WingedEagle

Part of my personal frustration with mid-late 90s AJPW is just how good and smart they are, with an attention to detail to very small things that can have huge emotional impacts within a match and over matches. There are so many specific elements that are completely down my alley and better and more layered than any other attempt at them I've come across. Then, they just go on too far with too much and lose me and it's much worse than if the match was terrible to begin with. It's, in part, why I gravitate towards Taue, because his physical limitations meant that he could only go so far and he was still awash in the general style and everything else. It doesn't mean his input is better necessarily but that I am more comfortable with his output. It's not a very good argument for him as a better wrestler (he probably wasn't), but it's the argument for him having matches that I'm happier watching. I also recognize my lack of breadth of watching, so I'm not a particularly loud voice on this topic. I should check out mid-2000s Kobashi at some point. Someone suggest me a few specific matches I'd probably be high on? A very interesting side-topic that came out of Chad's discussion with Quentin on Psychology is Dead is the possible uses of "excess" in storytelling. That excess is in someway not only an intrinsic part of Kobashi's character but also one of his fatal flaws like Icarus trying to fly to the sun and having his wings melted every time. It's also a lesson that he (the kayfabe character) consistently fails to learn from charging into Stan Hansen in the early 90s and getting himself near killed, to his battles with Misawa and others. All heart, all guts, all the time, and so "winding it back" isn't part of his role or who he is meant to be portraying. I've said this before but Nick Bockwinkel's character was "smart guy", "wily vet", "sneaky champ", when THAT's your character then of course a lot of stuff you do is going to "smart". But Kobashi didn't have that character. Ric didn't either, but I don't think there are four faces of Bock like there are four faces of Flair ... from a certain perspective Bock is more one dimensional in his actual character work than Flair is. I'm not picking on Bock per se, I mean I had him in my top 10 for GWE, but he's the flag bearer for "psychology", and Flair and Kobashi are the routine whipping boys, but I think the analysis isn't really deep enough in any of the three cases. Bock does MICRO psychology very well, Flair and Kobashi, both I think, excel at layered match-on-match stuff and what I'm going to call "deep character". And hubristic excess is a part of both of those characters for different reasons. You've talked a lot about "purpose" and "meaning", what about cases where the correct artistic choice is something that is over the top or excessive to get a certain idea across? I just think the talking point is completely overplayed as criticism, to the point where I think venerating Taue out of the four pillars for doing more with less has become an eye-rolling cliche. Not a shot at Matt or anyone in particular, but I don't see the talk around that as being particularly enlightening at this point. Found myself nodding along with much of this. It also strikes me as a more fair and objective way to evaluate it, as we don't know much about the intentions behind what takes place in a match. All we know is what we see in the ring. We can choose to give workers credit or blame for thinking about and planning it in great detail beforehand, but that requires a whole lot of conjecture and speculation. I voted Kobashi #1 in GWE, but fully acknowledge its possible he only knew one way to approach matches before his body was wrecked, and another way thereafter. Not sure I buy it as there is enough nuance and variation across the career to suggest he gave a lot of thought to his performances, but that could be dead wrong. He may have been a bumbling fool who went out to wrestle the only way he knew how given certain time & card placement constraints.

Context does always matter. The Hog Wild reference above is a great example of it. There are different ways to explain it and the related nuances, but everything from build, crowd, place on the card, commentary, what preceded it and a host of other factors beyond purely what the wrestlers in the ring did from bell to bell can impact the viewing experience.

This is easy in the sense that I think Charlotte is better and more effective in her role, and as Parv said, the first true heel they've had in years. She's not just a proper heel, she's fantastic at it. On the other hand, I haven't seen anything yet to suggest another woman on the roster can take a beating like Sasha and make Charlotte look so strong in that role. Her charisma, music, slender build and fearlessness create a dynamic in their matches that I haven't seen anyone else bring to the table yet. Becky Lynch? Perhaps, but remains to be seen. Bayley? Dead in the water since being called up so she'd really need to be rehabbed to work as well, even if I thought she'd be tremendous on the main roster.

Dave seems to value a crowd and the presentation elements quite a bit. No inside info here but I wouldn't be shocked if that's what he was alluding to in making such a comment. He's also always noted how junior matches don't play well at the Dome so perhaps he's referring to the big, expressive matches of recent years like Tanahashi/Okada, Styles/Nak, Nak/Ibushi etc. that were indeed well received at such a setting.

Haven't been a fan for the duration of their babyface run. Just not my humor. It seems like they sold a lot of tshirts and perhaps cereal boxes. Good for them if so, but the entire routine is not funny or entertaining. This is exactly the point. It works because its not what we're accustomed to and expect so throwing variance into what's become a routine spot makes it special.

