jdw

As far as product that mattered? Raw + Smackdown + Nitro + Thunder + ECW + WWF PPV + WCW PPV + ECW PPV That's just in the US, and it's not counting things like WCW SN (which had its fans) and WCW Heat (dittos). Is there as much quantity now? Maybe, though when you can point to WCW not exisiting the reality is that nothing has replaced it. TNA is more the successor to ECW as a second rate promotion that barely matter. The difference - ECW was wildly more interesting as a second rate promotion from a conversational standpoint. Opinion on it was wildly split, so keeping up with it was sort of important if you wanted to be able to talk about the promotion. How many people who think lightly of TNA put in the time? With ECW, you'd put in the time. Hell, WCW went off the cliff... and we still watched it so we could bitch, moan and analyze just how they were going off the cliff. I'm sure there still are some who do that with TNA, but after 5 years of being a clusterfuck, I tend to think that most like that have wandered off to something else. There also was current Japanese stuff that was getting pretty fair discussion. Obviously there still is discussion on things in Japan, and people like Stuart built up cottage industries on declining/dying promotions. But discussions now about Misawa not being able to find the Next Generation are *ten year old* discussions. It's something that goes back to All Japan when folks could see a generation of one (Akiyama), and even by 1999 were starting to have doubts that he had it in him to succeed the Four Corners. The storyline of New Japan this decade was largely already written during the 1999-2002 period. The story of All Japan was largely written by 2002 with Mutoh's permanent jump, and what hadn't been done since Misawa & Co. left. Joshi? Dead. It's not that there isn't *any* good conversation on puroresu now. But the big themes of where the business is headed, and who if anyone from generations after Four Corners and the Three Musketeers can lead the business back... is there any truly deep analysis of that in 2009 that isn't largely a rehash of things that were obvious back in the early 00s? :/ You could say the same about the US business. No doubt there's lots of good discussion on workers and matches. But as far as the direction of the WWE, TNA, ROH, the entire US business... anything big that isn't a continuation or derivative of where this business has been heading since it's peak and the collapse of WCW and ECW? I think that's why 1998-2002 was interesting to me from a reading standpoint. Even as WCW was going in the tank, people were analyzing how a healthier company could come out of it. And in hindsight, some of that was pretty solid and could have worked with the right people running it. Same with "ways to improve the WWE in a Trip-McMahon dominated promotion". Been done. :/ Like I say, I think there's lots of good conversation out there. But it's at the point of say a lot sabermetric areas. Saying the BB's and OBP put runs on the board in the 80s was cutting edge, as were discussions on it. Saying it now... it's 25+ year old baseball knowledge. It's painful to read discussions on it now. Or discussions on bunting where it's down to the differance of 100th's of a run in value. Where there are good saber baseball discussions are on things like fielding where the entire field of researchers are still working on getting a better understand of it. Do we have that in wrestling? Understanding why the WWF and WCW were taking off in the 90s, and the different revenue streams they were tapping into, and the fan base they were drawing in, and the talent base that was working or not working, and the creative decisions that spurred growth... that was all cutting edge. We'd never had two national promotions in this country on that scale. Then as first one collapsed and then the other fell strongly, looking at the flip side of the coin. Now? Sorry if I rambling. John

Preach it. John

Today is the golden age of internet wrestling collecting. There is so much available, and so easily available because of the changes in media (dvd and downloads), that it's pretty ridiculous. Of internet wrestling "conversation", "writing" and "discussion"? It's hard pressed to say that. I don't think it's because of the writers. I think it's the current product versus the product of the late 90s or even early 00s. Not that the product was better or worse then versus now, but there was more of it, and it was a bit less stagnant. WWF & WCW compared to now just the WWE, which has evolved a lot less in the past four years than the WWF passed through from say 1998-2001. I wasn't a fan of ECW any more than I'm a fan of TNA, but the ECW conversation was more interesting because of the massively divergent opinions on it. Japan in the late 90s was declining, but that itself made for interesting discussion of a number of promotions. It's dead now. Perhaps the indy world has better conversation now, but the DVDVR guys and others were starting to write a lot about a variety of indy feds and wrestlers in the late 90s and early 00s. Not saying that period to tie myself to it. I'd shot my wad in 1996-97... probably through Carny 98, and was washed up by most of 1998-2002. But for reading, the second half of 1998 through 2002 was the period that was the most interesting, creative and challenging for me. Plus reporting online came of age in that period as Keller and Meltzer came online, and the "drop a dime" crowd of Scherer and Ryder slowly got exposed as shills. Is online reporting better or more interesting now than it was in the WCW Russo Era and the Death of WCW period? I suspect people's golden ages tie into when they got the most out of something. If it's collecting and watching matches, it flat out is now. If it's discussion... depends on the person. John

