BigBadMick Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 This has been on my mind for a good while, ever since I found this place in early 2013. I PMed Grimmas the following a week ago - 'Another really good discussion you had was on the Christmas party. I liked Will's defense of watching the current product - just cos it's not the best ever doesn't mean it's not worthwhile, and as long as you can cherrypick good matches and angles it's worth keeping an eye on it. I never watch Raw live - generally get through it in less than an hour on Tuesdays. It's an interesting topic - the benefits/disadvantages of watching live/classic footage. There's the convenience of stockpiling stuff with classics to watch at your leisure, but you're sacrificing the sense of community with modern stuff.' Speaking for myself, I lean far more on old footage nowadays. And harass Shoe with thoughts on Texas wrestling as I go along Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted January 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Have a bit more time, so I'll expand on this. I had stopped watching Raw altogether after Night of Champions last year, just keeping up with the ppvs. I'd read reports and the general consensus was that it was skippable more often than not, and that was fine with me as I had other stuff to watch. Actually, the one exception was going out of my way to see Rollins v Orton. I've watched Raw since the New Year - when I say 'watched', I mean picked out around 40-50 minutes of matches/angles to breeze through. Instead, I've been going through loads of older stuff for the past 2 years - WCW ppvs and Clashes 1990-97, 80s AJPW, WWF 1990-97 and then 2002-12, Mid-South, 80s World Class. I just find it more satisfying to have a viewing project that I can go at really hard and heavy when time permits, rather than dipping in for a bit of this and that, randomly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButchReedMark Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I'm a lot better at watching live wrestling than older stuff, as I can have a bad habit at times of going straight to the finishes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I try to watch old wrestling as much as possible as if it is "live". As in, I try not to look at who won beforehand, I try to out out of mind exactly what happened. Sometimes you can't avoid that, but I find that most of the time you can. I pop and react to near falls etc as much during 70s matches as I do watching something "live". Since I was the one who launched the attack that Will was defending on that Christmas show, the context was that him and Tim and Grimmas had spent the past 2 hours moaning and moaning about WWE, and I had to raise the question of why they continue to watch it. I've said it before, the ONLY reason people watch stuff live now is to be part of the big conversation. Let's be honest here, the awfulness of the Royal Rumble was an event. We all sat through it. But then -- and come on admit it -- everyone relished the aftermath, the discussion, the podcast with Will, Dylan, Pete and co picking through the rubble. The fall out. Twitter. The observer reaction. Etc. Etc. THAT is what sustains watching "live". It's so much more about what you're going to say to your buddies than it is about experiencing the live thing or watching good wrestling. Even if sometimes you're going to get good matches. I'm not saying all that's a bad thing, just that people should admit it. Nothing to be embarrassed about really. For all the #cancelthenetwork stuff, I wonder how many peope actually did. Do they really want to miss out on the next big twitter event induced by WWE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted January 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Sorry Parv, I should have mentioned it was you and Will in that original conversation. 'I've said it before, the ONLY reason people watch stuff live now is to be part of the big conversation.' I'm wondering if that's true for me, because if so I don't think it's a good enough reason to keep up. Although, the only thing I was 'live' (ie, without having read spoilers first), is the PPVs. No way I'm sitting through entire Raws/Smackdowns - and I'm only checking out recommended parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted January 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Also, I care much more about good, decent matches (I'm not sure how to define that right now) than the entire product and storylines being up to scratch. I'm happy to get TNA matches from last year recommended to me and give them a go without getting too caught up in the wider context. I might differ from others in that respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawho5 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Okay, here's a question for you then just for the sake of discussion. IF you separate the wrestling from the booking and watch for the good matches, what is the difference between that and watching a match from the past with little to no context? Isn't it a very similar thing once you think about it? And another question. How can you have truly great wrestling matches without context derived from a well-booked feud? What makes matches great is often something more than just the work in the ring. It's the meaning of what's going on in the ring as it relates to the feud between the workers. Does the lack of a consistent, well-crafted narrative outside of the matches in a vacuum have an impact on the matches themselves? Which leads me to yet another question. Is this what Vince means by "sports entertainment"? Is that a part of his