DMJ

There are moments here when these two show that they could've delivered the ultimate mid-90s dream match. But there are just too few of them. For example, at one point, Hart counters a Stinger Splash with a boot to the face. It's a simple counter and one that's probably been done before, but I can see that spot, in a better, more dramatic match, being an amazing transition. I know people hate matches where both guys are just "trying to get their shit in," but in a dream match, when Hart pulls out nearly every one of his big moves, you want to see Sting bust out the Scorpion Death Drop, some knife-edged chops in the corner, or maybe even a press slam early. As good as Hart is as a heel (and he's very good - he gets a ton of heat early with the fans at ringside), the context of this match hurts it a bit for me. I didn't want to see Hart work as a face, but to me, WCW should've built up the idea that this is a dream match and that neither man has ever beaten the other and that this was to finally find out who the best there is, best there was, yadda yadda, truly is. Then, you can have Hart kinda goad Sting into waiving off his Wolfpack allies (I think Hart was out of the nWo by this point, but I'm not sure), demanding a fair fight. That way, you can get your dream match stuff where these two are evenly matched and busting out their signature offense but unable to put each other way (which is what the fans really want to see) instead of hokey weapon nonsense and a 4 minute ref bump. in classic WCW fashion, they also tend to use weapons that just make your head shake. "Brass" knucks that look more like a leather strap? Bret using the bat makes sense considering who he's facing - but aside from the last shot with it, the others just looked weak (like when HHH uses the hammer in a way nobody has ever used a hammer). Would've preferred Hart using the ring bell - he always wielded that thing well. Not the worst match on the show - but how could it be when Disco Inferno wrestles twice, Lodi's in action, and Warrior/Hogan follows it?

- Pretty good pull-apart brawl between Samoa Joe and Brock Lesnar but this has to be what? The 3rd or 4th time they've done this with Brock? I'd say it was ineffective, but the crowd ate it up and it was cool seeing Joe kick Lesnar square in the face. I'm not expecting these two to turn back the clock at Great Balls (yeah, I'm shortening it and hoping it catches on worldwide), but I'm definitely going to tune in. - If you're Seth Rollins - hell, if you're anyone - you're hurting yourself by selling shock or fear of Bray Wyatt. Bray Wyatt really is the anti-Taker as Taker was basically protected for all of his WWE career and Bray Wyatt hasn't been protected for any of his WWE career. Hell, they still haven't taken RANDY ORTON'S FACE OUT OF HIS TITANTRON VIDEO! I knew Vince and the rest of the creative team had stopped giving a shit about the guy's presentation, but the production crew checked out too? - I really like Emma, so it kinda pained me to hear her music hit to interrupt a completely dead divas segment. Her big return was basically just to come out and say "Remember me? I'm still just a space filler" before Sasha Banks arrived to actually attack Bliss. Why not have Emma return to take out Banks? Or screw Jax by aiding Bliss? Or what about just having Emma come in as Bayley's next hurdle or as the woman determined to retire Mickie James? When you've got a relatively thin division on your hands, it behooves you to present returning or new talents as more than just Girl #4. She tapped out at the end of the match too. Welcome back.

Luger beating Hogan for the title on Nitro. To me and I think most fans it was a foregone conclusion as early as August 97' that Sting was going to be the guy to take the title off of Hollywood, so, Luger winning it on an episode of Nitro was a huge shocker. Now, Luger's victory telegraphed that Hogan would get the belt back on PPV - but it doesn't take away from the shock of Luger getting the belt even for 6 days or whatever it was.

I've found Russo to be insufferable on the podcast circuit over the past few years. Like, I know WWE weekly TV hasn't been my cup of tea for years now, but his ideas to make it better are actually even less likely to bring me back (shorter matches, more gimmicks to make us care about Seth Rollins). For me at least, Austin's two-cents and, oddly enough, the things Nash, Hall, and XPac posit are far more basic and general, but more sensible and intriguing (Seth Rollins should be Bret Hart - no comedy, just mechanics and fighting spirit, let Owens talk even more trash and highlight that as his "thing," keep AJ at the top because he is the best guy they have, don't worry so much about Roman and just keep giving him fresh opponents - heel or face - cuz he's money either way). Russo wants to blow up the product and that's dumb. It didn't work for WCW either time he was in control and they were way worse off than WWE is now. The sensible thing to do is to see what works and keep doing those things (Braun/Reigns or Charlotte's RAW run, for example) and see what's not working and fix those things (Rollins not being definable as a character) . A complete renovation, as Russo often espouses, is exactly why he doesn't deserve a seat at McMahons table.