Agree with the hyperbole part, and even said that if Will said it, he wasn't being literal. Disagree on the semi-logic. Which sort of was my point on this comment: :/ John

This was #1: ANTICHRISTO- MEXICO'S ULTIMATE MONSTER HEEL! and other stuff I saw and heard this week Which would be August 14, 1996. The pre-DVDVR's started here: Psicosis wears a wig and other annoying Lucha Libre Conclusions and Questions: One man's veiwing marathon comes to an end.. That was about two months ealiers. Looking at what Glenn collected way back when, there were 5 of the pre-DVDVR's. John

I could see someone not being a fan of it, and still being a fan of pro wrestling. It would be a bit like saying that because Bahu liked FWM more than All Japan that he wasn't a fan of pro wrestling. There are a lot of different tastes in what folks like in wrestling. I don't think Memphis is for everyone anymore than All Japan 90s was for everyone. The "If you're not a fan of X, you're not a fan of pro wrestling" spot probably warrants a place on the Wrestling Mythbusters list. That's not a knock at Will, because I doubt he was being literal if he said it. John

Not sure where that one started. Memphis was rather praised back in the early-to-mid 80s for having strong angles and storylines, and for getting more out of less than just about any other promotion. It's television probably wasn't seen quite as much as some of the other promotions, and some of the wilder things are what tended to get into wider circulation. So things like Tommy & Eddie & The Trophy became famous, or Jerry being drunk. The wrestling style was written up as being a bit different from other places, but the same thing was said about most areas as they were being explained/defined. John

And to be a little clearer, I suspect he would have done it no later than his 1990 trip to Japan that got a big write up. He may have in write up of his 1987 trip. Don't recall if he talked about it in his 1984 trip. I'd point to those as places to start. John

I believe that Dave started talking about it while writing up being in the buildings in Japan, rather than watching it on TV. He likely was contrasting it with other live crowds he'd been in. I doubt anyone online talked about it in advance of Dave. John

That sounds like me talking about Backlund. John

People "inside" baseball, and those who protected it like reporters, thought Bill James didn't know dick about baseball because there was so much "inside" stuff that he could never know. In the end... those people had their heads up their asses. I remember Bischoff telling Keller to his face that Beach Bash '95 was a great card because they got a lot of great visuals for the PPV. Wade laughed at him, and even Eric backed down to the ridiculousness of his point. I've had Konnan tells us what a great main event there just was, when in reality it was incredibly horrid and just laid their with the fans, not even getting them worked up towards the heels as was intended. The fans came expecting one match, and when Konnan fed them an overbooked clusterfuck, they were annoyed and turned off at the *promotion* rather than at the heels as he hoped. Of course when this was pointed out to him, he changed his tune that the fans were marks, they could feed them anything and they'd be back at the next show because they were wrestling fans. It was one of those jaw dropping moments where you just shake your head at someone who lost their mind. Which is kind of funny because just a year or two before he crasped that while his own and Perro's and Cien Caras's matches weren't as "good" as the matches on the under card that he really liked, they were well booked to give the fans what they wanted, or to build to another match where the fans would get what they wanted. I had other similar experiances here, in Mexico and in Japan. My own observation is that wrestlers and people inside the business are as fucked up in their opinions as "fans". Sometimes they're just laughable. Sometimes they're insightful. Take them all with a grain of salt. John

GUYS TERRY FUNK SAID MASATO TANAKA WAS BETTER THAN ANY OF THE AJPW GUYS AND MIKE AWESOME AGREED SO WE HAVE A FACT Said it with a straight face to Meltzer and me. Granted, Dave did laugh at Terry when he said it. So there was a time when what Guys In The Business Said was taking with a big grain of salt. Anyway... Diet Pop is trolling again. john

