Dylan Waco

I'm not going to argue that Luger is a better tag worker than Jeff because he isn't. And 07 Jeff was pretty clearly a very good worker. Hell I saw Hardy work a house show match against Punk a month or so back that was a tremendous effort for a throwaway b-show in front of maybe 6,000 fans. But I don't see any argument for Jeff's peak as a singles guy being better than Luger's 89. And I'm not a big Luger fan. Also that Hardyz v. MNM match was at RR not SS. And it's a great match. There was a recent thread at SmarksChoice asking when the last great WWE tag ever was and people were rattling off shit from the "Golden Age" that makes one wonder if they've bothered to watch any of that shit in years. I'm actually a huge fan of The Rockers and think they were probably one of - if not the best - of those mythologized mid-80's-early 90's WWF tag teams, but MNM almost certainly had more high end matches than them. I mean MNM had a better series with fucking Charlie Haas and Bob Holly than Rockers did with Arn and Tully and I'm a huge fan of Arn, Tully, Jannetty and Rockers era Shawn (which I think was Michaels peak if we are being honest). .

Honestly I can't believe anyone could watch modern Rey and sarcastically say he's having "good" matches that run five minutes and that this isn't a "great" thing, while holding up his run in 95-96 as his pinnacle. Don't get me wrong, you can like what you like. I've always thought that the people who don't like modern Rey as much as 96 Rey basically boil down to people who preferred the novelty of a fresh guy doing crazy shit and you've basically admitted as much. And I'm a guy that likes 95-97 Rey an awful lot. But let's be honest - modern Rey isn't working five minute matches that people are calling great. Modern Rey is working ten, fifteen, twenty plus minute matches that people are calling great. I'm not going to speak to the AAA stuff because I've seen a handful of it, but in WCW he wasn't getting near the time on average that he gets now. It's literally not even open for discussion. Hell even in his most highly touted WCW match v. Eddy at HH 97 goes less than fifteen minutes. But nitpicking about time is mostly unimportant. What really gets me is that people really believe Rey hasn't improved his babyface work, particularly as a guy who sells, times comebacks, et. Having watched a lot of 95-96 Rey recently, I really can't see how anyone could say that Rey hasn't drastically improved in that regard or that his performance in the 05 SD match with Eddy isn't a great example of that. 96 Rey could have never had a series of matches like 06 Rey had with Mark Henry. And the fact that he is the most over face act on the roster besides maybe Jeff Hardy is a testament to this. Rey is on the same level of Steamboat and Morton as a babyface worker. The Hansen v. Vader comparison is odd to me too, in that Hansen clearly didn't rely entirely on stiffness and Vader was arguably more reckless than Hansen. That Flair match - which isn't even good really - is a great example of that as Vader took extreme liberties with Flair to the point where Ric was essentially begging him to back off during the match. So far as I can tell that is worse than a blind guy occasionally potato shotting someone.

You know I don't have a problem with any of that. I don't have any of those near that high, but Liger/Pillman and the Nastys Street Fight are both in my top forty. Only match in that batch I didn't vote for is the Hog Wild match.

I didn't vote for WrestleWar because I prefer the Starrcade 88 match so much by comparison that it feels worse than it actually was. Still a very good match. It's insane to think that more than half of your list is different than mine.

We're up to 49 now though, Flair v. Steamboat is something I really wanted to vote for. I left it off my ballot because it was the only match I wanted to rewatch that I didn't get to.

Holy shit. I don't have a single one of that batch on my ballot. Now up to 47 matches you have that I don't. Also I think Pillman v. Badd is really disappointing and I really don't buy the argument that it was "Pillman's show".

Flair/Steamboat. Damn, and I remember when I was virtually the only net fan touting that as a great match. I voted for it, but not high.

