JerryvonKramer

Really? What does he have in the locker to rival something like Flair vs. Steamboat at Spring Stampede '94? Or Flair vs. Savage at Great American Bash '95?

Why are people saying Lawler? He was 45 in 1994. What are the great Lawler matches 94-present?

Who had the greatest "well past their prime" career outside of Funk and Flair? I think Bockwinkel would be in the conversation. Who else? People talk about Thesz and Edouard Carpentier, but were they any good at that age? To give some dates for when key people were 45: Thesz in 1961 Carpentier in 1971 Verne Gagne in 1971 Fritz von Erich in 1974 Bockwinkel in 1979 Sammartino in 1980 Baba in 1983 Inoki in 1988 Hansen in 1994 Tenryu in 1995 Savage in 1997 Hogan in 1998 The number of people who actually wrestled past 45 in major promotions is actually quite small. A lot of guys were younger than you might think when they retired. To give one example, Harley Race was 45 in 1988! Arn Anderson was only 45 in 2003! Wrestlers tend to look older than they are.

I guess a better question might be: what was consistently WCW's best annual show? Again, I'd say it was Superbrawl, but if you include Beach Blast as being the same event as Bash at the Beach, that would be a talking point. Also, something needs to be said for Fall Brawl/ War Games here too: for ages, they seemed to book feuds to the War Games match as a point of climax. That's another thing about Starrcade, feuds wouldn't end there and they weren't built towards there. I've been thinking about this of late: WCW seemed to be a product geared towards TV RATINGS, so it was always like they'd use the PPV to get you to watch Nitro rather than use Nitro to get you to buy the PPV. Weird.

I know that technically the answer is Starrcade. But do you know what I mean when I say that it never felt like a really big deal? In the 90s at least. Starrcade never feels like "the show" in the same way that Wrestlemania does.

With WWF, it's always been clear that Wrestlemania is "the big one", but with WCW Starrcade never seemed to have that same special night feel to it. Always seemed like just another PPV, especially as for many years they devoted it to experimental tournaments and gimmicks. I was thinking about this and for me I think it's Superbrawl, but what do you think? Superbrawl, for some reason, was almost always had a good card with really good matches on it.

Are you making excuses for Hogan again McMahon?

Just watched Marcus Bagwell and Scotty Riggs go over Shark (Earthquake) and Maxx in less than 5 minutes on The Main Event leading into Slamboree 1996. Wow, the internet is amazing sometimes, here it is on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et48SdWu4cI Now, while they do call this as a big upset, why is Shark getting pinned so easily there? Then Giant comes out and chumps him out even more with a choke slam. Talk about a burial.

I was going to mention: But it's not just that, it's the fact that he celebrates it like a massive achievement and milks the crowd for about 10 minutes after it.

