jdw

Great line. John

What we see of Dusty's face turn on the Dusty DVD is a hoot. Dusty in the studio with Gordon as they're watching and voice-overing the turn. Dusty is still pretty much cutting a heel promo throughout, just aiming it at Pak Song and Gary Hart... and he's great. John

Nah. People read too much into it. As Loss said, just short hand. There were/are too many other Scotts and Keiths in wrestling fandom to run the risk of insulting when pointing out that SKeith is an idiot. SKeith is nice, short, is unique for him, has a little bit of color when you pronunce it... fit well. "Mr. Schemer" is the one that's an insult, though it allegedly started out innocently enough. The person who came up with it said it was a typo... and he first used it in an e-mail with Dave. But when you look at the layout of a keyboard, it's hard to see how an M gets in there in the place of an R. Maybe a feudian typo, but it was pretty fitting given Dave. I though "Herb" was pretty funny, though I'm far too nice and respectful to use it. It was pretty funny in origin, and is pretty "Dave". John

I'd like to apologize to SKeith for blaming that review in him. SKeith is still an idiot, though. John

I agree that the "quality" of the match has long been overrated. But the angle remains gold, and a massive amount of the match is about the angle. It's hard to factor in the angles from the two big Kerry-Flair matches of 1982 from the quality of the matches. One almost could split them into ****1/2+ for the angles and something else for the match quality. I like the quality of August match a bit better, and the angle of the December match is hard to argue with given what comes after it. But this is SKeith, and he's an idiot. John

Eric deserves a lot of the credits, and a lot of the blame. The problem with WCW is that a lot of people fall into those categories and it's just about impossible to give a realistic "percentage" of credit and blame to each person. We can say positive and negative things about the signing of Hogan. He did twice run his course, after the Flair feud and after the Vader feud (which actually did very good PPV business despite the bad booking). But the reality is that they never would have "beaten" the WWF for that long run without him on top going heel with the nWo. No one else in that role would have done the same business. So Eric has to get some credit for that. We can say positive and negative things about the signing of Hall & Nash. On their own, they *didn't* launch WCW through the moon. On the other hand, without them there wouldn't have been the Hogan turn and the nWo storyline that anchored the company through most of their success. The signing did start a ball rolling that took off huge. Eric made that deal. We can give Ted some credit for greenlighting Nitro. But honestly we have to give Eric credit for throwing _everything_ into Nitro right from the start in attacking Raw. I don't think many hardcores, nor many people in either company, expected Nitro to challenge Raw. "Suicide" was the more common thought. Eric made it work. They had a concept of "Big Matches" that no doubt pissed away a lot of money on things like Rodman and Jay Leno. But they also had quite a few strong PPV buys (along with strong TV ratings) on things like Hogan-Savage renewed, Hogan-Piper renewed, Hogan-Sting, etc. Even the Leno match did a strong buy. Eric greenlit this stuff, and has to get some credit for it. Of course there's the other direction. Some of the things that Tom points to as laissez faire management eventually helped kill the company. The company would have shut down earlier without Eric. I doubt it would have lasted long in the Time Warner era continuing to lose money, and without the cash cow that was Nitro and Thunder programing. The old business model of 1992-93 and even 1994 and early 1995 wouldn't have lasted. A unit can "lose money" in a Time Warner corporation if someone else in the corp is making money off you. The "books" of the Braves might have shown a loss, but other elements of Time Warner (such as TBS) were raking in the cash because their contract for Braves programing vastly undervalued its true worth. So the big profits were over on someone else's books. Pro wrestling wasn't a big cash cow in programing in 1992 through early 1995. Nitro and then Thunder helped change that. Then the PPV's took off. I tend to think we vastly underrate the true "profit" to Time Warner-Turner in the 1996-2000 time frame, simply because all that's floated to Meltzer are the "books" of WCW. We can talk about contracts being moved over to Turner Entertainmaint. It's a drop in the bucket compared to the impact of Nitro and Thunder on those channels revenue streams... even if one wants to roll out the "wrestling's ad rates are lower than other stuff". I know that. But they are lower than the 5th re-run of America's Funniest Home Videos doing test patern ratings. John

