C.S.

I'll defend the top rope rule...sort of. Was it an an antiquated and misguided idea? Sure. But I understand where he was coming from too. Watts wanted the rules to matter again - and in the time that I've been watching wrestling, they've never mattered more than during that brief period (for the sake of context, I started watching in late-1991). In major American promotions from 1991 to now, the rules were given the most emphasis during Watts's tenure in WCW. I can't think of another federation or era in the past two-and-a-half decades where the rules mattered more. It gave WCW such a different, sports-like feel that it still stands out in my mind as one of the coolest times in wrestling. Are there better ways to accomplish that than banning cool top rope moves? Well, yeah! But I gotta say, there's something awesome about gasping at the fact that a heel just did something as basic as going off the top rope. "Oh my God, how dare he!" It seemed so nefarious somehow. Especially if he got away with it! Pillman's babyface rebellion of going off the top rope (I think he got DQed against a jobber once) was also pretty damn novel.

When I compared Doc and Gordy's push to Goldberg, it was not my intention to imply that they got the exact same push. It was just a quick and dirty example of the whole "badass mows everyone else down" type of push both Doc/Gordy and Goldberg got. The particulars are, obviously, quite different. At the time, Doc and Gordy coming in as wrecking balls against the seemingly invincible Steiners made them look like world beaters. Fair enough. Easy to forget, because Dustin/Windham were probably rushed into that spot - likely because of whatever out of the ring stuff Gordy was dealing with.

1987 is his first big league exposure. He was new and fresh then. A clean slate. By 1995, he has tons of baggage. You can't even compare the two. Japan is its own world. What worked in NJPW would not necessarily have worked in the WWF, and vice versa. Apples and oranges completely. He was pushed as a main eventer in ECW, and all that did was devalue the title. No one bought him in that spot. Ditto for his later WCW feud with Goldberg. Hardly revisionist thinking when there's actual proof from later in his career that backs up what I'm saying.

I loved it. I'm surprised anyone didn't. But you're right, some people here weren't fans of it.

Teddy Long managed a bunch of jobbers during the Nitro era, which made no sense and was a giant waste of Long's potential. His success in the WWF a half-dozen years later is proof that WCW had no idea how to use most of the people they had.

But Williams and Gordy did eventually "get theirs" - via a shocking loss to Barry Windham and Dustin Rhodes, which set in motion the chain of events for Barry's awesome heel turn and great feud with Dustin. You can't say there was no "final ending" just because the overrated Steiners weren't the recipient of it. Doc and Gordy were better than The Steiners, period (kayfabe), and then they met their match in Windham and Dustin. Seems fairly conclusive to me.

The GWF/USWA issue bothers me too. I encountered a bug on Roku. If you add a series (for example, GWF, Midsouth, etc.) to your Watchlist, it only adds one year, even if there are shows for multiple years.

They're probably waiting for a Mania to be in or near Hillbilly Jim's hometown. Okay, Hillbilly's kayfabe hometown was Mud Lick, Kentucky, so no Mania will ever be held there. But a Mania in Kentucky or whichever Southern state Hillbilly really comes from is certainly possible.

I'm surprised to hear you say this. I loved the hell out of the Doc and Gordy push. They were world-beaters who just ate everyone up - a tag team version of Goldberg years before Goldberg - and it didn't hurt that they were steamrolling over the overrated, underwhelming, and completely disappointing Steiner Brothers, who I never thought even came close to to the hype I read about them in the magazines.

The problem with this thread, and all of the other ones like it, is that everyone re-books a reign, territory, etc. with a modern revisionist mentality. "Let's have so-and-so drop the title for a few months to this not over at all but we like him flavor of the month heel." No! That kind of shit did not happen in 1995. In 1998, yes. Now, yes. Back then, no. Bam Bam as a challenger would've been a box office flop, LT loss or not. The guy was never anything more than a midcard act. Like I posted earlier, when he won the ECW World Title, it devalued that belt for me. Don't get me wrong, I liked Bam Bam, but he had a ceiling regardless of whatever "what if" scenarios people want to pose.

I loved WCW toward the end of 1991 and into 1992 and 1993. Other than a few dubious angles and some front office musical chairs, I didn't necessarily realize those years were thought of poorly.

I noticed this on my Roku last night. A few episodes of Smoky Mountain showed up, along with a category for Mid South but no episodes yet.

Except, it was absolutely different in the WWE as of a year or two ago. At one point, the women were told not to hit as hard as the men, etc.

