PeteF3

And it's not entirely correct. Luger was let out of his contract early--it wouldn't expire for another year. That's why he was a WBF Superstar for 1992 and absolutely positively not a wrestler. Luger's contract called for a specific number of dates per year and WCW, as they would do with Sting himself in 1996, overshot it, mainly because they of course lost Flair. So they had to keep Luger inactive.

The Disasters' title win was at a TV taping and eventually released on Coliseum Video (with the oddity of Jim Ross doing play-by-play of a match that took place almost 9 months before he was with the company). The Steiners' first title win was also at a TV taping but for whatever reason never got a release, even on the WWE Unreleased DVD set which showed the show-closing dark match of that taping. The Midnights' title win was basically an emergency switch because Arn & Tully gave their notice. I would imagine the plan was to run that program until Starrcade, or at least the December Clash.

It's not inconceivable at all. They'd just wrestled for the titles at Mania 10. The tag division was pretty much a wreck so it's not like there were other viable challengers to the Quebecers (they had to turn a heel team babyface for that to happen). There had been other quickie overseas title switches before and a number of house show title changes in the WWF the previous year. Plus the switches were acknowledged on television and in the magazine. Edit: Also, there was a card in-between the two title switches in Peterborough where MOM defeated the Quebecers to retain the belts. If it was an accident, why book a successful title defense before undoing it?

Yes, the idea that it was an accidental title change has been pretty definitively debunked by all involved parties. I don't know where the story originated but I'm not sure even Maffew has it right without looking at the original book, but it doesn't seem like the type of story that Will & Duncan would have included.

I seriously doubt either of those guys are Mexican. That's a bog-standard U.S. wrasslin' minis match with most of the usual comedy spots like the referee catching one of them on a kickout. Mexican minis pretty much work the same style as the bigger guys and I don't see a trace of the tumbling lucha style in there. (And no, that monkey flip/arm drag thing that one of them does is not a lucha spot.) We know Cowboy Lang worked France at this time. These were either guys in the troupe he brought with him or even guys he had a hand in training.

I just asked what other luchador could have accomplished what Mil did in America (and Japan). Not sure what lucha movies in Spain and France have to do with any of that.

Name them. They not only needed his skill and charisma and his physique, but also his size which is what was going to trip up most of them. Santo was a draw in parts of Texas but was never going to be able to be in-demand nationally as Mascaras was. I suppose Canek might have gone places (and he did, to some degree)--tall for a luchador, could fly and do power moves--but while he was a major star I don't think he had the same it-factor that Mil did. The "thousand masks" hook had more cache to an international audience than Jacinto Canek.

Who gives a fuck? As suggested earlier, maybe they prefer the gender-neutral version. Maybe they think it rolls off the tongue better. Maybe they do it in a concerted effort to annoy you, the (sometimes) viewer. (I actually don't ever remember Tenay using the term in WCW, though I never watched much TNA.) We can hammer those guys for using the term "tornado tag team match" or the misuse of the term "one fall to a finish." The use of "trios" as a descriptive term is so far down the list of things even within the specific topic of wrestling commentary that I give a shit about that it can't be measured.

A three-man team can be called a trio. Trios titles are called the Campeones Mundial de Trios. The matches themselves are not called "trios matches." "Manchette" is not an English word. "Trio" is. Yes, it's a loanword--the entire fucking English language consists of loanwords. And it's a basic one. This isn't like referring to The Simpsons as anime even though that's not wrong and is how a native Japanese-speaker, who doesn't differentiate between western animation and Japanese, might refer to it. It would sound weird to western ears. A "trios match" makes perfect sense in almost any language. Were the Kingston Trio or Dolly Parton/Emmylou Harris/Linda Ronstadt being smug and aggravating for daring to use the word? Do you get this frazzled and confused when someone refers to Cream or ZZ Top as a power trio? Is that also being pretentious and snooty?

Also, lucha doesn't usually use "trio"/"trios" as a modifier at all. Tag team matches themselves are "revelos australianos" whether it's two to a side or three.

"A sales rep." "A systems analyst." "A Yankees game." "A savings account." "An arms race." "A clothes hanger." Plural noun adjuncts are allowed and nobody bats an eyelash at 99.9% of them.

Yes, there are two trios competing against each other. Just like how in tennis you have "a doubles match."

This pedantic arguing is setting me on edge. I think I'll relax by listening to the soothing folky sounds of the Kingston Six-Man Tag Team, or admire the jazzy virtuosity of the Thelonious Monk Six-Man Tag Team.

Tecnico and rudo are kayfabe terms, though. The graphics and chyrons will spell out what alignment a luchador is. "Trio" is also not an exclusive Spanish word.

Well, yes, that makes it hard. That's why we're trying to crack the mystery. If they'd said his name was Joe Blow no one would be asking. I have to assume that a 74-year-old ex-wrestler in 2004 is dead in 2025 though the post doesn't seem to say so definitively. So it's not a case of libeling the guy.