Stan Hansen or Vader? This is very close, but I think I prefer Hansen. To me Hansen's out of control brawling schtick was more believable than Vader's which could border on cartoonish when he was in their with certain opponents. I also think Hansen was arguably more versatile in the sense that he seemed to have less of a routine to his matches than Vader did. Eddy Guerrero or Rey Mysterio? Another real tough one. I think the best case for Eddy is that he was more versatile than Rey. While Rey has had two peaks, working two different styles very effectively, Eddy was a guy that could pretty much work whatever style or role a match called for at the moment. In 97 he worked clean babyface, conflicted babyface, sneaky heel, cowardly heel and vicious heel against a variety of opponents all well. He had a set of bumps, ring movements, techniques, etc. for each role and worked them perfectly depending on the circumstances. Rey is a better babyface now than Eddy ever was, but he doesn't have that depth and probably never will. On the other hand Eddy was less consistent - largely because of drug use - so there is that. Still I'll go with Eddy albeit slightly. Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels? Bret easily. He was just more capable. Shawn is a great gimmick match worker and has a good sense of the big moment in matches, but I think Bret smokes him in almost every other category.

I'm not arguing Sting is a Vader level worker or that he has the same number of Classics as Vader. I'm arguing that Vader v. Sting was a good matchup for each guy. Sting was also a good matchup for Page and a good matchup for Regal. Vader's schtick worked best against believable babyfaces, especially guys that could sell, work comeback spots and had enough power offense to make his big bumps look legit and not silly. Sting was a good foil for him.

I really don't like either, but I do think Marufuji v. Taue and Marufuji v. Kobashi are better than any KENTA v. heavyweight match I've ever seen. All other things being equally annoying, I guess I prefer Marufuji.

Shawn Michaels match with Jeff Jarrett was more similar to Jarrett match than Shawn match. You wanna argue Shawn was carried (I think he was the weaker worker in the match ftr, but he was more than game that night)? Sting had good matches with a lot of people. He had a great match with DDP as late as 99. Fact is that Sting and Vader was just a good match up for each guy.

"But Vader was a better carrier; I can't imagine Stan getting the same matches out of, say, a man called Sting like the ones Vader did." Having watched all of those matches in the last few months, I really can't see any argument for Vader being carrier in those matches. To be honest there are very few "big" Vader matches where I think you can make an argument he was carrying someone.

And we are at 42 matches I don't have on my ballot. That actually shocks me.

Jesse and Tony were always a better fit. I had the exact opposite opinion of that Clash tag as I thought it was better upon this viewing than any other time I'd seen it before. It's a sprint, but it's a sprint where the moves seem to mean something.

I think Chi-Town is going to finish higher than the others. Chi-Town is a quick match by comparison, is the match I think that most people were mostly likely to rewatch and has the most satisfying finish of the bunch. I had all of them in my top 11, cept for the handhelds which I won't vote for under any circumstances for the reasons you mentioned.

Surprised the Dangerous Alliance tag is so low. That was in my top ten, and I considered it for number one. Hogan v. Flair is a really fun match. Eddy v. Jericho is another one that is in almost the exact same spot on our lists. Weird. Now up to 39 matches on your ballot that aren't on mine. I would imagine the closer to the top we get the more unanimous the picks will be, but I still wonder if I hit fifty.

Tim, which SS94 match are you talking about? I had four matches from the show in my top hundred and three of them in my top fifty.

I love Clash VIII. I was there live for that as well (at the ripe old age of seven!). The thing I like about Eddy v. Dean is it's the very front end of the awesome Eddy heel turn and Malenko actually shows a shit ton of fire for maybe the only time in his WCW career. Another factor in my not rating it was that I thought it would rate well on other ballots and your ballot suggests I was right. This voting really is going to be all over the place. Of the sixty matches you've posted so far 37 didn't make my ballot at all - but then like I said several of them are in virtually the same spot.

What's crazy about your list is that you and I have huge differences of opinion on a lot of these matches and yet there are several others that you and I have in almost the exact same spot. I want to say the Clash VIII tag is the fifth or sixth such match, which is impressive when you consider the fact that probably half of the matches you rated didn't even make my ballot. Also Eddy v. Dean was one of the last two matches I cut from my ballot. I was really torn about it, because I was there live and really like the match, but I hate the NWO cuts and I'm not a fan of the finish even if it was a good way to further the storyline with Waltman.