I don't believe that was the case. When Vince was making his initial big push about the unfair competition from Ted and WCW, Dave began one of our calls with: "Guess who my new best friend is this week?" "Who?" "Vince." And then I got about three hours on what ended up being the lead in the coming issue. When I talked to Wade that week, Vince was also his new best friend. FWIW, I think they both did a good job of filtering through Vince's bullshit whereas other would have such a hardon over Vince calling them that they'd buy his spin. Anyway, that stretch was a bit unique in the time that I was talking to Dave on the level of love and info he was getting from Vince. Dave has usually been pretty clear that his relationship *from* Vince had tended toward Love-Hate, and pretty much Vince being friendly when it Vince thought he needed a "friend". See the Donahue show. You've read enough stuff of the 80s to see that Dave wasn't at all positive towards the WWF, and (if you were a WWF Fan, Wrestler or Employee/Owner) was clearly "rooting" for the enemy. His coverage of the various scandals that hit the WWF in 1991-92 was freaking brutal towards the WWF. In early 1991, Vince tried to get him fired from The National. Etc. Dave's always had sources in the WWF's front office, and also with several of their regional event promoters. And of course with lots of the wrestlers. Upper Management, as in the McMahon, Patterson, Ross, Steph, Trip, "Kevin Dunn" level? I doubt it ever was 90%, even when Ross was a pipeline for him. A lot of the "inside" information that Dave deals in reads straight from wrestlers & agents and in addition these days like mid-level folks on WWE Creative and/or Production. Even when Paul had his hands in the pie, he never really was what one would call "upper management". Even the local promoter who jumped from the WWF to WCW... he was at the level right below the ones mentioned in that first sentence. It's hard to completely crackdown. What you'll more often see is that key sources to information have something happen to them, either in leaving, or in losing a seat at the table, or thinking it wise to shut up for a while since eyes are watching them. So you might see a certain type of information leave the WON for a while, until someone Dave hooks up with someone at the right table within the promotion. John

In the case of Dave, people just talk to him. More times that you would think, people seek him out. Even Vince McMahon sought Dave out a number of times. Vince did the same with Wade as well. One may think it's strange, but after you see it for about the third time, it's almost natural. It's like moths to a light, and more often than one would think, Dave is the light and the people in the business are the moths flying to him. John

I didn't say you thought Backlund sucked. What I was saying is that you don't appreciate the greatness of Backlund as much as I do, while I don't appreciate the greatness of the Brothers as much as you do. I've seen the fans cream themselves for nothing at the Sportitorium for nothing as well. Simple he for inactivity doesn't mean the inactivity is great work. Juice has been a part of American Wrestling since before anyone currently active was born... well, maybe Abby if he's still working. But juice for juice's sake, kind of tossed out there because it's what Flair or Dusty does, even if it gets some form of heat/pop doesn't mean it's good work. I just don't see the bullshit at the start of the match as "epic". I see it as jerking off. Break down the epic nature of it and why it's the best bullshit comedy stalling of the 80s in the WWF. I mean... it had to be to carry an otherwise crap ass match to #6 for you. *snip example of another match* Again, break down why *this* match was great, warranting #6 among WWF matches in the 80s. I really don't care if someone else in another fed did it better. Bored the fuck out of me. Did it work for the crowd? Sure. But what match in the 80s worked the most for it's crowd? Hogan vs Andre at Mania III. It draw the fans in. Gave them the handful of spots they wanted. Gave them the finish they wanted, but weren't at all sure would come. I'm guessing that matches was #101 on the DVDVR List since it didn't make the cut. Setting that aside... I don't mind good comedy in wrestling. I've pretty consistently pointed to what I thought was good stooging and theatrical crap in the 120+ matches that I've talked about, and when I've thought it was weak. That we don't like bullshit comedy to the same degree means... what? You recommend the match highly was one of the elite WWF matches of the era. I think it's dog shit. People can watch it and make up their own minds. John

