JaymeFuture

i think this was because he seriously injured the guy's neck in his debut match. wasn't that one of los boricuas? i am also surprised you didn't mention how much TV/PPV time DOA was getting that year. definitely my anti-MVPs of 1998 WWF! Yeh, he injured Jose Estrada in his debut, but still. They show him in the crowd doing nothing, he gets weeks of build up, debuts, then instantly is on ice. Funnily enough I was going to mention DOA. Every time that bloody motorcycle revving music kicked in I'd groan out loud. Though there is a somewhat amusing moment during an LOA/DOA backstage fight where this large metal trolley, extremely heavy looking, gets knocked out of place and begins to roll downhill, the cameraman running for his life as it threatens to smash into him at high speed. Also, Steve Blackman gets better reactions than I remembered.

So, I'm taping another podcast later this week, and as the one we did for 1994 in this format was a big success, we're going to broach 2000. I'm very interested to see how you folks will break down this year with retrospect, a fairly insane year in the business with a lot to choose from. The idea is that out of everything that happened on a worldwide basis in 2000, what ONE thing (a match, promo, wrestler, angle, feud, theme, company, whatever it may be), epitomises each for you personally and why? For example, in talking 94, we got stuff like: The Good - WrestleMania 10, Misawa/Kawada, pre-Hogan WCW. The Bad - Hogan going to WCW and the change in the product The Ugly - Undertaker Vs. Undertaker Apply for 2000, and please go into as much depth on why things were the best or the worst as you'd like. As always I'll read the feedback and credit the fine folks who do on the show.

WWE 2006 was a really bad year at the time. Have been watching every Raw from 1998 this year to see how it holds up on a week-to-week basis. The main storytelling with Austin and Vince, along with the slow burn build to Taker Vs. Austin, is pretty good. Rest of the show is shaky at best, with the Brawl 4 All taking up way more time than I remembered, Jeff Jarrett still not over a lick, the demise of Vader in the WWF, and some real inconsistency with how midcard angles are pushed. Oddities debut with the Jackyl, appear one more time, then are gone for weeks and Jackyl hasn't been seen since. Steven Regal debuts against Droz (which I have NO recollection of), then doesn't appear again until the Real Man's Man months later. Edge debuts then does nothing for weeks. Droz gets an MTV style "Droz's World" video that promises something next week, but next week never comes. Also, the four weeks or so of pre-taped TV after Summerslam 1998 is awful, fast forward material almost all the way.

Thank you sir! Yeh, I wasn't exactly sure where he was going with that analogy when it began ¬_¬

Honma Vs. Shibata may have been my favourite match of the tournament so far. I love Shibata, but I was rooting so hard for Honma to finally win. Amazing to see how over the guy while having 'nil points'.

If anything they didn't go nearly as over the top with Del Rio as they could have. That awesome robe he wore at Mania 27 should have been a regular part of his look - what extravagant ring jackets or robes do we have in WWE these days? Jericho's is all I can really thing of off the top of my head, and that's the stuff that makes people come off like genuine stars..

I know what you mean, am watching old Raw's from 1998 and get the same thing. It should be noted that on more than a few of these shows, Owen really looks like he doesn't give a flying fuck.

Want to thank everybody for the awesome (and frankly hilarious at points) feedback, the show is online now in the Publications & Podcasts forum, or if can't be bothered to go there, you can click on the link in my sig.

Well, I want to thank everybody here for all the feedback on this topic, because this was a very entertaining show to do. Talking all the major Highs and Lows for TNA, including Angle Vs. Joe, Hogan & Bischoff, Claire Lynch, Fucked Up Jeff Hardy, Knockouts, Austin Aries, LAX, Blow Up Dolls, Gut Check and a ton more. http://squaredcirclegazette.podbean.com/mf/web/mz6g9q/SCGRadio9-TheHighsAndLowsOfTNA.mp3 Give it a listen and let me know what you think, your feedback is always very much appreciated.

