S.L.L.

Why didn't they fire Jeff hardy then? Didn't he refuse? Nobody has said anything about him being offered rehab this time out. He was fired originally for refusing rehab. There was also that other guy with the gold medal who was far less expendable than Ashley who got tossed for refusing to go to rehab.

It definitely took a lot of wind out of his sails but then I thought he rebounded nicely with some quality work in WWE. His WM match with Undertaker was especially good and he even carried Vince to a good match. It's been the last year or so when he's really declined...it feels/looks like he's aged 30 years in the last 3. I could still watch an entire DVD filled with nothing but his World Championship Wrestling promos though You know, I would actually say that Flair rebounded somewhat in the last few years after accepting his role as a higher-profile American version of Mitsuo Momota and working the "broken down old man" style accordingly. I mean, he's not a fraction of what he was in the 80's, but then, not too many people are. But I'd dare say he's better now than he was when he first came to the WWE (and his last years in WCW, for that matter). I can get behind the idea of Flair as a sneaky old bastard fan favorite who's starting to bear a striking resemblance to my grandma.

I remember an anecdote (not sure who told it) from a special edition of Meltzer's old eYada show after Solie passed away where one of the guests talked about how viewers complained "we want our wrestlers back, and we want Gordon Solie back," which would seem to suggest it wasn't him. Then again, those could just be old, foggy wrestler memories, so I don't know.

Dave says the last inductee, to be announced tonight on ECW, will be Gordon Solie, who I am almost 100% certain never worked for the W/WWF/E in any capacity. For that matter, I pretty sure Verne Gagne didn't, either, and he got in a few years back. This is how they do things now. Abby is as viable a candidate as anyone.

John, I can't believe you actually wrote all of that and still can't be bothered to list even one thing you find wrong with Magnum's work. Look, call me lazy for not spending as much time and energy writing about pro wrestling in my spare time as you. So be it. I was kinda amused by egging you on at first but....this is just sad. We should probably just drop it before it gets any worse. If it makes you feel any better, I'll leave you with one specific comment about Magnum: the second match from the Mid-South set with DiBiase, Magnum's punches really stood out to me. Keep in mind that this is a match with DiBiase, one of the better punchers in wrestling history, and it was Magnum's punches that jumped out at me. So there's that, for what it's worth.

If it's the one I'm thinking of, it's a fairly well-known match, but an awesome one worth checking out if you've never seen it before. And yes, YouTube and Dailymotion are Godsends to wrestling fans everywhere.

Well, it's March, my current wrestling watching is probably the lowest it's been since I got the internet, and to top it all off, my Segunda Caida overlord Phil hasn't started up his annual MOTYC list yet. So, I turn to you, the gentle reader (tm Dean Rasmussen), and start up this topic to discuss the best matches of 2008. Go on, you know you want to. I'll go ahead and mention the blowaway greatness of the last two Batista/MVP matches to get the ball rolling. I'm probably the only guy who liked the first one better, as the finish to the second kinda bugged me, whereas the finish to the first struck me as perfect considering their characters and position on the card. The last Noble/Palumbo singles match from a few weeks ago was pretty great as well. This year's Rumble was pretty awesome, but Rumbles are always kinda tricky when considering MOTYCs. But I thought Jericho/JBL and Orton/Hardy from the same show were both really boss matches. Really liked Morrison/Miz vs. Jesse/Festus from this week's Smackdown, but "MOTYC" is probably overstating the case there.

