kjh

When I was at Wrestling Classics, there was the occassional Hogan defender. Most likely, it's the same fan or same two fans going after Dave, tossing out ridiculous claims that he can easily refute. The posts were from the Figure Four message board, where you're more likely to find Hogan and TNA defenders. Dave stopped posting at Classics when the Observer site merged with the Figure Four site. The thread title is a bit outdated now. Sorry for the confusion!

Dave goes off on Hulk Hogan and TNA:

Actually I think the boys convinced Dave of that talking point. It's the new kayfabe. I mean we now have Greg Gagne claiming he and his father invented MMA and pitched the concept at a U.S. wrestling convention in Las Vegas in 1992, but had the idea stolen by Randy Couture and Chuck Liddell, who took the concept to Dana White and the rest is history. Patently ridiculous, but it shows the whoppers old carnies will tell to pretend it's the same business.

I haven't read the book yet, but I think Bix's criticism of the book lacking a discussion about how Chris and Nancy got together is a fair one. Not only does it underscore the unique ridiculousness of the wrestling business, but also its warped morality, where a top ranking wrestling executive could get away with being a drug addled wife beater, co-workers were nonplussed about Benoit cheating on his wife while his second child was about to be born, and said colleagues were more appalled by Sullivan's vindictive booking than the aforementioned domestic abuse.

But remember, making mean spirited jokes about a talentless whore who got bigger pops than him for flaunting her surgically enhanced breasts is AOK in Mick's book!

I'd be surprised if this wasn't the big announcement. The long term goal of the company has always been to recreate the Monday Night Wars. I'm not sure Hogan would come on board if TNA wasn't positioned to be directly competitive with WWE. Why bring in so many highly paid expensive guys simultaneously if Impact is staying on a Thursday night where they get decent ratings already?

What John said. Hogan may lead to a short term boost in business, but in 2009 you can't bank on him to be the franchise of a promotion. We learnt that in 2002.

And going:

And going...

And going...

Mick must have skipped Dave's recap of the Iron Sheik's roast where a drunk Scott Hall went crazy over an Owen Hart joke.

Dave still finds time to do some historical pieces (like the pieces about amateur wrestling stars who did pro wrestling and the run down of the greatest draws in wrestling history through Matt Farmer's research). I just find his choice of subject matter often uninspired. Some subjects have been beaten into the ground by this point (like the war between JCP and the WWF in the mid 80s, the rise and fall of WCCW). It would be nice if Dave focussed on a major historical figure or territory that he hasn't had reason to do a major historical piece on occasionally.

Yeah, the moderated area is still there Bix. I tend to go to the board only to see what Dave is posting there.

Expanding on Tim's idea, they need to book a Feinstein vs. Silkin ownership feud with the obvious wrestlers supporting their competing visions.

No word on Liz isn't baffling; it's perfectly logical. Why would WWE want to draw attention to her sleazy death in the piece? The whole point of these articles is to prove that not every ex WWE wrestler is a broken down drug addict waiting to die. I also wouldn't read too much into this puff piece on Luger being published on the WWE website. It's probably below Vince and Steph's radar.

I like the story about Hulk almost decided to commit suicide by ODing on Xanax and Rum, until Leila Ali talked him out of it.

I think Shane Douglas is a better comp than Dynamite.

If people "nitpick" everything Dave says, it's because he's by far the most influential wrestling and MMA journalist ever. He should take it as a sign of respect that we pay more attention to what he writes than all the other wrestling commentators out there put together. Speaking about old school match finishes, if a German suplex can't be bought as a finisher today, maybe the next generation of workers wasn't so great or smart after all. Just a point to ponder.

Dave certainly does. Have you ever read a Meltzer WWE DVD review that mentioned anything about the matches on it?

I haven't heard the latest installment of "rethinking matches and wrestlers is so totally unfair", but I've heard a previous installment and IIRC Dave backed up his opinion by pointing to what the boys have told him. Basically that they work matches for the fans watching live not for a handful of geeks who watch the matches years later after the fact. I'm sure part of the comment stems from Dave and Bryan being defensive about their past analysis being questioned, but part of it seems to stem from the insecurities of the workers themselves who've had an online backlash over the years (for example, sometimes Bryan seems like a mouthpiece for Shawn Michaels, such as putting over how well worked and booked DX's recent Hell In The Cell main event with Legacy was, despite the crowd reacting disappointingly to it).

However much Flair has tied up in retirement accounts, I doubt it's enough to pay for his lifestyle and the consequences of his lifestyle. Which means things probably aren't going to get any better for him long term, unless Vince takes pity on him like he did with Jim Barnett and Superstar Billy Graham (well, until the financial crisis hit at least).

I don't think they came to this deep moment of Truth by themselves. Sounds like Dave and Bryan not stopping to think about what the wrestlers tell them and just taking it at face value.