Charlotte as a heel gives you the aforementioned Charlotte/Naomi and Charlotte/Lynch feuds. Charlotte as a face give us what? I totally agree that the division could use some help via an NXT call-up or two, but I don't necessarily agree that there is a benefit to "holding off" on Charlotte being a heel right now. The Charlotte/Sasha feud ran for like 6 months it seemed - I don't see it as so problematic that you could have Charlotte/Naomi/Lynch in different pairings for the next 3-4 months, especially if you throw in Natalya on occasion or Carmella into multi-mans and I think Nikki Bella will be back around August maybe? So, putting my booking hat on, Charlotte comes in as a heel, goes right after Naomi. Meanwhile, Lynch plays the Sting to Charlotte's Luger in the way that while Charlotte is acting quasi-heelish, Lynch stands up for her as a friend as she challenges Naomi. Charlotte wins the title semi-cleanly - Naomi rolls her ankle or something and Charlotte gets the Figure 8. Lynch confronts her on SD, but Charlotte says in the moment, she just wanted to win. She says she will give Naomi her rematch and they even hug it out, Lynch essentially brokering a peace treaty. Then, at the next big show or whatever, Charlotte out-and-out cheats to retain the title and maybe kayfabe injures Naomi with an underhanded tactic. Lynch finally sees Charlotte for who she is. As this is going on, you have Becky Lynch involved in a feud with Carmella and Ellsworth and maybe even pair her up with someone for a mixed tag (I'm thinking the "Fiery Becky Lynch" with fiery mystery partner Kane doing a one-off appearance just to chokeslam Ellsworth for a crowd-pleasing pop).

I didn't mind the brand split at all when SD was booked well. This show wasn't. Nak/Ziggler was a very poorly layed out Ziggler showcase. Remember when SD had Lynch defending the title on one part of the show and Nikki Bella in a grudge feud with Carmella elsewhere on the show? That was pretty cool how they could rotate the talent around and have two legitimate storylines going on. Last night we got the same multi-man nothing match we got at Mania. Also, Charlotte as a babyface, even short term, confuses me. Like, if you've got Kyrie Irving on your team, you should probably play him as a point guard, not a power forward. I disagree that Mahal/Orton was better than either Wyatt/Orton match. The Wyatt/Orton matches were insulting, stupid, tasteless, and corny - but they were also somehow "must see." They were a shared burden all modern WWE fans had to submit to (like how liking the first Matrix movie meant you were obligated to sit through the atrocious sequels). Mahal/Orton was a C- match with an "out of nowhere," "shock for the sake of shock" finish. I regret watching Mahal/Orton more than I regret watching either Wyatt/Orton match. I gained nothing from watching the match that I couldn't have gained by simply reading a spoiler. If you only read spoilers of the Wyatt/Orton matches, you missed out on a what were two of the most absurdly bizarre, poorly conceived, poorly executed matches in recent WWE history. There was something, however offensive, however terrible, however failing that made the Wyatt/Orton matches worth sitting through in their entirety. There's something to be said for being part of a collective groan. Epically bad is better than just bad - or even just below average. Orton was maybe a *hair* more motivated (read: he didn't sit in any headlocks too long) and I will admit to liking the spot where one of the Singh Brothers did a flippy-doo on the table, but aside from that? Pretty pedestrian stuff leading to a shoulder-into-the-post spot and then pretty much the same finish that we got when Mahal won the contendership against Zayn (Singhs interfere, Mahal hits unimpressive finisher). Now, I try to keep my match reviews devoid of complaints about overall direction - meaning, I don't think this was a bad match just because I don't think Jinder deserves to be a champion and I think its ridiculous that in a company with this much talent, Jinder is the one getting the push (to me, that's like arguing Hardcore Holly deserved a title run in 2004), but...c'mon. You want to take the title off of Orton and put it on someone fresh? Bring Braun over or hotshot it to Corbin. You want to put it on someone who draws heat? The Miz didn't need to be traded last month. Isn't Rusev on SD now too? You want to do something shocking and crowd-pleasing instead of crowd-infuriating? Big E's sitting around. I don't see how Jinder Mahal is a better option than any of those others - and I haven't even mentioned "indie faves" Zayn and Owens. (Personally, I think AJ Styles should be at the top of the card because he's the best act on the brand, but that argument is too easy to make.)

