JerryvonKramer

To be honest, I don't care about any of that. People can vote for who they want and will. When did I say they couldn't or even shouldn't? And, yes, I don't see very many lower mid-carders being in the final 100. Which I guess was my point in the first place. I just maintain that anyone who says that card placement "doesn't matter" isn't being truthful with themselves or the reality of how wrestling works. If that stance rubs some people up the wrong way, well sorry, get over it. Since when did PWO become the make a wish foundation? Now we have to skirt around saying stuff like that in case it offends someone's sensibilities? "Paternalism"? Give me a break for god's sake. Sorry if I'm being unusually grumpy about this, but I've seen everything now. Lower mid-carder rights? Really? Maybe it's because my default setting is to think about the 70s and 80s, and the territories and so on, rather than about current WWE. In my thinking, if a guy had any sort of talent or charisma (or "look", which I guess falls outside of our criteria) and got over, he found himself rising up the card. It's not a simple 1:1 correlation, but anyone who gets a reaction and gets over, will find themselves given a push and usually in the upper mid-card for a good portion of their career at the very least. Maybe things don't work like that in current WWE -- although I seem to recall pushes for Punk, Bryan, the Shield and various others who have gotten over, so even that is overstated -- but the E in GWE is "ever" and in most promotions in wrestling history, the way things have worked is good reaction = push. As I said in a previous post, there is an element of smarkdom of always assuming the worst of the bookers and assuming that they have a base level of incompetence. That's not true really. Most promoters who made money had to listen to the crowd. I'm still not really seeing any examples of super-workers who spent their entire career low down on the card. Childs put it pretty well here: I don't want to put words in Parv's mouth, but I think he's arguing that main eventers don't simply stumble into those opportunities. They earn them by being great. And as a corollary, he's arguing that most wrestlers who were truly great earned strong card placements. So practically, it's rare to find career lower-card workers with strong cases for this list. Broadly, I agree with that line of thinking, though it has its limits, given the number of stiffs who've been thrown into main events over the years. Of course it's complicated by politics, fetishes for big muscle dudes, and so on. But bookers are seldom so blind that they completely squander talent. If someone spends their entire career curtain jerking, there's a reason for it. Whether it's lack of talent, lack of ambition / happy to stay in comfort zone (old Vince Sr WWF had a ton of those guys), lack of charisma, drug issues, or whatever else. Don't really understand why people wouldn't be comfortable co-signing that.

A lower midcarder is someone who beats JTTSs but typically loses to midcarders and above. Lower midcarders mostly don't get put in featured feuds and seldom get titles, although they might on occassion get title shots. Some lower midcarders: Brad Armstrong in WCW Sam Houston in JCP Tommy Rich in WCW in the early 90s Koko B. Ware in WWF The Bolsheviks in WWF The Orient Express in WWF The Killer Bees in WWF Albert in WWF circa Attitude Era Owen Hart in WWF before his push in 94 These are all lower midcarders. A "true midcarder" is someone on the level of, say, Dino Bravo in 1989. Bravo would not be a lower midcarder until his hair went dark circa late 91 /early 92. Midcarders who are firmly in the midcard (as opposed to lower or upper), might have feuds, they might even have transitional secondary title reigns, but mostly they are placeholders on cards. It's "another match" to eat up some time. Rick Martel spent most of his time around here when he was "The Model". An upper midcarder is someone who is featured and who might headline house shows. The IC champ or US champ. Tag champs. Guys with strong pushed characters who have had main event runs before (DiBiase, Piper, Jake, Dusty in 89 etc.) are upper midcarders.These guys are usually given time and space to shine and will be in matches that add value to a card. It might not be a main event, but it might give someone ANOTHER reason to see a show. Many of these will be de facto GWE worthy, but then many of them will spend their careers shuttling back and forth between here and the main event. Hope that clears things up. Tell me if you disagree.

Did it ever mean anything? Could it ever mean anything if they ever brought it back? Why couldn't the European Title get over like the NWA TV title or the old National title when Dusty or Tully had it? http://wrestlechat.net/photo-speculation-that-rusev-lana-are-bringing-back-an-old-wwe-title-soon/ Do you have any memories of the European title?

[/thread]?

I think it factors in before such a comparison takes place. i.e. With limited time and energy, whose work should I explore first: Dolph Ziggler's or John Cena's? You know it's Cena every day of the week. He takes priority because he's more important, simple as that. Maybe I never get round to Ziggler. It's just the way things are. On Titans we've watched tons of workers, but it's Backlund who eats up a lot of the attention. Even if I'm not his biggest fan, I'd have to tell anyone considering workers from the early 80s to start with him if they are going to look at WWF. You start with Backlund, not Bobby Duncum. You start with Cena, not Ziggler. But beyond that, it won't factor in because ... well, anyone who is going to be considered seriously for a GWE 100 is going to be exceptional in some way. No one even gets on the radar unless they've done something remarkable to stand out -- and that's very hard to do from the lower card, which is why no one is talking about those guys. And, yeah, Arn probably finishes above Harley in my list. But in some ways there are things to even out the fact one was NWA champ and the other wasn't. Arn enjoys a lot of advantages over a guy like Harley (almost entire career on tape, peak was more recent, style most of us grew up with, worked in places most of us are fond of, etc. etc.), and he worked almost all his career in the upper midcard having meaningful matches, so it's not a particularly uneven fight.

