Matt D

The nature of WWF pre-what, 95? 94? was one of long, long programs. That's one of the most frustrating thing about WWF footage. So it's a little tricky.You do get some random PTW matches, though. There's also his month long run in 92 where he ran over a bunch of random guys (Kamala, Berzerker, Papa Shango, etc.) right after winning the title.

There are a lot of guys like Condrey who just disappear. Tommy Rich is pretty surreal too, but that's been covered. All the York Foundation really. Geez, look at Terry Taylor. Pretty boy in Memphis who was then pushed as Watts' big new face. Gets screwed for doing a Dusty impression on a plane when Dusty's headphones weren't actually playing music. Ends up the Red Rooster. Ends up the Computerized Man of the 90s. Ends up the Taylor-Made Man with a US tag run in WCW with Greg Valentine, Goes to WWF as Terrific Terry Taylor, ends up back in WCW again, ends up back in WWF as a backstage announcer, then becomes an agent for every company under the sun multiple times. He's the one who left WWF after they instituted the new style of contracts after Russo and Ferrara left, right? Yet he was still welcomed back later.

I'm not sure about the one-off thing either. I have to look at results. There's the 123-kid match, the Backlund match the night before KOTR 93 was their second match. They wrestled a night or two before in Baltimore. I was going to say Bam Bam, but I think they'd done dark matches at tapings for a bit first. It'd an interesting thing to look at. One-Offs isn't exactly the same as "First time." I know the Goldust match should barely count since it has two commercial breaks in ten minutes or so; and a bunch of split screen bs. You never really get to see it.

Any idea what the match is? I'd want to see that. So far as weird matches go, there's the match vs Koko where Koko plays heel.

There's a lot going on here. Let me ask a few questions, the first of which may have been covered before. What makes for a good heel then? What about Tito Santana, someone who lived and breathed his shine-heat-comeback structure, who can talk about it very distinctly now and the reasons behind it, who was frustrated when facing heels who wanted to wrestle him evenly in the shine and not cheat to take the advantage to start the heat. Wouldn't he understand his role so well on the other side of the coin? Do we have reason to believe that? Also, I still want to know what elements of Martel's work as a heel weren't up to snuff, the specifics? I think it's worth looking at with that in mind. That's different than saying "He did these things well. Those things were not important as a heel." I want to know what he DIDN'T do well as a heel. I'm not at all against Martel being considered a better babyface than Steamboat either, btw. You've just raised general process points that are interesting to me.

I feel like Rotunda has a pretty weird career, actually, falling into being the Destroyer's apprentice, having the big run in WWF as their RnRs basically only to have a mental break down, then have his partner have a mental breakdown, going over to WCW as part of the Varsity Club, becoming a ship captain because he wanted a free boat, getting featured as Michael Wallstreet in USA Today just as he was on the way out, the IRS gimmick, moving back to WCW as Wallstreet and having a late career in Japan, then ending up an agent with his kid as the Eater of Worlds. It's sort of weird.

Again, Rick Martel has said himself that his heart wasn't into it. That sounds like a pretty reasonnable reason to me. Actually that's why he came back in the late 90's, to end his career on a high note as he was motivated again by then. My impression is that was more about 92-93. But I don't like that as an argument in general.

Alright, but why didn't it work? I don't think the answer is "Fans just didn't want to boo Goldberg/Austin." Fans liked booing Martel. He played his character well in promos. He came off as arrogant and haughty and did despicable things and got real heat in those settings. So then, why didn't it work? And that, to me, goes back to failings that Martel had as a wrestler. Maybe. And I say that because some of it might have been stylistic WWF issues. To agree to that, though, then you'd have to sort of figure that no mid-card technical heels of his era were good at doing the things that he did not do well due to limitations imposed upon them by Vince and road agents, and that's a much bigger argument. To me the big question isn't "was it good booking or not?" but "why didn't it work?" and "He was a natural babyface" doesn't cut it, because other natural babyfaces have become strong heels given similar opportunities. What was Martel lacking and what does that mean about him as a total wrestler?

