BrianB

When's the HIAC reaction show going up?

I'm not surprised Dave wasn't high on the women's match. It was worked less the kind of style that Dave responds to, and Dave didn't think much about the Last Battle of Altanta either. I'm not as high on the match last night as other people, but it was clearly really good, imo.

Great episode this week on Slamboree 1998. Creating a top 10 episode list for this show would be really, really difficult. Maybe this is a sneaky one in the mix? Anyway, it's always awesome to hear takes from people in attendance. I've always wondered if the audio was screwed up for this show, as my friends who saw it live always said the turner video sound seemed off. I recall the Massachusetts nitro being loud as hell too, so the VHS reactions surprised me a bit back in the 90s. I know everyone doesn't love the impressions, but there's some great stuff this week from Dusty and Bulldog. Plus, we get more lapsed Nash which always = $$$. It's a middle of the road PPV, maybe a weaker one for 1998. I didn't see it until later, but lots of the air was out of the balloon already for Raven vs. DDP, after their awesome matches and feuds earlier that year involving Benoit. This ppv kicked off the Benoit vs. booker best of 7, I believe. Malenko and Jericho was truly an amazing feud, though they walked back this payoff. 1998 Jericho was truly a treasure. Considering Savage's ACL tear and Bret's rough personal life at the time, that match was way better than it had any right to be, especially with Piper as guest ref--always a bad guest ref. But it was definitely really underwhelming. I hardly even remembered that Piper and Savage had a program right after this until I started going back through WCW on the network. It's definitely a show imo, sympomatic of how WCW screwed up 1998, despite having a banner business year. Luger worked ok I thought. He lost a lot of steam after Hogan cut him off, and then losing so much vs. Buff. The woflpac only ending up slightly helping Sting briefly because he was treated so terribly aftr Starrcade 1997. It definitely hurt Giant, Hall, and Bret. I only figured out what they were going for with Bret years later. They didn't convey that Bret was angling for a title program vs. Hogan well at all on TV. Plus, they did it in a really undermining way, since longtime WCW fans and most fans hated Hogan's guts, so even if I recognized Bret wanted to only wreslte and beat Hogan for the title, I wouldn't have sympathized with him at all because my mindset was fuck Hogan. Similarly, when Hogan started to screw people trying to beat Goldberg, it probably only hurt Golberg, and it just made me dislike Hogan even more. Then, of course, he had to start pretending to run for president because that Ultimate Warrior program was so atrocious.

Has Bix made a return yet? It'd be cool to hear him check in for a good 15-20 minutes.

Finished the ep. No sound drops. Phenomenal ep. If Kris and Bix ever drop part of this for advertising the patreon, people might get a sense of how strong this content is. Lederberg is really good as well.

Slamboree 1998 up next. This one could be really interesting. KOTR 2001 was real strong. I'm wondering how many unintentional parallels we may get. 1998 and this time for WCW was good business, but lots of the writing for the decline was definitely on the wall. Even though WCW was more competitive around this period and after this until around October than people tend to remember.

They break some of what you said, not other things. It made for an entertaining segment. I think they deliver both content and presentation quality. Presentation quality and the whole performance aspect to the podcast medium is the biggest weakness overall in the current wrestling podcast landscape. It's not as huge as it was a year ago or so, since a number of podcasts have imrpoved and some new ones have popped up from what I've heard, but it's still one where I'd put Jack and JP far above the rest of the class. Their USPs, in your terminology, are plentiful. Plus, they have found their audience and it's a bigger audience than people wanted to initially give them credit for having. But they've not compromised their individual voices. You could listen to episode 20 or episode 100 and you'd not feel a dramatic shift. I don't want to dwell too much on them in particular, but they've got much more depth and variety to their appeal than almost every pod. And for as much as every non-listener bitches about the length, there's no pod that consistently goes as long, but is as consistently top-notch and strong in quality, episode in and out. As a listener, one thing I'd recommend for most pods now is timestamps, if they apply. That always makes it more inviting for people to drop in and maybe go back to check out the rest of the episode or keep listening. Another thing is developing the right format for your particular voice. I'd generally say doing something that fits within a broad structure but also reflects how you like to talk about wrestling within your impassioned fandom, particularly with other fans, is a good format.If you're reviewing a PPV or whatever, obviously you're a bit of a slave to having to go through all the matches in order because it's the most natural thing, but you've got some freedom in terms of where you want to insert some thoughts (e.g. about the product direction, about the quality of the show overall, where to give appropriate context/background, where to put offbeat tangents, etc.) and you still decide the ultimate structure of your show.

