Sean Liska

I really don't see it that way. I don't even remember anyone saying it after the show, or months after, until the YouTube compilation came out with just the bumps. There was nothing about it in the Observer or Torch. Meltz gave it ***1/2. How did he even make Hogan look bad? He could have called plenty of spots to make him look old or slow. Instead he just bumped his ass off because he was working a major PPV main event with an immobile 55-year old man and big expectations existed for the match. Watch Hogan/Warrior-Perfect/Genius, then watch the Hogan/HBK match, and tell me what the difference is. Yeah, the bump off of the big boot looked ridiculous, but the rest of the match wasn't bad.

Shawn's career is probably (temporarily, at least) going to be over in less than 24 hours, so I suppose this is a moot point. That said, I think Shawn kinda sucks as a face, and I think there is (was?) more potential with Shawn as a heel. So, yeah, I care. I know that doesn't count for a whole lot, but as long as you're asking.... Yes, in that he went from a guy who used his position as the company's top star and as a perceived drawing card to pull power plays to a guy who used his position as the BFF of the company's heir apparent and his perceived religious reawakening to pull power plays. It's more of a lateral movement than anything. I don't see this. WWE's made a whole new generation of stars since HBK came back in 2002. He hasn't done a ton of clean jobs because Vince has gotten really protective of all of his top stars, but he did give-and-take programs with Orton and Edge, tapped to Cena at WrestleMania, helped Chris Jericho reach a level of importance in the company that he's never been at before, tapped clean to Angle at a Mania, tapped clean to Benoit at Backlash in 04, put Jeff Hardy over clean on RAW in February 08, etc.

Love Dave, but he's slowly losing it on the Observer board. In response to allegations that Dave always glosses over stories that make Flair look bad: "Yep, the only publication that covered his being yelled at for throwing blood in the crowd last week. Yep, never mention his financial issues. Yep, had more details than any other media outlet on the deal with his wife. Yep, go fuck yourself." In response to people making fun of Alvarez for getting the wrong quarter's for Impact on Monday: "He got the numbers from Spike. Seriously, is he supposed to be a mind reader when he gets numbers from an official source and due to a clerical error on their side the numbers are slightly off. Save the Bryan shit for if he makes a mistake, not because somebody from Spike looked at the wrong column on a spread sheet." Then again, I can see how that board could do this to someone.

Pretty sure he was at 12 since he always talks about the building emptying out during the main event.

I don't know if he's said he was more interested in Shamrock-Le than Mania. Recently on the board he said it was a professional and financial decision he had to make with his family in mind.

I can believe the RAW number. If Bret Hart's return vs. TNA only did a 3.6, and Austin did a 3.7, a 3.2 for a normal show seems plausible. I talked to a few casual fans who tuned in last week to see Austin and were dissapointed in how little he did, so that may have turned people off as well. TNA is clearly costing WWE a few viewers at this point. I hope Vince gets ticked off and goes into war mode because that always brings out the best in him.

That's how I view things. The only major wrestling company in the world that seems to be truly healthy is WWE. I don't have faith in WWE maintaining its success once Vince is gone. Vince is a 65-year old man who has taken a lot of steroids in his life. Every other company in the world seems to be in bad shape. Thus, I don't have much faith in there being a ton of current wrestling for me to watch when I get old. I may have to last the final 30-40 years of my life with just DVDs to watch. So I'm not freaking out about how I want to watch every 80s Japan TV season set from All Japan and New Japan, and how I want to get all Mid-South TV from 80-86, and how I want all the Memphis TV from the same era, and Mid-Atlantic TV, and who knows what else, and how there's so little time. I figure I'll have plenty of time eventually.

Dana's the one that was really pissed about the comments.

It's crazy to see how Dave and Bruce are both still living in that 1986 "us vs. them" world where Jim Crockett Promotions was the good guy and the WWF was the bad guy. All of the old biases are still there. People like Flair and Cornette are still the babyfaces (Cornette more with Dave than Bruce), and Hogan and Vince McMahon are still the heels. I mean, I was a rabid ECW fan. Still am. And we're notorious for being nuts. But I don't think I view the wrestling world in the same that I did in 1995, when Bischoff and Vince were the big heels.

The new Observer has a transcript of the audio from the call. The daughter said that they weren't slurring their words, although she later says that she thinks they're drunk.

If there's no evidence that Flair is in the wrong on this one, what is Meltzer supposed to say?

I think - and I'm only maybe 25% joking here - is the appeal was he threw a lot of clotheslines (excuse me, "lariats") so it reminded smarks of their favorite puro guys. Nigel's one of the few ROH guys that I always thought had major-league charisma and presence, along with probably only Punk and Joe. He carries himself like a star. His run as ROH champ produced a lot of entertaining promos and some really good matches with guys like Danielson and Generico. My favorite heel Nigel moment was getting Danielson to agree to a match where there would be no strikes to the head due to Nigel's recent concussions, Danielson passing up opportunities to win the belt with his elbows finisher, and Nigel then repeatedly headbutting Danielson en route to a victory. Great stuff.

