Loss
-
Posts
46439 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Everything posted by Loss
-
If it's so easy to define, why are people having such a hard time defining it? Armstrong headlined with Flair around the horn once, for what it's worth.
-
Midcarders with a storyline, midcarders without a storyline ... these are things just that happen to be the case, not really things that require distinguishing, right?
-
There are also midcarders who have blond hair, midcarders who wear singlets, midcarders who have had both face and heel runs, midcarders who have been in the company more than one year but less than three years, midcarders who like all meat pizza toppings, midcarders who find Hamlet's true mental state to debatable, midcarders who will give a woman until the third date to put out and midcarders who once saw a main eventer live as a child if we're doing pointless subcategories.
-
I don't understand how Fifi fits into all of this. She is the current girlfriend, right?
-
I always thought "technical wrestler" was a gimmick. It's kinda like having a "Best Cowboy" category.
-
Cornette talked about it in a radio interview and possibly the MX Scrapbook (not sure about that part). But he said they weren't happy with the match at all, but that he might like it now because sometimes matches look better or worse with time.
-
Something interesting about this match: They made a specific effort to do entirely new spots in this one, just to challenge themselves. The end result was a disappointing match compared to their other matches, but I always thought this was interesting for that.
-
Let me ask you this though. If you had put anyone else in Sting's role for the nWo would it have worked as well? No. It would not have worked as well. Is that alone a HOF case?
-
Either that or someone who was a great worker, yes, that's about it. Keeping the HOF exclusive is what makes it worthwhile. There are plenty of people who were talented and had good careers that have no business going into a HOF. It's not an insult to be left out in most cases. "Hypothesis", "conclusion" ... "pro wrestling", "serious" ... Just saying. Is "hotness" something that only happens out of thin air, or is it directly impacted by who is working on top? You can be a respectable draw without being Hulk Hogan. See Ric Flair, Randy Savage, Roddy Piper and plenty of other guys. No. Bret Hart was mentioned earlier in this thread and you never responded to it, except to downplay it because of being in the right place in the right time. Hogan and Austin were in the right place at the right time too. That's what wrestling is about. Exactly! That's the whole point of a Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame should not be used to right wrongs. I feel like we're going in circles and you're ignoring counterpoints that have been made.
-
Unless they have something going for them outside of those years ... yes, that's exactly what that means. No. Steamboat was a great worker for many years before this. The Steamboat/Youngblood team drew well in Mid Atlantic. The early versions of Flair/Steamboat did well too. Steamboat in 1992-1996 has nothing to do with him being in the HOF. He'd be in if he would have retired after the 1989 series with Flair. Yes. Those guys didn't have whatever qualities were needed, at least not at that point in time, to overcome all of wrestling's systemic problems and turn things around. That's not necessarily their fault, and that's asking a lot, yes. But a HOF is not a consolation prize for happening to peak during a period where wrestling was unpopular. "Sorry you didn't draw, but I like you anyway, so let's put you in."
-
Absurdly pompous. "serious discussion board" "pro wrestling" "serious discussion board" "pro wrestling" "serious" "pro wrestling" And for the record, I do not think that any of us on this entire forum can have a serious discussion on any wrestlers who pre-date the 1970s. How can we with no footage? Guesswork based on a few title histories and a few figures? For all intents and purposes, "best ever" might as well mean "Since the 1970s". Since when has "ever" actually meant "ever" in the world of talking about wrestling? Are we going to be that pedantic, that uptight, that "serious" on this forum as to quibble over semantics each and every time hyperbole is employed? Well? You can take things seriously that aren't terribly serious. People do it all the time, yourself included. You have 1500 posts on a pro wrestling message board and have started some thought-provoking threads, so there's no reason to pretend to be above it.
-
Wrestling was in a big lull from 1992-1996. It's sometimes called the dark ages because business was so bad. So, excluding Bret, who I think most of us agree should have had to go on the ballot, there is no one in the HOF for what they accomplished in the U.S. between 1992 and 1996, except maybe Vader. And Vader is in for being the best working guy at his size possibly ever, more than he is in for being a huge draw. Sting is not the reason WCW wasn't successful. As I mentioned before, it was a dysfunctional promotion. But had Sting overcome all of that to draw anyway, that would be his HOF case. He didn't. Sting drew a huge number opposite one of the biggest draws ever, and never really drew any other big numbers. The same could be said for Larry Zbyszko.
-
A clean-shaven Lee Marshall, sans weasel jokes, is in Florida interviewing Jerry Lawler. Lawler does the standard promo about not being a company champion.
-
Fundamentally sound, but lifeless. Jumbo drops the Triple Crown to Gordy, and it seems like a pretty uneventful switch. It's not a match I can point to and say specific things are wrong with it. Jumbo even survives the hot shot. I think the bigger issue is that it didn't really rise to the occasion.
