artDDP

I watched the Rock vs. Steve Austin main event from WrestleMania XVII for the first time in almost ten years and I still don't understand why people think of it as four- or five-star epic? What I saw were two outstanding workers clumsily tripping over each other and exchanging too many punches as transitions between the "I hit my finisher then you hit yours then I hit you with yours..." spots building towards an awkward finish that didn't get anyone over. I prefer their match at WrestleMania XV.

You're right, I'd forgotten that. Back when he was booked against "a black man who couldn't speak the English language" as he memorably recalled one evening on "Raw."

Wait, didn't Jarrett go to WCW about a year after the Michaels match? I don't remember him resurfacing in the WWF during 2005-07 until he later came back with his "Aztec" tights.

I just want to say I love the board. I love the diversity of opinions and the depth of information from so many of the posters. I wish I could contribute more but, sadly, I ceased following pro wrestling regularly in 2003. Most of my viewing these days is limited to WWE boxed sets and YouTube clips. And, Loss, your post reminded me of this:

I was wondering if you were the same guy from Wrestlinggames/The Wall. That was a fun place before it got ruined by family politics. I remember when I used to post my WWF No Mercy N64 create-a-wrestlers on that forum. Wow, the memories that brought back!

This thread has caused me to reflect on the WWF in 2000. At the time I wasn't quite 18 and I thought that while a lot of the match quality was just ok I was totally engrossed in the overall product. When I look back there are very few matches I actually want to go back to watch again. In fact, it's a very small handful. Outside of Rock and Hunter and a few midcard guys there weren't a lot of really great wrestlers on the roster back then but almost every gimmick was insanely over. Also, slightly off-topic: Is there a good reason why the Hunter-Rock iron man match hasn't been released by WWE on any DVD set? Do they really think it wasn't as good as the "Pat Patterson special" from Backlash a month earlier?

My knowledge of the inner workings of the WWF from this period is very limited so I'll ask: Had the WWF implemented their policy of most wrestlers working a certain limited style to make bigger moves more dramatic and not to get more heat than the main event...or something like that?

I don't remember the names aside from NMB. I usually turned up wherever sek69 and Loss were posting since the beginning of the decade.

Does this really work for them? Don't most people just find the news on various free sites?

For a while Curt Hennig was "Mr. Perfect" Curt Hennig on WWF programming. I think they did the same thing with Von Erich, have him debut using his "real name" and then slowly phase it out in favor of the ring name.

Dude, I think you, me, and eight other people (who probably all post here) know that was Curtis Iaukea.

It's all about intent. The difference is that wrestling intentionally blurs the line between work and shoot, and historically, wrestling has tried to make audiences think it's real. TV dramas and cop shows don't have guys using their gimmick names in public and good guys not traveling with the bad guys. So, a gun confrontation doesn't come off as an entertainment segment to a naive audience, it comes across as a heated rivalry that has gone way too far. Even if an audience isn't fooled by it, it comes across as a desperate attempt to exploit real violence, and even those who aren't fooled by it see that the intent is to make viewers think this really happened, which is not at all the intent of a cop show. Yes, there are a million counters to that argument, and I can probably have a debate with myself on that topic, but I think that's the logic behind that type of complaint. Loss, your argument is pretty much spot-on. I also remember the WWF hyped this a week earlier with a phone interview with Pillman or something like that where he threatened that if Austin did try to break in he'd be waiting for him with his gun. So, in 1996, the WWF pushed an angle where one wrestler was going to break into another's home and assault him and the other wrestler would be waiting with a loaded gun. They were encouraging you to tune in next week under the assumption one wrestler may just kill the other.

I'm pulling these from memory but I know they are on the Ric Flair DVD sets WWE put out. Flair, to Tony Schiavone & David Crockett: "That's why this jacket cost $1000 and this [schiavone's] cost $500...[grabs Crockett's] and I don't know how much this cost but I'd be ashamed to wear it!" Flair again: "My shoes cost more than your house!" Flair, on wrestling an African-American jobber: "I don't wrestle guys like this, I employ them."

