Matt D

I hate the Butcher angle at Starccade 94, so much. I've mentioned this before, but it's an angle that should have been workable. The betrayal from a guy who hadn't been heel in 8 years or whatever, who had only a year before main evented Mania as Hogan's partner. I get that Hogan was paranoid in 94, but if you're going to let ANYONE get heat on you, you figure it'd be the guy who carries your bags and who you trust with your life. The masked man attacks Hogan for months. The payoff comes when Hogan legdrops him and unmasks him. And it's Beefcake. But he's already legdropped him and unmasked him. The bad guy's basically gotten his comeuppance. We're at the end of the Scooby Doo Episode here. It's over. Where's the heat? It drives me nuts because it would have been simple as anything for him to legdrop the masked guy, pull it off, have it be Arn, and then the second one come in, put Hogan out with the sleeper, unmask himself, and have it be Beefcake. Or fifty other scenarios. It's just maddening to me for some reason. I'm always going to think he's a bully as a face too, though I don't think Savage actually had a point in 89.

Sometimes I wonder: did we change or did wrestling change?

Hogan's matches were very, very well put together between 89 and 91. Each big match seems to have a build to it and a story behind it, and that story plays out in the match. I think the two Taker matches are especially interesting in how one builds into the next. I'm sure I hated them in 91 and I hated them even more in 2001 (where are all the moves?!), but in 2011, I found them really interesting and very smart. I also love his first heel performance against the Giant. It's one thing to work too small against Piper. It's another against the Giant and you can just tell how much Hogan is loving the stooging. I actually kind of hate Hogan's goofy hammerlock take down chain wrestling thing he did whenever he felt like he had to prove that he could wrestle. It was like he was trying to appease people who would never get it anyway (and I was sure as hell one of them for most of my life).

Naylor is a guy who loves what he loves as earnestly and emotionally as anyone and is really good at letting others feel how they feel too, disagreeing without insulting, so it's hard to fault him for much.

The fun part about WCW in mid 91 is trying to figure out what the hell they SHOULD have done with everyone given the roster. My favorite thought is a York Foundation vs Sting feud for the US title, probably with them adding Zenk to the Yorks too.

He did look like he was having fun there though.

You know what's a weird match? Santana and Jim Powers vs Andre from right before WM 5.

Taker was downright scary with Brother Love. I'm totally convinced they gave him Pringle to make him less scary to the kids. Also, the only useful role Mick Foley has left is to be face manager Lou Albano

No idea on the Mid South, but this was some of the "weak" 1980 Jimmy Hart stuff I was talking about. The months without Lawler all pretty much stunk (except for Billy Robinson) until Tommy Rich came in.

He did buy his competition.

It's just so weird to me that Ellering had a "strong man" gimmick in memphis.

It's even better if his theme music is playing. And doubly so if it's "Man Called Sting"

I would have COMPLETELY believed he did it last year.

Jones was like Mr. Wilson to Boogie Woogie Man's Denace the Menace.

Only if it teams with Kane's wig?

Orton coming back right before the Rumble was close, and Miz with the #1 entry, but not too many others.

Search out the 1980 Memphis TV set; the guy pretty much carried the territory in the wake of Lawler getting injured and being out most of the year. So much of the stuff would revolve around him. Also, honestly? I think that Hart w/Lawler was GREAT and I hate that it was cut off too short. I think Hart vs Lawler was great. And I think the stuff with Tommy Rich and Bobby Eaton right before Lawler came back was really good too. But Hart with Valiant in 80 and ESPECIALLY with Paul Ellering wasn't so hot. He wasn't quite there yet without Lawler to bounce off of.

Wasn't the issue not Pearl Harbor but "Japan is buying up Times Square" or whatever? That was pretty relevant until a couple of years later when the crisis hit. Granted, I'm not sure how much that'd sell to Mobile or Charlotte.

I think Sheamus vs Henry vs DB would be more fun than Henry vs Sheamus or DB vs Sheamus.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2005/07/21/1141424.html This says Alfred joined in 82

I did a quick count, and on the first 48 Shows (Raws and Smackdowns) of 2001, he wrestled 25 times. With a lot of run ins as well. So he was basically wrestling once a week. It might be a higher % if you take out May too as he seemed to just be on Smackdown that much.

I assume you mean post brand split?

Is there a lot of footage of the Hayes/Humperdink feud? I always wanted to see that.

My big problem with Hart in Memphis, and it's not a huge one as it was effective, but he REALLY put himself over the talent. Now, in part, he had to because a lot of .. I mean, look, I like Dream Machine as much as the next guy but I'm going to spend money to see Hart get it more than I'll spend it to see Dream Machine get it. But it's more than that. At least early on, Hart was always in the thick of things in matches. He really imposed himself physically in a way you'd expect Harley Race to do, maybe, but not a guy like Jimmy Hart. That might have been part of why he was so over, to be honest, because he was so often right in the middle of the brawls and on a visceral level seeing a scrawny loudmouth do that is infuriating, but it's always a little offputting to me.

When talking about Luger, I meant the intrigue. I think they underestimate how much people tune in to see "what will happen next" these days. The huge thing about the Monday Night Wars was always "Who will jump next." Having Crush suddenly show up on a Nitro was just part of the draw to it all. On a more micro level, it was all about Who Will go NWO next? For a while at least. With Luger there was the whole "What side is he on?" thing in late 95, early 96, and I think it was a ratings draw on some level. It's surprisingly compelling to go back and watch it now.