jdw

Add Jun Akiyama in 1992-93, especially considering the setting. Setting aside what happened after that, he was amazing comfortable for a rookie being tossed into All Japan main events out of the gate. John

I agree on the point that Wade glosses over the fact that Hennig bombed his ass off opposite Hogan. Going back to the original question: "My question is why wouldn't Curt Hennig be a good choice for even a transitional champion run in his first WWF stint?" Hard to tell what he means by "first WWF stint". Clearly not his time in the early 80s. 07/29/88 return 10/01/88 Mr. Perfect skits start airing One or the other of those is probably what he means as the start of the "first stint". The end is a problem 08/26/91 Injury (SummerSlam '91) 11/25/92 Return (Survivor Series '92) 10/29/93 Wanders Off (pre-Survivor Series '93) I think a lot of us in 1991 thought that the injury was a career ender. I can't what it was that Meltzer wrote at the time that made me think it, but it was the vibe I had. The coming back as an announcer in the Ventura role played into that, since Jesse never truly came back in a sustained way from his health issues. The seconding of Flair seemed to play into them looking at another way to get use out of him. Of course he did comeback opposite Flair, and then sent Flair out the door. But he never really was pushed massively in that run. I don't even recall the feud with Michaels being all that major. But what Wade misses is looking at the periods closely. The real run where he was healthy and pushed was: 10/01/88 - 08/26/91 03/27/88 Randy Savage 04/02/89 Hulk Hogan 04/01/90 Ultimate Warrior 01/19/91 Sgt. Slaughter 03/24/91 Hulk Hogan We can scratch Hennig taking Savage's place - Curt wasn't even in the fed when it started. The alternative to Savage was Ted, and that was the plan initially and got changed. But even that is moot. Savage transitioned directly into Hogan with the huge heal turn that made a shitload of money. There is no spot in there for Curt to get the belt from Savage and drop it to Hogan. Hogan transitioned directly into Warrior. WWF thinking was always pretty clear in that they were looking for a main event of the Hogan-Warrior and Hogan vs. Savage level, and Hogan vs. Warrior was it. There isn't a place for Curt in there. Which leaves Slaughter. Look... the thing bombed. But Vince did have a Big Idea to try to play off the war. It side stepped Hogan vs. Warrior II, got a transition in, and thought it would do huge business. It didn't. But it's kind of hard to picture a Big Idea with Hennig vs. Warrior at the Rumble and Hennig vs. Hogan at Mania that would have been... what? Just not Vince's style. So there just isn't any place in there for Hennig to even be programed as a transition. All of those title changes where long planned out. It wasn't an era where the WWF just threw shit at the wall. It's one of the reasons the the Savage-DiBiase switch is memorable - that type of stuff didn't happen a lot back then with the WWF Title. When Curt came back in 1992, Bret had the belt in Vince's desperate attempt to "do something". Yoko got the belt specifically to hand it over to Hogan a few minutes later, and then to be Hogan's "opponent" coming out of Mania. That really isn't a spot for Curt Hennig, is it? Yoko ended up getting the long run from KOR to Mania because various plans didn't come together, such as the plans for Hogan and the plans for the Lex Express. Again, there isn't a spot in there for Curt before he wandered off. John

