Exposer

My weekly schedule is tentatively: 3 hours - Watching RAW Live 1-2 hours - Watching Pimped Main Event, NXT, Smackdown stuff 1-2 hours - Current wrestling outside of WWE including Lucha, Japan, US/Europe Indies 2-3 hours (Every two weeks or so) - Watching random old footage/Sometimes this is me watching 2000-2009 WWE for my project that I've been working on for three fucking years because I'm lazy. 3 hours - This is for WWE PPV's once a month. 3-4 hours - This is when I have an 80s set, watching footage for WWF 80s, or a wrestler's compilation set. This will start back up when I get the Lucha set.

I'm insane when I get on a hot streak but it's only in pockets. Dylan and Kris Z come to mind for me as well for "Kings of footage" intake. I know Dylan is totally fucked up. ANY freetime this guy has is devoted to watching wrestling. He's doing a "Top 500 Wrestlers of 2013" this year. Who the hell does that shit? Who's ever done that? What the hell is wrong with you Dylan? Over the summer, he would pop on my Facebook IM and tell me about the latest "Outlaw" Joe Gomez or Honky Tonk Man match. That is deeply disturbing.

I picked Dustin. I think he beats Taker pretty comfortably but it's not a blow out. Pros for Dustin: Dustin's 1992-1994 work alone is outstanding. I didn't give him the nod for just that though. There are a few years in the WWE where he has been tremendous as well. In 2002 his tag team with Booker T was the best thing on WWE television arguably for the entire year if one wanted to add in the hilarious skits. He performed exceptionally in those tags and was oftentimes the best guy in them. 2009 was of course another big year from Dustin. His matches with Regal and Sheamus were incredible and I'm convince that feud with Sheamus considerably helped Sheamus's ability to work due to Dustin. His 1992-1994 stuff has been discussed pretty extensively on this board through the yearbooks and what not but I do want to give examples of his stellar work during that period which include the Rhodes-Stud Stable feud which is my favorite feud of all time, the Vader matches, and the Dangerous Alliance work. The bulk of that stuff shows how good Dustin was during the early 90s in WCW. I want to point out that I think Dustin has some better intangibles and qualities as a singular performer than Taker as well. Ignoring the early 90s "Deadman" gimmick, I think Dustin's selling is better overall. Taker tends to get caught up in the WWE Main Event style where selling isn't the most valuable asset and that hurts him in this case. I think he's actually had some nice selling performances in those particular matches but it was inconsistent and I believe Dustin is very consistent in his ability to sell and show vulnerability. Furthermore, I like Dustin's offense a little more than Takers. Taker's got some fun MMA stuff he pulls out from time to time but sometimes it looks terrible. He's also got the big finishers and the dive and I enjoy all of those but I'm more into Dustin's style of offense. I think Dustin has some of the best strikes ever. His punches are really great and as a babyface they work really well in the comeback. His powerslam is the best I've ever seen and I saw his way before I saw Samoa Joe do the move similarly so I'll take his over Joe's any day. The bulldog can be weird sometimes but the way he does it is very unique and I think it worked well for him as a big babyface move. Ultimately, I like Dustin's simple but fiery babyface offense more than Taker's power offense and occasional shitty MMA offense. I don't want to forget Dustin's bumping which is off the charts and the missed crossbody bump is my favorite match-by-match bump by any wrestler ever. Cons for Dustin: His bad periods are really bad. Both of his stints in TNA were embarrassing but the Black Reign run was worst of all. Nothing good came out of any of it. That puts a big damper on his career as a whole. His other times in the WWE were more focused on gimmick and character development rather than work which isn't a bad thing and I liked a lot of his stuff including Tourrettes Goldust but I tend to focus on in-ring more. There are parts of his WCW return that were just awful on every level too. Dustin also hurts a little from not having the big time matches although I count War Games 92 and 94 for sure. Pros for Taker: I really enjoy some of Taker's work from 1996-1998. He really seemed to be motivated during a lot of those matches during the period. The Diesel match from WM 12 is very solid big man match and one of the better ones during that time period. I like his 97 work a lot with Vader, Bret, Austin, Foley, and Shawn. He worked all the top stars that year and wrestled good to great matches with each of them. The Austin feud in 98 is pretty good too and the Summerslam match is a lot of fun and had a great build. From 2002-2008 Taker improved a whole lot and had some awesome matches with a variety of opponents from Brock, Big Show, JBL, Mark Henry, Batista, Jeff Hardy, and Angle. From 09 till now he's delivered on the big stage very well but has tapered off a little bit and has looked average to bad at times like the Kane feud and the Rey feud where I think Rey carried him. To look at him singularly, he is very good at selling but can be inconsistent at times. He's great at taking super bumps during big time matches like the dive in the WM 25 match with Shawn. He actually has a really varied offense with a shit ton of finishers which is good for the WWE style but sometimes it doesn't look very good at all. I will say he's one of the better big match performers of this generation and probably the best in WWE history because he's so well at making a match feel huge. Cons for Taker: I've seen a little of his WCW work which is decent but 1990-1995 Taker isn't my thing at all from an in-ring perspective. He may have some good sprinkled in there but I haven't seen or found it yet. I know he was severely handicapped due to the gimmick but five years of no selling and mostly silly angles doesn't help his case. I like Corporate Ministry Taker as a character but thought he sucked in the ring for the most part. When he returned in 2000 he was TERRIBLE until he turned heel and finally got to change up the way he worked. Recently, he's been hit or miss in the ring and has been carried a few times. Age is probably his biggest downside at this point but he's still looked really bad a few times in that last four years. Finally, I'll take Dustin pretty comfortably but it's certainly not a landslide. Dustin has a higher volume of good matches even with Taker wrestling in this era of free televised wrestling. Taker died and came back to life too much to catch up. Dustin's best performances may outshine Taker's too and he has a ton of great ones in early 90s WCW, 2002 WWE RAW, and 2009 WWECW.