Sounds like I need to rewatch the EVOLVE tag. I had it at about ***3/4 on first viewing but am open to checking it out again. On the other hand, I am not at all a fan of Sabre Jr. and actively dislike most of his matches. But happy to approach it with an open mind.

At the time this felt like one of those rare instances where WWE actually presented a dream match. These two had been kept apart from the time they both ascended to the top of Raw & Smackdown during the build to Mania 21 which made for a truly fresh match. Even with Taker/Edge in a Cell, this still seemed like the real draw at the show. They didn't disappoint, working an oddly compact match in under 14 minutes that's a virtual sprint compared with some main event matches today. They work a basic power match with lariats, powerbombs and slams for Batista while Cena is constantly looking for the FU. A neat wrinkle along the way is Batista borrowing a page from Flair's book as he clips the knee, goes to a kneebreaker and then actually breaks out the Figure-Four. What I loved here is how simple this was. Basic transitions borrowed from the Horsemen like a kick to the gut. Yeah, we had finishers teased throughout but they weren't spammed. They maintained a solid pace as there were no real rest spots or killing clock for anyone to regain their wind, but at the same time they let everything sink in. Every shot and offensive maneuver was allowed to breathe so that its impact registered. One legit false finish at the end on the powerbomb where Batista caught Cena coming off the top for his legdrop that absolute absolutely popped the crowd, and made the finish that followed thereafter all the more satisfying. Still amazing that this was a 100% clean job, although Cena didn't look at all the worse for wear coming out of a match that felt like stage 1 in a prolonged feud. Perhaps Cena's injury had something to do with that but they wouldn't return to it until 2010 when Batista was a true heel. Great, simple match with no real waste. ****

Very much agree with that. On Goc's point -- if a majority of fans who pay for and watch the programming preferred Owens/Rollins they should absolutely run with it. I'd find that hard to believe, but far be it from me to suggest they cater to anything but the largest possible segment of the audience. If that feud and its developments post-HIAC move ratings and crowds go crazy for it then perhaps they hit something. Haven't seen anything since they crowned Owens or throughout this feud suggesting that's the case though.

Of course we all want it entertaining. I just don't think the difference between something like Kane-Wyatt and Billie Kay-Emma is big. I think a company should strive to represent reality. Having more females can only help the company not look like just for men to watch. Also, saying women aren't as good as wrestlers is silly when we saw Joshi in the 80s/90s, we saw NXT last year. Agree with you about more females. But disagree if you think they have enough right now. When there are enough to stack cards like 80s AJW across 3 brands your point will be dead on. I don't think we're there. NXT last year, and this year, is a 1 hour TV show with with sporadic big shows. How does making that work that translate to 6 hours of weekly TV across all 3 brands plus all the PPVs/Takeovers?

There isn't enough to talent to split the show in half without burning through the roster depth and matchups, and it shouldn't be a goal. No clue at all where the reference to tag teams comes from. The goal should be to produce stars who can fill the show with quality matches and segments that compel an audience to buy tickets, watch the programming and subscribe to the Network, not to find a satisfactory ratio of men to women, singles to tags, cruiserweights to heavyweights or midgets to animals. I believe that is best accomplished by choosing to highlight and push a couple key acts above the rest of the roster and would be hampered by any attempt to throw a women's division out there as though it is completely the same as what's been on television for decades. Which gets to another part of the idea that boggles my mind. Wrestling has a number of inherent advantages over sports because it is predetermined and can thus choose who's dominant and stands out, as well as hopefully make sure that those individuals are the ones with elite charisma and personalities that draw an audience. But a large part of it is very similar to sports -- its a physically demanding endeavor that demands a certain degree of athleticism. I don't think its controversial to suggest that to the average viewer male wrestlers are more physically impressive than the women. On average they're bigger, stronger and faster. Not in all cases, but it doesn't seem a stretch to presume that the average viewer thinks Braun Strowman or Sheamus look more physically impressive and dominating than Charlotte or Nia Jax or Sasha Banks. You put the women out there in the same company, on the same show, and under the same banner with the exact same presentation as the men and they're working with a handicap. Ronda Rousey isn't one of the 2 biggest UFC draws of the last few years just because she's blonde, but because she dominated people in impressive fashion time in and time out and how she carried herself in doing so. UFC has for the most part gone out of their way to feature women up and down the card, and they've got a lot more women to use. How many of them matter, and if they do, why do the matter? The answer is not because they're slotted on a random PPV or fight night. Its not WWE or UFC's job to provide equal employment opportunities to women on camera. Their goal should be putting together shows that people can't miss, and I don't see any reason to believe that simply throwing women out there the same way they do men makes that more likely. If anything, I think they have more of an opportunity to make a woman or 3 into legit stars primarily because the women's roster is so much smaller and limits their ability to bounce from push to push to push, and move the title from champ to champ to champ. One can debate whether or not that is forced upon them or not because of the size of the division, but its still an opportunity that's there and an advantage that isn't present on the men's side. Filling up the roster with girls and treating them exactly the same eliminates that. Maybe I'm crazy. I don't care if there is 1 woman or 12 on Raw tonight. I want good matches and promos that entertain me and build big shows I can look forward to. No bonus points on my end whether they pull that off with men or women. I just don't think its happening by booking the women like the men, especially given the glaring lack of depth.

