Dylan Waco

Yeah I like AJ a lot, but Arn is a top fifty all time in ring performer.

He thinks the Harris Brothers and Disco Inferno should have been Superstars and are the most misused talents in wrestling history.

The best part of the book is when he rambles about not being a racist and then talks about his best friends the Harris Brothers

Also should be noted that Rockin Robin who is Jake's half sister claims Grizzly molested her when she was a kid and supposedly told Howard Brody that the family thinks Grizzly was involved in the murder Jake talks about of another family member (sister?) on both Beyond the Mat and his DVD.

Best angle on WWE tv since Mayweather jumped the barricade and even that wasn't half this good. So much good shit from the initial shot of Tarver as Terrorist in the crowd, to Heath Slater actually looking vicious, to Darren Young having to deadlift the "out of it Cena" to Bryan choking out Roberts with his tie and channelling his inner-89 Funk with the "you aren't better than me shit," to Justin fuckin Gabriel of all people looking like a real badass, to Lawler getting his ass kicked and the table turned over on him, to Cena getting up and everything thinking he was going to make a comeback and then bam Tarver drops him with one punch, to the post brawl scene with the whole area wrecked and looking like a bomb went off. Just a great and awesome angle.

I'm sure Jerome knows this already but there was a Shane v. Pillman match from WCW Sat Night in late 92 at the front end of the Blondes v. Douglas/Steamer feud. Match is excellent and far better than any tag match out of the feud. Shane also had a very good match with Austin from the same period.

Family leaves town on Friday. Maybe I'll throw something up on Cageside Saturday if I feel inspired

That Rude v. Steamer match is more than watchable John. It's a legit great match, IMO the best of Steamboat's career.

If it's the guy I'm thinking of he was banned from Classics after a week or so for trolling the board vis a vis Cornette/Russo. Totally unrelated subject, but does anyone know where I can get a good listing of Puerto Rico shows with the gates going back into the early 80's (or earlier for that matter?).

It means Dave is an Angle fanboy. Angle has not just NOT been in a draw in TNA. He has traded at WELL BELOW his name value as the companies "big star."

and that is why the WON HoF is a joke. There are hundreds of wrestlers as qualified - or more qualified - than Angle who will never see the Hall.

Murdoch was considerably better than Slater. I've soured on Murdoch a lot over the last few years in part because I think North/South was a really overrated team but also because I think Murdoch had a tendency to try and cram all of his shit into matches even at the expense of making sense/following the flow of the match. But Murdoch was almost always "fun" in the ring and when he was on his game he was an indisputably great talent. He's also one of the only guys who consistently got good shit out of Inoki so that should count for something. Slater was a poor man's Terry Funk. If you are going to pick someone to rip off that's not a bad choice but I don't think Slater was in the same league as Murdoch. Taylor v. Dibiase is an interesting comp. I'm not sure how mid-80's Taylor holds up as I haven't watched much of it in years. Dibiase's best stuff from Mid-South is awesome, but those that put the set together suggested that Dibiase wasn't consistent at all and watching his WWF run that isn't something anyone should find shocking. I'm going to go with Dibiase because I think he worked a tighter style, but I could pretty easily be convinced otherwise. Neither of these guys is someone I think that highly of anymore. Kroffat is a lot better than DK. Better tag wrestler and better singles guy actually. I think Valentine smokes Muraco. I've seen a lot of bad Muraco from a period when he was supposedly a great wrestler. There is bad Valentine but it's much less common than bad Muraco. I also think Valentine's best work outshines Muraco. Valentine was a hard hitting motherfucker with a few nice theatrical bumps and not a whole lot else but he really got the most of that at his peak and was excellent. Post-prime I really like the Garvin matches as well.

Yeah Christian was over huge at that point and the inclusion of Jericho in that feud totally cut his balls off and made him seem like an afterthought.

Meltzer liking Dibiase/Hansen isn't surprising, but in this day and age I think when most people read about a tag team or wrestler being overrated they aren't assuming that the reference is to 25 year old opinions of Meltzer but rather the consensus of the general IWC/smark/hardcore fan universe. And Hansen/Dibiase is a team that I don't EVER remember being talked up in those circles and I've been around them for over fifteen years.

I actually wasn't responding to you John though I could see how you would read it that way. Was really speaking to Jerome's comments on Sano/Tamura. Steamboat just seemed like an obvious example because there are people out there who will claim Steamboat was worse than wrestler X because he never worked heel.

Versatility can be overrated which is why I always find the "Steamboat was never heel" talking point to be weak. Steamboat was never a heel because he was great babyface and there was no cause for him to be heel. Tamura was a great shootstyle worker to be sure and being the best at one style is a huge feather in anyone's cap. Having said that I don't think Tamura was better than Han and Tim's comps are true. Sano was a great shootstyle wrestler, after having already been a great junior wrestler. Being an arguably top ten guy in two different styles strikes me as being comparable to being a top three all time guy of a particular style. Though I can definitely see the case for Tamura over Sano

Turning Austin heel in Texas was a bad start to begin with.