I blame booking rather than Heyman for the fate of Axel and Cesaro. Neither of those guys have main event, money drawing personality to begin with, Heyman is put them to fill that void, while neglecting the other half of the equation, which is booking them to be something special. Good booking and personality can make stars, but they were put in the position to flounder in the middle, and that's what they did. I agree that maybe Brock doesn't "need" Heyman (I think Luke said the same thing if memory serves), but I don't think there's any question he adds massively to the act. And in the WWE, where they do want the heels to talk, Lesnar doing it on his lonesome isn't nearly as good as Heyman is in selling a match, and since Brock isn't there often, his presence is very valuable. Paul as booker not letting guys be themselves in matches is one I'll question though. He didn't always use the Memphis masterpiece theatre finishes in - he stayed hands off on the stuff he knew didn't need the run-ins and the woman getting spanked, and he usually did it for the guys he had that could do with the help. Sandman and Dreamer without the smoke and mirrors are nothing special, but they were the main guys he had to work with, they were over with his audience and it made them come across like stars to his crowd. No doubt he didn't make money with it, and in terms of money Jarrett is far superior as a businessman, but they had two different agendas. Jerry was running within his area and targeting a broad audience in one place (and did superbly), Heyman was targeting a niche audience on a national basis (and failed). In terms of trying to run nationally, Jerry lost his ass on TNA pretty bad and pretty quickly (I don't recall the exact figure at this moment but $20 million rings a bell?). Still, getting off track, and there really is no point in arguing the business side because clearly Jarrett wins. Booking. The reason I think Paul's ECW work was so good was because he was able to create auras around guys, and his company in general, to the point where people either truly believed they were great (Sabu, Public Enemy, etc) or bonafide top star quality (Shane Douglas, Mike Awesome, Taz, etc), despite the limited remit and appeal of the company. In the most heated competitive landscape ever, he survived almost solely on the illusion. Ultimately I think it was an environment that nobody could have succeeded in, but he did a hell of a job. As an aside, we're going to be doing a show soon, that I'm looking forward to getting feedback from here on, about how good ECW really was and how successful it really was. As for the rural Minnesota line, I'll apologise on Karl's behalf, but to clarify it was meant a good-natured jab at me since me and my family are from an area of Shropshire that is about as rural as it gets, and he jokes about it all the time. Knowing that nobody knows the context I probably should have edited it out, but it was so throwaway I completely forgot about it until you mentioned it. As for JvK's point above, I wasn't trying to say Backlund sucked at all, but I think the presentation of Bob Backlund as a technical wrestler was very much in the way he was talked about and his demeanour being so straight. Maybe it's down to most of his opponents, maybe it's just a stylistic thing, but I think of matches like the one with Muraco where he's just holding a headlock without doing all that much with it forever, grinding it in the over the top "New York" ham-sandwich style, and compare that to the way a lot of the guys in the NWA and it just doesn't come off nearly as technical, and it may just be a personal preference when it comes to the execution of the style.

I'd say in terms of importance to the promotion, I can certainly see the case for Russell over Ross, but I voted for JR based on being superior in the other criteria. I think Bill Watts was a very good commentator also, though not on the list.

So, with the recent news of Spike choosing not to renew TNA's TV deal, it seems like a good time to do a podcast looking at the story of TNA thus far - the good points and the bad. The direction of the show will be balanced purely based on the feedback given. So what I'd like to ask is, to you personally, what is your one high point and one low point in TNA history. A moment, a match, an angle, a character, a point in time, whatever. Feel free to elaborate on your chosen points, and feel free to add any additional comments about the Spike TV news and TNA's situation itself (I know a lot have been posted in the Cancelled thread, but I didn't want to mooch off that without permission) I'll be reading the comments on the show, and it should be pretty entertaining due to some of the absurdity of the past twelve years. So yeh, in your opinion, highest high and lowest low? Was there ever any hope?

Yeh, with the TNA story, I think that's the best line of questioning - how close was to jumping on board. As a side question - thoughts on working with Pillman in 96 on his Loose Cannon stuff.

I expect it's UFC related listening to his breaking news show today, something about a big fight announced for September on the Jones/Cormier show. Gina Vs. Ronda is best bet.

I'll seek them out - they in the Microscope forum?

Agreed that nothing strikes as MOTY stuff so far, but there is an awful lot of very good. Honma is having a great tournament, shame he has nothing to show for it yet.

I propose they do the show on a giant wrestling ring-shaped cake and try and get on the Food Network. It can have as many sides and flavours as they like.

