Dylan Waco

I think concrete was touting Starr as an in ring WOTY. While he wouldnt be my number 1, I think hes a very reasonable contender if you are a regular wXw and Beyond viewer. I certainly dont see him as any more or less fringy than Miyahara is. Speaking of which, I think WALTER has a very strong case. Great everywhere, several MOTYCs, strong in tags and singles, great series against both Riddle and Starr, made a huge impact in US debut. Has an aura and is a unique presence in the ring. Id consider Reigns, Keith Lee, Riddle and Yehi as well. Maybe a few others

Lewin finishes second among historians. A huge number of people who voted for him were probably voters like me who felt he was one of the strongest people on the ballot, but thought he was in a dumb region. I didn't vote for him because of the region he was in, but I'm guessing many voters just said fuck it and pulled the trigger anyhow. On Suzuki I don't doubt that the shoot cred helps him, but if you look at the specifics I think it's a near certainty that he got a "Dave says he's a good candidate so I'm voting for him" bump. Dave usually doesn't explicitly release a ballot in advance, he did this year, and it's my understanding he made a case for Suzuki in the process. If you look at Suzuki's totals he finished first among reporters, and didn't really place in either of the other voter categories (IIRC he wasn't even in the top 30 among either sub-group of wrestlers). Based on what is known he more than any other candidate was carried almost entirely by one portion of the electorate. I'm of the opinion (and always have been) that the reporter category is the category that is most likely to be influenced by Dave's thinking, though I admit that can't be proven. In general I suspect that Dave's public ballot helped Pedro and The Sharpes get over the hurdle as well, but they were close to induction anyhow. Suzuki jumped 25%. If you follow New Japan, it's really hard to see what happened with him in that promotion this year that would merit that kind of leap. While I LOVE the G1 match with Okada, the earlier Okada title match was widely panned even by NJPW hardcore fans (to be fair the match was polarizing, but usually NJPW hardcores are pretty unanimous in their praise of NJPW main events), and the lumberjack match main event v. Elgin a few months back is generally thought of as one of the worst - if not THE absolute worst - NJPW main event of the Bushi Road era. The angle where Suzuki Gun returned this year was a hot one, but I'm not buying the idea that voters were deeply enamored with that. Regardless of whether or not you think Suzuki belongs in or not his induction is very likely "Takahashi sold out the Tokyo Dome numerous times!" 2.0

I have no major problem with this years class, though I don't think Suzuki is a particularly good candidate, and it seems pretty clear that Dave's public endorsement of his candidacy is the reason he got in

If they run at the right time of year, in the right market, I think they have a pretty good shot of hitting the 10,000 mark. They are smart business guys regardless of your feelings on them as talents and they will likely promote and build this thing for months and months. There branding is excellent, and they are icons for a certain sort of wrestling fan. As Matt noted, the show will be seen as a hardcore fan pilgrimage, both a way to stick it to Vince, and a way to illustrate that someone is part of the cool kid table. If they get to 8k plus in a pre-sale you can bet your ass they will slash remaining ticket prices the last week to desperately get to that number, and it wouldn't shock me to see them heavily paper at the tail end if need be to get 10k in the building even if it isn't 10k paid. I am virtually certain this will be the largest drawing U.S. indie show in history if they do it in the U.S., though I think it's possible they do it in the UK. Of the U.S. places listed as options I personally think the smartest place to run is Chicago because it's a central location, with two major airports, and maybe the most vibrant indie wrestling culture in the U.S. But I'm sure they know their fanbase better than I do.

I want to be clear about this because as usual when something like this happens people on all sides will misrepresent the positions of others, but my specific issue with Dave here was the claim that "Cena doesn't add 1700 [paying fans] in 3 days anywhere." I have zero problem with Dave or anyone else trying to make an argument that Omega or Okada or whoever is a bigger singular ticket mover than Cena or Brock or whoever. I think it's tricky to prove and I think the relative models of the promotions being discussed kind of makes it a weird exercise all together, but if you want to debate it as a thought experiment have at it. That said, the idea that John Cena couldn't move 1700 fans to buy tickets in 3 days anywhere on earth, for any promotion, in any hypothetical situation, is about as stupid a position as one can take. Dave has his own agenda and that's never been more transparent, but that's at best an all time stupid troll. At best.

