PG-13 vs. The World

[Matt D]

I'm watching all the SMW tv now and literally JUST watched a Scott/Steve match. They were a fine team and they had a solid run in 99 WCW but they aren't even the best Steve Armstrong team. That would be the Southern Boys who also haven't been mentioned but were a really good team

The Southern Boys were really good and all but the Young Pistols, after the heel turn, were AMAZING.

 

One reason I can't get myself to watch much SMW Smothers is because of the face turn where he turns his back on that run and embraces his podunk roots or whatever. Not for me.

 

You are insane. The Tracy pre-tapes begging forgiveness for falling for big city scheming are incredible. Also Smothers was incredible in the ring in SMW. The best run of his career probably.

 

I'm not insane. I'm just too much of a Nothern carpetbagger or something, I think. I don't doubt for a second that he wasn't awesome in SMW or awesome in that role. It just offends my sensibilities or something. Thankfully later in his career he comes to his senses and appeals to my Italian roots.

[Victator]

I think the Garvin/Hayes Freebirds was a really underrated team. At their peak I think they were really good. They had a match with the Freebirds on a WCW syndie I think was better than the Midnights GAB match.

 

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xgjglt_fr...s-nwa-pro_sport

 

To me the Demolition love is strictly a product of childhood memories,

The "childhood memories" is really the worst current argument. I rather just be called an idiot than have my argument dismissed with mind reading bullshit.

[Dylan Waco]

I liked the Hayes/Garvin Southern Boys match and I actually liked their Country Whipping Match with the RnR's even though it was horribly booked in terms of the rules. My big beef with that team is that I think Garvin did not give two fucks at that point. He really comes across as lazy and bored during a lot of the random tv I watched from that period and seemed annoyed to have to sell for people at times like his graduation to full blown Bird meant he was supposed to be a Gordy level bruiser or something.

[Victator]

In 1990 he seemed to become broke down. Like he had rickets or something.

[Matt D]

Neither here nor there, but I love the Hayes/Garvin Freebirds vs Dynamic Dudes match (which I think is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pn6S-NmjPTU)

 

because the crowd was so anti-Dudes that they were cheering with Hayes, and 1989 Michael P.S. Hayes loved nothing more than the crowd cheering for him and he was eating it up in the most hilarious way.

 

I'm also partial to Freebirds + Badstreet vs Young Pistols + Dustin from the dreaded GAB 91, since that was the only tape I had at all as a kid, and it cut off in the middle of Sting vs Nikita so the fact that it's the best match on the card that I had puts it in a special nostalgic place.

 

I also had a WCW magazine where they explained how Precious was actually the business manger for the Freebirds behind the scenes.

 

(re: Demolition and childhood memories, since it came up, I started watching WWF in Oct of 1990 as a kid, so the only Demos I really knew as a kid were Smash/Crush and I hated them for being plodding since again, narrow-minded view).

[El-P]

To me the Demolition love is strictly a product of childhood memories,

The "childhood memories" is really the worst current argument. I rather just be called an idiot than have my argument dismissed with mind reading bullshit.

 

I was not refering to you per say, nor anyone on that thread actually, but since you brought it up I was just giving my own perspective about why the Demos are still universally loved by a large portion of the wrestling fans, that's all. Because I can't wrap my head about what makes them even a *good* team. To me they are a RW rip-off composed of two workers who were better under every other incarnations. I don't think the Demos sucked, I don't think they wre a particulary good team either. I went through the thread Matt D linked to, I have seen most of these matcehs already, and none struck me as particulary good exemple of Demolition being a great team. Sorry.

[S.L.L.]

To me the Demolition love is strictly a product of childhood memories

Yeah, I bet if Vic and Matt had sat down and watched a whole bunch of Demolition matches recently instead of relying on childhood memories, they'd have totally changed their tune.

 

Wait....

