JerryvonKramer

Coming back to the Ventura tip - I've been listening to a pile of 80s WWF reviews on various podcasts this week, a lot of travel. Talking about Review A Wai and similar such shows. etc. Anyway, EVERY SHOW. And I mean EVERY SHOW, without fail, comments on how great Ventura is, how he made shitty matches more enjoyable, how he made stuff like the Dino Bravo weight-lifting segment from Rumble 88 from being awful to watchable, how he constantly put over the stars and the action and the storylines, how he is consistently smart, funny, etc. For an accouncer to stand out THAT MUCH, with like 3 different sets of reviewers over 10+ shows he has to be special surely. Incidentally, Monsoon gets a lot of stick for a lot of stuff: -Repeatedly using "to Pearl Harbour" as a verb - Repeatedly using the phrase "it's a happening" - using the phrase "the excellence of execution" for wrestlers other than Bret - not knowing the names of the Jumping Bomb Angels. Also, ALL of these reviews have ragged on McMahon whenever he's been in the booth. But the common factor is Jesse love.

I think it is absolutely crucial, yes. I reckon if you did a straight up "Who should be in the HoF, Dory Funk Jr. vs. Terry Funk" poll that Terry would beat Dory by over 90%. Why? What's the big difference. Comes down to charimsa in my view. Dory was probably the better NWA champ too.

With respect though, shouldn't we question this if HTM -- the most notorious of all blow hards -- is our only source here? Also, do you think HTM would get the same deal as, say, a DiBiase or a Piper? Let alone some of the other guys on Legends contracts (Austin, Bret, Shawn etc.)

Oh right, THAT low? I thought it would be closer to like 80-100k.

Really? I was under the impression that AT MOST a guy like HTM would be picking up between $800-$1k for an indy appearance. He can make more THAT way than on a Legends contract? Seriously? How much are guys on now in general? I was looking at WCW Nitro era payroll the other night and DIBIASE was on $250,000 a year for doing basically nothing, Hogan was on over $4million basic.

Wasn't this the guy who had some Jack Tunney-style role in All Japan for like 20 years? "Commissioner" or PWF Chairman or something. Stan Hansen took over from him in 2001! Apparently he held that post from 1974 till 2001. He would have been 79 in 2001. Shit.

These seem to be the two options open to the wrestling royalty of the 80s and 90s. Maybe about 50 guys all-in. Seemingly the likes of Jake Roberts and Honky Tonk Man don't make the cut and are destined to work the indies or just retire. A bunch of elite guys -- Piper, DiBiase, Nash, Bret, Austin, Michaels -- get to sit on these WWE Legends Contracts. Another bunch of elite guys -- Hogan, Flair, Sting -- all work for TNA and still wrestle. I'm wondering about how these two options stack up. How much do you reckon a Legends contract pays? I notice that four of the guys I've named there (DiBiase, Hart, Austin, Michaels) are guys with career-ending injuries. Could working for TNA be more lucrative than one of those deals? Just wondering why would Hogan and Flair would opt to compete in the ring when SURELY if people like Snuka and Slaughter can get on these Legends contracts, they'd get them easily. I'd imagine that they'd both get reasonably high-end deals on them too. The other thing I wonder about is road agents and trainers: Arn Anderson, Steamboat, Rotunda all have roles in that capacity. Surely Anderson and Steamer would be eligible for a Legends contract. Could being a road agent possibly pay more? Or do they have some of the Legends benefits tied into their package?

Thinking more on Gorilla and I wonder if there's an argument that Ventura and Heenan both carried him? Like Ventura was great no matter who he was with. Stick him with Lord Alfred and Elvira and he's still awesome. Stick Monsoon with Lord Alfred and then it's just a tired cliche-ridden play-by-play guy struggling with an awkward partner (although Alfred is probably underrated for his subtle heelishness). So maybe we can say that Monsoon is "carryable"? The sort of commentary equivalent of Luger in 88-9? That sounds wrong.

As well as my ongoing All Japan set watching, I've been watching these videocasts of 80s WWF PPVs by this group of Irish lads called OSW Review: http://blip.tv/oswreview Really good production values, very very well put together and quite a good laugh in places. They absolutely love Ventura and have named him their MVP for first 3 Wrestlemanais and Survivor Series 87, ha ha. However, the really need to smarten up on some things and there is a (ever so slightly irritating) tendency to make comparisons to modern WWE -- for example at one point one of them argues that Savage vs. Steamboat is nowhere near the match that Christian vs. Orton was. I get the impression that the main guy who puts it together -- Jay his name is -- is much more of a smart/ hardcore fan than his mates. However, these are well worth the watch if you're into that period. Doubt there's anything new to learn, but they are entertaining and doing seeing the visuals is a novel way to do it. Obviously the BEST (mainstream) old-school wrestling podcast is the one with Dre and the Blackcat Duke Williams -- Flairchops: http://www.flairchop.com/ -- I don't mind shilling those guys, they've given me over 100 hours of free wrestling-based entertainment. I think Blackcat posts here every once in a while.

If Flair is there I'll lose my shit

Given that I'm now going to these London tapings, pretty much 100% for Hogan and Sting, can someone fill me on this piece of shit show? 1. Who are the key stars? Haven't heard of most of the roster. 2. Current angles

I've been a little surprised today by JUST.HOW.OVER. Hogan still is with like everyone.

I idea of Hogan on that show is faintly ridiculous.

