Parties

The trajectory of Ziggler's career in tandem with the increasing absurdity of his hair metal fashion choices has been great to watch this year.

I feel like too much of the New Day presentation has been that they're shitty wrestlers who are also somehow the champs. Though from a kayfabe perspective it is smart that your heel champs would bail on a midcard elimination match that has no stakes. The rest was fine and I actually think the sleeper story of the match is that Barrett continues to be a deceptively good tag worker who may yet turn over a new leaf in that role with the right partner.

Thought it was smart that they not only subtly called back to Del Rio nearly blowing out his knee on a botched stomp on Monday with Kalisto, but that it was presented as a heel playing possum.

Highlight of the show thus far: "Googs".

Dude lives in Park Slope, Brooklyn. If he's surviving on 50K a year there he's either Old Money or frugal to the bone. Re: monetizing Grantland - I'd be curious to know how many listeners they had for their best podcasts. I only listened to Cheap Heat and don't recall them ever running ads. To put this into polarized perspective: the fee to be the exclusive sponsor for one episode of Serial's upcoming second season is 175K.

Fond memories of the day my dog chewed the butt of my LJN Hogan clean off. Even then, Hogan needed a hip replacement. I actually found Ninja Turtles' supporting cast had the best dexterity for staging wrestling matches. I believe that as a kid I booked a long world title tournament won by "Dangerous" Devon Storm, as portrayed by some kind of feudal Japanese soldier from the third movie. Storm was a worker I'd never seen at that point, but who'd been so mythologized by The Wrestling Chatterbox that I assumed he was the Second Coming.

Would the parallel here by the upcoming Flair "30 for 30" that supposedly goes into Reid's death, or the E:60 about Scott Hall? (And yes, generally speaking, I agree that it's both weird of ESPN to run an infomercial dressed as a Sportscenter clip, and equally weird of Dave to say that "you're not really covering wrestling" if Billy Gunn taking HGH isn't Scott Van Pelt's top priority.)

I'm someone who really hated "You have to be there live in Osaka or wherever or else you simply can't properly judge the greatness of Billy Ken Kid" when Purotopia dudes were making such arguments back in the day. It just seemed lame/exclusionary/false to how most of us are able to experience matches (on tape). That said, there are many guys whose stature improves in person. Morishima was someone who was both more/less impressive live, in that he was shorter/less violent than you'd think, but his agility and execution was awesome for such a fat dude. Not unlike prime Samoa Joe in that way. Jimmy Jacobs is someone I didn't get until I saw him live. Timothy Thatcher is a more recent example of someone I liked a lot previously, but better appreciated after a live match. The Embassy as a whole was something that you needed to see in person, with Smokes and Nana barking epithets at the crowd and guys like Rave and Strong getting true heel reactions. There are no doubt other guys who lose mystique when you see them in person. KENTA was one. Punk was one for me in that it really seemed like he was phoning it in whenever I saw him live. One thing that I think gets exposed both positively and negatively in live settings is aerial high-flying. Done well, you're Cassandro, or a really fat guy hitting some awesome unexpected tope. Done badly, you're Rich Swann, Ricochet, and AR Fox doing technically impressive but utterly aura-free stuff to yawns. The best "now I get it upon seeing it live" was Kobashi. By 2005, strong style was rightly being criticized for feeling antiquated, repetitive, and reliant on the same aging guys without making new stars. I was not a fan of Chopbashi at all. But seeing Kobashi-Joe was transcendent, and understanding how hard that dude hits - how bizarrely loud those chops are - gave me a different appreciation for him.

Aside from being dismal for all of empathic humanity, it also flopped even as the cheapest of heat. Before it started, crowd hates on getting a Divas contract signing as their main event. Followed by the worst promo delivery yet in a feud built on truly bad promos. Then they take the most tasteless approach possible on the go-home show, where you don't even then have time to tell the story (herein a blessing in disguise). How many people in that crowd even know about Reid? Maybe 1/3rd saw the TMZ story, tops? I would think less than that, even? They're exploiting his death while avoiding everything about the cause/history/etc. It's likewise staggering when that's the bookend capper to your Paris and Bockwinkel memoriams. Even if by some impossible idiocy that angle was planned well in advance: no one calls an audible this week. Moreover, none of us are surprised.

