thebrainfollower

Sadly I wish Kevin Dunn was around in that Vader-BA match to cover the 2 mistakes.

LOL I glanced at your list jingus for a second without realizing what is was a list of but knowing the topic thread and thought you had lost your mind.

I guess it was booked no worse than any heel's title run in WWE but they ARE all booked horribly

I watched Nikki vs Paige from Smackdown which is a great match but watch Charlotte. Her performance at ringside as a babyface, good lord. I've seen more charisma from just about anyone.

This relates to his WWF run where had very very few tags at all on tape.

Just started listening to this now. I finished my final play in this region (moving to Boston area soon) last night and was feeling very sad about a part of my life being over and suddenly after a FAR too long absence are the Titans to cheer me up. Thanks a bunch guys.

I was a huge classic horror movie fan so Undertaker I really liked as a kid. So I was cheering like nuts when he beat Hogan, whom this 12 year old had grown on. I had exactly TWO days in school to crow over it (Monday and Tuesday) until Hogan got the title back but that 48 hours I was in my little heel glory.

It's funny, everyone was saying get the title off Nikki was priority #1. Now I think they need to figure out a #1 face. Sasha and Nikki are the top workers in the division IMO. Would either work half as well as a face? With Paige going heel and Charlotte not really doing that great IMO it's a problem unless you wanna have Becky Lynch step up or throw a hail Mary with Bailey, I actually think Bailey taking on all these supermodel types would be a great empowering story for young women, but it's WWE so I am not holding my breath.

I won't say a beef but I've always felt Hunter's not exactly a huge John Cena fan. And having his idol's daughter beat Cena's girlfriend despite her being far better and way more over is the sort of subtle stuff Hunter does in his sleep. Not that SOMEONE didn't need to end that title run but the fan base was screaming for it to be Sasha clearly.

She IS way better than Charlotte. Has actual personality, shows it every moment in the ring in her offense and character and can get a good crowd reaction. She's a casualty in HHH's disdain for Cena lately it would seem to me. Personally I find Charlotte the weak link of the divas division, with Paige, Sasha, Becky and Nikki all way ahead of her.

Flair was WAY too generous here. Other than the Tito match I've talked about at length this is a great example of Flair not thinking. Shawn at this point was half of a lower mid card tag team that was breaking up, losing all the time and had issues. Yet he dominates Flair for much of this.

Is it fair to say that the Rocky movies are really pro wrestling disguised as boxing?

It needs to end with a heartbroken Parv at London Bridge, staring in despair at the Thames when he feels a hand on his shoulder and Ted Dibiase in full MDM regalia smiles at him "I still believe kid" and they walk off together.

They could have given him a single storyline. That might have helped.

I think Nash claims that the poke was Hogan's idea as well, not his.

I agree. At best this is "greatest wrestlers of the TV" era. Unless we have somebody here who's seen 20 Londos matches live, in which case why the HECK are you not posting, whoever you are.

The analogy has a flaw because the heart cannot choose to pump better nor can the oil. I really think my definitions make more sense. High rate is good and low is bad. What defines good or bad is up to you Nevertheless my GWE 100 would at least take into account how big a star a guy was, merch sales, cultural impact and all stuff that happened outside of the ring. I will avoid stories and rep. But someone like Hogan for me HAS to be top 100, definitely top 50 and most likely top 20 just because of all those non ring things (the guy WAS the biggest star in wrestling for 15 years). However because it's not EVERYHING to me, in ring performance matters a lot as well he will not get the #1 spot. If Randy Savage gets my #1 spot for US workers (and only Flair and Lawler compete right now, Hansen I consider a Japan guy mostly) it will be because he's an A minus in ALL those categories for me, even if he's not an A plus in any of them. And FWIW guys who peaked pre 70's will be much lower if at all simply because there being no footage or little footage is a huge unfair factor. Sorry if I took you as being insulting.

That was indeed the Observer claim at the time. But if Hogan had creative control why would this be needed? Hogan could demand the title back any day he wanted and they'd have to give it to him. Here's the thing. We all know that from the second Goldberg won the title he became an afterthought while Hogan-Warrior dominated for the next few months. Then Hogan took a break, Nash got the book and what happened happened. Now Nash's claim (and I am not buying this either because to be skeptical of Hogan while going along with whatever Nash says makes little sense) is that Hogan used creative control to demand the title back but without actually beating Goldberg, because he wanted to look better with the boys. Nash follows this up by saying that beating Goldberg did nothing for him (there I do think he's right) and it only benefited Hogan and that was who it was supposed to benefit. Nash finished by saying that creative didn't matter because Hogan had veto power over basically everything in WCW. I do get that I took him the wrong way JDW. It was me seeing a word in another post that wasn't there. I still say Hogan had more to do with Goldberg's burial than Nash did, though neither were out to help anyone except themselves.

okay that seemed to be your point. So if you ARE saying that Hogan's politics were justified in Sting's case but not in Goldberg's okay, I can see that argument. I do think the point about how Hogan reacted to both and was he justified is interesting though,.

I am legit sorry I thought you posted "didn't" before that. Which is my fault totally and says something. But Hogan still undercut Goldberg as soon as he won the title off him until getting it back with the Fingerpoke.

I want to get other's thoughts on this, because I'm having a spirited debate with goc where he seems to argue that Hogan was in the right to bury both Sting and Goldberg in 1998. The argument seems to be that Hogan was the best, most spirited, caring, hard worker in the main event scene that year in 1998 and therefore should have kept the title. If I am going too far in overstating your view goc, I am sorry and feel free to correct me. Speaking as someone who gave up on WCW that year out of legit hate (as opposed to heat) for Hogan I cannot disagree more. But I want other's thoughts on this and in general was his political style justified in his WCW run?

Hogan did NOT put Goldberg over clean. Hogan was distracted by Page and Malone and had his back turned until right before the spear. it's closer but it's not clean. Nash has made a VERY good case that beating Goldberg did NOTHING for him and was a way to get the title back to Hogan which is indeed what happened. I can understand the newfound love the internet has for Hollywood Hogan. But anyone who doesn't see the damage the guy was doing to WCW by the end of 97 through his departure, I am sorry. I was a fan at the time and when Bret jumped I seriously thought about never watching WWF again then saw Starrcade and thought "you know what at least in WWF the face goes over at Mania' (well until HHH ruined that). Hogan did a ton of damage. And Goldberg stopped caring in 98? Well maybe fighting AL GREENE on Nitro and having no stories helped. Hogan undercut these guys on purpose again and again and again to keep himself on top. He made a career out of it, much more so without Vince to keep him in check. His politics in 98 and 99 was as bad as HHH's in 2002-2004. One turned me off WCW, the other turned me off modern wrestling.

Yes I know what people think work means. I am not a moron nor do I appreciate being spoken or posted to like one. It's insulting. But by definition the rate of something is connected with how good or bad it is, so work rate just is how good or bad a person is working. Any other definition is worthless and pointless. And now, like Jerry, I am done with this. Sorry for intruding on the sacred ground of the never ending feud.

What Hogan did to Bill Goldberg's title run as well is what cements this for me. It's Hogan being Hogan. having said that yes Sting hurt himself, he COULD have gone out there and given so much that a darn riot would have broken out over that finish. And FORCED Hogan to do a job for fear of his life.

No i don't think that goc. I don't think Hogan and Bischoff EVER had that meeting at all. But here is what they claim over the course of a year is he hadn’t been working out. Okay but during this "year" that things had not been working out they NEVER changed their plans. They continued to book towards a guy they knew would NOT work out. BS.