Dooley Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Any more than someone watching a football/baseball game goes "I could have caught that"? People will armchair QB any sort of sports or entertainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 What authority is this hooking the leg thing from because watch ANY WWF show from 85 to 95 and you can bet you'll see a leg hooked in almost every match. They DID hook the leg. Maybe they were told not to hook the leg for 2 counts so Gorilla could make that call? Anyway, it seems a tiny tiny thing to pick him up for. What about all the times he said "backdrop AND A BEAUTY" when Hercules Hernandez did the shittest backdrop you've ever seen? What about all the times he shilled Bret for being "the excellence of execution"? Seems absurd to me to say he buried people just because he'd always pick up on not hooking the leg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Yes, but the goals of sports announcers and wrestling announcers are different. Wrestling announcers aren't supposed to be honest, they're supposed to make everyone who the promotion wants to look great look great. Bret Hart was a key guy in the early 90s, and getting criticized for not hooking the legs during the Five Moves of Doom pin attempts -- even if it didn't *bury* Bret, it didn't point out anything particularly useful either. Again, I don't think it's a big deal to point out those things if it's not part of the house style not to do them. NWA announcers would point out things like babyfaces letting their emotions get the best of them, but the focus was then more on how smart the heel was for luring the babyface into the false sense of security. I agree with Dave that pointing out that no one ever submits from an abdominal stretch is a bad call ... but only if there's no further explanation. I remember Jim Ross selling the side headlock by saying Sting wasn't going to beat Flair with this hold and he knew it, but he was going to wear Flair down and keep him in a compromised position for as long as possible. The hold gets over, the wrestler gets over. These things have a trickle down affect on everything from the perception of the wrestlers to the heat holds get in the arenas. I strongly believe that a wrestling promotion can educate its fan to accept just about anything as important if they present it as such. No promotion more strongly proves that than the WWF. I should clarify something about Gorilla and Jesse that maybe we can all agree on -- I think they were good WWF-style announcers, meaning what they did nicely complemented the direction the WWF was taking, and they did a good job of doing a generalized selling of that direction. They were memorable, dynamic personalities and they are far from the worst announcers ever. On the specifics of wrestling talk, I think they were muddy at best (even Heenan, who was a riot). I realize the WWF's goal wasn't to present wrestling in a traditional way, but I thought we were debating these guys on the merits of their ability to traditionally call matches. If we're not, let's clarify that so I understand the battleground. I don't completely hate 80s WWF. It's far from my least favorite style of wrestling, but it's pretty far from my favorite as well. But I don't think I'm over-simplifying in saying Hogan and Vince can share 100% of the credit and/or blame for all the successes of that era. The WWF was not like other successful periods where there's a successful formula and everyone plays a role. This was Hogan Hogan Hogan Hogan Hogan and no one else that was on camera was critical to the company's success, meaning that they wouldn't have skipped a beat if they weren't around. I hope that explains my disagreeing with the idea that Vince and Jesse "sold" people on the WWF, because from what I could see, Hogan sold people on the WWF, and everyone else was lucky enough to be part of it. As Jerry said, some were in the right place at the right time and capitalized on it to become stars in their own right (Think Randy Savage) and some are pretty forgettable. I'd say Jesse and Gorilla are somewhere in between Savage and S.D. Jones on the not Hogan scale. There's nothing wrong with that, but there are quite a few people in that area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 I can't think of an instance of Gorilla hurting a match that had any hope of being good. The Tito/Savage no-DQ match from MSG. Not just Gorilla to be fair, but also Alfred Hayes and Ernie Ladd on color analysis. Even though Finkle shouts plain as day that there are no disqualifications, the three completely ignore that and spend the whole match bitching about the officiating and screaming for Savage to be DQ'd. I'm sort of agnostic about Gorilla as a HOF candidate and lean more towards the positive side than negative when looking at him overall. But that one match was a great one that I find to be a very tough watch because of the announcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 I can't think of an instance of Gorilla hurting a match that had any hope of being good. The Tito/Savage no-DQ match from MSG. Not just Gorilla to be fair, but also Alfred Hayes and Ernie Ladd on color analysis. Even though Finkle shouts plain as day that there are no disqualifications, the three completely ignore that and spend the whole match bitching about the officiating and screaming for Savage to be DQ'd. I'm sort of agnostic