shakla Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 I can't think of a single reason for Matysik. It's almost an insult to everyone else on the ballot. Not trying to justify him on the ballot, but he is a prolific author of sorts and he did say nice things about Dave in that HoF acceptance video. Who is a more modern/mainstream equivalent of Matysik? (EDIT: Thinking someone with a backstage or "non-wrestler" role in mainstream American wrestling from the last 20-25 years) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Well yeah he had more longevity against all the top guys of the era....Punk didn't have that and leaving when he did plus if he doesn't come back he won't have that. Edge benefited from the brand split more than just about anyone as he was able to have a world/WWE title to run with and to main event PPV's and house shows in an era when guys like Cena, HHH, Batista, Orton, etc were able to hold the other title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 The Grantland doofus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakla Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 The Grantland doofus? Was trying to think of someone more "in wrestling", not necessarily active, but more current and/or mainstream. Someone of a similar prestige who would qualify as a non-wrestler on the ballot. Nothing's really clicking. Wally Karbo? David Crockett? Zane Bresloff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 The Grantland doofus? Matysik was also an announcer and a booker. He's not just a WON personality, although I do admit to getting annoyed that he can't go two sentences without mentioning Brody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Re: Edge vs. Punk, I'm not sure how much longevity counts for if you have several long layoffs due to injury and WWE keeps pushing you on top long past your sell by date just because you were once red hot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Punk isn't one of the ten best guys on the ballot Since I know it will be well thought out and backed up with evidence, I'm curious about your opinion of Punk. I'm not averse to the notion of Punk as a Hall of Famer, but to me there is absolutely no good reason to vote for him now, especially with the new rule threatening a litany of candidates with resumes at least as good as - and in many cases clearly better than - his. But even setting that aside there are two problems I have with Punk relative to this years ballot. A. I think he's a borderline candidate at best at this point. This sounds more dismissive than I mean it to sound because I think it is possible that in five-ten years time Punk's argument on influence is going to have the sort of perspective it needs to be a really serious one. But it's too early to tell. As a star, he was not someone I saw as a top tier guy for very long at all, and in some ways I NEVER saw him as a top tier guy. He was a merch mover of note, but he's a guy who came out of his run as ace - which was really long - looking worse than he did coming in. That's not his fault, but it bothers me when thinking about him as a candidate. He is also a weird case of guy who's peak matches and angles are all time greats, but doesn't stand out as someone I could seriously consider an all time great worker. B. He's not one of the ten best guys on the ballot. He just isn't. I could run down the list of guys who I think he's a better candidate than, but not sure that's what you are asking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shining Wiz Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Punk isn't one of the ten best guys on the ballot Since I know it will be well thought out and backed up with evidence, I'm curious about your opinion of Punk. I'm not averse to the notion of Punk as a Hall of Famer, but to me there is absolutely no good reason to vote for him now, especially with the new rule threatening a litany of candidates with resumes at least as good as - and in many cases clearly better than - his. But even setting that aside there are two problems I have with Punk relative to this years ballot. A. I think he's a borderline candidate at best at this point. This sounds more dismissive than I mean it to sound because I think it is possible that in five-ten years time Punk's argument on influence is going to have the sort of perspective it needs to be a really serious one. But it's too early to tell. As a star, he was not someone I saw as a top tier guy for very long at all, and in some ways I NEVER saw him as a top tier guy. He was a merch mover of note, but he's a guy who came out of his run as ace - which was really long - looking worse than he did coming in. That's not his fault, but it bothers me when thinking about him as a candidate. He is also a weird case of guy who's peak matches and angles are all time greats, but doesn't stand out as someone I could seriously consider an all time great worker. B. He's not one of the ten best guys on the ballot. He just isn't. I could run down the list of guys who I think he's a better candidate than, but not sure that's what you are asking for. I was just curious.....actually sounds like we have similar thoughts in that Punk is an overachiever in that he had way better matches than his physical ability suggested he should have been capable of. I think that might be more of a mark in his favour to me than it seems to be to you, but I completely see what you're saying. Seems like a big problem is guys becoming eligible too early. I know wrestlers never really retire, so that can't be the point of eligibility, but 15 years after starting seems to invite issues like Tanahashi last year and Punk this year. But I don't have a vote, so it's no biggie to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 The Grantland