Wanted to add to the point about "against certain opponents". You'll see that one thing Harley tends to add are "moves" to other opponents that they might not regularly do. Examples would be: * the "I Gutwrench You... No! You Gutwrench Me!" counter spot * simple things like the vertical suplex into the bodypress counter * slightly more complex things like the diving bodypress that Harley roles through to end up on top for the pin Look at the finish at Starcade '83. I'm not saying that Flair *never* successfully came off the top with a press in his career for a win. I'm sure he has... and it's possible that I've seen some in his matches against people other than Harley. But we all generally know what happens when Ric goes to the top, just like when Arn does... or when Barry comes off the top with the elbow. These guys typically don't hit things in general, or in Barry's case a very specific things off the top. In contrast, the Press is in a lot of Harley matches, specifically as the finish. He loves it from both positions. From the bottom to counter roll through to end up on top. From the top off the ropes to have the person catching him to counter roll through to pin him. It's a Harley spot. Starcade '83 played off it by have Kiniski splat Harley with the trip up, which prevented a roll through. But it very much was a regular item in Harley's moveset, either with him hitting it or him giving it to the opponent. And some of them, like Ric, didn't have it as part of their regular moveset in the way Harley was using it. Some, like Steamboat, did have it in there, in which case you had in Race vs. Steamer a pair of wrestler going to one of their favorite finishes. You see some of this when Race is in there with Baba where you see Baba hit some things that really aren't out of Baba's playbook... except you'll see them when he's in there against Race. This isn't uncomon. Flair "added" the gorilla press and back bodydrop to countless wrestlers who didn't regularly do them. Not exactly like the second is really a "move", it it is a Flair Spot that loads of people did against Ric. John

Maybe, but the big difference is that Angle is going to hit every signature move in one 15 minute match. There are extremes in movesets: * stuff someone hits in EVERY match * stuff someone might hit once in a blue moon, or even against a specific opponent I don't think of either as being a wrestler's moveset. I tend to think of it as what a wrestler regularly will whip out. Harely regularly whipped out all sorts of moves. For the *era*, it was a shitload in number. In his typical matches, even when not hitting all of them, it was a lot that he was willing to run through. Then you have the grey area. Bret didn't hit the tope suicida all the time in his WWF singles career. He tended to use it as a specialty move. But it came across as more regular than Taker's dive over the top. For Taker, that was a super special move he might role out once a year for a key photo op. Bret would role out the tope suicida in some big matches, and on occassion when he was feeling frisky. Taker's dive isn't something I would consider part of his moveset, though it is a move he knows and does on occassion. Bret's is borderline. If you watched a year of his in 1993-95 and saw it show up in say half his PPV matches and bigger, lengthier, more important Raw matches (though they typically weren't as important back then), I'd argue they were part of his moveset. PPV was the end all, be all in that era, and if someone goes to the well with a move in half their big matches in a year, then it's pretty clearly part of the rotation of moves they use. The thing about guys like Bob and Harley and Jumbo in the 70s is that while they had things like the swinging neckbreaker or double arm suplex that were in their moveset, they didn't bring them to the table in all their matches. 3-4 "big moves" in a match were a heck of a lot in the era. I've seen Backlund matches where he might just use 2-3 such as the Bob Driver, the Vertical Suplex and the Atomic Drop. Probably some where I've seen him use just one. John