Well, first of all, thank you for listening and enjoying, even if you do disagree ;-) Would rather that than the "I agree"-fests that don't generate any talking points, and as I said to the guys when we did it - the problem with looking at Underrated/Overrated is that you're gonna piss people off no matter what, either by disagreeing, insulting things they like, or because you don't have that mindset, you can't speak to why they feel that way. But alas, it was interesting if nothing else to gauge reactions. I think "Cactus as a better opponent for Vader than Sting" is absurd as well, for what its worth. I don't think any Vader/Cactus match was as good as GAB92, Starrcade 92, or Superbrawl 3. Lance is a weird one, because you'll rarely hear anybody in the business shit on Lance's work in the ring. Ever. Who did he have bad matches against on the ECW house show tapes? The Heyman discussion could have gone forever, and if there was a flaw it was in opening the discussion to people so wide that we had to tackle so many in a short period of time. I don't put blame on Heyman one bit for Axel, Ryback or Cesaro failing - as soon as they were put with Heyman, the priority was never on them to be elevated. I think saying Heyman is ever "awful" on the mic is a stretch personally, what would you base on that on, out of interest? ECW booking, if people don't like or disagree with, I wouldn't argue - it was a niche style for a specific point in time, and to the audience it was designed to target it worked. But on the grand scale of life it wasn't the success of other companies in respect of money made, not was it as big a failure in terms of money lost. It was a small company, and in that sense, the fact it has such wide reach, was emulated stylistically in many ways, and resulted in so many guys being plucked from there, is pretty amazing. Jerry Jarrett, and Memphis in general (opinion of Lawler's work) seems to be somewhat isolated and overlooked, so I wouldn't disagree with that at all, but I'd say it's more that Jarrett is underrated than Paul is overrated.

TNA has looked like a dying company for year now. Sale rumours (that the company lied to the wrestlers about) since last fall, and even before the Russo situation Spike was in no hurry to sign them. I think they've just had their fill of this company, and the Russo situation confirmed to them that they were doing the right thing. I'm hoping that this isn't Spike washing their hands of wrestling completely, but they went from having UFC and WWE, to Bellator and TNA, and the stigma of secondary programming isn't great.

Stemming from all the feedback we got, this show was a lot of fun - the SCG panel discuss the Overrated wrestlers, matches and shows, including a big debate on Sting, as well as talk on The Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Lance Storm, WrestleMania X7, WrestleMania 6, the nWo and a whole lot more. This one was a lot of fun to do, check it out, let me know what you think~! ;-) http://squaredcirclegazette.podbean.com/mf/web/e4m7is/SCGRadio8-TheOverratedInProWrestling.mp3

I don't think anybody denies Shawn was an asshole though, and it's a flaw no doubt. Not to justify anything, but top guys have always gotten away with stuff, and Vader was a letdown by the time Summerslam rolled around. Granted, it still would have been better than Sid. We go into Shawn a little on the Overrated show that'll be up this week, but I'm not so hot on using the "self-conscious epic" point against him personally.

New Japan is suffering from keeping guys in their spots for too long at the moment - the big attempts at elevation this year were Naito and the Bullet Club, both of which fell flat, which is particularly frustrating when you could see genuine momentum for Ishii and Shibata at the turn of the year that made it obvious these there two guys to run with in a major way, and while they've done more with Ishii, they've put a ceiling on him it seems. Liked Ishii/Kojima a lot, and Nagata/Honma was really strong too, definitely recommend seeking them out to anybody that is looking to pick and choose the key stuff on these shows as opposed to watching it all. Day 2 was helped a lot by a very lively crowd that was responding well to everything, even Benjamin/Fale, whereas Day 1 that didn't come alive for too much.

Usos on Sunday? I agree with this though, and its a shame. Part of it is simple evolution when it comes to stuff like the DDT, but the move itself never really matters big picture, its the context. A kneelift was a finisher in another time and place, and while that seems bizarre now, Bryan's running knee is over huge. A lot of guys on the indies try that "Japan influenced" style with the emphasis on moves and the athletics and it doesn't resonate that much with me at all. And with WWE keeping guys on a treadmill, you can only emotionally invest for so long. Promos are a big part of this too. Not to harp on scripting, but its hard to connect to somebody if its not their own words or emotions being presented.

I am a big fan of modern NJPW, but the Day 1 hype was a tad much, maybe would have appreciated it more had I gone in blind like I'm planning to for Day 2. Okada/Styles match was really good, built to a fine crescendo. Was a little disappointed in Shibata/Nakamura, to be honest, never really seemed to draw in the people.

Great point. Both WWF and WCW got this much TV time back when the business was red-hot and depth was better in terms of star power. Strip those away, and we still have the same amount of time to fill. Brand extension shielded us from that for a while, when they were strict about the divide anyway.