Ah, but who can deny that remarkable crowd heat it got? Deafening.

Good match. I was impressed by Cesaro's near falls at the end: felt like he had a chance when he stood no chance at all. Announcers giving their Nick Bockwinkel tributes, then immediately cutting away to close shot of the Ascension as Cole says, "Meanwhile..." was quite a transition.

I was ludicrously amped about this on DVDVR circa 2007. Dug Nishimura after the Fujinami match and sought out earlier/later stuff. There was an enthusiasm back then toward seeing cards in advance, then not being able to see tape of the show for long after, building up the legend of the match and eagerness to see if it delivered.

Debuting Breeze in a first-round loss of a world title tournament is sort of the textbook example of 2015 WWE booking. The Reigns truthers who think he's being covertly buried should run a WikiLeaks train on this one.

As surprises go, that's a pretty tame one. They needed to have at least one of these matches end unexpectedly. If he pulls the second round upset and makes the semi-finals that's kinda cool, but the bracketing of this tournament is weak. Lots of guys paired up badly, losing at the wrong times, etc.

I can't recall if I ever stopped entirely, but 2003-2004 RAW was a dull, cynical show that became really distasteful and depressing to watch. "HHH/Evolution cosplaying the Horsemen" is a good way of putting it, but there were so many bad (or badly booked) acts that I disliked: La Resistance, 3 Minute Warning, Steiner, Kane, Michaels, Hurricane, Heidenreich, Snitsky, Simon Dean, Eugene, the Dudleys, Conway, Nowinski. It was like all the gross parts of roided-up early 90s WWE spliced with the saddest parts of ECW and dumbest parts of WCW. Smackdown was of course far better, but something about Thursday made it a show I caught even less often in those pre-DVR/uber-internet times.

Ambrose-Reigns friendship has been so artificial since the Shield breakup. They never say or do anything cool to put over the idea that they're bros whose camaraderie matters. I'm not convinced the crowd likes or cares that they're paired together. It's not like one has ever come to the aid of the other in a way that popped the crowd. They don't have a team identity, nickname, memorable matches, triumphant babyface moments, double-team moves, or anything else that garners loyalty to a team. They aren't booked as greater than the sum of their parts, and if anything, it often seems like Ambrose is booked as a detriment to Reigns. Reigns' finest hours have been on his own without Ambrose, while Dean has been in neutral for like a year or so despite a main event Wyatt feud and (not so seriously) challenging Seth for the title this summer. The most significant memories of Dean post-Shield split has been getting taken out of the IC title match by falling through a ladder, that time he stole Seth's belt and gave his corny "Champ buys the beers" line to Reigns, and being defeated by an exploding flatscreen TV in the Wyatt blowoff last winter. An Ambrose turn would feel forced, in that I don't think fans want to boo him right now, and they haven't told the friendship-betrayal story well enough. Which is not to say Ambrose doesn't know how to be a convincing heel. But even if put in that role, it speaks to a larger issue with current WWE: they've decided that heels shouldn't get real heat, because there's something about genuine fan hostility that's either not PG, or feel too much like "old school rasslin". Which leads to the screwed-up dynamic where your top babyfaces are getting booed half the time while heels receive cheers or total apathy.

It is a good point that Reigns-Sheamus is one of the best bell to bell matchups on paper that they haven't already driven into the ground. That is a match I want to see that I don't think I ever have seen one-on-one. As lame as the MITB cash-in tends to be, this whole catastrophe may prove the best possible way to get it over with and create a main event program that can last until Rumble/Mania.

