Bix

Ostensibly as of January, yes. Unless the percentage is out of a total that includes those who are deceased and not contactable as opposed to the number of those contacted. And depends on if developmental guys who were never called up are included.

Huh, it's on the WWE corporate site: http://corporate.wwe.com/news/rehabilitation/summary.jsp Not sure how wise that is...

From the local newspaper article about how Travis Tomko posted bond yesterday in his robbery case and is going to WWE-sponsored rehab: Umm. Holy shit. I've emailed the reporter to ask if he got that figure from WWE (if he didn't, then I have no idea who the source would be, but why would they give it out?) and have my fingers crossed that he will reply, but... Holy shit. The sample covers everyone who has ever had a WWE booking contract (waiting to hear back from Meltzer about if that covers developmental wrestlers who never got called up but I would guess it does) or referee agreement. They started signing most wrestlers to contracts in '83-'84 and have had 150+ guys signed at a time at some points. Also, they haven't necessarily been able to contact everyone and obviously some are dead, as well. 6 out of every 100 wrestlers or referees ever signed to WWE who are not currently with the company have gone through their rehab program. When you think about how many more there may be that don't want to get clean, haven't gotten letters from WWE, are dead, etc...wow. That's not too far from the amount of addicts needing rehab in the general population going by the little bit of research I did today. The amount who want help and go is a lot lower largely due to financial/lack of insurance reasons. This is pretty fascinaingly screwed up of accurate. I'm very curious to hear more about this.

Bix, read the thread. Even if I give him that benefit of the doubt----the globetrotters? I would need the thread pasted here.

I'm going to give Dave the benefit of the doubt this time and guess he meant Pride (due to the mix) and shoot style that happened after UFC and Pancrase launched.

"He just doesn't know how to show it sometimes..."

For the millionth time, REASONABLE CREATIVE CONTROL WAS DEFINED AS BRET AND VINCE HAVING TO AGREE.

Wrestler of the year = MVP, essentially. Most outstanding wrestler is best in the ring.

It covers December 1, 2010-November 30, 2011, so Survivor Series counts.

How well does Survivor Series need to do for The Rock to have any kind of legitimate case?

Punk had a great year in the ring, singlehandedly boosted a B-level PPV over its 2010 number, became the #1 merchandise seller in WWE, pushed a 21 year old song high up the iTunes charts to the point it was #1 rock song in the UK and in the top 5 in the US and Ireland, generated a ridiculous amount of buzz until booking knocked his angle off the rails, and got himself put at the Cena/Orton protected level. That's more than most people this year and I suspect he'll win.

Nope. It's 100% correct. Yeah, El-P, I don't see where the problem is with Dylan's analogy. It is spot on. And I thought Bret's 'creative control' was a less-autonomous version of the Hogan bearer. I recall clear terminology - 'unreasonable demands' being one of them. Losing to Shawn in Canada wouldn't have ruined Bret's legacy in Canada, irregardless of it being his quote-unquote "last WWF match ever". I think Bret's hatred for Shawn Michaels blurred the lines of 'reasonable conduct' and 'unreasonable demands'. It was "reasonable creative control," specifically defined as Bret and Vince having to agree.

The night after having a major heart scare, to boot.

A subscriber could check the archives but Wade said in the Torch at back during the height of the Clique vs everyone/"Titanic Sports" period that there were one or two organized opposition groups who showed solidarity by wearing similar articles of clothing or something like that.

When Morton was jailed for not paying child support, didn't Meltzer et al say that it was more complicated than it seemed because the numbers were crunched based on his WCW pay circa 1991 and never updated?

ROB NAYLOR.

One thing Bret mentions in the DVD is that he agreed to drop the belt to Shawn on Raw if Shawn put him over on the PPV to show he was willing to do the right thing after the "I'm not okay with doing the job for you even though you're fine with putting me over" conversation. Also, am I correct in saying that Bret having passed his required dates and not even having to work if he wanted to something that never came out before the DVD?

I'd go with Funaki over Sakuraba because at least Funaki was a pro wrestler specifically trying to turn pro wrestling into a legitimate sport. Yes, he also is better for an MMA HOF but I think he has more historical importance "as a pro wrestler" than Sakuraba.

It's worth adding that in the days before SS Bret was on Off The Record speaking very frankly and openly about his dissatisfaction at the current direction of WWF programming, and acknowledging the rumours that he might jump ship to WCW. I think "everyone knew anyway" would be an exaggeration, but the hardcore, online fans knew something was up. I'm using Vince and Bret's wording.

Michaels mentions HHH's role in passing on the DVD.

I'm not sure Bret was quite as flexible as he makes out. People were expecting him to come into SS as champion, when push comes to shove I'm not sure he'd have dropped it before that date. It also might have hurt PPV buys at the time if Bret vs. Shawn wasn't a World title match. Bret outright said in his book that he felt that he shouldn't drop it before the PPV for that very reason. In realistic terms, with Bret still under contract for a few weeks, the only thing Vince was risking was Bischoff announcing the signing on Nitro. In the Observer transcript of the extended version of the Bret-Vince conversation from the Wrestling With Shadows raw footage, Vince said that it didn't really matter since everyone knew anyway. So the issue is if he was lying or was paranoid enough to enough to expect Bret to violate the contract and Bischoff to invite further legal action.

"Ultimo was arguably the best in the world in late '96" isn't a brand new talking point, FWIW. I forget how it came up, but I remember someone (Wade?) bringing it up in that year's Torch yearbook when talking about his time at the center of the junior/cruiser divisions in both WCW and NJPW. John could probably dig it up. It didn't seem entirely outrageous at the time (especially with how Michaels was being pimped back then), as he had at least three (Ohtani, Rey, Malenko) consensus MOTYCs from August to December in addition to some other interesting stuff.

I thought it wasn't out yet? Various smaller vendors have broken the street date.

Yeah, and the substance of the "Where are the blow jobs?" conversation was that more female fans means more male fans going with them as well.