smkelly

Russo to me is partially responsible for the resurgence of wrestling in the late 1990s. Vince, who is normally the power hungry chief was seemingly lost and needed help. Russo brought about the booking and nonsensical material needed to push the WWE past WCW. For all his strengths, which in my opinion, are completely underwhelming in contrast to his weaknesses, attempted the same methodology in WCW, the fly by your pants, high on drugs, driving in the wrong lane at 165MPH kind of thing. At any rate, WCW lacked the personnel that the WWE had to connect Russo’s insane point A to point Z logic. It is telling of Russo’s career that he was fired by a company that had lost the necessary direction to continue competing with the WWE and was replaced by the person who had beaten the WWE but had fumbled at the one-yard line causing the subsequent touchdown and loss to begin with. Having watched a lot of Memphis and the Jerry Lawler compilation, it seems as though Russo has attempted, and on more than one occasion, to recreate the shoot like environment that Memphis had with its controversial angles. Unlike Memphis however, WCW, and now TNA, lacks the talent to pull off the risqué angles that Memphis routinely did. Furthermore, the WWE has tried using similar angles (Austin being hit by a car a la Lawler) but with marginal success as well. Russo will be remembered more for his shortcomings than his triumphs, which I think is unfair considering the demise of WCW started before Russo ever got his hands on the wrestlers’ careers. There has always been more than one culprit behind the internal destruction to the equivalent of ancient Rome in WCW, and it really started with its greatest savior Eric Bischoff, who ultimately turned out to be its greatest persona non grata.

I've heard from multiple people that DiBiase was injured in Japan. IIRC, it was against Kobashi. Any truth to that?

What's worse about the backstage announcers being humiliated is that someone has scripted for that humiliation to be done. Definitely a nice way to be shown appreciation for hard work and sacrifices. I sometimes cringe when reading stories about pranks Dynamite used to pull on his fellow wrestler, but I wonder how many and how much worse the pranks were on non-wrestlers.

Not really the first, there were plenty before them, going back from early Alan Moore all the way to the earlier works of Will Eisner and other of his ilk. But they were certainly the first "dark" characters to get incredibly popular and sell a shitload of comics, so I see your point.Yeah, there were others, like Iron Man for example, another notorious drunk. Did Giant Man's problems predate Wolverine/Daredevil? Batman is probably one of the first, if not the first subtlety dark hero. His past haunts him, problems adjusting - stuff a psychologist could make a career over While I am more inclined to agree with this, there was some story in there. HHH did have him run over with a car, but I'm not 100% of the context there, as in his motivation behind the hired hit. Plus McMahon made his life miserable on more than one occasion for his actions. So yeah, there is some, but not a lot

I like Warrior as a character, but I would not go as far as saying he has a lot of good matches. Three come to mind - vs. Rude at SummerSlam '88, against Hogan at WM 6, and the retirement match with Savage. What are the ones you're talking about?

Arn does beat Ted across the board. Overrated to most, but appreciated by us. The dude could out bump luchadores, cut scathing and insanely intense promos which were simplified for the average man to understand, and he was the #2 guy on the greatest stable of all-time. To answer the question of the extent of great matches a worker needs to be an all-time great = enough. More than a handful would be my estimation, which really depends on the greatness of said match. If Misawa had five matches to the caliber of 1-20-97, he would be an immortal icon, of which he is, and also, of which he has. But this is where the subjective nature of what is good and what is not good comes into play. I love Misawa versus Kobashi more than his matches against Kawada - not everyone shares that same mentality. I also rate 1-20-97 over 6-3-94, which again, a lot of people disagree. Does it mean I am wrong, no. Nevertheless, even if Misawa only had one match to the caliber of 1-20-97 or 6-3-94, he would likely still be considered an all-time great worker simply because of that one match. DiBiase has good matches, but in my opinion, not a match that can transcend time like Misawa's. Would Kobashi be a legend if he didn't have the legal pad page full of 4*+ matches? Maybe, maybe not. More likely no than yes. KiKuchi, while an awesome worker, has fewer 4*+ matches on his resume than Kobashi and he doesn't get nearly the amount of credit he deserves. Akira Taue doesn't get the attention either, more than Kikuchi, but no where near Kobashi, Misawa, or Kawada. He was involved in all of the epic tags, six-mans, and many singles matches that get ranked high (*****), but he is not labeled like the Other Three ©. Some may dislike him for his goofiness, awkwardness, or similarities to Baba, but for whatever reasoning it may be, his stellar in-ring work suffers because of it. Another example would be Liger. Or Ric Flair. If either man didn't have their coup de théâtre, for Liger the series with Sano, matches against El Samurai, and his 96-97 matches, then he'd be closer to an afterthought like a Koji Kanemoto, who is awesome, but falls in the Kikuchi category. The same applies to Flair. If he didn't have those 60 minute draws, matches with Race, Jumbo, Windham, Steamboat, Sting, etc - he would not be the Ric Flair we know today.

The WWE would notice likely drops in attendance when Taker leaves, but it will be like any other megastar they've had, they will recover and soldier on. Who else (besides Cole) has an undefeated streak at WrestleMania? The Miz?

