Dylan Waco

That is some Danny Hodge style shit.

On paper I really wish Blackwell over Hansen was an end game. Blackwell was actually Hansen's best drawing opponent, though that doesn't mean a ton by this point in the AWA. But another part of me thinks the physical decline of Blackwell - which was obvious by that point - meant there was no way Blackwell was really going to get the title.

No doubt Zhukov v. BOck suffers horribly from placement. Couldn't possibly have a worse slot on any disc really. Martel v. Debbie was a KrisZ personal. To be honest I was really iffy about it going onto the set, but so far in working my ballot (I'm insane an start from the bottom) i haven't placed it yet and I've got a bottom twenty set. I could see someone completely hating it, because it's basically Finlay v. Lorenzo with women involved, but I enjoy it anyhow. Also I LOVE that Battle of The Bay six-man. No clue where I will have it, but I see it as a top ten contender

Thanks Johnny. I thought Stevie was a really honest guest. He could have just put everyone over or played politics and I wouldn't have blamed him. Instead he was extremely honest about everything without burying guys or being negative.

That Rockers v. Buddy/Doug match is my number one. I really have grown to love that Blackwell v. Hansen match, but I thought the Hennig v. Hansen match from this disc was better and that is my easy number two. After two my ballot is still pretty wide open.

It's a brief show for us. Fifty minutes. We cover a lot of stuff in that time, including Stevie's philosophy on wrestling/what makes a good match, some ECW stuff, some WWE stuff, some stuff on WCW and TNA, his current run with Extreme Rising, et.

You jest but I like both of those matches a lot.

The top two matches are on the dock here

Please tell me no one is going to defend that Raw. I was chatting with several people during the show - including a lot of people who have been much more favorable to me on the Mania build - and the consensus was that it was an unbelievably bad show. I guess the Triple Threat was better than expected, but my soul had been crushed by that point. I honestly can't imagine anyone thinking that show presented any sort of interesting build for Mania or even anything interesting to make someone keep watching. I can't believe I made it through the whole show and it was a total waste considering how much I have to watch.

Premiering in the ECW Arena on April 20th. Announced as of today. Really excited about this.

My buddy Tom Holzerman has done the A1W/TWB 100 for the last several years and I thought there might be some people here interested in submitting ballots. It's deliberately designed to cast a wide net and include people with all sorts of tastes in wrestling. I have fun with it every year. Here is a link that explains how the things work. If anyone has any questions PM me http://wallsofjerichoholic.blogspot.com/20...-call.html#more

There is a guy putting up all the SAW shows as they happen this year and in the past that has been a really fun show week-to-week. I watch Rampage regularly, but it's probably not for everyone

El Boricua is the best poster on this board

How about Sting as John Olerud?

I don't want this to get political as a tenet of this board is that it is Pro Wrestling Only, but I would strongly recommend Kevin Carson's Studies in Mutualist Political Economy. For something less academic the Charles Johnson/Gary Chartier edited Markets Not Capitalism is a very good book. I also enjoyed The Pirate Organization which is new-ish and easy to consume in a single sitting if you are so inclined. Any other talk of this sort will be reserved for PM or off board conversation.

Maybe so, but I don't think Jerry's position is clear at all and I'm not entirely sure he understand the position of others. Also he can't claim to have "bowed out" when he's taking subtle shots at people in his last post. When did he take a shot at S.L.L.? I didn't say he did. You however did claim that Jerry had "bowed out." This is not bowing out: "We've seen that in general the majority of posters on this board put a disproportionate amount of weight and significance on "the product". My understanding of the world, of business, of media, and of the public is that it just doesn't work like that. I'll point you back to the four books I mentioned which each in different ways look at cultural phenomena." That's harping on the point about "the product" still. I'm not looking to take shots at Jerry who I like, but when I read that my take away is that he is relying too much on Gladwell, Taleb, et. and that he still doesn't understand how some of us view "the product" as a catch all term for a lot more than just bell-to-bell action and promos. I could recommend books to, but I generally reserve my Good Will Hunting gimmick for real life, or even less important debates on facebook.

Maybe so, but I don't think Jerry's position is clear at all and I'm not entirely sure he understand the position of others. Also he can't claim to have "bowed out" when he's taking subtle shots at people in his last post.

You should read more than Gladwell, Taleb, et. Not saying you haven't and I liked Tipping Point and love Black Swan, but if you are going to go around criticizing those of us who focus on "product" at the expense of other things (allegedly), I wouldn't hang my hat on those four books. There is a way of viewing markets and having a basic understanding of how they work that I think is easy to lose in all the pop psychology and cultural analysis that existed in those books. Taleb has said that himself though now that I'm wanting to use the quote I can't find it. I'm still not entirely sure you even know what some of us mean when we talking about "the product."

Why? If we apply your logic the area of the country he worked in was hardly massive. Was it more than half the country? Well no. A third of the country? No. A quarter? No. At every point in history there has been an someone who was the biggest drawing card in wrestling. Sometimes those people worked relatively small geographical areas, sometimes they were true international stars. JYD may not have been that person but he was in the running. Saying he was possibly the biggest draw in the world at his peak isn't hyperbole, it's fact.

Name a list of people who drew on or at the level of JYD during his peak, a peak which was almost entirely pre-national expansion. Now name the country JYD lived in. Now name the planet he performed on. In the era, for his time, JYD was one of the biggest draws in the world.

Who isn't acknowledging that his time in the limelight was temporary? Where is that occurring in this thread? Also "meant to be a draw?" I think you mean "was a draw, to the point of arguably being the biggest draw in the States and the world at one point." I'm not terribly interested in arguing over the term fad, I would just note that it is almost always used as a dismissive term in the United States. "It was just a fad" is the standard use of the term, not "that was a really impressive fad, even if it burned out quick." Of course in wrestling four years isn't quick.

I don't think Jake would have been any better than Rude. Also you are dead on about the fans being pissed about the way Flair left and not being able to cheer Luger. As a kid at the time it was obvious that the fans wanted Luger as a lead face.

I've read what you said a few times and don't understand the point. To me it just comes across as the opposite of what you are suggesting "the product" people are saying. I.E. "I don't want to believe it's the product, so it's not the product."

The problem with this is that I don't think anyone in this thread is saying that good booking/good matches will yield good results or vice versa. That's an assumption you have that you are projecting onto those who are arguing that the product was the source of Watts failings.

Define "quality."