-
So do you consider Nash a HOF candidate? Is Sting a demonstrably better candidate than Nash?
-
This was a tremendous match - a total war. Hansen gets the flash win with the lariat, but is a bloody mess and can't even stand up at first when the match is over. Some winner. Doc's toughness is put over in a big way. Not really epic in the typical All Japan way, but I appreciate that they worked a really satisfying match without a single 2.9 moment.
-
I acknowledge all the good stuff in this match, and I thought it was an effective way to get the lucha style over in Japan. But in spite of the good exchanges and nice moves, this didn't seem like it was laid out all that well. It was more of a showcase of everyone's athletic ability than a really good wrestling match. Odd as it is to say, that's not a total detriment, since they're doing a "spot show", but I do think it keeps this just as a good match, and nothing more. I liked the Joshi match that preceded it better, but otherwise, I agree that this is the best Hamada's UWF match so far. I think it's interesting that bumping gets over so much more in the U.S. and Mexico than Japan. An impressive bump gets almost no crowd reaction in Japan. It's a fanbase that is by far more interested in offense. It seemed like Kendo was too good to not be seasoned, and I never saw him in lucha footage, so I checked LuchaWiki. Check this out, it's very interesting: -
The equivalent to a Michinoku Pro match, as all six work really hard, cut a fast pace and show off their best moves. There's not the beginning-to-end narrative that you often find in Michinoku Pro matches, but I still thought this was a fantastic spotfest and touring match, filled with crowd-pleasing spots like the triple Boston crabs, and athleticism. The crowd also didn't seem to be showing them proper respect at the beginning, but they had them by the end. It's better for me than all of the little AJW stuff that made the set before now.
-
The Wrestlemania 29 Early Spring NY Weather Disaster Prediction Thread
Loss replied to Bix's topic in Pro Wrestling
Detroit hadn't died yet in 2007 though, had it? I guess the warning signs were there for many years, but the auto industry was still doing sort of okay at that point, right? -
Jeanne is pretty hateable and does her job really well here. They show an old photo of Chris Adams, which is a pretty lame piece of supposed dirt. Adams is out, still in a neckbrace. He tells Adams she hasn't gotten rid of him. He suckerpunches Austin and they brawl their way into the ring. Austin ends up attacking his neck and we have ourselves an impromptu match. Austin takes off the neckbrace and wraps him by the neck in the ropes. Jeanne comes in to throw a few slaps at Adams while Austin holds him, but this time, we have a new twist to the feud. Toni Adams is officially part of this feud. She hits the ring and goes after Jeanne and even socks Austin. The catfight pops the Sportatorium crowd in a big way. She cuts a surprisingly good promo promising revenge. Motive, Intent, Hype, as the old Scott Keith thing went.
-
An extended Lawler/Dundee feud in 1990 with a few complete matches would have been the cherry on the cake on the feud of this set. Lawler says Dundee isn't even a has been, he's a never was who has never beaten anyone of importance, won any titles and that he's not championship material. Again, I hate that Lawler takes this approach. What's wrong with mentioning their (at this point) 13-year rivalry to enhance the match - and their history both as teammates and rivals? I don't put that all on Lawler, but it's missed opportunity. Dundee's promo is actually better than Lawler's here. He tells him if he doesn't like coming to Dallas, to just stop coming to Dallas, but to leave the belt with him. He also gets over the Tatum feud nicely and teases an upcoming feud with Dirty White Boy. Dundee as a serious babyface works really well for me. This may be the best babyface promo I've ever seen from him.
-
Sid has been in the tux since Capital Combat. The Road Warriors are still very over, which makes me wonder why they stopped being used on top when Turner took over the company. Windham looks good, but he's also slightly off step. It took him a little while to get back in the swing of things. Despite the crowd reaction, the Roadies are sleepwalking and this has an odd layout. Not sure why it got ***1/2 in the Observer unless it's just for the crowd heat. It's not that things were awesome before Ole, but you can definitely see a further decline happening even this early under Ole. This is a clusterfuck, as Sid botches his run-in.
-
Arn Anderson interviews are always good or great. Windham is fine. Flair is excited that the Horsemen are going to put the LOD in their place.
-
Jim Ross interviewing Stan Hansen? This should be fun! He's been making his living abroad because he ain't a yes-man. You can see the guys Ole is pushing and bringing in, but they're pretty much all guys of the past. Even Hansen, who whatever reason can't have great matches in the U.S.
-
If my memory serves me correctly, WCW did a great job of hyping Vader's debut, then had no idea what to do with him when he started. I know hindsight in 20/20, but how different would this Sting run had been if Vader had been brought in as the first opponent?