doofus? Matysik was also an announcer and a booker. He's not just a WON personality, although I do admit to getting annoyed that he can't go two sentences without mentioning Brody. If Matysik (who I like BTW) is on the ballot for reasons like that then Peter Berkholtz from Houston should be on it too. They were almost exactly the same in many ways except Peter wasn't as good as an announcer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Yeah, I agree that Matysik isn't a strong candidate. I just thought the Grantland comparison was unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Yeah, I agree that Matysik isn't a strong candidate. I just thought the Grantland comparison was unfair. Anything involving Shoemaker is unfair especially his columns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 If I had to send my ballot by tonight at midnight, it would look like this. This is wildly preliminary, though, since we have weeks, so please try to sway me however you like. I FOLLOWED THE HISTORICAL PERFORMERS ERA CANDIDATES [Abstain] I FOLLOWED THE MODERN PERFORMERS IN U.S/CANADA CANDIDATES Junkyard Dog Ivan Koloff Dick Murdoch Rock & Roll Express (Ricky Morton & Robert Gibson) I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN JAPAN CANDIDATES [Abstain] I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN MEXICO CANDIDATES Brazo de Oro & Brazo de Plata & El Brazo Cien Caras Karloff Lagarde El Signo & El Texano & Negro Navarro I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN EUROPE CANDIDATES [Abstain] I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN AUSTRALIA/PACIFIC ISLANDS/PUERTO RICO CANDIDATES Carlos Colon Mark Lewin NON-WRESTLERS Dave Brown Howard Finkel Jimmy Hart Jerry Jarrett Gene Okerlund Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 How about Kevin Kelly then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Did anyone else in our little circle besides Dylan get a vote this year that previously haven't? I'm so confused by the changes that I have sort of checked out on the process already and am looking forward to podcast output / long articles on contenders at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheapshot Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 No Big Daddy love again Bix? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Bix, why are you abstaining from Japan? You follow that region. It should be a null vote instead? re: Matysik, every territory had office guys right? What makes him special? That he's a source for Meltzer is good for Meltzer readers, but I don't see what it has to do with the HOF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Talking to Bix and pretty shocked to find out Kevin Dunn is not in the WON HOF. The WWE's advanced television production has been key to their continued popularity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 An ECW Pitbull (dogface gremlin?) puppy dies every time Steve Austin says something positive about Kevin Dunn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 I'd argue that "WWE production" as an entity has been more important to their success than all but a handful of wrestlers. It's the key differentiator between WWE and everyone else. The rest look "second-rate" by comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 I don't disagree with you. I just don't think there's anyone more reviled than Dunn except for Russo when it comes to wrestling fandom, which probably makes him an argument that would be more of a headache than it's worth for Dave to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Bix, why are you abstaining from Japan? You follow that region. It should be a null vote instead? re: Matysik, every territory had office guys right? What makes him special? That he's a source for Meltzer is good for Meltzer readers, but I don't see what it has to do with the HOF. Is Jeff Walton in? The only argument I can see for Larry M is that he's done a lot to keep the memory of St. Louis alive, but is that HoF material? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Bix, why are you abstaining from Japan? You follow that region. It should be a null vote instead? I follow all of them. Essentially it comes down to two things: 1. Not wanting to null vote against not just Akiyama and Taue, who I was going to try to fit in before the rule change & new luchadores, but also Volk Han and Gran Hamada given the new rule. It doesn't mean I can never vote on Japan again if I abstain this year, though, 2. I was considering it anyway for the past year because it's the one region where people native to that country see their candidates very differently from the hardcore fans following their wrestling from afar. Not they were bad candidates, but nobody here sees Steve Williams, Kensuke Sasaki, Masa Saito, Seiji Sakaguchi (who hasn't made it in), etc as slam dunks the way the Japanese voters do. The Mexican and foreign lucha voters are much more in sync. re: Matysik, every territory had office guys right? What makes him special? That he's a source for Meltzer is good for Meltzer readers, but I don't see what it has to do with the HOF. Last year, in the thread about the post-HOF show with Bruce Mitchell, Dave wrote this in a post about Howard Finkel: Here's a comparison. Larry Matysik in the 70s and early 80s was considered, with Solie & Russell as one of the three best wrestling announcers. Most had him above Solie by the late 70s. He was so good and entrenched in his community that when Vince took over St. Louis, instead of Vince & Jesse, for years, Vince sent a tape to St. Louis and had Larry go in studio and do the TV for that market alone. He did that for no other territory. Eventually, he got tired of that. Should Larry be a Hall of Fame announcer? Probably not. If Vince hadn't made that call