Dylan Waco

In fairness to Okada (I want that quote printed on a VOW t-shirt with attribution to me directly below it), no one has good matches in TNA

Was Okada a bad wrestler before NJPW gave him a chance and pushed him? Or was he just a guy who was there doing the job asked of him, which required much less and where doing more was not really an option? Okada has been called an obvious "Most Improved Award" Winner for 2012, and a no brainer. But did he really improve or was it just that he got put in a better position? Compare him to Rush who went from being a guy universally reviled as terrible, to a guy who is pretty much a consensus favorite among lucha fans the exact same year Okada won that award. Aside from the fact that Japanese wrestling (NJPW in particular) is covered more strongly and talked about more by Observer readers, what is the argument for Okada over Rush? There is an element to how we as fans view "improvement" that is entirely wedded to booking and presentation. An element to it that is stylistic. And then there are guys like Rush who suck and all of the sudden are great. But I would argue Rush is an exception and not the rule

I recently had someone tell me that there were people inside WWE who were afraid of booking Lesnar v. Taker because they were afraid Lesnar would shoot on Taker, creating a "shoot" end to the streak, and then go back to UFC. I think that is completely insane, but it's the sort of insane thing I could see old time workers believing.

Sydal was over huge in the WWE. The problem is he got injured several times and really likes weed. I also think London and Kendrick got over really well, much better than you would think given what the WWE usually does with tag teams. One guy who didn't really get over a ton in WWE, but improved immensely while there was Kid Kash

Actually this is an interesting discussion - what do we really mean by "improved?" Probably deserves it's own thread.

I cannot believe people really thought that highly of Cena v. Sandow. I actually thought it was pretty "eh" though the crowd was very hot for it

I have less than no interest in Dragon Gate and only watch what I watch because I like to give things a chance every now and again to make sure I'm not missing anything. Also I still love Don Fuji. Anyway, Bourne's sympathetic selling/bumping combo in 2008 made his offensive runs more interesting and dynamic. I thought there was a period that year where he was the best guy in wrestling. Ambrose I still love and wouldn't argue over really, though I loved Moxley on the indies unlike you (he was actually my favorite guy in indie wrestling at one point). Brodie Lee is just much more visible now than he was on the indies. I see zero argument that he's improved in any meaningful way as he was a great base then, very stiff then, very good at match layout then. Having said that the period of his evolution from a good to great worker was spent working obscure indies no one other than me watches so this is likely a perception issue. On Cesaro it's very possible he always had a run like last year in him, but I don't know of anyone who was calling him a top five guy in years past.

I think Rollins has benefited dramatically from being in the WWE, I prefer Zayn to Generico (the guy actually has very good facial expressions) and Evan Bourne - who was at one point arguably the best guy on Earth while in the WWE - to the Sydal days. Ambrose? In a weird way I actually preferred him as Moxley in the ring, though I love The Shield as an over all act. Too early to say with Neville/PAC, let alone Callihan. Brodie Lee/Luke Harper is an interesting one because I think he had gotten excellent right around the time he was leaving the indies, but a big chunk of that period was spent working random indies against local hometown heroes and old vets (Tatanka, Danny Doring, et.), so I'm not sure how much of what we see now is the WWE "training" and how much of it is a work that was already in progress.

Will Vince get a subpoena? Hard to imagine he won't.

I'm sure that was the original plan, but it feels like a lower rung match, would likely get very little time, and I'm not sure how they can do it without the title match on the show getting Goldberg/Lesnar-ed times ten thousand

They aren't going to shit on a Taker match at Mania. Probably not a Punk match either, though Punk v. HHH would likely be an exception to that

I think it's less bad now than it was when every match had to have your Kobashi spot (or equivalent) of guys just standing there taking turns chopping away at each other. There is still far too much of it, and I agree that a lot of the guys who bust it out regularly now have no clue how to incorporate it into a match, but it feels slightly less common and annoying than it used to be

I wonder if they go Reigns v. Ambrose and Rollins at Mania, or Reigns v. Ambrose? They won't do it, but if Bryan were to win EC and wrestle Sheamus is an obviously "down the card" Mania title match I wonder what the general reaction would be

I was absolutely certain you would hate that match, which may mean I am finally starting to figure you out. Probably not though

Yes, I am aware of your gimmick

I generally just consider you a boring troll, but there was a real point I was trying to illustrate, namely the fact that not all circumstances are created equal, and pointing to an obviously unique situation near the end of someones career as an indicator of someone's historic standing in a certain role strikes me as unfair at best. Or boring trolling at worst.

They likely can't do any better long term for a variety of reasons, several of which are beyond the scope of this thread

The WWE expects Cena to get boos at this point. In fact Cena actively caters to it. It's part of his brand and part of what draws people to arenas. Fans shitting on the established main eventers in favor of Bryan is quickly entering that territory as well, but that is a whole different beast

This show was a series of errors that compounded to make a giant clusterfuck. First Batista - the intended "big surprise" of the Rumble - was revealed early. I think this is being undersold significantly. By no means am I saying that the crowd would have responded precisely as the WWE wanted them to if Batista had been a surprise entrant/winner, but there is no way in hell the response would have been nearly as bad as it was. Then Bryan works a great match in the opener and looses clean to Wyatt. The opener is supposed to fire a crowd up, instead this cooled - if not killed - this one off. This was made even worse by the world title match, and especially the post-match where Bray kick started his feud with Cena, effectively indicating that Bryan was just a stepping stone for him and that he's already definitively won that feud. Then the Rumble, which I honestly thought was pretty bad. Unless you count Sheamus, there was no other "surprise" of note in the Rumble. This included no "feel good" vet like they have done in the past, unless you count Nash, which is really stretching the definition of "feel good." They decided to call up an NXT guy, and instead of Zayn - who likely would have gotten a very good reaction, and might have taken some of the "where the fuck is DB" non-heat the match suffered from down a peg - it is Rusev (who I like, but is not even close to the same thing). Then they decide to throw the comedy in the back third of the match which felt really forced, and almost seemed like a pathetic attempt to get the crowd chuckling before they took their fucking. The whole thing was a comedy of errors.

One thing that is key, is that the surprise of Batista returning being blown, compounded the problem dramatically

I was just thinking about this. I was just wondering if Bret's status in the eyes of many as an all time great worker will be effected by his awful match at Mania with Vince a few years ago. I don't remember ever seeing a high profile comeback match involving a WWE star that was so terrible. Replies to anticipated responses: - Yes Rock v. Cena wasn't very good, but at least Rock worked hard enough to get blown up and got the match over with the live crowd. - It wasn't just that his opponent was Vince, because people like Steve Austin, Hulk Hogan and even C.M. Punk (when Vince was older) had considerably better matches with him.

I think you can take back a bored crowd, but it is really hard to win back a really pissed off crowd. Of course the real interesting element to watch here that is different is that in the old days if people were pissed they either quit buying tickets or would walk out on shows that pissed them off. Now the booing the stars on behalf of Bryan thing has become almost as much a part of the show as booing Cena

Also worth noting that they are almost certainly breaking up the Rhodes Brothers now as well.

Now that is a bit excessive. The match itself was fine. A lot better than the Royal Rumble where Cena eliminated Ryback or when Alberto Del Rio won. It really isn't. Everyone in my house was calling the match boring and uninteresting long before the no-Bryan reveal.

Pittsburgh isn't even a "smark" town.