about Gorilla as a HOF candidate and lean more towards the positive side than negative when looking at him overall. But that one match was a great one that I find to be a very tough watch because of the announcing. Things like that used to happen all the time in all the promotions back then. Matches would be No DQ/ No count out and the refs seemed as if no one told them, as well as the announcers sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 I don't think it hurt the match. it made Gorilla look bad, but it wasn't the Tokyo Pop FMW commentators ruining a Fuyuki/Tanaka match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Jackson Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 I bitched about that match a few months ago in another thread. I believe my exact quote was "it is the worst commentated great match I've ever seen". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Gorilla and Jesse just felt so comfortable to listen to. It's tough to put it into words, but there really was a feeling of "I'm enjoying these two guys" that shone through, especially if it was an MSG Card on the MSG Network. There'd be a lot of boring "WWF early in the card" shit on those shows where Gorilla and Jesse made it watchable. And I always liked that Jesse and Gorilla always came off as being pals even if they disagreed. Jesse would even call Gorilla "Gino". I remember a very short lived "feud" between Ventura and Sammartino back then as well that was basically an announcer's feud. I remember Jesse in the ring and Bruno announcing with Vince and some sort of argument went on. It got dropped after, like, two weeks I think. Actually, any discussion about WWF TV announcing should include Bruno. Everyone's been pretty clear about whether or not they liked Gorilla..but Bruno was all over TV in the early to mid 80's and no one really talks about how bad he was. Especially for a guy who was and is incredibly well spoken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Instead, I would argue that those 80s WWF guys were simply talented performers and good at their jobs. WWF production was also good in making them seem good at their jobs and a Big Deal. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 What I don't get, is that no one seems to think guys like Monsoon/Ventura/Finkel were anything more than just good fits for what the WWF wanted to do at the time. If it was that simple, why has everyone else who's been doing those jobs since been so noticeably inferior? Ring announcing in particular has suffered, I don't think anyone can seriously say Tony Chimel and his ridiculous sing-song pattern are an improvement over Finkel. Justin Roberts is probably the least horrible guy in the role post-Fink and even he gets grating with how he seems to have a running contest over how long he can stretch out John Cena's name. They had to bring back Lilian recently so it seems like even WWE knows its something they could do better. Announcing has been even more abysmal, other than JR they haven't had an announcer who didn't generate channel changer heat since Vince gave up the headset. When they do find someone who seems like they could be okay, they get their ears screamed out until they quit or become an emotionless robot churning out Vince-speak. I honestly wish Vince would just go back to doing commentary since it doesn't seem like he can stand having anyone else do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLIK Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 What I don't get, is that no one seems to think guys like Monsoon/Ventura/Finkel were anything more than just good fits for what the WWF wanted to do at the time. If it was that simple, why has everyone else who's been doing those jobs since been so noticeably inferior? Ring announcing in particular has suffered, I don't think anyone can seriously say Tony Chimel and his ridiculous sing-song pattern are an improvement over Finkel. Justin Roberts is probably the least horrible guy in the role post-Fink and even he gets grating with how he seems to have a running contest over how long he can stretch out John Cena's name. They had to bring back Lilian recently so it seems like even WWE knows its something they could do better. Announcing has been even more abysmal, other than JR they haven't had an announcer who didn't generate channel changer heat since Vince gave up the headset. When they do find someone who seems like they could be okay, they get their ears screamed out until they quit or become an emotionless robot churning out Vince-speak. I honestly wish Vince would just go back to doing commentary since it doesn't seem like he can stand having anyone else do it. Don't worry, Naylor will save us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Instead, I would argue that those 80s WWF guys were simply talented performers and good at their jobs. WWF production was also good in making them seem good at their jobs and a Big Deal. John A guy like Okerlund had a good voice, nice phrasing and a good sense of timing. Considering he worked with pretty simple camera set-ups most of the time I don't know that production values had much to do with it. The interviews he used to do inside the arenas had better production values than other companies, especially the promotions that did studio tapings, but I don't really see what that has to do with Gene. Replace him with another guy and he would've