I haven't completed part 2 yet, I'm at least 1/2 way through, but none so far. I may be biased because I'm a patreon supporter, but I think this is well worth the crowd funding cost. Any regular listener of BTS should already be aware of the immense content quality right out the gate and the virtues of Bix and Kris' personalities. The special epsiodes so far are the ying and the yang of that deal, but they're all awesome in their own way from what I've heard--which is all of them except the end of this recent 2 parter. And let's be honest, there's not a lot of easy to find in-depth content on this WWWF/WWF early expansion. There's tremendous bang for your buck.

Giant Gonzales had the decency to disappear after a few awful years. We've had to hold our noses at the stench of Kane for over a decade.

I didn't buy the Predators Blu-Ray. It's not as good as the original film in the series, but I'd put it a surprisingly solid #2. You wouldn't think Adrien Brody could pull off the lead role of the macho commando, but he's very good in the role. The rest of the cast and the craftsmanship is solid too. The movie's concept is simple enough----various people of different backgrounds, most snatched up from combat, suddenly dropped into the jungle--and they add some layers to it as the movie goes along. I'd recommend it to fans of the series or traditional action movie fans. MMA pioneer Oleg Taktarov has a part in the movie too.

I don't think it's as much a general hurdle so much as it may be a hurdle to something like the Royal Rumble 1992 match, where Heenan is just so brilliant at helping to convey Flair's story throughout the match. That's definitely the exception rather the rule. And I'd agree the more you familiarize with a promotion and/or a style, the easier it is to judge it fairly, but there still is something to be said, imo, for those cases more on the margins where commentary really does factor in something extra into the match. Obviously, for any longtime WWE fans, that's been dead for quite awhile, but I don't see any reason to hold it against any commentors that you can understand and do their jobs very well within the past 10-15 years. I'd also agree with the point that sometimes you can still get some emotion from each announcement call, even if it's in Japanese. I certainly ddn't know what any of the commentators were saying abot AJ back in Japan, but they did communicate and help get over his matches to me, to some degree anyway. I wouldn't compare it to Heenan, but I'd certainly say it was better than lower card WWE background noise.

With the recent poll on the Flair-Steamboat trilogy, this one seems especially appropriate as well. It's not up to their level, but I've heard strong advocates for each set of matches, so let's see how things shake out when it's put to the polls! In case anyone doesn't know or is confused from my poll: SB 3 strap = Sting/Vader Superbrawl III match, non-sanctioned, strap match Cade 92 = the Starrcade 1992 match between Sting and Vader, for King of Cable GAB 92 = Sting vs. Vader for the WCW world title at Great American Bash 1992 edit: Not sure if this is the proper forum for this topic. If not, plz merge and move it, mods

A large component is definitely on the viewer, I'd say. Depends on some things, like how much you import the feud/storyline into the match, the worker's past history (esp. with each other if applicable), the commentary, the typical style of the promotion for this card placement or the type of match you think you're seeing (e.g. streetfights), the wrestlers' individual styles and histories, your judgement of the crowd's reactions and what those reactions mean, and what I'll gently call the viewer's ability to read/judge the action going on in the ring. For me, the in ring action is the most important because otherwise it's like trying to read too much into weak text. I'm sure there's somebody who given enough time would read some brilliant interpretation into trash like 50 shades of grey, but it'd have to be really divorced from the trashy text itself to be even remotely plausible. In other words, context matters and can help make sense of the story you're seeing, but ultimately I think the story told has to judged mostly based on the in-ring itself and how it comes off. That can be informed by other things--e.g. if you're watching japanese matches and the commentators really flip out more than you've seen for other matches in a similar card placement that might mean something; or knowing things like the Macho Man Elizabeth and Sherry history before WM7--but the presentation is the key thing. Where the rubber seems to meet the road is when is it exactly when people go too far with trying to connect the dots of the storytelling. TV vs. live might sometimes be a different animal. I'm not sure how to tackle that topic besides pointing out that the presentations can be quite different, which could lead to different impacts and different messages communicated, depending on things like the commentary, editing, and directing.

