JerryvonKramer

When I was on the way to that TNA show on Satuday, I said to my wife something along these lines: "I don't know who any of the guys we'll see tonight are apart from Hogan, Sting, and Kurt Angle. If they do their jobs well, we'll know who to cheer, who to boo and -- without knowing any context -- we'll be rooting for one guy to beat the other." The PROBLEM was that they all looked the same and worked the same. It's was ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE to distinguish faces from heels, and to work out if a guy had a gimmick or not. That whole metally-goth thing is too played out. There were A LOT of guys in that crowd with sort of black metal style hoodies and things like that -- my wife even said "why are there so many goth types here?" Why is wrestling stuck in that shit sub-genre now? Anyway, my point here is that you take ANY ICON OF THE 80s and 2 things are automatically clear: 1. His gimmick 2. Whether he is a face or a heel (with the possible exception of Jake Roberts) Wrestling has lost its COLOUR. Everyone wears different shades of black. Everyone is a goth or metal-head. Everyone looks like fucking Jeff Hardy or Raven but on steroids. One of the two major promotions has to figure this out soon. Who are they appealing to with the goth stuff? What made the kids, and the old women, and the casual fans, and even the parents of the kids tune in and turn up back in the day? What caused the 80s boom? It was COLOURFUL CHARACTERS. That's it. It's Bigbossman and Akeem, it's Honkytonk Man, it's even fucking Brutus Beefcake. I'm not saying that wrestling needs to rewind to the 80s per se, but it needs more of THAT and less of ... well, what it's being doing for ages now. THAT SAID, I think WWE has moved on and is sort of ... a tiny bit ... more colourful than it has been and has moved away from they whole metally/ goth thing to an extent but the trouble is that no one has any real charisma and everyone STILL looks the same. You know that lampoon on Dreamworks characters all having the same face? Y'know this one: That's basically WWE wrestlers now. It's just the same guy again and again and again. I'm not talking about work here or even promo skills, but just about LOOK. How the fuck are we meant to tell these guys apart? Just for the visual comparison, look at this: It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why one group of them were SO OVER and the other group aren't.

Just reading El-P's account there is painful. Basically, as long as Will is still willing to make and send out sets, I should have enough material from the 80s and 90s to satiate my wrestling needs for the foreseeable future. I can't see any reason to watch the modern product at all -- WWE or TNA. I'll watch that Legends House thing they are doing and the 6 episodes of Legends of Wrestling they put out every year and that's it.

In that case, anyone know what he did between leaving the AWA and joining the WWF in 82? I assumed it was a straight move, but seemingly not.

It's weird because you think of Hayes as like a WWF guy through and through. Vince did a very good job not only of stealing Gagne's talent, but of making them loyal too. Partly that'll be better pay, but it's also man management skills.

What's the point of having Big Show on the roster if you aren't going to book him strong? Let's face it, he's on the roster because he's MASSIVE, that's his USP, that's why he's famous. Pointless to treat him as just another guy. Maybe they should run a few invitational battle royales and have him win them. What's stopping stuff like that getting over now? I mean even people who think wrestling is shit will still say "oh THAT's a big guy" when they see Big Show. Why not play to that as an asset? WCW actually did a better job of it in 95-6.

I think it's just about booking and protection, not size. Andre was really well protected, Big Show hasn't been since about 97. Once you've seen him jobbed out to Kane, where does he go from there? That isn't about era, it's about wrestling fundamentals. King Kong Bundy was effectively done as a major threat after Wrestlemania 2, he wasn't given the same sort of protection Andre was. As soon as a big man becomes "just another guy on the roster", their mystique as a massive threat is killed. And the WWF/E essentially buried Big Show back in 2001. If they wanted to start booking him again as an Andre-level threat they COULD do it, it would just take time. I'd point to Mark Henry as an example of how it's never too late.

Interested to see what people say if Dillon doesn't make top 10, who is getting in there? Would anyone rate Fuller over Dillon? A lot of questions for this one, I'd say number one is undisputed (Heenan) and probably number 2 as well (Cornette), but the conversation after that is interesting.: There are people who like Jimmy Hart and people who don't, same with Gary Hart. What about the old WWWF's "Triumvirate of Terror" (Blassie, Albano, Grand Wizard)? How do they rate? If there are really 10 better managers than Dillon, who were they? Do you rate Vince and Shane as "managers", or Bischoff? Was Meltzer right to rag on Mr. Fuji for all those years? What about Slick? Do we count women and if so is Sherri top 10, or Liz for that matter? What about manager runs people seldom talk about? Race in WCW, DiBiase post-93, Perfect as Flair's "Executive Consultant" in 92, Teddy Long as manager of Doom, Bruce Pritchard as Brother Love, Lanny Poffo as The Genius, Harvey Wippleman, Paul E. Dangerously in WCW, Paul Ellering in general -- do any of these have a case to be considered "top 10"?