Nah. He really does have a large moveset. It's a bit like Backlund or Jumbo at times where he doesn't try to cram all of it in like Bret's Five Moves of Doom. But watch enough of the 70s and 80s, and it's really quite wide for the era. Couple of other points... First one would be someone up above called Harley at 60s wrestler. I don't think we have much of anything of Harley's to show us what he typically worked like in the 60s. From what I've watched of him in the 70s and 80s, not a great deal of it comes across as 60s style. Perhaps the bumping might be out of the Stevens mold, though really some of the best of it was closer to the what Terry Funk was doing in "goofy bumping" - the spot down the ring steps, or the one where he'd control his bump to the floor by catching the ropes with his toe/foot before dropping down on his "head". That stuff really wasn't even major 70s style - they were a bit ahead of their time on it, and you'd see the later nuttier bumpers taking it to the next level. His matwork in the 70s and 80s clearly isn't high end 60s style. It's not something that one would confuse with say the 1969 Baba vs. Destroyer match. It's more just pedestrian stuff that you'd see in the 60s, 70s and 80s - basic shit. If he was against someone who wanted to work near escapes, they worked it. If not, it could plod on. But it doesn't strike me as 60s style. It would be interesting to see what he did in the AWA in tags in the 60s to see if there was anything different. His moveset clearly wasn't 60s. That's not to say that some or many of the moves didn't exist in the 60s. But I don't think anyone did them to the degree that Harley did. Yohe was around in the 60s, and has comment for years that the move towards more moves like a variety of suplexes seemed to come from the Funks. I don't have anything definative on nailing that down, but he did see the Funks out here as Dory was the champ and Terry often hit towns in advance of him, and what the Funks were up to stood out to him as "new". Take Baba as an example. We have a fair amount of his stuff from the 60s to see what he tossed out. We have a fair amount of his stuff in the 70s on into the 90s. We see a guy who was adding stuff to his moveset for *decades*. I could swear I've seen him use a DDT, which he sure as hell wasn't using in the 70s, let alone the 60s. There's not a lot of moves there in the 60s, though it's a boatload of fun to watch him roll out the bombs away. Over time as the 70s moved along, he added a crapload of stuff. It strikes me as a 70s movement. Race is right there. To me Race is part a 70s wrestler, part an 80s wrestler, and part a 90s wrestler. For better or worse. --------- Second one would be that Harley needed another person with a big moveset in there to have a good match. I'm not sold that's the case. As with others, I liked the Bundy match. I think it reflected well on both, but I'm not sure the "good" that Bundy brought to his end of the match were Moves~! I like the Race-Steamer from Japan, and it didn't strike me that Ricky's strength in it was hitting hot moves toe-to-toe with Harley. Not saying that he didn't hit some good stuff, but I actually think Ricky was better on defense eating shit in it and selling like Ricky Steamboat. --------- Third, the Angle comp is interesting. Hadn't seen it, but there are similarities. I wonder if Benoit isn't a better comp for Harley. John

So much for someone who thinks that barring the Porshe that Maggie would have been an all-time great worker actually being willing to point out what's good/great about Maggie in matches he thinks highly of. John

She does now. But how about in 2021 when she's 45 amd he's 52, shrivled up and not a wrestler anymore? And the company has some young 28 or 32 year old wanting to bang the Boss (assume Vince will have dropped dead by then). It's Pro Wrestling. She's a McMahon. Those are two things that bread insanity, delusions and trying to get whatever you want. John

And: My comment was in response to this: The point being that it wasn't "common knowledge" in the 80s that Maggie was a good wrestler. There were some hardcores that liked him. But he really didn't have strong support among them in 1983-86. I also copped to the polls being goofy, specifically with the mention to how Jumbo finished in them. But someone were to say: "I thought it was common knowledge that Jumbo was a great worker in the mid-to-late 80s." Any of us could properly point out that simply wasn't at the time among hardcores. As people know, I happen to think they were missing the boat on Jumbo. But it remains accurate to say they didn't think highly of him. Same goes for Maggie. The notion that Maggie would have turned into an all-time great worker but for the wreck is a pretty new one. John

