DMJ

The birth of the nWo revitalized wrestling in America. It led to a career rebirth for Hulk Hogan and remarkable matches and storylines for everyone from Randy Savage and Sean Waltman to nWo rivals like Lex Luger and Diamond Dallas Page. For more than a full year, we saw the WWE forced to push their own creative juices to keep up with WCW, a true competition between two promotions the likes of which we'd never seen before as fans. While, in the end, no one could applaud the booking of the show, if you were a wrestling fan, the build up for Starrcade 97' was thrilling in a way that hadn't been experienced in years. Meanwhile, in the aforementioned WWE, without the nWo, Vince McMahon has no impetus to update his own show with more adult-oriented storylines and characters. Without that, we get Rocky Maivia "The Blue Chipper" and not The Rock. We get Shawn Michaels the Boy Toy and Hunter Hearst Helmsley the Blue Blood and not DegenerationX. Without the middle fingers, beers, and DTA attitude, what does "Stone Cold" Steve Austin look like? The nWo brought "must see" back to wrestling programming, led to competition that raised the stakes for both companies, and, by bringing a spotlight to WCW, even helped make guys like Eddie Guerrero, Steve Regal, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, Psicosis, Raven, and Chris Benoit household names. Sure, it also indirectly led to the downfall of the same company it brought to #1, but had it never existed, whose to say the company would've lasted much longer anyway.

On the subject of Ryback... Yes, the major factor to the crowd response was that he was the hometown guy, but I also think it was caused by a loud part of the audience who wanted to "defy" the WWE's plan - "hijack" might be too strong a word, but it was close to that. Cheering Ryback said (a) we won't conform to the rules of heels and faces (pretty common these days), ( we know you want us to cheer for Reigns so we'll do the opposite, and © we would chant for Randy Orton or Curtis Axel, but they're equally unimpressive these days, compared to Ryback, who still looks like a million bucks and is being "held down" (not really, in my opinion, but I can see why some people in the audience would think so). It didn't hurt that the "Feed Me More" chant was pretty over about 15 months ago and wrestling fans have long memories. That being said, I do hope they give him another chance as a babyface monster one day in the future.

Sleeze, you didn't mention Batista or The Rock, the only two names that I could think of on Sunday night that would pose a threat. Now, I'm not saying you can't build up anyone else, but those two names strike me as having a significant chance of doing it, especially if you consider that one of them could cost Lesnar the title at a prior date, leading to a feud without the title in time for Mania. If I were a betting man, though, I'd have to put my money on John Cena. That beating was so brutal on Sunday, there's almost no way I can see him not getting revenge in the future.

So many thoughts, but I'll ask this one... Was that the best lumberjack match ever? I understand the argument that it didn't "honor the stip," but when honoring the stip usually means we get the same lumberjack match every time, I'd much rather get what we saw last night. It started out traditionally, with the heel getting tossed back in a couple of times, then Ambrose getting tossed back in, and then, just chaos and Ambrose taking people out left and right. When Rollins was headed to the back, everyone I was watching with (myself included) were shouting about how "it can't end this way," so upset, and when the Usos & company dragged him back, we were cheering. The match turned a room of 30 year olds (mostly non-fans who just showed up to drink beers) into little kids. My knowledge of wrestling history is admittedly limited to mostly WWF post-90' and some WCW and I know lumberjack matches are a pretty old thing - but was that the best lumberjack match ever? If not ever, is it the best the WWE has produced?

I'm watching this show right now and it made me wonder - is this night the first time Heenan had ever done commentary with Solie or am I drawing a blank on them working together elsewhere at the table? The matches they call together have been really fun to watch, if for nothing more than just hearing them together after so many years of hearing Heenan with Gorilla, Vince, or Tony Schiavone most of the time.