Weirdly, WWF and WCW are the only two promotions to hire BOTH Lanny Poffo and Jim Powers. There could be a trivia thread game made out of this sort of question, but can't think how it would work right now.

The most interesting thing about that JBL gimmick was how he made a Republican right-wing character a heel in the ultra-conservative world of wrestling.

Yeah, it's always funny when Americans use "wanker" casually as if they don't even realise they are cursing. Twat and cunt are equally rude here though, the latter is pretty much the WORST swear word, it's just that -- and I believe this -- Brits are ruder than Americans when it comes to things like that. I've been to the States lots of times, and there's a kind of old-fashioned politeness in there, it's almost quaint. Then someone will try to take your bags from the taxi you've just had to pay a 10% tip for and expect money from you.

*spoilers* (obviously) So just got back from the London TNA show. Some thoughts: - Crowd was pretty hot, and Hogan got a big reaction every time he came out, easily the most over guy. Surprisingly hot for Sting too -- surprising because WCW was never that big here and a lot of my friends don't even know who Sting is. But there was a lot of TNA fans there, obviously. He got a few "Legend" chants. - No one else on the entire roster stood out really apart from, a tiny bit, Austin Aries (he seems to have bit of charisma). Eric Bischoff was decent on the mic. Everyone else might as well have been the same guy. "Bully Ray" shouted too much and got constant chants of "We want Devon" and then the classic "You fat bastard" football chant that I suspect they'll have to edit out. - Given that I am a wrestling fan switched off by the current product and I was there with my wife -- a total non-wrestling fan -- they had a CHANCE tonight of converting some people to watch the show at least. It was obvious that a decent chunk of the people there were the for Hogan, a lot of casual fans who wouldn't usually be a wrestling show. The had an opportunity of making us care about something or someone other than Hulk. In that endeavour they pretty much failed SPECTACULARLY. The only thing on the show I remotely gave a shit about was the Garret Bischoff angle. I saw Cowboy James Storm wrestle THREE matches and still totally don't give shit about him, two matches from Bobby Roode, the same. Couldn't care less. In fact, Roode and Storm might as well be the same guy for all the character either of them showed me. - There was a lot of stuff that made no sense at all. I'm fairly sure stuff was filmed out of sequence because we saw Samoa Joe and Magnus beat Crimson and Matt Morgan first match and then LATER cut a promo about how they are going to beat them. Made no sense. - Also, although they beat them, the belts didn't seem to change hands. This was not explained. There were some weird "Buckingham" rules in place to give one team 2 vs. 1 advantage. I'm assuming from the boos they got that Morgan and Crimson are heels, right, but they worked that entire match with the disadvantage and then lost. Against all booking logic. So I've already seen the tag champs beaten and then I'm meant to care about a promo where the face team who has just beaten them claim they are going to take their belts? WTF is going on? - There was some X-division triple threat match with Austin Aries, Doug Williams, and Alex Shelley and Aries was pinned. Again, no title change. I've already seen Gail Kim (another champ) pinned. And by the end of the night would see the World Champ tap out to Sting. So I've seen more or less every champ beaten tonight, but no title changes. Way to make those titles seem special. - The matches were mostly nondescript, but AJ Styles vs. Christopher Daniels was pretty good. It got a "This is awesome" chant, which I didn't fully understand. It was easily match of the night though. Only other worker who impressed me in any way was Austin Aires. He seems to be a heel, but he got a few babyface pops from the crowd. I was very unimpressed with both Storm and Roode. The female wrestlers were also fucking awful. - No one in the entire promotion apart from Hogan, Sting and Bischoff can actually talk on the mic. The promos from everyone else were uniformly awful. - Despite Hogan's best efforts to get Garrett Bischoff over, the crowd weren't having any of it, and he was solidly booed. They'd give Hogan a massive pop, then boo Garrett in the next breath, then cheer Hogan again. - The appearance of Angle was utterly pointless. I don't regret going because seeing Hogan was awesome, but most of the show was totally fucking shit. I've never been to a live show before, so it was fun, but I was really unimpressed with what I saw. EDIT: Oh and one thing more, I don't know what normal TNA crowds are like, but they seemed SO grateful to have a hot crowd. Almost embarrassing it was. You could tell they weren't used to it and the announcer kept thanking us.

How big was Thunderbolt Patterson at his peak?

What if you are talking about a non-wrestler though Dylan? Also "matches and performances" are AS SUBJECTIVE as measuring "charisma", which is what I've been trying to stress. Inducting Dynamite Kid for his work or "great matches" is no different from inducting Okerlund and Ventura for their charisma. Both are value calls. I was being rounded on for making charisma part of my Okerlund case, so it makes sense that being a "good worker" shouldn't be part of DK's case or anyone else's. Can't have it both ways. Either "traits" such as charisma and in-ring ability are part of people's cases, or they aren't. You can't say "oh, well THESE traits are important, but THESE ones aren't". That's not a consistent position. Not saying you ever said that Dylan, just clarifying why I brought up DK in the first place.

