Yo-Yo's Roomie

JBL pounces on everything Josh says, whether it's valid or not. Highly distracting. I've noticed the standard 'to commercial' verbiage has changed from "X is rolling/X is in control..." to "X and X are involved in a stalemate...", even though it's still the standard dive to the outside/someone being clotheslined over the top, etc leading to the break.

I'm a big fan of Varsity Club-era Rotundo. Yeah, not the most dynamic of wrestlers, but I generally enjoyed what he brought to the table. I thought he was very good at walking that line between accomplished wrestler who's a threat to anyone on the roster, and guy who was hanging onto his belt through pure luck. Always looked smooth in the ring, had some nice high spots, and one fo the better clotheslines in wrestling. Not just the jumping version- even from a standing position it really looked like he was creaming guys with that thing. Perfect TV title-level guy, or guy to have in a tag team or faction. I was quite impressed with IRS (relative to expectations) when I rewatched early 90s WWF stuff. Boring as fuck in singles matches, but I thought he brought the most to the Money, Inc matches I saw. Still weird to me that they renewed his singles push as late as 95, though.

We throw 10p in the kitty for every entrance, trying to guess who will come out next. That's always fun, because you're left scrambling for guys who haven't come out yet, and the kitty tends to build up to a pretty reasonable amount.

Ric Flair was all of history's great wrestling units.

One of my favourite, I guess underrated, or throwaway, ECW matches was between Primo Colon and the Miz, during the whole Colons Vs Miz and Morrison feud. There was also some good stuff during the Finlay Vs Hart Dynasty feud. The whole of the Regal/Christian title feud is great, culminating in the UK title match. That was the most I'd looked forward to a match in years. Around the same time, I remember Christian having a decent TV match against Paul Burchill, of all people, based totally around Christian coming into the match with an injured leg after being attacked on the entranceway. The pinnacle of WWECW may just be that Swagger tv title defence against Christian that Dylan mentioned above.

So Knox has ditched the wildman look? That makes me sad.

Bret is my favourite ever wrestler, by about a million miles. There are probably 5 Bret matches in my top 10 matches, including my number one, he was a part of my all-time favourite feud, and my favourite year in wrestling was '97, in large part due to his run with the Hart Foundation. I don't know that I'd call him the best ever (there was a time I wouldn't hesitate to do so), given, as has been touched upon, his relatively short run of being a great wrestler, but I think he's earnt a place at the table. I reject the claim that he hasn't had that many great matches, and at any rate, I think his very best are amongst the best ever. As has been mentioned, his selling was always so great, and what I particularly liked would how he would sell, not just a specific injury or move, but the physical exertions of a match. He had a great "fuck, I'm knackered" sell, the heavy breathing, open mouth and pained walk, just to get over the physical toll of a wrestling match.

This was a great match. Steamboat/Douglas were one of my favourite acts at the time, so I was anxious to see how they'd hold up years later. I'm happy that, so far, they hold up very well. I probably prefer the Starrcade 92 title defence to this one, but this is still all kinds of great, and I echo the love for Douglas here. What a prospect he seemed at the time. So, was Douglas renowned as a pretty hardcore or vocal right winger then? Because this is not the first time I've heard Jesse go off on him for that during my WCW ppv watching (another reason Jesse is the man).

Chavo Guerrero was offered a world title push after Eddy died? What's the story with this?

William Regal- I'm currently going through all the WCW ppvs. I've just come to the end of 1992, so Regal should be showing up fairly soon. He's always been one of my favourite wrestlers, but I haven't seen any of his WCW since it happened, so I'm really looking forward to revisiting it. Riki Choshu- I discovered him with the NJ set, and he quickly became one of my favourite wrestlers. I have some All Japan stuff featuring him lying around, which I'm eager to get into. Buddy Rose- it was when he died that I started getting into Buddy. I have a bunch of Portland stuff, and he's the undisputed highlight so far, and, I imagine, will continue to be once I get back into it. Antonio Cesaro and 3MB- a bit of a cheat, but these are the guys I'm most enjoying from the current product. Barry Windham- my WCW watching has confirmed him as one of my all-time faves. Heel or face, BW never lets me down.