I actually thought the main event better than UK Title match - and probably would've said it even without the post-match (which I thought was great). To me, that moment when Gargano took the bullet for Ciampa sealed it. Dunne/Bate may have had more fireworks, but to a casual fan like myself, I'm not really emotionally invested in them as characters yet (though, I did think Dunne was instantly unlikeable in a way so few are). Even if this was your first Gargano/Ciampa match, that singular moment was so heart-wrenching, you could fully understand the story of this team and of Gargano particularly. Then that post-match happens and, damn, you can just hear the money-printing machine boot on. I would like to see Dunne/Bate again. I fucking *need* to see Gargano/Ciampa.

Seinfeld and wrestling converged against last night! http://www.prowrestlingsheet.com/veda-scott-kings-of-leon-slut-shaming/#.WRJNs2UWzdk TLDR? The bassist of Kings of Leon mocked wrestling on Twitter. A Canadian indie wrestler used the "jerk store" comeback from the Seinfeld episode "The Comeback" on Twitter and things just escalated and escalated from there, with the Kings of Leon bassist's weak, arguably embarrassing retorts and his eventual attempts at clarity failing miserably. A day later, more and more wrestlers have done the one thing you should count on a wrestler to do - stomping a mudhole in this jabroni. And as long as we're talking about the unmatched peaks of 90s sitcoms, I'll leave this here too in case anyone else wants to join along in bashing this poor dude's unfortunate decision to criticize pro-wrestling...

Just saw this. As others have said, this is classic WCW shit booking, but I felt an urge to really detail it for future generations. At the previous month's Bash at the Beach, The Giant beat Kevin Greene (who was promoted as Goldberg's buddy). The crowd at that show chanted "Goldberg" during the match. WCW knew they had something in Goldberg/Giant and September's Fall Brawl was practically begging for it as you already had nWo Hollywood/nWo Wolfpack building with Nash leading his squad against Hall's team (with or without the Hulkster). Hall and Nash leave early in the battle royal - which is smart because the battle royal really only needed to do two things: build towards Hall/Nash and build towards Goldberg/Giant. ...And then the rest of the battle royal happens and it is boring and Giant eliminates only one guy while Goldberg takes everyone out (they should've each eliminated 3-4 guys). Goldberg spears Giant and things haven't turned to shit just yet. It's the Jackhammer that seals it, though. Why not have Goldberg fail to lift Giant? Then, Giant can toss the winded Goldberg and you have your Fall Brawl title match. Goldberg can still have his undefeated streak because who counts battle royal losses? The Giant, who was over, could gloat that Goldberg was just another "little guy" that couldn't overcome his size and strength. Goldberg could say that he was going to Jackhammer him. The cherry on the shit sundae is that the battle royal ends in a pinfall (!). Even if Goldberg had just somehow tossed The Giant, the Giant could've at least still claimed he'd never been pinned by Goldberg. Instead, the battle royal, with its thoroughly decisive ending, serves as the blow-off to a feud that, up to this point, WCW had booked perfectly. Side question - was Bret Hart getting paid by appearance or something? He didn't need to be in the battle royal, but him interfering to knock out someone like Sting would've given the Stinger some direction (and maybe Hart too - he was US Champ, but what was he doing? Lower midcard angles with Booker and Benoit?).

