Ric Flair (sigh)

[Jmare007]

Watch the Highspots shoot.......Flair does stuff like that on numerous occasions

Yep. Kinda surprised no one else in here brought it up. Flair told the exact same story on the HS shoot. No idea how or why but he's convinced himself he was there that night.

[goodhelmet]

If yo uare nejoying the wrestling yo uwatch, badass!!! At the same time we don't want PWO to become a place where you can't enjoy yourself and mark out a little. It shouldn't be a place where you get scolded by jdw every time you don't read an old thread before posting or feel like you have to write an essay to contribute. Having said that, keep writing and posting! We don't want this place to be a ghost town either.

[JerryvonKramer]

The guys Austin has on the show are either friends of his or guys he's a fan of, and the conversations are always just two guys shooting the shit. I loved the shows with Jay Mohr and Adam Corolla for example, they were a lot of fun, and if Austin had gotten serious with the interviews they would have not been as good. Expecting deep analysis and probing confrontational questions from that format is all wrong. That may occur on occasion, but that isn't the point. I like how he keeps it fun and lighthearted, and I think it brings the best out of his guests. Who cares if his guests BS, IT'S PRO-WRESTLING!!!

And Flair did give us some quite interesting stuff aside from all the fun. He argued that Crockett would have stayed in business if they'd stayed East of the Mississippi and given up trying to take the West Coast.

 

He talked about how he and Terry Funk worked their matches 50/50 on who called the match.

 

He talked about why he thought Dory Jr was a better worker than Bruno and about specific things each guy would do in the ring.

 

It's not like the stuff is completely worthless. You'll get occasional tidbits and insights. I know the "all wrestlers are carnies and lie all the time so nothing they have to say is of value ever ever" point of view is popular with some members of this board, but y'know Flair has legit wrestled in 1,000s of matches and can bring perspectives to bear that you'd never get from a Dave Meltzer. And Austin gives him a relaxed atmosphere to share them in.

[Loss]

I agree with Will on the balance. Everything in life in moderation. While we aren't here to just declare everything fucking awesome or sucky and walk away, pro wrestling being an entirely academic experience is majorly missing the point too. It's a balancing act, just like anything else. When in doubt, have fun.

[Log]

I think half the fun of listening to old wrestlers tell stories is the bullshit that comes out of it. We need more fables and tall tales and stuff.

 

I read Bob Dylan's "Chronicles". You wanna learn about Dylan's upbringing and his life and that kind of stuff, don't read it. It's Bob rambling about god-knows-what and devoting an entire chapter to the recording of Oh Mercy. I keep trying to read a Tom Waits biography. It's so much better to hear him tell his (obviously false) own stories.

 

I can look on wikipedia or whatever to find out what really happened in Ric Flair's life. It's so much more fun to have him tell it, bullshit and all.

[Matt D]

That is fun, of course. But it also would have been fun if Austin went.. "Ah, come on you jackass. You weren't there!" in his Austin voice and they both had a big laugh about it. I don't think anyone was actually think Austin should have started to contradict him like it was some sort of presidential debate. That's what we're for.

[evilclown]

That is fun, of course. But it also would have been fun if Austin went.. "Ah, come on you jackass. You weren't there!" in his Austin voice and they both had a big laugh about it. I don't think anyone was actually think Austin should have started to contradict him like it was some sort of presidential debate. That's what we're for.

A million times this. He doesn't have to turn into Professor Austin or message board Austin. But there's a way for peers to push peers that makes the whole experience even that much more fun. Sometimes Marc Maron, for example, strikes the balance nicely.

[cm funk]

Austin is just being himself on his podcast, more or less. I love Maron, but at his core he's a hyper neurotic over thinker, who obsesses over everything and owns multiple cats. Austin is a good ol' boy who just wants to shoot the shit with his pals and drink some beer and drive his truck and hang out with his dog.

