JerryvonKramer

What's this about?!

Where the Big Boys Play #4 – Starrcade 84: Part 1 Chad and Parv take a look at the first six matches of Starrcade ’84. Highlights include: Kamala’s wife and his payoffs, some thoughts on World Class, the definition of “catch-as-catch-can”, what the hell were the Zambuie Express meant to be? Dusty Rhodes looking the biggest he has EVER looked drapped in a tracksuit jacket, more complaints about the quality of finishes on these early NWA shows, some appreciation of JJ Dillon as a manager, Chad reveals his undying love for “Boogie Woogie Man” Jimmy Valiant, and Parv wonders why heels are always intelligent schemers and why faces are always happy-go-lucky “not too bright” types. Where the Big Boys Play #5 – Starrcade 84: Part 2 Chad and Parv complete their review of Starrcade 84. Highlights include: Parv speculates over when Minnesota Flair became “Slick Ric”, discussion over the psychology of heel-in-peril sections in tag matches, Ricky Steamboat’s reputation and where it comes from, Chad judges the judges for the mainevent, Dusty’s atheltic background, and our picks for MVP, match of the night and least valuable player.

I'd actually be interested in Sharpe vs. Houston ... who is going to go on offense there and what is that offense going to be? Admit it, that's kind of intriguing.

Where the Big Boys Play #4 – Starrcade 84: Part 1 Chad and Parv take a look at the first six matches of Starrcade ’84. Highlights include: Kamala’s wife and his payoffs, some thoughts on World Class, the definition of “catch-as-catch-can”, what the hell were the Zambuie Express meant to be? Dusty Rhodes looking the biggest he has EVER looked drapped in a tracksuit jacket, more complaints about the quality of finishes on these early NWA shows, some appreciation of JJ Dillon as a manager, Chad reveals his undying love for “Boogie Woogie Man” Jimmy Valiant, and Parv wonders why heels are always intelligent schemers and why faces are always happy-go-lucky “not too bright” types.

jdw, did you see my post here: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?s=&a...t&p=5510645 That's more or less right isn't it?

Amen to that. This is kind of what I was trying to get at in the previous thread. Think current WWE is genius in a way, in its ability to work self-professed "smart" fans in the way they do. It's a new way of being worked, but they are still being worked.

Can't imagine Bruno was up to much in those 86 matches. Was he still considered a draw in 86?

Forgot to mention that my friends have tickets to see the Olympic Wrestling on 10th August and, knowing I'm a big wrestling fan, asked me to go along with them. Never seen any ameutuer wrestling at all before. Anyone know anything about this? Any quick primers would be welcome.

Think Cena vs. 98-00 heel Angle would be more interesting.

