Loss Posted September 30, 2014 Report Share Posted September 30, 2014 I think everyone is being too tough on Parv. The guy is doing nothing but stepping outside of whatever fan bubble he has left, watching WoS, 90s All Japan, and pre-1980s footage that hasn't really been given the focus or attention it deserves. Of course everyone can prioritize what they want, but if I hadn't seen any Lou Thesz or any Low Ki and time was of the essence, I'd probably focus more on Thesz for the same reasons Parv mentioned. He was the first world-traveled wrestler of his kind and defined his generation. That's not to take anything away from the indy wrestlers mentioned - time permitting, I'll see at least a few matches from all the names listed here. Now all of that said, Parv, here's what I think you were looking for. These are the guys that ended up missing out on a bigger platform because of the decline of ECW and WCW. In a way, you're looking at many guys who really established a new norm. They were able to create interest and demand with no wider platform, and I think it's worth studying the wrestlers who excelled in this environment and seeing how they pulled it off. If you want a music analogy, imagine that all but one record label self-destructed. Anyone who doesn't fit the preconceived notion that the remaining record label has of what a successful act looks and sounds like has to find other ways to get noticed with an almost total absence of platform to do it. It really is a fascinating story and I don't think it just comes down to wrestling fans wanting wrestling. Indy wrestling has had peaks and troughs since 2001 which has generally coincided with the rise and fall of some key stars. Punk and Bryan made it to the big leagues and became stars, but not everyone who was worthwhile in that time period did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted September 30, 2014 Report Share Posted September 30, 2014 To me Parv's just trying to prioritize. He wants to do his due diligence. Having time is an issue. Should Parv watch 10 Johnny Saint matches, 10 Tracy Smothers matches, 10 Jerry Lynn match or 10 Quack matches. I think after 10 matches of someone you can flesh a wrestler out. That's a number for me, not a universal number that should be used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted September 30, 2014 Report Share Posted September 30, 2014 Out of interest Parv, how much time are you honestly willing to invest in due diligence on the 2000s? Because I'm pretty sure we as a collective can make you a short remedial viewing list to get you going. I could put together 10-20 matches from WWE that give a good overview of the top workers at their best. The relevant people could do the same for puro, lucha and the dreaded indy scene. Then if a particular wrestler/match/style jumps out at you, you can look into it. If not, you at least took a bite just to make sure you didn't like it. I am happy to watch matches of guys who genuinely have a realistic shot of the top 100. I intend on watching a decent sampling of Daniel Bryan for example. I'll happily even watch Tanahashi because a significant cross section of fans think he's a great worker. I'll watch Rey Mysterio. Kurt Angle. Cena. This isn't a period thing. I know it looks like it because everyone knows my leanings, but it's simply a case of "who is really worth my limited time?" I'll give you a good example. Paul Orndorff. Look at the responses in that thread: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/28881-mr-wonderful-paul-orndorff/ Nobody really puts Orndorff forward as a GOAT type candidate. Will dealt with him in two words ("no chance"). I'm not going to be spending an extra second watching Orndorff matches because I already know he's not a top 100 guy. If you remember I objected to The Mountie being nominated as a waste of time, because I don't see him making anyone's list. There's being comprehensive and then there's being ridiculous. I'm not looking at every 70s worker, I'm looking at ones who were pimped for at least a generation or more as GOATs. Guys who routinely finish top of Top 100 lists put together by respected historians and so on. Look at Matysik's Top 50. Guys like Billy Robinson deserve attention because a significant amount of people think he's one of the best technical wrestlers of all time. I was really asking, "who out of these guys is worth looking at REALLY?" There's no point in me spending 5 hours watching extra matches from a guy like Tonga Kid / Samoan Savage, he has no shot at the 100 at all. Is Quack worth the 5 hours? Maybe he is, I'm just looking for some good reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted September 30, 2014 Report Share Posted September 30, 2014 Low Ki Mike Quackenbush Austin Aries Nigel McGuinness Those are the four I could see you possible throwing on your list and I would recommend watching them along with Chris Hero, Bryan, Claudio and Generico (even though I don't think you will be much of a fan, he will get more high end votes than almost everyone else). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted September 30, 2014 Report Share Posted September 30, 2014 I think everyone is being too tough on Parv. The guy is doing nothing but stepping outside of whatever fan bubble he has left, watching WoS, 90s All Japan, and pre-1980s footage that hasn't really been given the focus or attention it deserves. Of course everyone can prioritize what they want, but if I hadn't seen any Lou Thesz or any Low Ki and time was of the essence, I'd probably focus more on Thesz for the same reasons Parv mentioned. He was the first world-traveled wrestler of his kind and defined his generation. That's not to take anything away from the indy wrestlers mentioned - time permitting, I'll see at least a few matches from all the names listed here. Now all of that said, Parv, here's what I think you were looking for. These are the guys that ended up missing out on a bigger platform because of the decline of ECW and WCW. In a way, you're looking at many guys who really established a new norm. They were able to create interest and demand with no wider platform, and I think it's worth studying the wrestlers who excelled in this environment and seeing how they pulled it off. If you want a music analogy, imagine that all but one record label self-destructed. Anyone who doesn't fit the preconceived notion that the remaining record label has of what a successful act looks and sounds like has to find other ways to get noticed with an almost total absence of platform to do it. It really is a fascinating story and I don't think it just comes down to wrestling fans wanting wrestling. Indy wrestling has had peaks and troughs since 2001 which has generally coincided with the rise and fall of some key stars. Punk and Bryan made it to the big leagues and became stars, but not everyone who was worthwhile in that time period did. One of the interesting things for me about the establishment of that "new norm" was the way they combined influences from all over the world and history. Yes, there are occasions when watching indy wrestling where you can tell what tapes a wrestler has been watching but there are also plenty of examples of guys making something new out of old ingredients. I think the best wrestlers of the indy boom did a good job of modernizing traditional wrestling tropes. Something like Aries vs McGuinness had All Japan style nearfalls and apron spots, traditional American face/heel dynamics, matwork that actually felt important, and MMA style positioning (guard positions, mounts, ground & pound). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W2BTD Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 A lot of the guys being talked about in this thread are 15-20 year pros. We aren't talking about green indie guys working tiny shows just getting started. What makes somebody like Jim Breaks (since he was the example) any more of a legitimate candidate for something like this than Quack or Aries or Joe? Nothing. Most of these guys are seasoned pro wrestlers, some on the back end of their primes at this point, with long resumes of great matches. Just not on TV. Hey, nobody can watch everything. Everyone has blind spots. I don't really care what any of you guys choose to watch or not watch, but to handwave an entire subset of workers and just assume they aren't worthy seems closed minded to me. The "they won't stack up to Thesz" argument is one I can't buy, not when I see some of the names from the past that have been nominated that I can easily make the same argument for, and the fact that this isn't a top ten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concrete1992 Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 I don't think anyone is being too tough on Parv, he just isn't saying the words h wants to say I understand prioritizing and that's what Parv wants to talk about but dropped his words at the door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 Started on Low Ki here: prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/29461-low-ki/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 I think Parv articulated his point well with the Paul Orndorff example. No need piling on the guy and I have given him a list of names that I have complete confidence he will at least give a curiosity look at before the project is over. Choices will have to be made in this project. I wouldn't begrudge Parv for not seeking out Ricochet unless YOU are willing to look at all the world of sport guys OJ dropped and the joshi guys and the lucha guys, etc. If you want to hold Parv up to a standard over everyone else with revisiting stuff, he consistently jumps over that hurdle and is willing to budge on his opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheapshot Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 I have the mindset as Parv to be fair. Could do with some primers myself here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 I'm sure if someone whose opinion Parv values wants him to take a look at a particular indy guy, he will. Half the board has looked at the Funks vs Abby/Shiek match because Parv wanted them to. He's looked at stuff I've suggested, etc. His criteria isn't unreasonable. That said, the idea of him watching a lot of Chikara is personally amusing to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Boricua Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 By all means, if there is any wrestler that someone feels should be considered go ahead and nominate them. The modern indie scene is one of my various 'blind spots' (I've seen some matches but probably not more than two dozen) and I would love to give everyone that is nominated their due consideration. But the key is to nominate them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concrete1992 Posted October 1, 2014 Report Share Posted October 1, 2014 I will bust on Parv till the cows come home, and I DO NOT live in the country! The Orndorff post makes sense but I already had a message in mind and refused to let it go. I'm with him with all my gaps I really just have to tackle the main players within the groups this