kjh

Hashimoto was short changed when you consider that he was an Eddie/Misawa level star and didn't get the same level of coverage as those deaths did. IIRC, even Chris Candido's obit was significantly longer than Hash's.

Given WrestleMania is in Atlanta next year, Goldberg going into the WWE HOF next year and doing a one off nostalgia match at Mania would probably work well.

I think the JCP vs. UWF fantasy booking loses sight that buying Watt's out and paying for the UWF's syndicated television network was a real drain on JCP's finances in 1987. You can do the invasion angle without buying the company out. So buying the company was really a waste of time and money. On a different note - 2010 is the year Matt Hardy finally needs to learn to shut the f*** up. See Matt Hardy's latest YouTube video to see what I'm talking about.

Actually, word needed...the video has been removed so I don't know what it was. Here's an alternative video of what El-P was talking about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSBzxHCN4qc

Ceteris paribus, Starrcade '87 would still be a major money loser due to going head to head with the WWF's Survivor Series and only 5 cable companies carrying the show. Maggie's accident didn't change the long term result, the fallout only meant that Crockett couldn't hold on for as long. JCP would've still been sold to Turner before the end of the decade.

Didn't the '88 Bash blood stoppage finish actually work in the short term and boost house show business for return matches between the two, as Luger only failed to win the title on a technicality and people thought they could potentially see a title switch in a house show rematch? Obviously the feud had run out of steam by Starrcade, but you could have done a house show switch in one of the matches on the circuit, which would have kept Luger's momentum going without having to give away a clean finish in their first PPV match together. To be honest though I'm not sure how much of this is Dusty's fault and how much to blame is the state of the company at the time (treading water until the Turner buyout who wanted Flair as part of the deal) and Flair being reluctant to drop the title to Luger. I really think Dusty's hands were tied. Or are we supposed to just take it for granted that Flair would happily drop the title to a green musclehead he had little respect for?

This was what Babinsack was talking about last week regarding Buddy Rogers: Yeah, so sounds like rovert was right about the origins of his Buddy booking hate. I came to the conclusion from that DVD review that Babinsack's just another columnist who doesn't really care all too much about the truth, as long as it makes for a good story and matches his biases.

Yeah, I posted a similar story on Cage Side Seats last night : The Connecticut media wakes up to WWE's hypocrisy on the concussion issue, but it's about more than just chair shots to the head.

They're all crazy Bix, so I'm not sure normal rules of logic or social etiquette apply here.

Yeah, that's what puzzled me. Rogers has a rep for being one of the best heel draws in history, yet in the context of the article (talking about the nWo and Sting) and the following sentence "Having a faction of cronies around to squeeze the life out of the fanbase, to suck up the profits, and to bleed a promotion dry?", Babinsack made it sound like Rogers killed territories like the nWo eventually killed WCW.

Can someone explain what Joe Babinsack is talking about here?

Dave did do a nice Johnny Weaver bio not so long ago. Buddy Rose's was very good too. So I think he's still got it in him. However, I suspect Scott may get a bit shortchanged, due to Dave having to write two bios this week.

I suspect the Doc obit got bumped by the Tony Halme and Jim White obits. Then Bob Shamrock died. Then Jack Brisco. Then Poffo. Now, Sandy Scott and John Hill.

Dyno didn't really bash his drug/steroid/alcohol abuse. Yes, he was open about it, but his attitude was fairly unrepentant. Despite ending up broken down and penniless, he said he had no regrets and would do it all again. Also some of his failings and shortcomings were completely glossed over (like his infidelity and spousal abuse). He also exaggerated his own toughness throughout the book. Don't get me wrong, it was a good book that was the first to really shine a light on the dark excesses of the business, but it's hard to call the book "extremely honest" when other books since Dynamite's came out give a different perspective to the stories told in that book.

Please, Dynamite was really far from honest about his failings and shortcomings in his book. Nor did he show any humility.

Given that TNA, unlike WWE, is not a public company that discloses its financial information, I've always been a bit skeptical about the stories that they were profitable. I'm sure some months in the past they took in more than they spent, but I'm skeptical that they've been profitable for any 12 month period. Even if they have been profitable for the last couple of years, they've made chump change compared to WWE. It won't take long for that chump change to be frittered away with the increased advertisement, production and talent costs incurred by going to war with WWE. WCW was far more profitable than TNA could ever dream of and they blew it all in a couple of years of extreme incompetence and recklessness. TNA's now on course to follow suit.

Even if Panda eventually wanted out, I think TNA will exist in some form provided Spike TV still wants wrestling programming on their station. I think the problem is that for Panda to keep throwing money at TNA they need some light at the end of the tunnel, a golden carrot to chase. For years that golden carrot was getting on Monday nights. There's really no golden carrots left for Panda to chase if their Monday night experiment fails.

From prowrestling.net: Wow, Bret's forgotten the part of the story where Vince hired incompetent stunt coordinators because the professionals were too expensive and refused to do the stunt exactly as he wanted due to its inherent danger.

I really don't disagree with this, but if TNA had kept costs down, small improvements in PPV and house show revenue generated by better booking could have made the difference between making a small loss and making a small profit, or at least cut the bleeding to a minimum. You act like this was a cunning plan Loss, rather than a kneejerk reaction to stop the bleeding in WWE's PPV business caused by their own creative incompetence, nepotism and overexposure. I really think in the end, they're just going to dilute the appeal of those gimmick matches. Loss, if TNA were patient they would have stayed on Thursday nights, saving all the money they've blown on going live every other week, advertising the move to Mondays, bringing in Hogan, Bischoff, Flair, Hardy and RVD, etc. They're pissing away millions of dollars into the wind on a foolhardy head to head war with WWE and are probably on course to lose more money this year than the last four years combined. TNA's problem was that they weren't patient enough and thought with their balls instead of their brains. Where is this "strong TV rights income" going to come from when moving to Mondays is costing them significant viewers. Overseas TV deals are really just chump change in the current big picture. This talking point is a little silly, given that part of the reason WWE has maintained its profitability in recent years is through its healthy house show business.

I assume you're talking about the Observer boards where we have dumb threads like "What is the WWE spin on Raw dropping to 3.38 during WM hype?" and "Why is everyone here so anti TNA?". At least it leads to an interesting response from Dave.

Yeah, I'm about half way through disc 7. I'm glad I'm not the furthest one behind.

Dave Meltzer doing damage control for Dana White shouldn't come as a surprise by this point either.

I was about to say something similar. I'd just add that "I'm not intolerant of people making their own way" is such crap when Bruce has punted wrestlers for years for their vices.

I think part of WWE's reluctance to use house show footage is the poorer quality from a production standpoint. Also, by the early 1990's most major market house shows (such as MSG, Boston, Philadelphia and Toronto) weren't being taped and televised like in the past.

IIRC, his "Rise and Fall of WCW" history pieces after the WWE produced DVD petered out at the end of 1998 too. No, Konnan HOF bio yet either. I have no problem with Meltzer covering MMA. However, I do think Bryan and Dave waste a lot of time covering everything twice. Do we really need two similar reviews of the Dragon Gate PPV, for example? I might actually read the Figure Four if there was less overlap with the Observer.