JerryvonKramer

I think a "current" folder is increasingly warranted personally.

My guess would be around 73-5 around the time Dory and Brisco were feuding over NWA title, before Detriot went bust, when IWA was in operation, that other North Eastern territory around Buffalo, Funks in Amarillo, SF and LA still fully operational. That weird Johnny Powers promotion (NWF) was active, Dick the Bruiser's WWA in Indianapolis, Gulas in Memphis, the Fullers in Knoxville, Hawaii under Lord James Blears, plus all the territories we know from the 80s. But ... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NWA_territories#Defunct_and_former_NWA_member_promotions Looking at that it seems like there might have been even more in the 60s. Also, remember all those completely forgotten about outlaws you, me and Kelly came across in those old newsletters? Best guess thinking about that is 1963-4.

I should point out that Grimmas was always going to reach cult quicker than me because he had to pop South East (a wrestling hotbed) rather than New England. I had to run extra shows in that region and it still took three months longer. He had an advantage there. On the flipside, Steven has more regional competition (Watts, Jarrett, Graham, Blanchard, Fuller), which might cause him some problems if he's not careful, and I'll be interested to see how big his crowds get. I have been using my time off to come up with new ideas for a hot summer of booking!

Khan is a pure character guy, but one who I'd rate much more highly than someone like Kamala or the Wild Samoans. Becaus he was very expressive, vocal, and his offense brought home the real "savagery" of the gimmick much more than the other guys. His career high from a big-time point of view was probably the feud in WWF with Andre from 81 which we've been slowly watching play out on Titans. I'm looking forward to the blow off of the injury angle later in the year. Khan was a travelling territorial heel a notch below guys like Ivan Koloff or Ernie Ladd. He was a generation on from those guys and at least a tier below. And it is reflected in the sorts of places he'd get bookings (Texas, Stampede -- second tier NWA promotions). I don't think he'll make my 100, but he was good at what he did. Maybe ten years previously or ten years later, he might have been a big star, but his career came at a weird time for gimmick heels. And by 87, the landscape wasn't quite right for him beyond a couple of shots with Hogan.

For any newer posters, if you've ever wondered where the feud between myself and jdw originated, take a look at this from two years ago: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/19298-little-questions-thread/page-4&do=findComment&comment=5538251 Long story short we had a massive ding dong about whether the oil thing was a factor in the demise of Watts. I maintained it was one of several factors, he absolutely refused to accept that. Things got nasty. I even left the board for a month or so after that. But there it was. I'm about an hour into this and it's been really top notch so far. So glad that there are two hours left.

Pat O'Connor memorial tournament.

Isn't he Lance's dad? Just the idea that Kerry and co have an evil Nazi uncle cracks me up.

As discussed on some show I did at some point in the past couple of months (God knows which one), I'm immensely entertained at the idea of where Waldo Von Erich fits in to that family.

Perhaps a factoids thread is required purely for such snippets.

Of course, listeners to Titans of Wrestling wouldn't be particularly surprised by this because they'd know that the Chief Jay Historian, Kelly, is an über-nerd who really knows his shit. Wins and losses matter, and here he's gone over big time and truly established himself as a legit Brainbuster main eventer and champ.

That headline game was genius Johnny. Laughed my ass off.

Thanks for the info!

Even if I grant they did do it, it's an exceptional case in history. And look at the cost: hotshotting the world title, wrestling on a bed of thumbtacks, breaking kayfabe to the point where it's now permanently broken. Quite an unfair paradigm to hold to the current era, and remarkably shortsighted of fans to expect it.

Austin was made in 97

You can push four established stars at the same time, you can't push four new stars at once.

No it can't. These guys were made at different times.

Also, one of the realities of booking is that you can't push that many people at once. If Rusev is getting a big push, you can't ALSO push Bryan, Reigns, and Rollins. Something has to give. So let's say Reigns is the other guy getting pushed, you feed Bryan to Rusev and Rollins to Reigns. You CANNOT make four new singles stars at the same time just through booking.

It is a conundrum of the modern product for sure. Something like ... Rusev over Orton - generic PPV Rusev over Jericho (if he's active) - generic PPV Rusev over Christian (if he's active) - generic PPV Rusev over HHH - Summerslam Rusev over HHH again (gimmick match) - Survivor Series Rusev over Reigns - Royal Rumble Rusev vs. Brock - Wrestlemania That's a push and a half. Although looking at the roster it seems pretty thin on established star power. I think another thing they could do is have some more squashes on Raws. JTTS or jobbers. A guy like Rusev could get some mileage out of kicking the shit out of the Mulkeys.

Could there be a "current" folder?

Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history?Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South? I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried. Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over. EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic. Cena's had one high profile loss. At the Rumble, he wasn't even pissed. In 2008, Cena jobbed clean at Mania to Orton, and was pinned by Orton again at Backlash. He then jobbed clean to JBL at Great American Bash and to Batista at Summerslam. That's four high profile losses and he seemed to do okay. The loss to Rusev at Fast Lane wasn't high profile? Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history?Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South? I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried. Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over. EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic. This is where not following wrestling or the modern product absolutely cripples you in these arguments. There was absolutely an argument for Cena to win, and the way the story was built coming into the show it was the "right" thing to do in the moment. But the number one problem with the modern WWE is the complete and utter failure to capitalize on an acts momentum and create new stars. I have been on record talking about the unselfishness of Cena before - there is no question that what he let Brock do to him is something no other ace would have done - but Cena beating Rusev, especially the way he beat Rusev, just continues the companies streak of not capitalizing on hot acts and creating new stars. Wins and losses do matter, which is why on the biggest show you should try and book based on who has the most to gain. Cena gained absolutely nothing at all from the win. Rusev would have been a made man. Now he's on the Bray Wyatt track, with no obvious next opponent (none of the over faces can really afford a loss right now), a potential split with his manager, and a probable continuation of a feud that he almost certainly isn't going to come back and win. In a world with talent rotating in and out of territories a Rusev loss absolutely would have been the right thing. In this world, with WWE's problems being what they are, it's just another star that wasn't created. Okay, I get that Rusev needs to be made into a star. The concept I still don't understand is why people think Cena is bullet proof from losses. Hogan during most of his WWF run had "nothing to gain" from most of his big wins. Royal Rumble 91 sticks out. He would have made big stars if he'd put any number of guys over. In the end he only put two people over: Warrior and Yokozuna. And the latter was an on the way out job and required lots of cheating. The loss to Andre was a screw job. My point is only this: clearly Hogan, even at his height, wasn't bullet proof. He had "nothing to gain" for any single win. But he had "everything to lose", potentially, from any single loss. I'm not arguing that Rusev didn't need the win. From the amount of money they spent on his entrance, it seems that they must have plans for him, because surely you don't invest in something like that for a guy who isn't going to be around. What I'm arguing is that this notion that Cena can just take losses and have it not affect him is completely alien to me and I'm not really convinced that the modern product being what it is has changed the baseline rules of how wrestling works. Look at Undertaker.

Johnny's rant at Pete 2:17 in. Laughing so much. Oh god, this might be one of my fave shows ever boys.

Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history? Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South? I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried. Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over. EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic.

You guys have me laughing my ass off here. Kris's line about Steph making HHH "look like a cuckold". Ha ha ha ha ha. Another genuine lol.

Diva match review was hilarious. Johnny's glazed donut line. Ha ha ha. Great feel on this show.

Jesus Christ, Dylan, almost crashed my car at that moment. Laughed very hard.