 

I like listening to both of them, and if either one veered in the other direction I'd think it was shit

[WingedEagle]

Austin is just being himself on his podcast, more or less. I love Maron, but at his core he's a hyper neurotic over thinker, who obsesses over everything and owns multiple cats. Austin is a good ol' boy who just wants to shoot the shit with his pals and drink some beer and drive his truck and hang out with his dog.

 

I like listening to both of them, and if either one veered in the other direction I'd think it was shit

Exactly. I think Maron is thoughtfully and necessarily engaging with the type of guests he has and type of product he is looking to put out there. Its probably safe to say that Austin's show isn't reaching quite the same broad demographics, so whether its a conscientious decision or not (and I don't believe that it is the case but simply a question of who and what he is), providing a forum for wrestling guests to freely speak at length is absolutely what his audience is looking for.

[Log]

Maybe Austin just didn't know better?

[goodhelmet]

I don't think he did. His research is wikipedia and youtube.

[Death From Above]

In fairness that describes a lot of people on subjects much more important than wrestling now.

[ohtani's jacket]

I'm trying to think of a situation where an interviewer or a podcast host would correct a guest's memory of certain events in even a joking way. Seems like bad etiquette.

[goodhelmet]

I'm trying to think of a situation where an interviewer or a podcast host would correct a guest's memory of certain events in even a joking way. Seems like bad etiquette.

Agreed. I think the easiest thing for Austin to do is read the mailbag, have listeners point out Flair was not there when Brody died and move on. No need to argue with Flair on the air (if he did know which i don't think he did) and waste time on it.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Let me phrase this better... I am not saying analyzing wrestling can't be fun. I am saying it isn't the only reason to watch wrestling which nerds like us tend to do... analyze something to death without sitting back and enjoying what is going on before our eyes. Also, I have done enough podcasts with Johnny to know that he is quite capable of analyzing wrestling and knows what the difference between good and bad wrestling is in his view and he is quite capable of articulating that. Just watching wrestling for fun without analysis doesn't really do a place like this good because what the hell would there be to talk about. On the other hand, if you are so caught up in your analysis that the fun is not in the product but in your essay, I can't agree with that either.

Yeah, of course we all analyze wrestling. It's what we all do. But when you leave out "Was it fun?", you're leaving out the most important part of pro wrestling. I realize that intangibles fluster some like trying to explain humor to Mr. Data, but it's the most important part. Like, when I watch Magnum/ Tully...I can analyze it till the cows come home. But at the end of the day it's all about emotion. And it's the best match ever.

Edit: Here's an example. We just watched Backlund vs Hussein Arab from MSG. It's a "technical" fucking masterpiece in my opinion. It's also a fucking blast to watch. It was fucking fun.

[jdw]

I'm trying to think of a situation where an interviewer or a podcast host would correct a guest's memory of certain events in even a joking way. Seems like bad etiquette.

Interviewer? Beyond pro wrestling interviews? Happens all the time. Less often for the type that Austin was doing which is conversational shooting the shit. But interviews in general? Here are two that stick in my mind because of the author/film maker:

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cenk-uygur-dest...r-dinesh-dsouza

 

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heathe...sh-d-souza-over

 

Podcasts are a slightly different beast, and I certainly don't listen to enough to give a fully qualified answer. But even in limited listening to Simmons, I've heard him correct people. Not to the degree that, say, we do here. But if someone is wrong on something pretty obvious (say Tom Brady claiming the Colts and Peyton Manning ended the Pats undefeated season in the Super Bowl a few years back), Simmons would gently reel him in.

[jdw]

And just to be clear, I don't expect Austin to have corrected Flair. Who knows if Austin knows the facts on it, and it really isn't any skin off his back if Flair is lying. If Flair were on a Meltzer show, I would expect Dave to try to gently reel Ric in.

[KrisZ]

Speaking of Dave he noted how Ric said that he competed in 47 straight War Games matches which is quite the tall tale.