[Loss]

I liked the Hayes/Garvin Southern Boys match and I actually liked their Country Whipping Match with the RnR's even though it was horribly booked in terms of the rules. My big beef with that team is that I think Garvin did not give two fucks at that point. He really comes across as lazy and bored during a lot of the random tv I watched from that period and seemed annoyed to have to sell for people at times like his graduation to full blown Bird meant he was supposed to be a Gordy level bruiser or something.

Yes! Have you seen the tag title change against the Steiners from late '89? Garvin wears his "I'm jobbing" face to the ring, goes through the motions and doesn't really feel like selling for the Steiners. Rick stiffs him a few times and Hayes totally carries the match. I don't normally notice things like that, but it's really hard to not notice in that match.

[smkelly]

The problem this board and boards like DVDVR have is the user definition of adjectives like awesome, fantastic, and incredible. Any adjective, really. Maybe for users like a Phil Schneider who has seen just about everything there is to see in terms of unquestionable greatness in wrestling from countless promotions over a time span that covers forty-years of footage, he undoubtedly searches for stuff he hasn't seen, stuff that will impress him as much as the pimped lucha, American, and puroresu he has watched for years before. His compilations show that type of discovery trend. Can the same be said about others, like Dylan or Victator specifically? I don’t know for sure, but I cannot recall them having compilations made in their names or having a column in a DVDVR issue. Have they too hit the bottom of the known stuff and are desperate to find new stuff to talk about? Yes and no.

 

But every so often wrestlers, either singularly or as a unit, are brought up as “oh my God, this is an injustice that _______ does not get more praise and/or recognition.” And it is usually by the same people too. That tells me people are digging at the bottom of the “crates” to discover stuff or that they are generally bored with the current product of professional wrestling. Maybe it is because of newly acquired footage, I’m not entirely sure, though. It just seems like a few are trying to influence the many with their ideas and are so blatantly stubborn in their efforts that they will not accept, “Yeah, it is cool, but nothing like Misawa & Kobashi vs. Kawada & Taue, 6/9/95.” That is an obvious debate winner, busting out one of the top two tag matches of all-time, but the thought is the same. Some people simply cannot accept different opinions and thoughts that conflict with those ideas and opinions of their own. Nevertheless, I am no different. I just said that 6/9/95 is one of the greatest tag matches of all-time. It would take a considerable effort to create disaffirmation in me from that particular thinking. However, there are other cases where my opinions can be easily changed, modified, and/or altered. This is not one of those cases, though.

 

However, with the issue at hand, I am more than a little surprised that this discussion has lasted this long. Like I said earlier on, PG-13 is a cool team, but they are not top twenty material. Sure, plenty of distinctions can be made to enhance them further in their positioning, such as “In America, in the 90’s, and not in any major promotion.” Outside of that clear advantage, what advantage do they have over a team like the Steiner Brothers? The Steiner’s were clearly a better team, right? I don’t recall PG-13 kicking the shit out of Kensuke Sasaki, Hiroshi Hase, or Keiji Muto once, let alone a half a dozen times over a span of four years (or so). I have never seen PG-13’s name on the title history for the IWGP Tag Team Championships. PG-13 also never made it big in the NWA, WCW, New Japan, or the WWF like the Steiner’s did. Can anything PG-13 has ever done compare to the first Steiner’s vs. Sasaki & Hase match, which remind you, was in the top twenty of the DVDVR 1990s poll. On a workrate perspective, I am doubtful that PG-13’s chicken shit heel antics could overpower the Steiner Brothers suplexing jobbers all over the place or kicking the literal shit out of Japanese icons. Notwithstanding, not all of those questions could really answer the deeper question of whether or not big league experience and respectable accomplishments outweigh good matches and angles in a promotion not on TNT, USA, or the Samurai Network. Example: The Kings of Wrestling are better than Heath Slater and Justin Gabriel.