In some ways I think tournaments are often not so much about booking the winner as it is about booking something like the semi-finals, where you establish who your upper tier is going forward. Like if it's an eight man tournament, it matters whether or not Cesaro is in the final four. It matters how you eliminate Owens and other heels: can they keep or gain heat even in defeat? I also think that a final four is a fun way to tell a Cinderella story without going all the way on somebody. Create a new upper midcard guy. Like have some kind of 16-man qualifying round where Titus O'Neil upsets a Sheamus or Big Show level guy. Then have him win again in his first round match against someone even more surprising but still beatable, like Jericho or Ziggler. Then at the PPV have him narrowly lose in the semis to an Owens or Wyatt after putting in a great effort. But treat it as special and significant that a guy who no one expects to advance at all ended up coming this far, and depict it so that going forward he seems to belong in that semi-main spot. Looking at the roster that's still left, I'm guessing the final eight end up being Reigns, Kane, Big E, Wyatt, Cesaro, Owens, Ambrose, and Ziggler. Sheamus is left out of it to leave the cash-in option, which feels super lame and would hurt pretty much any potential tournament winner, unless they're willing to pull the trigger on someone like Owens or Ambrose start raising hell every week in search of revenge.

Re: Nakamura vs. Akiyama/Taue: Japan was much deeper then than it is today, with several successful companies going at once and way more talent in high-profile opportunities. There is now one company that matters in Japan. Nakamura will probably end up being more influential than Akiyama or Taue, but I wouldn't say that's a good thing. Is he more of a household name? He's not as good a worker as either of them. Re: Styles - I read and listened to Dave's explanation. He's still saying that in all likelihood, if Styles continues to be where he's at now, he'll put him on again for a third time in five years, despite less than 10% of voters agreeing with him. Maybe that number grows considerably. I'm not even saying it's a bad move necessarily - maybe he'll have a better case by 2017 - just that it demonstrates a very pronounced favoring of Styles and modern NJ. Dave thinks it's among the best wrestling ever. Fine. But when guys like Murdoch, Buddy Rose, Sabu, Patera, Marty Jones, and Rick Rude have been removed from the ballot in the last few years, I'm wondering what makes Styles so bulletproof. And I say that as someone who both likes his work and has a reverence for international journeymen "touring champ" types.

