Childs

I would rather watch peak Misawa than peak Jumbo, but Jumbo was great for longer and in a wider variety of roles. I'd say dawho5's initial post undersells Jumbo's athleticism and offensive capabilities. In a '70s context, young Jumbo was a remarkable specimen, reeling off highspots few contemporary big men would have contemplated. In fact, one of his major advantages is that he developed more quickly than Misawa, who was often a mess as Tiger Mask. I also like pissed off elder Jumbo more than old Misawa, who was sort of forced to remain the NOAH ace against his better judgement. All of that said, it's hard to vote against the Misawa of '94-'98, who embodied his role so beautifully and peaked as maybe the greatest offensive wrestler ever. if anything, he ruled All Japan more absolutely than Jumbo did in the '80s and created more compelling rivalries out of his reign. I don't know, haven't decided on this one yet.

I voted for Hansen, and it's not a hard choice for me, though I could see it being more complicated if we had a lot of Terry's singles work from the '70s. The bottom line is I respond to Stan's aesthetic more than Terry's. Some of Funk's goofier mannerisms take me out of matches, and as much as I respect the effort he put in during his lengthy old-man phase, I don't love that work on a GOAT level. I'm drawn to great offensive wrestlers, and I've never found anyone more captivating on the attack than Hansen. Combine that with his tremendous command of character and underappreciated selling and you basically have my ideal worker.

He finished 44th in the Smarkschoice poll.

If I could only carry one disc of wrestling with me for the rest of my life, that match would be on it. No doubt.

I really wanted to like the album but found the music mostly dull and Darnielle's voice grating. The Goats just don't hit my musical sweet spot, though I've always dug his sensibility. Maybe I'll try his novel.

I watched WMIII live on a closed circuit screen at the Baltimore Convention Center and I will say that, though my 10-year-old self thought Steamboat-Savage was the most exciting match, Hogan-Andre in no way felt anti-climactic. It came off as the battle of the titans it was supposed to be, and the crowd popped huge for it. I still think it was a good match, with the near fall setting the early tone, Hogan selling his ass off and the iconic climax. The piledriver shit on floor was the only thing bad about it. I'm not sure what else those two guys could have done, given their physical limitations.

I did wonder if the blood, combined with Brock bleeding at Mania, signaled a change in their stance on that issue.

I don't think he would see it that way. I think he'd say he had one experience (live) in the moment and reported on it, then had a different experience (TV) in the moment and reported on that.

Do you think he was in better condition this time or that Brock just fucked him up early in the 2014 match? I'm not sure. He looked bad both years, though maybe cosmetically better last night.

I'm really surprised how many people thought Taker looked OK last night. His movement and timing were pretty poor, and he no longer brought the aura (or whatever you want to call it) to make a pointless match feel anything more than pointless. Are people just excited that he didn't have to walk to the ring with a cane? The spider walk/sit-up spot was the only thing remotely appealing in that match.

This is a poor comparison. The correct comparison would be a movie that went along traditional lines 98 percent of the way and did so in sensational fashion, then ended in a way that had nothing to do with the 98 percent. That movie might leave a lot of people buzzing about the shock ending, but it might also piss a lot of people off.

I'm not getting the great show hype from various corners. First hour (not the pre-show but the 7-man and Rollins-Orton) was entertaining but nothing memorable. Trips-Sting was amusing black comedy for students of the WWE mindset but not actually good. Divas match was fine. Cena-Rusev was good but no better than their Fastlane match and possibly a tad worse. The Rousey thing was interminable and set up a Rock-Trips feud that I can't fathom anyone wanting. Taker match was awful on multiple levels. And the main was great until a finish that at least created a lot of buzz. I'd concede it was a show that exceeded low expectations. A good show even. But one of the best of recent times? I don't see that.

The older I get, the less impressed I am by smart but unsatisfying product.

You wouldn't have got that from Roman Reigns capitalizing on his lucky break with the ring post dazing and bloodying Lesnar, throwing every finisher he has at him and finally slaying the beast against all odds? That is about as definitive a culmination as you will get. Yes, I would have. That was my point. I would've been perfectly happy with that. We're arguing on the same side.

I don't want the Wrestlemania main event to be an example of smart booking. I want it to give me a visceral sense of culmination.

It was the right booking. You're probably right, but I was way into the match and that pulled me right the fuck out. No interest in Rollins at all. No interest in the fallout. I just wanted to see a great match end with a great finish.

And I hate this company.

Bloood!

Yep, I'll happily accept a fast, violent 10-12 minutes.

One hundred times yes. They've lost any sense of how to present something organically.

Taker entering in the Arizona sunlight just doesn't work from an ambiance standpoint. Correction: California sunlight, have Arizona on the brain because I have to go there in a few weeks.

I agree with Parv. I'm sick to death of WWE string-of-stunt matches, though I did like the finish and Bryan winning. It's just hard to watch them squander talented guys when you know an hour of Sting, Taker and HHH is coming.

I'm not of the school that says you have to watch everything. But those tag matches are richer if you also watch the Misawa-Kawada singles matches from the period and maybe Taue's '95 Carnival run, which made him feel like a bigger threat to Misawa. You could also dig deeper into Kobashi's evolution by watching his matches with Hansen. It's not like you can't enjoy the tag matches without watching that stuff. It's just a matter of how much you want to engage.

The times I've seen him on NXT (not an every week viewer), he doesn't seem to have clicked to any great degree. He's obviously not terrible, because he's a polished, 15-year pro. But the best things about him--stiffness and surly attitude--haven't translated very well.

The 10/15/95 draw