NintendoLogic

Heels insulting the local sports team. A babyface getting tossed out of the ring by the heel and immediately rolling back in. A babyface winning the title and all the other babyfaces coming out from the back to celebrate with him. Scott Steiner promos. Tony Schiavone's excited voice. Howard Finkel announcing a new champion.

Like anyone who works for TNA actually gets paid.

I've always gone by the old Scott Keith definition of workrate as the ratio of action to inaction. Obviously, that's neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for having good matches. But the Bulldogs definitely upped the action in a way that, say, Greg Valentine didn't.

I'll freely admit that the podcast wasn't my finest hour. It was my first experience in that format, and I was clearly nervous as hell. Of course, I come across worse if you attribute to me things I didn't actually say. As far as overall body of work, sure. But I maintain that the KOTR 93 match with Bret is Hennig's single best match. And that's not me being a Bret fanboy, because it's Curt's work that makes the match. As for the tag team stuff, I guess it depends on how one defines "effective." I define it as "being over while having good matches." The latter element disqualifies teams like Demolition and the Powers of Pain. Also, people are overlooking the keyword "extended." MX were babyfaces for what, a year? And DiBiase and Williams were only together for like two years total. In any event, I'm not claiming that the Hart Foundation are literally the only team to meet the criteria, so listing other teams doesn't negate my argument. I'm simply pointing out that most tag teams of the era worked almost exclusively on one side of the fence. That the Hart Foundation was able to have success in both roles is a feather in their cap.

Personally, I find the notion that matches can be ranked to a quarter-star degree of precision rather questionable. But I recently whittled my 50 favorite matches down to a top 20, and if pressed, I would rank them thusly: ***** Jerry Lawler vs. Bill Dundee (6/6/83) Sangre Chicana vs. MS-1 (9/23/83) Stan Hansen vs. Toshiaki Kawada (2/28/93) Akira Hokuto vs. Shinobu Kandori (4/2/93) Stan Hansen vs. Kenta Kobashi (7/29/93) Misawa/Kobashi vs. Kawada/Taue (12/3/93) Mitsuharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada (6/3/94) Kawada/Taue vs. Misawa/Kobashi (6/9/95) Bret Hart vs. Steve Austin (11/17/96) Mitsuharu Misawa vs. Kenta Kobashi (1/20/97) ****3/4 Jumbo/Tenryu vs. Choshu/Yatsu (1/28/86) Midnight Rockers vs. Rose/Somers (8/30/86) Hansen/Gordy vs. Tenryu/Kawada (12/16/88) Ric Flair vs. Terry Funk (7/23/89) Hansen/Tenryu vs. Jumbo/Yatsu (12/6/89) Jumbo/Fuchi/Taue vs. Misawa/Kawada/Kobashi (10/19/90) Vader vs. Sting (7/12/92) Sting vs. Vader (12/28/92) Bret Hart vs. Steve Austin (3/23/97) Eddy Guerrero vs. Brock Lesnar (2/15/04)

If the goal of this poll was to flush me out of hiding, you've succeeded. Two things. First, the Hart Foundation was awesome. Like I pointed out on the Bret podcast, they had sustained effective runs as both faces and heels. How many 80s tag teams can you say the same for? Second, it's worth noting that the best match of Hennig's career was with Bret.

I actually don't think the "You know it's fake, right?" question is that stupid. I've encountered a disturbing number of people who believe that some of the matches are real. Or that it used to be real even though it isn't today (as in, it was real back in the 70s, not the Gotch/Hackenschmidt days).

I'm shocked that anyone thought that any result other than Cena going over was even remotely plausible. How many promotions in history have had evil foreign heels win feuds against patriotic tippy-top babyfaces? Even Stevie Wonder could see the writing on the wall once they went all-in on the USA vs. Russia storyline.

I think the reason I'm more down on this show than most is that for me, Rollins walking out as champ was the worst possible outcome. He's Orton 2.0 in that he's a borderline channel-changer for me despite being mostly good to great in the ring. Also, between the Mania main event and the Bryan match at Fast Lane, we've established that Reigns looks awesome when the other guy is doing 90% of the work.