I think we're at an impasse because you don't seem to be willing to pop in those matches you pimped and walk through what Maggie was doing great in them. If you're unwilling to give me the Cliff Notes version of why Magnum doesn't impress you, why should I be expected to give you the unabridged version of why he should impress you? Consider the hypothetical anti-Backlund statement you gave earlier: "Inoki, Patera, Muraco and Adonis were great workers and they carried Bob in those matches. Plus, Bob was goofy in playing to the fans." As you noted, there are counterpoints you could make to these statements: point to what Bob did well in those matches, point to the comparatively small amount of great non-Bob matches those guys have had vs. the volume of Bob's great matches, point to the goofiness of other great workers, suggest that Bob's goofiness didn't necessarily detract from his matches, etc. The anti-Jumbo complaints can be countered as well. What's the anti-Magnum statement that I'm expected to counter? "When does it get good?" Well, there is an obvious counterpoint to that: tell you when it got good, which I did. Here's your counterpoint to that: "They really did nothing to convince me he was a "good" worker." What's my counterpoint to that? "Yes they did"? That's not an argument, that's contradiction. If you're expecting me to carry you in this thing, at least give me something more to work with than "when does it get good". I told you already. You responding with the automatic gainsaying of whatever I just said doesn't make me inspired to write a Jumbo/Hamaguchi-style lengthy analysis of the DiBiase/Magnum matches. And it's not like I have an obligation to spread the Gospel of Magnum. Frankly, it's spreading pretty nicely on it's own, because people are watching the matches and coming to their own conclusions that he was good. They don't need you or I to tell them that. Wrestling really isn't that complicated. Most of what's good or bad about any given wrestler is obvious on a surface level. If you've seen all of Maggie's great matches, and nothing struck you about him, odds are nothing I write will make you see him differently, unless I actually know what you're seeing, and try to relate to you on that level. Otherwise, it feels much more productive to write a long-winded post like this where I try to figure out why you keep begging off of admitting why you don't like Magnum (were your parents murdered by a gay 80's porn star?) than it is to write a long-winded analysis of a Magnum match that just tells everyone exactly what they already know and changes nobody's minds about anything.

Punk isn't really reliant on being a tough asskicker type, though.

Strictly speaking, their style may not be the problem. They could tone it down a bit, and frankly, they'd be better for doing that. The problem is that they're kinda small, and their surly bruiser routine might come off as odd unless they're largely restricted to wrestling cruiserweights until they become established. If London and Kendrick were still tag champs, I could see bringing them in, running that feud for a while, and seeing if they stuck. But right now, there doesn't seem to be an obvious place for them.

He's still really good, and he's gotten a lot more TV time lately with the Palumbo/McCool angle. His last singles match against Palumbo a few weeks ago on Smackdown was pretty boss. Worth going out of your way to see if you haven't already.

He could actually tell me what Lawler is doing well in the match with examples. Are you asking me to or stating it as a fact: "Yes, Bix gives examples when challenged"? He's stating it as fact, trying to get me to provide more in-depth analysis of why Magnum TA was a good worker. I haven't done that, because I'm considered to be too long-winded as is, and if I'm going to sink that much time and effort into this, I'd like to be sure that I'm not just repeating stuff John already knows. John doesn't want to tell me what he already knows, so we're at an impasse. Had you seen all the great available Backlund matches at that point before somebody else changed your mind? I don't dispute that sort of thing can get you to see a wrestler in a different light, but when you've already seen all the greatest hits, and nothing worthwhile is jumping out at you about the guy, odds are that any deeper explanation on my part is pointless. If he was up your street, the matches would have spoken for themselves. Best guess I have is that he's not selling what you want to buy....and since you don't want to tell me what you want to buy, I can't sell him to you beyond the basics.

I meant more that your complaint was that no one struck you as "edgy" enough while complaining that they needed to do something "different", even though "edgy" is what they've been doing for about a decade now. "Edgy" is not different. Cena, like him or not, is different.

My thought would be to pitch to me why Maggie was great in what you are defining as his great performances. You don't have to buy it when I say that Bob Backlund was a good worker. But I think there are a good number of folks here who could tell you that I've written a shitload on why I think he's a good worker, with a ton of example and detail. They probably could point you to it even before I do. Again, you wouldn't have to buy it... and I'm sure plenty of people don't. That's fine. But I *have* made my points on it over and over again. When I say "when does it get good", it kind of is the court of the other person to sell me on what exactly Maggie is doing in there great. If I wanted to know why Bix thinks Lawler is great, what I might be missing... you don't think he could lay it out? The problem is that you asked "when does it get good" after seeing all the stuff where a Maggie defender like myself would say it "got good". If his best work underwhelmed you, trying to sell you on him becomes a lot harder, almost to the point of futility. I can give you the Cliff Notes version: excellent brawler, excellent seller, excellent babyface, and made a side belly-to-belly suplex into a believable finisher. Great foil for DiBiase, great foil for Blanchard, and a great foil for Flair. But you saw all that stuff and didn't dig it. What more am I expected to do if I don't know what you're seeing differently? Bix could - and has - defended Lawler until his face has turned blue, but if the other guy has seen the matches with Dundee and Mantell and Race and Funk and everyone else, and they still aren't buying what he's selling, what more can he do? If you try to sell people on Backlund, and they see the great matches with Inoki and Patera and Muraco and Adonis and they're still not feeling him, what more are you going to do? I've spent way more time and effort than I really should have trying to defend John Cena to people who have seen the matches with Edge and Umaga and Michaels and Khali and Orton, and if people still don't like him, there's not much more I can do to change their minds.

