khawk20

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.

This description made me think of Coach John Heath in Florida, who should win the announcer category of this hands down.

A sad day but one that, with Mad Dog's rapidly declining health, was coming sooner than later. RIP to a real icon from my childhood. It makes me happy that his family has a video record of his life story to show future generations. KanadianKrusty noted the signifigance of Vachon's death here in Canada, and I would suspect that many Canadian news outlets on every level will have a little something about his death to mention, especially in Quebec.

With reference to Trongard, are you sure you're not confusing the words "boring" and "bad" here? Even if Tronny's calls in Vegas were shitty (and a lot of them were), I don't think "boring" applies. Same with the awful Lord Blears on colour. Donna's segments, well...boring might be too kind. The AWA answer to this is probably Lee Marshall, but he was so fucking awful I can't tell if he was boring and bad, or just one of them.

Are we looking at a situation where their On Demand Channel goes dark without something launching at least close to that date to "replace" it? Alternately, would they keep On Demand active if the February-ish target gets delayed for an amount of time longer than expected?

Jos Leduc and Terry Funk in the summer/fall of 1979, off of his 4 day title reign over Harley.

A lot of VHS tapes were really expensive in the 80s. I think the movie studios priced them out of the market intentionally so they could make their money through the video rental stores. Correct; most VHS releases were "priced for rental." At $59.95 and later $39.95 they were actually pretty cheap, Hollywood movies were closer to $89.95. yep I can remember my cousin getting Back to the Future on VHS in I guess 86 or 87 and it cost like 90 dollars. Unreal And with inflation, VHS tapes cost even more. My parents got me "Ringmasters--The Great American Bash" on vhs for Christmas the year it came out. It cost them a ton. PLUS it had to be shipped to Canada which probably also cost a ton. Keep in mind that for me, making minimum wage at the time meant 4 dollars an hour, so there was no way I would even have been able to afford it myself. Remember that the technology of actually being able to record shows on a vhs machine was still relatively new in terms of the masses being able to afford the technology, and even then, vhs machines were around the $400 mark, a significant reduction in price from the $1000 that the original top-loading vcrs that became more available to people in or around 1979-80. All "newer" technology goes through a similar arc even today, but now the price points don't take several years to come down to a reasonable level. Most things get near an affordable level after a year (taking credit out of the equation, I mean, which makes everyone able to afford everything if they're willing to go into debt for lengthy periods). I'll stop now, this is one of those things I can reminisce about for a long time to the interest of nobody but myself.

Mad Dog Vachon. Every promo he laid out made you think he had murder on his mind, even the funny ones later on. He had the ability to change his facial expression slightly to go from standard scary promo guy to "Holy fuck he's going to kill that guy" in an instant, usually when walking off the set at the conclusion of the promo.

Would giving Orton a mouthpiece have helped? Adonis could talk and I think could have souped up his ring presence somehow to "fit the mold", if he needed to.

Strictly faces, all four of them. I spent too much time watching him as a face to have been able to make that leap. I was actually pissed when he did turn heel...seemed wrong somehow.

Maybe the first part of this would be better off discussed somewhere else on the board? Just askin'...

Anyone think Cowboy Bob Orton would have worked? What about an "in better shape" Adrian Adonis?

For me, the problem with that Martel argument is that I never, ever could envision him in ANY sort of a heel role before he turned in the WWF so many years later. How many others that mattered wouldn't have been able to see it either? He seemed soooooooooo entrenched as a babyface throughout the 80's. To me, at least. It did work when he eventually did turn and he was good at it. In 1981 I don't know it would have worked the same way for him.

(I feel dirty after writing that)

The Crusher was a huge draw for the AWA, but by the time 1981 hit he was mostly lousy in the ring given his advanced age and lack of mobility. He had a compelling series in late 1979-early 1980 with Bockwinkel, but after that, not much in-ring goodness to justify the mind-numbing pops he used to get wherever he wrestled right up into 1984-85. Anything less than a full-out brawl that he was involved with mostly wasn't good.

Maybe they come up with a monetary offer that Nick Bockwinkel couldn't refuse, no matter the evil of the travel schedule as he saw it compared to Harley's salary?

Jack Brisco vs. Bobby Heenan? Fuck, that must have been hillarious.

People your own age, I assume? Amongst friends our own age group, I imagine we all have quotes and bits from movies and TV that pop up like that. There are a couple of us that hang out here that pull Simpsons quotes from 20 years ago (literally) out all the time like that. Not many get them aside from us, but we don't care. The odd person out of our age range that does is a pleasant surprise. Heartening, too, for that matter.