I totally agree that these scenarios would enhance Brock as a threat...but I think him winning with an F-5 or two isn't going to kill his momentum or anything. I expect that to be the finish and I think its the right way to go. For example, last year, it would've probably cemented Bryan even further if he had one with the Yes Lock, but him debuting that knee-to-the-face move was so killer and he didn't suffer at all from not making Cena tap. I'd also add say that, in these "big match" situations with two powerhouses with such established finishers (F5 & FU) like we have here, I'd prefer the suspense and thrill of a 3-count finish rather than a submission one.

I've just finished watching all the 92' and 93' Clashes and PPVs on the Network and I wasn't very impressed with any of his matches from that sampling. Then again, like most guys, it seems like he looked better depending on who he was working with (and maybe whether or not that person was motivated at all). The feud with Maxx Payne? I didn't like at all. I thought his match against Foley at Clash #21 was below average, and didn't like his matches against Smothers (WrestleWar 92') or Ricky Morton (Clash #18) either...but I did think his match with Regal at Clash #25 was pretty good. Reading the above comments from other posters actually makes me a little excited for watching through 1994, though, as it seems Mero got better somewhere in that year.

Heel or face, ADR's gimmick was uninspired. JBL updated the Million Dollar Man gimmick by bringing in the over-the-top entrance and giving it a "Southern Business Man" twist that brought the "Cocky Rich Guy" gimmick a flavor that had not yet been done before. It was an obvious callback to a classic heel, but there was enough freshness to it that it got over. What did Creative or Del Rio bring to the gimmick that JBL or DiBiase didn't? A different car? An announcer (doing the same schtick that Armando Estrada did better for Umaga or Sharmell did for King Booker) instead of a Virgil? A scarf instead of a cowboy hat or Million Dollar Belt? DiBiase's greed inspired many of his feuds and storylines (buying the title instead of winning it fairly, treating Virgil like shit, trying to come between Dusty and Dustin, etc.). JBL's wealth and borderline racist taunts against Eddie Guerrero and later Rey Mysterio made things personal in his feuds. But how did Del Rio's gimmick or even the idea of his "Destiny" play into his feuds with Edge? With Christian? With Cena? With Punk? With Big Show? Heel or face, unrealistic portrayal of Latinos or not, Del Rio's character lacked any teeth, whitebread masquerading as pumpernickel, completely devoid of any meaningful trajectory. Del Rio was failed by the writing team just as much as his "inability to connect with the audience." Someone wrote they believed Del RIo was "just an entrance" - unfortunately, when that entrance had been done to death already, he wasn't even that.

Definitely can't wait to hear the details about this firing. As others have said, not completely shocked - they've done nothing with him for months (if not a full year now) and at no point did it seem like that would change. Oddly enough, I actually feel like his in-ring work has been much more consistent in the past 3 months than at any other time - maybe not ever reaching the rare peaks of possible greatness he showed hints of when they actually pushed him, but just, well, less annoying and "forced" as a character, more confident in just being himself and not playing Mexican JBL and letting his ring work do the talking. Funny, when the WWE doesn't go overboard in pushing someone down my throat or place ridiculous pressure on someone to come in and light the world afire and let them just develop organically, I tend to like them more. Too bad.

Supposedly, the fan is a stalker and has been harassing Orton and his girlfriend via Twitter? Not sure I understand how that even works (Can't you block people on Twitter? Why would you agree to take a photo with someone who is legitimately harassing you? Is she a "Perez Hilton"-type who celebrities begrudgingly have to do photos with or else face some media backlash on a blog?), but I do think, if this does somehow get onto TMZ or whatever, the WWE's best option is to ignore it anyway. Had this been John Cena, though, I think calling out the company for its Be A Star campaign would be warranted, but considering Orton is a heel, I think its okay - especially considering just how "PG" calling someone a "Latino Ms. Piggy" is. Racist? No more than saying someone is the "Black Donald Trump" or that someone looks like a "White Oprah." The Ms. Piggy joke is an obvious reference to her weight (or maybe facial features), but again, its far from foul-mouthed or crass. The sentiment is nasty, but since when should a heel live by the "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all" code of conduct? In the Twitter Age of pro-wrestling, wrestlers who promote their characters in a *relatively* decent manner (it's not like Orton is going onto Twitter and making AIDS jokes or ridiculing kids with cancer) are doing it right. Orton plays an arrogant, entitled douche, so, he does on Twitter too. As long as he keeps it somewhat clean and PG, I don't see how it is any worse than the trolling Triple H does.