From what he was saying, I think he was trying to analogize to the deserving guy passed over and screwed, often in favor of somebody else not as good. Donnie Brasco isn't Goodfellas, but it's a good flick. I'd rec it for a re-watch. Pacino is good. Depp isn't cartoony and puts forth a serious effort, and if you enjoy mafia and undercover stuff the plot and setting should be a nice fit. It's well crafted imo. And no worries. I know some people remember him more fondly. I'm not a big fan myself. Some of his Johnny B Badd stuff is alright, but I've rarely enjoyed any of his matches beyond being angle props. I can completely understand burying him. Thanks, Parv. I think opinions vary? I've heard lots of people trumpet GAB 92 because it's one of the standout major US promotion matches where the monster heel crushes the top face. A forerunner to summerslm 2014 is what I've often seen it compared to. Though I'd say GAB92 is more competitive and better as a match. I think Meltzer rated Starrcade 1992 as the highest of the 3, and the 3rd has sometimes been called the best strap match ever, which is sort of a backhanded compliment. Plus, some people take issue with the non-title and the finish. edit: This one is the first one I saw growing up, which could be a factor, but it's also the one I like the most. It's just so brutal. This was one of those matches that when I was a young kid and renting video tapes made me think...well WWF may be fake, but WCW is real. haha. Additionally I think it might have a sneaky blade job from Harley Race on Vader, given how Vader's back cuts are so neatly lined and show up not long after Harley weirdly motions on his back. IMO, Donnie Brasco is definitely worth a re-watch. I'll always favor the major Scorsese movies 1st because they're just brilliantly directed and crafted, and have that nice depth to them when you start to peel away at the choices made, but Donnie Brasco is definitely a solid movie. I know what you mean about WCW at this time. It's such a cluster. Part of the reason I became an observer subscriber was I started to re-watch and watch lots of this post-87 of WCW and it's just such a mess....I had to figure out what was going on backstage. It's a total cluster. I've always gotten the impression they didn't, at first anyway, as neatly divided it as you guys did on the show. And so, the people running TV might just be running the announcers and camera crew and presentation while the wrestling and booking would be run through other people...which obviously can't work over any length of time. I think Bischoff has said in some shoots that he didn't realize how involved he needed to get into the booking and writing aspect at first after he got the big job; I'lll be curious to hear your assessment of that over this period, as I think most hardcore fans see the quality of the product having some major falloffs for lots of Eric's run before the nWo.