Here's the full breakdown for posterity. Story remains the same. Reporters have way too many present-day candidates. Historians have by far the best list, even if they ranked Lesnar, Nakamura, and Aguayo too high. Former Wrestlers are all over the map, resistant to voting in candidates who are still working, and span all nations. Active Wrestlers have by far the weirdest list, and not one you'd expect from them (Bob Ellis? Byers? Ron Wright? The Von Brauners?). Overall it feels like Japan didn't do well at all outside of Nakamura, while Lucha overall did better than I'd have expected. Also kind of seems like late 80s/90s/Attitude nostalgia is waning, or that those generations have been thoroughly picked over: most of the top candidates are either really young or really old, which kind of makes sense in the YouTube era. REPORTERS: 1. The Assassins 2. Bryan Danielson 3. Shinsuke Nakamura 4. Stanley Weston 5. Perro Aguayo Jr. 6. Brock Lesnar 7. Jim Crockett Sr. 8. Gene Okerlund 9. Carlos Colon 10. Villano III 11. Mike & Ben Sharpe 12. Ivan Koloff 13. Cien Caras 14. Edge 15. Big Daddy 16. Los Misioneros de la Muerte 17. Sting 18. Jerry Jarrett 19. Howard Finkel 20. Minoru Suzuki 21. Blue Panther 22. Jimmy Hart 23. Volk Han 24. Bill Apter 25. L.A. Park 26. Ultimo Guerrero 27. Red Bastien 28. June Byers 29. Kiyoshi Tamura 30. Don Owen HISTORIANS 1. Volk Han 2. Ivan Koloff 3. Brock Lesnar 4. Shinsuke Nakamura 5. Gary Hart 6. George Gordienko 7. Los Misioneros de la Muerte 8. Jerry Jarrett 9. Villano III 10. Perro Aguayo Jr. 11. Karloff Lagarde 12. Blue Panther 13. Bill Apter 14. Carlos Colon 15. Mark Lewin 16. Don Owen 17. Sting 18. Bryan Danielson 19. Los Brazos 20. Cien Caras 21. Howard Finkel 22. The Assassins 23. Jackie Pallo 24. Jimmy Hart 25. Gene Okerlund 26. Stanley Weston 27. L.A. Park 28. June Byers 29. Jim Crockett Sr. 30. Killer Karl Kox FORMER WRESTLERS 1. Cien Caras 2. Mike & Ben Sharpe 3. Bill Apter 4. Gene Okerlund 5. John Tolos 6. Enrique Torres 7. Shinsuke Nakamura 8. Curt Hennig 9. Ricki Starr 10. Red Bastien 11. Jim Crockett Sr. 12. Ivan Koloff 13. Don Owen 14. Killer Karl Kox 15. Carlos Colon 16. Edge 17. Domenic DeNucci 18. Mark Lewin 19. Jerry Jarrett 20. Johnny “Wrestling II” Walker 21. Perro Aguayo Jr. 22. Los Brazos 23. Los Misioneros de la Muerte 24. The Assassins 25. Jun Akiyama 26. Brute Bernard & Skull Murphy 27. Larry Matysik 28. Rollerball Mark Rocco 29. Brock Lesnar 30. Sting ACTIVE WRESTLERS 1. Jim Crockett Sr. 2. Carlos Colon 3. The Assassins 4. Perro Aguayo Jr. 5. Rollerball Mark Rocco 6. Johnny Saint 7. Gary Hart 8. Shinsuke Nakamura 9. Brock Lesnar 10. Villano III 11. Dr. Wagner Jr. 12. Johnny “Wrestling II” Walker 13. Sting 14. Gene Okerlund 15. Bill Apter 16. Howard Finkel 17. Yuji Nagata 18. Akira Taue 19. Ron Wright 20. Jimmy Hart 21. Curt Hennig 22. Ivan Koloff 23. June Byers 24. Von Brauners w/Saul Weingeroff 25. Cowboy Bob Ellis 26. Tim “Mr. Wrestling” Woods 27. Junkyard Dog 28. Jerry Jarrett 29. Edge 30. Sgt. Slaughter

Also worth noting that Apter almost certainly would have gotten in if the Reporters (#4) ranking of Weston had gone to Apter instead. It's a situation in which the Reporters may be right and everyone else wrong, though I still don't have a clear sense of whether Apter's being modest or truthful when he gives all the credit of editorial vision to Weston. Apter will almost certainly get in first due to name association, unless perception changes over time. As clear a case as any of two candidates splitting votes and neither getting in despite coming quite close.