I agree, the WWF tag roster wasn't deep enough. I'm against the US tag titles even (as I've said before), but IC tag titles would have been ridiculous. The WWF was fairly consistent with number of tag teams for years. At any one time you had: Top face team - holders or in contention for tag titles Number 2 face team - up and coming, or "in the mix" for the tag titles Number 3 face team - tag team that is just kind of there, no real push, but will get wins over lesser teams and lose to those above JTTS face team - mainly there to put over other teams, only beat jobbers Top heel team - holders or in contention for tag titles Number 2 heel team - up and coming, or "in the mix" for the tag titles Number 3 heel team - tag team that is just kind of there, no real push, but will get wins over lesser teams and lose to those above JTTS heel team - mainly there to put over other teams, only beat jobbers They kept it like that for years until about 1993. Could probably go through year-by-year slotting in the various teams into those slots. Shall I do it? Ok. 1986 Top face team - The British Bulldogs Number 2 face team - The Faboulous Rougeaus Number 3 face team - The Killer Bees JTTS face team - The Hillbillies Top heel team - The Dreamteam Number 2 heel team - The Hart Foundation Number 3 heel team - The Funks JTTS heel team - Iron Sheik and Nikolai Volkoff 1987 Top face team - Strike Force Number 2 face team - The British Bulldogs Number 3 face team - The Faboulous Rougeaus JTTS face team - The Killer Bees Top heel team - The Hart Foundation Number 2 heel team - The Islanders Number 3 heel team - Demolition JTTS heel team - The Bolshevicks 1988 Top face team - Strike Force --> Powers of Pain Number 2 face team - The Hart Foundation Number 3 face team - The British Bulldogs --> The Rockers JTTS face team - The Young Stallions Top heel team - Demolition Number 2 heel team - The Brainbusters Number 3 heel team - The Faboulous Rougeaus JTTS heel team - The Bolshevicks 1989 Top face team - Demolition Number 2 face team - The Hart Foundation Number 3 face team - The Rockers JTTS face team - The Bushwackers Top heel team - The Brainbusters Number 2 heel team - The Twin Towers Number 3 heel team - The Powers of Pain JTTS heel team - The Faboulous Rougeaus 1990 Top face team - Demolition --> The Legion of Doom Number 2 face team - The Hart Foundation Number 3 face team - The Rockers JTTS face team - The Bushwackers Top heel team - The Colossal Connection --> Demolition Number 2 heel team - Power and Glory Number 3 heel team - Rhythmn 'n' Blues JTTS heel team - The Orient Express 1991 Top face team - The Legion of Doom Number 2 face team - The Hart Foundation --> The Rockers Number 3 face team - The Rockers --> The Bushwackers JTTS face team - The Bushwackers --> Virgil and Tito Santana Top heel team - The Nasty Boys Number 2 heel team - Demolition --> The Natural Disasters Number 3 heel team - The Beverley Brothers JTTS heel team - The Orient Express 1992 Top face team - The Legion of Doom Number 2 face team - The Natural Distasters Number 3 face team - The Nasty Boys JTTS face team - The Bushwackers Top heel team - Money Inc Number 2 heel team - The Beverley Brothers Number 3 heel team - The Orient Express JTTS heel team - n/a (tag division starting to thin out now) 1993 Top face team - The Steiner Brothers Number 2 face team - The Smokin' Gunns Number 3 face team - The Bushwackers JTTS face team - n/a Top heel team - Money Inc --> The Quebecers Number 2 heel team - The Headshrinkers Number 3 heel team - The Beverley Brothers JTTS heel team - n/a The only year where there could feasibly have been an IC tag division was in 89-90, when the likes of The Bolshevicks were pushed so far down the card they were effectively pure jobbers and not in the top 4 teams.

SLL are you agreeing with me there or are you saying they somehow linked the World title to the NWA/WCW title with more than the visual representation of Big Goldy?

They missed a trick by not linking the World Belt to the NWA/WCW lineage. However, I broadly disagree on the "too many belts" thing. Watch 80s NWA, then you'll know what "too many belts" means.

1. The Attitude era broke wrestling 2. The WWE has spent the past decade putting on the appearance of trying to put it back together again, but they know it is broken. 3. But the Attitude era broke wrestling, so what worked before wont work anymore, the WWE know this. 4. However, Vince is clever and knows that most of the fanbase think that somehow he doesn't know that, so he still goes ahead and books it the same way anyway. Why? 5. Because every fan thinks they are "smart" now and takes pleasure in ripping apart the product -- every fan has a blog or forum or whatever on which to analyse the latest Raw and Smackdown. Book Cena as Superman and they'll complain, keep the belt on him for 2 years and they'll moan about getting him shoved down their throats, job him out and they'll moan about devaluing the title -- the WWE know that whatever they do, however they book it, whichever way they write it, they'll get the product ripped to shreds week after week after week, but ... 6. They don't care, because if people are talking about their show, they are talking about their show and ... 7. All of the "smart fans" are actually just massive marks, maybe even bigger marks than the Hulkamaniacs in the 80s, why? Sure, they talk about booking, and angles, and whatnot now, but they are still programmed to think in certain ways -- for example, Shawn Michaels as the number 1 legend of all time ever ever ever, and Cena at least being in that conversation -- shit, they even control the list of guys that the fan who *thinks* he's smarter than all the rest of them might bring up in that conversation. In some ways, it's a lot more insidious than it ever was before, in others it is genius. The best way to control subversion is not to stamp on it, it's to give it some room to air itself, even to foster it -- then it is contained and doesn't grow into anything bigger. I believe that the WWE has relied on this power-containment model with its fanbase for some time now. Can only marvel at how it continues to work. I am convinced that this is the case. So, yeah, they don't care about the titles or anything else. All they want is for all of its legions and legions of fans to carry on watching the show disgruntled and moaning about it on blogs, twitter, facebook etc. etc. etc. They know they aren't going to lose their audience now.

Came today! YES!

Every morning I go to my postbox to see if my set as arrived and it's still not here No one batted an eyelid when I rated Bobby Heenan over Shawn as a worker in that thread. I am so psyched to see that first match against Lord Alfred.