[Cross Face Chicken Wing]

The whole Brody segment of the podcast still irks me. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the banter between Austin and Flair -- two old hands shooting the shit -- but forget the argument about whether it was a journalistic type of interview (it wasn't, nor should it be) or if Flair was actually there (he wasn't, obviously).

 

If I'm just having a conversation with an old friend/colleague who is a pro wrestler -- whether it's being recorded for a podcast or not -- and that friend/colleague tells me that he went out and worked an hour long match right after another friend/colleague got stabbed to death in the shower, I'm going to say something.

 

"You did what?! You went to the ring while Brody, a fellow wrestler, bled out in the shower?! What the fuck were you thinking?!"

[cowboy hats]

haha, i don't think i've come across a podcaster that needs to be (and is) corrected more than simmons

[goodhelmet]

5560530[/url]']

The whole Brody segment of the podcast still irks me. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the banter between Austin and Flair -- two old hands shooting the shit -- but forget the argument about whether it was a journalistic type of interview (it wasn't, nor should it be) or if Flair was actually there (he wasn't, obviously).

 

If I'm just having a conversation with an old friend/colleague who is a pro wrestler -- whether it's being recorded for a podcast or not -- and that friend/colleague tells me that he went out and worked an hour long match right after another friend/colleague got stabbed to death in the shower, I'm going to say something.

 

"You did what?! You went to the ring while Brody, a fellow wrestler, bled out in the shower?! What the fuck were you thinking?!"

This is a great response!

[jdw]

The whole Brody segment of the podcast still irks me. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the banter between Austin and Flair -- two old hands shooting the shit -- but forget the argument about whether it was a journalistic type of interview (it wasn't, nor should it be) or if Flair was actually there (he wasn't, obviously).

 

If I'm just having a conversation with an old friend/colleague who is a pro wrestler -- whether it's being recorded for a podcast or not -- and that friend/colleague tells me that he went out and worked an hour long match right after another friend/colleague got stabbed to death in the shower, I'm going to say something.

 

"You did what?! You went to the ring while Brody, a fellow wrestler, bled out in the shower?! What the fuck were you thinking?!"

Okay... that's a good point, and a pretty reasonable way to look at it. Hadn't thought of it that way, and yeah... "Went out and worked an hour" does take Ric's bullshit to another level where follow up wouldn't be out of line.

[jdw]

haha, i don't think i've come across a podcaster that needs to be (and is) corrected more than simmons

There is that.

[goodhelmet]

The whole Brody segment of the podcast still irks me. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the banter between Austin and Flair -- two old hands shooting the shit -- but forget the argument about whether it was a journalistic type of interview (it wasn't, nor should it be) or if Flair was actually there (he wasn't, obviously).

 

If I'm just having a conversation with an old friend/colleague who is a pro wrestler -- whether it's being recorded for a podcast or not -- and that friend/colleague tells me that he went out and worked an hour long match right after another friend/colleague got stabbed to death in the shower, I'm going to say something.

 

"You did what?! You went to the ring while Brody, a fellow wrestler, bled out in the shower?! What the fuck were you thinking?!"

Okay... that's a good point, and a pretty reasonable way to look at it. Hadn't thought of it that way, and yeah... "Went out and worked an hour" does take Ric's bullshit to another level where follow up wouldn't be out of line.

 

I thought it was a great response after reading the post but I think it would be a horrible way to approach the subject. Flair's response... "You wrestled after Owen died on a WWF PPV".

[jdw]

More in the sense of that going through someone's head. I certainly wouldn't ask Ric it in that way.

 

I'm guessing Austin has talked about going out and wrestling after Owen died. I haven't read his book, and haven't looked for what he's said about it. That would be a tough question to ask Austin, and you'd have to come around to it in a circular fashion: talking about Owen, then talking about the night, then talking about what everyone was feeling, then talking about whether there was any talk of stopping the show, then how hard it was for him, and then perhaps getting to an "on reflection / in the years since then, do you think about doing anything differently..." type of a question.

 

Tough one to ask or get to the point of asking.