with that at one point too.

I think it's the C in IWC that gets me. What, even in the Monday Night Wars era, made it a community? What was shared? There were still people online who only discussed old school stuff, or only discussed international wrestling. Then you just have your profiteers who I am convinced get no personal joy from professional wrestling like the people that were part of 1wrestling.com. Were they still in the IWC?

I split this off into its own thread. Just a note to add that this is all in good fun. I don't want anyone to think these words/phrases are banned or anything like that. Some of these I don't even have a logical explanation for disliking. I just do.

As do I with "control segment".

Billy Idol was a WON subscriber for years. Not sure if he still is.

Ambrose is way more over than Reigns right now, what show are you watching? Do you always have to be so confrontational?

I have no doubts Reigns will be a top guy for the rest of his career, and will probably be just fine in that role. It's just that taking on the Cena ace role is a completely different thing. It's possible he'll grow into that just like Cena did. If Cena did it with bad booking and heels who were using him to get themselves over, Reigns will hopefully be able to do it with a promotional machine that is protecting him and presenting him properly.

What is your best NJ match of the 90s overall, including heavies? I think Liger/Otani is still at the top for me, with Muto/Chono, Otani/Samurai and Liger/Samurai duking it out for #2. The great thing about Volk Han is that he doesn't have a ton of matches, so getting a completist look at him isn't as hard as it is for many of the other greats.

While I do think the lineup affects the house, there are so many factors that play a part that I'm not comfortable reducing it to just the lineup (nor do I think anyone in this thread is doing that). For example: - How often does WWE go to the market? - What did they draw last time they were there? Was this an increase or decrease? Who headlined that card? - Were there any no-shows or last-minute card changes the last time WWE was in town that might have disappointed people and discouraged them from going to a future show? Any surprises that might have ensured an increase next time they came back? - Did the finish of the last show in the market send people home happy? - Was the next date announced at the house show with tickets available for sale to those that were there? Not knowing the answers to all of those questions in every case makes it really difficult to drill down. I'm sure there are other factors I didn't think of too.

I would be interested in hearing a breakdown of other upper card post-Austin/Rock guys during the early 00s and doing a comparison to HHH. Would WWE have been better off building around them for 2-3 years instead? - Chris Jericho - Kurt Angle - Eddy Guerrero - Booker T - Rob Van Dam - Brock Lesnar - Chris Benoit (If you want to go there) There are plusses and minuses compared to HHH with each guy, but I think it would make for some interesting conversation.

Great list! Yes, I agree that this is the most loaded year of the decade. I'm just curious if you think Liger/Otani is the best New Japan match of the 90s. Unless there's a surprise for me in 1998-1999, I am pretty sure it's my #1. I also really loved Han/Tamura on rewatch and bumped it up to *****, although I am euphoric about 1997 RINGS, so who knows.