Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Money Inc. vs. Beer Money Inc.


JerryvonKramer
 Share

Recommended Posts

I decided to do a random google search on this earlier and this thread came up from Wrestlezone: http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=70524

 

It's fairly clear to me reading that, that probably not one of those posters genuinely watched WWF in the early 90s. It's clear that they are mainly fronting it out.

 

The general consensus there is that DiBiase is obviously the best worker out of the four, but Rotunda probably the worst "although underrated".

 

A lot of weight seems to be given to Money Inc's three tag title wins and WHO they won them against: Legion of Doom, Natural Disasters and the Steiners.

 

Now both you and I know that 1) they have got this information from looking it up on Wikipedia and 2) two of those title wins came at house shows of which, I'm fairly sure, no footage exists.

 

Point is, none of the people in this thread are in any sort of position to vote because it's clear that they only really know the work of Beer Money Inc. and are voting for Money Inc. based soley on their reputation, or their apparent reputation from reading their Wiki page.

 

I would like you to have a bash at doing this properly. Which is the better team and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thought it might be an interesting critical exercise. Not least because it is not clear to me which way people will call it.

 

And they have similar names, which makes the thread very very slightly more justifiable than something completely random like "The Godwins vs. Dino Bravo and Earthquake". I mean it is still completely random, but at least the fact that the two teams have similar names gives the appearance of it being a more substantial question.

 

Have I sold it to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first problem is that an outside discussion is being brought up here. Some times its kosher, but that generally involves something more important than a 90s WWF tag team going against a TNA team. Dylan made the PG-13 thread in pursuit of getting more people to enrich their viewing priorities with a team he thought were not placed in fair enough light. Weigh this thread against that of Dylan's. What is the point you are trying to get across? What is your goal?

 

Second problem is that you keep trying to measure pro wrestling in an almost scientific manner. There is no equation, man. None that exist and are universal, that is. I could only watch only Michael Jordan games and still say he is the greatest basketball player of all-time. Might be naive of me sure, but really, it isn't a subject worth a ton of effort and/or in-depth analysis.

 

Third problem, which might not be the case at all, but times that I've seen cross threading going on, the member bringing it up is using what other members have said to further their argument at the other forum. Like I said though, might not be the case, I didn't even click on the link to check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's fairly clear to me reading that, that probably not one of those posters genuinely watched WWF in the early 90s.

I have no idea where you got that impression form, especially since most posters on this board are older than on many wrestling boards.

Hell, I sure watched all the Money Inc. there is to watch, and barely anything from Beer Money, for obvious reasons (TNA, argh !).

Money Inc. was two guys passed their prime, Beer Money is two young guys probably in theirs. Oustide of the name, I don't see much similarities at all. Money Inc. didn't exactly set the world on fire and is pretty much a sport on tag team wrestling radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's fairly clear to me reading that, that probably not one of those posters genuinely watched WWF in the early 90s.

I have no idea where you got that impression form, especially since most posters on this board are older than on many wrestling boards.

 

 

He's talking about some other board, bro. :) Why JerryK wants people's opinions here about it is a tad weird. It's like comparing the awesome Ralph Macchio movie "Crossroads" with the Britney Spears movie "Crossroads" just because they're both movies and they have the same name. No offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's talking about some other board, bro. :)

Oups, sorry then. Reading too fast, thinking too slow.

 

Why JerryK wants people's opinions here about it is a tad weird. It's like comparing the awesome Ralph Macchio movie "Crossroads" with the Britney Spears movie "Crossroads" just because they're both movies and they have the same name. No offense.

Ouch.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really justify this thread. I posted it as a piece of mild frippery. It was much more whimsical than anything else. I'm sometimes a whimsical and playful sort of poster.

 

By the way, I am not at all involved in the discussion or thread on the other board at all. It just came up on a google search. I have no agenda at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...