Marty

Exactly! Where is the hate? If it was just about respect, I wouldn't beg for blood. Hell, I thought Steamboat-Savage was a great angle that played out and paid off... but I wasn't expecting them to open up some gushers either. Flair-Funk is a case of them not living up to their reputations. Also, I want to elaborate on my star rating. If you gave the match ** or *** or even ****, I wouldn't object. Since I am not a star rating kind-of-guy, the **1/2 stars is more of a response to the OMG ***** classics vibe the match gets around the net. Since it only fulfilled half of what I was expecting, it got half the rating. Now, maybe I need to watch Tully vs. Magnum in the cage to compare the two "I Quit" matches together. I may even compare it to Austin-Hart since that was also a monumental moment that outshines this one. I watched the Flair/Funk Clash match last night, and I have to concur with both these viewpoints. Flair/Funk, compared with Magnum/Tully, is far less intense of a match. Ignore the blood in Magnum/Tully for a second. The brawling was far better in the cage match and the hatred displayed in it was far better and was what was needed in Flair/Funk. You can almost use the mic work as a representation of the intensity in the matches. In Magnum/Tully, both guys are talking to each other, as if to say they better quit now, or things will only get worse. I don't recall the same thing with Flair/Funk, aside from one moment Funk where he threatens some worse violence on Flair. Aside from the neck work Funk does, neither guy wrestles that much of a sophisticated match, either. Yeah, it's an I Quit match, but Flair doesn't seem to have too much in his strategy besides chopping the hell out of Funk. The chops are nice, but it still makes the match feel like a 2002 WWE babyface Flair match. As Tim said, the no-selling of the piledrivers bothered me as well, which is a shame, seeing as the one that kicked off the feud knocked Flair out silly, as well as how today, the piledriver is no longer the killer move it used to be. The match is, as Tim and Will said, okay, but there really was so much more they could've done to close the feud.

I was tempted to say HHH five times as a joke, but I'll be nice. 1. Bret Hart 2. Eddy Guerrero 3. Chris Benoit 4. The Rock 5. Ric Flair

I'm in.

I hope this doesn't happen. If it does, it's gonna be awfully weird seeing those two in the same group with Ric Flair.

What's sad is that they had a very watchable match the month before in Manchester, England at the UK PPV. Wasn't great or anything, but as far as HHH-Undertaker matches go, you're not gonna get any more fun of a match than their Insurrextion 2002 one, from what I've seen. I think it's better than their WrestleMania X-7 match.

That does it! Tomorrow, I'm buying Judgment Day 2004. No questions asked.

I like this tournament idea, actually. Double elimination works for me.

I'm going to try my best to look around at other boards I'm at. To be honest, this group is the absolute best I've had discussions with in relation to wrestling. Each poster I've seen is really good at what they do. I think Loss is great at constructing storylines in a way that makes them work. Sass is great at pointing out the general highs and lows of wrestling, particularly from a business sense. Teke is king of shoot interview coverage. Goodhelmet, from what I've read, understands wrestling an awful lot and can point what makes a match great. Sek, while he does challenge conventional wisdom an awful lot, does it better than anyone who's tried to do so, bringing up a great amount of supporting arguments to suit his claims. There's others I'm probably forgetting, but this is my general feeling of the group. Hats off to you guys. I do have a question for everyone here, regarding DVD reviews. We already know what we all want in relation to match reviews. But regarding a general DVD review, how much do you want? If I'm reviewing, say, the Ric Flair, Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels or Rob Van Dam DVDs, do you care if I throw in the comments of those four? Also, if the main programs are a biography of sorts (eg. Trish Stratus, The Rock, Steve Austin) should I bother covering the main program? Or would people just want match coverage? Do you care just about the matches, or do you want a review covering the DVD in general? And if you want the biography, extras, etc. covered, how do you want them reviewed? Feedback to these questions, as well as any suggestions you have that would make your reading enjoyable is very encouraged. Thanks! As I write this, I'm going to add my DVD collection to my signature as a handy reference. Feel free to let me know which discs you'd like reviewed, if you wish.