 

At any rate, there is a chance that a career retrospective compilation could change my opinion but their material would have to be so incredibly good that it is undeniable, which honestly, I think is not going to happen. I have been known to be wrong in the past, though.

[Dylan Waco]

After going through the specific head to heads I am really convinced that PG-13 are at worst serious top 20 contenders especially operating from my admittedly narrow line of thinking where I look at tag teams as units that were defined by their tag work. Even conceding to some of the Japanese tandems like Kawada/Taue and the Misawa teams I have not found twenty teams in this thread mentioned that I would take over PG-13. I can see how someone would prefer the Steiners, but even Will who has done an entire 2 hour show on the greatness of the Steiners was non-commital on the notion that they were clearly better than PG-13. I certainly don't see how they were.

[Loss]

The problem this board and boards like DVDVR have is the user definition of adjectives like awesome, fantastic, and incredible. Any adjective, really. Maybe for users like a Phil Schneider who has seen just about everything there is to see in terms of unquestionable greatness in wrestling from countless promotions over a time span that covers forty-years of footage, he undoubtedly searches for stuff he hasn't seen, stuff that will impress him as much as the pimped lucha, American, and puroresu he has watched for years before. His compilations show that type of discovery trend. Can the same be said about others, like Dylan or Victator specifically? I don’t know for sure, but I cannot recall them having compilations made in their names or having a column in a DVDVR issue. Have they too hit the bottom of the known stuff and are desperate to find new stuff to talk about? Yes and no.

 

But every so often wrestlers, either singularly or as a unit, are brought up as “oh my God, this is an injustice that _______ does not get more praise and/or recognition.” And it is usually by the same people too. That tells me people are digging at the bottom of the “crates” to discover stuff or that they are generally bored with the current product of professional wrestling. Maybe it is because of newly acquired footage, I’m not entirely sure, though. It just seems like a few are trying to influence the many with their ideas and are so blatantly stubborn in their efforts that they will not accept, “Yeah, it is cool, but nothing like Misawa & Kobashi vs. Kawada & Taue, 6/9/95.” That is an obvious debate winner, busting out one of the top two tag matches of all-time, but the thought is the same. Some people simply cannot accept different opinions and thoughts that conflict with those ideas and opinions of their own. Nevertheless, I am no different. I just said that 6/9/95 is one of the greatest tag matches of all-time. It would take a considerable effort to create disaffirmation in me from that particular thinking. However, there are other cases where my opinions can be easily changed, modified, and/or altered. This is not one of those cases, though.

 

However, with the issue at hand, I am more than a little surprised that this discussion has lasted this long. Like I said earlier on, PG-13 is a cool team, but they are not top twenty material. Sure, plenty of distinctions can be made to enhance them further in their positioning, such as “In America, in the 90’s, and not in any major promotion.” Outside of that clear advantage, what advantage do they have over a team like the Steiner Brothers? The Steiner’s were clearly a better team, right? I don’t recall PG-13 kicking the shit out of Kensuke Sasaki, Hiroshi Hase, or Keiji Muto once, let alone a half a dozen times over a span of four years (or so). I have never seen PG-13’s name on the title history for the IWGP Tag Team Championships. PG-13 also never made it big in the NWA, WCW, New Japan, or the WWF like the Steiner’s did. Can anything PG-13 has ever done compare to the first Steiner’s vs. Sasaki & Hase match, which remind you, was in the top twenty of the DVDVR 1990s poll. On a workrate perspective, I am doubtful that PG-13’s chicken shit heel antics could overpower the Steiner Brothers suplexing jobbers all over the place or kicking the literal shit out of Japanese icons. Notwithstanding, not all of those questions could really answer the deeper question of whether or not big league experience and respectable accomplishments outweigh good matches and angles in a promotion not on TNT, USA, or the Samurai Network. Example: The Kings of Wrestling are better than Heath Slater and Justin Gabriel.

