Loss

For what it's worth, Dave has said he's heard so many similar stories this week from close friends of his. My only gripe was that it's not a call center employee's fault that you were dumb enough to take the day off for this.

The argument is that to perform a practiced match in front of an audience is not something that requires any skill except memorization.

This is mind boggling and a must read. If you see any other articles about the customer service aspect of this, or have stories of your own, please post them here. http://pwupdate.net/2014/02/26/networked-by-the-masked-mark/

Dave said at the last house show he attended that Orton was the only who he thought was good enough in the ring that he could have worked in JCP. He said Cesaro only would have been able to if he teamed with Bobby Eaton.

I understand that, but he's a big star, has been a part of some good matches through the years and was really good as a heel to wrap up his last run.

He's really not that bad. He just returned at an unfortunate time and is being booked in a no-win situation at the moment.

In defense of Savage, I will also say that Flair didn't have a ton of restrictions in the 80s. He usually went on last with the freedom to keep the match going until it was where he wanted it. The WWF would never let anyone go to the ring with freedom to go as long as they wanted and craft a finish on the fly.

I think the difference between those matches is the difference between performing and working. I remember Austin saying once, "We don't work anymore. We perform." I always loved that line, and the difference in these matches is a good way to capture that.

By comparison, I remember reading that Flair and Steamboat went into Clash VI without a finish. The only thing they knew was that Steamboat would retain, but Flair would need an out to set up the rematch at Wrestle War. But the specifics of the finish were just called in the ring.

Austin should have Steamboat on his show.

WWE is producing so much first-run content and giving so much archive access to their fans that I do worry about eventual burnout and overexposure, but that's nothing new, and in 2014, more content usually means more money.

I can understand the idea that a MOTYC should have this, but by definition, a MOTYC is merely a candidate for best match of the year so far. The standard can't help but change all the time because output is not equal in all years. If a three-star match is the best match that has happened so far in a year, that match is a MOTYC because it's a candidate for the best match of the year. I think what you're describing is what you think is needed to produce a great WWE match and I would disagree with you there, and I feel like Cena and Cesaro made that case. It wasn't worked like a pay-per-view main event and didn't have that drama, but it did have the dynamic of a main event wrestler facing a talented midcarder and giving him a decent amount of offense before securing the win in the end. You can say the same about all sorts of Jumbo matches that people praise from the early 90s and don't really consider MOTYCs. My point wasn't that the bout was "limited", but rather that they weren't reaching for the stars and that there was no reason for them to reach for the stars. I think criticism that they didn't go big is misplaced, since a match can be great without attempting to go big. I'm not a fan of it, but look at Hashimoto vs Fujiwara from 6/1/94, which I criticized for similar reasons that you are criticizing Cena/Cesaro. I don't recall the big dramatic arc in that match. In fact, that lack of "bloated" feeling was why it was praised. I don't think it was the best match I've seen so far this year, but I do think it was the kind of match I wish we saw more of in WWE, with the established guys facing talented midcarders in long TV matches that aren't in a position to headline a PPV, but can deliver in the ring. I'm not sure how that's different than the praise the Dangerous Alliance era of WCW TV got, and I think this match is analogous to Rick Rude vs Dustin Rhodes from Worldwide on 5/30/92, which I know you liked. I wouldn't criticize that match for not being worked like a pay-per-view main event, and that it wasn't worked like a pay-per-view main event doesn't detract from it for me. I realize no one calls Rude/Dustin a MOTYC, but that's because there had been more great matches globally from January to the end of May 1992 than there had been from January through the middle of February 2014. I do think that Cesaro is still honing his persona and that his matches will get even better when he fleshes that out.

I'm glad to hear they are turning him heel. A heel Batista does have real potential, especially in contrast with Bryan. I'm sure he's facing Brock at some point. I really want to see Brock against Daniel Bryan at some point too.

I picture Vince standing up and popping for Batista's "real men" line, only to be shocked that no one else did.

I would like to add that there have been no problems thus far that indicate Wrestlemania will be a problem. Wrestlemania will air on the live stream, which has worked great.

I saw the Men on a Mission video. There's also a segment on the Shockmaster that has aired a few times. I had no idea DX parodied the Shockmaster thing on RAW. I think I have underrated how "legendary" that whole thing is.

You often ask why people care about certain things. So I'm going to ask in this case why you care about big match WWE psychology and why you think the lack of it detracts from the match. It was a TV match between a main eventer and a midcarder, not a pay-per-view main event. Doesn't the fact that it steps outside of that formula and gives us something that only these two wrestlers are capable of doing make the match more unique and appealing? And how can you not even comment on Cesaro's feats of strength?

The air date was 7/23, but this actually took place on 7/9, so I updated the thread accordingly.

Date on this is 7/6, not 7/4, so I updated the thread.

Talk about it here.

Talk about it here.

Talk about it here.

Talk about it here.

Talk about it here.

Talk about it here.