Matt D

I think Studd was a cleverly dissonant (in part because of his size relative to his actions) stalling/stooging heel, who while not having a perfect game, in part due to the fact he was too reliant on relatively boring holds during his control sequences, is about 40% underrated/underlooked due to workrate primacy, which really speaks to the larger issue, so he's kind of a microcosm, and a useful one because he's so looked down upon by conventional wisdom, when almost no one seems to have ever documented an appreciation for the things he was actually quite good at. Mr. Logic, being the aggravatingly acerbic and lightning sharp enemy of double-standards and hypocrisy that he is, was quick to point out that your championing of Mauro is probably more topical and relevant and less odd than me making the specific case I do for Studd whenever I have any new inputs or whenever he comes up.

Man, I wish I had the time to even take a flesh wound on that one.

What a uniquely frustrating hill to choose to die on.

You can't go to this well often, but on this night, I appreciated this.

Doesn't everyone under 34 watch things streaming later?

Don't AEW fans like Adam Cole?

So wait, AEW did their big number but NXT only lost 10K from last week? I get that double dipping in ratings is possible but that seems striking to me.

If we remixed those and got 02 Corino vs 02 Brock, I'd be interested but as it is, no thanks.

There's a Jericho's lifts joke here somewhere.

There can be four drafts between now and then

Have the Fiend crush people until Mania and then have Reigns beat him?

I haven't seen it on my apple podcasts app yet.

By far the biggest thing NXT had going for it was the studio feel/style/pacing. It was an hour a week with big shows four or five times a year. They could tape a bunch of shows at once. They had squash matches. Characters were built. They were kept fresh and interesting. They occasionally put on matches where both guys really needed to win and sometimes it hurt a talent but those were usually not the guys who were long for the company anyway (Corbin vs Bull James comes to mind). In general, people were more protected by the sheer fact that they didn't need to draw and they didn't need to show success. There was no pressure to deliver immediately and manage the wear and tear of weekly live multi-hour TV and that let them actually develop a product and wrestlers that were worth something. Those first few tours felt absolutely special, in part because you'd get something at the live show that you couldn't get on TV, whether it be a unique version of a match-up that had only aired once or twice on TV ever or something special like Finn and Bayley singing. You saw something like that and it felt like you were part of a special club. It could have likely lasted but they didn't continue to offer that and capitalize on it and they, not unlike OVW all those years ago, got fleeced by the main roster again and again over time. There were still special things like getting to actually see Nak or Asuka or getting to sing GLORIOUS along with the rest of the crowd, but the returns began to diminish.

I'll fight Steven but I'm not messing with Stacey. I think my logic at the time was that the sloppiness gave it a visceral death match feel and raised the stakes but that such a thing has its pros and cons.

Wrestling without booking.

We should do AEW vs NXT vs Network Hidden Gem.

As always, paging @khawk20

It's representation. WWE for decades did everything they could to avoid, at all, presenting a product that made it feel like the nerdy/geeky/informed/smark/internet/etc. fan was being represented at all. It's why the Edge/Christian "This is a run-in" stuff felt like such a big deal and why everyone had about a three month love affair with Matt Striker in 2009 despite how bad he was. We're on the other side of the looking glass now though.

Paging @khawk20 It's an AWA taping from 88.

It makes it easy to find him?

You ever try doing crossfit with a stomach full of pancakes?