I honestly couldn't tell you whether or not Christian was clearly the best in regular tag settings during the time but as I said before I found him to be much better than Edge in those ladder matches. His bumping was off the charts in those matches including taking a Bubba Bomb off a ladder and consistently taking fifteen-twenty foot drops to the floor on the outside from the top of a ladder which is an absurd bump to take. I remember Edge's spear on Jeff Hardy in mid-air and that's about it. Christian also took most of the table bumps for his team too in those matches. I actually liked Christian fine in TNA. Yeah, TNA has pretty much been a terrible promotion from the beginning but I always thought he was solid there and had good matches with Jarrett, Styles, and Kazarian of all people. I give him credit for his run there because he remained consistently solid throughout in my opinion.

I thought Edge was solid at working underneath as a babyface during the Smackdown six era. He was clearly the worst guy in those matches except when Angle was in his "get my shit in" mood which developed during that period. He was nothing terribly special but I thought he looked fine in several of those matches of which I've watched in the last year. After his return from injury, he started to really go down hill starting with the heel turn. His facial expressions and acting is quite possibly the worst I've ever seen from a performer of any kind. It was a total buzzkill for me. As far as his in ring work goes it was middling at best and embarassingly dreadful at worst. His offense was horrific and my God the Spear was abysmal. I will say that he got over gimmick matches really well and generally created some nice build into those matches. Looking back and watching a few of them though it's clear to me that the Hardy's, Christian, Cena, and even the Dudley's were more engaging in those matches than he was. Christian was vastly superior to Edge in those TLC matches. I guess he was better than D-Von in them but I don't know I remember D-Von taking a few dangerous bumps that were more memorable and scary than anything Edge did in them.

I was thinking about the whole Bryan vs. Coporation angle a little bit today and I think my biggest problem with it is that nearly every show ends exactly the same. I do have issues with Bryan not getting a least one over on heels so far (although one could argue him vandalizing Orton's car would count as one) but I can handle that to an extent as long as there's a payoff down the road. I just don't like the shows closing with Orton standing over a prone Bryan in the middle of the ring. Why not have Bryan get attacked in the back? Why not switch it up in some way? I don't know I just think that image specifically is getting overused. This may be a really outlandish complaint to some but it does bother me to a degree.

I think the negativity towards obesity and weight problems is what completely derails this article. It's just one fat joke after another. That's just horrendous writing.

After reading about this for a page and a half in the WWE thread with potshots included I thought I'd make a thread for it. I read the Smackdown results every week. Sometimes, I'm unable to watch the show because I'm either out with friends, forget to tape it, or just don't get around to watching it or any of the pimped stuff from each show. With that, I do find myself forming an opinion on what I read. I'm able to ignore the jackasses who write these reviews and develop my own opinion on what I've read about the show. I think it's fine for opinions to be established from reading about shows. The direction of the company, the storylines, and the angles are very easy to follow from just reading results and other people's reviews. However, I do think that watching the shows can help people draw better and stronger conclusions about those things. One can find specific evidence from watching the shows to back up their opinions. On another note, I find it ridiculous that people establish opinions on matches by just reading results. A few years ago Drew McIntyre was having a really hot year of free tv matches and he had a match with Daniel Bryan on Superstars. After reading the results I thought "there's no way this won't be great." I watched the match and it was disappointing. Bryan just went through his spots and the match felt like they were just going through the motions. It's just a terrible trait to have to assume a match is going to be something by merely hearing about it or skimming through reviews and results. Therefore, I think someone CAN have an opinion on the direction of a company, angle, or storyline by just reading the results although I believe stronger opinions are formed from watching the shows. However, I am soundly against opinions on matches that haven't even been watched. Argue away.