See, I hear so many people saying this, and from the outside as I seem to be at the moment, I can't see it. I don't think any of the current characters are edgy enough to grab the attention of the mainstream and make wrestling cool again. Personally, I think it'll take a whole new direction, and there won't be another 'boom' like the last one for the next ten years or more. You do realize there's an inherent contradiction in what you just said, right?

When does it get good? The cage match with Mr. Wrestling II against Reed and Neidhart, Haven't watched that one yet. Is Maggie great in it, or are the rest carrying it? Maggie was great, but something tells me you would say otherwise. I watched the two that occurred on one day off the DVDVR set, which seem to be getting praised as his best singles matches on the set. They really did nothing to convince me he was a "good" worker. Ted didn't blow me away in them either, though at least he was solid. The third was even better, but you probably wouldn't like it any more than the others. I think you've seen his really great performances. You just didn't think they were great. Before you take my goofy opinion and throw it on the woodpile, what about Magnum's performances in these matches did you find so darn underwhelming?

It's kinda complicated, but not really. I think it just naturally follows that the quantity of wrestling discussion is going to be relative to the quantity of wrestling fans. The quality of wrestling discussion is the relative to the quantity of fans who tend to bring quality discussion who currently are watching stuff. The quantity of quality discussion then depends on the quantity of wrestling being watched by fans who bring quality discussion. WWE still has the most discussion of any promotion out there, because it's the most watched. It has less discussion now than it did in 1998-2001, because less people are watching it. But because they've been putting out a lot of good stuff the last few years, there's probably about as much quality WWE discussion as there was back then. They discussed it then, because it was hot and they were all watching it, and they discuss it now, because it's good and they're all watching it. I'd bet it pretty much evens out. The WWE has been kinda sorta on the precipice of another boom for a few years now. At this point, I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to actually happen, but if it does, and they maintain their current quality, I imagine there would be more quality WWE discussion than ever before. The US indy scene is a much hotter topic now than it was during the Monday Night Wars, even considering ECW. It gets a lot more quality discussion, and a lot more discussion in general. It's kinda cooling off now, so it doesn't get as much discussion - quality or otherwise - as it did a few years ago. It's much the same with Japan and Mexico, especially when you factor in the technological developments John noted. And historical stuff's availability and ease of distribution make that as hot a topic as it's ever been. In a way, I think John and Annie are both right. 1998-2001 probably had the peak of the quantity of wrestling discussion, and 2004-2006 probably had the peak for quality. But I think the cause for that ties back to the wrestling itself.

When does it get good? The cage match with Mr. Wrestling II against Reed and Neidhart, the series against DiBiase, the epic against Blanchard, the matches with Flair.....where wasn't it good?