What was the deal with that anyway? Given that Superstars was hardly a live show and VKM was sitting RIGHT THERE doing commentary with him, I assume that line had to be okayed. I remember McMahon saying something after Piper went off about how Atlas was re-embracing his heritage and made some comment about Piper & his kilt then Roddy backed right down. It struck me as odd then and it still is one of those weird meaningless things I still wonder about. Was it pre-emptive against some imagined horde of people watching Savoldi's ICW who might care about Tony Atlas or something? In short, I have no idea I have a tape of an old Superstars telecast when Col. Mustafa debuted and right after his "inset" promo Roddy says something like, "Vinny, I tell ya these ideas just keep getting stranger as the years go on!" Vince replies with, "Yes, indeed, a former WWF champion now calling himself Colonel Mustafa..." I mean, WTF? That show was taped months in advance and they made sure to sweeten the crowd noise at any opportunity but they let Roddy run wild? Was it a wink to the smarts at the time?

Thanks. I wasn't sure of the time frame. I remember it was during a "Triple-H is really mad and we're going to sell how pissed he is!" night on Raw. I think Test was back on Jakked by the time of the 2000 Royal Rumble.

I love this.

I remember Triple-H power bombed Test through the announce table on Raw and that was the end of that feud.

All I know is that my high school friends and I started ordering WWF ppvs in 1998 and ordered almost every single one. In 1999 we only ordered WrestleMania and SummerSlam, but in 2000 we ordered every single show. '99 was brutal. If they didn't have The Rock and Austin to save most of the shit it would had been the worst year ever. In 1999 I think the only compelling characters were The Rock and Austin. In most of 2000 the WWF tried to make everyone interesting and worth watching. Instead of relying on shock value they tried to create real, somewhat 3-D characters.

It was sek69 who said to me nearly ten years ago, "I don't think the average fan watches wrestling the same way we do." I think of that every time I read about Wade or Dave or one of their columnists complaining about something like the Raw GM sending a lengthy e-mail just seconds after some heel does something heelish. I just don't picture your average fan saying, "Oh, crap, this is so FAKE!" and turning the channel. There's this idea that for wrestling to succeed it has to be as tightly written as an Emmy-award winning drama. Yet, when wrestling was at its most popular it still suffered from quite a few logic gaps and a hearty suspension of disbelief. Casual fans will always forgive minor things as long as there are interesting characters who are fun to cheer or boo and storylines eventually pay off.

That is dead-on. I never even thought of that. I've pretty much stopped going to the Observer page because of this. I have quite a few good, reliable MMA-only pages in my Favorites folder if I need MMA news.

TNA management should be proud. Seriously, these guys are the biggest fuck up of their generations. So pathetic. This is a good illustration of the differences between the two promotions. Something like this would get you fired or at least suspended in WWE; in TNA they'll likely get a push.

This list was probably put together by WWE's "historians" (fresh-out-of-college kids who design the website) and between them they've probably only watched about sixteen years of wrestling history.

To be fair, they were referred to as "newcomers to the World Wrestling Federation," not as newcomers to pro wrestling itself. And besides, to talk about their years of experience could have provided free advertising to JCP/NWA, their main rival. When I was younger I knew there was an NWA and a WWF and sometimes wrestlers wound up working for the other promotion, and I thought nothing of it. When WWE released their first Ric Flair box set, I never appreciated just how...surreal it was how they danced around the fact that Flair spent almost ten years headlining their chief rival's cards. Lots of talk about defending his "real world's championship" all around the world and people wondering what would happen if he faced Hogan. They never actually said where Flair was wrestling but it was as if they assumed the audience just knew some of these guys were from the NWA and wouldn't notice the others (Barry Windham as "The Widowmaker," unless Roddy Piper pulled a Tony Atlas and shit all over that gimmick during Superstars?).

I have a few friends who are serious, die-hard MMA fans and they absolutely hate Meltzer's coverage of the sport.

Oh, the memories this brought back! I was about 14 or 15 and one of our local channels carried America One television and in addition to ECW they ran whatever southern promotion featured Bill Dundee and his band of all-stars. I remember my mom calling me into the living room one night to identify someone on "Springer" because they looked familiar to her. It was like finding out Santa Claus wasn't real. Was there ever a time when "Springer" wasn't a work? I got the "Too Hot for TV!" VHS at a local Goodwill and most of those fights look like shoots.