I think where the House of Horrors fell apart was that it wasn't the Boiler Room Brawl or Total Deletion. Whether or not you bought the pathos of the BRB, it was presented as a legit match - no spooky soundtrack, the match wrestled in a regular, musty, dark boiler room (not a "haunted" boiler room), no ridiculous post-production editing tricks, Taker nor Mankind making weird dramatic faces to the camera "that wasn't really there" - it was essentially a "reverse" falls count anywhere match building up to a meaningful, memorable finish with at least one hellacious-but-not-cartoonish spot (Foley's back bump to the floor) to make it clear, this was a brutal brawl. Total Deletion was kind of the opposite. It was absurd and ridiculous and took place in a thoroughly distorted reality...but the fact that it looked like it was edited in a junior high's AV room made it light, funny, and charming in its own weird way. It was Tim & Eric. There isn't a single frame that even bothers to exist within the already-limited realism of a typical pro-wrestling show. The House of Horrors match sucked for multiple reasons, but to me, part of it is that it was neither. The over-production (the music, the house set, the "acting") was heavy-handed and uninteresting without ever really hitting that "so bad it's good" level. To make matters worse, the actual brawling, in-ring portion, and finish were so flat (all of that work for a Jinder run-in?) that it made the whole thing feel like a throwaway anyway - an excuse to give Wyatt a "win," but nothing more than that. It was a match seemingly designed to please the small number of people who've always wanted to see what you'd get if you took a late 90s Marilyn Manson video and tacked on your average TV main event screwy finish.

This is one of those cases where winning and losing don't matter because the takeaways from Mania and Payback are... - Bray Wyatts "mystical powers" are goofier than they are dangerous - Randy Orton is the superior wrestler and was never in peril and had outsmarted Wyatt at every turn (even in his signature match) - It took the interference of the Singh Brothers and Jinder Mahal to beat Orton, because Wyatt alone is powerless and seemingly he is flockless now because nobody bothered to interfere on his behalf - which makes him even more impotent Where is Bray going on RAW? He feuded with Ambrose and Reigns a year or so ago, right? If they turn him face, they better have a great storyline in mind to get there because even with a cool entrance, why would anyone cheer this loser? The best case scenario after the disaster of this feud might be to send him on a 9 week vacation and see if there's a sudden need for the character closer to the build for SummerSlam.

Fun match, thank god Cesaro and Sheamus did the post-match beatdown as they had me fooled that they were heading to the back and I was gonna shit all over the booking of them just accepting the loss. I think the Hardys being back in the WWE is really fascinating in that they have so many potential directions to go with them but none are necessarily guaranteed. Tonight was an example of "At the very least..." as in "At the very least, they can be the centerpiece of a lukewarm tag scene and make people care about teams that they would otherwise not care about."

I actually thought that wasn't too bad. Much better than Mania thanks to an audible crowd that was way more invested than I thought a 2017 crowd could be for a Jericho match. I didn't think it was wrestled in slow motion at all, either - in fact, I thought the sequences were pretty tight with signature spot into counter into signature spot and repeat. Ending was a bit of a shocker too.

It almost seems like a marketing "Trading Places" bet. Brock Lesnar's drawing power (he's advertised for the show apparently and I'm guessing will face Reigns or Braun or both) vs. the absolute shittiest name ever. Like putting on Austin vs. Hogan in 2001 but naming the show "WWE Presents...DiarrheaFest 69."

This might end up warranting a thread of its own (just so everyone can get their digs in) but it was announced that everyone's favorite pipebomber CM Punk would be appearing as a "Pro" on a new MTV spin-off of The Challenge, a reality show where (I believe) former Real World cast members square off against each other to determine the best athlete and, I'm guessing, who can escape the shoot with the least venereal diseases/documented instances of alcohol poisoning? While Punk is competing on the show for charity (a good thing), it is impossible to ignore that this is the same guy who, in his DVD, openly criticized the WWE for pushing The Miz in 2010-2011 as he felt the WrestleMania 27 main event should've been "the best bad guy vs. the best good guy" (himself vs. Cena), more than suggesting his superiority to Miz - and its undeniable that most Miz hate stems from him being a former Real World cast member. Miz actually won a season or two of the original Challenge series, though (I think), so its kind of put up-or-shut up time for Phil Brooks. In summation, CM Punk is "Benjamin Buttoning" The Miz's life and will be enrolling at Parma High School around 2020.