Ted vs Savage in a cage got great heat in MSG, and entertained *more* people "who revisited it as part of a stupid internet poll" than the Brothers vs. Rockers: 21. 06/25/88 Randy Savage vs Ted DiBiase 34. 10/10/89 Fabulous Rougeau Bros vs Rockers Yet you disagreed with those people rather strongly on your own ballot: 5. 10/10/89 Fabulous Rougeau Bros vs Rockers 54. 06/25/88 Randy Savage vs Ted DiBiase I disagree with the people who think the Brothers vs Rockers was a good match. We both disagree with how a lot of people looked at various matches on that set. I'm not sure what you mean by "a few notches". The balance of the match is as bad as the other match between the teams, which you had down at #60. If that opening shitty six minutes of the match is the difference between the #5 match on that set and the #60 match on the set, I'm pretty amazed. As far as "too narrow", that's a wonderful cliche to toss at folks who don't agree with your opinions. I'm too narrow to appreciate the greatness of the shitty opening of that match as much as you do. Your too narrow to appreciate the greatness of Bob's goofy, awkward shitty wrestling as much as I do. It's a circular argument that goes no where. John

Considering how bad those teams were going 20+, that could be an exceptionally bad match to watch if it existed on tape. John

That's entirely possible. I'm just not sure that how he worked as "Handsome Harley" in the 60s is terribly relevant to how he worked in the 70s and 80s. It's a bit like Dick Beyers vs The Destroyer. It would be interesting to see what Beyers retained when he went under the mask, but he also certainly became a different wrestler when he turned masked heel. Or Mean Mark vs Taker. John

Again, I don't see Harley as a struter and preener in his NWA Champ Era. Perhaps he did as the "King" because that's what the WWF wanted him to do. I also think his stooging and bitching was far more toned down from say Rogers, Terry and Flair. Harley tended to show a lot of ass through bumping and pretty theatrical selling. Champs were "begging off" all the way back to Thesz. Rogers and Flair are super theatrical about it ("NOOOOOOOOOOOOO~!!!!!!!!!!!"). Harley's begging off was closer to what you might see out of a heeling Lou or Brisco. A bit more theatrical, but if Flair and Rogers are 10, Harley would be down at about 3 on the begging off scale. I think one reason that Harley attracted a lot of fans in the late 90s and early 00s is that he combined: * making faces look good like Flair (via bumping, selling and stooging); but * didn't bitch out quite as fully as Flair; while * having the ability to look like a machine on offense; in contrast to * Flair's offense largely there to set up the face turning it back in Ric's direction I think the Pro Harley Camp grew out of people being tired of Flair, Flair's style of work, and Watching More Flair. They liked a champ who made the opponents look good, but were tired of it being almost the only substance of Flair's matches. Enter an increased amount of Harley becoming avaliable. Here's a world class bumper who could make faces look great while also looking great when he was on top. Hence the people looking for something different finding Harley refreshing. Some of the old DVDVR's have Dean's review of some of those matches as they were becoming available. His Harley vs. Jumbo review is a blast, and probably does a good job of capturing what a number of people where thinking at the time. Myself, currently? I'd pretty much rather watch most any Harley match that I haven't seen that a Flair match that I haven't seen. They're both of the "I've Got Stuff To Do" school where the sum of the parts don't always add up to a greater match when you think of it (but sure do if you're punching numbers into a star ratings calculator). Ric "pushed the action" a bit more, but I confess that I find his "stuff" a lot less interesting these days than Harley's. John

Snowden is Evil Clown over at DVDVR, or at least was back when the WWF 80s dicussions were going on. He was talking wrestling at the time. Bix probably could say if he's still there or elsewhere. Sanchez was on the DVDVR for a stretch after the Cru. Don't recall seeing him in ages. Ganc is still Ganc. Old School John is still around, I think on the DVDVR Boards and probably elsewhere. I think other than Sanchez, none of them ever left wrestling message board permanently. John

Lou pretty much bitched, stooged, cheap shotted and roughhoused his was through a one hour draw against Gagne in the early 50s, which gave a pretty good indication of how he worked as NWA Champ opposite an Ultra Babyface. The "NWA Champion Templete" already existed with Champion #2. Did he strut and preen? Not really. But then again, I wouldn't associate "strutting and preening" with Harley as much as I would with Buddy Rogers and Ric Flair. Harley tended to have other ways to show ass and stooge. Harley was a clearer, more theatrical heel than Dory and Jack... but both of those guys heeled when needed as champs. Jack was a good heel, frankly. Terry was even more over the top than Harley. I would say that Harley was *less* over the top than Buddy. John