That is just a really, really broad way of looking at "bad booking." To me bad booking is more along the lines of "you have to wrestle El Gigante for 30 seconds every night." or "you will be in a tequila bottle on a pole match with sixteen people interfering" or "you will be in a TNA main event." That's bad booking, not necessarily "You, finely skilled and very experienced wrestler, are now a heel. Go wrestle Bret Hart for twenty minutes on Prime Time Wrestling." That's more on you than on the booker, no?

Shawn was a shithead as a Rocker, both in what he did in ring and in his perceptions of what he didn't get.

This is interesting. You're arguing reverse hypotheticals. 1.) We have a lot of proof that Martel, in his prime, was a mediocre heel. (I wouldn't say bad) 2.) We have no proof how Steamboat or Santana would be as heels. 3.) There are a multitude of wrestlers who were good at being heel and being face because understanding one helps in understanding the other and wrestling is wrestling and the talents are not mutually exclusive (though some are). We've had points here where people argue "well, if wrestler x just had the opportunity to do y, then..." What you're saying is that we shouldn't hold what Martel did with his opportunity against him, relative to other similar workers, because they never had the opportunity to do the same thing, which is something that I think no one's argued about anyone up til this point.

The difference with Martel, relative to Rey is that we have years of Martel's heel work on tape. It was in his mid 30s which is when most wrestlers are at their best. We have a bunch of matches against a number of opponents of all stripes, both TV and arena. We have long matches, short matches, tag matches, matches in Japan (see below), matches against great wrestlers, matches against terrible wrestlers, matches in well remembered feuds, matches in embarrassing feuds. Rey was a heel for a very short period of time. Also, it's not just the fact Martel was in the WWF because he has a number of strong matches as a babyface there. I don't know. I think it's very hard to outright dismiss Martel's heel work. It's not like he didn't get the opportunities. I get dismissing late era Flair. This is much harder to me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akHUSxbqk6s

The issue with Steamboat vs Martel is that Martel's heel work drags him down, no? On topic, I would think Hijo del Santo would have to be considered on a best babyface list.

People like to be a part of something and you can never be as part of something as in the moment it's happening. I think some people would rather be part of something that's happening that they don't enjoy and feel that sense of community and belonging than experience something that they actually enjoy something that's lapsed or that doesn't have the same instant social fix.

I think I've read here by people who have a semi-professional interest in getting twitter followers that you almost HAVE to live tweet Raw. That it's when you'll have the most eyes on your "content." I also imagine the reaction shows are some of the most popular on the podcast feed, though I don't know that to be certain.

I think they're called "Twitter Users."

Flair reading his texts is another one of those hugely jarring things you'd never hear on any other podcast. He's like your mother trying to use technology.

To be fair-ish, he's been shown with them backstage offering them advice and congratulating them a few times, so it's not totally out of the blue. Now, that he's in that role in the first place is a different story, but looking at the roster, there aren't many other babyface veterans who could play that role. For active wrestlers, not hurt, I don't think there are any, actually.

I think a counterpoint would be someone presenting a bunch of poor short matches. I think he was just in a position to have less of those sorts of matches than other people.

I know what I'd do with mine. You're catching a match now and again between drunk podcast appearances, Hulu Raw, and being in A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum so you're not experiencing it every day but the anticipation to see what the new match will be is worth half the price of admission. It hits that surprise "kid opening a pack of cards" sweet spot.

You know, I'm not one to praise Dibiase a lot because it gives Parv a big head, but he's a guy who really could project to the last row too, and make things feel important. I will give him credit for that.

Really looking forward to the Duggan vs Reed Cage main event on that one.

That's a good start, but I haven't seen a ton of Silver King either. Someone else suggest some more please.

Well, Buddy vs Lothario is the best 2:30 minute match you'll see this week. I like how the early missed roundhouse led to Buddy taking over and then there was a call back for the finish but if the new match announced each night is like opening a set of baseball cards, then I think our pack was missing a few tonight.

I just want some Nick Bockwinkel matches already. I'm curious about Steamboat being on the banner when we don't seem to have any results for him, mind you, but there are results we don't have going back into the 70s certainly.