El Boricua

Really enjoyed the women's rumble, was rooting for Beth to pull off the win.

Apparently Cain was not one of the 20 on the charter flight, he actually remained behind with the others. I'm guessing Fury arrived and left separate from WWE, so it's still up in the air who else got a seat on the charter that left. If one of them was Rollins, I'm guessing his popularity in the locker room is going to continue to plummet.

Atlas Air also probably wants to keep their business in KSA. So it's also not out of the realm of possibility of themgoing along with the explanation just to maintain their business status quo. What's interesting is that the wrestlers that were stranded have not really said anything that would indicate it was a normal malfunction issue.

One potential wrinkle from all this is the possibility of suspecting that the stock sell-offs various WWE executives did in the summer could be stemming from the Saudis apparently not paying them. If that's something that turns out to have legs, oh man...

I think Flair and Hogan were on a different flight, Meltzer at one point tweeted that Flair had arrived to Florida sometime yesterday afternoon and I think Hogan was on that flight. Vince and Dunn appear to have left on Vince's private jet, but no word if someone else flew with them. Brock and Heyman of course left on Brock's private jet and made it to Smackdown. The word going around was 12 wrestlers and 8 key production people were the ones on the second charter. It's likely the wrestlers advertised to appear on Smackdown before it was known that the plane wouldn't make it on time. So the guesses are Reigns, Bray, Corbin, New Day, Revival. Kofi tweeted last night about landing in the USA, so that confirms he was on that flight. WWE tweeted a video of Cesaro from when the plane was refueling in Ireland, so he also was on the flight. I've also heard possibly Nakamura and Lashley, with Lashley being a weird one since he's on Raw. Not sure who the others are.

Exactly what I was thinking. If I were Fox I wouldn't be happy about this at all.

Decided to read this thread (nice to see you around Parv) and came across the mafia tangent... Adding a bit to that tangent: Specifically the question as to why would Miguel Perez Jr. and Savio Vega be there at the funeral, it's likely due to the personal relationships involved. Two scenarios come to mind (neither necessarily having to do with mafia ties) and it could be a combination of both: Miguel Perez Sr. was Antonino Rocca's tag partner and a mainstay in New York for several years. He also was a key player of CSP/WWC for the first ten years of it's existence, so it's likely that Perez Sr. and Monsoon knew each other well. So it's possible Perez Jr. may have also gotten to know Monsoon because of this or he may have gone on behalf of his father. Savio likely accompanied his friend/travel buddy, or... They both went because they were close with Victor Quiñones, who was apparently Monsoon's godson. To be honest, I think "shady shit" pretty much applies to most wrestling promoters (I know what you're alluding to specifically with Colon, but don't want to derail the discussion going there). Monsoon did not have his stake when he died, although I don't know exactly when he sold or transferred it. My guess is probably by the late 80s and likely was the stake Victor Quiñones would say he had in CSP. By 1995 or 1996 Jovica and Colon would declare bankruptcy for CSP and reincorporate as WWC which would have negated any CSP ownership stakes from other parties. Never had heard the % of the stake before, wondering if you remember where you read this (just to know the reference source). I've always heard (and could be mistaken) that Brody got blackballed because he ran afoul of Monsoon, either because of a fight they had and/or taking liberties with his guys (one of which was Jose Gonzalez who was not listed in your rundown of Puerto Ricans with a lengthy stint in the territory). Considering Monsoon's position in the territory, not the person to piss off. Although Puerto Ricans being a fixture in New York probably goes back all the way to Miguel Perez Sr. and the huge migration of Puerto Ricans to New York in the 50s making it a desirable demographic to appeal to. After all, wasn't West Side Story basically Italians vs. Puerto Ricans.