Where the Big Boys Play #3 – Final Conflict Before moving on to Starrcade ’84, Chad and Parv rewind back to March 1983 for this big show at Greensboro Coliseum — a good example of what a supercard in the pre-PPV era might have looked like and featuring a main event that has been mythologized by smart fans for years. Topics include: assessing Dr Tom Miller as a ring announcer, the concept of face managers including Arnold Skaaland in WWF, the plight of ageing 60s and 70s wrestlers in the 80s, Chad wonders why Gary Hart was known as “Playboy”?, the pod pays homage to the energy of David Crockett, and an unusually in-depth review of the legendary Sgt. Slaughter and Don Kernodle vs. Ricky Steamboat and Jay Youngblood cage match for the NWA world tag titles.

Realistically, I guess it does sort of have to be a case-by-case scenario, doesn't it? Otherwise people will be talking about guys like The Warlord or Batista. Speaking of, if you try to go by weight, do you go by real weight or billed weight because that makes a big difference too. I'd probably class The Warlord as a big man.

Is it because we might pick you up on your renegade use of the apostrophe? I'm going to say 300lbs+ With guys who are basically at the 300lb mark, then maybe case by case. Someone like The Barbarian was always booked as a big guy. Hogan, despite being the same weight and even a bit taller, was not booked "as a big guy". In the two lists I produced, the first are guys where I don't think it's even worth discussing if Kane is better than them or not. But the second list may throw up some closer calls. Sid - reckon most would give it to Kane Bruiser Brody - traditionally, Brody might have walked it, but nowadays I'm not so sure. Big Show - hmmm Mabel / Viscera / Big Daddy V - I know his more recent run was quite highly rated. Might just shade it over Kane. Kevin Nash - really depends on if you think Nash ever had a good match in his life or was ever effective. Some people do. King Kong Bundy - case of how well did Bundy play his role vs. how well does Kane play his. Kamala - I've always hated Kamala, but caught heat on here in the past for ragging on him. He was better than Kane at selling pre-87. Big John Studd - I've only really seen him in the Wrestlemania match and in the 89 Rumble, but by all accounts wasn't bad. Mark Henry - highly rated in recent years, mocked for his armbar-laden offense in times of yore Abdullah the Butcher - How many terrible matches did Abby have? Don't think it's totally clearcut. Ernie Ladd - looked great to me on the Mid-South set, but I've seen Ladd criticized too. Mike Awesome - looking again, misses out on the "big man" criteria by 10lbs, so discount. Rikishi - very over during the Attitude era, reasonably effective worker.

What would be interesting is a thread comparing big guys and see where in the pantheon of big guys Kane ranks. Here are guys that are better than him no questions asked (NB. still not got my AWA set through so no Blackwell yet from me): One Man Gang Stan Hansen John Tenta Andre Bam Bam Bigelow Vader The Barbarian Yokozuna Undertaker Giant Baba Brock Lesnar Terry Gordy Meng / Haku - he got up to over 300lb in WCW More interesting comparisons, perhaps: Sid Bruiser Brody Big Show Mabel / Viscera / Big Daddy V Kevin Nash King Kong Bundy Kamala Big John Studd Mark Henry Abdullah the Butcher Ernie Ladd Mike Awesome Rikishi

I'd just like to mention, once again, that I think that matches aren't the be all and all. Warrior probably had more "great matches" in the WWF than DiBiase did in the WWF, does that mean that Warrior > DiBiase? Matches are just one measure. Any true comparison of Shawn and another wrestler has to take other things into account. It has to be an holistic comparison. It doesn't just come to "Well Shawn had 15 great matches and Ted only had 8, so Shawn wins". That approach seems rather crude to me.

goc = hero. Amazing.

Can't believe this is actually happening. What are we going to be debating next? Duggan in the WWF? The best matches of Nailz? The pros and cons of peak Hugh Morris?

This was just sarcasm Here's a little thought: now Tunney was a guy with zero charisma who never looked comfortable in front of a camera, and Jim Crockett Jr was also a guy with zero charisma who never comfortable on camera. So ... Why did Tunney seem to suit the role and work, but not Crockett? Tiny thing I know, but there's no logical reason for Tunney to have worked but he did and vice versa.

This seems like a good thing to me. One thought I had: what are records like for PPV buys outside of wrestling? Boxing say. Might be nice to verify Meltzer's figures with that in any given year to find the total no. PPV households. PS. Phil, tiny point but technically, Dibiase was captain in SS 89, and there was a brief Ted/Zeus angle going in. Argument to say SS90 was sold as much on Hogan's match as Warrior's too. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay-per-view#HBO_PPV A lot of boxing and UFC results there.