Sting and Kerry is an interesting one. In the past I've panned Kerry a lot but I'm willing to give him another chance. I think the Texas Set is going to make this comparison more interesting. I will say that I think the Flair as common opponent standard is a not a terribly good one because a) Sting never meshed terribly well for whatever reason and Of there two most famous matches one was from a period when no one would argue that Sting was a good worker (88) and the other was not long after Sting had come back from a major injury (GAB 90). I"ve grown to like Sting a lot more over time and think that he was a big part of what made those Vader matches classics (of the eight or so matches I've seen between those guys I never saw anything less than "very good" and I think Sting is actually the better wrestler in at least a couple of them). He was good for longer than we give him credit for and had quality matches up until the very end of the 90's. He was a really explosive athlete with a multitude of fun spots but not really predisposed to working spotfest and in fact could sell very well. Foley matches hold up well, he was a very good opponent for Regal. I don't know I just think there is more than meets the eye. I like Sano better than Tamura but only because Sano was awesome at more than one style. Honestly I think Steamboat is better than Bret by a very comfortable margin. Much better tag wrestler, sold better, bumped just as well, offense of the same caliber, better good matches and one of the few guys that can match Bret in depth of opponents. His brief run last year is sort ofa feather in his cap because you get the feeling he could start workign full time again and would still be a top thirty guy in the World. Haven't seen enough prime El Dandy

Does anyone really think Ted was a better worker than Arn anymore? Personally I think the only person on that list he was a better worker than was Orndorff. And consistency strikes me as an odd thing to cite as Dibiase strong point. I think Ted is probably a better HoF candidate than anyone on that list (other than Jimmy Hart) but I don't think I agree with anything else Dave says there at all.

I used to think Cornette would be the best wrestling book ever (and in some respects the Midnights book is the best pro wrestling documentary history I've ever seen though that's obviously not what I mean) and I'm sure it would have the best stories (although I would venture to guess Dutch Mantell's book has some great stories), but I have admit Ross is probably the single guy most likely to do an insightful book even with his penchant for the needlessly vague.

Edge is terrible. There aren't ten guys on the planet worse than him. He's always been overrated as a heel because he was with Lita and Vickie forever and they were both heat magnets. As a face he hasn't been since his initial run v. Angle in 02. To make matters worse the WWE writers seem to amp up his worse traits and the god awful spear as a dreaded death move is unbelievably stupid. Of all the people in wrestling he's the one I wish would retire the most

Last night at the ppv he was really at his douchiest as far as in ring stuff goes, losing "clean" to Sheamus but only after kicking out of a lead pipe shot to the head and then working a long offensive babyface comeback for five plus minutes.

No one is arguing that Finlay has had a better overall career - just that he's a better in ring performer. For a less contentious example, I can't imagine it would be considered "contrarian" to argue that Tim Horner was a better in ring talent than the Ultimate Warrior, though it would be "contrarian" to argue that Horner had the better overall career. If that was the argument being made, I would not have thought it was contrarian at all, by any measurement Warrior was a poor worker bolstered by his physique and his crazy promos (before we realized he was legit crazy). He also had charisma, which the Tim Horners of the world don't. That's why Warrior was going over Hogan at WM while Horner's big break was being part of a JTTS tag team in the UWF. I guess if you get down to it, that's what annoys me in the "X is better than Y" arguments. You can point to several examples of someone being a technically sound wrestler, but that's not what makes someone a good pro wrestler. Anyone who's ever been a main eventer or made significant money in wrestling did so because they had personality. Having wrestling skill is a nice bonus, but it's hardly a requirement. So yes, you can say someone like Finlay has superior wrestling talent compared to Shawn Michaels, but to paraphrase someone who made a few dollars in the business, it doesn't matter what your wrestling skill is. Hearing someone debate that a guy who spent his career in the mid card is better in the ring than a guy who's been a huge star just makes it sound like that person is either trying to blow up the mid card guy to something better than he is/was, or somehow denigrate the main event guy by saying he's no better than the guy who ran around with a midget. So argument is not contrarian if made about Tim Horner/Warrior, but is contrarian if made about Finlay/Michaels? Of course Billy Graham was a better overall talent than Brad Armstrong. We know that. This does not change the fact that Armstrong was a better in ring talent. If one wants to argue that it's irrelevant to debate about who is the better worker/in ring talent/whatever because that's not what makes a "good pro wrestler" that is their choice. But ultimately I'm not a fan of limiting discussion because it violates a sacred tenet of Kevin Nash's way of life. It's all fine and dandy to discuss gate receipts for house shows in 1984, but I didn't make any of that money and ultimately I didn't really give two shits. I watch pro wrestling for the angles, interviews and what happens in the ring and those are the things I'm going to spend my time debating/discussing.

I have no clue what this even means.

No one is arguing that Finlay has had a better overall career - just that he's a better in ring performer. For a less contentious example, I can't imagine it would be considered "contrarian" to argue that Tim Horner was a better in ring talent than the Ultimate Warrior, though it would be "contrarian" to argue that Horner had the better overall career.