The show is well put together and does a great job in getting across the emotional and human elements of these stories.And, although in several cases there isn't really too much new information presented, the target audience isn't really people knowledgeable about the subject, these are more for people not really aware about the topics presented. But this sentence reminds me of something I've noticed about the comments made across the Internet about the different episodes and how good or terrible they are. It seems to me that, for the most part, what determines whether someone finds the episode to be good or not as good is related to how easily they can spot the misinformation or BS being passed off in the stories told by those being interviewed. It's most prevalent for the Montreal episode, a subject that has been covered so many times and more in-depth elsewhere that it's easier for people to spot when something isn't correct. To a lesser extent, I've seen some comments about the Von Erichs were some issue is taken with how certain things are presented. Makes me wonder about what information in the topics I'm not familiar with falls into this area. Also gives some pause when you realize there are people not familiar with these topics who will just take everything presented as the face value truth.

Completely agree with both your points. That just underscores that you can't take any one account at full face value. Especially when, even if there are good reasons for it occurring, there are things that are verifiably incorrect included in the accounts. That doesn't invalidate everything else in the account, but it is a reminder that one should be more wary in just accepting as is every detail given by any account. And also agree with this. It's those consistencies across different people's accounts that are likely to be more credible (well, as long as there wasn't an agreement beforehand about what story to tell). That, and it's important to place the accounts into the proper context both in place and time. All that said, it is important to remember (and I say this mostly as a reminder to myself), that the discussion of what may have happened doesn't change the end result of what occurred and the effect it has had and continues to have on the people that it impacted directly. A man died in a senseless and violent act, and it's something that can't be condoned. That is ultimately what matters, even if I am getting tired of both the extreme hagiography and extreme condemnation that tends to envelop any discussion of this horrible incident.

That part was one I found over the top and absolutely felt like it was played up for the cameras for the reasons you mention. To be fair, Atlas has been consistent on several elements throughout his different accounts through the years (or as Bix notes the gist of his version has been the same) and these elements tend to be consistent with other people's account of what happened. But consistent doesn't necessarily equate with accurate or reliable, particularly when one part of his account is clearly and verifiably false. This may be due to Atlas conflating something that happened at a different time or something that he added at some point to the telling that he's retold so many times that he believes it to be true, but knowing that he's been mentioning this since the 2005 Mooneyham interview (at least to my knowledge or what I've been able to find, I don't think he had included this detail in his account before) and that it is just flat out wrong does give me pause in taking everything at face value. The parts that line up with other people's accounts are more credible to me, but it's a little harder for me on the parts that are just from his account (particularly with the polishing up throughout the years). If you watch or read his accounts throughout the years (at least since he stopped not wanting to talk about it), he does have a tendency to polish up the account as the years have passed with details he doesn't mention before (here it is the banging on the operating room doors, before this in more recent accounts it's the spending the night on the beach which he mentions here as well). As with all accounts, it's those inconsistencies that make it hard to wade through everything and know what's true, what's speculation and what's just bull. An example is the whole Abdullah calling the meeting part. Atlas has for years said Abdullah called the meeting, and I don't know if this is the first time someone actually asked Abdullah about it, but Abdullah says he didn't. Most people are saying Abdullah is lying or full of it, but I actually believe Abdullah may be telling the truth. Why would he call the meting if he owns a stake in the territory and is good friends with Carlos? The only reason that makes sense would be for damage control, but I don't think he'd be spearheading any meeting that results in going to the cops. Also, both Abdullah and Barbara Goodish state that they encountered each other in the airport. How does that timeline work if he's calling for and is at that meeting but also leaving town and runs into Barbara at the airport? And Dutch in his 2000 written account does say there was a meeting that afternoon and he lists the people that were there. Abdullah isn't one of them. But since Atlas has been claiming this for years, it's believed Abdullah is lying now even though I'm not sure if anyone has asked Abdullah before about calling the meeting (and if you take Dutch's account into consideration, that one would back up Abdullah not being at the meeting). That is significant. I think the popular suspect has been Jim Cornette, but I guess we'll finally find out.