If a guy can be THAT good while half-assing it, then he's the best announcer of all-time in any sports.

Oh of course, Tully vs. Funk legends match from Slamboree '94. Might rewatch just for the commentary.

Yeah, I'd be very interested to see / hear that also. I suspect Ventura would be really respectful and on best behaviour. At the same time, I suspect Solie would overlook or not respond to any outrageous claims Jesse made about himself. I'd be very surprised if Jesse berated Solie like he did with McMahon and Schiavone. He worked Monsoon differently too -- he was more respectful with him than he was with McMahon, always. I reckon there MUST be a random Saturday Night or something with Solie and Ventura. There must be.

My point was mainly that for WON being "a great worker who had great matches" is enough to get in. Whereas for WWE, being "a loyal slave to the WWE" is enough for Vince to get in. The point was that neither is really objective is it?

My point is really that it would be quite close. If you put Robinson's biggest shows agaisnt Koloff's biggest shows from MSG with Bruno, or Backlund, it would be close. The differentiator is Robinson's work.

Could you point to segments then, for interviewers, rather than angles? Or matches that were enhanced by their commentary? (benchmark example being Heenan at Rumble 92) I mean I could do that, but it'd take ages, and the list would be really long -- in Ventura's case practically every match he ever called. "Wrestling is more important than announcing" is a value statement, it's ideological. If WON has specific values that need to be met, then sure, I can accept that. But all pretences of objectivity need to be dropped. The WON HoF is as skewed as the WWE's. It's just that where Meltzer and co have Dynamite Kid, Vince has got Koko B. Ware. Strictly speaking, neither belong in any sort of hall of fame. The fact that Dynamite is in the WON HoF but Davey Boy isn't tells you everything. Also, from this, I don't understand the rationale of any of the non-wrestling picks that aren't promoters. Surely it just comes down to the personal tastes of Meltzer and his base of voters. So sure, there's no case for Moonsoon and Ventura, whereas the case for JR is watertight, because WON readers love the NWA and rag on WWF. Fine, but if that's what it is, let's just call it like it is.

If the HoF is just about drawing then I don't know why half the guys there are there. Or why anyone would ever mention Chris Benoit in connection with it because it's total bullshit that he was ever a draw. And Warrior is a shoo-in And if it's only about "what happened" then the case Okerlund I outlined can be replaced with: "Gene Okerlund was with AWA when it was hot, then he moved to WWF and his tenture coincided with the boom period, he left the company in 1993, just before the WWF tanked and entered a real dark age -- he resurfaced in WCW when the company was on an upswing and was its mainstay announcer during its peak years of the Monday Night Wars. All-in-all, he was the most visible and successful on-air interviewer in that 20-year period". THAT's "what happened". But it's obvious to me looking at the list of inductees that it's about much much more than just drawing and much much more than simply "what happened". Was Billy Robinson a bigger draw than Ivan Koloff? Could the fact that he was one of the best technical wrestlers ever and the other a mediocre-at-best one have anything to do with it? When was Dynamite Kid a massive draw? Warrior probably in one year drew more than Robinson and Dynamite did in 10. I'm calling BS on this "what happened" stuff big time. Just moving the goalposts if you ask me. If Robinson and Benoit get in on workrate, then why not Okerlund or Ventura on charisma? Just seems totally arbitrary.

Here's the thing though, with non-wrestlers, you can't really point to facts and figures or saw how much they were a draw. The case has to rest on a guy's quality and such things as being associated with and contributing to hot promotions at their hottest time. Charisma has to be part of Okerlund's case. That's one of the reasons we're talking about him and not Craig DeGeorge right now. It's one of the reasons why even if Michael Cole stays with the company another 10 years+ he wont be thought of as HoF worthy. It's an intangible, sure, but it has to play a part.

I liked how Ross and Ventura worked too, but they worked because Ventura was smart and flexibile enough to adapt his style, not the other way around. Did Solie happen to do any announcing in his WCW run? I used to love his news updates.

On Monsoon solo being decent, I wonder how much Solie is as revered as he is comes down to the fact that 90% of his stuff was worked solo. How was Solie when he had to interact with colourful characters etc? I mean obviously, Solie was legit great at what he did and there's no argument about him one of the GOAT play-by-play guys for his knowledge of moves and so on, but I just wonder about how he was with a colour man. As I said before, JR in 92 came across as brittle and inflexible in 92 when he had to work with Ventura, and I'd say that's a knock on much-pimped early Ross.

Doesn't charisma make someone a better worker?