Mad Dog Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 You at least had good matches in 1998. 1995 was brutal as the summer set in. The worst PPV main event ever in Diesel/Mabel and WCW was just an absolute mess as they were WWF-lite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 Summerslam was Pac v. Jarrett hair v. hair and Venis v. D-Lo for the Euro title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 I knew it was some configuration of that. D'Lo/Jarrett was 99 then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 I know not everyone agrees, but Wrestlemania XIV is one of my favourite Manias. It's just a fun show that really shows how hot the WWF was at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 Not be there and add absolutely nothing to the match. He didn't need to be there, the storyline shoved him into the match at the last minute. His presence weakness Austin as the lone wolf who needs no one's help. He shouldn't be there, and in the end all he does is to knock the match down even further. Â Outside of Austin's entrance and victory, I'd estimate Undertaker grabbing Patterson and chokeslamming him through the table was the biggest pop of the show. Â For something allegedly last minute, 'Taker's presence was pretty well-explained. Vince had to agree to Austin having a back-up in exchange for Austin dropping assault charges against him. From a wrestling storyline standpoint that makes perfect sense to me. Plus, while Austin was a lone wolf, he wasn't an idiot. There were four heels against him in that match, why shouldn't he try to leverage an advantage of his own? Â And intentionally or not, it added a bit of "you owe me one" intrigue in setting up their match at SummerSlam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 I actually agree with Bill. I'm not a big fan of 1998 either. Even though I was a lot younger back then & wrestling was super hot, I was a bigger fan of WCW in '97 I guess & sort of felt like the landscape was on the decline (other than the rise of Goldberg) in '98. I didn't know as much about wrestling back then but none of it stands up on rewatch really. I remember being really mad that WWF "won" instead of WCW. I also liked ECW in '99 as it was all new & different to me. I wasn't used to seeing things like table spots...but a lot of those garbage spots definitely don't hold up with 2014 eyes. Â Although earlier Bill mentioned that the commentators no sold the nWo still wanting to take over the company when it split into black & white Vs. red & black & I didn't even notice that kind of stuff the first time around. Gave me a laugh to hear it explained like that but it's so true. Â On MLW.com there's a podcast with Jim Cornette & Lance Storm where they talk about how the Attitude Era has done more long term damage than short term good. I'm not sure many people would argue against that but it was interesting to hear them talk about how wrestling has changed from being emotionally driven to physically driven. I think that would be a great discussion. I might make that thread, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 Remember when people thought Rock was making a mistake going into movies and leaving all that pro wrestling money on the table?  http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2014/07/21/robert-downey-jr-once-again-tops-forbes-list-of-top-earning-actors  I remember for years arguing that he just needed to make his Battleship Movie, that if a no talent like Steven Seagal could convert one such movie into a good paying career in Hollywood, then Rock could as well. Then I said that even if his movie career eventually stalled after a hit or two, he still had a Walker Texas Ranger television career to fall back on because Chuck fell back on that and cranked out 8 seasons, 200+ episodes of that garbage and got paid a damn good wage for it. I think I even throughout Nash Bridges where a washed up Don Johnson with a washed up side kick Cheech was able to grind out 6 years and 120+ episodes.  It's not even funnier: we're 12 years passed his The Scorpion King, and he hasn't yet had to fall back to TV for cash. Instead, he appears to be doing TV for fun, experience (as one of the Executive Producers) and connections (Wahlberg, Stephen Levinson, Peter Berg and Rob Weiss are serious players in tv).  