The Gino Hernandez episode is the one that interests me the most. Gave the Brody one a watch, absolutely no new information in it. Weirdly, I actually thought Abdullah was being genuine for the most part. Dutch continues to be Sgt. Schultz about the whole situation, and there's always some details about Atlas' more recent versions of what happened that make me not take at face value everything he says. There's some other stuff out there in Spanish beyond what Savio says and/or speculates on (by his own account he was last on the scene after the whole fracas went down), which doesn't line up entirely with Savio's account (but then again, no versions line up with each other be it in English, Spanish or whatever other language). Hard not to be cynical when the people talking only really started doing so once the get paid to do shoots era started. Still, this remains a horrible incident and there will never be a straight answer of what happened.

I'm a bit behind on the shows but just wanted to comment on the 89 rumble show. You know who I think would have made a good winner instead of Studd (and I know it's a bit in hindsight)? Brutus Beefcake should have won it. I'm being completetly serious. Considering how they positioned and used him going forward, this could have been a good start to that push to the next level.

Just a quick correction, the PR wrestler El Cuervo was the victim of the attack. And apparently it happened because the guy in the ring was upset over some chair shots he felt were stiff. It's an understatement to say that this incident has a lot of people furious and calling for Angel o Demonio's head. Cuervo needed emergency surgery to remove clotting from his brain and nobody knows yet what the prognosis for recovery is. He's going to be stuck in recovery and rehabilitation for quite a while in a foreign country. They're going to do a benefit show Thursday in Mexico and I imagine other things will pop up in terms of setting up help, but this incident is just absolutely heinous.

Over the Edge 1999 for the obvious reason. I'll think of some possibilities due to wrestling or booking decisions.

Taking advantage that today's a local holiday in Puerto Rico, I watched the show. My thoughts: The tag team elimination match was good for what it was, but it highlights the lack of interest WWE has in the tag division. The match was good for what it was. Looks like Roode and Gable are working on their team offense. Nice to see Metalik make a PPV event. It was absolute BS to ignore this match result in the head to head counter. Either have the Revival win or just tweak where Corbin's warned that he's on thin ice if they don't win out after that result. Women's match had some good character moments and action. Nia embracing the whole punch backlash is what you should do out of this situation. I've seen the reactions complaining about Nia getting a push out of this, well she was already getting a push before this and wrestling history si littered with shoot injuries being worked into feuds and character development. Glad Bayley and Sasha were put in the match, but why the sudden change of mind from Alexa. If they were to be consistent, she should have gone with any two of Morgan, Logan or Foxx. God showings from almost everyone, with Naomi being the only one done wrong. Nakamura and Rollins was a tedious match, do not get the people that I've seen calling that match good to great. It wasn't' good, just passable. AOP and The Bar should have been better but between the Enzo thing (not their fault) and the pants peeing (their fault), it was what it was. Ali and Murphy was good, hopefully it raises their profile more to the wider fanbase. The men's elimination tag was WWE presents Lethal Lottery with the way Raw was bickering. It was fun, Miz was the highlight for me with his sucking up and sacrificing of Shane. Samoa Joe getting eliminated right off the bat was a rehash of Naomi being eliminated quickly ion the women's match. An actual Rey vs. Balor match would be good. I'm ambivalent about Strowman eliminating everyone left on Smackdown like chumps and I've had enough of Shane being in these matches for Smackdown. Both Ronda and Charlotte brought in their match. Great match and the snapping at the end makes complete sense with the crisis of confidence Charlotte has had. It is the actions of someone who was desperate in the face of realizing that she might lose. Ronda is just like a fish to water with regards to wrestling. Feel Ronda should have a required a bit more assistance to leave the ring after having her throat/chest Pillmanized (not necessarily stretchered out, but definitely some helping her out). The one thing I really didn't like (and I'll avoid going on a tangent rant about the overall problem with the crowds too above it all) is the crowd reaction post-match, specifically the thank you Charlotte chants when Ronda got her chest crushed with a chair. that was just a trash reaction from the crowd. There's like five different directions they can go from here to Wrestlemania, it'll depend on when Becky is able to get cleared. One thing I would not do is have Nia vs. Becky until after Wrestlemania. The main event was really good once Bryan actually stopped getting killed. To be honest, this felt like matches one and two of a trilogy melded into one. The first part would be the first match where Bryan gets killed, once Bryan started coming back it felt like the second match where the underdog tries everything and comes close only to fall in the end. Likely will never get the third part where the hero finally pulls it off. I initially thought that Brock collapsing at the F5 attempt was due to the cumulative effects of the knee strikes and head shots he took, not due to elg damage. The first part where Brock was killing Bryan was too long and had one really bad fault IMO and it was the refereeing in the first part. Any referee that resorts to check for a pulse and does not stop the match should be fired and hanged. That right there highlights that the initial part went on too long.