I didn't do that because I thought there were some post 94 matches that deserved recognition, but if we are being honest, you could do a reputable to hundred on 89, 90, 92 and 94 alone.

All this Jarrett stuff is interesting and insightful. I'd kill to get a hold of some that USWA stuff, much of which I haven't seen in years if at all. I agree that Jarrett's initial Double J run got a lot of heat and I also agree that a lot of that had to do with Brian Armstrong, who is also almost entirely responsible for the limited success Billy Gunn had in his career. I think HHH physical size may account for some of the reason he's been able to work on top despite lacking charisma. But the primary factor in his semi-success was that the WWE invested the better part of two years pushing him as a beast that ran roughshod over every hot heel they had. Getting to "retire" the most beloved babyface in the company was really only the start and it grew from there. There was a year long period where he was never doing jobs and I think just by virtue of being next to other top acts people start to see you as a top act after a while. Jarrett never had the right friends to get that sort of push, nor did he fuck the right ring rat. So HHH is where he is and Jarrett is where he is. Still on merit I don't think Jarrett is a consistent main eventer. To me Jarrett is best as a utility player of sorts that fluctuates around the card depending on the needs of the company. Jarrett is a guy you could in the right context opposite a Shawn Michaels (he gave Shawn his best non-gimmick match ever IMO) or a Jay Lethal. Those who say he couldn't hang in the main event scene under any circumstances should watch his Greed 01 match with Flair v. the Rhodes. A lot of it is Dusty being really over and Flair being there, but Jarrett works a Southern heel schtick in this that makes the match and sparks the crowd despite the fact that he probably wasn't regarded as a "top heel."

This is exactly why Rey is a great worker, and why he is much better now than he was back then. Rather then rely on the same old stock spots that got him over, Rey reinvented himself as a wrestler who's matches emphasize selling and defensive wrestling. The spots are still there but rather than the match being purely about Rey being fast, exciting and "fresh" the matches are about Rey's comebacks. The fact that he was able to adapt himself to the WWE style without watering himself down to the point of having no appeal is in fact a "big deal." And despite toning down his style the young generation still regards him as the most exciting guy around as well.

No...Jeff is a harder worker than Luger ever was. Jeff is More over than Luger ever was and Jeff actually loves the business as opposed to Luger. Who would deny to people he was even in the business. What are you basing all of that on? All three points you listed are debatable, with the third one being based in nothing I have ever read or heard. The man liked the money but plainly had no passion for the business and kindly name me three good matches he had with someone not named Flair. Only three matches? That's not even hard. Off the top of my head v. Pillman Clash IX v. Pillman HH 89 v. Kendall Windham v. Barry Windham Chi-Town Rumble v. Tommy Rich Clash VIII v. Michael Hayes WrestleWar 89 v. Steamboat GAB 89 v. Eddie Gilbert v. Bret Hart Nitro 98 v. Ron Simmons HH 91 v. Sting Superbrawl 92 w/Sting v. The Steiners Superbrawl 91 v. The Giant v. Hogan Nitro 97 That was running purely off memory. I have no doubt I could find several others with little effort.

This looked pretty weak to me on paper and I have to say I didn't think much of it. Brad tried but Muta is just useless when it comes to working holds in a way that can connect to a studio audience. Muta was always sold in the States as a high flyer, which isn't really accurate but that's the breaks and I don't think anyone wanted to see this. What's interesting here to me is that there are virtually no highspots in this despite the fact that it goes nearly thirty minutes and features two guys perfectly capable of reeling off solid highspots. A match for a different era and a different time. I can't call it bad, but it's really a waste of talent and a huge waste of time.

This is actually my favorite non-Fujiwara, Sayama match ever. Watching young Dibase,young Gilbert and young Hennig work early 80's/late 70's WWF is something I really enjoy in general.