I find wrestling can be quite boring when I don't have an emotional attachment to one of the guys in the match. In a lot of ways, I watch wrestling like I watch other sporting events. Just like I get upset when my football team get beat, or when Roger Federer loses, I get upset when I wrestler I like gets beat. Hell, I still don't like to rewatch matches that Bret Hart lost... I guess, while I like to look at wrestling analytically, emotionally I never developed past the age of like 12 as a fan.

Never thought I'd see a Sandman match compared to a Wong Kar-Wai film.

I thought I read somewhere that Gibson was actually getting paid more than Morton, at least later on in their careers. The reasoning being that Gibson could afford to hold out for more money, whereas Morton didn't have that luxury.

How do people feel about everyone sunset flipping Rey?

I really liked Koshinaka on the NJ 80s set :/ I'll throw out The Undertaker as my answer. Taking out his early years in the gimmick, when he was admittedly hamstrung by the constraints of the character, I find most of his stuff to be quite embarrassing. I especially hate the self-indulgent faux-MMA shit.

In the context of a hall of fame discussion, or even just of forming our own opinions, I don't think we should care at all. I do find it interesting though.

So, which 3 of Austin, Rock, Benoit, Eddy, Jarrett and Flair said Angle was the best they'd ever been in the ring with? I'm guessing Benoit and Flair with their failing mental capacities, but really I can't see any of the others holding that opinion, unless it was just something they shot off in passing without really thinking about it.

I thought I read that last time they polled the four major north American sports leagues (shortly before the election), the NBA and the NFL were slightly in favour of marriage equality, with MLB firmly against, and the NHL something like 90% in favour of (good old Canada).

Ring-Ka-King filmed at the end of last year, but didn't air until the beginning of this, so they might be options for a few categories. For example, Jeff Jarrett: wealthy American businessman, is a gimmick that was a lot of fun. What about Sheamus for most outstanding? He had a whole slew of good-great matches against a variety of opponents, and I don't remember him ever underperforming or disappointing.

I would only vote someone in on work alone (and god knows I should never and will never be anywhere near a ballot) if they had 10+ years, preferably consecutive, of being a great worker.

Hulk Hogan- I like Hogan as a worker much more than I used to, but I think he was too formulaic too often for me to consider one fo the 100 best. You could call him a victim of his own success, but, to be fair, I don't know if even his best stuff is "top 100 wrestler" good. Roddy Piper- Piper is much like The Rock for me. Not the greatest worker mechanically, but his charisma always draws you into his matches, and makes him seem better than perhaps he really is. I would probably have Rocky above him, and I don't think Rocky would make my top 100. Sean Waltman- Waltman's tricky, and is the kind of guy I'd just have to make the list before being able to say with any accuracy whether he'd be on it or not. I thought he was a great worker in the early 90s, and I always thought he broke down early, but going back and watching his late 90s and beyond stuff, that's clearly not true. Lex Luger- I'm not sold on Luger ever having been great. I know he had this supposed great run in the late 80s, but from the evidence I've seen, he was never really more than good. I don't see him as a serious contender. Scott Hall- I like Hall a lot, but I'd hate to think there weren't at least 100 guys better than him. Scott Steiner- He was a very impressive spot monkey. His most notable singles run was mostly made up of pretty terrible matches though. Jake Roberts- I'd have to see early Jake to be sure of anything. I know I found his stuff in WWF quite boring more often than not. I felt he needed a really hot feud to get good results. John Tenta- Another guy I like, but I don't see him as a top 100 guy. Magnum T.A.- I've only really seen the 'big' Magnum matches, so it wouldn't be fair to say. Chris Jericho- Jericho would probably make my list towards the back end. I agree that he's overrated, in that he was never the elite worker that a lot of people made him out to be, but I do think he was at least good for a long enough period of time to make the cut. Brian Pillman- I don't think he has the longevity. I'm a big longevity guy. Dustin Rhodes/Goldust- I'd have him right around Jericho I think. At his best, he was quite a bit better than Jericho, but he has some pretty bad lows too. One of my personal favourites, so I would hope to find a place for him. Chris Candido- just an average worker, as far as I'm concerned. Bam Bam Bigelow- Bammer was pretty great, but I don't think he reached his true potential, and ever put a really strong run together. Hennig, Dibiase, Rude Rude possibly had the highest peak, but I thought he could be dull as shit far too often in his WWF run. Sometimes, I find the best way to decide head-to-heads like this is to look not at the peaks but the troughs. At his worst, Hennig never bored me, and he was pretty great at his best. Ted may have the most consistency of the three, and fits nicely in the middle. Flair, Funk, Lawler Tight between one and two, and it's possible I'd rank them the other way on any other day. Lawler is a ways behind them. Hansen, Gordy, Williams I think Williams is a bit overrated. Hansen is an all-timer. I need to see more of Gordy in singles action. Steamboat, Savage, Blanchard I like all-three guys. Blanchard is an easy number 3, because I don't think he has the resume of great matches/performances of the other two. Steamer and Sav is a coin toss. Savage could make anything interesting with hsi energy, but I did feel he cruised a bit at times. That just puts Steamer over the top for me. Hart, Austin, Michaels Bret is my all-time fave, and I don't even pretend to hide my bias. Such a great storyteller though. Michaels' two careers cancel each other out in a way. Misawa, Kawada, Kobashi I need to see more singles Kawada for one thing. I've never been totally into Kobashi, though I think he's safely great. Misawa is one of my favourites. Bigelow, Bossman, Gang I'd have to see lots more Gang to really back up him being in last place. Bigelow reached heights that Traylor probably couldn't, which is why I have him at number one. Here's a couple more: Rick Martel Bobby Eaton William Regal Marty Jannetty Matt Hardy Davey Boy Smith

