Loss

I agree with that. I don't like how they just assume everyone knows Lesnar's deal and never even try to explain where he is.

Chicago isn't normally that bad, so it's strange. I live in Lakeview and quite a few Cubs players live here and they are out bike riding and dining in restaurants without really getting bothered too much. I think it's a wrestling fan thing.

I will be adding all of these matches to the Match Discussion Archive within the next week or so, then people can review to their heart's content.

John, I would be interested in hearing your comments on the ethical side of cutting payoffs and not answering questions about pay that everyone has. Whether they lose talent or not, is that a good business practice? I feel like our posts about this are a little cold-hearted. "It's not like they're going to lose anyone" may be true, but it sucks for the wrestlers who are used to making more money.

I think even before that, Vince loved that they were twins and would yell at the writers for not doing more with that.

The Bellas were the ones bullying Kharma, right?

I can see that too, but I think it would have been better than what we got. Orton/Batista/Kane then could have faced The Shield.

If HHH was going to wrestle for the next two pay-per-views, I think Extreme Rules headlined by Bryan vs HHH in another match would have done well. If HHH wins, Bryan shaves his beard, gives up "Yes!" and never asks for another title shot again. If Bryan wins, HHH and Stephanie would go on Raw the next night and each have to admit that Daniel Bryan is an A+ player.

I remember Dave calling it a botched SSP away from being the best Wrestlemania match in history.

What I'm saying is that WCW didn't even charge admission for the show. They set up a ring in the middle of a bikers event that had no wrestling presence otherwise. So I wouldn't blame wrestlers for not getting a desired reaction on those shows. Any reaction -- good or bad -- doesn't really mean anything on a show like that because they aren't wrestling fans anyway, so it's not fair to use their behavior as an example of how wrestling fans typically act. I don't hear anyone calling Hogan a terrible heel for getting cheered in the main event, or praising Harlem Heat for working the crowd into a frenzy when it was only clearly because the audience was full of racists. So why single out Benoit vs Malenko? That would be like criticizing WWE for setting up a ring on my sidewalk right now and having a bunch of matches that don't get my neighbors hyped.

I love the idea that Countdown has its own political structure surrounding it, where turnout among younger voters is enough to swing some of the numbers in their favor.

He also sounded incredibly fake, just like almost every announcer did coming from the AWA that late. See also Lee Marshall.

I don't think that crowd is an example that can fairly or honestly be cited in conversations like these. Those weren't ticket-buying wrestling fans. It was an outdoor Worldwide Arena without cue cards.

I don't think working a crowd and keeping them involved is as simple as getting up and doing a bunch of flippy floppy stuff when they chant boring at the matwork. I think it's about making them want something that they think was their idea, when the guys in the ring were the ones pulling strings the entire time. That's wrestling at it's best.

People hated Jarrett's strut, outfit and speaking voice.

The reason I don't think the analogy is entirely similar is because wrestlers work with the goal of working a crowd. Or at least they are supposed to.

10 punches in the corner isn't even used that much anymore, so it's weird that he complains about that, yeah. That's a spot directly from his era.

Their primary goal is to get the crowd involved so I think they should adjust if they aren't. No rule in wrestling is hard and fast and some crowds are just impossible and suck, but one of my favorite things in wrestling to watch is seeing someone who knows what he's doing turn around an apathetic crowd, or one that is predisposed to react differently than the wrestlers want them to react.

I actually think a 3MB push could work simply BECAUSE they have been pushed as such losers. I just know almost nothing about Jinder Mahal.

I was on Jason Mann's Wrestlespective podcast tonight which will be posted within the next few days. Anyway, we got into a brief conversation about nearfalls and how they have changed over the years. To me, a great nearfall is less about kicking out of something no one ever kicks out of and more about timing the kickout at the best possible millisecond to get the largest reaction. The days of a two-count being so close that half the people in the building swear it was a three count are not something I would say is over, but it doesn't happen very often anymore. I've decided that I think "2.9 Wrestling" is a misnomer -- a negative term used to describe wrestlers kicking out of everything. I'm not a fan of that approach either but real 2.9 wrestling -- nearfalls that get a reaction not because of the move done to lead to it but because the call was so close -- is pretty awesome. I think it takes a decent amount of skill to feel a crowd enough to pinpoint the best possible moment to kick out of something and get the biggest reaction. I think Ric Flair was the master at timing his, and what I think worked so well about them is two things: (1) He varied them. Raising a shoulder was appropriate sometimes. Draping a leg over the bottom rope was appropriate sometimes. An actual kickout proper was appropriate sometimes. He seemed to vary this based on what was happening in the match at the time. (2) As much as people sometimes complain about the roll-up finishes in Flair's title changes, that approach played dividends in terms of having more ways to get heat. He dropped the title from an inside cradle or backslide a few times, and even Ron Garvin's top rope sunset flip on one occasion. As a result, there were more conceivable ways to end the match so an inside cradle would have the full attention of the crowd in a world title match where I'm not sure that would be the case for every world champion. I love it when Flair's also able to get a really close kickout off of a side headlock in the opening minutes of the match. It typically gets a very unique reaction. No one really expects him to get beat with a headlock but there's that split second where he waits so long to roll over that he gets a mild "whoa" reaction when doing it. Obviously, Flair isn't the only wrestler great at this, but because we were talking about a Flair match on the show, he was on the brain. What are some of your favorite nearfalls in wrestling matches? In the spirit of the thread, let's focus less on people kicking out of finishers and more on well-timed kickouts. Although this is a really good thread to complain about excessive finisher kickouts if you so desire.

I think this is the first year in ages where there's some real competition for Best Non-Wrestling Performer. Stephanie and Heyman have both been excellent.

They are in serious denial about Flair's coherency.

Those insanely fast Liger kicks in that match that popped the crowd are a vivid childhood memory for me, but I never saw him repeat that spot. My stepdad kept rewinding those kicks to watch them over and over and over.

I have no problem with Ross talking about the need for stronger heels in wrestling. I actually agree with him. I just think he's a chickenshit because he directs his criticisms to wrestlers instead of the people dictating their every move. When writers script every word that comes out of a wrestler's mouth, and agents script every move they do in a match, how is it fair to criticize the personal character of the wrestlers, even saying that they don't have the internal strength to deal with being hated? He obviously thinks Vince makes horrible decisions creatively, and he can never just speak truth to power and say "Vince makes horrible decisions creatively."

Their motives are unimportant and honestly none of our business. The action is all that matters.