khawk20

Were you lucky enough to see these guys when they were in their prime as a tag team? It was a little before my time and I didn't feel I had seen enough to rate one over the other in the context of their team. I didn't think there was enough footage to fall back on with them either. If you actually saw them wrestle more in their prime, maybe you can provide some insight into Ray Stevens the wrestler for us. He's a constant source of debate since there isn't much of him out there to see footage-wise.

Vachon more than Gagne Adonis more than Ventura Brunzell more than Gagne Blackwell more than Patera Hawk more than Animal Garvin more than Regal Hennig more than Hall Rose more than Somers Jannetty more than Michaels Tanaka more than Diamond (really, a toss-up) Enos more than Bloom Ustinov/Zurkov and Raschke/Crusher: dead heat

After Undertaker, does anyone have a winning streak longer than 1 or 2 of at WrestleMania that is currently active in the WWE?

-get done more AWA Year in Review sets (1980, 81, and 83 specifically. I'll be lucky to get one of them done) -Do more AWA wrestler comps (finish Verne's, do a Gagne-Brunzell one, maybe a chronological Nick one...there are others but getting one done properly is likely all I'll manage) -find more AWA stuff. Some good stuff turned up this year, no reason to think more won't turn up in 2014.

There's one Dory Sr match, you can find it on Youtube. Stylistically, I think Dory Sr wrestled more like Terry than Junior, which I wasn't expecting. Since WWE has the Texas Wrestling footage from Ed McLemore, I wonder if they're sitting on more footage. I would imagine they are, and will probably role out sporadic matches from it depending on when an old-timey wrestler goes into the HOF, or they do some sort of Texas wrestling retrospective, or a segment on specialty matches, stuff like that.

Maybe I misunderstood the question. Are we looking for exceptions to the rule of why they go to the cage match? As noted in the answers, most areas have at least one exception.

Guerreros are a good pick, IMO. They deserve to be in the conversation.

To win a WWF cage match you had to escape, so it did feature leaving the cage. Snuka actually had to go outside the cage after he lost to get Muraco back in for the splash. If you DQ the WWF model, I believe you're correct about the idea of the cage match and why a feud would turn to it to resolve things.

I got Ringmasters: The Great American Bash for Christmas the year it came out. My folks bought it through one of the magazines and got it shipped to Canada...must've cost eleventy billion dollars. Remember, it was a vhs tape. I still have it. My grandfather picked me up the first two series of the Superstar Pro Wrestling Game that came out back in th early-mid 80's. He ordered it when it was in Florida. Very cool game...I still have that one, too.

I'd offer that Brunzell didn't fly the coop right away as he was around until April-ish of 1985, and that the Fabs were brought in with a lot of pomp and circumstance but really didn't begin main event programs right away, it took a several months to get things going on near the top of the card in the main markets. The rest is the same-old same-old AWA died stuff, which all seems fine.

I was always curious - are these shows the first time we're seeing this footage or is this something you probably have some place already? Bits and pieces (the odd match or two) have been out there for some time--1981 isn't a complete black hole for footage (unlike 1983, which had massive gaps in it until very recently), but not whole shows. The arena matches that have popped up recently have not been out there previously (Patera vs. Robinson, Laurent Soucie vs. Evan Johnson, Tito Santana vs. Sgt. Jacques Goulet). Same with the odd interview segments that pop up. How's Patera vs Robinson? We get a good chunk of the match (missing maybe the first 5 minutes), but there isn't anything really special about it. I'll have to rewatch it to give a more detailed review but on first watch I felt it was just sort of "there" as a match. Tito vs. Goulet was fun.

I was always curious - are these shows the first time we're seeing this footage or is this something you probably have some place already? Bits and pieces (the odd match or two) have been out there for some time--1981 isn't a complete black hole for footage (unlike 1983, which had massive gaps in it until very recently), but not whole shows. The arena matches that have popped up recently have not been out there previously (Patera vs. Robinson, Laurent Soucie vs. Evan Johnson, Tito Santana vs. Sgt. Jacques Goulet). Same with the odd interview segments that pop up.

