Migs

If you want to watch the 86 stuff, you also need to go looking for some house show comps to actually see the payoffs to the feuds.

Pulling this over from the Meltzer thread because I think its interesting. I'll say that I feel like the excitement is a little limited because we exist in an internet world where many things can be found if one ties hard enough - the cool thing about the Network will be putting it one place and easily accessible. I'd really love to see them dig into the stuff that's been completely unreleased - certainly there's a bunch of ECW on tape that's never seen the light of day that would be fantastic to see. I want to see the weird stuff, like the Sandman/Raven crucifix angle. And I do think we're more likely to see that once they've already released all the Raw/Smackdown episodes, all the episodes of various territories, etc. In terms of fantasy archives - it'd be pretty incredible to have all the MSG/Boston/Philly/Toronto shows in full, in top quality. 24/7 has been a gift in that regard but their release has been haphazard.

I think they're smart to leave it at $10 - while I could certainly afford the $15, $10 makes it a lot easier for people on the border to keep it. I think it's a likely mental cut off between "Eh, whatever, its only $10" and "Do I really need to spend $15 a month on wrestling?"

There's no reason the streams for new content wouldn't be in HD.

Could they do a brand split that wasn't as clear cut? What I mean is, instead of simply rotating who happens to be on Superstars or Main Event every week (or even Smackdown), why not build certain feuds that are really developed on these shows? A bit like WCW Saturday Night in that 98-99 period, except the hierarchy wouldn't be as strict (i.e. you'd still have the payoff to that feud on PPV, not just on TV). The difficulty I see is that such a setup would be a lot easier in a prior generation where the performers were more used to writing for themselves and not dependent on creative. I'm thinking about that Seven idea that Raven always talks about pitching when he was in WWE (roughly speaking, the idea would be that he'd beat a guy each week and the way he'd do it would relate to one of the seven deadly sins). It's an idea you could let play out on Main Event (and I think his initial pitch was to do it on Heat), keeping people in the loop with a short update segment on Raw. But how many guys are out there now who can create for themselves? And if there's not enough of these guys, don't you just end up relying on the already burnt out writers?

I really didn't have a specific boogeyman in mind (beyond music rights, but as it's been addressed - WWE has clean versions of all of that). I was wondering if they have any content they're uncomfortable airing - footage involving people who've sued them or things like would Over the Edge 1999 be included? Considering guys have gotten paychecks for the tiniest clips of them appearing of them on DVDs, I do wonder if they face any kind of a revolt should they not be giving any royalties to wrestlers with the footage. Then again, I don't know if the wrestlers (or ex-wrestlers) have a leg to stand on. If it's not Jesse Ventura's voice or Kid Rock's music, maybe they'll be fine. I really, really don't have a clue. I'd be morbidly fascinated to see what they do with clips of He Who Shall Not Be Named.

What issues would they have? Yeah, not sure why they wouldn't go the route of 24/7 and just use generic music. That's by far their biggest rights issue. Being online would not effect that - the issue is attaching music to a video, so the problem is the same. Its why none of the SNL episodes on Netflix have the music (other than the first 5 years, where they did the clearance for the DVDs). On the royalties, the question is based on what the contracts say that determine what the wrestlers are owed. My guess is that whatever the answer is for anything shown on 24/7 would transfer to the network as well. Highly possible that the contracts only cover home video sales, which is why the DVDs are covered.

The factual errors look mostly like typos, frankly (although the mixing up of Memphis and Mid-South is constant and surprising for a guy who grew up in Louisville). I really don't think they derail the book, although from a major publisher, you think they'd get it right. I'm with Rich - it's a nice attempt at something, but it mostly fails to be more than it is, which is some okay bios and era specific histories. I generally enjoyed reading it, but I don't recall much from it a week or so later.

Oh, I'm sorry, I only paid attention to the reply and not the original post. I was refering to the fact they are gonna release Timeline WCW 1989 at some point too. Breaking Kayfabe, yeah, I wonder what they'll talk about that hasn't been said already. I hadn't seen them confirm him doing WCW 89 - that should be amazing.