and Larry had a 35 year career as an announcer instead of 17 years, would he be a strong candidate? Yes? Is that fair to Larry? Perhaps not. If he grew up in Memphis instead of St. Louis, he'd have been Dave Brown and sat in that desk forever and never been replaced, since nobody ever replaced Lance & Dave and they stopped when they made the decision themselves in both cases. But "if he grew up in Memphis" isn't a Hall of Fame qualification. Fact is, of the announcers in, you have Lance at about 50 years, Solie at nearly 40, Dick Lane at nearly 30 (impressive since he was in his late 40s when television stations started, if he started at 30, he'd have had a 45 year run and he pulled off the Blassie-Tolos angle in his 70s), all who continued and were so strong locally that they left on their own as opposed to someone making the call. I was surprised that Dave said Larry was put at that level at the time and asked Dave for more details since, while he was good, I had no idea he was considered to have broken out of the pack of good announcers at the time (and listed a few of them). Dave responded with this (emphasis mine): In the 70s, long before I ever knew Larry Matysik, within wrestling it was always said Gordon Solie and Larry Matysik were the best pro wrestling announcers because in those days nobody gave anything that happened in Memphis any respect. Dick Lane had retired and really they had surpassed him by then anyway. I liked Frank Bonema a lot but he was too low key and dry to be the best. Worked in his market, but everyone worked in their market because people had nothing to compare anyone to. Miguel Alonzo had the rep of being really good but he only did Spanish Once, when Matysik came up to Minneapolis to work, I don't remember the circumstances behind it but he did a set of tapings, and my friends (we were an AWA market at the time) were all raving about this new announcer who was so much better than anyone but Solie, that was how great the disparity was and how obvious it was at the time. Vince got better, but in the 70s when it came to calling a match, he wasn't very good. Had some formula phrases and kept for long periods of time during matches which was kind of eerie being used to guys who called the ebb and flow of matches and told stories about what was going in, knew moves and what they meant. Honestly Vince was one of the worst during the 70s. Handling an interview he was really good. Rick Stewart was good but he came around later. I first saw him in KC but in the 70s the guy was Bill Kirsten who was your typical local wrestling announcer who was kind of corny, comfortable locally but if you didn't grow up with him he was pretty weak. Steve Stack was average at best (I thought below average, but I was comparing him to the people I'd seen), Bob Caudle was solid, he came off like a nice guy, trustworthy guy (which was a good trait for those days) but didn't bring anywhere close to the level of commentary Matysik or Solie could bring out of a match. Very much like Frank Bonema, not quite as knowledgeable about wrestling but more personality. Charlie Platt was average. Nice guy and liked wrestling, but dry and was just another guy. He was much better as Gordon's sidekick than as the lead guy on his own. Gene LeBell was really bad. Before the days of VCR's I listened to everyone and Matysik & Solie were the best and Solie's peak was really 1968-77. But they were the only ones if you listened on an audio tape and couldn't see the match where you could visualize the entire match and flow of the match. Everybody else you couldn't get that with. The guy in Detroit who I don't remember was good, and their TV ring announcer was great. Paul Boesch had a manner that made him ooze respect like he was a great human being or respected member of the community calling wrestling matches but not that he was a great wrestling announcer. It was like listening to a nice old man tell stories while a match was going on that he touched on but wasn't really that into. But he had a dignity about him that only Solie could touch. Bill Watts was excellent, but he also came around later. So his HOF case is more great announcer that happened to be an important part of the office as general manager and sometimes (assistant?) booker, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 That sounds like the biggest crock of crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Joe & Rich had me on Voices of Wrestling to go over the changes to the Hall of Fame: New rule, new candidates, new subregion, etc. Fun was had by all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 I will say this for Matysik after watching St. Louis stuff for the 80's set....he was way different than any other PBP announcer at the time as he didn't cheerlead for the babyfaces or anyone in particular. He played it right down the middle and fully would explain when a heel was cheating that if the referee didn't see it happen then he was doing what he had to do to win. Now of course if a heel was doing some wild and crazy stuff then yeah he would react but other than that it was right down the middle. Meltz's ranking of Larry isn't as far fetched as you would think as the other PBP guys of his era were the following WWF = Vince, Gorilla AWA = Rodger Kent, Gene Okerlund, Rod Troungard Memphis = Lance & Dave CWF = Solie GCW = Solie JCP = Bob Caudle, Rich Landrum, David Crockett Mid-South = Boyd Pierce & early Jim Ross World Class = Bill Mercer, Mark Lowrance Southwest = Steve Stack Houston = Paul Boesch & Peter Berkholtz Maple Leaf = Jack Reynolds Stampede = Ed Whelan WWA = Sam Menacker Southeastern = Les Thatcher, Charlie Platt, Rick Stewart I can definitely see Larry as high as #3 on that list behind Solie & Lance. 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.