Daredevil and Wolverine were the first two comic book heroes to have dark shades of gray put into their characteristics. Daredevil was a notorious drunk, womanizer, and crippled a foe. Wolverine just killed his enemies, like during the Dark Phoenix Saga with the Hellfire Club's personal army. Hogan got stale, Angle was "too American" in his arrogance, and Austin represented what most American's wished they could do. Austin is a character like a Dr. House, Sherlock Holmes, Daredevil, or Batman. He is fundamentally good, but has some serious underlying issues as well. He wasn't the cookie cutter good guy like Hogan or the patronizing American super-hero like Angle. Most people, and I am generalizing here, could probably relate to Austin more so than the other two. From Hogan to Austin is a bigger change than from Austin to Angle. Hogan represented the George Bush Sr. ideology of traditional American values (whatever that means) compared to Austin representing the new generation of young adults who were not going to be thumbed back by "the man." Or something like that

1. Of the ones I have seen, no. 2. *** is slightly above-average. Nothing extravagant to me. 3. Flair is the definition of a broomstick worker. It meant that he was so good at what he did, an inanimate object could have the match of its existence with Flair. It was an unbecoming phrase for some of the no-name no-skill wrestlers Flair was facing at the time. 4. This point makes DiBiase look even weaker as a super-worker in relation to Flair.

Maybe one the most polarizing matches in recent memory?

I'm a huge wrestling enthusiast, but you're well above me. You have a larger collection, have been watching longer, and know more stuff than I do. Look at some of your posts for example - on CMax you and Ginnetty are discussing footage in complete/incomplete form, which is beyond the scope of my fandom. You routinely post Machiavellian-esque lists of matches. You may not think you are a super-fan, but I would believe the contrary. Since you used a number scale, I'd be like a 70-75ish, whereas you're closer to 90ish, and someone like Lynch would be at 100. Haven't you flown to Japan to watch wrestling? Will has you there, man.

AWA - I haven't seen very much AWA to be honest. Maybe a few of the key matches like the Hennig-Bockwinkel hour-long match, the bloodbath Midnight Rockers vs. Rose & Somers, and that's about it. Georgia - I haven't seen anything from this territory. Memphis - Not as big of a fan as most. I've seen plenty, and the pimped stuff too, but I never got it. World Class - Like other sets, got totally burned out and quit watching. I have a hard time watching the Von Erich's. Florida - Maybe seen one of two matches... Mid-South - Liked this. WWF - Hit and miss for me. Found some awesome matches I'd never heard of before, like Orndorff vs. Santana, which I think is awesome. I dislike, but still rate favorably, the Steamboat - Savage WMIII match. NWA - Probably my #2. AJPW - My #1. But, that might stem from bias. I was most excited for this set to be released. NJPW - Probably my #3. Portland - Seen a handful of matches... St. Louis - One match, and probably the same one most people have seen. Joshi - I have some footage but have never watched it. I will likely watch the 80s set. Lucha - I'm not a big lucha fan. But I will watch the 80s set. P.S. I would have replied had I seen the topic!

I never said I wanted him to win. But he is the face of the WWE after all. 2007 Cena was awesome though, especially against Umaga. That is a big if. Taker is 46 right now. One match every year nearly ends his career, and at the rate of his post-WrestleMania recovery, it is possible for him to make it to age 50. But I find it extremely unlikely. Furthermore, if the streak is broken, Taker will be gone. Taker's 2010 1. 1-16-10 2. 1-17-10 3. 1-26-10 4. 1-31-10 5. 2-2-10 6. 2-9-10 (two matches) 7. 2-11-10 8. 2-12-10 9. 2-13-10 10. 2-14-10 11. 2-19-10 12. 2-20-10 13. 2-21-10 14. 3-13-10 15. 3-14-10 16. 3-16-10 17. 3-21-10 18. 3-28-10 (WrestleMania) 19. 3-30-10 20. 4-19-10 (two matches) 21. 5-6-10 22. 5-7-10 23. 5-8-10 24. 5-9-10 25. 5-17-10 26. 5-25-10 27. 8-30-10 (vs. Hart, no actual match) 28. 8-30-10 29. 8-31-10 30. 9-7-10 31. 9-14-10 32. 9-18-10 33. 9-19-10 34. 9-21-10 35. 9-25-10 36. 9-26-10 37. 10-1-10 (two matches) 38. 10-3-10 39. 10-8-10 40. 10-9-10 41. 10-17-10 42. 10-24-10 His next match was on 4-3-10, WrestleMania 27. Injuries have been keeping him from working. It seems that he is one of the more injury prone wrestlers the WWE has. It is worth noting that most of Taker's matches from 2010 were six-eight man tags.

Cena is credible enough to end the streak. I also think Brock would be a legit streak snapper too.

Spitting and choking someone with a tie. Well, that combination means fired, but yeah.

A mark is someone who is the fundamental antithesis of what a smart fan is, like an antagonist to a protagonist, Joker to Batman, night to day, peanut butter to jelly. A smart fan to me, is what we as a collective represent in comparison to the ordinary fan who watches Raw and attends shows without having lengthy discussions of workrate, voting on 150 matches from one territory in the 1980s, or posting semi-religiously on Internet messages boards with a primary focus on professional wrestling. We are aware of the dark secrets the business has in its closet, we are knowledgeable in wrestling history, and most of us watch wrestling footage like a movie columnist watches movies. Not quite sure how to define a smark though... Maybe this is where Meltzer, Keith, and Keller fall into, but as I type that, I'm not entirely convinced. While I would call myself a wrestling fan, I am inclined to also say I am a bigger fan than the normal wrestling fan.

Though you and I have gone rounds before, I have always respected you and that is an example of why. That is the best idea of ending The Streak~! that I have ever heard. Amazing. If this board had a reputation option you'd get mad rep, man. By the way, what heel did you have in mind? Personally, I'd go with Del Rio. The dude is talented. The downside is his age.

I watched the Taker/Hunter match this morning. I loved it.