The above posts regarding 95's Feud of the Year (American only) made me go back through WWF and WCW's pay-per-view cards from the year just to see if there were any other months-long feuds worth noting... Undertaker vs. Ted DiBiase's Million Dollar Corporation: Multiple PPV matches, none I'm dying to see again, though, I remember watching Taker/Kama sometime this year and being a bit surprised it didn't totally suck. Bret Hart vs. Jerry Lawler: Not my cup of tea, but haven't seen it in years, so, maybe it's better than I remember? Hogan vs. Vader: Too lopsided to be considered, but thought I'd mention it. Hogan vs. Dungeon of Doom: If you like your wrestling fantastical, campy, and embarrassing, this isn't your Feud of the Year, this is your Feud of the Decade. Flair vs. Savage: I actually haven't seen many of their matches from this year (I'm currently working my way through WCW PPVs and am about to start 94'), but maybe this was WCW's best rivalry that year? ...Speaking of Savage in WCW in 95', not sure if it would count, but I always liked the ongoing tension between Luger and Savage and how Sting would try to keep things cool. If it doesn't count, I'd say Luger/Savage at least deserves to be considered the Near-Feud of the Year. In summation, Axl Rotten/Ian Rotten - the best feud of a year of bad feuds? Sounds kinda right, I guess, but forced to make a choice with a gun to my head, I'd say, tell my wife I love her.

Russo doing this will answer the question of how much work someone is willing to do for the chance to earn $18.

Loss, I understand your passion, but sending collection agencies to target people who violated the WWE Networks' TOS sounds kind of vicious to me. A person who bought the Network to begin with in March, even if their plan all along was just to pay $10 for Mania, may have "screwed" the WWE out of the rest of the $50, but in the grand scheme of things, if you take the 700k subscribed currently and the 130k who "cut and run," you can look at the total as being roughly 830k who at least TRIED the Network and could theoretically be brought back and convinced to stay subscribed. To me, the last thing they should do is try to prosecute these fans - these are the "fence sitters" they need to come back, not ostracize. Also, I will admit that I have set-up the Network on my non-fan brother's Roku as well as my own. He has since called me and said he was using the Network and loving Legends House in particular. From there, he's been brought back into at least a little bit of fandom, watching old PPVs and the Countdown shows. I don't think sharing my account is hurting the business at all. My brother had 0 interest in the Network, he was NEVER going to buy it, which means the WWE could NEVER market any of their own products to him. But by sharing my account with him, I have brought the WWE a new viewer - someone who is more likely to go see RAW or a live event, someone who is more likely to buy a throwback/nostalgia tee-shirt, someone who is more likely to tell a friend how great the Network is. If the WWE figures out a way to prevent me from using multiple devices, I won't be bothered...but until then, I'm going to let my kid brother enjoy himself and get back into the sport because THAT is what will keep the business going. Finally, and I hate to come off as this snarky but your comments really made me think - Loss, do you think fans who DVR Monday Night RAW and fast forward through the commercials are also "actively destroying wrestling" because advertisers aren't getting their commercials seen? Do you think having friends over to watch a PPV and splitting the cost, as so many of us did in the 90s, "destroyed the business" during the Attitude Era because instead of each of us buying the show for $39.95, we'd cram as many people onto the couch as possible? Did my aforementioned brother and I help kill the business when we shared our Undertaker, Mankind, DX, and Austin tee-shirts to wear to school? Did my parents kill the business when they only bought us one Hulk Hogan action figure and one Andre the Giant action figure and my brothers and I had to take turns playing with them? Re-reading your post, you stated very clearly that your aim wasn't to derail the topic and you even stated that you knew how your comments could come off as hypocritical. I apologize for jumping on the issues you raised, but I felt like the other side of the argument should be expressed, specifically that the sharing of accounts (which is just as possible to do on Netflix and has proven to be of no real consequence) and the violation of TOS by cutting a subscription early are not grievous offenses and may actually benefit the WWE in the long run if they can figure out (a) why fans are ending their subscriptions early and ( how to market/monetize their other products and revenue streams through the Network. Again, sorry for the longwinded response the derailment, but your comments really struck a nerve with me.