 

At any rate, there is a chance that a career retrospective compilation could change my opinion but their material would have to be so incredibly good that it is undeniable, which honestly, I think is not going to happen. I have been known to be wrong in the past, though.

So because the Steiners were more pushed and shot on their opponents, they are better? Because the Steiners wrestled on a bigger stage, they were better? Because other people like the Hase/Sasaki match (which I also like just fine, but we criticize people like Dave for defending matches by saying other people liked it), they are better? Not seeing it.

 

Also:

 

I am doubtful that PG-13’s chicken shit heel antics could overpower the Steiner Brothers suplexing jobbers all over the place or kicking the literal shit out of Japanese icons.

Am I to read this that because the Steiners would win a wrestling match, they are a better team?

[smkelly]

Notwithstanding, not all of those questions could really answer the deeper question of whether or not big league experience and respectable accomplishments outweigh good matches and angles in a promotion not on TNT, USA, or the Samurai Network.

[Dylan Waco]

So Hogan is at worst a serious contender for the best in ring wrestler of all time and it's impossible to debate his work opposite that of say Bryan Danielson because Danielson doesn't have the big league accomplishments, et?

[smkelly]

Oh, don't get all hissy. I've already said PG-13 is cool.

 

It's like comparing a minor league baseball player to a major league baseball player. Pretty basic stuff, really.

[Dylan Waco]

I'm not getting hissy. I'm asking a question that draws upon the logic you offered above. You don't have to answer it if you don't want to, but there really is no sense in dragging this thread down with name calling either.

[smkelly]

Notwithstanding, not all of those questions could really answer the deeper question of whether or not big league experience and respectable accomplishments outweigh good matches and angles in a promotion not on TNT, USA, or the Samurai Network.

Again.

 

Further:

 

Minor League baseball player versus Major League baseball player

 

Which one is better?

 

Or:

 

College basketball player versus Professional basketball player

 

Which one is better?

 

Last one:

 

College football player versus Professional football player

 

Which one is better?

 

In sports the former becomes the latter when they are exceptional, usually. There are cases of extraordinary talent in the Minors not making it in the Majors, or not going to the Majors at all. But there are also times where an average athlete at the minor level becomes a sensation in the majors.

 

Danielson vs. Hogan question:

If you had read the quoted piece of my post in response to Loss' questioning you would have never posed the question in the first place. I plainly state that I cannot find an answer to the, for a fourth time mind you, "whether or not big league experience and respectable accomplishments outweigh good matches and angles in a promotion not on TNT, USA, or the Samurai Network." The key word is fairly obvious there.

 

The point is, the Steiner's have accomplished far more than PG-13 ever could imagine, but since it is pro wrestling where exposure and marketing counts for something, it is not a fair comparison to make considering one side outweighs the other by a considerable amount. It's like comparing Hogan to Danielson. It is unfair by a large margin. If PG-13 and Danielson had been given the same opportunities of marketing, exposure, and accomplishments, they would undoubtedly be seen as the superior wrestlers. Even still, Danielson is no question better than Hogan in terms of actual wrestling ability, big leagues or not. Whether PG-13 is better then the Steiner's...not quite sold on it just yet.

 

Anyway, Dylan, your pimping of PG-13 has made me more and more eager to see more and more of them, so congrats on that. I'm glad this topic has been brought up.

[elliott]

Where do Steamboat & Youngblood fit in to this discussion? I've only seen a handful of their matches, but one of them was the cage match vs Slaughter/Kernodle which was amazing of course.

 

Elliott

[Victator]

So Hogan is at worst a serious contender for the best in ring wrestler of all time

This is true.