Kudos to Rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Faulconer Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 I don't think any wrestling program can touch 1999 WWF but then late 1999 WCW came along and I had to reevaluate how I saw the world...of wrestling at that time. 1999 ECW was (with one hour a week on TNN) the best wrestling out of the US in 99. It didn't start out too well but by late fall ECW had stopped airing all of Anarchy Rulz on TNN and hit a groove with the arrival of Hidaka and Tanaka as regulars. Â 1998 WWF was better than 1999 WWF. Around October of 1998 the Attitude was starting to wear thin and I started to enjoy most WCW shows more than whatever WWF was throwing out there. There were still some good moments in 98 but as an overall package the WWF had peaked around SummerSlam. The gimmicks were becoming confusing and overdone around the time Yamaguchi-san wanted to choppy choppy Val Venis' pee pee but it wasn't until the RAW when Undertaker wanted to embalm Austin alive that I really lost confidence in the WWF to tell any good storylines. Â It was a shame too after the Dr. Austin skit was one of the greatest skits during the Attitude...or any other WWF years. WCW had more to enjoy on a match-by-match basis if you checked out WCWSN and Thunder and Worldwide (maybe even the Pro too if it was still around). The booking in WCW was so half-assed though that it made watching most main event feuds pointless. Most midcard feuds felt that way too actually. The WWF on the other hand put maximum effort out there every week but they were clearly running on fumes creatively around the time the WWF Title was held up. The writing wasn't always stellar before Oct. 98 but it at least felt fresh. From then on it was recycling/redoing/reinventing previous ideas. They were digestable the first time around but the second and third storyline cycles of 98 it just made me feel silly for putting up with it the first time around. Â I couldn't enjoy the payoff to the Survivor Series after sitting through a $29.95 episode of Monday Night RAW. There IS a happy medium between the boring as hell WrestleMania IV tournament and the extremely rushed go go style of the Survivor Series' tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyonthewall2983 Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 The WWE Network description of the first episode of The Main Event says it was the most watched wrestling program in American TV history. I'm curious, what kind of ratings did it pull that night and how did it hold up against the other networks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Ewiak Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 The WWE Network description of the first episode of The Main Event says it was the most watched wrestling program in American TV history. I'm curious, what kind of ratings did it pull that night and how did it hold up against the other networks? According to the Great Wiki, it drew a 15.2 rating and 33 million viewers. It was up against the beginning of ABC's TGIF lineup (Full House/Perfect Strangers) and Beauty on the Beast on CBS. Again, according to the Great Wiki, they were doing about 10-12 million homes on average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014  So I have some disposable income and I was thinking of getting either (or both) a Torch and/or Observer VIP membership. I've never read the Observer and I stopped subscribing to the Torch in 2001.  I was curious if you guys had any thoughts on these and would it be worth my time and investment?  Get an Observer/F4W sub. Personal bias, but I can't listen to Keller, he annoys the hell out of me, and the audio quality of his podcasts are ridiculously poor for something he expects people to pay money for. Say what you will about Alvarez, but the quality of audio on his pods is good, and he strives to deliver a clear and listenable product. Keller's pods are worse than amatuer level. Also, Keller and Bruce Mitchell's opinions and whiny talk just really annoys me. I enjoy listening to Dave, I enjoy listening to Bryan despite how out there and whacky he is sometimes......I can not listen to Keller or Mitchell without wanting to cut my ears off  Who's harder to listen to - Alvarez or Keller? Tough call. Funny thing is I enjoy Mitchell and feel Keller is good at directing conversation. Can't say the same about Alvarez trying to steer Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 I've been a Observer/F4W subscriber for a while, can't recommend it enough. Yeah, Alvarez has his unbearable moments (usually when he's doing his heel troll gimmick to someone like Todd Martin), but most of the audio shows are top notch. Bryan & Vinnie shows now feature Bryan's friend Craig once a week and he's been a great addition with his comedic deadpan timing usually eliciting lolz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eduardo James Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 Never really read the Torch, but have been a WON subscriber. I'd say it's worth it even if the message board is terrible (haven't checked it out in like a year though) and Alvarez can be unbearably obnoxious at times. I'd stick to the WON newsletter, WON radio and the Figure Four Dailys where Alvarez interviews people and can't turn into a gimmick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Man in Blak Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 Keller's constant shilling of VIP content during the Torch podcasts is far more tolerable to me than Alvarez, who is one of the most obnoxious people that I've ever heard on any podcast, wrestling or otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 Wasn't sure if I could lift this from the Bruce Mitchell thread on podcasts and publications, so I'll copy and paste. It's from Johnny P: Â I'm probably bias because I am friendly with Mitchell, and I've always stuck up for him when he's been smashed by other friends of mine, but he is a very talented, thoughtful man. He can be over the top, and he sticks to a premise of a sarcastic joke a little too long, but not having the greatest comedic timing isn't a prosecutable offense. Is he grating at times? Sure, he has those moments. He is certainly moralisitc to a fault, but I'd rather he be guilty of that than play to fast and loose. There are times the Torch goes after a story on a basis which I think is a bit to overly PC, sensative, or just reaching. But that does not invalidate them. My arguement has always been that if they did that 4 times I would still support them because that fifth time they'll be the voice making something clear when others might brush it under the rug. They ae a bit of a watchdog organization who believes is journalism and form. They are a necessary figure in pro wrestling journalism and columns. Mitchell has been at the front of that bus for over 20 yrs. And just for his history podcasts, fans like those here should at the very least appreciate the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 I just wish Bruce could find a new angle beyond trying to find the con in everything. It was great when he was writing about Global's mystery investor or the Gangstas angle. But when he's writing about Zayn-Cesaro from Arrival being some sort of nefarious plot by that tricky HHH to fool internet fans, it's beyond reaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 I just wish Bruce could find a new angle beyond trying to find the con in everything. It was great when he was writing about Global's mystery investor or the Gangstas angle. But when he's writing about Zayn-Cesaro from Arrival being some sort of nefarious plot by that tricky HHH to fool internet fans, it's beyond reaching. Completely agree. I had to skip over most of that rubbish. He's better talking old school stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 I'm going to be about 5 feet away from Foley for his show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted July 22, 2014 Report Share Posted July 22, 2014 Give him a slap from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted July 23, 2014 Report Share Posted July 23, 2014 anyone else remember the rumor that Undertaker's "creatures of the night" during the Kama feud were Shane and Stephanie McMahon? Â Â Â Â Â yeah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomethingSavage Posted July 23, 2014 Report Share Posted July 23, 2014 Watching some WWF from '97 recently, and yeah. Vince definitely went above & beyond to dig up the dinosaurs throughout the year. Hillbilly Jim was floating around. Honky Tonk Man was pretty prominent. Sheiky and Backlund were there with the Sultan. Brother Love returned momentarily to manage the Spider Nuns. Hell, even Lou Albano pops up during LOD & Godwinns grudge match at SummerSlam - and, sure enough, Vince is hinting on commentary that the Cap'N could be there scouting for a team to manage. Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted July 23, 2014 Report Share Posted July 23, 2014 Foley's show was really good. Not much new ground was covered if you've read his books but it was really fun. He did some Q&A afterwards. I got my picture taken with him afterwards, got a signed picture and talked with him for maybe 30 seconds. Overall, really fun evening and worth checking out if he comes to your area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blehschmidt Posted July 23, 2014 Report Share Posted July 23, 2014 I am going Thursday night in Pittsburgh. Â Do you think a non-wrestling fan would enjoy the show? My wife is coming with me, and apart from commenting that Chris Jericho was cute back in '98 she has no interest, and I am scared she is going to hate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted July 23, 2014 Report Share Posted July 23, 2014 My wife came and had a really good time but she was a fan in her younger days. He's a good storyteller and he's funny and it's not all wrestling so I think she'll get sucked in. And failing that, it's a comedy club and you can get her boozed up first. Â It looked like he was signing things people brought. I wish I had brought his book. The 8x10s are $10 and the t-shirts are $25. A picture with him was free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted July 23, 2014 Report Share Posted July 23, 2014 I saw him last year and had a good time. My wife thought he was hysterical. My buddy and I got a kick out of him telling the crowd to not be "that guy" - and "that guy" being the one who asks if it hurt when he got thrown off the cell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts