khawk20

You presume two things here: One, that the WWE cares enough to produce an accurate version of the history of the NWA title, and two, that the WWE is interested in anything but making some money off this release. If 1000 people buy this dvd set, maybe 50 of them will notice or have any idea of what might be missing from the doc or what matches are skimmed over that are important. They are not catering to those 50 people (All of whom I would assume post here, lol) in any way, shape or form.

Used to drive me crazy but not anymore, just because there are far better resources for dates and venues through the results guys around the internet. As you stated, I can easily check it myself. It's less frustrating expecting a mistake (potentially like that Rhodes 1979 switch) and then to be surprised that the date is actually right when it does come out.

If it was the one from '81, wouldn't it say it was from '81? I'm pretty sure this list comes directly from WWE, or at least their DVD distributor. You'd think so, but the WWE screws up dates on their releases all the time. It's not even always their fault--the stuff was often labelled wrong even before Vince got his hands on it. The "most famous" example I can think of is the Snuka-Backlund cage match on the Cage match dvd, which is (and had been previously) labelled as being from May 1980 (It's a 1982 match). There are others. The AWA stuff is notorious for having the wrong dates on their material. On the recent Hogan HOF, they got the Hogan-Duncum AWA match date wrong, for example. The 1979 win/loss by Rhodes and Race is much more compelling overall than the June 1981 switch, so I hope the date is right. But I have my doubts.

I'm a little more confused now. Dory's title win was shown, right? that's what I meant, and I don't thin there will be much more than what was shown on this doc disc. I'm also thinking that the Rhodes title win over Race will be his second one, from Atlanta in June of 1981, not the 1979 one. Just a guess, though.

Clips of that were already shown on one of the 24/7 film rooms, IIRC. I doubt we'll get much more than what they showed there.

There wasn't a Wrestlerock II, but if one had happened it would have been what was eventually named Super Clash III. You're thinking of the Wrestlerock revenge tur that happened from April through JJuly of 1986, after the big Minneapolis Dome show. I remember seeing the promos for it. If you ever get a chance to track down Mimi vs. Candi Devine from late 1989-ish, do it. Mimi does a little wiggle-and wipe-act with her t-shirt before the match and then throws the T into the crowd. There have been very few things women wrestlers have done in the last 20 years that were hotter, imo.

Hogan on Larry King last nite...brief synopsis stolen from srossi on the S & W board: I want to laugh but I can't stop shaking my head over the Graziano part.

Given the time frame, I'm betting this is what morphed into Super Clash III (December 13, 1988, Chicago). I'm glad as 1500 people in the Metrodome would have been bad beyond comprehension to try and watch.

...and I would hypothesize that Patterson being gay would not count in his or the WWF's favour in a "he said/she said" scenario during this time frame. Settling became even more crucial to Vince, IMO.

How surprised would we all be if this is in fact the case, done as an angle to jump-start the feud for their tour?

Not so much "caught with", more like "Used to have one come up to his office regularly". Not sure how true it is but I've read it enough times over the years.

Link to the thread: http://wrestlingclassics.com/.ubb/ultimate...c;f=10;t=002250 List of the club members: Dan Anderson Libnan Ayoub Tom Burke Mark Hewitt Tim Hornbaker Fred Hornby Steve Johnson J Michael Kenyon Don Luce Jim Melby Koji Miyamoto Greg Oliver Scott Teal Chuck Thornton Haruo Yamaguchi Steve Yohe **edit** Note that Melby was an original member and his name stands postumously, in case someone thinks it's an old list.

I'll have to ask Steve. From my conversations with Steve, it doesn't sound remotely close to "official". Far more like an "informal" one of people that Dave talks to. Dave may know who all the members are, but it's not an official committee unless all the members can discuss the candidates among themselves and come to a collective decision. I don't think that's the case. John FWIW, Wrestling Classics has a thread in the Thez section (started by Yohe) about their inner circle of Historians...a club they vote members into occasionally, that reads like a who's who of real research guys. It's possible that list could be the Veterans Committee. Lossely affilated or not, it makes the most sense if Dave feels that he needs such a committee to exist. He would likely want to make it as high-end as he could, right? Those would be the guys. Just a guess/observation. I'll post a link to the thread if I can find it.

Isn't all pro wrestling worked shoots? Now you've got to define what a "shoot" is! **sigh**

Bump for this bit from meltzer's update today (and I suspect more gems will be coming over the next while as his Hulkmania tour takes shape):

FWIW Lance did this a lot, even in matches that didn't go to a draw.."five down, 55 to wrestler" and whatnot. More a standard of his announcing style than trying to give away the draw aspect of it. I always hated matches that counted down the minutes, personally. It provides for the odd surprise (8/8/82 Martel vs. Brunzell saw Martel score a pin at 29:57 of a 30:00 match, for example, right in the middle of the final five second countdown), but mostly it voids the match of suspense that someone will actually win the thing. Bockwinkel vs. hennig from 1986 was really, really hurt by this, IMO. Blears and Trongard pretty much called the draw way before the halfway point in the way they discussed the match. The WWF title match between Backlund and Valentine from 1979 that went 60 minutes didn't do this, as I remember, and it made when the bell did ring for the draw that much better.

American XXXtasy and the big C-band dish. Awesome. That's the setup I had as well.

That your username is "cox" makes this statement even better.

Wanz's reign was bought and paid for, with little logic attached to it other than the "SURPRISE! Anyone can beat anyone on a given night" mindest being reinforced. Whether Jumbo's reign was paid for or not (and I don't know if it was or not, to be honest), it at least had sense when you looked at how things flowed after that. Jumbo won the title from Bock, then Martel beat Jumbo for the title. Meanwhile, in the previous year Martel had been unsuccessful in beating Bockwinkel for the title. Suddenly, Martel vs. Bockwinkel had an element of doubt: Perhaps Martel would only be a short-term champion as well, and Bock would regain the title and continue as the Champ, same as it had been for nearly a decade. The initial Martel-Bockwinkel matches with Martel as Champ were very good and you could hear and feel the element of not knowing who would win in the crowds.