bradhindsight

I kind of merged thoughts there and ANX is more part of their idea to spend money to book proven acts, who most likely don't draw much versus investing in younger talent. Shelley, Sabin, etc fit in here as well. Then on the flip side you have their camp prospects who have paid to play (so to speak). In my example, was stating more like if they signed Corey Hollis on his own - who never went to a camp. It kind of stunts the message that they want guys to go through the $300 weekend and maybe they don't get the turnout (although it seems like they usually max out the 25-person limit). So I get their model and position of essentially requiring this before getting a chance to compete.

The business side of ROH interests me and my man Luchaundead (thank you for your work on TWIW) hits on a couple things i'll throw some thoughts around. ROH has a budget (and the Sinclair tennis thing is tough to stomach on the surface, although one has to assume given their business accumen and conservative nature, they aren't throwing that money away) and I'd imagine for something like the Top Prospects Tournament and the 8-man bracket they have $X amount of dollars to use on it. So while it's fun (and perfectly fine) to fantasy book the best unsigned eight indie workers in the US, they're filling in this bracket with guys like Beer City Bruiser or Colby Corino for $ purposes (a bonus here being the ongoing storyline; sidebar - how sick was that last ride powerbomb he took on the apron? that looked awful). re: the budget, the upgraded presentation funding is interesting. Is this NJPW funded or a joint thing with SBG? That cost $$ which could be at the expense of roster signings. Secondly, the camp thing. This is kind of a double-edged sword so I see why they're strict about it. The camps are $$ makers for their operation and let them get a look at the work ethic and talent of a bunch of guys up close. ROH has an avenue that few promotions have - TV exposure. So if they want guys to have gone through their camp first and they put an importance on these camps, it's hard to expect potential wrestlers to do that if other "new" guys are skipping the camp and getting signed directly. I get their model even though there are flaws when they're signing guys like....the All Night Express or Sabin, etc. Let's be honest - it isn't like those guys are drawing any more eyes to the product than others would. They don't move the meter for me at all.

I'd agree with 2001. The Astrodome was huge.

I use a similar style and I think an important thing here is the "Description of the match" is not play-by-play; it's more high-level with anecdotes mixed in around the crucial parts that make up the meat of any match. For example "There's something not quite happening in this match" is something skipped if you fast foward to just the summary. This pretty much mirrors Parv but: Intro: match stips and background, incidental information about the crowd or aesthetic that frames the moment in time the match is taking place. Match description: overview of match sans move-for-move play-by-play with mixed in notes around psychology and other points of interest (funny stuff counts here too) Evaulation; Things I liked, followed by things I didn't like, and a recap of my thoughts and match rating.

Backlund?

Thought your break down of the LMS match was really good. Glad you could join again Boricua!

Huge thanks to Bix for jumping in and recording and then subsequently getting the raw file over so we could have it live this morning. I mixed it down and have uploaded the revised file.

Totally dig the concept and enjoying the '77 card so far.

Welp, he didn't last long.

Anything net-new there Kelly? The 70s shows are 24/7 rips. Cap Centre ones seem like they've been circulated.

Up at PTBN also (apologies, can't paste link in over IE here)

The Superbrawl 2000 PAL disc is currently fetching around $2.99 - which is a shame because when I saw you had such a late era WCW tape, i thought it might be worth considerably more. Early WCW tapes and down-era WWF (as Chief noted) used to fetch pretty well but not sure since the Network launched and made those WCW shows readily available.

And in a similar vein, a "video" podcast which is just web cameras on the hosts doesn't move the needle and is really unnecessary. I do know people that like to listen to shows via Youtube (very simmilar to what Kelly has done actually - still pictures, or something of the like), but that's while they are multi tasking at work - they aren't flipping back to make sure they can see ugly mugs bantering on about RAW.

Hey, thanks for giving the show a listen through our page. We just use a link that embeds directly from SoundCloud, but I'm wondering if there was something momentarily in that script that caused that crackle. If you see that happen again, shoot me a PM here with the details and we'll work to resolve.

Miz having "go away heat" when holding the briefcase and winning the title is false. He was definitely over in 2010, a refreshing heel act during a stale time, but yeah, certainly in over his head with The Rock and Cena then and booking in general was questionable.

I love how they played off old wrestling tropes like the face being caught with the foreign object they didn't use, or the ref missing the tap out - giving you this sense of dread/familiarity of what's next - only to have it not work out that way. Well done.

Austin's performance in the Unforgiven 2001 match is really overlooked because Angle wins the belt there. I thought Austin completely blew Angle out of the water in that match from a work standpoint.

Does that mean the Raw from Dallas with that super hot 10-man tag is up? Cuz I haven't seen that since it first aired. That's some nostalgia I'd be willing to indulge right quick. Episode 350 - it's one of the 14 they have up for 2000.

I'd be curious if they even ran a canned 30 second network piece with that info on Raw or Smackdown - you know, the main avenues to getting the word out to their viewers.

I'm glad someone told Phil about the Sheety Awards! Nominations are here - votes are via twitter as Kris laid out (@prowrestling is Les) and also Les' email at sheetsandwich.com http://www.sheetsandwich.com/2015-sheety-awards-official-nominees/

Yup, big thanks there Allan. That'll be a great companion piece.

Bix made this note on twitter and it's something i've also said (and agree 100%): Yes, it'd be nice if they put these up in order, but it's really understandable why hand-picked episodes would center around WWE superstars before their run. Hopefully this is a tipping point where they see a boost in viewership and go heavier then. I can't get over these GWF Best of Comps from 92 - so random.

Get Jim on the board here Bruce! He's a huge part of this.

re: the question previously about "Eaton over Hart?" - the inherent nature of these rankings allows you to bucket or tier guys (wrestlers in the 35-39 score range for example) and from there apply a personal ranking. It's like tiering RBs in fantasy football - you have a group of 6 guys that project around the same # of points and from there you rank to your preference. Should be a great way to be confident in your baseline and then go from there.