Matt - He actually talked a bit about all of that stuff in his interview on Austin's podcast (might have been Jim Ross's) this year. IIRC, Lesnar had him come back because he doesn't like cutting promos and that Heyman readily admits that Axel was put in a "no win" situation when they were paired together. I think he suggested that the same thing was true for Ryback as they both were put with Heyman just to job to Punk. My questions for Heyman: - Thoughts on the rivalry with Madusa, specifically calling her a whore at Halloween Havoc 92'. How did that play backstage? Scripted or not? What did Watts think? - Was there ever any real truth to rumors about Heyman coming into TNA as head writer/booker? If so, when and how close was it to happening?

Just saw this match for the first time and enjoyed it a good bit. It is a straightforward story, but it just goes to show that simple doesn't always mean "average." The crowd is very into it from the get-go, breaking out into a huge "Whoop! There it is!" chant when Bagwell plants a kiss on Missy Hyatt, and while you would think they would die down as the match moves on, the story told in the ring keeps them engaged and there are some noticeable pops at other times. Aside from some small slips, everyone involved brings their A-game, though, it would've been nice to see more of Scorpio's offense. All in all, the good outweighs the bad by a hefty margin. I'm not through the whole thing yet, but Halloween Havoc 93' is a really fun show so far (if you ignore the opening match).

We definitely have different definitions of the word "significant." I'm strongly, strongly opposed to the decimation of historical artifacts and records, but if there was one library on this Earth I wouldn't mind seeing burned, it'd be TNA's.

The original DegenerationX were a great trio (i'm not counting Rude as a real member), but Chyna didn't compete enough at the time to really be considered a wrestler. If she had, I think one could argue that they were a really unique, possibly underrated trio. That is not the case, though, as I'm not even sure the three ever had a single six-man tag match. My vote would have to go to the Freebirds over the Shield due to longevity and impact. The Shield were a unit for what? 15 months? It was a good run and all, but I wouldn't even say they "dominated" all that much during that time, with no member ever capturing the World Championship, which is (no fault of theirs) the only title that means absolutely anything in the WWE. I had to google whether they even won the Tag Titles because I honestly couldn't recall (again, not their fault, its just that being champions of a division that only matters for maybe 8 weeks in any calendar year is hardly noteworthy).

Watched the conference. Some of its pretty funny, especially when the cameraman zooms in on the dog when Bryan's telling a story. The WWE would be stupid not to mention/show some of the press coverage on this on Monday, right? I'm not saying using it in an angle, but this is some pretty good free PR.

I voted No. I know I have hindsight on my side, but when people suggest that Cena could've turned heel and then had his spot given to Mysterio, Jeff Hardy, Daniel Bryan, or CM Punk, it makes me chuckle and shake my head. I think we could also agree that, had this ever happened, we'd probably still be looking at Cena as the top babyface in 2014. The only difference is that we would've been able to point to, say, 2009, when Cena "went heel for 8 months" but then, because Mysterio got injured, they turned him back to a face in time for Mania. While I do agree that a Cena heel turn would shake things up, I also think that the term "golden goose" has probably never been more apt to describe a wrestler. Here's a guy with the recuperative skills of Wolverine, who seemingly never tires of the schedule or the demands of being THE guy and never complains. Watching Total Divas and seeing his undecorated, barely-lived-in home and you can see he's a guy who has probably spent 8 months there total in the 8 years he's probably owned it. Even when he's getting booed out of the building, his merch is outselling everyone else's (by a wide margin, based on what I've read). He does movies (the Fred series, Trainwreck), but doesn't let them get in the way of being a touring member of the roster - and speaking of touring member, he's probably the only "draw" the company really has at this point. Turning him heel wouldn't change many of these things, but it doesn't seem like Cena *wants* to turn heel and an employee like John Cena is worth keeping happy. I definitely see how turning him heel would allow another guy to become the new top babyface and that this could lead to a boom period...but is that guy going to have the staying power, work ethic, and ability as John Cena? It is hard to think of anyone that could.