Totally agree with all of that. John

Hell, I still talk about Meltzer and I haven't been friends with him since 1999. I still talk about Scherer, and haven't had any interaction with him in what... seven or eight years? I'm over in the Keller thread talking about Wade, and I haven't talked to him in length in probably seven years or so. The names Mike Lorefice, Mike Oles, James Phillips and Keith Watanabe came up in a PM discussion I was having with someone earlier in the week as a longtime online person and I were talking about the old days. I'll probably be talking about all of them in ten years, along with Frank. That's just me. I have a decent memory. Hell, I'll probably be talking about you in a decade as well. Pretty much any time I see your name pop up on boards I go to, funny things like you smacking Frank for needing to get laid pop into my mind, or a rather humorous e-mail discussion you and Scherer were having with a former tOA poster that got forwarded to me pops into the head. Some things tend stick in the head. Well, at least mine. Frank and I hadn't been friends for quite a while before that last thread. I think that just about anyone reading the various threads in that forum across 2007 and early 2008 could pretty clearly see that we didn't like each other at all. That forum simply offered us a chance to take shots at each other and contain it to one section of the boards which most people tend to ignore. Far better than stalking each other across other parts of the board to take shots. The last thread was simply his blow off. Or so I assume. He wandered off for a while earlier and returned. This looks more permanent, which again is perfectly fine with me. All that said, I do enjoy reading his writing on wrestling, even the stuff that I don't agree with. If he shows up somewhere else and starts writing about wrestling publically, I'll read it. You've read above other saying that while they might think he's a prick, they still find his wrestling writing interesting. Count me in that group. I'm also not going to ignore the countless things he's written in the past about wrestling that have impacted how I think about wrestling. That's similar to Meltzer. John

I'm not sure where you think I'm protesting too much. I'm not singing the blues over him splitting. If he shows up somewhere else to post about Mid South, Memphis and Portland or other wrestling, I certainly would *read* it if someone pointed me to it. Doesn't mean that I want to *talk* to him about those territories, or get in any threads where he's writing about them. I don't. To the best of my memory (which would be spot on here), the friendship wasn't broken up over "online posts about politics". But nice try, Jim. John

Both the 1977 and 1978 Baba & Jumbo vs. Funks matches are fantastic. I don't recall being blow away by the 1980 version. John

Let's hope All Japan is several years off so that Dan can roll out more of the TV rather than just what made Classics. John

Not that I'm aware of unless he's found a new place to talk about it. Didn't write a lot in 2007 releative to the past, certainly not in the fashion he had. Mid South, Memphis and Portland would have been interesting things to read his thoughts on. John

I do recall some praise he got within the first year of his time in the WWF. I don't recall if Frank talked about the Dupree series. More likely the Lesnar series. Sticks in my head more in the sense that it was counter to the Lesner Love that some people had, and instead pointing out some positive things that Cena was doing. It was before he got into the feud with Eddy. John

Are we arguing that headrop at beginning of match while ignored long term contributes to vertigo making the crossbody more difficult? I wasn't really arguing, as is probably clear from my lack of serious participation in the thread. Simply asking a question. Going back to what I wrote for some context: We aren't talking about Harley Race throwing out a piledriver in a match and it not leading to a finish. We are talking about Race piledriving people on the floor in meaningless undercard matches and forcing the guy taking the move to no-sell it. Those things are pretty different, and it is as bad as IWA-MS rookies throwing burning hammers in openers. How often does Harley do this spot? How often is it no sold rather than slow sold? John Actually the first one is actually the key one - is this a regular Harley spot he was busting out all the time? Or once a year? Or an element of a specific match going around the horn (feud with Tito, Texas Death Matches with Hogan, etc)? The second one goes more to how it's done. Piledriving Backlund on the floor, having Bob juice, and having it take Bob two minutes to get back in the ring is Slow Selling rather than No Selling. Not that Race did that to Bob. But Bob had other spots where he's eat something and take two minutes to get back in, with the heel breaking the count or going back out to take some shots. Race piledriving someone outside the ring and in 20 seconds they back in... yeah, that forcing someone to make their own save. Not entirely no sell since I doubt the person popped up like Hawk, but forcing them to sell pretty weak. John