But that seems more useful for a Timeline (why hasn't he done a WCW one yet? Maybe that's next, since they did say he was doing two shoots?). I haven't seen any of the Breaking Kayfabes so far, but the focus has seemed to be on guys with drug problems (Jannetty, Waltman, New Jack). At the very least, the content for each has been "serious" - so you wonder where Sean's going with this.

Kayfabe Commentaries is next doing Breaking Kayfabe with Cornette. Release in January.

Could they do Orton/Cena to try to pop a buyrate at TLC? That would be... less terrible than main eventing Wrestlemania with it.

Do you not see the Bulldogs as influential because the influence is really that of Dynamite's style? I'd also argue the Steiners were fairly influential as well. Their style was really heavily incorporated into US indies in the early part of the last decade (for better or worse). High impact, less traditional "flow" to matches.

Almost done with the book. I think Shoemaker was attempting something interesting, but focusing it around dead wrestlers feels like it prevents a real focus on the ideas. Also - I don't the Warrior is an interstitial because he's supposed to represent a bridge between the two eras; it's because he wanted to talk about him but he's not dead (but was believed to be by some).

What about Eddie being the Scorpion but bringing in someone to do the actual main event matches with Sting? Using Eddie as the mouthpiece?

One thing I haven't seen discussed - if all (or most, either way) PPVs are moving to the network, what will they do in terms of online streaming? Right now they sell the stream for roughly the same price of the PPV. Will they sell an online version of the network? Will they sell the PPVs for a reduced price online (i.e. if its $15 a month for the channel, and you're only getting the PPV online, it would be $10 or so)?

Wait, can we discuss that Will was on a podcast with Scott Keith? What was that like Will?

WWF 2000 had such an amazing stretch... except they couldn't seem to put together 3 straight. Royal Rumble/No Way Out are amazing, but it's hard to put Wrestlemania 2000 in with the top tier. Backlash/Judgment Day are possibly the two best pure wrestling PPVs they've ever done... but King of the Ring is pretty crappy. Fully Loaded and Summerslam are also excellent shows, but Unforgiven was mostly a bit of a mess (although its better than the other streak breakers here).

I think you're fine recycling material. Although I also think the network aspect could free their documentary teams from being tied to DVD sales. There might be a documentary opportunity to do something that a lot of people would watch (the story behind Wrestlemania 3, maybe?) that might not translate into a lot of DVD sales. I think full seasons of old TV shows is probably a good bet to bring in some steady viewership. If you get someone hooked on a show, they will come back and watch the next one. One improvement they could make, that hasn't been done on 24/7 so far, is to show old PPVs/big events that the shows are building to. (i.e. if you're showing ECW from 1997, show Barely Legal when you get to that point in the TV run). The more serialized TV (ECW, the Monday Night Wars) might also do very well in blocks; catch someone on a Saturday afternoon and they find themselves watching 6 episodes in a row. Its a way that networks that air reality TV shows have done well in getting rerun value out of the shows. Frankly, I'm not expecting a lot of creativity here. My baseline assumption is that this will be 24/7 with original programming mixed in.

Is it too snarky to ask about his influences in terms of writing about wrestling? I'd at least be curious to know his background as a smart fan. Did he come in with the online boom in the late 90s?

I stopped completely somewhere in '03 (although at that point I was mostly just watching indies and old ECW). College was leading me in different directions and I was probably burnt from years of tape trading. I didn't watch at all until the TV writers' strike in 2008 led me back to Smackdown. Quite literally my Tivo picked up an episode randomly and it got me back into the WWE for about a year or so. I now watch very little of the current product (just bits of Raw and PPVs when the angles sound like they'd be of interest to me). But places like this make it easy to live in the past, and enjoy footage from 25 years ago like its now. I also admit that I watch Total Divas with my girlfriend (who was a fan during the Attitude era).

Just want to say that perhaps my favorite part of these is the Meltzer discussion. Always very entertaining.

And without the injury, if he's just sitting out for a bit... doesn't he end up working with Paul E in ECW sometime in 1995-1996 and probably becoming a hot free agent? Or is he too far above that?

His character really was tailor made for the era that he just missed out on. You can see it in the way he's used in ECW - his lothario character makes a lot of sense in a context where the women are all scantily clad and becoming major parts of the storylines.