I don't get the degree of outrage at the Springer segment. It was supposed to be a parody. They hit all of the classic Springer "spots" - paternity tests, transgender revelations, cheating spouses, white trash brawling, etc. I won't argue with anyone that thought it wasn't funny, but a low point in RAW history? For a harmless sketch with a bunch of prelim people? Compared with HLA, Katie Vick, Kane setting JR on fire, midget court, Dr. Heiny, Wayne Bobbit saving Val Venis from castration, Kane electrifying Shane McMahon's nuts, and on and on?

You only live once. Foley hated his job in WWE and seems to enjoy his TNA work, where he has a light travel schedule and is probably treated like a big deal by management. He's having fun. I don't see the harm.

I can see your point of view, but there's been way too many guys who didn't know when to quit in wrestling. He's probably feeling the consequences of all those extra bumps now and it will only be worse in years to come. We can wax romantically about him doing what he loved doing, but pragmatically it wasn't a smart decision. I certainly see your point, and we've seen enough examples to be weary. But Dreamer does seem like someone who has legitimately dreamed of being a wrestler since he was a little kid and has a passion for it, so the idea of him getting a few extra years in the big leagues, including Wrestlemania at Ford Field and the Rumble at MSG, is kind of a cool story to me. It's possible he will regret it some day. The good news is he's mostly been in 4-minute matches that look like they're being performed underwater, so hopefully he hasn't hurt himself too much.

Well, be fair, what exactly was the original ECW? It was a third-rate promotion. Anyone who got over wound up being signed by the WWF or WCW. ECW would in turn get many of the leftovers who had basically run out of steam in the Big Two. And, of course, they were receiving financial backing from McMahon. So the they new ECW was basically being treated the same as the old ECW, but with a higher profile and their position relative to the new "Big Two" being made official. The financial backing from McMahon thing is over-stated. Wasn't it just Heyman getting a grand per week? Meltzer has gone into the numbers in better detail.

Eh, he got to spend 4 1/2 extra years doing something he loved rather than sit in an office and stare at a clock. I think it's a nice story. Now he can go hang out with his friends in TNA and get some more ring time. Hopefully he left WWE on decent terms and can get another desk job when his in-ring career is over.

And because the match got over great with the live crowd and everyone went home happy. I think that whole thing is way overblown. Michaels was under pressure to deliver a Shawn Michaels PPV main event with an immobile old guy and went way back in his playbook. I was watching an old Hogan/Warrior-Perfect/Genius match a few weeks ago, and Perfect was more over the top with his bumping than Michaels was. The HBK promo the next night on RAW was another story, though.

I dobut Wade would be that obvious. He destroyed Russo in WCW, he's picked apart his recent Facebook posts, and he'll destroy him again if it comes out that Russo is the vision behind the current TNA product. I'd agree that it's likely Wade being contrarian, similar to him debating whether Benoit was truly a great worker back in the day. It seems like he just does it to be different than Meltzer.

Yeah, what Wade wrote was probably accurate. It also seemed like he was implying that Cornette was feeding Meltzer anti-Russo information.

I can't get to the Observer site, but the Torch is reporting that TNA did a 1.5 and 2.2 million viewers, and the Hogan segment did 2.9 million. I don't know how many are coming back after that show, but I would assume there will be more Monday night battles.

I doubt Jeff was the one initiating the contact here.

I dunno, I was at the Chicago Dragon Gate show and was actually kinda bored by it. It was just too much. I had more fun at the Bob Barker RAW the next night. The Dragon Gate show reminded me of all the complaints that I thought people unfairly threw at ROH, like every match being a similar style of spotfest.

RVD went on a run of legitimately busting open people he worked with when he first got a big push. Angle was one of several that were upset.

Here's a challenge for the posters here that know how to figure out Dave's "read between the lines" comments. There's currently a discussion on the Observer board about Wade Keller being overly ticked off about Bret Hart coming back. Poster V0708 posted, "Keller's audio about Hart returning to wrestling took negativity to new levels. It almost felt like he was personally offended and this is why Bret Hart is wrong, and this is why you the listener are wrong if you agree with anything he says, etc etc. It was almost as bad as reading one of Caldwell's columns about Hart back in the day (Montreal) that even Meltzer crapped all over." Dave's reponse, "There is a certain psychology at work here. Try and connect the dots and I'm surprised nobody has yet." The question - what is Dave talking about? Does it have something to do with Wade being mad about Dave getting this story before anyone else? That's all I can think of.