Its also not Daves local indie. He lives 5 hours away. Funny enough, there is a 20 year old indie that could be called Daves local indie that is running the Cow Palace for the 2nd time this year in less than 2 weeks with a dream match main event. Has Dave covered it at all? I dont know

I think aside from historical pieces, the primary reason to subscribe to the Observer at this point is to say you subscribe to the Observer. For some people it's still a social club, and signifies that you are one of the cool kids who is really in the know. In terms of breaking news, high level reporting, podcast/audio content, message board/other direct forms of interaction, social media, quality of writing/editing, method of content distribution, interesting/fresh analysis, covering new and different promotions/areas, et. the brand is so clearly lacking to me that I can't justify subscribing. It's just doesn't approach being a strong enough service for my wants as a consumer. I let me sub lapse around two years ago (probably close to the day actually) and I've never even thought about re-subbing. All that said, Dave can do whatever he wants with his business and social media accounts and he's made a lot of money at something very few people have made any money at, so he really doesn't have to worry too much about what I think

I don't want to pick on Matt Farmer, but he's anti-Taue too, and if I remember correctly part of his argument is that he doesn't think he was particularly good in the ring. There is nothing wrong with that, it's a matter of tastes ultimately, but I do think that the difference of opinion you see in HoF voting and discussion very often has to do with how the particular person engages with what they see and the facts that are available. There is no 3000 hits or 500 home runs metric you can pull from here, it's about making a holistic case for guys and with that a lot of the smaller points are relative. I've had guys like Patera dismissed as career mid-carders before and it's hard to take seriously with my own research, but I just have to accept that the definition of mid-card is relative and maybe I'm coming from it from a completely different place than the other person. If you start from the position that Fujiwara was a career mid-carder who was good but not particularly special it's unlikely you are going to be convinced by any argument. That's not a knock on Matt, it's just true. One of the things about revisiting the footage, GWE, et. is that it's created a situation where a lot of people sort of forced themselves into blank slatism. Yes you still come in with biases but if you are watching an entire DVDVR set, eventually some personal truths start to emerge even if they aren't what you expected coming in. For example, I didn't expect to think Ricky Fuyuki was as good as he was in AJPW, or that Michael Hayes was actually a great in ring performer in World Class. The question for an HoF discussion is whether personal takes like that matter in a vacuum, or whether or not they should be buttressed by consensus. I can make an argument for why I think Michael Hayes was a demonstrably great worker, or why I think Invader I is an all time great brawler, or why I think Fuyuki was better than Kawada in Footloose. But if it's an outlier argument, and I can see that, should that really matter in an HoF discussions? For years my answer to this was "probably not," but as time has gone on my answer is inching very close to "of course it should!" The reasoning is this - if you are selected by Dave to be a HoF voter, he is presumably picking you because he trusts your judgment with a ballot. He curates an electorate presumably so they can give their actual opinions on whether or not someone belongs in the Hall of Fame, and not so that the consensus editorial views of the Observer can be reflected back into the HoF. More than that even IF Dave's HoF voter curation is a Manufacturing Consentesque way of making his own views look like truisms, to my mind this makes it even more critical that a voter not act as a delegate for Observer speak, but rather a voice that reflects their own views. This does not mean being contrary for the sake of being contrary, but rather researching and making arguments for the strength or weakness of candidates as you see them. This also is not meant as a wholesale denunciation of consensus, but I do think we should think about what consensus actually means. For example, based on the consensus of hardcore fans at the time Fujiwara seems to have been thought of as a very good/great wrestler, who was near the top of talents in the World, but not at the tip-top. But this is based off of one worker poll, with 30 anonymous respondents. We know nothing about their biases, viewing habits, et. We can watch the footage and I think demonstrate that Fujiwara always seems to have been extremely over with live crowds, but what does that mean? I think Farmer's comparison of Fujiwara to Meng is away off if we are comparing what they do in the ring, number of great matches, skill, et. but it may not be wildly off base to compare him to Meng insofar as he was always more over than his push would actually indicate. So the consensus of crowd response and even sometimes card placement can betray you a bit or play into established biases very easily. Among the rewatchers, the project fans, the first time engagers, and the revisionists, Fujiwara does really well as noted by the stats Pete introduced above. I made a similar argument regarding Tamura and Regal last year based on GWE results (I'm not advocating a vote for either of them, but Regal finishing as high as he did, when looking at his surrounding company, and when considering the breadth of opinion and experience among the voting pool is a fascinating tidbit that was not really thought about when the results came out as everyone fixated on the number one race). One could argue that there are biases with the DVDVR sets (bias on the committees toward or against certain guys, guys who had several excellent high end matches but lots of trash and the trash doesn't get seen on a best of, et) and that is true. One could also argue that GWE voting still reflects a marginal pool of hardcore fandom and that is also true. But it is engagement, and I can't criticize that. I will personally take those metrics over those pointing to the individual star ratings of Dave Meltzer 100 out of 100 times, but with the understanding that there are still problems. I also prefer it to looking back at an anonymous fan poll result. I think the question of revisionism is interesting in general. It certainly has it's critics, though most of the arguments the critics make ignore how a lot of the revisionist process has unfolded. But at heart I'm in that camp. I'll vote for Fujiwara because I think he's one of the 15 best wrestlers of all time, the true godfather of shootstyle, and influential stylist and trainer, and was a guy who radiated a special energy as a talent when performing that live crowds clearly were attracted by regardless of his placement on cards. Any one of those things would not get him onto my ballot. As a whole it's enough for me.