been in the same set-up. With Gene it was all about the voice and the demeanour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 My case for Okerlund is forthcoming, see HoF thread soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Question about WWE's PPV announcing. Where were Monsoon/Ventura or Monsoon/Heenan actually do their announcing during an event? From their commentary it seems apparent that they're watching on monitors rather than the ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 On the Ventura tip, I forgot to mention that he's arguably the MVP at Wrestlemania 2 out of ANYONE on the card. He had to work with Lord Alfred and Elvira and he made it easily the best of the 3 commentary teams at that show. I don't understand anyone who doesn't rate Ventura as GOAT colour man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLIK Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 From their commentary it seems apparent that they're watching on monitors rather than the ring. That'sthe case for pretty much all your modern era announcers no matter whear they're placed in the arena. They get told to call what's being shown on tv rather then what's happening in ring since sometimes they differ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Question about WWE's PPV announcing. Where were Monsoon/Ventura or Monsoon/Heenan actually do their announcing during an event? From their commentary it seems apparent that they're watching on monitors rather than the ring. Sometimes it was the same as syndie TV, where they were on an elevated set-up back near the wrestler entrance. Other times it was upstairs in the pressbox. Heenan has always talked about being told to watch the monitors and not the ring when doing commentary. That's how they were able to react to certain camera shots and to people running in and so forth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khawk20 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 FWIW (and something I remembered doing some research on Dino Bravo's Quebec tenure), Vince used Mad Dog Vachon on commentary during some of their forays into the Montreal area. he even had a segment on WWF TV broadcast into the Quebec market called "Brunch with Mad Dog". The segment seemed to literally be Mad Dog asking various WWF stars what they like to eat for breakfast and lunch. Very, very odd. Sorry....carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 But who *watching* the program knew what the WWF's in-house working rules were? To the people watching at home it made perfect sense. That should count more than someone who views it through the eyes of "well Gorilla knew X was told not to hold the leg, what a douche". Sure, it made sense to those watching at home, as long as they're not thinking, "Wow, the Red Rooster is an idiot. No wonder he can't beat Mr. Perfect. I would remember to do that if I was in the ring, why can't this goofball?" Anyone thinking that would probably think the same thing about, say, anyone trying to punch Hogan while he's hulking up. Moving the story along by having someone carry the idiot ball is a hallmark of the WWF/E style, if not US wrestling in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 My post was about announcing and yours was about wrestling style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 My point was that Gorilla talking about hooking the leg wasn't a big deal because of the style. It might have hurt someone's heat in JCP, but the WWF was more kabuki dance than sporting competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 So if Gorilla is bad, what does that make Michael Cole? By that criteria, has WWE ever had a "good" play-by-play guy? Just Jim Ross, I guess? I liked Jesse Ventura, Bobby Heenan & JBL as color, but none of them were play-by-play. Tony Schiavone? Vince, himself? I've heard this argument before. I think Jericho brought it up in his book or something because I remember having the discussion in person with some friends of mine that are also wrestling fans. I think we all universally pretty much love any show with Gorilla/Ventura or Gorilla/Heenan as the commentary team. It's when you start putting in guys like Piper, Savage, Cole, & Lord Alfred Hayes that we shit on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 To be fair, the WWF was pretty bad at telegraphing skippable shows. If Sean Mooney and Lord Al were your commentary team it's most likely C Show Buffet Time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 The whole deal with Gorilla always cracks me up. When I was a teen watching WWF we all liked Gorilla, AND made fun of him at the same time. All the shit that's been said about him being bad, we loved BECAUSE it was so predictable and bad. "They're LITERALLY hanging from the rafters, Jess.", "Shot to the the external occipital protuberance", "You can cut the electricity in here with a knife!", "I wouldn't buy a used car from that guy", "You gotta hook the leg, you'd think ________ would know better.", etc, etc. I always liked that he seemed to be fond of Ken Patera for some reason, always calling him "Kenny". Monsoon was great BECAUSE of all his dopey shit. No one was watching and thinking "Boy, he's making so and so look bad." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 So if Gorilla is bad, what does that make Michael Cole? Utter shit, which he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.