Matt D

He will too.

Tim is a wise man.

Yeah, I was about to say.... Well I'm younger than YOU!

Fans went nuts for him. I always forget Taker, but he was more over than Bulldog. I don't know why. He just was before they gave him the accent. Savage, Warrior, Bret, and Taker, yes. Though Warrior was gone a week before Survivor Series. He had a dark match and again, was super over. Like Sid right before Royal Rumble 92 over. I think kids loved the head vice or something. He was the wrong guy for the Doink feud. I don't feel like going Superstars digging. Can we just trust that he was over enough to surprise me despite logic dictating otherwise?

Uh, considering the weird Vince/Steph dynamic, Chinatown comparisons for the WWE rather creep me out. I think Vic said Finkel and that would have made sense to me.

Do we have younger fans here?

Honestly, Crush was super over for his first couple of months, before they really played up the accent and everything. I think he was the third most over babyface on the roster right before the Perfect turn.

I think either Barry Windham as The Stalker or DDP as A Stalker would count.

So when have you ever got the indication that what you want and what Meltzer wants are the same thing when it comes to this?

It's okay not to like Demolition, but if you don't, and you actually watch some matches, then all I ask is that take a look at WHY I like them and if you're going to engage, engage me on either whether I'm wrong about those points and why, or why you just don't think they matter. The latter is perfectly valid. People have different tastes. But it's not some crazy random thing, me liking them. It's not a whim.

I LOVE Bock's WWF announcing. It's so different than anything else you get.

We could probably break off a note just on what having "Good offense" means. Is it meaningful offense? Is it offense that looks believable? Is it varied offense? Is it innovative offense? Is it offense that the fans respond to?

isn't a lot of the offense issue being able to fill in the gaps and find things to do. In that regard, Steamboat had the opening match arm work and then the karate stuff for his come back. I can't see Arn Anderson going "NOOOO! NOT SHAWN MICHAELS!" but with Steamboat it was believable.

I'm curious (and I know you were sort of fishing for flaws since you generally like his stuff, but humor me). How long do you think a finishing comeback should be in 1996 WWF? From what i saw in 96, the MAIN Shawn Michaels match story was one of cutoff comebacks. And USUALLY, the payoff would be that he'd come up with a distinctive comeback of a few moves before kipping up and starting towards the finish. I think it'd bug me a lot more if all of his matches went forearm > kip up > inverted atomic drop > bodyslam > top rope elbow > SCM. Usually they don't. There's usually at least a twist or two in there somewhere from what I've seen. The only one that sort of ended like that was the house show match. Does it make sense for him to kip up mid match and then have another 6 minutes of back and forth, or another cut off and a second kip up? I'm curious what you'd prefer.

Duggan I could understand, but Bossman had a pretty solid 91-93.

Past MAYBE a Steamboat match or two and some of the underdog matches like Koko and Sam Houston, name me a few matches where the first few minutes of a Flair match actually matter? I'm not arguing that they're not entertaining. I think Flair is awesome at making holds interesting, both applying them and taking them, but he just runs through his shit. Are you arguing that he doesn't do that? As for Shawn, I think he actually rarely does a real superman comeback in what I saw in 96. He definitely changed things up. Oh wait, there was that terribly frustrating 95 Bulldog MSG match where he kips up three times. Anyway, later Shawn, when the entirety of matches are built upon backwork.. well, that's a different story.

Isn't that "Every Flair Match Ever?"

From what I've seen now of 96 Shawn vs Post-Comeback Shawn, the latter is a much huger issue as a lot of his matches are based around the heel working on his damaged back.

Our tastes don't match up anywhere close to perfectly, but I remember the Gunn match as Michaels' worst of the year. Gunn is worse than Helmsley, and Michaels is more interested in Sunny than in the match. The Lawler match is more fun. I know you're mostly doing TV stuff, but the International Incident match seems like the sort of thing you'd be interested in - you get to see which guys are entrusted with certain portions of the match and just how much Sid and Ahmed are allowed to do. That's exactly why I want to see the Gunn match, btw. Well Not because of Sunny, but because it's not against a guy the quality of the others.

I still have one more Michaels match to watch! And I kind of want to see the Billy Gunn one too. Someone break this stuff off to its own note.