I think guys like Angle (but moreso a guy like Ray Stevens) sort of fall into a category all their own when it comes to how their peers remember and rate them. There may just be something about them in the ring that you have to experience for yourself in the context of being a pro wrestler to "get". Just a thought. Sometimes "You weren't there, you wouldn't understand" makes sense depending on how you look at it. How these guys are rated by their peers, Stevens especially, might be the best examples of it where it shouldn't be taken in a condescending manner (like 99% of the similar references we've all encountered reading and interacting with old-time workers), it's just correct.

If Bruno isn't B.S.ing, that's impressive.

Watched the latest AWA 1981 TV offerings from WWE Classics on Demand today. Two shows from November 1981, with interviews included from Sacramento and Salt Lake City. The Salt Lake ones were generic, without a card upcoming, but the Sacramento ones were promoting a 12/27/81 Battleroyal, and the indications were the show itself aired a week before, on December 20th. Not sure if WWE added the interviews to the show (since it aired a month + before the interviews were relevant), or if the AWA just sent a show down there that was older that particular week. Either way, the interviews were nice as very few of their tv re-airings have them included due to the interviews being sent around on a separate reel for each particular market and put together by the station when they got the footage. No non-squash matches of note on either show.

99% might be high... but not far off. John Context, context, context...I'd watch Greg Valentine & Dino Bravo vs. The Killer Bees with great glee when it came after Kamala vs. George Wells, Outback Jack vs. Steve Lombardi, and Salvatore Bellomo vs. Big John Studd. Now watching that tag match all on it's own 25 years later might be another story...but in the context of a card like that, it was welcomed.

No, it's not enough, my point is more about how I would structure my own considerations of WWF 80's teams for a HOF. The teams that stood out would be a starting point, but it wouldn't disqualify other teams that may not have "risen above the din" from being looked at. I really wasn't thinking about drawing level per se, although it does bear some consideration, for sure. I don't think work-only is the basis of what I'm saying, especially when it comes to 80's WWF teams. I'm saying that standing out required something other than a push from above, they had to have something to get that push. Work is a part of that, as is longevity, charisma, innovation, look, fan-bonding, and probably other stuff I'm missing.

I always found WWF tag matches compelling back then mostly because they had created a whole slew of "equal" teams. Anyone could beat anyone without the loser losing their standing as one of the teams in the mix. I think that was the goal that the WWF was trying to acheive as I view the sheer number of tag teams at the time as a way to accommodate all the talent they were grabbing. Those guys were made to look like they had meaningful roles due to their tag teams moreso than any of them could ever have done as singles guys. By doing this, it also created an endless series of relatively meaningful title matches, by which I mean that it wasn't implausible that the Bees could win the title from Demolition based on past successes against them before they won the titles. Likewise, a team like Valentine and Beefcake could beat another established face team well past their title reign and nobody really thought anything of it. So, whatever I thought of the tag matches themselves was usually offset by the fact that the outcome was always relatively in doubt, plus it meant we had passed the George Wells vs. Kamala portion of the card, where there was nothing compelling to see other than the finisher of the overwhelming favourite...and that was a god thing. The teams that climbed above that mix are the ones that deserve Tag Team HOF consideration, because the environment they were wrestling in seemed to fight against that being able to happen.

"My deepest condolences to the family of Maurice 'Mad Dog' Vachon, a Canadian wrestling legend," tweeted (Canadian) Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Sympathies were also extended by the leader of the Official Opposition, whose party counted Paul Vachon as a candidate in the 1980s and 1990s. "A true legend from the glory days of wrestling has just left us," tweeted NDP Leader Tom Mulcair. "My condolences to the family of Maurice 'Mad Dog' Vachon." http://ca.news.yahoo.com/montreal-born-for...-163853825.html

I think a weekly model like this would work better, like on Tuesdays after Raw.