Didn't watch any of the pregame crap. IC ladder match: I'd be perfectly happy if I never saw another multi-man ladder match for the rest of my life. It's just completely played out. Orton/Rollins: There was nothing wrong with this match from a technical standpoint. I just didn't care about it at all. The ending sequence was pretty good, though. HHH/Sting: I had a bad feeling about this match when the babyfaces won first two matches. And sure enough, HHH got the pin. At least it was overbooked six ways from Sunday, which is the only way the match would have been watchable. Divas tag: Ummm...the Bellas repeatedly knocking AJ off the apron was pretty cool. Cena/Rusev: I remember people scoffing when I suggested that they were building Rusev up to feed to Cena at Mania. Well, who's laughing now? As for the match itself, it was OK, but the Fast Lane match was much better. Rusev's Rocky IV entrance was off the charts, though. Oh boy, Rock/HHH at WM32! I'm slightly more excited for that than I am for a 2 Girls 1 Cup sequel. Taker/Wyatt: Jesus, this was sad. It was like they were wrestling in a tar pit, they were moving so slow. Taker should never wrestle again. Neither should Bray. Lesnar/Reigns: So they spend all that time building up Lesnar to have it culminate in a chickenshit MITB cash-in? Fucking bullshit. On the plus side, I loved the "this is awesome" chant when Lesnar was beating the hell out of Reigns. It's the only this is awesome chant I've ever liked. I said a while back that Reigns chasing the Authority was my vision of wrestling hell. Adding Lesnar to the equation makes it somewhat more tolerable, but not much. I'm seriously on the verge of canceling my WWE Network subscription. Fuck this company.

As for the "Vince killed the territories" nonsense: the territory system was rotten to the core. All it took to bring it crashing down was a little push. If Vince hadn't killed the territories, cable would have.

It's worth pointing out that HHH was one of the biggest critics of Cornette and OVW on the grounds that someone who never drew money himself can't teach others how to draw money.

Back when wrestling was presented as a sport. Anyway, my pick would be Stephanie McMahon. Probably the worst case of nepotism in wrestling history. Her elevation to the position of head writer was directly correlated with a precipitous decline in the quality of the product, and she has single-handedly made Raw virtually unwatchable over the past year and a half.

Basic psychology tells us why those who made it through developmental wouldn't speak out against DeMott. It's the same reason members of fraternities with the harshest initiations are the most likely to have positive feelings about their frat brothers. Who did DeMott successfully train? NXT is great as a finishing school for established indy guys, but who have they built up from scratch?

Note how it was the fans in attendance and not WWE who were responsible for the one part of Raw Johnny didn't like. WWE can never fail, it can only be failed.

Well, the Mania builds have been week the past four years. Last year was an exception, but that was only because the fans revolted and forced WWE to change course. Before that, we were getting Punk/Kane, Bryan/Sheamus, and Orton vs. a babyface Batista in the main event. The last Mania where the build was strong across the board was 26.

If nothing else, that segment should remove any lingering doubts over whether Stephanie is stroking her ego by playing the cool heel. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if there were Daily Show writers with legit wrestling knowledge. The Colbert Report, which draws from the same pool of writers, referenced El Hijo del Santo and Los Gringos Locos a few years ago.

Wait...did that video say that Maria Kanellis was going up against AJ Styles?

What classics did Rey throw out on PPV in WWE?

Samoa and Tonga? Shit, Vince thinks China and Japan are interchangeable.

Don Leo Jonathan, Dick Beyer, Danny Hodge, Mr. Wrestling II, and Nick Bockwinkel are all in their 80s.

Cena/Lesnar was an incredible experience on first viewing, but the ref bump has largely ruined it for me on subsequent viewings. I don't have a problem with ref bumps, but it happened after the match had been stopped so the ref could treat Cena's cut. Blood necessitates a match stoppage, but the ref getting knocked out doesn't? How the hell does that make any sense? That's a huge logic gap I just can't look past. I also agree with OJ that there wasn't anything remotely shoot-style about the match.

Isn't that what the Rumble is supposed to be for?

EDIT: deleted because I got tired of keeping track of them

Looking at the matches that are more or less set in stone: Lesnar/Reigns-The quality of Lesnar matches is directly correlated with the other guy's willingness to let Lesnar manhandle him, so I guess it depends on whether Reigns is willing to man up. I just hope to God we don't get a Rollins cash-in. Reigns feuding with Planet Jarrett 2.0 is pretty much my idea of wrestling Hell. Orton/Rollins-Best-case scenario, this is on the same level as Orton/Punk at WM27. It'll probably be slightly worse. HHH/Sting-The best we can hope for is enough overbooking to make this a decent Wrestlemania spectacle. There's zero chance of this being a decent wrestling match. Taker/Wyatt-This is by far the weakest Taker Mania match since The Streak became a major selling point. Bray needs to be carried, and Taker was never much of a carrier even in his prime. All in all, this is shaping up to be the worst Mania in over a decade. Our only hope is that Bryan is given enough time to save the show, but the chances of that seem pretty slim.