I've seen a bunch of matches where it hasn't happened QUITE like that and a bunch where it did, and it's weird to me. Did people make the Hogan comparisons in 96 at all?

Try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf66Zlt3P7s and here's the first half of the stern interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVrluiMq_bs

I've got one more Shawn vs Goldust match (house show) to watch (Thanks Gregor!) but I did watch the 9/6/96 Shawn vs Goldust Raw match and I thought it was actually better than all the other ones I've seen so far. It didn't have the fast action, necessarily, but it was really solid. Goldust was very aggressive in the early going and it was obviously he wanted to win the thing. Dustin's offense was both believable and smart. Exactly what the match called for. Shawn was a bit more active from the bottom; instead of just laying there in a chin lock, he'd kick his feet and what not. You really got the sense that Dustin knew this was for the title, that he had earned the shot, and he wanted to WIN it. I thought for sure the kip up was gong to come after the double clothesline but it didn't, and I would have bought the finish after the elbow-drop as into SCM but they twisted it a bit. I think some of the other matches I've seen so far were flashier, but this was the best. Also, one thing I've noticed that 1996 Shawn is very good at is that when he flubs something (which is about once a match), he's USUALLY pretty good at recovering through sheer athleticism and instincts alone. I know sometimes he doesn't and throws a fit, but I've seen more recoveries than not. and I saw the 8-9-96 house show. I'll say off the bat that the most interesting thing about Shawn in 96 is that he really changes things up. I know I said that before, but here it is again after seeing a few more matches. This didn't look all that much like the other two Goldust matches I saw. Lots of different spots and some unique spots, such as missed kick to the head by Goldust (trying to counter a back body drop set up by Shawn) followed by a missed elbow drop by Shawn. Or the beginning of the match being Goldust reversing a Shawn attempt at a piledriver on the floor. The real meat of the match storywise was Goldust grounding Shawn and hooking in a chinlock. Shawn comes back the first time with the elbows but is cut off with a kneelift to the gut. Comes back the second time in a test of strength sort of way a couple of minutes later, but is powered down, and then the third time actually powers out of the thing and tosses goldust across the ring. It's a solid story if not an entirely compelling one. Goldust's chinlocks are pretty good though Shawn's selling isn't as interesting. The fans pop for each comeback but I think in this case, the blending of a slightly quicker pace and the story being told in the TV match worked better.

I saw the Marty match. Lots of fun tit for tat stuff. Cornette being out there was a let down since he didn't really play a role. It didn't exactly tell a story outside a broad "Two guys who know each other well" one, but it was worked pretty damn hard with Michaels going over for armdrags with more zing than I might have ever seen, and whipping across the ropes for his leaping forearm with as much speed as I've ever seen anyone in the ring. Good cut offs by Marty. A little less of a miraculous comeback. I thought it protected Marty's fistdrop well, though there was a weird moment when Shawn sat up to avoid the top rope iteration where, once again, he seemed momentarily lost in there. It was an awkward few seconds, for certain. Probably my favorite of the matches I've seen so far as there was just enough of a skeleton of a story in there to make the work worth the effort they were putting into it. Storming through. Saw the Owen match. Geez Owen was good. He had a way of making reversals look like he was actually trying something, like how Michaels floated over early on and it really seemed like Owen was going for some sort of slam instead of it just being part of a planned wrestling exchange. There's backwork that's ultimately meaningless (which is disappointing, since I thought it was going to go somewhere), but the comeback works the best out of all of the matches. While it's pretty much straight to the finish (though never entirely straight which is a testament to Shawn), it comes after Owen mocks the stomping and what not, so it's more of a hubris thing. Good athletic action like all the rest of these matches but I think they're all ultimately missing something.

John, I know how you feel about 80s WWF tag wrestling. One of my major points is that I think a lot of your major general complaints against wwf tag work don't appear in the Demolition matches, though (with the exception of maybe one or two Bulldogs matches, because it's pretty damn hard to hold back DK). I feel like I'm shouting into the wind here, but to me it's all the more impressive that they're able to avoid those pitfalls, or, in matches with things like the babyface team having an early offensive advantage, they're able to bring something to it by not just sitting there and eating the offense. They make it actually mean something, and create a far more even environment without resorting to no-selling and shrugging things off.