Being top of the card buys you a lot of other things, not just "opportunity". It buys you time and attention from fans. It buys significance. It buys weight and gravitas. If you're exploring Puerto Rico you start with Colon, not with whoever is bottom of the card. Try to imagine Jumbo vs. Tenryu as a mid-card feud. Is it as good? Does it mean as much? Can you think of any mid-card feuds that have that same level of weight? What I'm saying is that I think a lot of people who are touting "card placement doesn't matter" aren't being true to themselves as fans or to the game itself. The things that matter to fans, the things that stick in the memory, the moments of "greatness" mostly tend to come from featured matches in the main event. If the match is over World Tag Titles or the IC/US title it's "featured" -- or at least it was before parity booking and the burial of secondary titles happened. We can't pretend that none of these things factor into our thinking. Johnny Rodz was a pretty good worker, he was. But nothing he ever did ever mattered in the overall scheme of things. And no one talks about Rodz as a great. That's just the way of things. His job was to be a "good hand" and that's what he was. These things can work for and against guys in the main event. I think the level of vitriol thrown HHH's way is often a bit over the top, because he was super visible and failed in the role. We might think of Luger as an analogy -- although clearly Luger was better than HHH, he was a whipping boy in online communities for years. But look at the nominations. Luger and Triple H have threads to their name, Outlaw Ron Bass doesn't. My point is simply "don't pretend it doesn't matter" -- and I mean "don't pretend it doesn't matter more than simply 'opportunity'". Bill Thompson's accusing me of making a strawman. I'm not, him and various people have flat out said "card placement doesn't matter" in their estimation. They aren't being truthful.

I'd say it's a bit disingenuous to make Arn the poster boy for midcarders, because he enjoyed a level of visibility and success in his career that most midcarders could only dream of. Horseman, Flair's sidekick, greatest tag wrestler ever, never slid down the card like Tito or Greg, and so on. Arn is a bad example of a midcarder.

I don't want people saying with a straight face that "card placement doesn't matter to me" when it obviously does. Regal and Arn both had many many chances to have 20+ minute matches with something significant on the line (e.g. TV title), they were parts of feuds and angles that were featured. They were given real mic time. They weren't lower midcarders, even if Regal has spent portions of his career there. This thread is simply there as a reminder that whatever anyone says card placement does matter. The failure of anyone to produce a top 10 list of lower midcarders is proof of it. Also, all this talk and not a single Brad Armstrong mention? No one has even made a fist of it. Point is that if anyone is *that* good, they tend to get moved up the card sooner or later. Eddie and Jericho and Rey and Benoit all became world champs. And it's those guys who get more attention. And still no one is talking about the lower card guys. I made a thread for them. Here's a space for it. But no, let's stick to hypothetical talk of world-beating lower midcarders, rather than actual talk of them.

I sense a lot of old smart fan axes to grind in the stance. "Oh it's a travesty that Eddie vs. Malenko wasn't the main event when that egomaniac Hogan was hogging all the limelight, wah wah" There's also this smarky sense of thinking you always know better than the booker, that great workers were always held down by lesser talents etc. etc. It's a narrative that I'm very sceptical of that comes from shoot interview culture and the WON down into fandom. And yet, despite all these theoretical objections, I still see no top 10 lower midcarders list.

There's a reserve squad in the NFL ? I thought there was just a practice squad ? Maybe just terms, but I havn't followed the NFL closely this season and last. If it's still the practice squad.. That'd be more like TV enhacement talent. TBS Saturday Night Style. You're there to help make people better. And maybe get a spot in the battle royal / special teams, ha! Actually as a side note, I remember Bobby Beathard was kind of a genius with hiding raw talent on the practice squad back in the 70's and 80's. Keep em there cheap, have them learn and develop your way, see if they can make the squad. The massive amount of video and scouting now makes that pretty difficult to pull off. I think I'm still talking about wrestling.. Anyways, a point, for this thread was alluded to earlier. What is it ? I like talking bout card placement, but if this is just some proving ground for someone's arguement.. context would be nice. I guess I was more talking about being a second or third choice wide receiver or something like that. You're still part of the main roster, but don't always start and don't always see playing time. I get why people are making the argument that card position doesn't matter because they want to protect one or two of their favourites who might be special cases. I'm still waiting for that top 10 list. No one has one? And don't give me Bobby Eaton.