Fantastic post Rainmaker! I think you're right that 1987 is definitely the transition year. With the Andre feud being the real capper to the "rock 'n' wrestling" era. You can witness a sea-change from the cast of characters who were featured in the Hogan cartoon ... Just to recap: the faces in that show were Junkyard Dog, Captain Lou Albano, André the Giant, Wendi Richter, Superfly Jimmy Snuka, Hillbilly Jim, and Tito Santana. And the heels were Roddy Piper, Iron Shiek, Nikolai Volkoff, The Fabulous Moolah, Big John Studd, and Mr. Fuji. By the time of Wrestlemania 4 almost all these guys are gone already, on their way out or pushed way down the card. I always thought that Vince had a particular fondness for the 83-7 roster and that's why we see COUNTLESS comebacks and second chances for the names listed above. How many Snuka comebacks did we see? How many times were Sheik and Volkoff given jobs when they had no place on the roster (think Sheik in 91-2 as Col. Mustafa and Volkoff in 94). The Big John Studd comeback in 1989. Albano managing the Headshrinkers in 1994-5. Even Hillybilly Jim made a come back in 1995, for god's sake. If you look at the 2004 Hall of Fame, the first one they did in the modern "big deal" sort of style: JYD, Tito, and Big John Studd were all STRAIGHT in there. Piper, Orndorff, Volkoff and Sheik the very next year. I don't think Vince is ever seen as the sentimental type, but he DEFINITELY has a thing for that group of workers. Incidentally, I think the next transition point or paradigm shift happened in 1993. 83-87: Rock n roll wrestling era - as discussed above 87-93: Global domination era [can you think of a better phrase?] - you can see the big turning point by contrasting Royal Rumble 93 with Survivor Series 93. By the end of the year most of that roster has gone: biggest WWF stalwart names being Hogan, DiBiase, Tito Santana, Bossman, Earthquake (came back for a brief spell in 94), Bam Bam Bigelow, and Repo Man / Smash. And also Flair. Should be mentioned that on air it was a big transition too. Heenan and Mean Gene Okerlund left around this time as well. Gorilla Monsoon had stopped commentating on the A shows and PPVs. Even Sean Mooney had left (remember Todd Pettingal?) I think 1993 might be an even bigger changing of the guard than 1987. 94-97: New generation / cartoon era/ dark age - this was a pretty shitty time in general, where the WWF went hyper-cartoony with the many Doinks, crap like Men on a Mission, the Godwins, "Adam Bomb" all that crap. You had Shawn, Bret and Diesel on top of the card, but the rest of the roster was shocking.

I wasn't really saying that a big man always beats a smaller guy, I was saying that in wrestling logic they are ALWAYS presented as a big threat, so by that same logic shouldn't ever be squashed or easily beaten. I don't agree that because Giant is huge, he can beat Loch Ness in less than 3 minutes. That doesn't ring true for me -- not unless Giant was particularly BRUTAL and did something to KO him. It's stupid because not only does it make Loch Ness look like a total chump and a joke, it makes a total mockery of the past 3-4 months of build. And for all of the hype from the commentators who made out like he was a big deal. And who said Viscera never got squashed? I just typed HHH vs. Viscera into google with no specific match in mind because I just KNEW a 2-minute squash from some time or other would come up. And low and behold here it is, first one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhT8hIjO_jI What's the point of doing that to Viscera? You've buried him as being any sort of legit threat. HHH is THAT much more powerful than him that he can beat him with a few punches and a pedigree. This is exactly what I'm talking about. I think big men need an element of protection to be honest. If they are going to be booked as legit threats that is.

This has always been something I've found a bit problematic. I've just watched Uncensored 96 where Big Show beats Loch Ness in less than 5 minutes. I can think of examples in the past when people like One Man Gang, Uncle Elmer and Sid (vs. El Gigante) have had similar squashes. I know the practical reasons for this: either the guy is on his way out, as in the case of Loch Ness or Sid, or the guy is so fat that he can't go more than 5 minutes without getting blown up. But what is the KAYFABE LOGIC of such losses? I mean I can't think of anything that breaks the suspension of disbelief more than that. The worst examples are generally big men who are built to face Hogan AFTER the Hogan match. Both in 80s WWF and around 95-6 in WCW when most of the Dungeon of Doom were such big men, you have these guys who were meant to be a massive threat only a few months ago getting squashed. How is the fan meant to believe that Shark or Akeem the African Dream or whoever has gone from being this monster heel to basically a fat jobber in the space of a couple of months? It's something I've always had a problem with. You can throw Viscera and to an extent Mark Henry in there too. I never like to see a big man beaten easily. Why? Because it highlights the fact that a big man is only a threat or a monster when he's receiving a push. This shouldn't be the case. A guy like Viscera should have been a legit threat even if he was hanging round the mid-card doing nothing. Anyone got any further thoughts on this?

That's true to be fair. One Man Gang vs. Konan from Superbrawl VI is a contender for worst match of all time. I blame Konan for that mainly though.

What is Luger's financial status?

They always talk about "Sting money" don't they? I think during the Monday Night Wars, Sting might have been on even more than Hogan. I don't entirely know the story there, but he was definitely on more than $1million a year.