What ever you guys do, don't just give some PBP and slap a star rating to it. That is the laziest and worst kind of writing you can do when it comes to generating meaningful discussion. I don't intend to do play-by-play. I think it's boring, let alone its lack of ability to generate discussion. The big issue for me is getting a notepad handy, not to jot the moves of the match down, but to cover things that are happening and why they are happening. I have a bad memory otherwise.

Me too. I own roughly 30 WWE DVDs. Might as well think about doing something useful with them.

My opinion? No change. I think things are fine the way they are as the material that's generally here is enough to keep me coming to this forum. The problem is a lack of interest at the moment, as my head is turned towards other things. Having a dull current product normally doesn't help, but that hasn't stopped me from posting lots in the past. There's always wrestling's history we can talk about, which we've been doing anyways. Eventually, when I get motivated, I'll do another "Thoughts On The Following Matches" thread. Or someone else can feel free to do so. Wrestling just hasn't been an attention-grabbing priority at the moment, though.

I was watching SummerSlam 2000 the other day, which of course is arguably most famous for the three-way main event having a blown table spot involving Triple H and Kurt Angle (the one where HHH attempts a pedigree on the Spanish table on Angle, and the table collapses under itself). My question is: How much of Angle's injury and the stuff afterwards was a work? Obviously, the table collapsing wasn't planned, but was Angle legit hurt at all? And was the plan to take Angle out of the match anyway (for whatever bizarre reason) and have Stephanie coax Angle back into the match to further the angle? Just some random shit I'm curious about.

I'm going to get a lot of heat for saying this, but turning this into an angle, especially when one of the stars involved is already fired (yeah, I know, you're assuming he returns) is as disgusting as putting Raw Is Owen as one of the choices for best episode on the Raw Awards show two years ago. You're simply exploiting even more the private lives of four people, one who's not even involved in the wrestling business period and another who probably should've handled the situation better but probably should never have been fired by the WWE. The thing may turn out to be a success, but I think for all the wrong reasons. Wrestling may not exactly have the highest of morality levels, but I guess if I'm a promotor, I have my limits. Al's comment about Matt and Edge I agree with too.

Maniac, your avatar rules. Too bad no one else here probably gets it, except maybe treble or any Canadian lurking here. Anyways, regarding the HHH-Hogan comparison: Wasn't Hogan 10 years ago a guy who had a stranglehold grip on the company who was with, and who dictated the overall direction to suit his wants and needs? Sure, WCW made money in 1995, but maybe there's a subtle blasting of HHH that Jericho's making here...

Are they planning another three-disc Flair set? I hadn't heard that there was going to be one yet.

I was thinking about that earlier. Good point.

Silvervision's generally always accurate with the DVD covers. Odds are that's the one. I don't find it that bad. I think a black background would've been better though.

I can live without the Warriors' WWF stuff, but that old-school stuff on DVD is going to be fun!

You're way too nice. I agree with Nik. Hell, this might actually make me watch RAW on a regular basis again... presuming he stays off TV for awhile. It'll take more than HHH being gone to get me back into things again. There's no one compelling in the WWE to me at all right now. NO ONE. It's not just HHH filling the main event scene. The overall product of both brands stinks right now and has been for a while.

I think HTQ said this a while ago, but I believe Austin said of Jarrett, "This isn't UFC, but let me know you're in there with me!" I may have the quote wrong, but it was something along those lines.

I picked up for cheap a copy of WWE Insurrextion 2002. Nothing too notable about the card, except for the main event: Undertaker vs. HHH. This was the best match I had ever seen between these two, even better than their WrestleMania X-Seven encounter. Unlike the WM match, there was no lengthy ref bump to use as an excuse to brawl in the crowd, which was used to set up a cheap HHH highspot. Both guys were really game here, especially Undertaker, who was bumping like he was Jeff Hardy or someone like that. Early on in the match, he took a VERY NICE bump off of a HHH backdrop. HHH himself moved around a lot smoother than most of his matches at this time (this was, of course, during his brief face run). The top rope broke about midway through the match, causing Undertaker to slap on a chinlock for about 30 seconds to talk things over, which was about the only real wasted amount of time. Taker probably could've slapped on some sort of leglock instead, as he had attacked HHH's quads just before that sequence. Finish was clean, with HHH going over, and the heat was very good. I'd probably call it around *** and as I said, the best match these two have ever had together.