My take on Reigns' work in singles matches, which I thought was pretty exposed at Battleground, was that he is a guy that is good at HIS offense (Superman Punch, Dropkicks Around The Ring, even the Spear) but he also seems to hit them in the same sequence and with absolutely no selling of any previous damage and, unfortunately, that means his matches are getting harder and harder for me to really enjoy. I think Orton, Cena, obviously Bryan and Cesaro and Sheamus too, are just so much better (granted, they all have years more experience) at transitioning between spots and pulling them out at different times so that you end up with an actual story in a match. Reigns just seems to do nothing interesting until his opponent, at Battleground it was Cena, tells him, "Okay, now go." Then, he goes through his routine and, at the end of the it, it's done. That style *can* work and has worked for many, but in 2014, it just falls a little flat for me. For example, you know every Sheamus match is going to have a spot where he gets in those forearms to the chest outside the ropes. You know Cesaro is going to hit his toss-up European uppercut spot. You know Orton will get his elevated DDT thing. You expect to see them and you get them...except when you don't. Or you get them, but the opponent reverses them the first time. Or you get them AS a reversal to an opponent's offense. Or you get them, but because their opponent worked their arm or shoulder, they can't hit them properly. Or, most simple of all, you get them as part of a sequence of utter domination - as part of a shine or heat segment that is not going to segue into the finish at all (see Cena's use of the 5 Knuckle Shuffle in several of his matches in the past few years not against the Rock). Reigns' barrage lacks variety to me, in delivery, sequence, and as to how it fits into a larger story. That's not to say Reigns can't get better - the dude has tremendous potential. I just don't think he's ready to have to carry main events the same way I don't think Cena or Batista could in 04'. Even in 05', I felt neither guy had particularly great outings. Cena, to me, really began to shine in 06', when he seemed to finally be able to blend his style/spots/pacing with that of Edge, HHH, and RVD, instead of kind of just eating Angle and Jericho's offense for the first two-thirds of a match before going into his finish sequence.

I'm curious to hear your answer to. If Ambrose isn't, do you at least concede that the Ambrose/Rollins feud is the most over program going on? A case could be made for Steph/Bellas, but about 45 seconds after the bell rings, I think we'll be hearing crickets. Cena/Lesnar's going to get great responses, but anything involving Lesnar is almost a "ringer" at this point (kinda like anything the Rock was involved in was automatically the "A Program"). This is why Bryan was so special - his feud with Cena (to me) overshadowed Punk/Lesnar and his feud with the Authority completely overshadowed the build to Taker/Lesnar, which even just a few months removed, seems untrue...but wasn't. And if someone's going to chime in with Rusev/Swagger, one segment does not a "most over program" make. Ambrose/Rollins have been popping the crowd for weeks now, regardless of city and how "smart," "hot," "cold," "burnt out" or whatever audience they're working. I don't think Ambrose is threatening Cena as the number one merch mover or a top ratings draw yet, but I'm willing to wager that in a poll asking fans (before last night at least) what match they cared about most at SummerSlam, Rollins/Ambrose would've soundly whooped Reigns/Orton OR Reigns/Cena even, and Jericho/Wyatt or Rusev/Swagger would've barely registered.