I think that's a cop out. Here's the thing. I can point to this: http://www.otherarena.com/phpbb/viewtopic....403&start=0 And that of the 108 matches I've rambled on in that thread that 17 of them have Backlund in them, and another six or so matches are in the que to be watched and rambled on. There's a lot of rambling in there, but there are also a lot of examples of things Backlund does in the ring. Here's one from the 10/17/81 Bob Backlund vs Don Muraco draw in Philly: There are examples of good/smart work by both Don and Bob in it. In addition, I have fun with Bob firing up in the same way that Kobashi would be doing while winning all those WON Wrestler of the Year awards. You pointed to several matches. I indicated that I'd watched several of them and they didn't click at all with me as showing Maggie as a great worker. I also asked what exactly in those matches show Maggie as being a good-to-great worker. You passed on that. Cook is passing through the thread gave litterally a throwaway example. When I watch the I Quit match again, at least I have one thing to look for. You can't even get worked up to toss out a throwaway. I'll give you another example: Fan #1: "Taue was a great worker because he was in some of the greatest matches of all-time, like the 12/03/93 Kawada & Taue vs. Misawa & Kobashi Tag League match." Fan #2: "I've watched that match. I don't recall Taue's performance to be all that special. Misawa and Kobashi were great. Kawada was the God of Work that night, just on another plain from even two other great workers. But I don't recall Taue being all that great." Fan #1: "Well he was." Fan #2: "Okay... what great stuff did he do? I mean... he was pretty cool at the finish eating the elbow to bump out of the ring, and then eating the elbow sucida to bump onto the table. But that's pretty basic stuff - Johnny Ace ate spots like that all the time in All Japan. What was great about Taue in that match?" You're basical adding the following line: Fan #1: "What did he do that wasn't good?" WTF? I'm not the one claiming that Maggie was "good". That would be... you know... the people who think he's good (or who thought he'd be an all-time great but for the Porsche). I also didn't say he was a Shit Worker. If I said that, then it's perfectly warrant to ask me to explain why I think he's a shitty worker. But that's not what I said. I'm just saying that I never thought he was a "good" worker, even after watching some of the matches you cited. I'm at a loss why someone who things something is "Good" doesn't want to explain why. They didn't for me. They did for you. Why? Perhaps you can point out something that I didn't see. You've lowered any expectation I might have had on that one. I'm not exactly asking that the Gospel is spread. That people are coming to conclusions that Maggie is a good worker means... what? That the discussion is over, it can't be thought about, and people who don't get it can't ask what they're missing? In 1995-96 people thought Toyota was one of the 3-4 best workers in the world, and quite possibly the best. Depending on what day of the week it was, Meltzer thought it and the Gospel spread forth. I remember being in a rather large building in Japan, Team Toyota passed backstage, and an American photographer making her first trip to Japan asked, "Who's that?" "Minami Toyota - the best worker in the world." -Dave Meltzer I confess that when Kawada came down the hallway without a Team Kawada trailing in his path that I enjoyed throwing out the comment to the photographer with Dave still there next to us: "That's the best worker in the world, Linda." We're a decade removed from that. People are still watching Kawada and Toyota from that era and "coming to their own conclusions". Admittedly I'm pretty much all talked out about that era after writting a few thousand posts (literally) on it. But that doesn't mean that it isn't reasonable for people to still toss out questions on why one thinks Toyota was great or Kawada was great. You might not get an answer from *me*, because as I say I'm about as talked out on Kawada as anyone can be. That might change if I ever go back and re-watch all of 90s AJPW. But even if I don't jump in, I suspect there are a dozen or more people who would jump in and yammer about him, with examples. Same with Toyota if you find the right circle. I can't imagine that Maggie is talked out so soon after the release of the Mid-South set. If it is, that's not a great sign. I was more than a year into walking through the DVRVR matches and still into workers like Bossman and Bret to point out good things they were doing in an otherwise pretty useless 05/17/89 Hart Foundation vs Twin Towers match. And after all the bad performances I'd see on the set, I was more than willing to cite just how awful Akeem was in the match. I mean... sure, it's easy to knock his shuck & jive routine. But I went beyond that by pointing out examples of where he was asleep in the match while the others were trying to set up standard Tag-style Spots that needed his involvement. The 100th match of the set, home sweet home, meaningless worthless match... but it did actually give us some insight into all four wrestlers if you watched it close. Hell, I don't like Anvil and I had some positive things to say about how he kept up his end of the match just so it could contrast with Akeem really sucking Donkey balls. So if after a few months of the Mid-South set being out you can't work up any passion to point out what he did that was great in some matches that you thought were great... ? I tend to think that what I see is obvious as well. Then I see a match like the Briscos vs. Murdoch & Adonis finish high on up the list, and it reconfirms that not everything is obvious. I have no doubt over the years that I've pointed out hundreds of things to people that I thought were nakedly obvious, but they missed. Same goes in the other direction - many people have pointed out things that were obvious to them, but I missed. There are times that I've heard it so often over the years that I joke about it when talking about matches: "This is a match where very early on Yohe would call out that they're going long or to a draw." This strikes me as an utterly lazy approach. An example: I don't know what you, or anyone else on this board thinks of the Fans vs. MX match from Clash I. Taking a wild stab, I'd guess that some like it. I may have talked over the years with some people here on what I think about the match. If so, I'm drawing a blank. But when I sat down to write this: I never thought he was a good worker. I don't think I ever compared him to 1986 Jimmy Valiant and Paul Jones. Spent the weekend with my parents so they're perfectly fine. I haven't watched any 80's gay porn, so I can't comment on Maggie's look relative to that genre. It wasn't what went through my mind when watching Maggie in the 80s. I didn't even think of him in terms of 80s straight pornstar look, and I probably watch more of it in the 80s than anyone on the board. Again, I tend to think this is lazy. It's Meltzer or Keller level analysis - Wrestler X is a great worker because I happen to think he's a great worker, but don't bother with me trying to support it. John