Shane looks like he's going to have a heart attack every time he's active for two minutes. He's not in better shape than KO. So does Brock, so it's normalized for WWE top guys

Was honestly my favorite WWE ppv of the year. I tend to be way off from a lot of folks thoughts on this board nowadays so I rarely comment at length, but I didn't think there was a match on the show worse than decent (didn't see the pre-show match). People can say what they want about Jinder v. Nak but it was heated and I can't say that for the women's match that is being praised (which i also liked for structure reasons, but it really was Divas era level in terms of crowd response). I have no clue if Shane v. Owens was good or bad. But I was on the edge of my seat watching it. For spectacle guys with bad cardio that was a vastly more entertaining offering than what we got out of Brock v. Braun. I wouldn't blame anyone for hating it, but if Shane insists on wresting, Owens is one of the few guys on the roster I don't mind him wrestling at all. Usos and New Day killed it and managed to do a bunch of creative stuff with an excellent finish. Corbin winning the title is dumb since he gets no reaction when hitting great spots on AJ Styles, but the match was as good a triple threat match as I've seen in recent memory and an all time great AJ performance. I was also happy for Tye to get the match. Rusev and Orton was a solid match with a nice finish. Roode v. Dolph was just average, and I hate that the feud is continuing, but it wasn't terrible and that was the worst thing on the show.

Arn and Tully with JJ is honestly one of the weaker candidates to ever come on to the ballot. Dave seems to have removed Jim Breaks himself

Brock looked like complete dogshit. He's either totally done, got hurt, or sandbagged Braun. Whatever the case may be it went south quick on the kimura and it was pretty clearly all on Brock. At one point he was visibly lost and I worried about his health as he laid on the mat with Braun desperately trying to feed to Brock for a triangle or a kimura. Brock legit looked like someone with dementia who had just fallen and broken their hip. He was totally confused, lost, and gassed at that point and he never came back. He's really been a shit show for the bulk of this return, but he's the only protected guy so he has star power. They could have made Braun tonight and didn't which I can accept even though it's garbage, but to put in that level of performance when the company gives you every advantage on Earth is just trash. On the other hand I loved the undercard, and thought Reigns and Cena was excellent as well as the tag title match.

Very, very happy to see this

Rufus R. Jones in Puerto Rico. Huge fan of the look, the sass and the double punch. I also love the Fred Sanfordish selling techniques he would employ It doesn't hurt that he is a legit cultural legend among a lot of people in my old neighborhood in Charleston.