round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted October 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2014 Little nudge here. I kind of feel like at least Aries and Steen need threads, but I don't want to be the guy to nominate either guy (especially Steen to be honest). Still someone should take that task upon themselves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shining Wiz Posted October 4, 2014 Report Share Posted October 4, 2014 Having a guy around who is a big enough fan if wrestling that, in spite of not enjoying the product put out for 20 (?) years or so, still goes out of his way to find old wrestling to watch and discuss is a big, big bonus for a project like this. Just as having lucha fans and puro fans and Indy fans is a big bonus. Even if I can be pretty assured of what style/era of wrestler is my preference, having others passionate about wrestling I am mostly blind to is a huge plus to this thing, and the part that is going to make it the most fun. Based on all the Lawler love, and whoever it is that ends every discussion with "....but not as much as I love Memphis guys" or variations thereof, I got my hands on 8 gigs of 82-83 Memphis that will be my background viewing for the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted October 4, 2014 Report Share Posted October 4, 2014 Little nudge here. I kind of feel like at least Aries and Steen need threads, but I don't want to be the guy to nominate either guy (especially Steen to be honest). Still someone should take that task upon themselvesWhen I first started reading the thread, I just figured Steen wasn't listed there because he had been nominated already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted October 4, 2014 Report Share Posted October 4, 2014 I think Parv has it right. Prioritize in the styles you are most interested in. I mean really, is Joe going to waste his time watching Bill Dundee matches? He'd rather light his face on fire or something. I know I am not going to waste my time on watching footage of people if I don't enjoy that wrestling style. Now, at the same time, if somebody comes along and says "Will, I know you are a huge Dick Murdoch fan. You should check out this Indy guy who works the mat like Dick, has punches almost as good as Dick and has amazing facial expressions like Dick. Oh, and by the way, he has some amazing matches that remind me of Dick's best". I would probably check that guy out. For Parv, I would say, "Parv, I know you like boring old guys with horseshoe haircuts. You should check out this indy guy who is boring as piss, always looks like he is on meds and has a really bad hairline." I think Parv would definitely check that guy out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbo Slice Posted October 4, 2014 Report Share Posted October 4, 2014 I feel like Parv would like the Brahman Brothers based on what Will just said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted October 4, 2014 Report Share Posted October 4, 2014 Happy to help Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 5, 2014 Report Share Posted October 5, 2014 Hey Will remember when we were recording five-hour podcasts about The Kinks and David Bowie that never seem to get released rather than "feuding" over Dory Jr and Dick Murdoch's place in the WON HoF? Where have all the good times gone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawho5 Posted October 5, 2014 Report Share Posted October 5, 2014 But the feuds are what bring in the fans, Parv. Will is just looking to put asses in the seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted October 5, 2014 Report Share Posted October 5, 2014 Hey Will remember when we were recording five-hour podcasts about The Kinks and David Bowie that never seem to get released rather than "feuding" over Dory Jr and Dick Murdoch's place in the WON HoF? Where have all the good times gone? Well, since Joe left the territory after throwing out the challenge, I had to turn on my tag team partner to keep things fresh. I imagine once Joe comes back and we start feuding over the legacy of this company, you and I will form an uneasy alliance to combat the vagabond Bruiser Brody-like no selling Joe before he runs out of the territory demanding a bigger payoff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 5, 2014 Report Share Posted October 5, 2014 I don't know Will, can I trust you anymore? It's going to be like Windham vs. Luger GAB 91, crowd is chanting "WE WANT LOSS" and then jdw walks out as your new manager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted October 5, 2014 Report Share Posted October 5, 2014 I don't see Loss taking a year long sabbatical to go post at the Figure 4 board. It would be closer to Hogan joining the NWO as crow Loss stalks us from the rafters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted October 7, 2014 Report Share Posted October 7, 2014 One thing I really don't like is the idea of guys going into matches looking to put on MOTYCs or ****+ matches. This aspect of ROH commentary has been extremely jarring to me and I've never been against anything so much in my life. I just hate that, so ass backwards. Wrestling that panders to the critics for god's sake! Entirely different too from the horsemen wanting to steal the show or whatever. Can't think of anything less authentic than that. If guys who worked ROH are going to make my list it'll be despite the environment, which is my least favourite ever in all the wrestling I've ever watched from anywhere, including modern WWE and TNA. 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.