Basically what you said. I look forward to Steph following in her father's footsteps, and Trip playing the Linda in the relationship - remaining a good friend and colleague, sticking together for the family and business, etc. John

I'm not entirely sure the depth of what he was exposed to of Kikuchi. Possibly the Budokans he went to. On tape, as I said, he would buy custom tapes from Lynch that focused on Big Matches, largely singles among the heavies but also tags among the top guys. Quite a bit less focused on the six-mans or TV tags (even something strong like Can-Ams vs. Kawada & Kikuchi). Some Kikuchi probably popped up for him, but not the stuff that made a mark. He pretty copped in the thread that he hadn't seen enough Kikuchi when the examples were made. Hell, Terry had about a half dozen or more "characters" he'd play when being goofy. Sometimes in the same match. We enjoy it all - I dig the shit out of it. But someone like Yohe who likes his World Champs to have some credibility, has always viewed Terry as nothing but a goofball. Thought it from before the time Terry was Champ when he worked out here, and thought it when he watched the Funks while living in San Antonio. It's really hard for me to get Yohe to see the all around "straight" worker that Terry is in the classico against Jumbo, simply because Yohe has the same type of issues with Terry than people have with Backlund. It's really hard to overcome. I know. I enjoy pointing out that a lot of what they despise is right there as elements of "great" workers of the era or other "top faces" of the era. And that in addition to what they despise, there's a *lot* of shit that he does really well... some of it better than "great workers" or other "top faces" of the era. I also know that I'll never be able to get some folks to open their eyes. Same thing back when we were praising Taue's work in 1995, or starting you point out that Toyota wasn't The Shit back in 1996-97. Some folks are locked in, and there's nothing you can do. My point of this is that I'm willing to look at Maggie in new light. Christ, that should be perfectly obvious. I've looked at guys like Hogan, Backlund and Kerry Von Erich in a new light from the era. I've looked at my Favorite Wrestling from back in the day in a different light: Ric Flair. That one has been going on for close to a decade as I think more about him. John

I think we're at an impasse because you don't seem to be willing to pop in those matches you pimped and walk through what Maggie was doing great in them. WTF? If you want me to give an example of why I think one of the original myths that Jumbo Was Lazy because he Didn't Fire Up In Big Matches was nosensical, it's here: 03/13/86 Jumbo Tsuruta vs. Animal Hamaguchi Is it long winded? Sure... really fucking long winded. But the people making that claim had a certain amount of credibility. There never was *any* chance that I could convince them to change their mind because they're utterly locked into it, to the point of making up new shit for fall back positions. I'm not playing to him. On the other hand, there were people who might (i) buy what Meltzer said because of his credibility, but are (ii) still open minded enough to listen to reasonable arguments and example. I'm playing to *them*, and to do so I need to give examples to make it clear on a lot of levels why that match is a perfect example of how far off base Meltzer is on his thinking about Jumbo from there era. Right down to Dave's own review of the match originally in the WON: Dave simply wasn't an observant enough viewer of matches to see or understand just how much that match was exactly as good as Jumbo wanted, because he clearly led the match from even before the opening bell. Dave will never admit that or see that. There are other things in wrestling that I might get him to see, and still can. But not that. And because Dave is Dave, there are some who will continue to buy it despite a walk through a match like that. But again... I'm not playing to him. In the Jumbo Was Lazy discussions, I was playing to people like Bix or Iron Chad. Bix had his own thoughts on Jumbo from watching him, and also read enough stuff that I wrote that he had the great fun of blowing Dave out of the water on WO Live on night about the Tag League that Dave was trying to use as his latest fall back. So... you're not wasting your breath. At some point I'll dig into the Mid South stuff in depth, and of course there will be all the Crockett stuff. Giving me examples to look for is helpful. John

