NintendoLogic

Not a steep decline. A slow steady one. None of which were serious issues for UFC until they started oversaturating the market and running too many weak cards. It's almost as if there's a lesson of some sort that can be drawn from this.

Peep this chart: There was a significant uptick in PPV business during Cena's first year on top (though it should be noted that WWE ran 15 PPVs that year). But buys declined every single year after that before rebounding in 2011 thanks to Rock. Cena isn't the primary cause of the rot at the heart of WWE, and they'd be much worse off without him. But he's become part of the problem. WWE right now is like an aging NFL team that keeps trading away draft picks so it can make one last run.

If Tanahashi got inducted, it wouldn't be because of work alone. A big part of his candidacy is his role in turning business around for New Japan. I don't think he's a strong candidate now, but if he maintains his current career trajectory, he will be in a few years.

Tell that to Mitt Romney.

From the Businessweek interview: Those worked out so well that she did even worse with women voters this time around (60-39 vs. 59-40 in 2010). She also got creamed among working-class voters (67-30 among voters with incomes of less than 50k). So either the polls showing her doing well among that group were way off or they smartened up after the debates.

Is Sting a better candidate than Randy Orton?

Steve Sims had a column in the Observer for a while, and it covers a lot of the Lucha 101 type stuff. http://z11.invisionfree.com/wrestling_ko/i...?showtopic=2331

Going back to Rey, I think he's top 30 for sure and most likely top 20. The thing is, I don't think he was particularly great in AAA or WCW, and his WWE run isn't really enough to vault him into GOAT contender status. And he suffers by comparison to Eddy Guerrero, who was as good or better than Rey at Rey's strengths and brought plenty more to the table besides.

I have to say, I've never heard anyone use "fire and brimstone" to describe Hubert Humphrey or Paul Wellstone before.

Comparisons to Al Franken don't work. Running as a liberal Democrat in Minnesota is far less of an uphill climb than running as a conservative Republican in Connecticut. Plus, Franken has exponentially more interest in and understanding of policy. And let's not make too much of the charisma thing. Donald Trump is charismatic. He's also universally regarded as a buffoon. Same with Vince.

Ventura won a three-way race with 37 percent of the vote. And the problem with Vince isn't that he's wacky, it's that he's evil.

Vince running for office would be a Christine O'Donnell-level train wreck. I'm pretty sure he'd try to strangle a reporter with his bare hands at some point.

If I had 100 million at my disposal, I'm certain I could get at least 50 percent of the population of any given state to have a favorable opinion of me.

While screwing around on WC, I came across a quote from the 9/1/92 WON that I thought was interesting given our discussion about Chigusa/Madonna parallels: "I recall in 1987, the first time I saw the group live, that the workrate was exceptional, but the audience was there for Chigusa-mania as the building was filled with young girls dressed like Chigusa Nagayo with haircuts like Chigusa Nagayo and screamed and cried like crazy for when Chigusa Nagayo was being brutalized by Dump Matsumoto."

I don't know what the voting history for Mexican candidates is, but it seems to me that Atlantis and Cien Caras would get in before Blue Panther.

That's what his Japanese Wikipedia page says. The sources it cites are an All Japan TV special and an article in Weekly Pro-Wrestling, neither of which are online. And for what it's worth, the Jumbo stand-in is the strongest character in the Fire Pro Wrestling games. At the risk of piling on, this isn't exclusive to wrestling at all. I've seen more greatest film/album/video game/NFL team/etc. of all time lists than I can count. See, Fujiwara is a lot closer to what I think of as revisionism. He wasn't highly regarded in his own day, but he received greater appreciation from certain circles after the fact.

My quick take on Tanahashi: he'll do his part to bring a match up to a certain level, but he leaves it up to his opponent to take it beyond that. TanahashiSuzuki was better than other Tanahashi matches because Suzuki brought more to the table than other Tanahashi opponents. But that's quite different from saying that Tanahashi was just a warm body. Suzuki couldn't have had that match with a broomstick.

As I understand it, there was always a contingent advocating for Jumbo as GOAT. As footage spread, so did that sentiment. Correct me if I'm wrong, but guys like Lawler and Fujiwara weren't really pimped on that level even by those who had seen the footage until fairly recently.

Tanahashi centering his matches around attacking his opponent's leg is one of his trademarks. People bitch about it all the time, so I find it difficult to believe that it's something that's escaped you. Do I really need to cite specific matches?

If this campaign doesn't pan out, how likely is it that she runs for Governor in 2014? Last I heard, the incumbent Democrat was highly unpopular. Then again, you have to figure Linda fatigue would set in at some point.

That's what I'm saying. Jumbo footage became more widely distributed after his death, which led to a reevaluation.

I want to go back to Tanahashi/Suzuki. Specifically this: I think it's largely correct that Tanahashi as ace means that his matches tend to be more showcases for his opponents. But he's still the fulcrum around which the matches revolve. Saying that Tanahashi was just a warm body in the Suzuki match is off-base because Suzuki was clearly working within the Tanahashi formula. Suzuki was like Steamboat or Windham versus Flair. They brought more to the table than most opponents, but they were still unquestionably Flair matches. I also think it's worth noting that New Japan and All Japan seem to have both largely adopted the other company's traditional in-ring style. The notable IWGP matches have been rather King's Road-esque with things like learned psychology and targeted body part work. And Funaki's Triple Crown matches are a lot closer to a Hashimoto match than they are to a Misawa one.

Honky Tonk Man, I suppose. But people tend to forget that the story ended with him decisively getting his comeuppance and then crashing down the card. Heels don't seem to work as well as long-term centerpieces of a promotion, particularly chickenshit ones. Comic books are probably the closest form of entertainment to professional wrestling from a narrative standpoint, and I think promoters could learn a lot from how comics work. The Joker is great as a recurring Batman villain and in the occasional one-shot or limited series, but he shouldn't have his own series.

How many people are specifically fond of the evil twin ref angle? It's more a case of people having fond memories of 80s WWF and viewing things from the era with rose-colored glasses. I don't see too many people looking back on 2012 WWE with nostalgia. Anyway, I'm kind of struggling with the distinction between a chickenshit heel and a bitch. Would Punk have really looked like less of a bitch if he had gotten some offense in off something like a Heyman distraction?

Was the Jumbo thing really revisionist? Plenty of folks in Japan were calling Jumbo the strongest wrestler in Japanese history at the time of his death. As Jumbo footage became more widely disseminated, Americans started catching up to what Japanese fans already knew. I tend to think of revisionism more as new interpretations of available footage. Setting that aside, since you're fond of the musical analogy, it's true that some people go through a grunge phase, a punk phase, and so on. But plenty of people discover the Beatles, decide they're the greatest shit ever, and never budge from that no matter what new stuff they come across. New discoveries don't necessarily lead to revised opinions.