I'm glad that it's going to be preserved at least, hopefully what was damaged during Maria is salvageable (they should have sold it sooner). This must be what that big shipment that was delivered to them last month was. Any possibility of them acquiring surviving IWA or AWF footage from whoever has it over here?

I missed most of the show last night (but am planning on watching what I missed). I did watch the two title matches live. The LWS was very good, but I can't call it great. It's basically Flair vs. Race at Starrcade 83. The refereeing (especially the counts in the last third) and the plunder setup killing some of the flow stop it from being great to me. But it was very good and so happy to see Becky win. Rousey vs. Nikki was good, liked Ronda toying with Nikki at the beginning and Nikki needing three ring post shots on Ronda in order to take control. If the rest of the show was as fun and entertaining as these two matches I can see why it's getting such good buzz. And please stop with the curtain calls.

Horrible ref counting there. That's twice the ref stopped the count at nine without Charlotte getting up to her feet.

I wouldn't be surprised if some form of the conversation from Eraser took place in WWE during this past week. "You don't get it. The money's already changed hands. These are not the kind of people you cancel on!"

Makes you wonder how many times this dynamic has happened before when a friend/source has been involved and they are the only corroboration/presenter of the story to Meltzer.

This last batch of WCW items from the first half of 98 just crystallizes how it went wrong. It's even more amazing when you realize that Hogan was essentially working the first five months of 1998 without having signed a contract and still was allowed to work his magic.

This is an interesting what if. I'm pretty certain that if Valentine had gone to JCP, he would have been Luger's replacement in the Horsemen. Master bridge burner Brody. How was Brody a master business man again? These quotes have definitely shifted my picture of Bob Orton (and that incredibly Randy might be the more well-behaved of the two). These quotes are an absolute blast to read.

It's absurd that he does not have a ballot. It's basically an indictment of what the process has become when you're a voter because of who you know rather than what you know. Add that there is no check as to where some of the voters decide to vote region wise and express their 'knowledge' then it results in the travesty that is the current panorama of the Mexico region. We can do better.

I agree with you with regards to that there appears to be someone from AWA with an ax to grind as well. Which goes to the larger point, a lot of times we take what is printed in the newsletters from sources as they are without considering who the source is. The reality is that what we learn or get from the newsletters can sometimes be a skewed retelling due to the source being used which can lead to certain assumptions and narratives that are not entirely on the level. So some people come out better than they should and others come out worse because there is only one side being presented with regards to the facts. And we are all human, so that leads to some distortion or skewing through our particular lens of the world. I also agree that its likely Harley just didn't show so as to not have to deal with the bs. I sometimes wonder, since the Arn and Sid incident most resembles it outside of (thankfully) one key difference in the end result, if you don't see a similar dynamic in how things are viewed and reported with regards to Brody and Invader.

Probably one of the greatest unsung feuds in wrestling, on the level of Randy Orton vs. the announce table.