Kofi and Truth are rolling. Can they keep it going, as Raw continues.

Does George Napolitano have any sort of case for being on the ballot?

I don't really think that comparisons like this are fair. For a start, it suggests that having a good run as the top guy is the most difficult thing to accomplish in wrestling, and I don't know if I agree with that. When you're working at the top, you have a lot of advantages that other guys don't really have. It's worth bringing up as a plus for Cena, but at the same time, it shouldn't really be held against other guys. More broadly, these kind of comparisons are always something you can flip around and manipulate to fit your point. For example, Cena has never had a 3 or so year period of good-great matches the way that Hardy or Christian did. Hasn't really come close, to be honest. To be fair, not many can achieve that level of consistency. Furthermore, having a good match with Umaga is hardly surprising, since Umaga was really good. Other people have managed to work around Khali's limitations. Sheamus had the best Khali match I've ever seen. Batista and Triple H both had good matches with him. Lashley, eh, he was getting better. I don't see it as wildly controversial to suggest that any number of guys would have been able to work some good stuff with him. - Re: execution. I'll never say it's the most important thing in the world, but surely it's a fairly crucial skill when we're looking to break down a guy's ability. I don't get giving him a pass for the STF because he 'must know how to apply it properly'. It seems like we're making excuses for him that we wouldn't neccessarily for other guys. Do we give Punk a pass for his shitty flying elbowdrop, because he's obviously seen it done hundreds of times and knows how it should look? I don't think his motives for applying the hold like that should really matter anyway. Owen Hart might have been one of the all time greats if he had been more passionate about wrestling. He wasn't, so he isn't, and that's how it should be. I don't see how that differs from 'Cena would have a great-looking STF if he didn't think it was funny to apply it like someone trying to massage a large pill down the throat of a dog'. I agree in theory with the idea that everything in wrestling is symbolic, but following that to its logical conclusion, what exactly are we supposed to be looking for when determining what works and what doesn't? Does contact even matter at all then? If someone whiffs on a dropkick, but the other person bumps for it (hi, Eve Torres), what do we make of that? Can we also take the symbolism theory to selling? I didn't need the commentary to know that Brock Lesnar had severely injured Shawn Michaels' arm on Monday. Shawn's writhing around, as embarrassing as it was, made that abundantly clear. It was shitty, but it got the point across. To what degree it this more damaging than shitty execution?

Not even close.