What always winds me up about Keith is that if a match has a big man in it, who isn't Vader or Bam Bam, he will AUTOMATICALLY give it a DUD. He's the text book example of a guy who thinks that great working is doing suplexes and/ or flippy floppy moves. Don't think he's ever given a One Man Gang match more than * I've said it hundreds of times, but he just doesn't understand wrestling. The "he played his role well" line is perhaps a cliche on this board, but it's obviously one that Keith either never understood or, for some reason, objected to.

The modern guys seem to be doing better. Foley, Michaels, and Jericho come to mind as being great workers with lots of money put away. Many considered Edge a great worker and he seems comfortable. I think that the WWE has much greater support structures in place now and the money IS better. Flair was probably one of the top earners in the 80s, sure. But life on the road doesn't lend itself to long-term security OR the idea of saving. Who of the big 80s workers is really well off now?

It's only sad from the point of view of ability. Like in any other walk of life it would be sad if the GOAT was broke but someone mediocre or "above average" at best is a multi-millionaire. I'm still inclined to think that at the end of the day it just doesn't matter. When all is said and done, Flair will be remembered as the GOAT (or damn close) for decades and his body of work is worth more than any money -- and no one can ever take that from him. His personal life and business (mis)dealings are his own business. I'm interested in "backstage stories" insofar as they affect bookings and the outcome of matches. But I sort of draw the line beyond that. I guess this is a point of view that extends beyond wrestling. Like in football, I honestly don't care if Ryan Giggs cheated on his wife. I just don't care. I know him only for his football, that's the only context that matters for me. What he does on the pitch and what he says about football. He could be the biggest scumbag on the earth privately, and it would not change that. Same with Tiger Woods or any other sports person. Or just any other person in the public eye in general. This comes down to a personal view I guess. Among my group of old school friends, all big sports fans, we agree on this. I don't see why wrestling is any different to be honest. Do wish Flair would stop wrestling though. THAT makes me sad.

Can't we have that sort of conversation just after watching The Wrestler? I'm not sure I feel comfortable raking over all these court proceedings. I mean, in a way, Flair is one of the luckier guys. I mean 1) he's still alive, 2) he's still working in a *snicker* major fed. Have you seen the state of some of the people on recent shoot interviews? Have you seen how washed up a guy like Road Warrior Animal looks now? Or a guy like Matt Bourne? On the other hand, it is sad that someone like Kevin Nash -- because he was shrewd and careful -- is a multimillionaire and the legit GOAT is broke. But like I said, I'd prefer not to think about any of these things. I guess I'm happy to be a mark. If Beyond the Mat had never been released, I can honestly say I wouldn't care. I sort of want to think of Jake Roberts as the character, rather than the damaged man we see in that, y'know?

For what it's worth I think Keith's original Monday Night Wars rants and the PPV rants he did of old shows during that time are good time capsule pieces capturing the zeitgeist and to an extent epitomizing everything that was wrong with the nascent IWC smart fan. I hate Scott Keith, I really do, but he nicely symbolizes a whole generation of fans for me. All of whom I hate.

Am I alone in absolutely not giving a shit about any of this stuff? In a way, I just don't care. The "Ric Flair" I know is on screen. I literally couldn't care less about his IRL dealings.

I thought pro wrestling has its origins in carnival side-shows and travelling fares in the late 19th century. Is that true or did I make it up and then believe it?

Eric Bischoff. I may have this confused, but the guy I have in mind is INCREDILBY annoying, doesn't stay quite for a minute, sounds like he's on coke, whiny voice. He was on one of the clips from the recent Kevin Nash Legends of Wrestling NWO show. Thought it was Fingerpoke. Only reason I'm second guessing myself is that there are times when Bischoff was an ok commentator and he didn't sound like this guy who I have in mind.

Who was commentating on finger poke of doom with Tony and Bobby? He's the worst announcer of all time.

He was treated as a big deal IN GENERAL, but not really in the ring, because Flair vs. Warrior or Flair vs. Undertaker would have been booked as virtual squash matches unless he did something cheap.