I'm not asking. I'm offering you up as an example: if someone wanted to have Lawler walked through to help get him, you'd be able and willing to do it. At the time (late 90s), Frank was Big Match Centric in his collecting of All Japan. Also focused on the heavies. So stuff like Kobashi & Kikuchi vs. Akiyama & Kikuchi just wouldn't have been on his radar when having Lynch make him a custom. He *might* have gotten Kobashi & Kikuchi vs. the Can-Ams because it took the WON MOTY, be even that wouldn't interested him in ordering as much as Kobashi singles matches against Jumbo, Misawa, Kawada, Taue, Hansen, Doc, Gordy, the Patriot, Johnny Ace... etc. He'd get big World Tag Title matches and the big teams hooking up in the Tag League, but the six-mans weren't something he'd grab unless it was pointed to. When you were starting an AJPW collection from nothing back in those days, that's usually how it was. You might try to get a hook up for the *new* weekly TV, but by the late 90s the AJPW weekly TV wasn't very insightful on what Kikuchi was up to. No doubt Frank trolled for a lot of things, as do all of us. But Kikuchi was simply something he was ignorant on since he just hadn't watched as much 1990-93 Kikuchi as some of the rest of us did. When given even a list from *one* match, he instantly agreed that he underestimated Kikuchi's offense from the small amount he'd seen of him. There *are* times when giving examples work. Just saying Dandy is a Great Motherfucking Worker~! and pointing me to 2-3 matches can be hit and miss. There are times when you need to help a viewer with what they're looking for. I'm not entirely sure that Maggie is that way or not. I'd be surprised if he is, since he wasn't exactly a unconventional worker. But I may also be overlooking things he does well similar to Kerry Von Erich doing things well when "on" and being a decent enough babyface. I've always realized that. But... Dory Funk is awkward and mechanical as all shit, not to mention Akira Taue being even more awkward and mechnical. Terry Funk is goofy as all shit... far more goofy than Bob frankly. People are able to look past that. In the case of Dory, I think 90% of it is simply because people have been told Dory was GREAT~! so they just cut him slack for a lot of the shitty or shitty looking stuff he does. In the case of Terry, we just happen to love the goofy shit he does. Hell... this is a guy who was hiding under a car in a parking lot because he was "scared" of the insane Sabu. And we all found it funny as shit in a good way. But seriously, it was goofy fucked up shit. I look at Bob's "goofiness" these days and see things that are similar to everything from how Bruno worked up those same crowds to how Kenta Kobashi worked him All Japan crowd... even after he moved from being a young boy to being the #2 face in the company and the TC Champ. Wrestling is goofy. We all freaking know it. Christ... I suspect that a lot of us here that that a certain Lucha transvestite was a hell of a worker in the 90s, and how much goofier than that shit can you get? Goofy and awkward are part of the business. If people can't see past that to what Backlund did well, or even how extremely effective the "goofy" was in doing the most important thing in wrestling (connecting with the fans), than they really aren't the people I'm writing when talking about Backlund. And I suspect it's pretty obvious from what I write in discussing him and other wrestlers in the WWF 80s series that I'm more than willing to take shots at them. One of my favorite spots is to point out stuff that's "goofy" or "sucky" if Bob does it, but cool when someone else does it because they're a KEWL~! wrestler. John