Nice episode guys. Really enjoyed it. I also enjoyed Benoit and Scorpio. I'm a bit surprised you didn't comment on the crowd during the match. There's a weird racial element to them cheering Benoit over Scorpio, imo. Benoit was still developing his heel mannerisms I thought, and you could tell some in this match. I'd also agree that the match in places...I wouldn't call it go-go quite as much as choreographed. Still, it's quite a good match and I vascillate between both your ratings for it whenever I see it again. Just depends on my mood, I guess. I think this match is a bit close to a hidden gem because I don't recall seeing it on the Turner Home Video release. The Cactus-Orndorff match was on that--not sure if it was cut down any though--but it definitely seems weirdly overlooked on the IWC, I'd agree, despite Meltzer giving it a strong 4 star rating. Maxx Payne is way better than PN News! I'm not saying he's good but PN News was dreadful. Good call on riding Dustin for really not working that match in a way where it would even be halfway decent. I also thought it was weird that Payne would play the national anthem--kind of a face move, no? His promo was atrocious though. I always looked at his gimmick and look as more like late 80s guns n roses metal rather than grunge, since he's not weird as plaid and while he's a bit of a slob, his look and general attire looks consciously styled. I think Chad has a big bias against "git-tars" in wrestling (I'm from the south myself, but couldn't help but chuckle...no offense intended.) Payne isn't Hendrix or Slash, but unlike MC Hammer, it looks like he could actually play, right? I'm glad you both commented on the pacing. It definitely drags in some parts, but personally speaking this full show has always worked for me from that pov. The white castle of fear inserts are weird, but Cactus really energized the show back up by showing up with the shovel. I also liked the SMW tag a good bit, and didn't think the Muta-Windham match was quite as bad as either of you, though I didn't think it was good. Was this the match where Muta supposedly had the flu or was that Starrcade 1992? I thought they tried to work it more like a 70s NWA title match, and the crowd didn't really get to into it and wouldn't fully accept Windham as the heel. I never know how to rank the Vader-Sting singles trilogy. Maybe we should get a poll going as I can see arguments for favoring all 3. This was the first match of the 3 I ever saw, which might be why I always put at #1 or #2, but I can see valid arguments for putting any of the 3 number 1, 2, or 3. It seems like some consensus has emerged for Flair-Steamboat; I'm curious if the same thing is there for Sting-Vader. Parv...I think you may need to re-watch your gangster movies, or it's just been awhile. The Goodfellas reference was part of the way there (although Nicky does get "made" briefly) but Donnie Brasco...not so much. I think you meant to say like you were overlooked Lefty (Pacino) in the mafia to the overpushed Sonny Black (Michael Madsen).

As a worker? Bret for sure imo. As a promo? I mean both have had bad promos, but Cena strikes me as the better promo. I'm not crazy about his character and he has some bad ones, but he also can be very good and frequently has shown that, so he's definitely more talented. Bret's best promo work is 1997 and that stacks up, but the rest is mostly far behind from what I've seen. He can be very good, but he's not as talented imo. I doubt it, but Cena might have a bigger volume of ****+ matches simply because he's been an ace for over a decade and was one in an era of monthly PPVs and where TV could also get big quality matches. Bret's work looks believable and his storytelling is almost always simple, straightforward, and effective (both the biggest advantages I think he has over Shawn, which is a common comparison.) Also, Bret got some very high quality matches out of substandard subworkers. My impression is that Cena often gets that when he's with a superior technical worker. In terms of peak years, what Cena years would people put ahead of Bret's 1994 and 1997?

Gotta finish the show, still going through the observer section and this whole WCW era before Bill Shaw left and Bischoff reallybecame very secure is such a mess, but here's some follow-ups. Sharon Sidello was dating and living with Ole Anderson around this time period and had a marketing background from working at Turner. I believe she is the one responsible of these WCW's mini-movies--not sure about Spin the Wheel Make the Deal--but the White Castle of Fear, the Masters of the Powerbomb Crash the Party, etc. 1993 mini-movies were hers. And supposedly she de facto ran WCW while they were transitioning from Watts and then Bischoff was hired and took over more. Dave Meltzer talked some about this on The Lapsed Fan podcast for Starrcade 1993 I think. There's a funny bit he talks about regarding Ole hated working in WCW management around this time period and sitting in on these board meetings because he knew better than anyone else, since he was seeing her, that she didn't know anything (no surprise someone like Ole would say that, but pretty hilarious nonetheless.) (they touch on this subject after about 12:45)(Dave also touches some on what WCW higher-ups were thinking and why Bischoff got the job--basically what you guys said, that he had more of a television background and pitched himself that way.) I'm sure others can add more about Sidello. Anybody who hasn't watched or recently re-watched the white castle of fear mini movie, here's a youtube link featuring the intro from WCW Saturday Night with Ross and Larry. Larry's stone face is absolutely brilliant. Fun pod so far guys! Looking forward to finishing it over the weekend.

