JerryvonKramer Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Where the Big Boys Play #34 – Clash of the Champions 6 Chad and Parv review Clash of the Champions 6: Ragin’ Cajun. In this episode: Wrestling Observer roundup from March 1989 including disciplinarian George Scott’s 13 new rules for the locker room and a look at Meltzer’s top 100 workers from then, tag match structure with two face-in-peril sequences, a first look at The Great Muta, Parv in liking matwork shocker, the Road Warriors’ 4-year streak of being unpinned, it’s Ranger Ross!, in-depth analysis of Flair vs. Steamboat including ‘the four faces of Flair’ theory, roundup of listener comments and some plugs and recommendations for recent podcasts by other people we like and forum activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Solomon Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 The top 100 lists that Meltzer used to do were a semi regular occurance on the Observer. He did it as far back as 1983 as I have Observers from 83-86. The emphasis was on work rate from what I remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Dave was always down on Jumbo, it seemed. All his great matches were either due to his opponent or the exception because Jumbo would take the night off if the card wasn't televised. Obviously most of us don't agree with either statement, but that was a lot of the prevailing opinion at the time, including Dave's wrestler sources. I have no clue what was up with the Stan Hansen ranking, unless Dave simply thought he was at the end of the line. I didn't see any indication that was the case just looking at his '89 work and hindsight sure doesn't support it. Re: George Scott's "rules." A lot of these were throwbacks to his days running Mid-Atlantic in the 1970's. From what I understand Scott was a major stickler for details much the same way Bill Watts was. That extended not only to how matches would be worked, but quality-control stuff: wrestlers were not to appear in ring gear if they weren't scheduled to wrestle, wrestlers had to change clothes between appearances if they were taping multiple weeks of television/multiple shows in one shot, etc. Mid-Atlantic house shows were all built around the main event or MAYBE a semi-main too, with the rest being undercard/mid-card matches. No question as to what "drew" or issues with depth--meaningless or otherwise--here. Cards built from prelim vs. prelim matches to the lower-mid-card stuff, which was "before intermission." None of those were even mentioned on television in advance. Then came the upper-carders and main event. And it's the stuff "before intermission" that had the most restrictions. The thinking was that if Abe Jacobs and Larry Sharpe are working the mic, brawling on the floor, or posting each other in the opener, then what's the main event going to do? The early matches were meant to be wrestled mostly cleanly so that the rules could be established and followed to increase the heat when the upper-carders broke them later. That said, wrestling had sort of moved on in the interim and particularly for a show like a Clash or a PPV the shows can't be structured the same way at all. You have main eventers and matches that mean more than others, but ideally a majority of matches on a Clash or PPV should be "special" in some way. In some ways I appreciate Scott's efforts to throw things back the way Watts also would attempt to do, but in others it really shows that Scott was out-of-touch with how a wrestling company in 1989 needed to be run. Just as much as with the disastrous advertising job that almost ruined this show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Thanks for these comments guys. Pete what do you know about that advertising campaign because on the show we are both just utterly in shock at the idea that only 900 tickets were sold the Sunday before the show. What were they doing? They had over 3 hours of national TV a week on TBS and in syndication. The Flair-Steamboat feud had been booked well. The feud was hot. The Chi-Town show had produced one of the greatest matches anyone had seen for years so what the hell were they doing? I mean George Scott quit (and probably would have been fired), but he can't carry sole blame for this. Turner had all the resources you could hope for to push this show, so what gives? It sickens me. ----- I know this is a long show, but when people get to the main event would love to hear thoughts on Flair vs. Steamboat both in terms of what you think of the match and if you still have it in the greatest match conversation (or is it considered passe now?) I don't think either of us had watched it as closely or as analytically as we did here before, and honestly I saw levels that had escaped me in the past. I really love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 As I understand it, Scott thought giving Flair/Steamboat away on free TV would be detrimental to house show business. As a result, the 900 tickets sold was less about an advertising fuckup and more like deliberate sabotage to order to underplay the match as much as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Disgraceful how much Flair vs. Steamboat flopped at the box office. I would never call it a blood feud along the lines of what Flair/Funk will do later in the year but damn they really lay into each other in these matches and their is a lot less sportsmanlike aspects than I remembered watching these first two matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 30, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 As I understand it, Scott thought giving Flair/Steamboat away on free TV would be detrimental to house show business. As a result, the 900 tickets sold was less about an advertising fuckup and more like deliberate sabotage to order to underplay the match as much as possible. Really? That's pretty douchey. Didn't he understand they were up against Wrestlemania that night and that seeing NWA's top talent in an empty stadium might be more detrimental to house show business than them giving away their headline match for free? Also, if that was his plan, booking the New Orleans Super Dome is just positiviely crazy. That place has a capacity of 70,000. I don't