This felt like a distinct possibility at points throughout the match, but it needed blood and/or a more satisfying finish to cement it. RE: Matt D's comments about Sasha selling the back. I agree that there were instances Sasha could've shown a greater commitment to selling the damage. But from legitimately turning on the waterworks to the point that it looked like she was truly disappointed at having the match called early following the table powerbomb, to the agony she showed at every bump along the way (such as the backbreaker) on the chair and then hammering it home when her back gave out on the attempted Liger Bomb, I thought the back selling absolutely made the match. Along with Charlotte's heel performance and mannerisms, of course. On the table powerbomb itself, I thought the spot looked and sounded brutal the moment it occurred. The impact along with how Sasha slid off thereafter looked devastating. It also absolutely makes a difference it was a woman with her frame taking that bump, much as it would have different mileage if it were Mysterio going through the table as opposed to Big Show. Just changes the dynamic entirely. Need to rewatch the entire thing again this week, but as of now I'm pretty firmly in camp with Parv that this is about as high a ****1/2 as you can go. A more impactful very possibly kicks this up a notch, but still one I"m looking forward to going back to.

I have got to watch that again. It felt on the level of the best matches I've seen this year but between the long delay, all the crying and the sick spots it may have been a lot of shock value it needs a rewatch. Incredibly gritty, violent and and incredible spectacle. Very much unlike most of what WWE produces. ****1/2 at worst, but fully reserving rights to go higher.

You're not wrong. In over her head as a babyface when called up but she's been the standout heel performer since turning. Perhaps since Punk as a heel with Heyman or the Shield before they were getting babyface pops? She's a real highlight of TV. I'm going to play the Miz card. Not in my book. Go away heat until earlier this year, and never came across as someone who should be headlining anything.

You're not wrong. In over her head as a babyface when called up but she's been the standout heel performer since turning. Perhaps since Punk as a heel with Heyman or the Shield before they were getting babyface pops? She's a real highlight of TV. Notice that there's no dueling chants. Just cheers for Sasha. Great to see. Yup. No pandering from her. Just a proper heel through and through.

Doing the '98 tribute act is solid after the build. If they somehow give us blood this will be incredible.

You're not wrong. In over her head as a babyface when called up but she's been the standout heel performer since turning. Perhaps since Punk as a heel with Heyman or the Shield before they were getting babyface pops? She's a real highlight of TV.

Alright, loving this already. Way to make it original.

It absolutely does. Charlotte has been the best heel on Raw for months. It just should've been hyped as the main event for a while to capitalize on being in that position if they were going to go that route.

Awesome entrance for Charlotte.

Our own Marty Sleeze reporting live says this is false Meltzer's not recapping the PPV for the site, according to the byline.

Perkins has a great entrance package and cool sneakers. He's otherwise possibly the most boring wrestler on the roster. Nothing about him remotely likeable or unlikeable. He's just there. The purple ropes and special mat also feel like the kids table at a big family gathering.

This is why I thought the title match should headline even if it was cold heading into the show. Only reason I can justify it is Owens's title reign is dead in the water so might as well try to put the women over as headliners.

Cell #2 thus far isn't much better than #1. Big bump from Rollins thus now but its been pretty pedestrian with the only difference from a normal match being how its filmed at times.

That match had its moments but it felt really cold until the kendo stick and chain got involved, and even the finish seemed mistimed. Its odd as Reigns's selling was great as always and his offense always looks solid, but this was probably the worst match they've had thus far. Just way too long.

This is a show and lineup where my interest is about as low as can be for a PPV, yet I fully expect a number of matches to be good. That usually leads to a pleasantly suprising night, but if they run really long that could easily not happen. Just a cold show but one with a lot of potential.