Holy fuck, my wife met Hulk Hogan today. She has pictures with him and everything (she's a tv journalist, he was in for an interview). Fuck it, I just booked tickets to the TNA show in London on Saturday. I'm such a mark.

See, I can't even imagine Gene as a play-by-play guy. One of the things I'm looking forward to on the AWA set.

Mean Gene Okerlund Ok, this is a little less straight-forward than Ventura because it is not 100% about ability / quality. Here are the things I think Mean Gene has going for him. 1. Synonymous with the role - No other guy has defined the interview role to the same extenet as Okerland. Who are his competition here? David Crockett? Schiavone? Lord Alfred? Kevin Kelly? The Coach? Mooney? He absolutely blows all of those out of the water. In a league of his own when it comes to that. 2. Synonymous with boom-era WWF - I think Mean Gene is even more synonymous with this era AS AN ON-SCREEN PERSONALITY than Vince (or Ventura or any other member of the broadcast team). As evidence of this -- think of how many arcade and video games had screens with Mean Gene prominently featured doing interviews. The two that stick out in my memory are the one with DiBiase and Andre in Superstars and the one with Legion of Doom on Wrestlefest. But that's just scratching the surface and that's just GAMES. Mean Gene was BUILT INTO the promos of certain guys. Hogan being the main one: "Well d'ya know something MEAN GENE?" But Savage had his version of that. Hell, The Iron Sheik had his version of it ("Gene Mean", lol). He was like an omni-present. 3. Authority on the camera and in his voice - Mean Gene COMMANDED the segments he was a part of. His voice is distinctive, deep and made you care about what was going on. He did a good line in concerned (i.e. for injured babyface), and a good line in righteous indignation (i.e. when interviewing a heel). I'd suggest that no interview man before nor since has had such an authorative on-screen presence. 4. Professionalism and workrate - aside from Vince himself, I don't know if anyone else put more MAN HOURS into his job than Gene in the 80s. He recorded 100s of interviews back-to-back for long periods. He was working with guys of wildly different levels of talent and competency on the mic -- and he did a SUPER job of keeping them to time, keeping them on topic and butting in if required. I think that is quite a skill and it's easy to overlook. Anyone can hold a mic if you're standing next to Ric Flair, but what about some of the shitty guys Gene had to interview over the years? And not all of them were pre-tapes -- oftentimes he'd be working LIVE at the bigger shows. Also, the fact he had the balls 1) to sing the national anthem at WM1 and 2) to step into the ring when he was asked and 3) to do the Gobblygooker spot just shows you that this is a guy who'd do anything that was required of the job. I think we're talking about legendary levels of commitment there. Also, for what it's worth, he always does a SOLID job of hosting Legends of Wrestling on 24/7 and anything else he's been asked to do in the 21st century. I have respect for Mean Gene -- and if you don't, why not? He deserves it. 5. Charisma - he had this vibe of having been around the block and being nobody's fool. Okerlund's on-air personality was that he was a shrewed operator with a hint of being a guy who liked a cocktail or two after hours and an eye for the ladies -- the latter part became sleazier into his WCW career. But whichever way you look at it he was a BIG personality. You couldn't call him a bland company man. Those are the 5 things I'd rest his case on. The major knock on Mean Gene, which people bring up is that "he brought little if anything to WCW". Not true. He brought all of the qualities he brought to WWF. He bought them LEGITIMACY. He bought them FAMILIARITY. And tell me his performance in the vignettes with Flair in the run up to Starrcade '93 aren't the stuff of greatness. I think Okerlund is a 100% should be in case. More than anyone else mentioned in this entire thread. Certainly any of the wrestlers (Dino Bravo? Give me a break!) and more than Ventura or any of the other guys I've pimped.

On the Ventura tip, I forgot to mention that he's arguably the MVP at Wrestlemania 2 out of ANYONE on the card. He had to work with Lord Alfred and Elvira and he made it easily the best of the 3 commentary teams at that show. I don't understand anyone who doesn't rate Ventura as GOAT colour man.

My case for Okerlund is forthcoming, see HoF thread soon.

Whatever happened to the Mean Street Posse?

What authority is this hooking the leg thing from because watch ANY WWF show from 85 to 95 and you can bet you'll see a leg hooked in almost every match. They DID hook the leg. Maybe they were told not to hook the leg for 2 counts so Gorilla could make that call? Anyway, it seems a tiny tiny thing to pick him up for. What about all the times he said "backdrop AND A BEAUTY" when Hercules Hernandez did the shittest backdrop you've ever seen? What about all the times he shilled Bret for being "the excellence of execution"? Seems absurd to me to say he buried people just because he'd always pick up on not hooking the leg.

The Ventura recording was from 93-4, so the insinuation was that Meltzer was getting stuff from Ross in '92 and before that. If you look at the awards it does look ridiculous that Gorilla wins worst commentator and Ross best commentator for something like 8 years straight. I mean there's NO WAY Jim Ross was the best commentator in 1993. That's just stupid. Interesting that Vince never picked up best nor worst.

Oh man, that's cheap. Taking pot-shots at Mooney now! lol I think with Monsoon that he was probably on auto pilot about 90% of the time. He had a stock phrase for every occassion, he treated almost everything as if he'd seen it before. BUT he was able to do things that JR, Vince, Solie and Schiavone couldn't. I will save the rest of this post for my HoF case in a few days

jdw - did you listen to the Ventura thing that was posted a few days back? (it'll be gone now it was on megaupload) He was saying on that that Ross was never criticized by Meltzer because he was feeding him information and results. Is there any truth to that at all?