disconnect from what he would call "pro wrestling"? It's obvious that there are aspects of the older styles that he doesn't care for and has done away with. Or it could be just a side effect of the philosophy that the brand is bigger than any of the stars that work within it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted January 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Dawho, I can't write much now but I'll quick say that in an ideal world good-to-great matches will take place in a well booked feud and all of it will be worth watching. However, I think good-to-great matches are also available without the support that we would all prefer. Cherrypicking these takes a lot of the heartache out of hours and hours of drivel. Maybe I'm stripping things down too much for most people's tastes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawho5 Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Don't get me wrong, I'm just asking questions. I tend to cherrypick matches a lot myself so I completely understand. I just know that when I have watched all the lead-ins I tend to enjoy the match more for it in a well-booked feud. I was just wondering if you saw any difference between cherrypicking the present and the past. The rest was just stuff that popped into my head as I was typing that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 For me I prefer watching stuff in the past. I'm not saying everything in the past is great that'd be a lie. I generally like the presentation of wrestling in the 80's. I like how the audience got caught up in the emotion of the moment. I feel what we are getting nowadays is akin to frozen pizza. So to me the advantage of watching old footage is looking at how many different ways it can be booked,promoted,and/or presented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steenalized Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 For me I prefer watching stuff in the past. I'm not saying everything in the past is great that'd be a lie. I generally like the presentation of wrestling in the 80's. I like how the audience got caught up in the emotion of the moment. I feel what we are getting nowadays is akin to frozen pizza. So to me the advantage of watching old footage is looking at how many different ways it can be booked,promoted,and/or presented. I was watching some 80s Memphis today and I love how reactive the crowd is even in the studio. The crowd at Funk-Lawler No DQ is nuts. I wish a crowd would still react like that. You could see the cops there to keep the crowd away still focusing most of their attention on watching the match, people are jumping up and down and screaming. Only kids really do that today. Now everyone is too 'smart.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stomperspc Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 I think that if people only watch modern wrestling and don't go back to revisit classic footage, they are going to have a hard time putting the current stuff they are watching into perspective. A match might be really good relative to everything else in 2014/2015, but how does it compare to historical matches of similar style? Even if I've watched a match before, if it was years ago I can easily forget how good the match actually was. Likewise, if people mainly watch old stuff, it is going to be difficult to put a current match into proper perspective. There is something to be said for modern matches that are maybe not historical classics, but are much better than their modern day peers. If someone is only watching a few current matches here and there, it is difficult to have a perspective on how much better or worse the match is relatively to everything else happening currently. You are also potentially missing out on some good stuff. So I think its a balancing act. To determine if a match is historically great, I feel like I need to watch similar, hyped historical matches. To determine if a current match is better than its peers, I feel like I need to watch enough modern matches that are similar so I have a basis of comparison. In the end of course, its just about watching what you like. If new stuff did nothing for me, I wouldn't watch it and I wouldn't comment on the state of modern wrestling. If specific older matches/styles/promotions did nothing for me, I wouldn't watch them but I also would try to avoid praising a current match as an "all time great" because I would not have the perspective to make such a claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButchReedMark Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 I've said it before, the ONLY reason people watch stuff live now is to be part of the big conversation. Well, that's not true. I'm on no social media, I don't post while shows are on, I don't get bogged down in the conversations about it, maybe I just like watching live wrestling? I thoroughly subscribe to "Everything is better live", be it wrestling, gigs, or Wales trouncing England next Friday night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthedoctor Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Better wrestlers and characters you could believe in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 My only problem with people watching a lot of the "live" product is that projects like the DVDVR sets or the GWE poll aren't as good as they might have been if people had devoted more time to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSR Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 I've said it before, the ONLY reason people watch stuff live now is to be part of the big conversation. Well, that's not true. I'm on no social