Dean Malenko: I've heard it said that of all the guys who were deified as great workers in the 90's, Dean's work is some of the stuff that ages the worst. It's been a while since I've rewatched his better matches, so I can't say for sure, and looking back, I wouldn't say he was on par with running buddies Eddie and Benoit, but I still think he'd look pretty sharp to me. He was a personal favorite of mine when I first became "smart", and stayed that way as long as he was active. From 1995 to 2000 - and probably before then if I had more footage of him - he really carved a niche for himself as an all-purpose technical wizard, a great utility player for any promotion. Despite being branded as "uncharismatic", he was capable of deceptive character versatility, proving effective as a stoic, killer heel, a quiet, sympathetic babyface, a tough, determined member of the Horsemen, and as both the straight and funny man in WWF comedy acts. He wasn't really uncharismatic, of course, he just had a brand of quiet charisma that still connected with crowds. His matches with Eddie often get singled out for aging poorly, specifically the last one, which is often thought of as a good match with a great crowd. I've written this elsewhere, but every time I've rewatched that match, I've always come away with the opposite impression. It's the same shitty ECW crowd you always get. Eddie and Dean are taking it to the mat, and the crowd is too busy chanting "Bischoff takes it up the ass, doo-dah, doo-dah" to really care. And then they APPLAUD THE FUCKING CHANT. Lord knows I've sad bad things about ROH crowds and ROHbots in general, but I don't think they've ever applauded their own chants. Point being, match isn't great because of a great crowd. Match is great because of a great match, and it ultimately forces the crowd to stop basking in their imagined glory long enough to make them pay attention. Then there's the feud with Jericho. Again, this gets passed over sometimes because the matches weren't as good as other Cruiserweight Title stuff, and I wouldn't disagree with that. That said, I would mention - again, as I've done many times elsewhere - that I think it's the pinnacle of the WCW cruiserweight division being something more than just a lucha highspot showcase. Certainly, Jericho's heeling was a major part of that, but Dean's sympathetic face work turned what had been a simple but entertaining new gimmick for Jericho and made him someone who we actually thought would be a major player some day. Then, of course, there was his run with the Horsemen, and all the great tag matches with Benoit that followed. He even had a fun - albiet brief - stint with The Radicals in the WWF before being shuffled off into obscurity. All in all, not a bad six years, at least not as I recall it. Masa Fuchi: Speaking of great utility players throughout wrestling history, here's one of the all-time great grouchy henchman characters. My familiarity with his 80's work is limited, but he was good enough at beating the tar out of Tsuyoshi Kikuchi in the early 90's that some nine years after fading into the background, he was able to stage an effective comeback as a still-grouchy All Japan defender of the faith. And you know what? He could still beat the tar out of people. Magnum TA: The DVDVR Mid-South Project really opened my eyes to this guy. This is a guy with a long-standing rep as someone who got over mostly on looks and a really strong push despite having minimal ability, and that's really just not true at all. Frankly, if he hadn't been cut down in his prime the way he was, we'd probably be looking back at him as one of the all-time great workers, and likely an all-time great in other areas, too. He was a really effective babyface, he was a great brawler, great seller, and he made the side belly-to-belly suplex look like a credible finisher. What more could you want from a guy? Jerry Estrada: The second best working murderer of all-time. Well, that I know of, anyway. Estrada has been a favorite of mine for a while now, as he is one of those dudes who is just a master of bullshit. Everything in wrestling that doesn't involve actually attacking your opponent, Jerry can do better than 95% of wrestlers ever. Everything that does involve actually attacking your opponent...well, it's not like his offense is actively bad, it's just that it's not what you remember his matches for. Never do I so fondly remember matches where I can't actually remember a single move that was performed than when I remember Jerry Estrada matches. Marty Jannetty: Oh, Marty. He was more than talented enough that he should've been able to sustain employment as well as his more famous tag partner, but...well...it's Marty. What can you do? Kuniaki Kobayashi: I haven't seen enough to offer a really informed opinion of the Tiger Hunter, I just know that what I've seen of him against Tiger Masks Sayama and Misawa, I really liked, and it wasn't because of his opponents. Kobayashi really had this hunter-like attitude in the ring, a sort of quiet intensity that would lead to him just taking his opponents apart. Frankly, I liked his matches with Sayama better than Dynamite's.

Courtesy of Dukes, my homeboy from another board:

True, but you led with this without elaboration in a largely positive 4 month old thread: I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now and explain that I like pretty much anything as long as it's done well. My original post pretty much covers the rest: So, as I see it: Yokozuna > Great Khali > Abyss or.... Yokozuna > Bruiser Brody > Takeshi Morishima when fighting juniors Jury is still out where Mori's work against heavies fits into that picture. He's ahead of Brody, but not sure yet if he's ahead of Yoko, as I'm kinda rediscovering Yoko and it seems too soon in Mori's run to judge him on that scale.

Perhaps it was Kane.

Wild II vs. KENTAfuji from the 7/06 Budokan show, if I remember correctly. Although I also remember that match being pretty awesome, but not quite as awesome as advertised, fwiw.