Some additional takeaways: Nakamura did well among all the voting groups, but did best with “Reporters”: would be curious to see which goons fall into that category and can be blamed for this. Perrito's highest voting block was Current Wrestlers, which may suggest his selection being a tribute and honoring of their contemporary “killed in action”, so to speak. Colon likewise seemed to get in largely due to votes from Current Wrestlers, the group with whom he did by far the best. #2 highest vote recipient for Current Wrestlers, 9th with Reporters, 14th with Historians, 15th with Retired Wrestlers. Pretty interesting that while a lot of his peers remain opposed to him, the current generation hold him in much higher regard. “Those coming the closest to getting in were Okerlund (eight votes short), Crockett Sr. (Six votes short), Los Misioneros de la Muerte (six votes short) and Villano III (seven votes short).” You can in particular really see in the breakdown of the voting how close Crockett and Mean Gene were. Okerlund was 4th among Former Wrestlers, 8th with Reporters, and 14th with Current Wrestlers, but was only 25th among Historians. Crockett's downfall came by being not even among the top 30th recipients among Historians, and only #29 with Former Wrestlers, which suggests a really staggering difference of perception between how those who were “there” view him vs. how modern wrestlers credit him with the success of JCP. Bryan did best with Reporters (2nd overall), but poorly with the other groups, esp. Current Wrestlers. Zellner seemed to be saying on Twitter that Nagata was now off the ballot, which I don't think is correct. By “significant drop” I think Dave just meant that Nagata's percentage plunged, but that he's still on the ballot. The only names to actually fall off the ballot with less than 10% were Geigel, Styles, Big Show, and Garza. Dave is already planning to put Styles back on for the third time in 2017, which - as others have already said - flexes a pretty lame bias. Dave is planning to kill the “Rest of the World” category now that Colon is in, which basically just means that all of the American guys who were Australian stars are moving back to the U.S. category. The worker to receive the most votes from Former Wrestlers was Cien Caras, which is amazing and tells you there are probably a lot of luchadors voting. Candidate to receive the most votes from Current Wrestlers was Jim Crockett, Sr., which is equally baffling. #2 highest votes from from Former Wrestlers went to the Sharpe Brothers, which also surprises me. For those slagging the formatting (really just a botched C&P of columns he made for the online version, methinks), here's a top half breakdown of how the blocks voted. Overall I'd say Historians have the best taste, then Former Wrestlers (solid picks, inoffensive even when wrong), followed by Active Wrestlers (surprising, interesting choices, but several bad ones) narrowly beating out Reporters, who I'd place last. Again, not sure who falls into the category, but it sure looks like a lot of WON “columnists” and Euro geeks voting high on Nakamura, Perrito, Brock, Edge, and Big Daddy. Reporters is likely the largest group as well, given that their list most closely reflects the results. REPORTERS: 1. The Assassins 2. Bryan Danielson 3. Shinsuke Nakamura 4. Stanley Weston 5. Perro Aguayo Jr. 6. Brock Lesnar 7. Jim Crockett Sr. 8. Gene Okerlund 9. Carlos Colon 10. Villano III 11. Mike & Ben Sharpe 12. Ivan Koloff 13. Cien Caras 14. Edge 15. Big Daddy HISTORIANS 1. Volk Han 2. Ivan Koloff 3. Brock Lesnar 4. Shinsuke Nakamura 5. Gary Hart 6. George Gordienko 7. Los Misioneros de la Muerte 8. Jerry Jarrett 9. Villano III 10. Perro Aguayo Jr. 11. Karloff Lagarde 12. Blue Panther 13. Bill Apter 14. Carlos Colon 15. Mark Lewin FORMER WRESTLERS 1. Cien Caras 2. Mike & Ben Sharpe 3. Bill Apter 4. Gene Okerlund 5. John Tolos 6. Enrique Torres 7. Shinsuke Nakamura 8. Curt Hennig 9. Ricki Starr 10. Red Bastien 11. Jim Crockett Sr. 12. Ivan Koloff 13. Don Owen 14. Killer Karl Kox 15. Carlos Colon ACTIVE WRESTLERS 1. Jim Crockett Sr. 2. Carlos Colon 3. The Assassins 4. Perro Aguayo Jr. 5. Rollerball Mark Rocco 6. Johnny Saint 7. Gary Hart 8. Shinsuke Nakamura 9. Brock Lesnar 10. Villano III 11. Dr. Wagner Jr. 12. Johnny “Wrestling II” Walker 13. Sting 14. Gene Okerlund 15. Bill Apter

"The newcomers to the Hall of Fame are: Weird list. Some bad choices, some good ones. Overall I do agree with Dylan's hot Twitter takes:

Swagger is always about three to five Cesaro-level matches away from being over. He's someone who the crowd buys into when he's pushed and give up on when he isn't. WWE no longer views him as anything more than a midcarder used to elevate heels: I don't know if it was his weed bust or the idea that he failed as champ? Considering Vince's pet peeves, I'd think the lisp is what really hurt him long-term. They clearly love Paige and view her as a pro who they can count on. The Tough Enough gig was the first thing that made me realize that they think of her as the lead woman going forward. HHH has sort of an Anglophile streak in him that will be interesting to see play out going forward. I wonder if maybe she sells a lot of merch? Or does well on Social and other measures of fandom? There are a lot of goths who love wrestling (hence Taker and Kane), and I can see her scratching that itch and being young enough that they see her as a long-term project.