Well, there's this guy here in the Tennessee indy scene named Logan Alvey. I've been to many shows with him on the card over the years and he's been in some good tag matches so I'd say he's a good worker for sure.

I've "shakin' my head" in agreement many, many times actually. And I know a lot of other people who have too. I'm from the south so I guess it's a southern thing. I'm not sure.

I refuse to listen to this podcast unless Dylan gave a shout out to "Outlaw" Joe Gomez and Gangrel.

Bryan-Barrett was awfully good and about on the same level but I thought this years show was better.

Cena is absolutely a strong contender for best "big match" wrestler ever. Just from 2007 he had the Umaga, HBK, Khali, Lashley, & Orton matches. With both Umaga and HBK he had two outstanding matches with. I love the JBL "I Quit" match too and I think it was the first great Cena "big match." It was also one of the last really gruesome bloodbaths the company ever had. I think both Jericho matches from late 08 were "big matches." They were very, very good. I also think the main reason Cena's so excellent in the "big match" setting is his ability to show vulnerability for his size and play the underdog against various monsters. His selling and mannerisms are usually phenomenal in these settings.

Matt, your reviews make me want to go back and watch some of this shit from the Buddy comp. Goddamn, I love the Rose-Martel series.

HCTP also had the great CAW wrestler mode which came right at the time I was finding sites like CAW.ws so I could max out my memory card with different versions of Sting. Yeah, I remember that! Man, I'm getting huge nostalgia from all of this video game talk.

Wrestlemania 2000 was an excellent game also! I played that as much as No Mercy. What I remember most about that was during simulations the matches would be like Val Venis pinned Hardcore Holly in 45:47 and I would be in total "what the fuck" mode.

In no particular order: WWE No Mercy 2000 (Nintendo 64) - This ruled. I remember coming home from the 2nd grade and simulating cards or having Kane go for the Women's Title because I thought it was amusing shit. That game was fucking awesome. Smackdown: Know Your Role (PS2) - The advanced entrances (for the time) and the loaded roster were highlights for me. Battle Royal's and Rumble's were always a blast on here as were the HITC or Cage matches. Smackdown: Here Comes the Pain (PS2) - This is arguably my favorite of the Smackdown video game era because it had fuckers like Ultimo Dragon on it whom I marked out for when I was 10 and 11 years old. I played this with my brother and cousin all throughout 5th and 6th grade. WCW vs. NWO: World Tour (Nintendo 64) (I think!) - I'm pretty sure this is the WCW video game I played constantly in the 1st grade. Dylan might be able to clear this up on whether I'm talking about the right game or not. Anyways, I remember this having a packed roster with a lot of options to choose from. It was a great game for its time period. Smackdown vs. Raw 2004 (PS2) - I played this all through middle school and high school until I got the 2006 version or something which I didn't like as much. This was a pretty advanced game as far as the storyline part went and I played the hell out of it. The Rumble was awesome on there. Of course now I have no clue where the hell any of these games are. I no longer have No Mercy for sure or the WCW game. The three Smackdown games are possibly buried underneath of heap of God knows what in my closet. That's too bad or I might play one for a little nostalgia.

I remember watching this on Austin's DVD a few years back and thinking it was very good.

I went to an outdoor show in Jasper, GA held on a lot adjacent to an Irish pub a few weeks back. The main event was Kyle Matthews vs. Cyrus The Destroyer who are a couple of relatively big names in the local indie scene here in the tri-state area. It wasn't much of a show because we got rained on which in turn didn't help any with the humidity. It was fine though. The pub had good food too.

I'd definitely say a couple hundred give or take. It also really depends on the venue, who's on the card, and if it's outside the weather. I've been to over a dozen different small indy promotions here in the Chattanooga area in the last 12 years. I've been to a few shows where it's reached about 300 before. Another thing to consider is the scheduling because I've been to a couple of shows where moderately "big" names came and not enough people showed up because it was deep into College Football season which is a religion here. They had to cancel the show and give us our money back so there's a lot of factors in it. An average good crowd would be 125-150 I would say. I don't know if they really truly profit from a couple hundred because I'm not terribly close to any of the wrestlers around here. All of them have second jobs as do the promoters more often than not. I know a few guys who've been working at the Family Dollar for ten years along with wrestling. Honestly, small-time indy wrestlers seem to get extra money from wrestling rather than making a living off of it.

That Khali cameo was tremendous.

I'll succumb to Dylan's argument about Orton here. I fucking hate Randy Orton and find him completely uninteresting but I think it can work if he cashes in the MITB on Bryan at Summerslam. He might actually become relevant again and this is the perfect catalyst for that.