I think Waltman's wacky heat was a pretty common point being discussed by 2001. You can find a reference to it in the 2001 RSP-W Awards, though not quite as "X-Pac Heat". Sean had strange heat going back before that. Sure, there were times where he was very over. But I seem to recall some annoyed heat during the feud with D-Lo. And his heat as CW champ in WCW took a massive amount of momentum out of the division that had been there in 1996 and even early 1997. Jericho picked things up a bit when Sean's long (for the CW title) reign ended, though it didn't seem like the division got healthy until Eddy won it and his feud with Rey. Sean's had strong heat at points in his career. But he's also had stretches of strong indifference, and also that negative heat. On the heat during Invasion, the WWF were the babyfaces. Waltman getting boed wasn't exactly the "plan". It seemed to be the fans who chose to root for WCW guys against him. John

It's funny... but I still prefer the Mania Shawn-Razor of ladder matches than have come since. I don't think it's a gimmick that has gotten better over the years with more "creativity" and "crazier shit". Stuff like the TLC's where just bigger clusterfucks, whereas the clusterfuck elements of the Mania match worked for what it was and hold ups to me. On Rude-Steamboat, I actually recall writing (faxing) into the PPV poll that I liked the match. I pretty sure that I was one of the people who voted Windham & Rhodes vs Austin & Zbysko as the best match on the show, but that SuperBrawl part wasn't the part of the fax that was published in the 3/9/92 issue. 90% of the readers felt Liger-Pillman was the best match on the card, so it's going to stick in the memory. It also got votes for MOTY, so again it's going to stand out. John

I assume the "WCCW Set" being mentioned is the DVDVR 80s set at some point down the road? If so, and if there's a lot of great Kevin that hasn't been circulating, then I look forward to it. Kevin looked shitty on Frank's WCCW sets, which included pretty much all of the big matches from mid-82 through... I want to say some point in 1984. Don't recall if he did 1985. Anyway, Kevin was consistently a trainwreck in the ring. Dave looked shitty as well. Kerry was passable in a "Good Sting" way - he'd catch you with some really nice stretches, and then run out of things to do, or get goofy, or get lost. I'd go: Kerry Kevin Dave Simply because Kevin could be so bad he was funny, whereas David's shitty work would be painful to watch. I don't think any of them could be confused with Tito Santana as a worker, and I'm not sure anyone thinks Tito was a "great" worker. A good, solid pro. John

http://www.prowrestlinghistory.com/superca...amite.html#2007 Dynamite!! 2007 December 31, 2007 in Osaka, Japan Kyocera Dome drawing 25,000 Shown live on TBS (14.7) Could be wrong.

I don't know if the number opposite Sakuraba was inflated. But the number listed on prowrestlinghistory.com was 25K, which isn't mind boggling giving Sak's drawing power over the years. Perhaps people try to put over the TV rating. Again, there were lots of strong ones over the years. How off the charts was Saku vs Funaki compared to other big TV ratings? John

I'm not completely sold on that one. Fujiwara wanted to *work*. That was his vision - worked "shoot" pro wrestling. It wasn't a unique vision to him or created by him, as others shared it when they split originally from New Japan. Funaki, Suzuki and Shamrock had a different vision. A hybrid of "wrestling" as real and frankly a martial arts competition of one thinks about it. It was a stretch at the time, and frankly moreso now looking back at it from what we know now, to call it "wrestling". It had elements and a base of wrestling. But it also had other non-wrestling elements in the base "art" such as striking and submissions. While those are comic book elements of "pro wrestling", they aren't really elements of wrestling and instead items out of other martial arts. Funaki, Suzuki and Shamrock went "real" (setting aside the matches that weren't). There's a gulf between that and Fujiwara, and clearly he preferred sticking with the pro wrestling side. The "two huge crowds" thing is always something I scratch my head at. The PWF dome show was widely seen as a total failure at the time with a heavily papered gate. I guess in hindsight the myth has built up over it. Sort of the reverse of the New Japan Dome shows that over time have been talking about as being inflated figures. The PWF show was flat out called inflated and papered at the time, similar to the SWS shows. The "25K" against Rickson... that's a "huge crowd"? Those goofy Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye shows drew more. Is there a real "huge crowd" that he truly was the one drawing it? I mean... Aikiyama has main evented some dome shows with bigger crowds. :/ John

