sek69

For that matter, I don't ever remember Jim Duggan as thin as he is in the first pic, even when he was fighting cancer. He and DiBiase look like they could be related too.

A lot of people are going to be at home this New Years, since most of the US is up to its ass in snow. Now watch the last two weeks of December be unseasonably warm and causes everyone to go out and party.

Seems odd, considering Sting was the ulitmate team player in WCW, some would say to the detriment of his own career. If he's not being brought in to put people over, what is he there to do? Is JJ going to let him have a run with the belt?

The angle with Sting looks like that they're going to say they can't reveal him until 2006 for "contractual reasons" and have him make his first appearance in their "First Match of 2006" special on New Year's Eve. Seems pretty good to me, hype your special, hype your new talent, get people watching. Whats not to like from a business standpoint? You can argue if Sting can still bring the goods (he didn't look too bad last time I saw him), but if he fails it won't be from lack of trying on TNA's part.

I guarantee if there was some Internet-like communication method back in the 80s there would be much bitching over Flair never giving the title up for more than a month at a time. Again, most of it would be bullshit like most of the griping about today's wrestling is, but it would be there.

No, I don't. There are no similarities in the way Flair has been booked and the way Jarrett has been booked. Sure there are, both were protected by their stablemates from losing their titles. Just because there's a canyon between the talent levels doesn't mean its not similar.

You know what I meant, Loss. The constant negativity on the Internet causes people to base their opinions on workers or promotions almost entirely on someone else's, which may or may not be entirely full of shit. I think part of the appeal of watching all the classic wrestling I now own is being able to watch something that hasn't been completely torn to bits by smarky types.

I bet if there was the Internet in 1986, there'd be people bitching that Flair gets the title back within a month when he loses. Or that all his matches end the same, with people running in and causing a huge schmozz. Not to say JJ=Flair, but people didn't have easy access to streams of negative opinon back then. They were forced to come up with their own views without having them be shaped by others.

I'm no JJ fan, but aside from the guitar shots how is it different from the Horsemen saving Flair every week?

Obviously not, but you've already passed judgement on something you're apparenly admitting you didn't watch which pretty much says all that needs to be said for your credibility in a discussion of wrestling.

Did you watch the show? Sometimes things that sound like an overbooked mess on paper or in type work when you actually see it. ECW was good at that, reading results of their shows would make my head spin but it tended to come off better when you saw it. I didn't watch the show, maybe it did come off as a mess, I'm going to hold off judgement until I actually see it.

Emphasis on "read". Makes me wonder how many people base their opinions of PPVs (WWE ones too) on what someone who may have a bias wrote about it. I know there's been a lot of shows where I watch them then read someone's review and wonder if we watched different shows.

LOL at Meltz and Bryan's non-answer answer on the Savage thing. I've always said even if the rumor's not true, Vince must think it's true.

The thing is, that the NWA champion still defends the belt in different NWA promotions. Hell, JJ won the belt from Raven in D'Amore's promotion up in Ontario. Just because TNA doesn't tour doesn't mean the NWA title shouldn't have world title status.

I don't see how you can call ECW's title a world championship when they barely promoted outside of NY/PA and occiasionally FL. ECW then was no more a world title than ROH is now.

Maybe I'm too easy on wrestling companies, but I don't think any one group is all good or all bad. I usually can find something on RAW every week that entertains me, even if it's just a small segment in a show full of crap. It helps that I mark for Maria I guess, but hey entertainment is entertainment. An interesting side effect of the people I mentioned above is when you try to defend TNA you get accused of thinking they can do no wrong. I love what TNA's doing so far but I'm not going to say they do flawless entertainment either. I mean, sure when colossally bad things happen I expect people to bash, but sometimes I suspect folks just cherry pick when they look for bad news.

I think some people don't want TNA to succeed because they're happiest when they have nothing but bad wrestling to grouse about.

TNA's been very good at stacking their PPVs. The ratio of good to crap is much higher than the average WWE show and most of the time their crap is at least entertaining.

I really wouldn't consider ECW's title a world title. I think only the WWF/E, WCW, NWA, and the AWA until 1990 qualify.

Cam and others will get their answer when they look back at the last 20-30 years (at least) of professional wrestling and see there's never been a world champion as small as Rey in WWF/E or NWA/WCW.

Word is that not only is Sting going to be the highest paid guy in the company, he's set to become the centerpiece of the show. So perhaps JJ's stranglehold on the title isn't as firm as everyone thinks.

It's a nice "fuck you" to Vince too, since Sting's the only WCW guy he's never been able to sign (and job out).

I keep hearing rumors that the mystery guy is Sting. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.

I love when Q makes long posts in a thread that don't fit in to anything else being said. News flash: fat people tend to have heart problems. Just like the roid monkeys put strain on their heart, so does fat. The difference is with fat guys, they get fat over a longer period of time so their body can adjust to the extra weight more than a roider's heart can. That's why Abdullah is going to end up outliving most guys who started 20 years after he did. I knew someone would bring up the Taker-Jeff match, pointing out everyone thought Jeff had a chance to win at the end. Well guess what, he didn't. Guys like Taker and HHH can make anyone look like a world beater for one night, but they'll never job to them. If they do, expect a payback squash within a week. That's my whole point right there. You're going to have a hard time getting the fans to buy small guys beating big guys when you're having a harder time convincing the big guys to do the job.

How do I know this? Because they're redoing the Hulk-Warrior angle with Taker-Orton. Seeing Josh Matthews get "posessed" by Taker is one of the most unintentionally hilarious wrestling moments ever.