Yep, even if you count the "bad" shows, they still have some strong qualities, and I'd rate favorably, especially compared to the other wrestling podcast landscape. King of the Ring 2001 next. I don't think there's been much coverage of this period yet on TLF, so it'll be interesting to hear their perspective on this show and the time period. Heel Austin, Kurt Angle and Shane, the Invasion started but about to kick into full gear, DDP as the stalker...Edge wins KOTR, etc.

Austin's hospitalization also resulted in Brock vs. Kurt ending the show, since Rock and Austin were originally supposed to be in that spot.

Shorter. 13:55 http://www.profightdb.com/cards/wwf/monday-night-raw-1622.html Angle and Austin was 17:18. http://www.profightdb.com/cards/wwf/monday-night-raw-1706.html

Probably should know my position though which isn't "Shawn sucks at wrestling" it's only "he's not in GOAT discussion". And I don't think Bret is either, which mainly boils down to neither of them having GOAT careers like Flair, Jumbo or whoever. He's tier 2 at best. I don't know if that would lead to a great debate or not. I'd be interested in hearing it. There's always arguments about whether you should grade on a curve because of certain promotion's traditions and styles as well as other factors (like heavy road schedule and dates, harder rings, not having as many repeats on a loop etc), as well as more outside factors like how much being a star in the biggest or a bigger promotion should impact assessing one wrestler's legacies, and Shawn and Bret both come around as the territories are really fading out and hit their singles peaks after that era has practically died. It's a fitting backdrop and transition to the current scene. Plus, the fireworks ought to be very interesting regarding Shawn's comeback and his "epic" matches post 2002.

Good episode. Too much love for Shawn imo, but knowing these panelists not completely surprised. Still not sure how Savage's slight promo decline (and I was still usually entertained all the way up until 1999) was worse than Shawn's bad babyface promos for most of his career (we're going to overlook how HBK was a face until that Summerslam 1997 heel turn?), or how Savage's drawing power didn't cancel out any perceived in-ring advantages Shawn had and then some given what was said about other candidates and how Savage could go in the ring too. But Savage is one of my favorites and the 2nd name that came to mind when I first read this topic, so I may have some personal bias. I enjoyed the discussion of Austin and The Rock too. Pretty thorough and fair coverage there.

As a heel maybe. As a face, he's just a spastic, jacked up party bro.

I'd take Angle.I can see why others don't. As a go-go worker, Angle is definitely better than Cena has been the past few years imo. I don't object to the summerslam match with Styles though, and I think it was a great match, but that's because the work fit the story they were telling. All the other matches on the show with at least 2 finisher false finishes is another story... From reading the old replies, I think people really are undervaluing how good of a talker Angle was in the WWE. Taking advantage of his ability to be so goofy probably hurt his drawing power, but it really led to some hilarious segments that hold up and date much better than plenty of other WWF/E stuff from that era. I'd be curious if putting up more of those old shows on the Network has changed people's opinions some on that topic. I'd agree with that, but I'd add that a big part of the reason why there isn't another way is because ever since Cena got crushed by Brock at SummerSlam, he's transitioned more and more to that false finish kickout style, particularly all through his US open challenge era.

Thanks very much - and I'd agree I think Diesel is actually fairly organic in that position. As for Savage, I agree you don't want to kill the guy, and we're walking a fine line with him to not try and just kill his star aura off, so I think you'd have to balance out the losses on the major shows by protecting him with wins on television. I think after the pre-Summerslam scenario we painted (where Kid gets a countout win beforehand to set up Kid/Shawn and Savage/Razor), it'd be wise to do a rematch post-Summerslam where Savage wins a close one just to re-establish his position. Lawler as a motormouth to get Savage back on the side of good to give him another win before he puts over Shawn is nice as well. Surprised they never did Piper/Savage, always wanted to see that as a kid as well, though I suppose they were two guys they would create opponents for to keep them over rather than to have them clash. Good points. The drawing power of Piper-Hogan in WCW in 96/97, despite how awful those matches were, makes me wonder if Savage/Piper would have drawn money and helped return business. After all, Savage/Flair and Liz helped heat WCW's business up too before the nWo, so while Piper and Hogan was special, I wonder if Piper and Savage with the right story would have helped WWF turnaround some.