actually understand why they booked the Super Dome anyway. When had JCP/NWA EVER done a gate of that many? Through all these shows I don't recall a show going much over 15,000. Starrcade 83 drew about that. Whoever got the idea that they could even fill the Super Dome to HALF capacity? Especially when nut-job Scott is running around sabotaging the advertising. Just nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 I would assume the Superdome was capable of being set up as more or less "arena"-sized--the Silverdome was for house shows and for Pistons basketball. It still was a worse option than the 10,000-seat Lakefront Arena or the 7,000-seat Municipal Auditorium if they insisted on running New Orleans. On top of the advertising, running a dome killed what meager demand for tickets there was because of over-supply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Also if I'm not mistaking the ppv companies offered this date to Turner for a ppv because Vince was playing hardball. Turner booked this show as a ppv, but Vince and the ppv providers made peace. Though Turner had booked the Superdome for a ppv show. Instead they ran it as a Clash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Meltzer was talking about earlier in the year this date being a PPV but it being held in the Omni. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 I just wanted to say this might have been the best show the 2 of you have done together. You guys had some good analysis of the main event. Also I don't think it was Scott who booked the finish. I thought it was Flair who changed it to what we got to set up rematches for a heel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Thanks a lot Shoe. Clash 6 is a real fun show overall and the main event held up. I was actually slightly dreading watching it based on a. me thinking I might be too nitpicky on the match and b. I am sure its a match we have seen multiple times so it doesn't seem like unchartered waters. However, when watching the match real analytically you do pick up on little themes and developments that just enrich the match. A true classic all around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebrainfollower Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 I'm just not a huge fan of 60 minute matches. I've never encountered one where I haven't gone off and done something else for a bit while it's playing and while I have a few friends who'll watch any wrestling with me, if I suggest anything over 30 minutes they protest. But for in ring bell to bell action this is probably the greatest match we'll ever see (in terms of storyline, emotional involvement and other extraneous stuff I would rather watch the Savage-Warrior WM match if all the post match stuff is concerned. That's the closest Vince ever actually came to doing what he wants to do, transcend wrestling into entertainment that matches any movie or TV show for emotional kick). Listening to all these rules of George Scott, it's shocking he lasted as long as WWF booker as he did (84-86 right?). The story I've always heard is that Hogan and Piper went to Vince to get him fired in mid 86, claiming that he was too focused on his Carolina boys. But let's look at that for a second. Steamboat's biggest storyline didn't begin until after Scott was fired. Valentine, well yeah he went from IC and tag champ to mid card tag team member but who else is there that was getting this supposed favored treatment? Does anyone else know if Scott imposed these same rules during his run as WWF booker at the start of the boom period? And yes booking a 70,000 seat arena was simply insane. WCW was entering a phase where 10,000 people at a show paid was nigh high impossible so I don't know what they were thinking here. This must be the best example of Turner's hands off disinterested attitude towards WCW coming back to bite them in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Jackson Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 The comments about Scott motivated me to do a little research. According to Slam! (http://slam.canoe.ca/SlamWrestlingBiosS/sc...ge_wwf-can.html--a series of interviews with Scott that may also shed some light on his 89 WCW booking stint) Scott quit the WWF and wasn't fired. He had problems with the rampant drug abuse in the company and clashed with Hogan over it, in particular when Hogan allowed some "unsavoury characters" to hang around backstage at an MSG show, which led to a "big argument" between the two. Piper isn't mentioned as being someone who had problems with Scott, but Hogan definitely was, and apparently a lot of his problems with Scott, besides the drug stuff, stemmed from wanting to make sure his buddies were pushed or at least given spots on the roster and Scott resisting. And in the end, Scott claims it was burnout from the workload that led to his departure in 86 more than anything. Edit: It looks like the interviews only cover his time as booker in 70s Mid-Atlantic and 80s WWF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJRogers Posted February 5, 2013 Report Share Posted February 5, 2013 Quick question, and this is quite some time down the road for you guys, but have you thought about how to cover the "Internet Pay Per Listen" events that happened around 1997-1998? I wouldn't be surprised if the shows can be found...ehem...by certain means on the interwebs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted February 5, 2013 Report Share Posted February 5, 2013 We haven't discussed those but i wouldn't be opposed to doing them when we get there in 2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebrainfollower Posted February 5, 2013 Report Share Posted February 5, 2013 The Halloween Havoc 90 stuff was great for a laugh soup, thanks for the mention of that. Waiting for Wrestlewar 89 with baited breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted February 5, 2013 Report Share Posted February 5, 2013 Thanks Brain, it was good to take a week off but I am itching to get back to it this weekend. In many ways Halloween Havoc 90 is the perfect WCW show, some great southern wrestling, some good brawl matches, and a whole lot of stupid. 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.