I recall O'Neill and he was quite the nut. John

I'm not terribly interested in a WWF/WWE style HOF where I need to turn off my brain. John

Funaki didn't come along until 40 years after the war. Frankly he came along at a time when Native vs Native did more money than Native vs Evil Nasty Gaijin. Funaki vs Takada or Funaki vs Maeda in a Pancrase vs UWFi or Pancrase vs Rings match up would have outdrawn Gracie against any of those guys. Funaki's biggest "pro wrestling" matches, along with his biggest MMA/Pancrase matches, didn't really have anything to do with the old inferiority complex. John

To make it clear: #1 - Funaki isn't a Pro Wrestling Hall Of Famer to me #2 - I don't care whether he's an MMA Hall Of Famer People tend to get confused and think that Pancrase led to Pride. It didn't. UFC led to Pride. The path largely went through UWFi and UWFi wrestlers rather than Pancrase fighters. John

I always enjoy that Pancrase was out drawn by not only UWFi, but also Rings. From a "pro wrestling" standpoint, Pancrase wasn't a success. From an MMA standpoint, it was a success. To a degree. But in terms of impact: Takada vs Gracie > Pancrase The mention of Sakuraba is pretty funny. You'd think he was Funaki's protege in Pancrase rather than... well, probably best to ignore that for people who push Funaki. John

That's not going to help the divorce. John

The Inoki thing is intesting. Would it have opened up schools? Sure, if Inoki gave a shit about them. I don't think Inoki would have cared all that much. The difference is that the Gracies were running schools before UFC. It mattered to them. They wanted to push their "art". Inoki wanted to push himself more than his art, more than pro wrestling, more than New Japan. Would he have been bigger in Japan? Sure. He also would have instantly worked to protect himself so that he didn't lose. True MMA that we saw in 90s wouldn't have sprung up in Japan *around* Inoki simply because of the way he protected his spot. It would have had to spring up from and away from him: he launches it, but very quickly the more talented fighters bail because Inoki won't let them fight him. In the meanwhile, New Japan would have been paying people to dive for Inoki. And if anyone more talented than him shot on him and jumped to the opposition, Inoki would be toast. In terms of Charisma, Inoki was the right man for the moment in Japan. In terms of MMA talent and the willingness to lose with the spotlight going to other people, Inoki would have been the wrong man for the moment as soon as the business blossomed beyond his ability to complete have it controlled. Anyone who thinks he'd play Sakuraba and get his ass kicked repeatedly is hitting the bong. That isn't in Inoki. How long before we saw what happened in Japan in MMA: the natives getting their asses kicked, mob problems, other issues? Who knows. As far as the US... Ali was bigger than anything that was in the Martial Arts sporting world in the 90s or 00s. Bigger than Tyson, and Tyson was rather huge at his peak. But I'm not sure that Inoki submitting Ali in that match the way it was built to and played in the US would have meant a great deal. It wasn't built as MMA vs Boxing. It was built as Pro Wrestling vs Boxing, and other than a very limited number of even Pro Wrestling Fans in the US, no one took the thing seriously. They didn't even take it seriously enough to pay attention to it. It became a joke because of Inoki's tactics. I'm not sold that a skilled Inoki "shooting" on Ali, taking him down and submitting him in two minutes would have gotten lasting run in the US. Ali and boxing people/fans would have dimissed it - they're boxers, not wrestlers... and there are no chokeholds in boxing. An MMA "business" would have had to sprung up in that era to be any threat to boxing. Around Inoki? It wasn't going to happen. The 70s were a different era. Three networks, and local channels. Someone would have had to create MMA and then push it. Not impossible, but hard to see. All the issues that popped up in the 90s would have popped up in the 70s, and the forces against MMA would probably have been even stronger at that time since Boxing was stronger. Not impossible. But I think one needs to be careful projecting the mid-90s and the 00s back into the late 70s, and what UFC/Pride did into what would have happened back then if Inoki "beat" Ali. John