[MJH]

Whilst the idea that "Steiners > PG-13 because they won more titles in bigger companies" is a ludicrous assertion and holds no weight whatsoever in a discussion of who were, and who age as, the best in-ring team... there is something to be addressed as to why PG-13 didn't have more success if we are to sit here a decade-and-a-bit later and say that they were the (or a serious contender for) best in-ring team of the '90s in the US. Even their ECW run wasn't much. Now, with people like Lawler and Dundee, Memphis was a thriving territory where Lawler was the biggest star for life and part-owner... USWA/SMW in the mid-'90s though are/were hardly the extent of anyone's ambitions. Was their act too "small-time"? Were they too small? Were they born 10/15 years too late for what they did? Is there anyone we would agree was a great worker/s who didn't get over in a single big league environment? For all we might talk about the political backstabbing etc nature of wrestling, top talent have always gotten themselves over to at least a solid mid card spot on a big league level, right?

[Victator]

JC Ice was way too small to ever make it. He was probably too small to make it in ECW. They might of did better in the WWF if not Ice causing trouble. Wolfie didn't make it because of JC Ice.

[Dylan Waco]

JC Ice was way too small to ever make it. He was probably too small to make it in ECW. They might of did better in the WWF if not Ice causing trouble. Wolfie didn't make it because of JC Ice.

I agree with all of that. Combine this with the fact that they really got rolling right as tag wrestling died in the U.S. and I think it is pretty clear why they didn't get a bigger break/didn't pan out in the bigs.

 

Too small? check

 

Bad attitudes/crazy behavior? check

 

Lack of well placed political allies/friends? check

 

Death of the emphasis on tag wrestling across the board? check

 

It's hard to say "they would have been huge stars in 80's" because of the fact that their gimmick itself was a spoof of 90's cultural quirk. But I think those two guys tagging as a unit in the South would have been far more succesful in the 80s

[Tim Evans]

Wasn't Wolfie a pretty bid deal in TNA when they first started as Slash in the New Church?

[Victator]

Wolfie as Slash was one of the best things about TNA. Which is not saying much but he was really good there.

[Dylan Waco]

Expanding briefly on the Steiners v. PG-13 comp, but another reason I would lean strongly toward PG-13 in a head to head is that PG-13 is one of a very small number of tag teams in history that are on the Steiner's level offensively. That will seem like heresy to some given some of the Steiners more emphasis spots and big moments and believe me I love them. The fucking crossbody/devestation device combo at WW91 and Knobbs getting spiked on the Frankensteiner are two of my favorite "holy shit!" spots ever.

 

Having said that the Steiners are almost entirely an offensive team. No one watches the Steiners for any other reason. On top of that MOST of their best spots are spots each guy individual does - usually Scott. I like the DDT/Bulldog double team variations but that was not the offensive identity of the team. PG-13 I think almost definitely had better and more varied double team spots, whether it be the double plancha, the misdirection clothesline, one guy using other as wheelbarrow for a legdrop, et. But even in the individual spots they were awfully good and unique. Seriously, Wolfie's rana into a face first turnbuckle smash is one of the most unknown "that was awesome!" spots of the 90s.

 

Anyhow my point is that even in the ONE area that defines the Steiners and has historically made them recognizable as a great team, you could make a case without much of a stretch that PG-13 were their equal

[Mr Wrestling X]

PG-13 I think almost definitely had better and more varied double team spots, whether it be the double plancha, the misdirection clothesline, one guy using other as wheelbarrow for a legdrop, et. But even in the individual spots they were awfully good and unique. Seriously, Wolfie's rana into a face first turnbuckle smash is one of the most unknown "that was awesome!" spots of the 90s.

I do agree with this, however it should be noted that several teams were coming up with newer spots in tag team matches. Just look at the amount of teams in ECW during the mid 90's who were known for their unique spots. The Eliminators, Sabu and Rob Van Dam, The FBI, The Dudley's and The BWO are just a few teams that come to mind when you think of "better and more varied double team spots".

 

Comparing them to the Steiner's however, PG-13 probably win in the spot department. In the early 90's some of the stuff the Steiner's were doing was stuff nobody had ever seen, however they failed to progress from that and thats what PG-13 did right, they modernised their repotoire and kept it fresh.