media, I don't post while shows are on, I don't get bogged down in the conversations about it, maybe I just like watching live wrestling? I thoroughly subscribe to "Everything is better live", be it wrestling, gigs, or Wales trouncing England next Friday night. I agree with Butch, and have zero interest in being a part of 'the big conversation'. If I watch something live I want to engross myself completely in it, be that wrestling, MMA, whatever. The last thing I want to be doing is going online, checking forums, tweeting, posting etc. After the events over, absolutely, but never while it's going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Something else I'm thinking about - even with the NWA in 1989, or WWF in 2000 (inarguable high points for creatively for both companies) there's still a lot of bitching and moaning going on (In Observers in 89 and on-line in 2000). It's very easy to get caught up in negativity in the present - a bit of distance from a product can enhance appreciation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 My only problem with people watching a lot of the "live" product is that projects like the DVDVR sets or the GWE poll aren't as good as they might have been if people had devoted more time to them. Yeah, I think I've given more time over to the Rumble and post-rumble discussion than I feel I should have. Time would have been better spent on something in the 80s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 I think people underestimate the element of surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 My only problem with people watching a lot of the "live" product is that projects like the DVDVR sets or the GWE poll aren't as good as they might have been if people had devoted more time to them. The GWE project is still a work in progress... a marathon, not a sprint. The interest in the DVDVR project is directly related to the original board going down and the lack of involvement in the latter sets with guys like Phil Schneider and Dean Rasmussen dropping out or not being as involved. Having said that, Lucha was a hot seller, it just isn't getting the discussion that earlier sets received. I am going to release Portland, the WWF redo and the NWA sets this year (hopefully) and I think all of them will generate plenty of interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Migs Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 My only problem with people watching a lot of the "live" product is that projects like the DVDVR sets or the GWE poll aren't as good as they might have been if people had devoted more time to them. The GWE project is still a work in progress... a marathon, not a sprint. The interest in the DVDVR project is directly related to the original board going down and the lack of involvement in the latter sets with guys like Phil Schneider and Dean Rasmussen dropping out or not being as involved. Having said that, Lucha was a hot seller, it just isn't getting the discussion that earlier sets received. I am going to release Portland, the WWF redo and the NWA sets this year (hopefully) and I think all of them will generate plenty of interest. I am very excited for all three of those, although a little sad that Puerto Rico is on the backburner, as that one seemed intriguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthedoctor Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 The main problem today is that there are far too many spoilers around the internet that basically tell you whats going to happen. Now in the day of Magazines I dont recall any of this happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Guitar Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 I've never been too bothered about watching wrestling "live". My fandom has always been on "tape delay" so to speak. I can't remember when we started getting the PPV's live in the Uk, but whenever it was it was the only time I was up to date on a par with US fans as far as being current. WWF TV was always at least a few days behind, and in the early days, weeks. Certainly enough time to seek out spoilers if you knew where to get them. I never got to see WCW "live" at all and ECW was always weeks after the fact, so in some cases I always knew what had happened or what was coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthedoctor Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 I've never been too bothered about watching wrestling "live". My fandom has always been on "tape delay" so to speak. I can't remember when we started getting the PPV's live in the Uk, but whenever it was it was the only time I was up to date on a par with US fans as far as being current. WWF TV was always at least a few days behind, and in the early days, weeks. Certainly enough time to seek out spoilers if you knew where to get them. I never got to see WCW "live" at all and ECW was always weeks after the fact, so in some cases I always knew what had happened or what was coming. I dont think there was many places that we could find out what happened as wrestling magazines were pretty much out of date time we got them. The PPVs were odd. One minute they aired on Sky One the next its Sky Movies + and after that Sky Sports. Wish they could make their mind up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted February 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 I think people underestimate the element of surprise. I think the element of surprise was more important when there wasn't so much tv to keep up with. Also, the possibility of a surprise debut, like during the Monday night wars, is virtually nil. 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.