"Better than Mabel" is a pretty bottom of the barrel designation. You could plug anybody into that category. Even Brooklyn Brawler would be "better than Mabel" - or at least more interesting. That doesn't make Bam Bam a viable or good choice. The LT loss and face turn didn't help, but you could also argue that main eventing WrestleMania with LT was the highlight of Bigelow's career, his most interesting feud, and a lot higher than he was ever going to reach otherwise. All three are true, in a way.

Yeah, total brain fart on my part. But I have to believe they saw something in Stone Cold by then. Even if they didn't yet envision him as the standard bearer of the company, they had to know there was something there. So, saddling him with a hokey crown gimmick would've been counterproductive. I agree that it worked for Owen. I disagree with whoever suggested Bigelow. The guy was a career midcarder who was never credible as anything more than that. His run in ECW and feud with Goldberg are proof of that. I liked Bam Bam a lot, but he had a ceiling, and midcard was it. When he won the ECW World Title, it only dragged down the prestige of that belt and made it seem less important IMO. As for the Goldberg feud, no one in their right mind thought Bigelow had a snowball's chance in hell of winning, and he didn't. The real solution here: Give Backlund a real reign and have Diesel take it in a similar surprise house show win a few months later. That way, he's beaten a heel with actual momentum, and there's more time for real feuds instead of filler opponents that stack the deck against his reign.

I agree with most of what you said, but I disagree with this. Of course Mabel shouldn't have happened, but Jarrett wouldn't have been a great substitute (and I like Jarrett). Much better match, obviously, so there's that - but no one would've believed that Jarrett would actually win the title (just as they didn't believe Mabel would win). That was the problem with most of Diesel's defenses, and this era in general. Definitely build guys up, but create believable heels who could plausibly take the title. Too many PPVs were main evented by champion vs. midcard heel who has zero chance in hell of winning. Also, on the one hand, you say to tone down the goofy country music aspect of Jarrett's character, but on the other hand, that would only be replaced by the midcard goof "King" gimmick, which every heel played up to maximum silliness. Only face KOTRs (Bret, Austin, etc.) were allowed to avoid the silly costume and "royal" trappings.

Tatanka had a long undefeated streak and later one of the few genuinely shocking heel turns in the company (even though I saw it coming) + he beat Luger when wins and losses still mattered and Luger was still a big deal. I was never a Tatanka fan, but he did have an impact for 2-3 years.

Luger himself has taken full blame for what happened to Liz, calling it his fault. Whether that's just him being "a good Christian" and "confessing his sins," I don't know...

Yet, Kofi's the one on the Mania poster, so I wouldn't be surprised if WWE views this as a launching pad for him. They've never fully gotten behind Big E IMO.

I'll be honest: I didn't particularly enjoy Brock vs. Roman at the time, and I say that as someone who loved the finish. However, I appreciate it more in retrospect as a brutal brawl with blood and great facial reactions from Reigns. Nowhere close to a MOTY for me by any stretch, but it was fun. Sasha vs. Bayley was much more enjoyable for me. Some might say it was a forced epic with a manufactured feel-good narrative, but the emotional aspect worked for me and I loved the Four Horsewomen "moment" at the end. That being said, I thought Charlotte vs. Sasha vs. Bayley vs. Becky was the true MOTY for the women, and I generally hate 3- and 4-way matches.

Maddox released allegedly for saying "prick," but Blake gets a DUI, keeps his titles for another month, and remains in the company - nauseating!

If that's true, this company is the worst.

Main Event is a show no one that matters watches or pays attention to, so not that odd.

Brad Maddox released - right before Thanksgiving. Hope it was at his request. http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/2015/11/25/9802138/brad-maddox-released-by-wwe

Agreed. The "hacker" gimmick opens up other larger avenues, such as what you suggested about uncovering the truth. There's a ton that could be done with it, and a heel turn later on would open up even more options. Only "meh" because they did zilch with it. Could have been awesome, for all of the reasons I stated a few posts up. I think the difference between Graves and Crowe is this: Graves wasn't a "name" on the indies, so he's expected to be more raw and have room for improvement. Whereas, Crowe was an indy "name" so for him to be this terrible and goofy is bound to be a massive disappointment compared to someone like a Graves or Baron Corbin who are coming in with less of a "reputation." Different expectations. I hope he proves people wrong too. I have nothing against him personally. Just wasn't impressed with anything I saw of him in NXT. If he had been a no-name who came up through the system (like many of the current NXT wrestlers), I think he'd have a lot more leeway to be this bad at first. But the fact that he was a "big name" on the indies probably gave him a lot less breathing room to fuck up.