That's the cliff notes, and again really doesn't tell me much. He could actually tell me what Lawler is doing well in the match with examples. I remember a discussion with Frank Jewett years ago where he tossed out one of the reasons he didn't like Kikuchi is that because he didn't have much offense. I did a double take, and not because of the typical "MOVES~!" crap that might be tossed at Frank. It was because Kikuchi in his prime did a variety of offensive stuff in the ring. Frank: "Kikuchi doesn't have much offense." jdw: "You're nuts. He had a lot of offense." And that gets Frank to see the point... how? It doesn't. Of course... there are times when I enjoy tossing "You're nuts" at Frank, but usually not when I actually want to convince him of anything. So I gave examples. It was a pretty decent list. From just one match that he hadn't seen: 01/24/93 Kobashi & Kikuchi vs. Akiyama & Ogawa I'm sure I could have overkilled it by popping in a few more matches, but that one had enough to show a wide amount of offense that wasn't just punching, stomping and kicking. Frank got the point. He still may not have liked Kikuchi, but at least he knew and acknowledge that Kikuchi had a pretty fair amount of offense. Giving examples of matches is just the first step. They may not connect, and they may never connect. But it's also possible that the person is still just not seeing something and more eye opening would help. "Inoki, Patera, Muraco and Adonis were great workers and they carried Bob in those matches. Plus, Bob was goofy in playing to the fans." To get past the first sentence, there are a few things one could do: #1 - point to specifics of what Bob did well in those matches #2 - point out that for such "great workers", Patera & Inoki & Muraco don't really have a ton of *great* matches with other workers, and when they do how often was it with someone thought of as a Great Worker or someone they "carried" like Bob #3 - do some comps of their matches with similar opponents and point to how Bob vs. Worker > Workers vs. Opponent, and how Bob also may have brough something out in that Opponent that the Worker didn't On the second sentence, one can: #4 - point to examples of other wrestlers being "goofy" in playing to the crowd in the era and/or setting, and how the crowd reacted #5 - point to examples of the fan reaction to faces who didn't play to the crowd quite as much In other words... there's a lot of shit one can do. I didn't like Baklund. Yohe use to think he was goofy. We both now think that he was a good worker, and did some things about as well as anyone in the era. Part of that was due to someone pointing out things Bob did well... specifically pointing them out. With Maggie... I haven't seen that yet. John

My thought would be to pitch to me why Maggie was great in what you are defining as his great performances. You don't have to buy it when I say that Bob Backlund was a good worker. But I think there are a good number of folks here who could tell you that I've written a shitload on why I think he's a good worker, with a ton of example and detail. They probably could point you to it even before I do. Again, you wouldn't have to buy it... and I'm sure plenty of people don't. That's fine. But I *have* made my points on it over and over again. When I say "when does it get good", it kind of is the court of the other person to sell me on what exactly Maggie is doing in there great. If I wanted to know why Bix thinks Lawler is great, what I might be missing... you don't think he could lay it out? John

Actually, there really wasn't an opinion among hardcores that Maggie was "great" in the 80s. I'd be surprised if he ever finished in the Top 10 in the annual WON Worker Polls (not the awards... the Worker Polls that Meltzer conducted). I'm not sure Maggie every even cracked the Top 20. Granted... those polls aren't perfect as can be seen how Jumbo rates. My point is more that the notion that Maggie was a great worker really isn't something that was out there at the time. Not like say a Bobby Eaton or a Ted DiBiase from the era. No doubt there are some individual fans who thought he was a good worker. But it didn't really make a dent. My vibe in reading the stuff was that he was thought of as being akin to Good Sting as a worker. From my watching him at the time before he crashed the car, he just didn't do much for me. When I started getting stuff later in the 80s and in the early 90s... he didn't do much for me. John