Night 2 is now up too

I actually thought the first round of the MYC was pretty comparable to the first round of the CWC. Highs weren't as high, and lows may have been lower, but I felt there were fewer lows than the CWC had. Shows were really about building characters and story arcs for the future rounds and I think to that end the shows were successful. I don't think there were more than 5 or maybe 6 matches that I'd rate 3 star or better, and nothing got near the 4 star level, but the main events on each show were all good/very good, and there were only two matches that I thought stunk. I'd say half the matches were at the 2 1/2ish star range and that's fine. Rachael will redeem herself in round two so I'm not worried about her, and Tessa was well protected against the best wrestler in the tournament in a match that was designed to hide her glaring flaws (she has improved, but she's nowhere near a top flight talent). I thought Piper v. Santana Garrett was probably the best match in round 1, but I did like Laith v. Jazzy an awful lot too and if I watched them back to back I'm not sure my opinion wouldn't switch. Mia Yim and Candace should be signed yesterday but that's something I already thought coming in. I was more impressed with Sage Beckett than most people seem to have been, and thought she was basically a better version of Nia. Dakota Kai and Toni Storm were hurt by booking, though Kai does have star presence. I don't get Storm and think her entrance is among the worst thing in modern pro wrestling, but she is over as hell with most people so I'm clearly in the minority. I thought a lot of the PC talent was better than expected. Savoy and and Shayna are two of my favorite people in the tourney, but really showed little in round one. Hoping for big things from them going forward.

Night one is up on Powerbomb.tv. Night 2 should be up very soon

Shows are being edited now. Hoping they will be out in the next 10-12 days

If you are coming this weekend be sure to say hello! Also we have Wrestler Q and A's and other events going on at the Best Western Heritage Inn on Lee Highway all weekend. Come join us!

It's precisely the unique criteria of GWWE that has me convinced Shawn has no business as a number one contender. FWIW I think Savage is the father of WWE main event style, Shawn is probably the Paul to his Jesus though.

My issue with Shawn is that the competing narratives surrounding him are so strong that it's hard to get a fair picture of him. I am more sympathetic to the critic camp, and at times have probably been one of it's biggest advocates, but I agree that it's gone too far. Even if someone is largely unenthused about his post-comeback work, I think much of his entire singles career has been viewed through that prism in reverse and that isn't fair. I also agree with the argument made above that Shawn is sometimes held to an unfair standard by his biggest critics, though I confess that I see that largely as a reaction to the other big narrative surrounding Shawn. On the other hand I think Shawn is the most heavily pushed and promoted wrestler in WWE relative to his actual success rate as a performer/star and yes that includes HHH. They have pushed the narrative of him as "ultimate great in ring worker" for years, often times at the expense of storylines. I don't think people who love Shawn are being worked, but I do think this narrative effects how people view him at least as much as the overly critical narrative. Shawn is a case where I think we can disagree on his work, with one group arguing that he's the best in company history and the other not even close to being in that camp, but I think objectively it's hard to make the case for him having a super compelling character for huge swaths of his career regardless of how you feel about him as an in ring talent. More importantly to me at least, i think in the grand scheme of things he was far less important to the company than company marketing/talking points would suggest. He will make my list and make it easily, but I can't give him the benefit of any doubt when I'm well aware that a large portion of voters - probably the majority - are likely to be operating from the universe of that second narrative. I also think the NJPW system being used to consider people means that some of Shawn's issues from his 90's peak cannot be dismissed out of hand. For that reason alone he would be DQ'ed as a serious top five contender for me.

Regal finished 21 in GWE and I'm not sure he fits what you are describing above

El Dandy 89-92 and Buddy Rose 79-82 are my top 2

There was a very preliminary effort to try to figure out a way to work with Liger.

The rubric makes it tougher for me because I think it does shift the meaning into a discussion of star power and importance and away from work. That is fine, but if others aren't approaching it that way I don't want to either. I'm torn because I don't think drawing power was covered but I don't see how it could possibly be left out of a project like this. It's much easier for me to dismiss that stuff when we are explicitly talking about bell-to-bell work - it doesn't seem that we are here.