Hidden gem of a match. I had to look up where this show took place because, based on the crowd reactions for Rey, it sounded like San Diego. The fans are invested in this match from the get-go and the participants deliver a match full of complicated sequences and big spots and though basic in its layout, a bout that definitely builds up the suspense and tension the right way. The original poster mentioned that Haas and Benjamin don't do a lot of character work but I thought their heelishness came across in the cut-offs and 2-on-1s the way it does for The Revival today. In fact, I found Haas specifically great. If you were to watch him in this match alone, you'd be convinced he was headed to a decent midcard singles run down the line. His clubbering on Kidman early looks vicious, as does a pretty nifty kickout inverted spinebuster thingamajig he does to Rey. Facial expressions are nasty too. His haircut screams 2003 but everything about the production of this show and many of its characters scream 2003 so its not that bad in comparison (for example, the match before this is an APA Invitation Brawl featuring Sean O'Haire and before that there's a match where the prize is nonconsensual sex). The star of the match, though, is Rey. Everything he does is so crisp and well-timed and crowd-pleasing even when its not necessarily the craziest move you've ever seen (the West Coast Pop, for example). The crowd was hot and the match was layed out well, but unless you can keep them in the palm of your hand the way Rey does, you're not going to get reactions like the ones that this match earns by its conclusion. Extra half-point at least for the commentary as well - all four men are put over strong, their personal histories (including a Filthy Animals mention) are all brought up to help give context and credibility, and Cole and Tazz are clearly having fun trying to keep up with the action without tripping over themselves. Easy 4 stars to me as I tend to reserve that score for matches worth seeking out. This match is worth seeking out.

I think he ad-libbed calling Kofi stupid for a mistimed RKO that one time.

I'm not a Sheamus superfan, but I don't think he necessarily belongs in the discussion because I don't think he can really be called a "top star" like Orton. If you do include Sheamus, then throw Del Rio's name out there too - a World Champion, a Royal Rumble winner, a PPV main eventer, but obviously a huge disappointment in terms of impact.

I can see what Dave is saying (and I'm someone who thinks that Dave not being more pro-Miz is ridiculous at this point). There's an upper level that Miz is just not a part of. That upper level is incredibly thin - Brock, Cena, Reigns now, Orton, Triple H when he's around...and that might be it. AJ is on the cusp, but he's challenging for the US Title right now (which is kind of a step down). Jericho certainly isn't at that level in 2017 and maybe had two runs at that level at any time in his career. I think they wanted Rollins there, but it didn't materialize. Ditto for Ambrose. Braun Strowman looks like he could get there - but we'll see (he might end up at that slightly below upper tier where Big Show and Kane have spent most of their careers after an initial big push). When all is said and done, The Miz's career will resemble that of a Jericho more than it will The Rock. Jericho has never been a "dominant" guy - even at his peaks, he was a cheater, an opportunist, and the guy at the right place at the right time. Dave doesn't give enough credit to Miz for his in-ring improvements or his consistent greatness on the mic for quite awhile now, but he's not wrong here.

To the point on how hard it is to "freshen" Orton after so many years, I'd just note that when the feud with Lesnar began, Orton got a HUGE pop for RKOing Lesnar. The moment he went into the crowd was awesome too. Even fans like myself who generally are bored or uninterested in Orton were interested in him. Then the match happened and it underwhelmed...which is kind of what tends to happen with Randy's big matches. Also, I'd second the point about others taking lemons and turning them into lemonade. Extreme Rules 2014 comes to mind and has been sort of alluded to by others in this thread. I thought the Kane/Bryan match was really fun - that making it a wild, cartoonish "kitchen sink" PG hardcore match worked (flaming tables, kendo sticks, a forklift - it was zany entertainment and the crowd was hot for most of it). Earlier in the show, John Cena lost a steel cage match to Bray Wyatt because a little girl singing "He's Got The Whole World In His Hands" distracted him...and I liked that mostly ridiculous match too. Speaking of Cena, around a year later, he made a squash match where he took 20some suplexes in a row into a seminal event, easily one of the top 5 "must see" matches of the 2010s. I'm guessing some people here forgot Orton even wrestled Lesnar before reading this post. It would've taken a great performer to make "The ring has cockroaches on it!" work...but how many big, tough heels in the 80s got mileage out of being afraid of an animal 15 feet away? How terrified did the heels of the 90s always seem of Taker's generally harmless "sorcery"? Orton didn't need to devalue himself to the level of Hogan in the Dungeon of Doom ("This water...it's not hot!"), but no-selling it entirely? Came off as "I'm too cool."