When does it get good? The cage match with Mr. Wrestling II against Reed and Neidhart, Haven't watched that one yet. Is Maggie great in it, or are the rest carrying it? I watched the two that occurred on one day off the DVDVR set, which seem to be getting praised as his best singles matches on the set. They really did nothing to convince me he was a "good" worker. Ted didn't blow me away in them either, though at least he was solid. Never has done a thing for me. That goes back to watching the original Best of Starcade set when it came out two decades ago. I don't recall anything about Maggie's performance that struck me as "great". I like Tully, and frankly think his World Wide match Garvin is more the epic of great wrestling. The next Flair vs. Maggie match that I think is good will be the first. Again, when does it get good. The Warrior was in a great match with Rick Rude. Quite possibly the best laid out WWF match of the 80s. Warriors performance in it is actually pretty good as it wasn't 100% Rude carrying it... and as someone who loaths the Warrior, I hate admitting he had a good/strong performance that helped make a great match. But I'd never say Warrior was a "good worker" even if he pulled one good performance in one great match out of his sorry ass. Perhaps there are really good performances from Maggie out there that I need to watch. What people have pointed to as good performances that I've watched don't strike me as such, and I really can't think of anything over the years that I've seen of his that I've thought was a revelation or made me think he was overall a good worker. The comments above that he'd blossom into one of the great workers of all-time if he hadn't wrapped the Porsche up struck me as kind of goofy. But perhaps at some point I'll get Will's Maggie set, and whatever supplimental stuff he might have found since then that he thinks helps make the case for Maggie The Good Worker. John

Charisma Solid but stupid. Solid and smart. Only in the South When does it get good? Loveable Villan Poster Boy For Pro Wrestling Bad Luck John

I would think so, though not doubt there is a shitload of wrestling discussion going on out there. Not even close. I think the online discussion/buzz peaked during the Monday Night Wars. Having both the WWF and WCW had two massive fan bases along with that middle ground that watched both and either liked it or was annoyed by it. Mix in ECW, which to me seemed to have a much bigger online buzz than ROH ever has had. I don't think discussion of US wrestling "current affairs" has been remotely close to that since there, whether it's the amount of it or the quality of it. There might be better discussion, and more of it, of "historical" stuff. But it's pretty much always a drop in the bucket relative to "current stuff". I'm willing to bet a lot of other people who were online in the late 90s and early 00s would agree. While some of us may have had our *own* peak of interesting, writing and reading after that overall peak, I think we'd agree that the amount of online wrestling interest and stuff was at a high in the late 90s and no later than 2000 before WCW and ECW went off the cliff. I'd have a tough time putting a finger on when puro discussion peaked. I think there was an increase in the number of people watching it overtime as it got easier to get ones hands on it (moving from tapes to the DVD & file sharing explosion). I'm not sure if the discussion improved with that mass of posters. You can take All Japan. More people probably "talked" online about matches from the 90s in the *00's*, but I'm not sure if there was a great deal of anything new being talked about it. New Japan discussion in the 00's had volume, but a lot of it was around the myopic stuff of Stuart... which really isn't discussion of much use. It's hard to say that's a "peak" other than someone running a house organ style sit for the promotion. That's not a "better back then" argument on my part. Discussion on 80s and 70s puroresu has peaked in this decade because (i) a large number of matches became available, (ii) a lot of people were watching them, and (iii) a lot of those people brought new viewpoints to those matches that were insightful relative to what people thought in the past... or what wasn't even pondered. John

People in the company have believed a lot of nonsensical stuff over the years. It's a delusional business. John

Link doesn't work. Try this one: I NEVER saw that coming!! By Oliver Newman Might want to get involved in the discussions here a bit rather than just stopping by to post a link to your AWW reports on a 9th different board. John

Bob Backlund. John

That's probably how HRC should have handled he vote on Iraq. John

John

Pretty embarassing. John