When we get there Charles, we might have to have you on GAB 92.

Brisco has a ton of these. See my Microscope thread for more. Jack Brisco vs vs Terry Funk (03/26/76) -- really excellent, you can tell this was a great match with great psychology, despite the clipping. Jack Brisco vs Edourd Carpentier (04/04/75) -- one of the most mind-blowing clipped matches I've ever seen. Jack Brisco vs Bill Watts (09/13/75) -- not sure if it's clipped, but everyone needs to see this for Watts's commentary. Jack Brisco vs Harley Race (11/09/73) -- looks terrific from what we get Race has a few too (again see Microscope): Harley Race vs. Terry Funk (4/7/78) -- not as good as that Brisco one though Harley Race vs. Ted DiBiase (1/79) -- this one looks like a GREAT match from what we see

Isn't that like saying that the guys who make the reserve squad aren't given a chance to have great games in the NFL? If not, why not?

I made this: Because I don't think some people have the same definitions in mind as me. NB. No idea how to classify Snuka at that point, lower? Small oversight.

I'd like to see a show on Liger as a guy who might sneak into a lot of people's top 20 who I haven't seen a ton of discussion on. I'm also interested in Akiyama. We will be providing extensive converge of 70s candidates on Titans Xtras during 2015, mostly beardy discussion between me and Pete about NWA champs, headlocks and hour-long broadways in Japan.

It's not. Rock n Roll Express were a main event drawing tag-team working long 20-30 minute matches, gimmick matches, etc. They were on the top of cards. They were a featured act with feuds and storylines, who would have mains on the house show loop and semi-mains on PPVs. A lower mid-carder at that time would be someone like Sam Houston or Rocky King. I don't see threads for those guys or discussion of them. I don't see anyone discussing Jim Powers.

And where will they rank for you? Interested.

How many lower mid-carders are being discussed primarily on the strength of their lower mid-card work? I think people are genuinely delusional about this. Ideally the card placement doesn't matter, but you're kidding yourself if you think it doesn't.

My view on this is less nuanced. NWA World Champ when it mattered > career mid-carder > career JTTS or jobber People can pretend that it doesn't matter but who is putting Johnny Rodz forward other than my man Kelly? Where's all the Mike Jackson discussion? Vast majority of people being discussed are main eventers or upper midcarders. People will point to Arn, but he worked a hell of a lot of semi-mains in his career and was part of two of the most high-profile stables in wrestling history, so let's not kid ourselves that it doesn't matter.

I don't like this at all.

What makes you say this? What does Henry have that Butch Reed or Tony Atlas didn't? what the next couple replies said, plus the olympic cred which i figure would have mattered much more back then. in reagan's america, you know... but i think the size is particularly important. i've always had the impression that the 80s were the peak of people in the business being size marks. NWA champ is a different proposition though. He'd have been a good traveling heel or a good Hogan opponent.

Not really buying it to be honest. I don't see Mark Henry as NWA champ.

What makes you say this? What does Henry have that Butch Reed or Tony Atlas didn't?

http://placetobenation.com/titans-of-wrestling-39-wwf-april-1981/ Take an acid-induced trip through Pat Patterson's 60s San Francisco mind as the Titans go back to 1981 for a legendary match ... and a pile of other random shit. On the docket tonight: 04-04 ANDRE THE GIANT vs THE HANGMAN WWF TV 04-06 PAT PATTERSON vs SGT SLAUGHTER BAD MADISON SQUARE GARDEN 04-81 BOB BACKLUND, STAN HANSEN PROMOS WWF TV 04-06 BOB BACKLUND vs STAN HANSEN WWF TITLE/CAGE MADISON SQUARE GARDEN 04-11 GEORGE STEELE vs JACK CARSON WWF TV 04-18 DON MURACO vs CHARLIE BROWN WWF TV 04-18 MIL MASCARAS vs JOHNNY RODZ WWF TV 05-04 PETER MAIVIA vs RICK MCGRAW WWF TV 05-04 BOB BACKLUND vs KING KONG MOSCA WWF TITLE MADISON SQUARE GARDEN 05-81 SGT SLAUGHTER, PAT PATTERSON PROMOS WWF TV 05-04 PAT PATTERSON vs SGT SLAUGHTER ALLEY FIGHT MADISON SQUARE GARDEN 05-81 LOU ALBANO PROMO WWF TV 05-04 MONSOON/MARTEL/GAREA vs HANSEN/REX/ALBANO MADISON SQUARE GARDEN Highlights include: - Killer Khan under the bed - Charlie Brown bio featuring Apollo Creed and Lando Calrissian - Assessing Slaughter's "greatest hits" - How Pat Patterson's t-shirt helped decrease crime in New York - Plus: Guys who wrestled in 5+ decades, the most beautiful pro wrestlers in history, and much much more!

Agree with Will, Johnny and Bix that it's neither a shock nor anything to be angry about.