I'd have It end in some sort of DQ with Braun coming out looking like the subjective winner. Reigns beat him clean before Mania, so Reigns can take a "loss" here. Somehow build up to what I'm guessing will be the big MITB match (?) to declare a new number one contender. I'm all for them finagling things towards Reigns/Joe and Braun/Rollins, for two examples of options. Reigns and Joe would probably have good matches and I can't imagine someone I'd like to see get dominated and destroyed by Braun more than Rollins.

Found a link that has Orton at the number 5 spot for most WWE PPV main events as of 2016 and he'll be number 4 before all is said and done, easily. Looking at everyone else on that list, aside from Kane, Orton is probably the guy I enjoy least (though, Triple H might come close). In what way do you mean lackluster, though? In terms of great matches? Reliability for good work on TV/PPV? As a character? Luger and Orton are an interesting comparison because they were both relatively protected throughout their careers to an extent that a guy like Jericho, even at main event level, never was. I also think it will be interesting to see how fans 5-10 years from now look back at Orton's "peak." I, personally, started watching wrestling around 91'-92' when I was 7-8 years old, so, by then, Luger was an established star, but was also not really that great in-ring. In 98', I'm 14, seeing cruisers and ECW for the first time, watching Austin and The Rock and Jericho and the Outsiders, all these fresh characters, and Lex Luger was a kind of a one-trick muscle guy to me. Sure, him beating Hogan was cool - but to me and my friends, he was old hat. Its only been recently where I've gone back to watch Luger's work in the late 80s and been astounded at how entertaining he is. I wonder if the same will be true for fans of today. Watching Orton now, he's pretty boring and his endless feuds with Cena and Triple H kind of blurred together to me, but, in 2025, will Orton's peak years (2004-2007?) be remembered as highly as Luger's 87'-90'? Is one of the issues that Orton has wrestled like a bajillion matches on TV versus Luger's TV output?

I wouldn't be surprised if they give him a couple month suspension. Hopefully that will let him know he needs to ease off the hazing and, though I think he deserves more of a punishment, I can see it also being looked at internally as an opportunity to test some of the newer commentators on a main brand, silver lining on a grey cloud that happened at the right time - post Mania is always a time when the WWE seems to be willing to try new characters and performers, so, a 6-week vacation for JBL that the WWE paints as a suspension wouldn't shock me at all (it also helps that if they do it soon, they can claim they handled it "swiftly" before any major outlets were to break the story - even if we all know this has been documented for over a decade now).

Haven't read the original source material, but someone on Reddit posted notes from Justin Roberts' book regarding JBL. Basically, "mauro" the same - JBL is a bully whose "razzing" borders on sociopathy. Also, just thinking of the guys who have had the most to say about JBL vs. those that are his friends - JBL does seem to have a pattern of picking on "weaker" newcomers like Roberts, Styles, and Miz - while I'm guessing JBL didn't try that shit with Eddie or Brock or even any of the second-geners because, like most bullies, its much, much easier to just pick on those that can't defend themselves or have any allies. Can we start a "JBL is a Vile Piece of Human Garbage" thread or can that honor only be bestowed on JR? I feel like we could fill a few pages worth of examples of him being a scumbag.

One almost silly question (but actually, not that silly) is what's in the future for the Hardy Boys. Broken Matt story redux? Just a couple month reunion tour and retirement? Jeff Hardy is nearing 40, but when he left the company, he was main eventing as a singles star. Hardy may not be everyone's cup of tea and I don't think he's going to be pushed to the moon once the reunion dies down, but 10 years ago, during his first comeback, it was obvious that longtime fans and new fans were behind him. He's got a "name" and credibility, he's got a bit of a "timeless" gimmick and popularity, and he's got a fresh batch of guys to work with - I don't see a title run in his cards, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him challenge for the title in some multi-mans (Elimination Chambers, Money In The Banks, etc.) over the next year or so. Maybe I'm crazy, but even in 2017-2018, Hardy/AJ, Hardy/Reigns, Hardy/Strowman, and odd pairings like Hardy/Zayn or Hardy/Owens are things I want to see as long as Jeff is still capable of at least somewhat good performances.