I'm not as down on Paige as others, but her weaknesses/inexperience is noticeable. At MITB, I was very annoyed by just how much yelling and grunting she does. Its just too damn much. Last night, it wasn't as bad because it wasn't as constant...but what she was actually yelling ("C'mon, AJ!") was arguably worse than the non-descript moaning. The fact that the commentators also brought attention to how weird it was certainly didn't help matters. As for her ring work, just like AJ I think we're talking about the best of a particularly average group on the current roster. As someone else said, I'm not sure either is that much more entertaining or dependable than Alicia Fox, who may not know a dozen holds, but can deliver a Lou Thesz Press, Scissors Kick, and Hair Toss well enough that I believe in her overall character. What is a Paige? I'd also say that Naomi vs. Cameron, while not a better technical match, was more enjoyable to me. The story was more straight-up (why should it be complicated?), Naomi looked like she was laying into Cameron much more, and the finish made me want to see a rematch. AJ/Paige certainly didn't accomplish that.

While I wasn't as down on the Jericho/Wyatt match as others (I thought it started off sloppy, but then got better as it went along), I wholeheartedly agree in the finish being a bad idea if they want Wyatt to still be a major consideration going forward. I can understand that Wyatt beating Jericho here would've been "predictable" considering Jericho's reputation for putting over talents, but why not end it with a DQ of some sort? Or even some sort of cool storyline-progressing bullshit like Jericho "getting crazy" and mercilessly attacking Wyatt with a weapon, only for the audience to almost turn on Jericho, who has "gone too far"? I'm not saying it needs to lead to a Wyatt face turn, but for the sake of a short-term storyline, why not play with the fans' minds? As Jericho is not a longterm priority, he'd be perfect for the role that Cena simply can't play. As for the tag match - I liked it too, especially the near falls in the end. I'm not sure where they should go with the Usos, but I do believe there is money in an eventual Wyatt split with Rowan and Harper coming to blows. Did anyone else also think that last night was arguably the first time the Usos' individuality came out? Honestly, before last night, I thought they were really interchangeable, but that match did a lot to make me think that they could eventually be singles talents in their own right. As crazy as it sounds, maybe they need to add new blood to the group? A Sister Abigail character to inspire them to more twisted acts? At this rate, though, I just don't "get" why the Wyatts haven't bulldozed through more opponents. Like Cesaro's post-Mania booking, it is just been head-scratchingly bad despite their matches being generally engaging and crowd-pleasing.

I recently read a report that the WWE's most recent show at Madison Square Garden sold 12,000 tickets. That is well under capacity (which I believe is 18k+). Is this typical for a summer show at MSG? If you live in the area, why did you or did you not attend? Is this very bad news, somewhat bad news, or "average" news? Was there another major event, sporting or otherwise, that might have played into the seemingly low attendance? I'm just curious about the relative weight of this type of attendance figure compared to prior years. From what I saw, this was definitely the "A" show, featuring Cena, Orton, Wyatt, and Jericho, as well as, I believe, Flair and Triple H.

Underrated - I'm gonna go with Christian, only because I think I'd put him up there with Goldust as one of those guys that quietly snuck back into the Top 5 Workers in the WWE when he came back in 09' and proceeded to just be consistently good-to-great. I used to say this about Matt Hardy in 07'-08', but with Christian it may even be more of the truth: "He may not give you the best match of the show, but he'll never give you the worst match of any show." Heel or face, Christian could be relied upon to give you a really good TV match and get the crowd into it no matter who he was facing. That sort of consistency and ability to connect with the audience is something I'd argue very few were able to maintain for the same duration as Christian did, even if he was generally a midcard guy. Overrated - Maybe not around these parts, but I'm going to go with Triple H. Any time I see his name in a "Top 10" of anything, whether its in-ring work or mic skills or finishers, it pains me. I'm not going to say he's terrible because he isn't, but there are just so many North American workers that have entertained me more that I really can't get behind calling him much more than a B+ player.